Site Notices
7/31/2014 7:43:02 PM
Page:  / 3
Author
Message
steveinct
Offline
Posts: 917
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 5/9/2007 7:57:40 AM
Ok , I have the statute number - it's CGS 29-38 Weapons In Motor Vehicles

Now, the state of CT website SUCKS, I can't get to the actual text of the law but I know for a fact, you CANNOT have a loaded firearm in a motor vehicle. You hear this in every pistol permit class, every hunter ed class, it's on the mint green pistol permit application form; Bob Crook mentions it from time to time, etc.

Trust me, you CANNOT leave a loaded firearm in a motor vehicle.

Now, how the hell you actually retrieve the text on line is beyond me. The link to SLFU only posts the number and title of the law, the CGS website doesn't have a way to get there that I can find and I even tried googling "Connecticut General Statute 29-38" five different ways and couldn't get a link to the actual document.
harlenm
Offline
Posts: 99
Feedback: 86% (7)
Link To This Post
Posted: 5/9/2007 8:11:28 AM
[Last Edit: 5/9/2007 8:17:10 AM by harlenm]

Originally Posted By steveinct:
Ok , I have the statute number - it's CGS 29-38 Weapons In Motor Vehicles

Now, the state of CT website SUCKS, I can't get to the actual text of the law but I know for a fact, you CANNOT have a loaded firearm in a motor vehicle. You hear this in every pistol permit class, every hunter ed class, it's on the mint green pistol permit application form; Bob Crook mentions it from time to time, etc.

Trust me, you CANNOT leave a loaded firearm in a motor vehicle.

Now, how the hell you actually retrieve the text on line is beyond me. The link to SLFU only posts the number and title of the law, the CGS website doesn't have a way to get there that I can find and I even tried googling "Connecticut General Statute 29-38" five different ways and couldn't get a link to the actual document.


Steve, I quoted the statute in the above post, it has nothing to do with leaving a gun in a motor vehicle. It has to do with having a weapon in a motor vehicle, while you are in it, and it specifically says, " for which a proper permit has not been issued". You have a pistol permit, you can have a weapon in a vehicle, it's as simple as that. There is no statute in titles 29 or 53 that state anywhere that you cannot leave a loaded gun in your car unattended. This is simply the case of once again, the state employees opinion, and not case law. I would like to see what statute is cited when they arrest someone on this, cause they would be making it up. This is just like the carrying open vs. concealed debate. We have a permit to carry a firearm, no where in any statute does it say that it has to be concealed, yet the state police say that it does, even though there is no statute against it.

This is another reason why I hate this state, they make up laws that fit their political agendas.

Here is the statute again. You can view all the statutes here, http://www.cga.ct.gov/2007/pub/titles.htm

Sec. 29-38. Weapons in vehicles. (a) Any person who knowingly has, in any vehicle owned, operated or occupied by such person, any weapon, any pistol or revolver for which a proper permit has not been issued as provided in section 29-28 or any machine gun which has not been registered as required by section 53-202, shall be fined not more than one thousand dollars or imprisoned not more than five years or both, and the presence of any such weapon, pistol or revolver, or machine gun in any vehicle shall be prima facie evidence of a violation of this section by the owner, operator and each occupant thereof.
harlenm
Offline
Posts: 100
Feedback: 86% (7)
Link To This Post
Posted: 5/9/2007 8:22:50 AM

Originally Posted By imtheflash:

Originally Posted By steveinct:
One of the issues that was raised, was if a permit holder is carrying a gun and cannot enter a business with a "no guns allowed" sign posted - like Blockbuster Video, for instance, he can't just walk back to his car and place the loaded gun in the car.

That is illegal


So what is he supposed to do with it?


