online chp classes

[Chasbo00]

I'll bet if someone does not want to provide the copies or a stamped envelope, they can still get a permit within the 45 day limit. Probably won't see before 45 days though.

I'll save my fights with city hall for something that matters.

[mrjam2jab]

I guess the online course didn't explain the "3 copy thing" to you.....



You are not required to provide 3 copies of anything. That is a Fairfax (et al) extra-legal requirement because they are too lazy to walk down the hall and push the button on the copier.

At the end of my CHP class, I always explain the application process to students so that they know exactly what they are required to do and provide to the Clerk of the Circuit Court in order to obtain their permit. No extra copies, no SASE, no photos, no credit card processing fees, no blood samples, etc.

A copy of your completed app
A copy of your training certificate
Permit fee - $50 max
Fingerprints, if required by local ordinance.


I'm not trying to be rude at all here honestly, but that is just an example of what you don't get by taking an online course....and you may have just gotten a good bit more.

You know I respect you and what you do.....

However...you can't knock the online class for the "3 copies" thing. The same results would have been obtained from a NRA Basic class, which is also accepted.

[BW1911]

"otherwise my staff has to make the extra copies"

YES, your staff....BECAUSE THAT IS THEIR JOB! If the system that you are using is inefficient, or you are understaffed, then that is up to you as the Clerk of Court to fix, so that you don't burden the citizens. If you can't fix it, then get the hell out of the way and let someone in who can.

That would be my response to the Clerk.

Pick your fights wisely... I would rather have those clerks recognize me and smile when they see me walk up to the counter. MUCH more valuable to have them being helpful than being sullen because I might have raised a stink in the past over something silly and trivial.

[ProShooter]

I guess the online course didn't explain the "3 copy thing" to you.....



You are not required to provide 3 copies of anything. That is a Fairfax (et al) extra-legal requirement because they are too lazy to walk down the hall and push the button on the copier.

At the end of my CHP class, I always explain the application process to students so that they know exactly what they are required to do and provide to the Clerk of the Circuit Court in order to obtain their permit. No extra copies, no SASE, no photos, no credit card processing fees, no blood samples, etc.

A copy of your completed app
A copy of your training certificate
Permit fee - $50 max
Fingerprints, if required by local ordinance.


I'm not trying to be rude at all here honestly, but that is just an example of what you don't get by taking an online course....and you may have just gotten a good bit more.

You know I respect you and what you do.....

However...you can't knock the online class for the "3 copies" thing. The same results would have been obtained from a NRA Basic class, which is also accepted.

I'm not knocking the online course simply because of the 3 copy thing. Its just a very small example of something you don't get in the video. You also don't get to ask questions of the instructor, handle things you've never seen before, talk with other gun owners, etc. I have classes where total strangers end up exchanging contact info, so that they can shoot together.

The point here is this. The vast majority of people who take the online course do so because they feel that they already know enough and just need to get a piece of paper to get their permit....fine. Here's the difference - if you are going to spend money to watch a 30 minute video of stuff that you already know, why not spend a few bucks more and learn about stuff that you don't know?

As I have said before, I could have had a video on our website for the last 4 years and have made money hand over fist. We actually had an idea about an online thing before the first one rolled out. I decided almost immediately that I didn't consider that to be "training", so we scrapped the idea as soon as we had it. Why do you think that the NRA has told their instructors NOT to involve themselves in any online training? I'm sure that they could create a video and make money off of it.

[ProShooter]

"otherwise my staff has to make the extra copies"

YES, your staff....BECAUSE THAT IS THEIR JOB! If the system that you are using is inefficient, or you are understaffed, then that is up to you as the Clerk of Court to fix, so that you don't burden the citizens. If you can't fix it, then get the hell out of the way and let someone in who can.

That would be my response to the Clerk.

Pick your fights wisely... I would rather have those clerks recognize me and smile when they see me walk up to the counter. MUCH more valuable to have them being helpful than being sullen because I might have raised a stink in the past over something silly and trivial.

So, you want the clerk to greet you with a smile in 5 years when you go to renew, because 5 years earlier you didn't give them a hassle about doing their job according to the law?

What you call silly and trivial, I call giving them an inch. I expect more out of my elected officials.

[BW1911]

So, you want the clerk to greet you with a smile in 5 years when you go to renew, because 5 years earlier you didn't give them a hassle about doing their job according to the law?

What you call silly and trivial, I call giving them an inch. I expect more out of my elected officials.

