Permit to Purchase treatment as juvenile?

[mnguy19]

@cobb

I appreciate the help, I'm just not sure you fully read all my posts. No records were accessed, and no law was broken by anyone. This whole process is a case of carelessness and convoluted policies but I never felt like my rights were violated. That's why I'm saying I don't know that a lawyer will help in this situation. There is no way to prosecute someone for carelessness or oversight.

Permit to purchase apps all require a signature for the PD to perform a background check on people. Eagan PD lawfully referred to my background check because I said they could. SLP PD didn't bother looking when if they had, I would have a new gun in my lap. That's what i referred to earlier when I asked why they bother to do background checks if they don't use them. Had they done it, this wouldn't be an issue.

[dsm2nr]

I have dealt with Kirk, the St Louis Park Deputy Chief before. He handles all firearm inquiries for the Chief.

He is a very reasonable guy and asks higher ups if he doesn't know the answer. Rather than assuming anything and throwing misinformation around about him or his department; why not talk to him and find out whats going on?

[Snowgun]

Here is what I think happened:

You checked this stuff on your previous permit, and THATS how it got entered into your current adult record.

This sheriff looked at that or somehow got a hold of whatever you wrote on Saint louis park paperwork, and since there is no record (obviously), he is wondering WTH is going on with you. The Sheriff isn't able to find or access anything, that's why there is the question.

Best thing to do is just talk to the guy and explain the situation.

[ninjaplease!]

no, I don't work for the guy. Matter of fact, I can never use him for a lawyer due to conflict of issue because he is a PT sheriff deputy in the county I live in.

But you obviously don't give much concern to the fact your civil rights are being violated and they are accessing information they should not be.

Since you are disregarding what you came here searching for,....

Enjoy your problem.

What information are they accessing illegally!? The guy said he wasnt sentenced to treatment. He checked on the app that he went to treatment. He needs to prove that he competed treatment before they will issue the permit.

[mrp]

If this were pressed, I definitely would. Luckily for me though, I was never sentenced to attend a treatment facility, it was voluntary, so I essentially should never have answered yes at that box. Basically, it sounds like the issue will be resolved by a few voice mails and phone call or two. The funny thing though is, Eagan PD knows their stuff, caught my mistake, and approved me so it's good to know they're thorough

I would say that St. Louis Park is being more thorough. In my earlier reply, I mentioned one part of the statute that might apply to your situation. Here's another:

(10) a person who:
(iii) is an unlawful user of any controlled substance as defined in chapter 152;

If I understand the situation correctly, you admitted to the St. Louis Park police that you were an unlawful user of a controlled substance. I'd think they could make an argument that they're required (or at least allowed) to follow up on that issue before giving you a permit. I understand if you do not want to spend money on a lawyer at this point, but then you're also going to have to live with having answers which just come flying out of our collective non-lawyer butts.

[bstrawse]

I read your complete post - you're asking a bunch of folks on a forum legal questions - you don't know us, and we're not attorneys.

Some of us, like me, are instructors. My advice is to stop posting about this issue in a public forum and call an attorney. If you'd like advice on who to call, then call Marc Berris. You're welcome to call other attorneys, but Marc happens to have a particular specialty with Minnesota firearms laws.

Don't take legal advice from a forum - call a lawyer.

[ttousi]

I read your complete post - you're asking a bunch of folks on a forum legal questions - you don't know us, and we're not attorneys.

Some of us, like me, are instructors. My advice is to stop posting about this issue in a public forum and call an attorney. If you'd like advice on who to call, then call Marc Berris. You're welcome to call other attorneys, but Marc happens to have a particular specialty with Minnesota firearms laws.

Don't take legal advice from a forum - call a lawyer.

^

sound advice

[gyrfalcon]

What information are they accessing illegally!? The guy said he wasnt sentenced to treatment. He checked on the app that he went to treatment. He needs to prove that he competed treatment before they will issue the permit.

If it was as a juvenile, and not court mandated to the treatment he should have never checked the box. He should see if he can convince the police he incorrectly answered the questions, and ask to resubmit the application.

[mnguy19]

@dsm2nr

I'm sure he is a nice guy, I guess I'm just frustrated because I ordered a pistol and wasn't able to get it. You're right, I don't assume he screwed up but I do know this is not an airtight process either. There has to be some explanation for the inconsistencies from one department to the next. It does seem like this is probably a case of Deputy Chief Kirk airing on the safe side to be sure he doesn't give a permit to someone who shouldn't have one but I just wonder why this happened so differently from one situation to the next. Also, I didn't realize the person accepting my application didn't have access to my background check so thanks for that info. That's kind of what I was looking for from the beginning.

In any case, I am going to call him this morning, I'm sure he's a reasonable guy.

[Snowgun]

There has to be some explanation for the inconsistencies from one department to the next.

You must have never experienced any type of government bureaucracy before.

[mnguy19]

@mrp

I think you said it best. Now knowing that the Dept. Chief doesn't have access to my background check, it does seem reasonable that they would follow up with me having checked the two boxes I did. It was partly my mistake but I just filled out the form exactly as I had previously so I assumed there would be no issues.

SOLVED.

Just got off the phone with Dept. Chief Kirk Dilorenzo and I'm an ass. Kirk is a great guy, said I just needed to come in to the station tonight, initial my corrections where I should have marked no, and he would leave the permit for me at the station. The guy really saved my ass and helped me out as I have my weapons qualification/ccw class tomorrow for work, and now I can use my new pistol.

I still don't know why the difference existed but I do think Eagan PD was likely not as thorough as SLP PD and that's what did it so kudos to mrp.

Thanks for everyone's help; I can confirm that SLP PD is a good department to work with as they'll work with you personally.

[mnguy19]

I guess the moral of the story is, don't check the boxes if you weren't court ordered to go to treatment or were a minor when you went. It seems like if it's not on your adult record, you don't need to report in on your application. Lesson learned.

[Snowgun]

I guess the moral of the story is, don't check the boxes if you weren't court ordered to go to treatment or were a minor when you went. It seems like if it's not on your adult record, you don't need to report in on your application. Lesson learned.

Never offer anything to the police that will be used against you, always communicate through a lawyer when in trouble.