I found this

Sec. 29-37i. (Formerly Sec. 29-37c). Responsibilities re storage of loaded firearms with respect to minors. No person shall store or keep any loaded firearm on any premises under his control if he knows or reasonably should know that a minor is likely to gain access to the firearm without the permission of the parent or guardian of the minor unless such person (1) keeps the firearm in a securely locked box or other container or in a location which a reasonable person would believe to be secure or (2) carries the firearm on his person or within such close proximity thereto that he can readily retrieve and use it as if he carried it on his person. For the purposes of this section, "minor" means any person under the age of sixteen years.



This is for storing a gun in your house, see the word premises? Again, nothing to do with vehicles.
RealFastV6
كافر
Offline
Posts: 4023
Feedback: 100% (75)
Link To This Post
Posted: 5/9/2007 10:29:42 AM
Loaded Pistols are fine in vehicles with a Permit.

www.cga.ct.gov/2007/pub/Chap529.htm#Sec29-38.htm

Not sure where anybody heard otherwise. This hasn't changed in a long time.
"Don't make me come down there." - God
RealFastV6
كافر
Offline
Posts: 4024
Feedback: 100% (75)
Link To This Post
Posted: 5/9/2007 10:36:20 AM
Also, FYI, CT Law doesn't define what constitutes a "loaded" firearm.

A friend of mine was recently in the jury on a "Drunk while Carrying" violation, and part of what the Jury had to determine was whether the firearm was "loaded". The defense had a number of "expert witnesses" testify that because the firearm wasn't chambered, it wasn't loaded, and the jury ended up agreeing.

In other words, get a good fucking lawyer.


"Don't make me come down there." - God
NUcadet07
Still Avoiding the Coat Hanger
Offline
Posts: 1600
Feedback: 100% (59)
Link To This Post
Posted: 5/9/2007 1:56:04 PM
Harbor YArd ran into problems with this and LEO's right off the bat. My father works for the city and was and still is heavily involved in the HArbor Yard project (his name is on the plaque's on both the stadium and arena) and he was telling me how the management of the Arena, mind you this isn't the city, it's the private management of the arena, refused to let a government agent, I can't recall if she was FBI or Secret Service, into the arena for a disney on ice show with her children because she was required by her job to carry her weapon on her at all times. That produced some kind of change but obviously not much of one. The management over there are the big assholes, the guys who run the ball park are alot better than the guys at the arena.



Originally Posted By steveinct:
I have a friend who is a police officer in one of CT's larger cities (I won't mention which city) but it's not Bridgeport. We went to a hockey game at Harbor Yard, he was carrying
his off duty S&W Bodyguard and his dept. shield and at the line where the security people wand you - he mentioned he was carrying a gun and produced his badge.

The security officer called in a supervisor who told him '"No, I'm sorry, you can't come in here with your gun even though you are an off duty officer from another CT department"

The only people allowed to carry were Bridgeport police and State Police
assigned to that event and they had a roster of names of the plain clothes officers who were there. and the one agent from Homeland Security who was the liasion with Bridgeport PD. Those were the only people there carrying.
I don't swim in your toilet so don't pee in my pool
steveinct
Offline
Posts: 918
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 5/9/2007 7:03:36 PM
[Last Edit: 5/9/2007 7:14:25 PM by steveinct]
It might have to do with how they are insured.

And I'm sorry - I still don't agree with Harlem and the others saying leaving loaded firearms in vehicles is ok. Loaded handgun on the person, with a permit, yes, but not a loaded firearm stored in the vehicle

There isn't one person I know who will tell you this. I do know if you're caught with a loaded weapon in a motor vehicle, in CT, you will be someone's wife in a prison cell.

I've emailed both Bob Crook and Bruce Stern for clarification.

Obviously, the State of CT does not want correct information easily found in a user friendly fashion
harlenm
Offline
Posts: 103
Feedback: 86% (7)
Link To This Post
Posted: 5/9/2007 7:27:03 PM

Originally Posted By steveinct:
It might have to do with how they are insured.

And I'm sorry - I still don't agree with Harlem and the others saying leaving loaded firearms in vehicles is ok. Loaded handgun on the person, with a permit, yes, but not a loaded firearm stored in the vehicle

There isn't one person I know who will tell you this. I do know if you're caught with a loaded weapon in a motor vehicle, in CT, you will be someone's wife in a prison cell.

