PDA

View Full Version : Residence requirement for CCW permits


nicki
10-18-2009, 6:52 PM
If a CCW permit is a statewide permit, that all applicants are cleared through the CalDOJ, thn why are applants limited to only their county of resdence.

Now I know some would argue about that the local government can check people better, but the fees collected for a CCW permit would not cover th investigative costs for a CCW permit.

The counties tht send sheriffs to check and see if someone actually lives where they say they live for instance doesn't coverthe costs of the deputies time to go and talk to the neighbors.

It appears to me that there is probably a understanding among the sheriffs about respecting each other's turf, that is probably why the will issue counties in this state actually check with neighbors.

WHich brings us o the Sykes case and maybe Gene could write in on this.

Post Sykes we should have shall issue, but based on the behavior of LA city regarding compliance with other CCW permits, I suspect that there will be lots of court games for years to come.

I am not a legal eagle, but it seems to me that maybe we should consider either in the Sykes case or perhaps a follow up case stripping out the county/city residence requirement or at least modifying it.

My suggersted modification would be simple. A applicant may apply outside their county of residence, but in doing so they have to pay both counties their allowed administrative fees.

This cuts out the argument that a county makes that they are losing revenue.

I figure we are bound to find one sherifff or chief of police somewhere in the state who would be more than happy to process CCW permits and will appreciate the revenue to their departments.

From what I undestand, former police chief Gene Byrd found that the CCW applications he was processing rom Sacramento county residents provided significant revenue to his departement before the state law was changed back in 1998.

I figure a sherff who would process applications and not put any bs restrictions on the permits would get many non county residents to apply for CCW permits.

Nicki

Fjold
10-18-2009, 6:59 PM
It was changed a while back because a CLEO (I think in Rio Vista) started giving CCWs to everyone who applied. All the big city CLEOs and the legislature freaked out.

CSDGuy
10-18-2009, 7:31 PM
It was changed a while back because a CLEO (I think in Rio Vista) started giving CCWs to everyone who applied. All the big city CLEOs and the legislature freaked out.
You're thinking of Chief Byrd in Isleton. I've heard that the then Sac County Sheriff and Sac City PD Chief essentially told him to stop. He didn't and then the law was changed... and you had to be a resident of the city (if the issuer is the PD Chief) or the County (Sheriff). That limited Chief Byrd's ability to issue CCWs...

Fjold
10-18-2009, 7:35 PM
You're thinking of Chief Byrd in Isleton. I've heard that the then Sac County Sheriff and Sac City PD Chief essentially told him to stop. He didn't and then the law was changed... and you had to be a resident of the city (if the issuer is the PD Chief) or the County (Sheriff). That limited Chief Byrd's ability to issue CCWs...

Yep, you're right. Isleton is right next to Rio Vista. Chief Byrd, my kind of CLEO

bodger
10-18-2009, 7:45 PM
It was changed a while back because a CLEO (I think in Rio Vista) started giving CCWs to everyone who applied. All the big city CLEOs and the legislature freaked out.


I'll bet they did. And the line was pretty long to get a CCW that was easy to get in one county, residence or not, and valid statewide. Hell, I'd drive anywhere in the state to get one.

nicki
10-18-2009, 9:50 PM
The Isleton CCW story is interesting. Some research needs to be done, but from what I understand sometime in the 1940's the state did try to clean up the CCW process.

My understanding is there was a move to make it so that a person coud aplly anywhere, a compromise was reached where a person could go to any LEO in a county instead.

Now in practice what happened is city residents went to their police departments, county residents went to the sheriff.

Gene Byrd rocked the boat by doing what was legal, but against unwritten rules and customs. It is kind of like our unloaded open carry folks.

Prior to 1967, you could legally open carry, so their probably was not much demand for CCW permits and in urban areas the local police probably may have been more inclined to actually issue permits to discourage people openly carrying guns.

Of course back then certain people had no chance of getting a CCW permit due to their race.

We can't prove it, but enforcement for illegal carry by whites probably wasn't a high priority.

I brought this up because the California legislature has been hostile to our rights and we are going to have problems, regardless of what the courts say.

After the Sykes victory, I want to see it possible for people to be able to get CCW permits without unneeded hassles.

I fgure that if some sheriffs want to play games, we find someone who is only too happy to issue CCW permits.

The reason I want put that the applicant pays extra fees is so that sheriffs in counties that are being by passed can't claim they are losing revenue from permits they would (but really won't) be issuing.

