The Down Range Forum
Member Section => Handguns => Topic started by: mward58 on May 08, 2008, 08:19:45 PM
-
Just wanted to share my experience with the Oakdale MN Police Department with obtaining my permit to purchase. I applied on Tues. Apr 29 at 8:AM. They told me it would take 7-10 days (I know that should have been a red flag since I read the statute and it says 7 days).
This Wed I called the Oakdale Police office and the person who answered the phone said they are still waiting for a response from my place of residence nine years ago. I stated that the way I read the law is that decisions are to be made within 7 days. She abruptly stated, "The way we do it here is 7-10 work days." I did not argue. It is now Thursday the 8th at 7:14 PM and I still have not been notified.
Just out of curiosity, I looked at local municipality websites to see how they administrate this law. Crow Wing County states 7-10 days. Burnsville states 2-3 weeks. Coon Rapids seemed to get it right with 5-7 days. They confirm my understanding of the law with this statement on their site: "The application process takes approximately 5 to 7 Days. State statute 624.7131 subdivision 5 ensures the permitee will be provided with a permit or notified of a denial of permit within a 7 day period. When the permit is ready, the applicant will be notified by telephone. "
What really perturbs me is not the wait so much, it is the inconsistency of administering the law by people who are supposed to "know the law". Hopefully this poor administration of even a poorer law will not cause me to miss out on the sweet 686 Smith and Wesson I have on lay-a -way.
Thank you for reading this epistle on how I have been harmed by those who feel they are the only ones who know how to "do good".
-
Maybe a letter to the local prosecutor with a cc: to the Police Chief asking why the department is allowed to violate the state law, which has supremacy?
But then I have been know to whack a hornet's nest with stick before. :o
-
Maybe a letter to the local prosecutor with a cc: to the Police Chief asking why the department is allowed to violate the state law, which has supremacy?
But then I have been know to whack a hornet's nest with stick before. :o
If I did not have 500 bucks down on a revolver I might. What I find disturbing is the blatant poor administration by the local governments. Crow Wing County has a link to the Brady Bunch right below the handgun permit info http://www.co.crow-wing.mn.us/sheriff/handgun_permit_information/permit_to_purchase_handgun.html
-
Maybe a letter to the local prosecutor with a cc: to the Police Chief asking why the department is allowed to violate the state law, which has supremacy?
But then I have been know to whack a hornet's nest with stick before. :o
Have a GOOD lawyer write the letter, If the LAW states 7 days it MEANS 7 days.
-
Have a GOOD lawyer write the letter, If the LAW states 7 days it MEANS 7 days.
That's what I thought too. But according to the clerk in Oakdale it means 7-10 Business days. Read subdivision 5 and see if you are as dumb as I am! https://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/bin/getpub.php?type=s&num=624.7131&year=2007
-
If I did not have 500 bucks down on a revolver I might. What I find disturbing is the blatant poor administration by the local governments. Crow Wing County has a link to the Brady Bunch right below the handgun permit info http://www.co.crow-wing.mn.us/sheriff/handgun_permit_information/permit_to_purchase_handgun.html
Even the PD's own website quotes state law, as linked to above. Screw 'em, a good letter by a lawyer to the state's Attorney General.
-
Since NC is different from county to county, I can say living in several different counties, your county is consistent with others that
act as if WE are imposing on the "system" to get a purchase permit or CCW.
It took me 3 trips to the sheriffs office, parking, waiting, waiting some more, taking a $90.00 course, paying a $90.00 fee, notary, references,,... etc,...
BUT, I got it. I earned it, qualified for it and did the dance to get it. Yes it seems the law abiding citizens get the hassle, compared to the criminal who can get whatever in 5 minutes.
I am stocking up on PMAGS, and other "stuff" before the price goes up even more. My .45 Colt prices are outta sight!!
Fight the good fight and don't let 'em pull that crap. File a complaint, something, and good luck.
If the ATF, DEA FBI, show up at your house, keep us posted.
-
We all need to stand up when we are being messed over.
All too often we keep our heads down in fear of losing what little we have. That's just the attitude the antis want us to have, fear!
It is a RIGHT, so stand up for it. If the law says 10 days then THAT'S IT. 10 days, no more! Take a stand.
-
Police department policies that refuse to follow the law...what's next...or perhaps what is happening now, eh?
What is that that makes us different from, oh say, Pol Pot? Being a nation of laws?
I knew there was a reason for that pesky 2nd Ammendment.
-
In Ma. a county Sherrif was removed and arrested for charging an extra $20 "Handling fee" for CCW permits.
-
Let’s keep this in perspective. This is a permit to purchase handguns and black rifles. It is not a CCW permit. The permit processing comprises a background check to see if you meet the legal requirements to purchase handguns and black rifles. A permit to purchase pre-qualifies the holder to purchase handguns and black rifles.
