411 from ISP on board review

[jkdkaliman101]

I am a firm believer in the 2nd amendment but if these people are being flagged legitimately I support the law enforcement agencies 100%.

 

Short of a court order or court conviction that makes you a prohibited person (I don't even fully agree with the list of qualifiers that make you prohibited) there is no reason any LEO should be able to object let alone the board be able to deny...

 

I support the entire Constitution and that Constitution does not grant LEO or a politically appointed group the power to arbitrarily interfere or deny anyone's protected rights based on 'opinions or feelings' without that persons day in court and being found by that court through due process to lose the rights...

 

So unlike you I will not and can not support law enforcement in this matter as it will be abused, in fact by design it's pretty much abuse already, IMO...

Agreed. Edited February 12, 2014 at 03:46 AM by jkdkaliman101

[Molly B.]

in fact by design it's pretty much abuse already, IMO...

 

It's not abuse unless, until someone is unfairly denied a license to carry. We know Sheriff Dartt is filing objections over nonsense. We can only wait and see if it turns into abuse. Unless and until it is, we need to give the process a chance to work. If rights are denied unfairly, then the fight is on.

[RockerXX]

It's not abuse unless, until someone is unfairly denied a license to carry. We know Sheriff Dartt is filing objections over nonsense. We can only wait and see if it turns into abuse. Unless and until it is, we need to give the process a chance to work. If rights are denied unfairly, then the fight is on.

 

How can you say that it's not abuse in the first sentence, follow with the second sentence that we know Dart is abusing it, and follow that by your third sentence that says we have to wait to see if it's abused?

 

The fact that Dart is already abusing it at will pretty much proves my point that by design it's an abuse and is infringing upon those flagged peoples rights, many of them members here apparently...

 

I can't agree with your philosophy that it's not abuse until the board rules and denies a right... IMO the fact that LEO and an appointed board are able to interfere at all with a protected right without the persons day in court is abuse enough, irregardless of the final outcome...

 

IMO it also violates the 5th and 14th amendments guarantee of due process and infringes upon the 2nd as well...

 

Sorry but I will never support the review board and process...

Edited February 12, 2014 at 04:04 AM by RockerXX

[Molly B.]

It's not abuse unless, until someone is unfairly denied a license to carry. We know Sheriff Dartt is filing objections over nonsense. We can only wait and see if it turns into abuse. Unless and until it is, we need to give the process a chance to work. If rights are denied unfairly, then the fight is on.

 

How can you say that it's not abuse in the first sentence, follow with the second sentence that we know Dart is abusing it, and follow that by your third sentence that says we have to wait to see if it's abused?

 

 

 

Because we do not know yet if anyone at all is going to tolerate Dartt's nonsense. If his nonsense is discredited and licenses are issued then he will eventually get the picture that his objecting nonsense is for naught. Dartt is not the be all, end all here. I believe his wailing, gnashing, screeching will fade into oblivion.

[Marie]

Molly, love the "screeching."

 

Dart would be best described by this quote from Macbeth:

 

 

It is a tale

Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,

Signifying nothing.

[Molly B.]

Molly, love the "screeching."

 

Dart would be best described by this quote from Macbeth:

 

 

It is a tale

Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,

Signifying nothing.

 

Love it!!

[TyGuy]

I love that quote even if MacBeth isn't one of my faves.

[Dr. Rat]

Although your exuberance is appreciated, you really didn't add anything to the original post of this thread and actually may have included some misinformation.

 

1) "if your application was placed under Board Review, that could only be done by ISP or a local law enforcement agency period" Common knowledge

2) "As far as a letter being sent out to you, the ISP has up to 90 days if you had your live scan submitted or 120 days" Common knowledge

3)".........and go ahead and approve the applicant at which point the applicant will not be notified other than his status will change to "approved" I addressed that in point number three in the OP

4) " If the Board requires more info then they will contact you with instructions how to proceed further. If at the end of the 90 or 120 days you were denied, again you will have directions on how to appeal" If they require more info from the Applicant, the ISP or the objecting agency they MAY request more information or time to review if needed. Otherwise the board will make a decision within a thirty day time period (the ISP also has ten days to get an objected application to the board for review per section 87 of the FCCL)

5) "I was also told by this higher up staff that they cannot control what LEO objects to but unless they have documentation and proof that you are a clear and present danger they will not be able to get your permit denied" True that they have no control over the nature of an objection. False that they need proof that you are a "clear and present danger". They only need reasonable suspicion that you are a danger to yourself or others to file an objection. The board then decides if there is a preponderance of evidence to support that claim. Clear and present danger applies to the FOID ACT and the eligibility to receive or maintain a FOID card.

