No; as the opinion says: “A local licensing authority need not write a decision rivaling War and Peace[4] in length, but its decision must still address the salient reasoning for the denial of a license. In doing so, the necessary findings to support the determination must be made, and “[t]hose findings must, of course, be factual rather than conclusional.””
“Because” is not salient reasoning, nor is it a showing of factual findings.
Also, note one of the footnotes – “after observing that the petitioner held “several gun licenses from other states” and was “[a]n avid gun collector,” we stated that the petitioner “ha[d] a proper reason for carrying a pistol or revolver.” ”
While they still have a despicable “reason” requirement, “because I collect guns and have a carry permit elsewhere” is in precedent as … a reason that the local LEO has to respect.
The Court, in this response, is not helping the local LEO arbitrarily deny all applicants, which looks to be the locality’s history.
May 12th, 2015 at 9:08 pm
I have to admit I’m surprised by that. RI is pretty much a carbon copy of NJ and NY on their feelings about guns.
May 13th, 2015 at 12:40 pm
Oh, they’ll still turn you down for a CCW; but now when you ask them “Why?” they have to say “Because!”
May 13th, 2015 at 5:29 pm
No; as the opinion says: “A local licensing authority need not write a decision rivaling War and Peace[4] in length, but its decision must still address the salient reasoning for the denial of a license. In doing so, the necessary findings to support the determination must be made, and “[t]hose findings must, of course, be factual rather than conclusional.””
“Because” is not salient reasoning, nor is it a showing of factual findings.
Also, note one of the footnotes – “after observing that the petitioner held “several gun licenses from other states” and was “[a]n avid gun collector,” we stated that the petitioner “ha[d] a proper reason for carrying a pistol or revolver.” ”
While they still have a despicable “reason” requirement, “because I collect guns and have a carry permit elsewhere” is in precedent as … a reason that the local LEO has to respect.
The Court, in this response, is not helping the local LEO arbitrarily deny all applicants, which looks to be the locality’s history.