I can’t speak to the motivation of your Oakdale, MN Police Department regarding their attitude toward applicants for a permit to purchase. I do live in Minnesota and my local suburban Twin Cities Police Department says to allow 7 to 10 days because processing the permit to purchase permits is an administrative function. They process all of them for the past week once a week. So it is an issue of timing and US postal service. When I turned in my last renewal of my permit to purchase I was given a dated, time stamped and signed receipt of application.
If you drop the permit off on Monday afternoon and they processes the previous week’s permits Monday morning, then you will wait seven days for the processing. If they put the permit in the mail, like my local department does, then it may take one to two additional days for you to get the permit to purchase. If the department admin person is sick on Monday or Monday is a holiday then the timing could get messed up by another day or two. All this “delay” with no intent to cause the applicant harm.
Yes, they may not meet the letter of the law but as a tax payer and gun owner I don’t want them wasting money on administrative resources to process paperwork. I would rather they put the money into putting officers on the street.
-
Lets keep this in perspective. This is a permit to purchase handguns and black rifles. It is not a CCW permit. The permit processing comprises a background check to see if you meet the legal requirements to purchase handguns and black rifles. A permit to purchase pre-qualifies the holder to purchase handguns and black rifles.
I cant speak to the motivation of your Oakdale, MN Police Department regarding their attitude toward applicants for a permit to purchase. I do live in Minnesota and my local suburban Twin Cities Police Department says to allow 7 to 10 days because processing the permit to purchase permits is an administrative function. They process all of them for the past week once a week. So it is an issue of timing and US postal service. When I turned in my last renewal of my permit to purchase I was given a dated, time stamped and signed receipt of application.
If you drop the permit off on Monday afternoon and they processes the previous weeks permits Monday morning, then you will wait seven days for the processing. If they put the permit in the mail, like my local department does, then it may take one to two additional days for you to get the permit to purchase. If the department admin person is sick on Monday or Monday is a holiday then the timing could get messed up by another day or two. All this delay with no intent to cause the applicant harm.
Yes, they may not meet the letter of the law but as a tax payer and gun owner I dont want them wasting money on administrative resources to process paperwork. I would rather they put the money into putting officers on the street.
They are LAW ENFORCEMENT , paid for by OUR (Mn. residents) TAXES ! They BETTER stick to the letter of the law. IT'S WHAT THEY ARE PAID FOR !
-
Let’s keep this in perspective. This is a permit to purchase handguns and black rifles. It is not a CCW permit. The permit processing comprises a background check to see if you meet the legal requirements to purchase handguns and black rifles. A permit to purchase pre-qualifies the holder to purchase handguns and black rifles.
I can’t speak to the motivation of your Oakdale, MN Police Department regarding their attitude toward applicants for a permit to purchase. I do live in Minnesota and my local suburban Twin Cities Police Department says to allow 7 to 10 days because processing the permit to purchase permits is an administrative function. They process all of them for the past week once a week. So it is an issue of timing and US postal service. When I turned in my last renewal of my permit to purchase I was given a dated, time stamped and signed receipt of application.
If you drop the permit off on Monday afternoon and they processes the previous week’s permits Monday morning, then you will wait seven days for the processing. If they put the permit in the mail, like my local department does, then it may take one to two additional days for you to get the permit to purchase. If the department admin person is sick on Monday or Monday is a holiday then the timing could get messed up by another day or two. All this “delay” with no intent to cause the applicant harm.
Yes, they may not meet the letter of the law but as a tax payer and gun owner I don’t want them wasting money on administrative resources to process paperwork. I would rather they put the money into putting officers on the street.
Irrelevant. They are paid to enforce the law as tomboggan noted, and are not above it, even for an "administrative" function. "Administrative"? Interesting word to use for allowing someone to exercise their rights.
This is also a form of the arrogance and disrespect for civilians rampant in most police departments. And maybe, just for good measure, an indication of the incompetence and laziness of those in administrative positions, a sign that either the Chief is arrogant or incompetent at running the dept., setting priorities and the like. As a taxpayer, it should be absolutely unacceptable.
Once mward58 gets his pistol, I would still have a lawyer send a note to the MN AG's office - a note as in a formal complaint, especially if they do not comply with the law that is quoted on their website - right above the Brady link. Kinda gives you a clue as to their thinking, right?
-
They are LAW ENFORCEMENT , paid for by OUR (Mn. residents) TAXES ! They BETTER stick to the letter of the law. IT'S WHAT THEY ARE PAID FOR !
Napolean said it best," There are NO bad Regiments, only bad Generals." The adherence to the letter of the RULES and general conduct of individuals from any group, good or bad, is a reflection of the Leaders of that group.