I've emailed both Bob Crook and Bruce Stern for clarification.

Obviously, the State of CT does not want correct information easily found in a user friendly fashion


How about this, you look through sections 29 and 53 of the CT statutes, and find me one that says you can't leave a loaded gun in the car. When you do, I'll stop leaving mine in the car.
steveinct
Offline
Posts: 919
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 5/9/2007 11:55:46 PM
[Last Edit: 5/10/2007 1:19:25 AM by steveinct]
Suppose it's somewhere else?

- I've been licensed since 1984, every dealer I've talked to, every cop I know, every hunter ed instructor ; and it's in the guide you get from the State Police when you get your permit on day one; and everyone I know at five different gun clubs I belong to all generally recognize that you cannot leave a loaded firearm in a car, in the state of CT
steveinct
Offline
Posts: 920
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 5/10/2007 12:16:00 AM
From the Hartford Courant April 28, 2007


NOTE: Jose Lopez, 26, of 402 Freeman St., Hartford, charged with having weapons in a motor vehicle. His bail was set at $100,000.




NEW BRITAIN REGION

Firearms Seized, Six Arrested

One Man Faces Multiple Charges After Firing At Officer
April 28, 2007
By STEVEN GOODE, Courant Staff Writer Hartford police seized firearms and made six arrests in four gun-related incidents late Thursday and early Friday - including one in which an officer was shot at.

A Hartford man faces multiple charges after he allegedly fired at the officer during a foot chase about 3:40 a.m. Friday, police said.

Officers responding to a report of a home invasion at 161 Martin St. pursued two suspects who fled from the back of the house. One suspect, Horace Vasquez, also known as David Vasquez, fired at Officer Jeremy Ball before he was apprehended on Garden Street, police spokeswoman Nancy Mulroy said. Ball was not injured.

Vasquez, 29, of 865 Tower Ave., was charged with first-degree robbery, first-degree burglary, two counts of conspiracy, interfering with police, assault on a police officer, criminal possession of a pistol, carrying a pistol without a permit and unlawful discharge of a firearm, Mulroy said.

His bail was set at $1 million pending arraignment in superior court in Hartford.

The second suspect, Shaun Hawkins, 30, of 318 Broadview Terrace, Hartford, was discovered hiding between fences near the Martin Street house, police said. He is charged with interfering with police, two counts of first-degree robbery and two counts of first-degree burglary, Mulroy said. His bail also was set at $1 million.

In a separate incident, four people were arrested and three loaded guns were seized by police investigating a 12:40 a.m. report of shots fired in the Frog Hollow neighborhood.

Mulroy said those arrested in the incident at 90 James St. were:


Jason Colon, 25, of 97 Van Block Ave., Hartford, charged with carrying a pistol without a permit and interfering with police. His bail was set at $300,000.




Two 16-year-old juveniles, charged with carrying a pistol without a permit and interfering with police.

A Thursday night report of shots fired on a South End street resulted in the arrest of a 16-year-old boy and seizure of a stolen gun. Police found the juvenile hiding in a garbage receptacle following the 8 p.m. report in the area of 63 Annawan St.

The juvenile was held on $750,000 bond on charges of first-degree reckless endangerment, carrying a pistol without a permit, unlawful discharge of a gun, theft of a firearm and carrying a dangerous weapon, Mulroy said.

At about 3:40 p.m. Thursday, police seized two handguns from a car stopped at the intersection of Niles and Gillett streets in the North End.

Kuwan Russ, 27, of 17 Clinton St., Manchester, was charged with criminal possession of a firearm, carrying weapons in a motor vehicle, carrying a pistol without a permit and altering the serial number of a firearm, Mulroy said. His bail was set at $750,000.

