View Single Post
Old October 10, 2008, 07:19 PM   #11
Senior Member
Join Date: February 15, 2007
Posts: 936
I think it is reasonable for local law enforcement to be included to make sure someone who applies is not under suspicion for criminal undertakings even if they have not been brought up on charges yet. Probably a lot will disagree with me here, but if you have an anti-firearm sheriff you probably have a bigger problem than not being able to get a CCW.
How utterly absurd. There's a reason that we have a legal system with rules of evidence and the presumption of innocence. I have a serious problem with laws that deprive a person of their rights when they have not been convicted of a crime. At present, a person looses their 2A rights if they are subject to a restraining order or under suspicion for domestic violence. (Not sure if that's a federal or state law.) The burden of proof is much lower and the defendant doesn't even get a chance to be heard in some jurisdictions. In others, they don't even have to be notified of the hearing.

So a psycho vindictive ex decides to get back at you for some real or imagined insult. She gets a sympathetic judge to issue a restraining order against you in absentia and the next thing you know, the sheriff shows up at the door and confiscates your firearms. If you ever want to see them again, you're going to have to spend a lot of money on a lawyer. Your CCW application get denied, or your permit gets revoked. That's OK with you?

I don't care if the sheriff has me under surveillance and believes I'm cooking meth in my basement. Until I'm convicted of a crime, I should not lose any of the rights I enjoy as an American citizen. I've seen enough real investigations done that I don't ever want to be the subject of one. In one case, the authorities didn't interview the one person who was privy to the most information. They couldn't prove that the subject had done anything wrong, which he absolutely had.

If you can't tell, I'm extremely mistrustful of authority figures who have too much power. Having discretionary power as to what constitutes "just cause" is waaaayyyyyy too much power for one person.
lockedcj7 is offline  
Page generated in 0.04762 seconds with 7 queries