For a bad example look at New Orleans PD, A Mayor and Police cheif with no regard for State or Federal law are reflected in a generally lawless group of Police Officers who either abandoned thier responsibility, or participated in the looting by stealing firearms from law abiding citizens at gun point. I do not have a GOOD example, the GOOD Police forces, (the majority) do not make the news, but we all have a Dept. in our area that people speak well of and they, like our Veterans, deserve our respect and thanks.
-
Finally received my permit to purchase late Fri. afternoon. I wrote an email to NRAILA letting them know of the situation in Minnesota. Got a response right away and the HQ states they have informed their local lobbyists in Minnesota. Thank you all for your support. P. S. Picked up my S & W 686. Cleaned it up and it looks near mint!
-
Finally received my permit to purchase late Fri. afternoon. I wrote an email to NRAILA letting them know of the situation in Minnesota. Got a response right away and the HQ states they have informed their local lobbyists in Minnesota. Thank you all for your support. P. S. Picked up my S & W 686. Cleaned it up and it looks near mint!
Enjoy ! ;D
-
I'm glad you got your permit to purchase. Just curious, how long did it take from the time you dropped it off until you received it?
Let’s get real here; not every missed date is an affront to the 2nd amendment. Laws are selectively enforced on a continual basis. Most of time when law enforcement turns a blind eye to the letter of the law it is to our advantage. Imagine if for one week the police enforced every law to the letter! My how we would complain!
What if you got a speeding ticket every time you drove one mile per hour over the posted speed limit? What about all those times you came to a rolling stop at a stop sign or speeded up on a yellow light to try and make it through an intersection but the light went red before you made it through?
So, yes perhaps the Oakdale police missed the seven days limit. We don’t know the circumstances and we don’t know what their intent. Now, if the Oakdale police have a pattern of dragging their feet on all applications then they should be investigated and held to task. However, to get the Minnesota AG involved (who happens to be a liberal) is counter productive.
Perhaps, mward58, you should call the Oakdale Chief of Police and ask what happened before you have our liberal Minnesota AG sticking her nose into the Oakdale Police department. Don’t you think the Chief deserves the right to answer your question before you go over his or her head? Perhaps you might cut the Chief some slack just like the when the police do not stop you every time you may not live up to the letter of the law.
But for some of you to get all hot and indignant and comparing the Oakdale Police to situation in New Orleans and Mayor Ray Nagin is over the top, in my opinion.
To say, “They are LAW ENFORCEMENT , paid for by OUR (Mn. residents) TAXES ! They BETTER stick to the letter of the law. IT'S WHAT THEY ARE PAID FOR!” would require law enforcement never to use their situational best judgment in enforcement of the law. We would have a “non-tolerance policy” toward everything. I really don’t think that would be in our best interest and, if you take the time to think about it, I don’t think you do either.
-
Every now and then is no big deal. Every administration has an issue or people sick, on vacation whatever. What I interpreted was an administrative policy or practice knowingly contrary to law. And not just dragging feet about some administrative type law but a right granted by the 2nd Ammendment. If it costs more, ask for funding.....lots of luck there.
Most politicians cry for taxes for police, firefighters, and teachers. Taxes are passed because we all want these people to be fairly compensated. Many states and municipalities have asked for dedicated funds because, they slyly say, there is not enough to go around in the general fund. So...we agree to tax ourselves...then they reduce the general fund by more playing the game of backdoor funding for their pet projects. More for police, firefighters, roads and teachers......it never seems to be enough, eh? Only because the real purpose for that tax was to divert money from the general fund to a pet project by freeing up funds that should have been going to police, firefighters, and teachers....how do you think they fund those projects you would never approve?
Democracy costs more than other forms of government. If there is a policy by the enforcers to not follow the law that is morraly corrupt and we are on a slippery slope.....take a look at international history if you don't recognize the dangers when local, state or federal enforcement disregards law. Sure the good guys can do it "OK" and be "fair"....but then who are the good guys....those who enforce the law or those who follow the law (morally good laws, not perverted laws saying, for example, kill every newborn son)?
-
Every now and then is no big deal. Every administration has an issue or people sick, on vacation whatever. What I interpreted was an administrative policy or practice knowingly contrary to law. And not just dragging feet about some administrative type law but a right granted by the 2nd Ammendment. If it costs more, ask for funding.....lots of luck there.
Most politicians cry for taxes for police, firefighters, and teachers. Taxes are passed because we all want these people to be fairly compensated. Many states and municipalities have asked for dedicated funds because, they slyly say, there is not enough to go around in the general fund. So...we agree to tax ourselves...then they reduce the general fund by more playing the game of backdoor funding for their pet projects. More for police, firefighters, roads and teachers......it never seems to be enough, eh? Only because the real purpose for that tax was to divert money from the general fund to a pet project by freeing up funds that should have been going to police, firefighters, and teachers....how do you think they fund those projects you would never approve?
