Police object to very few concealed carry applications

Chicago Sun-Times ^ | 30 jan 2014 | Frank Main

[rellimpank]

Even though local police departments can object when they believe applicants for concealed carry permits pose a threat to the public, less than 1 percent of the 33,631 applications in Illinois have been challenged, according to figures released Thursday.

A state licensing board composed of a former judge, two former prosecutors, three former FBI agents and a psychiatry professor will consider the 236 objections that police have filed since the new concealed carry law took effect this year.

[rellimpank]

---hummm--

[from occupied ga]

So the police infringe on the right to keep and bear arms in less than one percent of the CCW licenses which are already an infringement on the aforementioned right.

[PapaBear3625]

Police don’t reject many applications, WHEN they must articulate a specific reason for rejection, and knowing their basis for rejection will be reviewed.

[BitWielder1]

CCW holders have a very low crime rate.
Not only are they pre-screened for responsible behavior, they are careful to keep it that way.
The cops know that.

[MaxMax]

And the crime rate will fall. And the police will have an easier job to do.

[FreedomPoster]

I’ve seen it claimed that CCW holders have a lower crime rate than cops. It wouldn’t surprise me.

[DaveA37]

And then we have Chicago..........

[ImJustAnotherOkie]

Just saw this

Known gang leader’s application for CCP in Illinois brings scrutiny to requirements

http://www.guns.com/2014/01/30/chicago-gang-leader-applies-concealed-carry-permit/

[taxcontrol]

Or another way to look at it.... 99% of all applicants have NOTHING in their background for the police to question issuing a CCW.

[rellimpank]

—yep—posted it from here -—

http://www.suntimes.com/25162259-761/latin-king-leader-wants-to-conceal-and-carry.html

[from occupied ga]

I understand your point, but I suspect that the process is self selecting. People who know that they'll hit a snag don't bother applying.

OTO when I look at the 2nd amendment I see nothing about exceptions and needing permission from the government to exercise a right. If you need permission then it is no longer a right, but a privlege. I see nothing about magazine limitations being constitutional (ala NY)Although it's encouraging that 99+% of the people applying have clean records, the fact they they're being checked at all is discouraging.

[zeugma]

Interesting story. Sounds to me like if they want to deny this fellow his rights, they'd do better to actually convict him of something. I'm quite sure they'll find a way to deny him the right to carry, but it's wrong. Just think of the abuse of process that can come from being able to deny someone's rights based on them having been charged not not convicted of a crime. Perhaps if the police had been doing their jobs, this would all be a moot point no?

[rellimpank]

—yep—and when I read the comments after the article the other day when it was published, that seemed to be the consensus—

-there were of course , numerous examples cited of “gangbangers” plea bargaining out of serious offenses-—