Nicki

Nicki

devildog999
10-18-2009, 10:17 PM
I wish we could apply anywhere. I'm ready to just get an address in Kern or something to get one.

Can you list a PO Box as an address?

bigcalidave
10-18-2009, 10:29 PM
No they want utility bills. Here in shasta you have to give a utility bill from a year ago and from a month ago, to prove you live here. But there are lots of poor people around, I'm sure you could find someone that would let you pay their gas bill or something :P How much is a ccw worth to you?

(my pg&e bill is only $9 a month... think about it.... )

devildog999
10-18-2009, 11:09 PM
No they want utility bills. Here in shasta you have to give a utility bill from a year ago and from a month ago, to prove you live here. But there are lots of poor people around, I'm sure you could find someone that would let you pay their gas bill or something :P How much is a ccw worth to you?

(my pg&e bill is only $9 a month... think about it.... )

I think it's well worth it ;)

However paying someones bill could end poorly. Putting a lot of trust into somebody not to screw you over

bigcalidave
10-19-2009, 3:03 AM
Your big worry is finding someone who will rat you out for paying one of their bills? I'm seriously contemplating offering this service to people in san fran, etc! :P Too bad for the one years worth of bills things, but hey, CCW in a years time is better than nothing, right?

1923mack
10-19-2009, 8:36 AM
You need more than a utility bill. It has to be your primary residence. You have to certify that the address is your primary residence. Where is your voting address, Where is your drivers license. Where do you sleep over 50% of the time. Do you want to commit a felony on your CCW submission? You cannot just own land (even with a house) and visit it 3 times a year and call it your primary residence.

devildog999
10-19-2009, 5:22 PM
Your big worry is finding someone who will rat you out for paying one of their bills? I'm seriously contemplating offering this service to people in san fran, etc! :P Too bad for the one years worth of bills things, but hey, CCW in a years time is better than nothing, right?

First off, I wouldn't actually do this just because of the legalities; not worth it.

But no, that would not be the concern. The concern would be that they would run the bill and the guy goin for the CCW would be responsible for it. Could cause that person a lot of issues

GuyW
10-19-2009, 5:35 PM
It has to be your primary residence.

Care to cite a law in that regard?
.

bigcalidave
10-19-2009, 6:35 PM
I'm joking, by the way.

In case anyone didn't get it.

And I think they want your DL and two utility bills...

otteray
10-19-2009, 7:42 PM
Care to cite a law in that regard?
.

I think this brings that detail up:


CALIFORNIA PENAL CODE SECTION 12050
12050. (a) (1) (A) The sheriff of a county, upon proof that the person applying is of good moral character, that good cause exists for the issuance, and that the person applying satisfies any one of the conditions specified in subparagraph (D) and has completed a course of training as described in subparagraph (E), may issue to that person a license to carry a pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person in either one of the following formats:

(i) A license to carry concealed a pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person.

(ii) Where the population of the county is less than 200,000 persons according to the most recent federal decennial census, a license to carry loaded and exposed in that county a pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person.

(B) The chief or other head of a municipal police department of any city or city and county, upon proof that the person applying is of good moral character, that good cause exists for the issuance, and that the person applying is a resident of that city and has completed a course of training as described in subparagraph (E), may issue to that person a license to carry a pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person in either one of the following formats...

GuyW
10-19-2009, 8:36 PM
I think this brings that detail up:

....and that the person applying is a resident of that city

Yep, no "primary" there.....
.

nicki
10-19-2009, 8:49 PM
Sheriffs and Police chiefs can issue to people who are residents, but the question is what and who determines residency?

Let's face it, back in 1923, most people didn't have cars, generally most people lived and worked in one city or county.

Today many people have residence in one county and work in another. Many people have flex shifts and they may go to an urban area where salaries are higher and go back to a rural area on days off where living costs are lower.

For exampe, there are a number of people who come into Santa Clara who rent rooms or hang out with friends during the week to work, then leave on the weekends for example.

Many people have jobs/businesses that they are always on the road.

Some people are what are known as traveler's, very common in the medical industry, where people will take temporary jobs and be gone for 12 weeks or more at a time.

The original law was copied from Florida's CCW law which was designed to be an end run around equal protection. On the state level, all ccw permits were shall issue, but they were administered on the county level where all the discrimination happened.

The reality is most of us who live in urban areas don't even know who are neighbors are, we see them come and go, but many of us are busy with other things in our lives.

Unless we do something stupid, the police don't have regular tabs on us. If we have started creating files, agencies can quickly share info since everything is computerized anyway.