Democracy costs more than other forms of government. If there is a policy by the enforcers to not follow the law that is morraly corrupt and we are on a slippery slope.....take a look at international history if you don't recognize the dangers when local, state or federal enforcement disregards law. Sure the good guys can do it "OK" and be "fair"....but then who are the good guys....those who enforce the law or those who follow the law (morally good laws, not perverted laws saying, for example, kill every newborn son)?
Very well said.
-
I have one thing to add..."permit to purchase"? What a load of cr@#! Isn't that what the "instant" backgorund check at the point of sale is for? I'm glad I live in a state where I don't have to deal with that. Bless you for your patience.
One more thing, the Texas Deparment of Public Safety, the agancy that processes the CCW applications, is swamped and has had to add additional staff to handel a 39% increase in applications since the beginning of the year. I guess folks down here have caught a clue about what's likely coming after the November elections.
-
Every now and then is no big deal. Every administration has an issue or people sick, on vacation whatever. What I interpreted was an administrative policy or practice knowingly contrary to law. And not just dragging feet about some administrative type law but a right granted by the 2nd Ammendment. If it costs more, ask for funding.....lots of luck there.
All I'm suggesting is the "we don't know that." I'm suggesting that before we kick something up to the a liberal leaning AG's office (who couldn't care less about gun owner's rights) that perhaps a call to the police department to inquire as to what happened might have been more effective. Then if the answer doesn't pass the smell test then take the issue forward.
Good Luck!
-
All I'm suggesting is the "we don't know that." I'm suggesting that before we kick something up to the a liberal leaning AG's office (who couldn't care less about gun owner's rights) that perhaps a call to the police department to inquire as to what happened might have been more effective. Then if the answer doesn't pass the smell test then take the issue forward.
Good Luck!
If you read my initial post you will see I did that already and after stating what the law says I was rudely met with "That's not the way we do it here." I then did research by surfing the web and found the majority of the municipalities make statements on their websites that are contrary to the law.
What concerns me is that some people I know hesitate getting their first hand gun because of the time it takes to go to the police station (which have very limited office hours). It seems as though many depts. are doing as much as they can to make it difficult to purchase a handgun. This is bad for commerce and bad for the growth of the shooting sports.
I wrote an email to the NRAILA HQ and they will pass it on to their local lobbyists. I will be more than happy to work with them if they want.
-
If you read my initial post you will see I did that already and after stating what the law says I was rudely met with "That's not the way we do it here." I then did research by surfing the web and found the majority of the municipalities make statements on their websites that are contrary to the law.
What concerns me is that some people I know hesitate getting their first hand gun because of the time it takes to go to the police station (which have very limited office hours). It seems as though many Dept's. are doing as much as they can to make it difficult to purchase a handgun. This is bad for commerce and bad for the growth of the shooting sports.
I wrote an email to the NRAILA HQ and they will pass it on to their local lobbyists. I will be more than happy to work with them if they want.
Give 'em hell ! Those were called "Jim Crow" laws when they were used to deny CIVIL RIGHTS to Blacks, If a county or Town does not obey the letter of the law they risk fines and loss of funding dollars.
And to Rastus, Saying that "every now and then is OK" is like saying it's ok to steal, just don't do it ALL the time.
The police and government are SUPPOSED to set a good example, The example that is being set in this case is that ignoring the law is OK, They would have a different answer if you showed up 2 or3 days late for a Court date or to pay a SPEEDING ticket, Heck why even bother paying that stupid ticket, You were running late and that speed limit was not CONVENIENT.
It sounds like a statewide lack of leadership. I get a little torqued about this kind of conduct by "OFFICIALDOM" because on occasion I have been shafted on this kind of thing, Speeding, late for court, not checking parts, etc. and it ALWAYS, ALWAYS bites me on the butt :( In the case of Government I've gotten " The LAW say's...." from more than one to many bureaucratic tyrants to cut them any slack. Also I've heard, "Well the instruction DOES say..." often enough, to realize that all rules, no matter how odd sounding, Have a purpose, (In law and politics the purpose is not always good for US )We have "speed laws so fewer people get killed in cars, We have to be in Court on time because they are trying to process a large number of cases, AND WE HAVE TIME LIMITS SO PETTY BUREAUCRATS CAN'T "FLEX THEIR MUSCLE"at the expense of citizens rights.
Excuse the capital letters, I'm writing this in the little reply box ,and do not have ITALIC button.
-
'.....And to Rastus, Saying that "every now and then is OK" is like saying it's ok to steal, just don't do it ALL the time......".
