PD chief "purchase permits take more than 5 business days"

[justaguy]

i do have one - utah - and i don't want to go through all the arguments of not having a mn carry permit. utah permit does not allow me to purchase in mn. thus my need for a ptp.

Fair enough, but In case you didn't know we don't argue here.

[pastorpaul]

oh, how could i have forgotten we don't argue here! i swear it is the early stages of old age setting in.

[nyffman]

You can tell me it's none of my business, but why not get a concealed carry permit?

If you don't watch it, you'll be taken off to one of the reeducation camps

[ttousi]

You can tell me it's none of my business, but why not get a concealed carry permit

If you don't watch it, you'll be taken off to one of the reeducation camps

it's already been tried with him (several times)...........it doesn't work.

[justaguy]

You can tell me it's none of my business, but why not get a concealed carry permit?

If you don't watch it, you'll be taken off to one of the reeducation camps

That was a trap. I won $50.00 dollars on a bet that you would point it out. And I wanted to show Pasterpaul that we dont argue

[nyffman]

Oh yeah? Well, trap this! And have a nice day.

[pastorpaul]

Update:
today i received a phone call from a certain lt. of the brooklyn park police dept. was on the phone for 10-15 minutes. conversation was fairly cordial. he asked what the original problem question was. i told him the details and ultimately the issue was it took 13 days to receive my ptp when the legistlation states it must be returned in 7. to summarize his response, he stated there are 2 good reasons for the extension of the 7 day window.
first: the legistlators who passed the law don't fully understand the limitations of many police depts. these pd s cannot "efficiently" comply with the window. the manpower and priorities of the pd may not / cannot efficiently deal with the high number of applications. thus, they wait with all the applications until the following tuesday and have one staff person process them all. he said with this policy in mind, my ptp was only 1 day late. he stated this was a much better and efficient use of bp pd personnel and time.
after a period of debating the concept of the letter of the law and the "efficient" application and enforcement of the law, he continued with
second: the actual text of the law only requires the receipt of the ptp within 7 days of receiving the application for processing. he stated the law does not specify when the local agency is required to process the application. he stated the bp pd has determined to process all ptp applications on tuesdays. they could tell everyone who is applying for a ptp on any other day to go and come back the following tuesday and make application. he stated the bp pd is actually better serving the public by receiving the paperwork and holding it for applicants until tuesday rather than having them reurn a second time to apply.
again, there was a lengthy discussion on this reasoning, especially the difference between "receiving the appllication" and "processing the application".
the conversation never became belligerent nor even tensed even though there was an obvious lack of agreement to the reasoning. i informed the lt. i would think and investigate this further.

[b]what say ye??[b]
a) is this reasoning valid?
b) is the second point even legal?
c) if not, should anything be done about it?
d) if so, what and how?

my personal evaluation so far: i received my ptp, albeit later than the law stipulates, and i was in no crucial need for it. therefore, no big deal. but something about it just doesn't seem right. i am wondering, as stated previously in this thread, is this a "slippery slope"? regardless of what is efficient use of manpower and time, is not the law to be upheld, even if it causes additional effort? i am not a law expert so i stand asking for help from those who are or do know more than i. i do consider myself to be fairly objective, well, most of the time, but do acknowledge times when my toes getting stepped on cause my brain to short circuit unfairly or unwisely.

[phorvick]

When the speed limit was assigned to my local highway, it was set by the authorities without knowing all that goes into travel on that road. It is an inefficient use of my time to abide by it, so I have taken a more logical approach to the limit, one that better serves my needs.

[princewally]

he stated the law does not specify when the local agency is required to process the application. he stated the bp pd has determined to process all ptp applications on tuesdays. they could tell everyone who is applying for a ptp on any other day to go and come back the following tuesday and make application. he stated the bp pd is actually better serving the public by receiving the paperwork and holding it for applicants until tuesday rather than having them reurn a second time to appl

Lies.

624.7131

Subd. 5.Granting of permits.

The chief of police or sheriff shall issue a transferee permit or deny the application within seven days of application for the permit. The chief of police or sheriff shall provide an applicant with written notification of a denial and the specific reason for the denial. The permits and their renewal shall be granted free of charge.

[R.E.T.]

When the speed limit was assigned to my local highway, it was set by the authorities without knowing all that goes into travel on that road. It is an inefficient use of my time to abide by it, so I have taken a more logical approach to the limit, one that better serves my needs.

To make more efficient use of my resources I shall comply only on Sundays.

[hammAR]

To make more efficient use of our time and resources,
we shall remove such sign, convert it to a productive backstop, and relocate it to a local range.....................