My suggestion to everyone is to wait for the MacDonald case to incoporate the 2nd via the 14th, then the hammer will fall with the Sykes case.

After that, I believe there is enough dirt already to file another lawsuit to get rid of the "county/city residency requirement" or at least modify it so that applcants can apply across the state even if they have to pay extra for it.

From a good government perspective, this would eliminate the ability of the sheriffs to use the CCW system to fund their political warchests.

Nicki

JeffW
10-19-2009, 8:50 PM
I think this brings that detail up:

person applying is a resident of that city and has completed a course of training as described in subparagraph (E), may issue to that person a license to carry a pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person in either one of the following formats...


There is a legal difference between residence and domicile.

Friendo
10-19-2009, 9:19 PM
Seems like there is a work around with the sheriff if you work there?

12050. (a) (1) (A) The sheriff of a county, upon proof that the person applying is of good moral character, that good cause exists for the issuance, and that the person applying satisfies any one of the conditions specified in subparagraph (D).........

(D) For the purpose of subparagraph (A), the applicant shall satisfy any one of the following:
(i) Is a resident of the county or a city within the county.
(ii) Spends a substantial period of time in the applicant's principal place of employment or business in the county or a city within the county.

CSDGuy
10-19-2009, 9:28 PM
However, under (D) (ii) that CCW is only valid in the county where it's issued... and yes, you can have many residences, but you may only be domiciled in one of them. If you happen to own residences in multiple counties and you do not rent them out... does that make you a resident in all of them simultaneously for purposes of getting a CCW? Somehow... I doubt it.

1923mack
10-20-2009, 11:34 AM
Ok, you guys got me, it does not say primary residence, just residence. Most county sheriffs seem to interpret it as primary however. Over at another forum, it is reported how the issuing agency does checks at the house and interviews your neighbors. A CCW friendly county Sheriff may be able to work within those words. A non friendly one, well Orange County comes to mind, will not go for it.

bigcalidave
10-20-2009, 11:41 AM
Where the hell are they interviewing neighbors?

GuyW
10-20-2009, 12:09 PM
Where the hell are they interviewing neighbors?

San Bernardino Co for one.

Probably several others...
.

Meplat
10-20-2009, 8:30 PM
The real irony here is that the counties where a CCW is actually obtainable are the same counties where if you carry without one and have a clean record with no wants or warrents, the average cop will say; Don't let me catch you with bthis again, boy. Then unload it and give it back to you. :eek:



You need more than a utility bill. It has to be your primary residence. You have to certify that the address is your primary residence. Where is your voting address, Where is your drivers license. Where do you sleep over 50% of the time. Do you want to commit a felony on your CCW submission? You cannot just own land (even with a house) and visit it 3 times a year and call it your primary residence.

Meplat
10-20-2009, 8:36 PM
But those are generally limited to the issuing jurisdiction and not valid statewide.

Seems like there is a work around with the sheriff if you work there?

12050. (a) (1) (A) The sheriff of a county, upon proof that the person applying is of good moral character, that good cause exists for the issuance, and that the person applying satisfies any one of the conditions specified in subparagraph (D).........

(D) For the purpose of subparagraph (A), the applicant shall satisfy any one of the following:
(i) Is a resident of the county or a city within the county.
(ii) Spends a substantial period of time in the applicant's principal place of employment or business in the county or a city within the county.

dantodd
10-20-2009, 9:26 PM
you can have many residences, but you may only be domiciled in one of them. If you happen to own residences in multiple counties and you do not rent them out... does that make you a resident in all of them simultaneously for purposes of getting a CCW? Somehow... I doubt it.

the statute does not say the county of your domicile. If you have a second home in the Sierras the sheriff can issue you a permit there assuming you actually use it as a residence part of the year. However; because it is discretionary the sheriff can also choose to only issue to people whose primary residence is in his/her county.

It's a discretion thing, not a legal thing.

artherd
10-21-2009, 1:50 AM
Sheriffs and Police chiefs can issue to people who are residents, but the question is what and who determines residency?

Let's face it, back in 1923, most people didn't have cars...

...or jets...

artherd
10-21-2009, 1:51 AM
Adding CHP (who absorbed the CA State Police.) as an issuing agency would be interesting post Sykes...

redcliff
10-21-2009, 4:18 AM
Ok, you guys got me, it does not say primary residence, just residence. Most county sheriffs seem to interpret it as primary however. Over at another forum, it is reported how the issuing agency does checks at the house and interviews your neighbors. A CCW friendly county Sheriff may be able to work within those words. A non friendly one, well Orange County comes to mind, will not go for it.

