Poor Gun Law Administration

[WatchManUSA]

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!

[mward58]

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.

[tombogan03884]

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.

[Rastus]

'.....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! 

[tombogan03884]

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.

[Sponsor]

[WatchManUSA]

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...

[tombogan03884]

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 

[WatchManUSA]

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!

[mward58]

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!!!!!

[WatchManUSA]

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&section=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!