[compconsultant]

When the speed limit was assigned to my local highway, it was set by the authorities without knowing all that goes into travel on that road. It is an inefficient use of my time to abide by it, so I have taken a more logical approach to the limit, one that better serves my needs.

To make more efficient use of my resources I shall comply only on Sundays.

I will be even more efficient and comply when I am sleeping.

[Tutmos]

The laws means whatever they feel like unless you have it on hidden video and then it must be out of context

[pastorpaul]

When the speed limit was assigned to my local highway, it was set by the authorities without knowing all that goes into travel on that road. It is an inefficient use of my time to abide by it, so I have taken a more logical approach to the limit, one that better serves my needs.

this was the example i used in my discussion after he said the stuff about efficient use of manpower and time. i prefaced it with, "what if i used this same same argument if i was pulled over by a bp officer ...." i ended the hypothesis with, "i'l bet the officer would not readily agree my excuse would be valid." the lt. responded, "no, he wouldn't." i think it is amazing but not surprising that soe logic espoused by one side is not applicable to the other side.

The laws means whatever they feel like unless you have it on hidden video and then it must be out of context

when the "they" is the powers that be, this is an absolute truism.

Lies.

624.7131

Subd. 5.Granting of permits.

The chief of police or sheriff shall issue a transferee permit or deny the application within seven days of application for the permit. The chief of police or sheriff shall provide an applicant with written notification of a denial and the specific reason for the denial. The permits and their renewal shall be granted free of charge.

princewally - i informed the lt. i had read the actual wording of the legistlation (altho i didn't tell him the source, it was on this forum or tcc, i can't remeber which) and i was fairly certain it says "shall issue .... within 7 days of application". his response was the bit about they are not required in the law to take the applications every day of the week or month, for that matter. on this point of his i am not sure what is the intent of the legistlation or if there is a court precedent that applies. i do confess i believe his reasoning to be a somewhat circumvention not intended to be allowable by the law. i guess what i am saying is he may "legal" in this position but not necessarily righteous.

[Tutmos]

I think you're making the mistake of assuming you were debating with a logical and bright person. On average your local LEO isn't going to be the brightest bulb on the tree. The barrier to entry is fairly low and, again on average, you're not getting the smartest people to debate the reality or finer points of law with. The mental faculties tend to reside more with the prosecuting office where they can act as a filter for the masses of LEO's. In Minnesota over 1/3 of all charges brought by police are rejected for prosecution by the County Attorneys. Let's be honest, essentially anyone that wants to be a LEO can be, case in point being our little innocent girl in Rochester with her gang banger boyfriend.

Since there's virtually nobody to oversee or prosecute LEO's unless it's a major infraction I think the law turns out to mean whatever they want it to mean. Even if you video tape them breaking the law the odds are slim that they'll be prosecuted as they, just like the prosecutors, are agents of the state, they are on the same team. In almost every case a blind eye will be turned unless there is substantial public outcry about the specific case.

As I made sure to note, these are only generalities, which means I'm sure there are plenty of bright honest LEO's out there.

When the speed limit was assigned to my local highway, it was set by the authorities without knowing all that goes into travel on that road. It is an inefficient use of my time to abide by it, so I have taken a more logical approach to the limit, one that better serves my needs.

this was the example i used in my discussion after he said the stuff about efficient use of manpower and time. i prefaced it with, "what if i used this same same argument if i was pulled over by a bp officer ...." i ended the hypothesis with, "i'l bet the officer would not readily agree my excuse would be valid." the lt. responded, "no, he wouldn't." i think it is amazing but not surprising that soe logic espoused by one side is not applicable to the other side.

The laws means whatever they feel like unless you have it on hidden video and then it must be out of context

when the "they" is the powers that be, this is an absolute truism.

Lies.

624.7131

Subd. 5.Granting of permits.

The chief of police or sheriff shall issue a transferee permit or deny the application within seven days of application for the permit. The chief of police or sheriff shall provide an applicant with written notification of a denial and the specific reason for the denial. The permits and their renewal shall be granted free of charge.

princewally - i informed the lt. i had read the actual wording of the legistlation (altho i didn't tell him the source, it was on this forum or tcc, i can't remeber which) and i was fairly certain it says "shall issue .... within 7 days of application". his response was the bit about they are not required in the law to take the applications every day of the week or month, for that matter. on this point of his i am not sure what is the intent of the legistlation or if there is a court precedent that applies. i do confess i believe his reasoning to be a somewhat circumvention not intended to be allowable by the law. i guess what i am saying is he may "legal" in this position but not necessarily righteous.