City of Riverside COP gets sued...

[GuyW]

http://californiaconcealedcarry.com/blog/

.

[tankerman]

Glad to hear about the law suit.


You may want to suggest to 'Billy Jack' that he have someone edit for him.

[halifax]

http://californiaconcealedcarry.com/blog/

.


Account for domain californiaconcealedcarry.com has been suspended

Huh?

[tankerman]

Huh?
the link works fine for me.

[yellowfin]

Funny how he complains that the chief has no right to say when 1st and 14th amendment rights stop yet ability to determine who has 2nd amendment rights he has no problem with at all unless they actually recognize them....

[halifax]

the link works fine for me.

Tried again. Same message :(

Parallel's H-Sphere Account suspended.

[tango-52]

So it appears that Preston's CCW was not renewed, as he states:

Billy Jack is now working in his city under 12031PC, loaded, open carry.

Unfortunately, I doubt it will change his opinion on Shall Issue. :rolleyes:

[CCWFacts]

I can't believe that this chief wants to get into a tangle with Preston on this subject. I have a feeling that CCW corruption festered in secret for decades until the Internet allowed a lot of people to get together and work each other into a (good) frenzy of indignation over the situation. Now some of these chiefs are being caught with their pants down, not realizing that the game has changed.

[Adonlude]

How is he not getting arrested for open carrying loaded?

[tango-52]

How is he not getting arrested for open carrying loaded?

I believe he has the state security guard card with the add on allowing Loaded Open Carry.

[tango-52]

I am curious about something though. In his blog, Preston indicates that he knew of improprieties two years ago when he was renewing his CCW. Why did he wait until now, when he is not being renewed, to do something about it?

Here is what his blog said:

Billy Jack and others are currently sending PRA's to obtain records that will make Federal case against Chief and others. Chief is resisting. Has even ignored PRA's for very simple documents that Billy Jack saw 2 years ago so I know two things. They exist and they were not privileged two years ago. Chief is about to find out what happens when you violate California Government Code Section 6250 to conceal official misconduct. You get served with a Writ of Mandate. After Superior Court Judge educates Chief and City Attorney and compels production of the records, the Chief is off to Federal court on a 1983 action alleging numerous violations of Billy Jack's Consitutional rights.

[gotgunz]

Isn't he a former LEO and as such isn't he allowed to ccw through that affiliation?

[CSDGuy]

He would have to have retired and have a CCW endorsement on his retired LEO credentials. If he didn't retire, that avenue is gone. As a PI, he would have to have a BSIS Firearms permit to open carry his loaded pistol. Just being a PI isn't sufficient to be able to carry a firearm.

[FreedomIsNotFree]

Correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't BJ one of the folks that didn't support open carry, either loaded or unloaded?

[Liberty1]

Correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't BJ one of the folks that didn't support open carry, either loaded or unloaded?

Maybe we've educated him to the positive political aspects of OC? :D

The general reception of OC on this board has also changed from skeptical/hostile to generally positive/neutral in the last year and a half too.

Sadly, there is no exemption in 171b,c for BJ while 12031. That would be a fun one!

[MudCamper]

I have a feeling that CCW corruption festered in secret for decades until the Internet allowed a lot of people to get together and work each other into a (good) frenzy of indignation over the situation. Now some of these chiefs are being caught with their pants down, not realizing that the game has changed.

I think you are right on target here.


The general reception of OC on this board has also changed from skeptical/hostile to generally positive/neutral in the last year and a half too.

Absolutely.

[CitaDeL]

Maybe we've educated him to the positive political aspects of OC? :D

The general reception of OC on this board has also changed from skeptical/hostile to generally positive/neutral in the last year and a half too.

Sadly, there is no exemption in 171b,c for BJ while 12031. That would be a fun one!

Change has come in spite of the protestations of deniers and those who strictly subscribe to a 'CCW' only philosophy. If this is where two + years and 10 or 20 open carriers can take us, I would be interested to see what a couple of hundred open carriers can do in 5 or 6 months.

Good on Billy Jack.

[Liberty1]

I'm also very interested in BJ's open carry experiences. Yes the cops know his 10-20 at dispatch etc..., but are the everyday citizens PANICING at the sight of a firearm carrying person in "civilian clothes" without a badge? I think not. (or do guard card carriers have badges?)

Still I'm curious. :cool2:

[N6ATF]

http://www.bsis.ca.gov/

There is a difference between PI and Guard Card. The only similarity is both need a Firearm Permit to carry loaded/exposed. Billy Jack (insert real name) has a PI license, Guard Card, and Firearm Permit.

http://www.bsis.ca.gov/customer_service/faqs/pi.shtml
Can a Private Investigator use a badge?
No. A Private Investigator may not carry or wear a badge in connection with an investigation since it may mislead others to believe that he or she is a peace officer or other government official.

http://www.bsis.ca.gov/forms_pubs/pocket_guide.pdf
No private patrol operator licensee or registered security guard shall use or wear an exposed firearm unless he or she is wearing a uniform.
(B&P 7582.26(i)) (B&P 7583.3(b))

7582.26(i) No private patrol operator licensee or officer, director,
partner, or manager of a private patrol operator licensee, or person
required to be registered as a security guard pursuant to this
chapter shall use or wear a baton or exposed firearm as authorized by
this chapter unless he or she is wearing a uniform which complies
with the requirements of Section 7582.27.

7582.27. (a) Any person referred to in subdivision (i) of Section
7582.26 who uses or wears a baton or exposed firearm as authorized
pursuant to this chapter shall wear a patch on each arm that reads
"private security" and that includes the name of the company by which
the person is employed or for which the person is a representative.
The patch shall be clearly visible at all times. The patches of a
private patrol operator licensee, or his or her employees or
representatives shall be of a standard design approved by the
director.

7582.28. (a) Any badge or cap insignia worn by a person who is a
licensee, officer, director, partner, manager, or employee of a
licensee shall be of a design approved by the director, and shall
bear on its face a distinctive word indicating the name of the
licensee and an employee number by which the person may be identified
by the licensee.
The provisions of this section shall not be construed to authorize
persons to wear badges who are prohibited by Section 7582.26 from
wearing badges.

[GuyW]

...looks like the Police Chief caved and issued Billy Jack a CCW...


http://californiaconcealedcarry.com/blog/
.