I"m not aware of any of my neighbors ever being interviewed as part of my ccw up here in Shasta County and I've done the process twice since I let mine expire for a number of years once. Or any of my friends with ccw's having any of their neighbors contacted.

1923mack
10-21-2009, 12:13 PM
You are up north in Gods country. US Southerners are not so lucky. Riverside, SanBernardino, Los Angeles all conduct interviews with neighbors. It is not in the State regulations, just in the issueing Sheriffs policy to get the CCW.

MudCamper
10-21-2009, 2:12 PM
The primary residence requirement is a false myth, similar to other firearms law myths, like the myth that you cannot transport ammo in the same case as your firearm. It is a myth that we need to dispel. Yes, some sheriffs might make that a part of their policy, but it is NOT part of the requirement in PC 12050. A temporary residence or part time residence is perfectly legal if one simply reads 12050. What we need is a pro-2A sheriff with the balls to start issuing to all of us, who just come up for a visit to his county. He'd be within his authority to do so. Anyone know of such a sheriff?

dantodd
10-21-2009, 2:25 PM
The primary residence requirement is a false myth, similar to other firearms law myths, like the myth that you cannot transport ammo in the same case as your firearm. It is a myth that we need to dispel. Yes, some sheriffs might make that a part of their policy, but it is NOT part of the requirement in PC 12050. A temporary residence or part time residence is perfectly legal if one simply reads 12050. What we need is a pro-2A sheriff with the balls to start issuing to all of us, who just come up for a visit to his county. He'd be within his authority to do so. Anyone know of such a sheriff?

Interesting, I hadn't thought of the temporary residence issue. I believe a campsite is a temporary residence. It could also be a police chief doing the issuing I believe. Maybe one of the chiefs up in the Sierras or out in the desert could make regular visits to the local campgrounds. It would certainly be a fun way to put a burr in the saddle of gun grabbers until McDonald/Sykes are decided.

MudCamper
10-21-2009, 2:28 PM
Interesting, I hadn't thought of the temporary residence issue. I believe a campsite is a temporary residence. It could also be a police chief I believe. Maybe one of the chiefs up in the Sierras or out in the desert could make regular visits to the local campgrounds. It would certainly be a fun way to put a burr in the saddle of gun grabbers until McDonald/Sykes are decided.

Yes, a temporary or part time residence is still legally a residence. A domicile is one's primary or permanent residence. Notice that 12050 does not state domicile, but residence.

I would think that this kind of thing (applying with a pro sheriff from your hotel room) would best be attempted post-Sykes, although there's nothing prohibiting it now.

dantodd
10-21-2009, 2:29 PM
I would think that this kind of thing (applying with a pro sheriff from your hotel room) would best be attempted post-Sykes.

Nah. Post-Sykes it will be irrelevant.

MudCamper
10-21-2009, 2:33 PM
Nah. Post-Sykes it will be irrelevant.

That may be a bit optimistic. While some sheriff's might start to play ball, others will resist until they themselves are sued.

dantodd
10-21-2009, 2:39 PM
That may be a bit optimistic. While some sheriff's might start to play ball, others will resist until they themselves are sued.

It depends on the relief given by the court. While some may require a bit of prodding I suspect the court will leave zero wiggle room for those who would be recalcitrant. A threatened lawsuit would get the departmental attorneys involved and things would likely go quite smoothly. I suspect there will be a line up for cities to file (g) though. :D

artherd
10-21-2009, 3:58 PM
The primary residence requirement is a false myth, similar to other firearms law myths, like the myth that you cannot transport ammo in the same case as your firearm. It is a myth that we need to dispel. Yes, some sheriffs might make that a part of their policy, but it is NOT part of the requirement in PC 12050. A temporary residence or part time residence is perfectly legal if one simply reads 12050. What we need is a pro-2A sheriff with the balls to start issuing to all of us, who just come up for a visit to his county. He'd be within his authority to do so. Anyone know of such a sheriff?

Uh, just a 'visit' is rather thin and a great way to get law changed...

However, a leasing program with real habitable structures and actual regular annual visits would be interesting.

MudCamper
10-21-2009, 4:42 PM
Uh, just a 'visit' is rather thin and a great way to get law changed...

However, a leasing program with real habitable structures and actual regular annual visits would be interesting.

