PDA

View Full Version : Video: OC citizens and Bill Hunt take on Hutchens


VW*Mike
10-19-2009, 8:35 AM
This is good to see. This was taped at a board meeting with a personal interview with Bill Hunt. From Fulldisclosure.net. I didn't see it posted so I thought I would share. Lets rally the troops. Enjoy.

http://www.fulldisclosure.net/Blogs/79.php

vladbutsky
10-19-2009, 10:39 AM
Greate video!

ZRX61
10-19-2009, 10:40 AM
WTF? Hutchens basically accused the Sheriffs who do issue of breaking the law??

Mitch
10-19-2009, 11:02 AM
Fourth "concerned citizen" is a registered Democrat!

The Director
10-19-2009, 11:07 AM
Hunt rules. Great video.

locosway
10-19-2009, 4:03 PM
Hutchens is out the door in 2010. She's playing the same games that got Carona into trouble.

mquejr
10-19-2009, 4:18 PM
great vid!!!

Jamsie567
10-20-2009, 6:25 AM
Hutchens is out of step with her constitutents. This LA culture in OC needs to get packing. Great video

soundwave
10-20-2009, 8:15 AM
What a complete *beep*.

This lady is a joke.

Reloaderx2
10-21-2009, 6:13 AM
That lady has got to go. But who's surprised? LA Sheriff Lee Baca was one of the few LE officials that supported 962 and Hutchens claims him as her mentor. :rolleyes:

Huzar
10-21-2009, 6:30 AM
Scratching my head....... Was Bill Hunt there????? I don't want to put him down as a candidate but.... as far as I know he wasn't there and he's using other's people's efforts to further his agenda.... which scares me as that makes him more of a politician then a cop and we need a cop back in OC not a politician.

bradph
10-21-2009, 6:32 AM
Few months ago, two young men broke into my next door neighbors apartment (front doors face each other) at approximately 2:30pm. I don't recall the exact time. My neighbor returned home from a walk shortly thereafter with her 2 year old son, she was 8 months pregnant. She found two men in her apartment, obviously there to steal items from her home. They roughed her up a bit then fled the scene. To the credit of the police, there was a helicopter overhead within 10 minutes, officers in a bit less than that. The bad guys did get away as far as I know. Thankfully she did not sustain serious injuries, though she did receive a laceration to her head, her child and unborn child were not hurt. She had a rather large, but friendly, pet dog that they had locked in a closet. Henceforth, I give my dog a treat when she barks at passers by.

This happened in La Jolla Colony, San Diego, California. Supposedly a nice, safe neighborhood.

It could have been much worse. What if she miscarried? What if, when she was stunned and not lucid, her 2 year old son had wandered away into the loading lane behind the apartments (where cars drive way too fast).

My wife was pregnant at the time (still is, expecting in January), she was home in our apartment at the time and didn't realize anything was happening until the helicopter showed up. It could have been her. My wife qualified at the last IDPA event as marksman, she has taken several of the local IDPA training seminars, been to the high dollar academy in the desert, she can shoot. YET the local sheriff won't issue CCW permits to law abiding citizens unless they fit some arbitrary definition of just cause. Just cause? How about, "I'm pregnant and just want to protect my child."

Sorry for the rant.

Jamsie567
10-21-2009, 6:44 AM
Scratching my head....... Was Bill Hunt there????? I don't want to put him down as a candidate but.... as far as I know he wasn't there and he's using other's people's efforts to further his agenda.... which scares me as that makes him more of a politician then a cop and we need a cop back in OC not a politician.

Hunt is not a politician he is a career cop that worked his way up through the ranks and was the only one who stood up to ex-sheriff Carona and his thugs in the 2006 sheriff race. He was demoted to patrol by Carona the day after the election after losing by 1%. He was forced to retire.

After Carona was indicted on federal corruption charges a year later.

