Woman denied permit because of who she’s married to.

Posted by Jonathan at 11 November 2011

Category: Suitability

I have serious issue with the Doutel case.  Ed Peruta has information regarding this case on his site http://www.ctgunrights.com/.  This is one of those topics that come up from time to time regarding what happens when one half of a couple lose their civil rights regarding firearms possession and ownership.  Granted, that can be a whole ‘nother topic, but I digress.  I suggest reading up on Ed’s page about the Doutel case, it makes for rather interesting reading.

Flash forward to the 11.10.11 Board of Firearms Permit Examiners (BFPE) hearing.  I observe these hearings so that I can gather information to help others with the permitting process, but also to help when I work during the legislative session.  Often, there are cases that are shockers.  Yesterday didn’t disappoint.

Glastonbury had a few cases on the agenda, one involved a woman (I will not publish her name here) who was denied a permit by her local issuing authority (Glastonbury).  When prompted during her hearing as to why she was denied, it had NOTHING to do with her.  The case rested solely on her relationship with her husband.  He, indeed, legally cannot handle a firearm.  Understood on that front.  She, has enabled his habits a time or two (often the “path of least resistance” in situations like this).  In this particular case, over a past drug debt and her husbands drinking.  Two instances in an otherwise long marriage.  There “may” have been abuse, but no real confirmed data on this issue.

When outlining his case, the Chief admitted that she, in and of herself, would’ve been granted a permit under other circumstances.  It’s her marriage and prior restraining order (which she did not request because she felt she wasn’t in any danger).  The board, all six members also agreed that she wouldn’t be denied in other circumstances.  But, citing suitability, she was denied 5-1.

The basis for the denial, in the chief’s own words, so she doesn’t become “a future victim”.  Really?  This is basis for denial under suitability?

Now, practically in-arguably, she was her own worst witness.  The topic came around to target shooting (her original reason, she even compared it to bowling).  Then when told her husband wasn’t allowed to even handle the firearm, was going to withdraw.  Discussion then went to not needing a permit to rent a firearm at a range.  A point, I feel, is moot (even though most ranges will indeed require you to have a permit before you can rent).  Then she decided to continue so she could go to the range with her sisters.

It is at this point, I felt that she should have her permit.  But it brought up an interesting topic.  Is there a process in the State of CT system to grant her a permit, but not allowed to have a firearm in the home.  It was discussed and I think the result was no.  Either way, I still think it’s moot.

So, in the end, they all agree she is suitable in and of herself.  The board also felt that she shouldn’t have a permit in that scenario.  Which then brings up the other issue:  What if she just obtained her eligibility certificate?  She would indeed get that certificate as it has a lower burden of suitability.

Either way, all that suitability did in this case is prevent a woman from recreational shooting with family or possibly the ability to defend herself.  For the record, that low crime town of Glastonbury also had a home invasion the same time of this hearing – http://www.nbcconnecticut.com/news/local/Home-Invasion-Crime-Glastonbury-133678253.html

I believe the BFPE has an open seat.  Maybe the governor should fill the seat with a woman.


  1. Chris says

    I think the only problem with going for the CoE now is she has already been denied a permit and will be required to state that and explain why on her app for the CoE. *Should* she still get the CoE? Yes. Will she? Probably not. Is there something in the law that allows them to deny based on prior denials? No time to look right now.

    • Jonathan says

      She will have NO problem if she has any other disqualifiers, the town will be overuled indeed on this one.

  2. Sammy says

    given the shooting that occurred with A Lanza against his own mother with her own firearms, it does raise the question and answer of “yes”, there sh be a issue a gun permit with a stipulation to prevent it from being in the home, due to circumstances, outside of the actual permit applicant (ie.. the members of the household living at the same address).

    • Jonathan says

      I still think “NO”. The same thing that could prevent both situations from being tragic is a safe. If the firearms are locked and secured in a safe – they don’t fall into the wrong hands.