Are We Serious about Fixing Crime in T&T?

[alfa]

I'll ask one more time, what criteria do I need to get an FUL, simple? I realize you only place you can feel you win besides on tuner is with church and porn. Answer the question straight, let's say you and me meet all of the above, you get though and I didn't. What criteria did the COP use?

[redmanjp]

Allyuh go ahead and give a set of Trinis FUL.

Watch bacchanal

u are assuming we giving out FUL like hops bread with zero criteria?

[Habit7]

Answer the question straight, let's say you and me meet all of the above,

Meet what, the criteria?

[alfa]

Answer the question straight, let's say you and me meet all of the above,

Meet what, the criteria?

Yeah we both over 25, no criminal record etc. You get your ful and I don't. What was used to decide that? And it has happened many times already

[MaxPower]

Allyuh go ahead and give a set of Trinis FUL.

Watch bacchanal

u are assuming we giving out FUL like hops bread with zero criteria?

That “criteria” is easy to fulfill.

Just remember, there is no irresponsibility test.

[pugboy]

it’s pure cloak and dagger black box scenes
nobody supposed to know or ask questions
the kicker is you don’t get a rejection
you just get a “your application pending” to keep you hanging

Answer the question straight, let's say you and me meet all of the above,

Meet what, the criteria?

Yeah we both over 25, no criminal record etc. You get your ful and I don't. What was used to decide that? And it has happened many times already

[pugboy]

but there is a psychometric test where the evaluator asks you about your tendencies and ting
plus they interview your other half

[alfa]

it’s pure cloak and dagger black box scenes
nobody supposed to know or ask questions
the kicker is you don’t get a rejection
you just get a “your application pending” to keep you hanging

Answer the question straight, let's say you and me meet all of the above,

Meet what, the criteria?

Yeah we both over 25, no criminal record etc. You get your ful and I don't. What was used to decide that? And it has happened many times already

Correct and the only way to get a decision from them is via judicial review cuz they not even responding to pap letters

[pugboy]

eventually a judge will issue an order for them to have a proper process when it get absurd repeatedly
but by that time they may change the method
ie move the goal posts

[Habit7]

Answer the question straight, let's say you and me meet all of the above,

Meet what, the criteria?

Yeah we both over 25, no criminal record etc. You get your ful and I don't. What was used to decide that? And it has happened many times already

But you said there was no criteria

1. The COP has final say on granting of FULs i.e there is no fixed criteria which she has to abide by like say granting of a building permit by T&C once you satisfy defined criteria.

[alfa]

Take win habit. Hopefully the readers have sense if you don't

[MaxPower]

but there is a psychometric test where the evaluator asks you about your tendencies and ting
plus they interview your other half

Easy to bypass.

Bear in mind pug, this is a corruptive culture.

Money will pass and people will get their test results via pdf whatsapp and print it without even seeing a doctor.

[16 cycles]

folks making the point that after meeting the pass / fail criteria, there seems to be some subjectivity in the process.

Persons meet the pass criteria, there is then a discretion exercised by the CoP but no guidance on what guides the discretion.


This opens up the process to perceived influence where one of the discretionary principles post passing of criteria is a quota mandated by the government on how many licenses may be granted per year.

Then it becomes, for a limited number of grants - if 1000 ppl pass but only 100 are allowed - how then is this determined?

[Habit7]

Well if we are discussing the issue there is no need to embellish it because it only proves that you have an agenda and not trying to address the actual issue.

There is no doubt there will have be discretion as the law admits. In the same way an Immigration Officer uses his discretion to let ppl into the country or a Visa Officer in the embassy. They will be guided by govt policy and then use their discretion after ppl meet basic criteria. Likewise, though the MoNS cannot give the TTPS operational commands, it can guide their policy. So the previous policy was let’s say 5000 FULs a year. GG as COP not answerable to the MoNS increased it to 60,000 FULs (not sure of the exact no.). Rowley lamented this as, despite what GG says, legal firearms and ammo have been linked to crimes. Plus there were rampant corruption in the FUL process which exacerbated with the ramp up in FULs.

So the MoNS and by extension the PM head of the National Security Council expressed that the policy is to return to the past policy especially with ongoing investigations. So it is not the PM having the final word on FULs, or the PM dictating to the CoP how many FULs, or the PM saying no FULs. All these are claims being made here. The CoP is issuing FULs by her discretion according to the law because FULs are a privilege not a right.

[alfa]

So you fully understood the question I was asking for several days just just playing dotish and just now decided to give a answer. Habit have yourself a merry Christmas eh

[redmanjp]

folks making the point that after meeting the pass / fail criteria, there seems to be some subjectivity in the process.

Persons meet the pass criteria, there is then a discretion exercised by the CoP but no guidance on what guides the discretion.


This opens up the process to perceived influence where one of the discretionary principles post passing of criteria is a quota mandated by the government on how many licenses may be granted per year.

Then it becomes, for a limited number of grants - if 1000 ppl pass but only 100 are allowed - how then is this determined?

perhaps by who needs it most? business ppl, ppl who already victims of crime or getting threats/extortion ?