Well, if CHP renewals are the ONLY thing you ever do there, then fine, ruin their day with haughty impunity. The ladies who you probably actually deal with are not elected, they are employees of the court. They are human, just like you and me, and they follow their employer's (you know, the one you ELECTED) policies, just like you and me. And yeah, my guess is that they'll probably remember YOU five years later! My ladies at the courthouse remember me...

[mk4]

So, you want the clerk to greet you with a smile in 5 years when you go to renew, because 5 years earlier you didn't give them a hassle about doing their job according to the law?

What you call silly and trivial, I call giving them an inch. I expect more out of my elected officials.

Well, if CHP renewals are the ONLY thing you ever do there, then fine, ruin their day with haughty impunity. The ladies who you probably actually deal with are not elected, they are employees of the court. They are human, just like you and me, and they follow their employer's (you know, the one you ELECTED) policies, just like you and me. And yeah, my guess is that they'll probably remember YOU five years later! My ladies at the courthouse remember me...

correct... the clerk is ELECTED and is a servant of the public. as such, the clerk should be polite and helpful to any of the electorate that gave them the job. the staff is EMPLOYED by the clerk's office which, if i'm not mistaken, is funded by taxes collected from the electorate. they ALL work for the citizens of the circuit. they should be polite, knowledgeable and efficient in ANY business they transact for/with you. in the issue at hand re: chp and extra requirements, your taxes already paid for copiers, paper, envelopes, postage and wages.

Proshooter is making a philosophical point about "giving an inch", and it's an important and completely valid point that has concrete effects in reality. a non-trivial number of circuits have (or have had) extraneous requirements in the chp process. many of them have been postulated as being an attempt at discouraging citizens from applying by creating theses extraneous nuisances.

the good thing to report is that, as of 7/1/2012, it will be a violation of statute for a circuit to impose ANY extraneous requirements. no multiple copies, no sase, no need to bring a utility bill to show address... NO EXTRA BS. the option to require fingerprint of 1st-time resident applicants is also gone as of 7/1/2012. it will be interesting to see how quickly clerks' offices will comply and how many will need to be pressured through appropriate channels.

[Chasbo00]

the good thing to report is that, as of 7/1/2012, it will be a violation of statute for a circuit to impose ANY extraneous requirements. no multiple copies, no sase, no need to bring a utility bill to show address... NO EXTRA BS. the option to require fingerprint of 1st-time resident applicants is also gone as of 7/1/2012. it will be interesting to see how quickly clerks' offices will comply and how many will need to be pressured through appropriate channels.

Have you a statute cite for this? I would like to read it.

[mk4]

here ya go...
both are modifications to section D of 18.2-308. the fingerprint change is a big strike-out. the other is a language addition above the fingerprint text.

hth.

http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504 ... +sum+HB754
HB 754 Concealed handgun permit applications; removes option for locality to require fingerprints.
http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504 ... 1+sum+SB67
SB 67 Concealed handgun permit applications; removes option for locality to require fingerprints.

http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504 ... +sum+SB563
SB 563 Concealed handgun permit; alters certain application procedures to obtain.

[BW1911]

What you call silly and trivial, I call giving them an inch. I expect more out of my elected officials.

Proshooter is making a philosophical point about "giving an inch", and it's an important and completely valid point that has concrete effects in reality. a non-trivial number of circuits have (or have had) extraneous requirements in the chp process. many of them have been postulated as being an attempt at discouraging citizens from applying by creating theses extraneous nuisances.

w/e. Life must be very stressful for the folks who never give an inch... I still think you catch more flies with honey than vinegar, and I'd rather pick my fights over more important issues... and when I DO pick a fight, I'd like to have allies whom I haven't alienated on my side. I'm done.

[mk4]

What you call silly and trivial, I call giving them an inch. I expect more out of my elected officials.

Proshooter is making a philosophical point about "giving an inch", and it's an important and completely valid point that has concrete effects in reality. a non-trivial number of circuits have (or have had) extraneous requirements in the chp process. many of them have been postulated as being an attempt at discouraging citizens from applying by creating theses extraneous nuisances.

w/e. Life must be very stressful for the folks who never give an inch... I still think you catch more flies with honey than vinegar, and I'd rather pick my fights over more important issues... and when I DO pick a fight, I'd like to have allies whom I haven't alienated on my side. I'm done.

no worries, Mongo.
Proshooter and i (and i'm sure a few others) will take the watch trying to prevent our rights (yours and ours) from being chipped away at, one inch at a time. 'we the people' have already given up far far too much, imho.