It is not OK as a practice and it's not OK if it's routine. I'm just saying if they are staffed for 50 apps a week and get, say 500 apps, then I can understand it not happening on time. Sometimes the judge will even let you off for cause! ;)
-
It is not OK as a practice and it's not OK if it's routine. I'm just saying if they are staffed for 50 apps a week and get, say 500 apps, then I can understand it not happening on time. Sometimes the judge will even let you off for cause! ;)
Yes, and sometimes they won't nail you for the max on child support because you need to eat as well, That has not been my experience. According to the original post , the county websites suggest that it is STANDARD policy for you to wait till they are darn good and ready, that IS NOT the attitude we pay them for, If it were due to an unusual ly large number then common curtesy dictates SOME form of apoligy,not take it or leave it, that is not the attitude we pay their wages for.
-
This Wed I called the Oakdale Police office and the person who answered the phone said they are still waiting for a response from my place of residence nine years ago. I stated that the way I read the law is that decisions are to be made within 7 days. She abruptly stated, "The way we do it here is 7-10 work days."
Just for the record your post did not indicate that you talked to the Chief just the person who answered the phone. I doubt it was the Chief.
The second issue is that, according to the person you talked to, they had cause to hold off the approval over the issue of your residence.
I would assume that if you wanted their response in 5 to 7 days they had cause to deny your a permit to purchase (PTP) because they couldn't verify your past place(s) of residence. Instead they worked through the issue and eventually they got it right.
It seems like the system actually worked for you rather than against you.
Of course people are right suggesting the Minnesota law requiring a potential gun buyer to go through the process of getting a PTP is a deterrent to gun ownership. I would suggest that the time of the NRA-ILA is better spent trying to challenge the Minnesota law requiring gun buyers to have a PTP in the first place. Certainly the Minnesota AG is not going to initiate that fight.
Perhaps you should have let them deny your application and then gotten the NRA-ILA to take the issue of a PTP to a court challenge.
Just a thought...
-
Just for the record your post did not indicate that you talked to the Chief just the person who answered the phone. I doubt it was the Chief.
The second issue is that, according to the person you talked to, they had cause to hold off the approval over the issue of your residence.
I would assume that if you wanted their response in 5 to 7 days they had cause to deny your a permit to purchase (PTP) because they couldn't verify your past place(s) of residence. Instead they worked through the issue and eventually they got it right.
It seems like the system actually worked for you rather than against you.
Of course people are right suggesting the Minnesota law requiring a potential gun buyer to go through the process of getting a PTP is a deterrent to gun ownership. I would suggest that the time of the NRA-ILA is better spent trying to challenge the Minnesota law requiring gun buyers to have a PTP in the first place. Certainly the Minnesota AG is not going to initiate that fight.
Perhaps you should have let them deny your application and then gotten the NRA-ILA to take the issue of a PTP to a court challenge.
Just a thought...
I had lost sight of the fact there was an "issue" with his info. I'm irked that the Law says one thing and the county websights disregard that and just impose their own time limits, which is UNACCEPTABLE >:(
-
I had lost sight of the fact there was an "issue" with his info. I'm irked that the Law says one thing and the county websights disregard that and just impose their own time limits, which is UNACCEPTABLE >:(
Agreed, the PTP policies of the local police departments should reflect the law. Also, note that in Minnesota the PTP process is not a county issue it is owned by the local police department. There could be some situations in rural Minnesota were there are no local police departments so the Sherriff's department is the only law enforcement agency. In that case they might control PTP, too.
The county Sherriff owns the process if issuing of CCW permits. In most situations, especially in the urban and suburban areas of MN (such as Oakdale), it doesn't matter what a county Web site states about PTP because it is in the hands of the local police Chief. I can only speak to my situation and in my Minnesota community they are, from what I can tell, within the law regarding PTP.
The onerous issue is that we Minnesotan’s have to go through the PTP process to buy a hand gun or black rifle in the first place.
Good Luck!
-
Just for the record your post did not indicate that you talked to the Chief just the person who answered the phone. I doubt it was the Chief.
The second issue is that, according to the person you talked to, they had cause to hold off the approval over the issue of your residence.
I would assume that if you wanted their response in 5 to 7 days they had cause to deny your a permit to purchase (PTP) because they couldn't verify your past place(s) of residence. Instead they worked through the issue and eventually they got it right.
It seems like the system actually worked for you rather than against you.
Of course people are right suggesting the Minnesota law requiring a potential gun buyer to go through the process of getting a PTP is a deterrent to gun ownership. I would suggest that the time of the NRA-ILA is better spent trying to challenge the Minnesota law requiring gun buyers to have a PTP in the first place. Certainly the Minnesota AG is not going to initiate that fight.
Perhaps you should have let them deny your application and then gotten the NRA-ILA to take the issue of a PTP to a court challenge.
Just a thought...
Law says you can only be denied if you a crazy, criminal etc. Can't deny if they can't get your info. They must issue if they cannot get your info in 7 days. Also, I never said I talked to the chief. Shouldn't have to.