Contact Steven Goode at sgoode@courant.com.


steveinct
Offline
Posts: 921
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 5/10/2007 12:17:14 AM
[Last Edit: 5/10/2007 12:28:44 AM by steveinct]
Ok?? Not sure of the statute number but it's in there, somewhere.
steveinct
Offline
Posts: 922
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 5/10/2007 12:31:41 AM
Here's another unlucky customer from April 27th Journal Inqurier:


Journal-Inquirer - 04/27/2007

Armed holdup ends in crash
By:Megan Collins , Journal Inquirer

WINDSOR LOCKS - An armed robbery at the 7-Eleven on Thursday led to a fiery car crash, a footchase, and the arrests of one local resident and two Hartford residents, police said.

Police received a call around 11:30 p.m. from a person who was witnessing a robbery at the 7-Eleven at 535 Halfway House Road, police said.

After giving police a description of the suspects and their vehicle, the caller stayed on the phone with the police dispatcher and followed the vehicle, police said.

When the suspects' vehicle reached the intersection of Halfway House Road and Southwest Avenue, it crashed into a tree, police said.

Police arrived as one suspect, A.C. Leonard Brown, 21, of Hartford, fled from the vehicle, police said.

Police said that they were able to apprehend Brown after a footchase, but during that time, the suspects' vehicle caught on fire and two officers worked to pull the other two people from the car.

Alexandria Moreau, 20, of 34 Ellis St. in Windsor Locks, and Donald Vail, 19, of Hartford were safely pulled from the vehicle, police said.

All three suspects were transported to local hospitals for complaints of pain sustained in the accident before returning to the Police Department later in the night, police said.

Police said that they recovered a 22-caliber revolver from the burned interior of the car after the accident and also recovered a total of $430 dollars, which Brown had stolen from the 7-Eleven store and a customer.

Moreau and Vail were each charged with four counts each of criminal liability to commit robbery, two counts each of first-degree robbery, and two counts each of second-degree larceny.

Moreau was also charged with reckless driving and weapons in a motor vehicle, police said.

Brown was charged with first-degree robbery, second-degree larceny, first-degree reckless endangerment, and illegal possession of a firearm, police said.

Moreau, Vail, and Brown were all held in lieu of $250,000 bonds each and were to appear today in Enfield Superior Court.

©Journal Inquirer 2007


MOREAU WAS ALSO CHARGED WITH RECKLESS DRIVING AND WEAPONS IN A MOTOR VEHICLE
steveinct
Offline
Posts: 923
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 5/10/2007 12:35:05 AM
Here's one from May 8th 2007.........


NEW BRITAIN REGION

Three Face Weapons Charges

May 8, 2007
NEW BRITAIN - -- Police surveillance near the Osgood Package Store led to the arrest of three men allegedly involved in the sale of a stolen rifle Friday night.

Police, who were in the area in response to complaints about drug trafficking, observed a man they identified as Jose Caban, 42, of Hartford, get out of a Chrysler and approach a GMC van, Sgt. Gregory Wright said. They then saw a hand-to-hand transaction in which Caban received what appeared to be a rifle or shotgun case, police said.

Officers followed both vehicles after they left the scene. When police stopped Caban, a convicted felon, he told police he purchased the rifle for $75.

New Britain and West Hartford officers pulled over the GMC as it headed into West Hartford. The passenger, Carlos Romas, 44, of New Britain, told police he stole the gun from a New Britain home in 1995 and sold it because he needed money, according to police.

Police charged Romas with criminal possession of a gun, illegal firearm sale and having a weapon in a vehicle. The van driver, Maximino Torres, 47, of New Britain, was charged with accessory to the sale of a firearm and having a weapon in a motor vehicle.

Caban was charged with criminal possession of a weapon and having a weapon in a motor vehicle.