6) your last statement in which you mention your conversation with a Gat Guns staff member contradicts what the ISP manager told you. The manager "dared to prove her wrong" in her affirmation that it's unlikely an applicant would be denied. The woman in charge of the CCW class evidently thinks otherwise

 

To add to that, "truth" is relative. You could potentially have 5 different law enforcement personal look at the same app and have differing opinions on the applicants "danger" risk.

 

Thanks for making the effort though.

 

Actually, this post was about how people at ISP are interpreting the law and what they expect to happen, not how it is written, so I found it valuable. It never hurts to get more info.

 

As for your point 4 - the FCCA states in Section 15 that the ISP has to send the objection and application to the Board within 10 days of completing all necessary background checks - which could be weeks later, so long as they adhere to the 90/120 days time frame. Section 87 concerns appeals.

Edited February 12, 2014 at 01:52 PM by Dr. Rat

[Colt guy]

Doesn't ISP have the authority to deny the flimsy denials of Dart et al or does it immediately go to the board ?

[Dr. Rat]

Doesn't ISP have the authority to deny the flimsy denials of Dart et al or does it immediately go to the board ?

 

The FCCA states that "If a law enforcement agency submits an objection within 30 days after the entry of an applicant into the database, the Department shall submit the objection and all information related to the application to the Board within 10 days of completing all necessary background checks." So it look like if a local LEO objects to an application, it automatically goes to the Board.

 

Truth is, we don't really know how flimsy the objections are yet. AFAIK, the Board hasn't met and no one has evaluated the evidence supporting the objections.

[marathonrunner]

The Review Board may contact you they may deem the LEO has no basis and approve your application with no interaction from you. It all depends on what LEO is objecting to and unless LEO can show proof, not just because they don't like you, then they won't be able to go anywhere according to a high level ISP Manager.

[gpsgreek]

Don't know if this helps or has any bearing on UR but I work for a municipality and have gone through several background checks, physical and mental checks and drug tests. All came back clean or I probably wouldn't be working. I have worked for 3 municipalities over last 4 years and all did the same checks with finger prints and all.

I am a Board Review candidate. Why? I have 2 cousins and 2 uncles with the same name and I cannot vouch for them. I think name similarities are causing this. Dart is overwhelmed and just runs a name and not the full profile. I have made some calls to friends in LE and am waiting for reply.

I will post as I hear.

[Dr. Rat]

Don't know if this helps or has any bearing on UR but I work for a municipality and have gone through several background checks, physical and mental checks and drug tests. All came back clean or I probably wouldn't be working. I have worked for 3 municipalities over last 4 years and all did the same checks with finger prints and all.

I am a Board Review candidate. Why? I have 2 cousins and 2 uncles with the same name and I cannot vouch for them. I think name similarities are causing this. Dart is overwhelmed and just runs a name and not the full profile. I have made some calls to friends in LE and am waiting for reply.

I will post as I hear.

 

That's interesting. I hadn't thought about the shortcut possibility.

[jkdkaliman101]

Don't know if this helps or has any bearing on UR but I work for a municipality and have gone through several background checks, physical and mental checks and drug tests. All came back clean or I probably wouldn't be working. I have worked for 3 municipalities over last 4 years and all did the same checks with finger prints and all.

I am a Board Review candidate. Why? I have 2 cousins and 2 uncles with the same name and I cannot vouch for them. I think name similarities are causing this. Dart is overwhelmed and just runs a name and not the full profile. I have made some calls to friends in LE and am waiting for reply.

I will post as I hear.

just found out recently that there is another man with the same name as me living in illinois albeit a different County that was convicted of a heinous And brutal murder, armed robbery and Aggrevated kidnapping.

 

Kinda erie reading the report with my name in it!

Edited February 12, 2014 at 06:11 PM by jkdkaliman101

[Hatchet]

Don't know if this helps or has any bearing on UR but I work for a municipality and have gone through several background checks, physical and mental checks and drug tests. All came back clean or I probably wouldn't be working. I have worked for 3 municipalities over last 4 years and all did the same checks with finger prints and all.

I am a Board Review candidate. Why? I have 2 cousins and 2 uncles with the same name and I cannot vouch for them. I think name similarities are causing this. Dart is overwhelmed and just runs a name and not the full profile. I have made some calls to friends in LE and am waiting for reply.

I will post as I hear.

just found out recently that there is another man with the same name as me living in illinois albeit a different County that was convicted of a heinous And brutal murder, armed robbery and Aggrevated kidnapping.

 

Kinda erie reading the report with my name in it!

 

When I was 12 there was an article with my name in it.(different person) 23 i think and on $1million bail for selling coke and threatening to kill an under cover cop. But he is still in cook county jail to this day. So i'm hoping they don't get me mixed up with him.

[skinnyb82]

I may not be under board review but if you wanna talk about common names, there's some piece of work in Wisconsin (where I was born, lived there until I was 18) with whom I share first, middle initial, and last, and he has an insanely long sheet for everything from reckless driving, DUI, deadbeat dad stuff, etc. WI court records are public and searchable online. I ran my name and it spit out 74 results, 3 pages, mostly his stuff too. Ugh.