[Chasbo00]

here ya go...
both are modifications to section D of 18.2-308. the fingerprint change is a big strike-out. the other is a language addition above the fingerprint text.

hth.

http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504 ... +sum+HB754
HB 754 Concealed handgun permit applications; removes option for locality to require fingerprints.
http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504 ... 1+sum+SB67
SB 67 Concealed handgun permit applications; removes option for locality to require fingerprints.

http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504 ... +sum+SB563
SB 563 Concealed handgun permit; alters certain application procedures to obtain.

Thanks for the good links. I knew the locally required fingerprint requirement was history. The wording I was looking for is I think this:

"No information or documentation other than that which is allowed on the application in accordance with this subsection may be requested or required by the clerk or the court."

So, playing Philadelphia Lawyer, how does this prohibit the Fairfax County Circuit Clerk from asking for additional copies and a SASE? Have I missed something in the cites?

[mk4]

They can *ask* for just about anything, and be told *no* with authority, but after 7/1 they can longer create procedures that have the effect of hindering the statute-governed process. Some circuit websites spell out the process with all kinds of add-ons that can give the impression of an application packet being incomplete without them. Words and the way they're interpreted set tone and the statute removes ambiguity. It gives the citizen the authority to supply the required materials and expect efficient processing, whether a clerk or circuit likes it, politically, or otherwise.

The VA Supreme Court Chief Justice's office oversees the circuits, as you may know, and they are very efficient at making sure circuits are in compliance with statute. I'm sure there will be some circuits that test that resolve again after 7/1. Again, imho, it's circuits in firearm/chp unfriendly locales that are the worst offenders. Greene County was a model of fast, friendly and efficient service.

[Chasbo00]

They can *ask* for just about anything, and be told *no* with authority, but after 7/1 they can longer create procedures that have the effect of hindering the statute-governed process. Some circuit websites spell out the process with all kinds of add-ons that can give the impression of an application packet being incomplete without them. Words and the way they're interpreted set tone and the statute removes ambiguity. It gives the citizen the authority to supply the required materials and expect efficient processing, whether a clerk or circuit likes it, politically, or otherwise.

The VA Supreme Court Chief Justice's office oversees the circuits, as you may know, and they are very efficient at making sure circuits are in compliance with statute. I'm sure there will be some circuits that test that resolve again after 7/1. Again, imho, it's circuits in firearm/chp unfriendly locales that are the worst offenders. Greene County was a model of fast, friendly and efficient service.

I fail to see where the stature would prohibit a clerk asking for extra copies or even providing a SASA. As I read the statute, it prohibits information or document requests that are for other than information on the application. Maybe someone could make a case for a SASE being actually documents, but I think that's a stretch. How does requesting extra copies of the application violate the statute? Now if they asked for a picture, then that would be a violation as this clearly is information or documentation other than what is on the application.

[BW1911]

no worries, Mongo.
Proshooter and i (and i'm sure a few others) will take the watch trying to prevent our rights (yours and ours) from being chipped away at, one inch at a time. 'we the people' have already given up far far too much, imho.

Really? Are you so worried about the length of the chain that you've forgotten the chain?

Consider this while you stand up for MY rights. Hypothetically, if I believe in Constitutional Carry and that "the Second Amendment is my carry permit", and that ANY paperwork required to "bear arms" is an infringement on my rights, then when you go to war with the Circuit Court over an extra copy or two, you two aren't standing up for me. In fact, you'd be facilitating the continued denial of my 2A rights by giving the CHP permitting system legitimacy by even APPLYING for a CHP... From that perspective, y'all haven't given an inch... you've given in completely... After all, REQUIRING an application, an application fee, and proof of competency at ALL does not indicate that a RIGHT is being exercised, does it? I wonder what would happen if all of a sudden, NO ONE applied for CHP's anymore, no one worried about reciprocity, and EVERYONE carried when and where they pleased... or not... without permission or permit. Is a law that cannot be enforced a moral law? IDK? Anyway, all hypothetical...

However, I do appreciate your sincerity, I just disagree with a "take no prisoners" approach over the little stuff... like an extra copy. Now darn it, I said I was done and now I certainly am... after all, "Mongo just a pawn in the game of life"

[mk4]

no worries, Mongo.
Proshooter and i (and i'm sure a few others) will take the watch trying to prevent our rights (yours and ours) from being chipped away at, one inch at a time. 'we the people' have already given up far far too much, imho.