Oe more example of loose interpretation: A friend of mine who I have been trying to get interested in the shooting sports finally decided to get a Ruger GP 100 and start getting serious about the sport. He went to the St Paul Police dept. and they said it would take two weeks to get a permit to Purchase. The place with the GP 100 would not put on layaway for him. he may not be able to get that 6 inch GP 100. As I stated earlier it affects commerce and our freedoms!!!!!
-
Law says you can only be denied if you a crazy, criminal etc. Can't deny if they can't get your info. They must issue if they cannot get your info in 7 days. Also, I never said I talked to the chief. Shouldn't have to.
This is actually what the law says: https://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/bin/getpub.php?pubtype=STAT_CHAP_SEC&year=current§ion=624.7131&image.x=0&image.y=0&image=Get+Section
After reading the law as written I still believe the Oakdale police could have denied your PTP application because they could not confirm your places of residence at the seven day mark - but they didn’t.
Subd. 2. Investigation. The chief of police or sheriff shall check criminal histories, records and warrant information relating to the applicant through the Minnesota crime information system and the national criminal record repository and shall make a reasonable effort to check other available state and local record-keeping systems. The chief of police or sheriff shall obtain commitment information from the commissioner of human services as provided in section 245.041.
Subd. 3. Forms. Chiefs of police and sheriffs shall make transferee permit application forms available throughout the community. There shall be no charge for forms, reports, investigations, notifications, waivers or any other act performed or materials provided by a government employee or agency in connection with application for or issuance of a transferee permit.
Subd. 4. Grounds for disqualification. A determination by the chief of police or sheriff that the applicant is prohibited by section 624.713 from possessing a pistol or semiautomatic military-style assault weapon shall be the only basis for refusal to grant a transferee permit.
Subd. 5. Granting of permits. The chief of police or sheriff shall issue a transferee permit or deny the application within seven days of application for the permit. The chief of police or sheriff shall provide an applicant with written notification of a denial and the specific reason for the denial. The permits and their renewal shall be granted free of charge.
Under the investigation clause they could not, according to your conversation with someone in the department, verify your statement of where you lived for the past 10 years. If they can't confirm your places of residence then they can't determine if your other provided information is true. If they can't determine if your background information is correct then they can’t determine if your meet the legal ability to own a handgun or black rifle. If they can determine your ability to own a handgun or black rifle then they can deny your PTP application. This becomes the ”Grounds for disqualification.”
Unfortunately, you will see if you go to the link with the law that there is no provision in the law for an automatic issue of a PTP if the seven day time limit is exceeded by the police department. "The chief of police or sheriff shall provide an applicant with written notification of a denial and the specific reason for the denial."
If one is denied a PTP there is recourse as defined below:
Subd. 8. Hearing upon denial. Any person aggrieved by denial of a transferee permit may appeal the denial to the district court having jurisdiction over the county or municipality in which the denial occurred.
As I said before, the onerous issue is that we Minnesotan’s have to go through the PTP process to buy a hand gun or black rifle in the first place.
Good Luck!
-
This is actually what the law says: https://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/bin/getpub.php?pubtype=STAT_CHAP_SEC&year=current§ion=624.7131&image.x=0&image.y=0&image=Get+Section
After reading the law as written I still believe the Oakdale police could have denied your PTP application because they could not confirm your places of residence at the seven day mark - but they didn’t.
Subd. 2. Investigation. The chief of police or sheriff shall check criminal histories, records and warrant information relating to the applicant through the Minnesota crime information system and the national criminal record repository and shall make a reasonable effort to check other available state and local record-keeping systems. The chief of police or sheriff shall obtain commitment information from the commissioner of human services as provided in section 245.041.
Subd. 3. Forms. Chiefs of police and sheriffs shall make transferee permit application forms available throughout the community. There shall be no charge for forms, reports, investigations, notifications, waivers or any other act performed or materials provided by a government employee or agency in connection with application for or issuance of a transferee permit.
Subd. 4. Grounds for disqualification. A determination by the chief of police or sheriff that the applicant is prohibited by section 624.713 from possessing a pistol or semiautomatic military-style assault weapon shall be the only basis for refusal to grant a transferee permit.
Subd. 5. Granting of permits. The chief of police or sheriff shall issue a transferee permit or deny the application within seven days of application for the permit. The chief of police or sheriff shall provide an applicant with written notification of a denial and the specific reason for the denial. The permits and their renewal shall be granted free of charge.
Under the investigation clause they could not, according to your conversation with someone in the department, verify your statement of where you lived for the past 10 years. If they can't confirm your places of residence then they can't determine if your other provided information is true. If they can't determine if your background information is correct then they can’t determine if your meet the legal ability to own a handgun or black rifle. If they can determine your ability to own a handgun or black rifle then they can deny your PTP application. This becomes the ”Grounds for disqualification.”
