I was not violent at all during my arrest. I have never been violent, ever. And my references interviews went perfectly. They are my good friends. The officer explained to me exactly why I was being denied, and it is because I have shown repeated non-compliance with the law. Even though I've never been convicted of anything, they see the arrests, and cannot ignore that.
They also see that I have gotten many traffic tickets in my past, (mainly they were all many years ago), and they said "if I can't obey even the simplest of laws (ie: my traffic tickets like speeding, seat belt, expired sticker) then how am I supposed to store and transport a firearm properly?
That's exactly what he said to me. He said collectively, all of my brushes with the law in the past (traffic and criminal) has disqualified me from owning a PAL, even though 90% of my traffic charges were withdrawn in court, and both of my criminal charges were withdrawn in court. I have no convictions for any of this stuff. They're going on the information that's in the police reports and the charges themselves, not the outcomes in court. Like I said I was told by the CFO "we have a saying in this office, just because someone was found not guilty, or their charge was withdrawn, doesn't mean it didn't happen".
The problem is, I don't have the money to fight this, and to pay a firearms lawyer to appeal this decision. I don't even know if that's possible. And they're telling me I will be qualified in 3 years if I apply again, so I'm also worried if I try to fight their decision, that it would take years in court anyway, and could just be a waste of money, whereas if I just be patient and wait 3 years, I will get my PAL.
I just can't believe they're allowed to make their decisions based on charges, rather than the outcomes of those charges in court.