Visiting or not, your hotel room or camp site is still your legal residence. It's just your temporary residence. Now I suppose that one could argue that because another code, 12031, specifically includes the language, "including any temporary residence or campsite", that 12050 does not allow this because it does not include that language. But that's still just an argument - an opinion.

But that extreme case aside, let me explain my particular case.

I live primarily in Sonoma County. (No-go for CCW.) I own land in Lake County (fairly pro-gun sheriff), and in Modoc County (extremely pro-gun sheriff). Now I spend about every other weekend on my property in Lake County, and I plan on building a cabin there. Once I do, I plan on paying the sheriff a visit about this. There is no doubt that I reside there. It's just part time. Given that 12050 does not state "primary" nor "domicile" the sheriff could legally issue to me there. The problem is that he likely is unaware of this and believes the FUD myths about primary residency.

But my situation doesn't help anybody else (if even me). I'm more interested in a generic solution. Thus the wish for a very pro-RKBA sheriff somewhere with this attitude: "Come and visit our county, take our class, and get your CCW permit!"

dantodd
10-21-2009, 5:22 PM
Uh, just a 'visit' is rather thin and a great way to get law changed...

Yes, and by the time the law got changed and signed it would still need a period of time to take effect etc. By the time all that happened Sykes will be settled law and many people will have had the ability to protect themselves for a year or more than they otherwise would have. Even if the law is changed and effective before Sykes is won they are only going to change it to domicile or "permanent residence" or some such which just puts us in the same place we are now.

I am also unsure of the previous incident of the chief issuing to non-residents. Were the CCWs he issued revoked or just left to expire? If just left to expire then there is even less risk as we would have 24 months after the law before the CCWs expired for Sykes to work its way through the system.

However, a leasing program with real habitable structures and actual regular annual visits would be interesting.

As the law is written this is perfectly acceptable, not just interesting.

dantodd
10-21-2009, 5:26 PM
I live primarily in Sonoma County. (No-go for CCW.) I own land in Lake County (fairly pro-gun sheriff), and in Modoc County (extremely pro-gun sheriff). Now I spend about every other weekend on my property in Lake County, and I plan on building a cabin there. Once I do, I plan on paying the sheriff a visit about this. There is no doubt that I reside there. It's just part time. Given that 12050 does not state "primary" nor "domicile" the sheriff could legally issue to me there. The problem is that he likely is unaware of this and believes the FUD myths about primary residency.

If you're actually spending so much time on your Lake County property I would just ask the sheriff or a deputy when you see them around town. The deputies will likely know as I'm sure there are a lot of summer homes etc. up there.

KylaGWolf
10-21-2009, 5:32 PM
Nicki While I agree it would make things a hell of a lot easier if the application process for CCW would make much more sense I don't see the county sheriffs giving up the control they have. Unfortunately it brings the county revenue which if it was centralized means they would lose. I think that is a big problem this state has in general that they gave way too many things to each county to run and set up a myriad of rules that contradict one another and even in some cases contradict state law.

nicki
10-21-2009, 5:55 PM
Nicki While I agree it would make things a hell of a lot easier if the application process for CCW would make much more sense I don't see the county sheriffs giving up the control they have. Unfortunately it brings the county revenue which if it was centralized means they would lose. I think that is a big problem this state has in general that they gave way too many things to each county to run and set up a myriad of rules that contradict one another and even in some cases contradict state law.
[/QUOTE]

I understand the revenue issue which is why I posted that non residents would have to pay both the issuing agency and their county of residency their normal fees. At least for intitial applications.

The issue of loss of revenue from CCWs is bogus if you are not issuing permits when there is an obvious market demand.

Now if we have sheriffs that are actually investigating that people actually live and interviewing neighbors, the departments could actually be losing money on CCW permits due to use of man power.

I believe the real reason San Bernadino investigates to see that people actually live in the addresses is because they don't want to anger their neighbor sheriffs.

I also believe that is the reason why rural counties have come up with this one year residency crap also.

We can win Sykes, but then we are going to have to play other games with each agency.

I propose that if people can shop, that will eliminate the problem.

The only argument a sheriff could make is that his department is losing revenue if his county residents are going somewhere else and that argument is really a stretch.

Take away that arguement in a follow up case and then we will trully have shall issue.

What will happen is the sheriff with the most reasonable training standards and no BS and great customer service will get a flood of applicants.

For the rural counties, it will be good for your local economy since people will stay overnight and will buy gas, food and take training in your county.

Nicki

1923mack
10-23-2009, 1:11 PM
San Bernardino does offer a 30 day non reisdent CCW permit. I considered getting it, but all that work for just 30 days?