CABAN WAS CHARGED WITH CRIMINAL POSSESSION OF A WEAPON AND HAVING A WEAPON IN A MOTOR VEHICLE
steveinct
Offline
Posts: 924
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 5/10/2007 12:40:33 AM
[Last Edit: 5/10/2007 12:43:07 AM by steveinct]
Here's one straight from the State Police website from last year signed by Sgt Paul Vance:


On 01/26/06 State Police filed additional charges against both of these accused. The accused were incarcerated as a result of the Darien arrest for narcotics violations

Today both accused were presented in Superior court GA #4 in Waterbury and formally arrested on the strength of arrest warrants related to the vehicle pursuit that took place on 0110/06

ACCUSED#1: RUIZ, Michael DOB:9/15/85 LKA 203 Alder St. Waterbury, CT.

ACCUSED#2: ESTEVES, Benjamin DOB: 11/28/82 249 Jefferson St Brooklyn, NY.

CHARGES: Weapons in a Motor Vehicle

Interfering with Police

Destruction of Evidence

Reckless Endangerment.

Both were held on $250,000 and arraigned in Superior court.

Meriden Police are continuing their investigation.

##END###

Sgt. J. Paul Vance


Here's another one - from a 2005 FEDERAL press release:

September 8, 2005 Project Safe Neighborhoods: BRIDGEPORT MAN INDICTED ON FEDERAL FIREARM CHARGE

Kevin J. O’Connor, United States Attorney for the District of Connecticut, today announced that FRANK BEST, age 32, formerly of 500 Soundview Avenue, Bridgeport, Connecticut, has been charged in an Indictment with one count of knowing possession of a firearm and ammunition by a previously convicted felon. The Indictment was returned yesterday, September 7, by a federal grand jury sitting in Bridgeport.

According to statements made in court, on February 23, 2005, BEST was stopped by Bridgeport Police following a report of his alleged involvement in a domestic dispute and assault. During the stop, officers located a black CZ75 9mm semiautomatic pistol loaded with15 hollow-point rounds in the extended magazine and one hollow-point round in the chamber. Officers also located a small glassine fold containing heroin. Best was arrested by state authorities and charged with assault in the third degree, disorderly conduct, possession of narcotics, criminal possession of a firearm, weapons in a motor vehicle, and possession of a dangerous weapon.

The federal Indictment alleges that, on February 23, 2005, BEST knowingly possessed the CZ75 9mm semiautomatic pistol and the sixteen rounds of hollow-point ammunition. The Indictment further alleges that BEST was previously convicted of felony charges in U.S. District Court for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute cocaine and cocaine base, and in Superior Court of the State of Connecticut for both possession of a weapon in a motor vehicle and assault in the second degree.

It is a violation of federal law for a convicted felon to possess a firearm and/or ammunition that has moved in interstate or foreign commerce.

U.S. Attorney O’Connor stressed that an indictment is only a charge and is not evidence of guilt. The defendant is entitled to a fair trial at which it is the Government’s burden to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

This case was investigated by the Bridgeport Project Safe Neighborhoods Task Force, which includes the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives and the Bridgeport Police Department. The case is being prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorney Stephen Reynolds.


Note in all of these "WEAPONS IN A MOTOR VEHICLE" is a separate charge


steveinct
Offline
Posts: 925
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 5/10/2007 1:04:44 AM
[Last Edit: 5/10/2007 1:14:20 AM by steveinct]
http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cache:ANB0yqzld0wJ:www.jud.state.ct.us/external/supapp/Cases/AROap/AP99/99AP164.pdf+CT+%22weapons+in+a+motor+vehicle%22&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=24&gl=us


This one is in a Law review journal from 2002. It is the case of the State of CT vs. Strich
(AC 27331) 2002

It boils down to a domestic stemmed issue where an estranged husband confronted his wife -in a parking lot -shot and seriously wounded her - after having his handgun and permit confiscated - violating a restraining order, etc.

He had a loaded shotgun in the car and among other things was charged with having a LOADED WEAPON IN A MOTOR VEHICLE under 29-38

So, you may be reading the law and interpreting YOUR way................ HOWEVER, CT
Courts and Police interpret it a totally DIFFERENT way and that way means NO LOADED FIREARMS IN A MOTOR VEHICLE


Again, I've been taught over and over by dozens of sources you CANNOT have a loaded firearm stored in the motor vehicle


Not trying to argue or get into a pissing match - just sharing what I believe to be true and at least prudent, based on how I understand and was taught these laws are interpreted and applied. Hopefully, if it does any good - it may help keep people who read this out of JAIL if they're out riding around with loaded guns in their cars, believing they're "A-OK" when in fact, they are not.

