jgullock said:
So, if your called in for an "interview" and they ask something like how many weapons you own (as I've read has happened) . . .
Not exactly eligibility or good moral character, is it?
jgullock said:
. . . my response should be "that's irrelevant and not a requirement for this process" or some such? Where do you draw the line between appropriate and inappropriate questioning?
Me, personally? [
WARNING: Following MP's suggestions may cause denial of license] Well, I would bring along a copy of 16-11-129, with the eligibility requirements (all in subsection (b) of the statute - all six or seven of them) highlighted in super-bright yellow, and introduce myself to the judge with a big smile and describe how happy I am to get a chance to meet an elected official and what a good public service I think the meeting is and thank the judge for taking the time . . . and then question why the judge did not issue the license back on November . . . whatever the sixtieth day was.
Then I would not answer any questions that do not relate to something in subsection (b) of 129, and, if the judge pushed the issue, would inquire into whether he (or, more likely, she) seems to think this is a discretionary process. I would probably get jailed for contempt right around the time that I asked what part of "shall" did the judge not understand?
:jail:
By the next day, when the Sheriff's Deputy hauls me back into the courtroom unshowered and unshaved, I would have thought up a whole bunch of smart aleck things to say. Then I would probably campaign against the judge in the next election.
After I got out of jail again . . .
