R.I. Supreme Court sides with applicant for concealed weapon permit

[Midwest 28]

R.I. Supreme Court sides with applicant for concealed weapon permit

Reading into this article, and other articles regarding this story. It appears that "Shall Issue" in Rhode Island is closer to reality or in fact shall issue depending how you read it.

 

Interesting that Rhode Island has a "good reason" clause for getting the permit. Is that the same as "justifiable need". 


http://www.providencejournal.com/art...NEWS/150429594

"The Rhode Island Supreme Court ruled Wednesday in favor of a man claiming he was wrongly denied a concealed weapon permit by the former police chief of East Providence, a city that had not given such a license for 10 years."

However, read this....

"In October 2012, the police chief sent Gadomski a letter denying the permit based on what the chief deemed a lack of need and because Gadomski had two misdemeanor charges from 20 years earlier. The charges — destruction of property and possession of alcohol by a minor — were both disclosed in the application and ultimately dismissed."

The police chief was accused of abusing his position by putting his own discretion on the conceal carry license. But the State Supreme Court ruled in the applicant's favor.

While it would seem that "Shall Issue" is now the order of the day in Rhode Island with this ruling. Does it only apply to this particular case only? Or where a city like East Providence has denied issuing carry permits? The article doesn't come right out and say that Shall Issue is the order of the day, although it sounds like it.

"Rhode Island law dictates that authorities in any city or town "shall" issue a license or permit to carry a loaded handgun to a person 21 or older "if it appears that the applicant has good reason to fear an injury to his or her person or property or has any other proper reason for carrying a pistol or revolver, and that he or she is a suitable person to be so licensed."

So is Rhode Island  really "shall issue" now? It does appear that a "good reason and/or proper reason'  clause works with shall issue.

[Kevin125 4,772]

Promising.

 

But I'd like this wording to be the law of the land.

 

 

"[insert state name here] law dictates that authorities in any city or town "shall" issue a license or permit to carry a loaded handgun to a person 21 or older "if it appears that the applicant is a suitable person to be so licensed."

 

 

That's in line with "the right the bear arms shall not be infringed."

[maintenanceguy 510]

Promising.

 

But I'd like this wording to be the law of the land.

 

 

"[insert state name here] law dictates that authorities in any city or town "shall" issue a license or permit to carry a loaded handgun to a person 21 or older "if it appears that the applicant is a suitable person to be so licensed."

 

 

That's in line with "the right the bear arms shall not be infringed."

 

in line with the right to bear arms except for the part where a permit is required. 

[Kevin125 4,772]

in line with the right to bear arms except for the part where a permit is required. 

 

Excellent point.  See what living in NJ does to you.....?

[CMJeepster 2,777]

Not even that will make me think about moving back to Rhode Island.

[Kevin125 4,772]

No Ragrets?

 

Not even one letter?

[mipafox 438]

Most people can get permits in RI. They are generally restricted to the area you live in unless you go to the SP or AG I think, which is often more of a pain.

 

I think (not sure) people from out of state get the whole enchilada. Kind of like how most municipalities in Massachusetts give you a "learner's permit" the first time around unless you fight, and don't give you the full blown deal until your second application. While out of staters get the full carry/baby killing assault weapon permit on the first try.

[Zeke 5,504]

Most people can get permits in RI. They are generally restricted to the area you live in unless you go to the SP or AG I think, which is often more of a pain.

 

I think (not sure) people from out of state get the whole enchilada. Kind of like how most municipalities in Massachusetts give you a "learner's permit" the first time around unless you fight, and don't give you the full blown deal until your second application. While out of staters get the full carry/baby killing assault weapon permit on the first try.

Ummm, phrasing

[O-gre 7]

I have a beach house there, going to apply next time I go up. Stay tuned.

[mipafox 438]

I have a beach house there, going to apply next time I go up. Stay tuned.

I would look into whether it is better to apply as resident or non-resident first. I'm guessing you might qualify for both but I haven't read their laws.

[Newtonian 453]

I would look into whether it is better to apply as resident or non-resident first. I'm guessing you might qualify for both but I haven't read their laws.

If memory serves an out of state permit is nowhere as practical as Utah. Unless you own a summer cottage in Newport:

 

[mipafox 438]

If memory serves an out of state permit is nowhere as practical as Utah. Unless you own a summer cottage in Newport:

 

^Ignore this, he was not paying attention.