 

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk 2

Edited February 12, 2014 at 07:01 PM by skinnyb82

[potomuss]

So now we know why you left Wisconsin!

[gpsgreek]

jkdkaliman101

 

just found out recently that there is another man with the same name as me living in illinois albeit a different County that was convicted of a heinous And brutal murder, armed robbery and Aggrevated kidnapping.

 

Kinda erie reading the report with my name in it!

 

 

 

You can find something with your name on it. I cannot find anything but an obituary, Village ordinance reports and corporation info with my name included. Whatever they have/may have is not available to the normal Google user. I did find out that my one cousin was arrested for a DUI 8-10 years ago. That may answer somethings but raises the question of why wasn't my address checked and that would have cleared up that report. Oh well. I am not losing faith yet and can wait but I have been racking my brain "what have I done that I don't remember"? I like the rest have had my share of crazy stories to share but none have included LE of visits.

 

I am having my name run on LEADS computer in the next day or two and hopefully I won't find anything. I am just getting ready to prepare answers to false accusations but I really need to know. Curiosity killed the cat.... Satisfaction brought him back....

[operator45]

Gpsgreek im in the same boat as you. Passed physical/mental/background/lie detectors.... and im under board review? I have a very uncommon name but I share it with my father and now my son... when searched on google all I can find is my arrest in 2003 for a village ordinance under age possession of alochol that was dropped in court (I was the passenger in a vehicle and didnt know thrre was beer in the trunk) so if thats what dart flagged me on so be it but cmon! Its the not knowing who and for what I was flagged thats got me thinking to much.

[gpsgreek]

ISRA has reported, you guys should already know, but I will post anyway..

 

As of Tuesday, February 11, 2014, there are 39,549 submitted Concealed Carry applications; 548 objections.

 

they shouldnt call it objections... they should say 548 Darted..

[operator45]

The other 39000 darts missed the dart board!

[gpsgreek]

Any word on Board Review status? Has anyone heard when and if the Board will meet? If the numbers are correct they will probably not be able to go through 550 objections at one time. I, like some others, am almost at the 55 day mark. Still don't have a clue why I am where I am.

 

Todd, Molly ??? any input??

 

Thanks.

[POAT54]

ISRA has reported, you guys should already know, but I will post anyway..

 

As of Tuesday, February 11, 2014, there are 39,549 submitted Concealed Carry applications; 548 objections.

 

they shouldnt call it objections... they should say 548 Darted..

Nope, only 300 were darted as of 2/11/14. The rest of the sate did the half.

But dart is running about 2 to 1. 3% objections in crook. .08% for the rest of the state.

[chislinger]

When I was 12 there was an article with my name in it.(different person) 23 i think and on $1million bail for selling coke and threatening to kill an under cover cop. But he is still in cook county jail to this day. So i'm hoping they don't get me mixed up with him.

Still in Cook County jail after all those years??? Will the case ever go to trial?

[Hatchet]

When I was 12 there was an article with my name in it.(different person) 23 i think and on $1million bail for selling coke and threatening to kill an under cover cop. But he is still in cook county jail to this day. So i'm hoping they don't get me mixed up with him.

Still in Cook County jail after all those years??? Will the case ever go to trial?

Ha just re-read what I wrote. lol its Chicago, trials are trivial in there view. I remember when I was enlisting in the navy at 18 the court got us mixed up when they did my background check. Good thing I warned them about it before hand lol.

[almosthuman75]

My status went to under board review yesterday. Do they have to supply reasoning for their objection or can it be just because? I don't have a criminal background.......I got a parking ticket in St Louis last year and before that I got a ticket for improper display of registration in 1998. Surely that isn't a disqualifier. (sarcasm intended)

[Dr. Rat]

My status went to under board review yesterday. Do they have to supply reasoning for their objection or can it be just because? I don't have a criminal background.......I got a parking ticket in St Louis last year and before that I got a ticket for improper display of registration in 1998. Surely that isn't a disqualifier. (sarcasm intended)

 

Nobody has heard anything official yet about why they're under Board review. People have speculated that an improper 10 year residency history can send you there. Are you sure yours matches the state's records?

[almosthuman75]

I would hope they match. how would I find out what the states records say?

[Dr. Rat]

I would hope they match. how would I find out what the states records say?

 

You can't. You can only infer what they say by remembering any address changes you've made with them for your DL or FOID or other things. A discrepancy between those and what you list on the application might be enough to get you flagged for further review since it interferes with the local LE objection process.

[jkdkaliman101]

Patiently waiting for the board to act on my application. Everything runs like ice cold molasses with this state. You can expect to hear nothing for at least a month. Ps I have a pretty good idea why I was flagged. I'm just waiting to find out how they vote.