If you don't agree, that's fine. You make your own choices and hopefully not face consequences if called out on it someday in a traffic stop or an motor vehicle accident
steveinct
Offline
Posts: 926
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 5/10/2007 1:25:54 AM
Here's one that involves DEP "EnCon" police enforcing hunting regs from the Norwich Bulletin

Please note in the story there is a hunter arrested for having A LOADED WEAPON IN A MOTOR VEHICLE

Found this posted on another board. Thought the members here would be interested in reading it.

EnCon police do their duty
By BOB SAMPSON
For the Norwich Bulletin

During the regular gun season for deer, many of the shady characters that every sportsman would like to see removed from the woods go into hiding. The reason is there are so many land owners and legal hunters who would have them busted in a wink for poaching the woodlands.

However, as the gun season ground to a close with only a hand full of muzzleloader enthusiasts along with a sprinkling of late season bow hunters to contend with, the bums start creeping out from under their rocks once again. As a result, EnCon Police (Environmental Conservation Police) have been busy since late November with an assortment of arrests.

It took me about 10 years to routinely refer to these dedicated, hard-working wards of our fisheries and wildlife resources as Department for Environmental Protection Conservation Officers rather than Game Wardens. I will try to do better with this new term in the future. Whether referred to as wardens, COs or EnCon Police, they are the people who go out into the field to apprehend violators of our conservation laws with powers of arrest in other areas as well.

Tall order
People don't realize just how highly qualified full fledged COs are once they are completely trained and tackling the broad array of duties they are called upon to perform every year.

Bob Zabolinski, a veteran CO, told me that after passing a state test and being accepted into the program, they spend 16 weeks training at the Connecticut State Police Academy. This rigorous and intense training is followed by 10 more weeks of police standards training.

Then these future wardens spend a couple more years learning wildlife, fisheries and environmental rules, regulations, and related material in an on-the-job intern program before taking another test that qualifies them to become an Agency Police Officer (APO), which is a step below full fledged EnCon Police status.

APOs work in state parks and localized patrol situations, where full-fledged EnCon police have statewide duties and authority. It takes about five years total, more than the equivalent in education to many graduate programs, to becoming a full-fledged conservation officer. Their duties don't only include fisheries and wildlife issues, but boating, ATV violations, trespassing, as well as drug, alcohol, family violence and even prostitution in some of the state park facilities and camp grounds.

They don't only have to know civil law, but fisheries, wildlife and a whole array of environmental and conservation regulations as well. It's a tough job that during the hunting season requires approaching often very unhappy people who are almost always carrying loaded guns while hunting. Even state troopers don't face anywhere near this number of gun-toting individuals. However, most law-breaking hunters and even poachers are not out to harm anyone.

Environmental police work is a dangerous job, one that for the first time in Connecticut history cost an on-duty conservation officer his life on Nov. 20, 1998.

That evening, 21-year DEP veteran biologist/CO James Spignesi Jr. was accidentally killed by a poacher's bullet while investigating an illegal deer-hunting complaint.

The poacher that killed him shot at a shadow in dark conditions, thinking Spignesi and his partner were a deer. Humans don't look at all like deer. We are way too tall and our legs much too fat. The killer broke the cardinal safety rule of the hunter's safety code of ethics, which is "always positively identify your target and what's behind it before shooting." It's a common-sense rule occasionally broken with deadly consequences.

Recent incidents
On Dec. 4, EnCon police responded to a complaint in Windham of someone hunting illegally on private land near Pigeon Swamp Road. The trespasser was not wearing orange, but was in full camouflage with a mask and swung his gun towards one of the officers as they approached. He was tackled and, after a brief scuffle, handcuffed. The offender, Shannon Colburn of Putnam, was charged with interfering with an officer, possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, hunting under the influence of alcohol, third-degree criminal trespass and illegal deer hunting. He was released on a $10,000 bond.