[alfa]

folks making the point that after meeting the pass / fail criteria, there seems to be some subjectivity in the process.

Persons meet the pass criteria, there is then a discretion exercised by the CoP but no guidance on what guides the discretion.


This opens up the process to perceived influence where one of the discretionary principles post passing of criteria is a quota mandated by the government on how many licenses may be granted per year.

Then it becomes, for a limited number of grants - if 1000 ppl pass but only 100 are allowed - how then is this determined?

perhaps by who needs it most? business ppl, ppl who already victims of crime or getting threats/extortion ?

That's the thing no one says or even provides general guidelines. Also the numbers issued by different COPs vary greatly with no explanation. Gary was tainted with corruption so we can discount his numbers but under Erla last year less than 30 persons got provisional firearm permits out of 25000 waiting and they still want to insist there is no political interference. If there isn't then the alternative is massive incompetence as indeed indicated by frank seepersad when he wood she for six.
My figures of 30 last year is accurate as I mentioned I last year I was one of those and based on my number at the time of issuance in the later part of the year, a basic extrapolating puts it at 30 tops. That's why they getting blaze in court for failure to process applications in time. Initially they were blaming COVID but when that got shot down as an acceptable reason they have none so that's why they're rushing to change the act to include a committee to decide on applications

[Habit7]

So you fully understood the question I was asking for several days just just playing dotish and just now decided to give a answer. Habit have yourself a merry Christmas eh

You were saying and was adamant that there is no criteria and that it only based on COP discretion. That is not true.

perhaps by who needs it most? business ppl, ppl who already victims of crime or getting threats/extortion ?

One problem under GG was that many of the FULs were multiple for one person, while ppl with no guns were getting blanked. Damian Laing had 27 firearms and Sharaz Mohammed had 5, president of the Pharmaceutical Board shot himself with one of the 2 guns and 69 rounds on his person.

[pugboy]

the entire application system is by design lending itself to ambiguity and so much so right here in this forum nobody can give a straight answer if it really is officially or unofficially up to the Cop

as was said before by rowlee “we can’t give everybody a gun”
it easy to say that in the past but now every bandit have a gun and to keep using that excuse makes no sense if the purpose of a gun remains a form of legal protection

bottom line is the govt wants it that way to have underhand control for a variety of reasons
eg “would have one race being killed by another”


bringing gg into this discussion is pointless too because the process became quickly corrupted under his watch

[MaxPower]

president of the Pharmaceutical Board shot himself with one of the 2 guns and 69 rounds on his person.

And many more to come with mass FUL approvals.

This is not the country for a gun toting public.

We need another solution.

[maj. tom]

National Security Minister Fitzgerald Hinds has labelled Opposition Leader Kamla Persad-Bissessar’s call for police officers to “return fire with full force” against criminals as dangerous and reckless.

“She has now gone on to call on the police in particular to stand your ground, empty the clip, lock it, Rooster it. Now I speak as a former police instructor, I speak as an attorney-at-law and, of course, as a legislator and Minister of National security, as far as I and the police are aware, the law and the ethos is and has always been no more than is absolutely necessary is to be used.”

https://www.guardian.co.tt/news/hinds--kamlas-call-to-cops-to-return-fire-with-full-force-dangerous-advice-6.2.2013265.d391a59fd5

[16 cycles]

folks making the point that after meeting the pass / fail criteria, there seems to be some subjectivity in the process.

Persons meet the pass criteria, there is then a discretion exercised by the CoP but no guidance on what guides the discretion.


This opens up the process to perceived influence where one of the discretionary principles post passing of criteria is a quota mandated by the government on how many licenses may be granted per year.

Then it becomes, for a limited number of grants - if 1000 ppl pass but only 100 are allowed - how then is this determined?

perhaps by who needs it most? business ppl, ppl who already victims of crime or getting threats/extortion ?

the hope is the award will help prevent persons from becoming victims of violent crime / extortion which might happen to anybody these days as the same organization awarding has essentially failed us over many years leading to present problems.

[Mmoney607]

Since when people does listen to Kamla

[zoom rader]

According to the Firearms Act the CoP has the final say on FUL, hence Rowley’s criticism of liberal distribution of FULs. The PM didn’t approve.

The COP is appointed by majority vote in the Lower House from the PolSC Merit List. It is not by the final say of the PM.

[zoom rader]

Since when people does listen to Kamla

Well they listen to Rowlee, and get kill, raped, robbed, home invasions , extortion and taxed.


No need to listen to Kamala,

[aaron17]

listen from .. 1:11:13
they take about the extortion of the doubles lady and how one of the suspects was involved in the pennywise shootout. The man get bail from the pennywise outcome and he went to do back his normal crime after like normal. They discuss the failure or 'current laws' of tnt.

[zoom rader]

I thought Habit7 said crime down?

[alfa]

I thought Habit7 said crime down?

Down south probably

[Habit7]

I thought Habit7 said crime down?

You lie again

Quote me.

[zoom rader]

I thought Habit7 said crime down?

You lie again

Quote me.

U were Quoting fake stats from PNM reports.