Unfortunately, you will see if you go to the link with the law that there is no provision in the law for an automatic issue of a PTP if the seven day time limit is exceeded by the police department. "The chief of police or sheriff shall provide an applicant with written notification of a denial and the specific reason for the denial."
If one is denied a PTP there is recourse as defined below:
Subd. 8. Hearing upon denial. Any person aggrieved by denial of a transferee permit may appeal the denial to the district court having jurisdiction over the county or municipality in which the denial occurred.
As I said before, the onerous issue is that we Minnesotan’s have to go through the PTP process to buy a hand gun or black rifle in the first place.
Good Luck!
Watchman,
Read subd 2, 4 & 5 real careful. Then read 624.713 https://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/bin/getpub.php?pubtype=STAT_CHAP_SEC&year=2007§ion=624.713
If you still think they can deny a permit to purchase to a 9 year resident of Oakdale for not getting enough info, then this discussion is over because I am convinced you voted for Mondale over Reagan in '84!
Good Luck!
-
It is not OK as a practice and it's not OK if it's routine. I'm just saying if they are staffed for 50 apps a week and get, say 500 apps, then I can understand it not happening on time. Sometimes the judge will even let you off for cause! ;)
Rastus,
I agree with you and the last time when I got a permit to purchase they were late by a day as well. But the difference was last time they did not say 7 to 10 days, they said 7. Then this time when I talked to the person who handles the permits she said 7-10 work days. Then I did research and several local agencies blatantly misquoted the time up to as much as 2-3 weeks along with links to the Brady Campaign. If you thoughtfully look at all of the law pertaining to PTP's you can only conclude that a local agency is to check as much as they can in 7 days and can only deny if you do not meet the criteria of 624.713(Too young, too crazy, too criminal, or papers saying you're too stoned)
-
I had lost sight of the fact there was an "issue" with his info. I'm irked that the Law says one thing and the county websights disregard that and just impose their own time limits, which is UNACCEPTABLE >:(
I forgot to put in the first post that I got a permit to purchase two years ago from the same two clerks and my Wisconsin residence info must have been ok back then. I also told the clerks that I have had one in the recent past and I put that on the form where they asked. It is also clear on the application that I have been paying their wages for over 9 years in Oakdale. Again, Poor law...Poor administration. Also, I have talked to several people at my gun club and they were lifelong area residents and they waited past 7 as well. It is fairly evident that they just want people to wait as long as possible. Big bad gun owners...Big bad gun companies.
-
Watchman,
Read subd 2, 4 & 5 real careful. Then read 624.713 https://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/bin/getpub.php?pubtype=STAT_CHAP_SEC&year=2007§ion=624.713
If you still think they can deny a permit to purchase to a 9 year resident of Oakdale for not getting enough info, then this discussion is over because I am convinced you voted for Mondale over Reagan in '84!
Good Luck!
Oh, so you have stooped to name calling!
BTW – No I don’t think “they can deny a permit to purchase to a 9 year resident of Oakdale for not getting enough info.” But that is not what you said. You said their reason was because, “…they are still waiting for a response from my place of residence nine years ago.” I have no clue what information you provided nor if it was complete enough. I only know, that according to you, they were waiting for a response from - I imagine - someone.
All I’m trying to point out to you is that when NRA-ILA gets the MN AG involved this is what they will see. The facts, as you have told us about, don’t support that you were wronged in fact they went out of their way to approve you PTP. This is what the MN AG will conclude if she see’s these facts.
It really is quite simple, verifying 10 years of residence is part of verifying who you are. A discrepancy in residency is an indication of identity fraud.
This is not a reflection on you personally and I only say this to illustrate my point. Criminals do steal identities and make things up. So when checking out your record and they find a discrepancy or some sort issue with your residency history – that IS a problem. It raises a red flag and you could be a criminal or a crazy for all they know. So they have to check it out.
You may see it as silly and stupid being a 9-year resident of Oakdale but the history they ask for is for 10 years. I would assume that the issue they had was with residence in the 10th year. The issue was may have been and probably was a small simple problem to overcome. But, apparently it was enough of a problem for the Oakdale police not to approve you in seven days.
Maybe they took liberties with time because there was a minor issue. The thing is we don’t know that. You have right to feel what you feel about your experience. I don’t question your right to have these feelings.
If you are really this fired up about the PTP requirement use this frustration as motivation to work with NRA-ILA to challenge the MN PTP statute. I think it is a superfluous requirement given that most gun stores in MN still do their own check on you before the sale is final. Plus the fact that you can buy from a private individual without a PTP.
If you take challenge the PTP I’m there with you.
Good Luck!