The following day, across the state in Harwinton, five more deer poachers, two of whom had traveled south from Vermont to steal our deer, were arrested under an array of charges ranging from illegal deer hunting, loaded weapons in a motor vehicle, negligent hunting, failure to wear orange and interfering with arrest.

Quad and motor cycle riders have become a progressively greater problem, one that the law has been clamping down on more frequently this year. On Nov. 24, EnCon police responded to complaints of a quad rider trespassing on private property in Torrington. This law breaker, 26-year-old Jason Wesolowski, has the dubious distinction of being the first person arrested under a new law (as of Oct. 1) that makes it illegal to drive ATVs while under the influence of alcohol. At least this guy was packing his empty beer cans out in his backpack (solid evidence), because the slobs that tear up the woods where I hunt throw them along their riding trails. Zabolinski said one of his fellow officers was literally run over by a drunk last year while making an arrest of a quad rider who took off from a local pub outside Willimantic.

The point is EnCon police and COs have a difficult and dangerous job. To make things worse, there's not enough of them around. They were stretched thin when I worked for the DEP as a biologist 20 years ago and they've lost a bunch of veterans since.

Remember, with a five-year turnaround time for complete training and 21 out of 52 existing officers eligible for retirement over the next few years, the department could be in serious trouble. Like police anywhere, they can't just pull a person off the street, put them in uniform and put them on the job. Intense long term training is required first.

If you see illegal activity, lights in fields at night followed by gunfire, people fishing before opening day, hunting on Sunday (though target shooting is legal), fishing before opening day, etc., call Project TIP (Turn In Poachers) at 1-800-842-HELP.

Don't try to do anything yourself other than take notes, descriptions, patterns of sightings, license plates and other pertinent information for the professionals.

Cash rewards ranging from $50 to $200 (for deer poaching busts) are awarded for convictions resulting from these totally anonymous calls. No one's name is ever mentioned, callers are assigned a number that they can simply check on from time to time to see if they hit the jackpot.

Most people who report outdoor-related crimes never claim their rewards. Instead, they ask to have it remain in the program.

Bob Sampson Jr. writes an outdoors column that appears each Thursday. Reach him at sports@norwichbulletin.com
harlenm
Offline
Posts: 104
Feedback: 86% (7)
Link To This Post
Posted: 5/10/2007 7:14:30 AM
These stories are not proof of anything, all they show is that people were arrested for havong weapons in a vehicle. The last one with the illegal hunting most likley were loaded rifles or shotguns, which is specifically prohibited. as for the others, do you see how they are charged with multiple offenses including criminal possesion of a firearm? Then they don't have permits and theb you can't have a gun in a car.

Once again, you cannot have a loaded weapon in a vehicle if you do not have a pistol permit. Show me a news story about a permit holder who was arrested for keeping a gun in the car and that was the only charge.
steveinct
Offline
Posts: 927
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 5/10/2007 8:09:29 AM
Ok....

Remember the alleged motorcycle gang shooting on I-95 last year?

One of the two bikers arrested had a pistol permit and was arrested initially for having a loaded handgun in his car along with other things like police gang intelligence reports and face masks.

I found it last night googling stories searching under "weapons in motor vehicles" and CT

I'll find it again and post it here
steveinct
Offline
Posts: 928
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 5/10/2007 8:17:47 AM
On second thought,Harlenm you make your choices and do as you wish. I'm done with this.

If you believe you're legal with a loaded firearm left in your car, hey - that's your business and your call - not mine.

I'm just sharing what I know and believe to be true - and I for one will not have a loaded firearm in a car.

