heck with telling us, once it's all done you might need to write a book!!!pete7469 wrote:carlson1 wrote:This is very interesting. I sure wish you were able to discuss the original charges.
I really would like to share every mundane detail, but I don't want to compromise my case in any way because I'm pretty certain it's unique. Once it is finally resolved to my benefit which I'm certain it will be, I will be more than happy to report every detail so that anyone who reads it will not fall into the same circumstance.
I don't know how much government drones pay attention to the internet venting about the abuse of power we labor under, but I'd rather play it safe.
However to update, DPS did their 2nd appeal a while back and the judge granted them audience. Briefs have been filed and I'm confident the judgement will not be reversed.
It still frosts my hide that someone would dedicate so much tax payer resource to deny someone a right that was deliberately not taken from them in a court of law.
I could even see if there was even a single police report or anything thing else on record that indicated a pattern of behavior that would lead a rational person to conclude issuing my CHL was a public safety issue. That's why I'm convinced it's not a public safety issue, it's a political/employment justification issue dragged out by bureaucrooks who have nothing else to do .
I have several irons in the fire on ways to clear this up, but I would still appreciate any information or points of contact to legal professionals that have backgrounds in fire arms law.
don't ya love bureaucrats?
go get'em