Really? Are you so worried about the length of the chain that you've forgotten the chain?

Consider this while you stand up for MY rights. Hypothetically, if I believe in Constitutional Carry and that "the Second Amendment is my carry permit", and that ANY paperwork required to "bear arms" is an infringement on my rights, then when you go to war with the Circuit Court over an extra copy or two, you two aren't standing up for me. In fact, you'd be facilitating the continued denial of my 2A rights by giving the CHP permitting system legitimacy by even APPLYING for a CHP... From that perspective, y'all haven't given an inch... you've given in completely... After all, REQUIRING an application, an application fee, and proof of competency at ALL does not indicate that a RIGHT is being exercised, does it? I wonder what would happen if all of a sudden, NO ONE applied for CHP's anymore, no one worried about reciprocity, and EVERYONE carried when and where they pleased... or not... without permission or permit. Is a law that cannot be enforced a moral law? IDK? Anyway, all hypothetical...

However, I do appreciate your sincerity, I just disagree with a "take no prisoners" approach over the little stuff... like an extra copy. Now darn it, I said I was done and now I certainly am... after all, "Mongo just a pawn in the game of life"

nowhere, before now, has constitutional carry come up in this thread. that is the goal that i and a number of other activists have begun working on very hard for the next session of the ga. will we get it? who knows... it's certainly an uphill battle, but one certainly worth fighting.

to be completely clear, i absolutely feel that the entire chp permitting process is counter to the va constitution and the us 2a, which has its roots in the va constitution. unfortunately, over time, the right has been so heavily infringed that now we have statutes governing concealed carry. none of us can change history, but i don't think we should give any more ground, either.

finally, nothing in the new statute precludes the circuit from *asking* for anything. they just can't *require* it or set policy to hinder the process if the extra requests are not complied with. copies and envelopes and stamps are no big deal, in and of themselves, but they represent further acquiescence where there should be none related to rights. some circuits have made proof of residence via bills or insurance policies a *requirement* though, and that would be counter to statute. there is another post where the circuit seemingly arbitrarily refused to recognize a dd-214 as proof of competency, and that's counter to existing statute.

unfortunately, it seems as though most public servants really do need everything spelled out in black and white. leave anything 'in the gray' and all manner of nonsensical bs arises. lines must be clearly drawn.

thanks for the vigorous debate.

[Esquire]

Here is an anecdote to add to the extra requirements discussion. I had to re-file my application after a SANFU with my competency documentation. I went back to the clerk in Arlington to pay another $50 to file my application for the second time. After giving the documents to the clerk she said I was missing copies of the extra pages of the application, meaning the pages the county fills out. When I filed my first application they did not ask for extra copies of those pages and I did not provide them. The other clerk reached under the desk and pulled out a stack of pre-printed sheets to add to the required copies of my application. They charged me an extra $4.50. I've been an attorney for over a decade and I am far from naive about how local, state and the federal government works. Why do they do this when it is not required under the statute? Because they can and no one calls them on it. It is the same with any bureaucracy that is forced to do something they have no interest in doing. Until citizens demand they follow the regs or the folks in Richmond get involved they will continue to flout the law.

[Chasbo00]

I've been an attorney for over a decade and I am far from naive about how local, state and the federal government works. Why do they do this when it is not required under the statute? Because they can and no one calls them on it.

Since you are an attorney, why did you not call them on it or fight it?

[mrjam2jab]

I've been an attorney for over a decade and I am far from naive about how local, state and the federal government works. Why do they do this when it is not required under the statute? Because they can and no one calls them on it.

Since you are an attorney, why did you not call them on it or fight it?

Exactly. You of all people should have been quick to deny them their ways.

and you said you "paid another $50"...so did you pay $100 + the 4.50????

[Esquire]

I've been an attorney for over a decade and I am far from naive about how local, state and the federal government works. Why do they do this when it is not required under the statute? Because they can and no one calls them on it.

Since you are an attorney, why did you not call them on it or fight it?

Because I had to take time off work to Metro from DC (where I work) to Arlington just to get fingerprinted and submit my application. The 15 minutes I might spend arguing with a clerk would cost me many, many, many times the $4.50 in lost billing. I could be 100% in the right but they could still refuse to accept my application. The cost to fighting such a petty annoyance, at least for me, isn't worth my valuable time. Even if I didn't care about wasting my time what would happen to the clerk's office if I "won"? Nothing. Maybe they get an admonishment from someone in Richmond, which they don't care about to begin with.