I know a dozen cops from a half dozen CT towns and cities and have shot along side some senior current and retired state police officials on trap fields, pistol ranges and sat at the same table at dinner functions; I've heard them testify at Public Hearings and have sat in the same meeting room with them when Bob Crook had his meetings in Wallingford. This topic does come up from time to time in conversation and the answer is always the same - "you cannot keep a loaded firearm in a vehicle" in CT.

The answer was the same in 1980 when I got my first hunting license, it was the same answer in 1984 when I first got my pistol permit and hasn't changed any time the subject came up at any meeting, event or shooting related activity I've been privy to since.

So, that's all. Do as you wish. I'm only trying to help keep some people out of jail.
harlenm
Offline
Posts: 105
Feedback: 86% (7)
Link To This Post
Posted: 5/10/2007 8:56:49 AM
[Last Edit: 5/10/2007 9:20:20 AM by harlenm]
I found the article. Yes, one of them had a gun and a permit. but they had bats, homemade clubs, golf clubs, and knives in the car, and that is why they were charged with weapons in a vehicle.

you believe what you want to, but you also thought town hall was off limits too.
harlenm
Offline
Posts: 106
Feedback: 86% (7)
Link To This Post
Posted: 5/10/2007 9:24:37 AM
OK, one last comment from me and I'm done.

I was involved in an auto wreck about 5 years ago on 95 in Norwalk. My Jeep ended up on it's side, and my Glock, which was in the armrest, was ejected from the car and landed about 5 or 6 feet away.

I decided to leave it there because my first concern was getting away from the car until I knew it was safe to be near it, and I didn't want to be fumbling with a gun as the police showed up. When the responding state trooper got there, about 5 minutes later, I pointed it out to him, explained what happened, and that i have a permit. He picked it up, looked at it, and then handed it back to me and told me to just tuck it into my pants for now.

Well, not only was not arrested, I was never told I couldn't do this, and I ended up chatting with him and the other responding trooper for an hour about guns.

Really illegal huh?
imtheflash
Member
Offline
Posts: 516
Feedback: 100% (1)
Link To This Post
Posted: 5/10/2007 4:33:52 PM

Originally Posted By harlenm:

Well, not only was not arrested, I was never told I couldn't do this, and I ended up chatting with him and the other responding trooper for an hour about guns.

Really illegal huh?


I think there is a difference if you are still in the car with the firearm vs leaving it in the car unattended.
If I'm curt with you it's because time is a factor. I think fast, I talk fast and I need you guys to act fast if you wanna get out of this. So, pretty please... with sugar on top. Clean the f'ing car!
harlenm
Offline
Posts: 107
Feedback: 86% (7)
Link To This Post
Posted: 5/10/2007 4:57:45 PM

Originally Posted By imtheflash:

Originally Posted By harlenm:

Well, not only was not arrested, I was never told I couldn't do this, and I ended up chatting with him and the other responding trooper for an hour about guns.

Really illegal huh?


I think there is a difference if you are still in the car with the firearm vs leaving it in the car unattended.


Doesn't matter.
AllserviceBilliards
Offline
Posts: 548
Feedback: 100% (13)
Link To This Post
Posted: 5/10/2007 6:46:16 PM
I was born in CT. My family still lives there. I can't figure it out. There isn't enough money in the whole state to bring me back - not even for a few days.
RealFastV6
كافر
Offline
Posts: 4032
Feedback: 100% (75)
Link To This Post
Posted: 5/10/2007 7:37:49 PM
It is absolutely not illegal to have a loaded pistol in a vehicle if you have a CCW permit. It doesn't matter if the pistol is in the trunk, under the seat, or crammed up your ass. No if's ands or butts. (Pun intended)

There seems to be some debate here about leaving a loaded pistol in the car. I can tell you without question that there is no law that specifically says it's illegal to leave a pistol unattended in a vehicle.

I teach the CT Pistol Permit courses often enough to stay on top of these things. Also for the record, my NRA Training Counselor is a CT State Cop. This is where I'm getting my information.

If anybody has any first hand information that says otherwise, I'd love to hear it.

"Don't make me come down there." - God
Page:  / 3