-
Permit to purchase is an outrage by itself. In NH if you want a CCW permit the way the law is written (clarified by several court cases) the Cheif of Police SHALL ISSUE a concealed carry license with in 7 days of recieving a completed application OR written explanation for refusal. I will note here that when I went to pick up my last permit, ( on a FRIDAY in JAN. 07) the Lady at the desk, who does the paperwork, said she "had been out with the flu" and NICELY asked if I "could come back monday as SHE was behind on the paperwork". She was pleasant, apoligetic and reasonable, there was no way I could find fault with this situation. (especialy as I had a cold myself at the time ;D )
10 AM monday it was waiting for me.
-
Permit to purchase is an outrage by itself. In NH if you want a CCW permit the way the law is written (clarified by several court cases) the Cheif of Police SHALL ISSUE a concealed carry license with in 7 days of recieving a completed application OR written explanation for refusal. I will note here that when I went to pick up my last permit, ( on a FRIDAY in JAN. 07) the Lady at the desk, who does the paperwork, said she "had been out with the flu" and NICELY asked if I "could come back monday as SHE was behind on the paperwork". She was pleasant, apoligetic and reasonable, there was no way I could find fault with this situation. (especialy as I had a cold myself at the time ;D )
10 AM monday it was waiting for me.
Yep, my point exactly. The first time I got a permit two years ago they were late by a day and I was ok with that because they properly quoted the law and they were kind courteous, etc. This time up front it was obvious they changed an internal policy at the office which obviously violates the law and the response I got from the administrator of the permits was brash and indignant and left me to believe there may be no end in sight to my wait. I just think that Minnesota gun owners need to point out when there is widespread misadministration of gun laws even though some may construe it as "minor". Dismissing liberal anti-gun crazies is very dangerous because in this state you are always just a liberal governor and a few votes in the legislature of losing your AR 15.
-
Oh, so you have stooped to name calling!
BTW – No I don’t think “they can deny a permit to purchase to a 9 year resident of Oakdale for not getting enough info.” But that is not what you said. You said their reason was because, “…they are still waiting for a response from my place of residence nine years ago.” I have no clue what information you provided nor if it was complete enough. I only know, that according to you, they were waiting for a response from - I imagine - someone.
All I’m trying to point out to you is that when NRA-ILA gets the MN AG involved this is what they will see. The facts, as you have told us about, don’t support that you were wronged in fact they went out of their way to approve you PTP. This is what the MN AG will conclude if she see’s these facts.
It really is quite simple, verifying 10 years of residence is part of verifying who you are. A discrepancy in residency is an indication of identity fraud.
This is not a reflection on you personally and I only say this to illustrate my point. Criminals do steal identities and make things up. So when checking out your record and they find a discrepancy or some sort issue with your residency history – that IS a problem. It raises a red flag and you could be a criminal or a crazy for all they know. So they have to check it out.
You may see it as silly and stupid being a 9-year resident of Oakdale but the history they ask for is for 10 years. I would assume that the issue they had was with residence in the 10th year. The issue was may have been and probably was a small simple problem to overcome. But, apparently it was enough of a problem for the Oakdale police not to approve you in seven days.
Maybe they took liberties with time because there was a minor issue. The thing is we don’t know that. You have right to feel what you feel about your experience. I don’t question your right to have these feelings.
If you are really this fired up about the PTP requirement use this frustration as motivation to work with NRA-ILA to challenge the MN PTP statute. I think it is a superfluous requirement given that most gun stores in MN still do their own check on you before the sale is final. Plus the fact that you can buy from a private individual without a PTP.
If you take challenge the PTP I’m there with you.
Good Luck!
Watchman
No malice here. LOL. You still never answered the question if you voted for Mondale over Reagan in '84 like the majority of Minnesotans.
-
Watchman
No malice here. LOL. You still never answered the question if you voted for Mondale over Reagan in '84 like the majority of Minnesotans.
Maybe he lived in a SENSIBLE state then, like ,Ca. or ANYWHERE else but Ma. that was the other state he took, and the ONLY one that went to Do Kuka's
-
Watchman
No malice here. LOL. You still never answered the question if you voted for Mondale over Reagan in '84 like the majority of Minnesotans.
I think I voted for you...
-
I think I voted for you...
That's OK if you did vote for Fritz. Just don't vote for Barrack No"bam"a. He'll take the guns you worked hard for...or, worse yet, make it so you can't use them.
-
That's OK if you did vote for Fritz. Just don't vote for Barrack No"bam"a. He'll take the guns you worked hard for...or, worse yet, make it so you can't use them.
Or ammo will be $5.00 a bullet
-
Or ammo will be $5.00 a bullet
Bullets? What're bullets? You got no use for bullets. No don't need no steenkin' bullets!! You don't get no bullets! At any price. You have an individual right to guns, no problem, but the 2nd Amendment don't say nothing bout no bullets.
Obambi - June 1, 2009
-
Just what the ---- is a Permit to Purchase? What country are you living in? I'll think about the underprivileged, overprotected, serfs of your country while I'm at the Gun Show tomorrow.