Instead of the BOS putting in office the guy who had over 100k votes and the endorsement of police, fire and bail. They appointed Hutchen to be safe instead of listening to the peoples choice and admitting their mistakes of backing Carona in the first place.

Good luck to Hunt he is in federal court exercising his first amendment right against the OCSD and Carona. He will not only defeat Carona but will be the next Sheriff of OC. He knows what it's like to have his rights trampled which makes him uniquely qualified leader in the Pro 2A community.

There is no way in hell Hunt would go in front of that board their corrupt. The BOS is motivated by their own special interests and a win for Hunt makes them look bad. Please also note Bill Hunt has had this same CCW stance since 2005.

BILL HUNT FOR SHERIFF 2010!

Huzar
10-21-2009, 6:55 AM
There is no way in hell Hunt would go in front of that board their corrupt. The BOS is motivated by their own special interests and a win for Hunt makes them look bad.

So instead he implies that he was part of the effort by other groups??? I can understand he chose not to go in front of BOS for his own reasons, I can understand he wanted to be the appointed sheriff but having efforts of other groups that he is not part of in his video..... come on. I thought this was all about being up front and a "straight shooter"....

Mitch
10-21-2009, 7:12 AM
So instead he implies that he was part of the effort by other groups??? I can understand he chose not to go in front of BOS for his own reasons, I can understand he wanted to be the appointed sheriff but having efforts of other groups that he is not part of in his video..... come on. I thought this was all about being up front and a "straight shooter"....

I'm not here to defend Hunt, but he's not implying anything. That was a news report by Full Disclosure. They covered the hearing. Then they interviewed Hunt. Very simple.

Hunt didn't appear to misrepresent himself in any way (though I think he could have given some better answers in the interview).

Jamsie567
10-21-2009, 8:00 AM
So instead he implies that he was part of the effort by other groups??? I can understand he chose not to go in front of BOS for his own reasons, I can understand he wanted to be the appointed sheriff but having efforts of other groups that he is not part of in his video..... come on. I thought this was all about being up front and a "straight shooter"....

In my opinion this guy is a straight shooter he has had the same policy same stance on CCW's since 2005. Also he is a very big advocate of gun rights which I attached his letter of AB 962 below if interested in checking it out.

Would you have the courage to stand up to your boss after 22 years and having a nice comfortable pay check? Maybe but this man did it...

He ran for OC Sheriff and lost by a small margin. The board of supervisors had to appoint a new sheriff because Mike Carona got federally indicted. Hunt spoke in front of this very same board and they appointed Hutchens.

If Hunt wins the Sheriff race in 2010 it proves that Bill Hunt was right for standing up to the corruption. I am just trying to win your support nothing more. This is a good man that respects your constitutional rights.

AB 962 letter by Bill Hunt 9-5-09 (http://www.billhuntforsheriff2010.com/posts/ab-962-opposition-letter-by-bill-hunt)

Here is the story if interested in learning about Hunt. God bless!
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/carona-hunt-county-2601200-sheriff-lawsuit

Huzar
10-21-2009, 8:37 AM
The board of supervisors had to appoint a new sheriff because Mike Carona got federally indicted.
They had to appoint a new sheriff cause Mike Carona resigned. Granted the resignation was related to the indictment but lets keep the order of facts in order ;)
Hunt spoke in front of this very same board and they appointed Hutchens.
Then why didn't he come down to support the CITIZENS of OC when they spoke up against Hutchens during the meetings throughout the latter part of last year?

If Hunt wins the Sheriff race in 2010 it proves that Bill Hunt was right for standing up to the corruption.

No.... it proves that he wins. That win will have nothing to do with him standing up against corruption.
I am just trying to win your support nothing more. This is a good man that respects your constitutional rights.
I can respect that, I'm just not convinced that he does respect my constitutional rights. I do recall reading an article where he had a slightly different stance on the issue (that article was out at the time of the elections he lost) but.... since I can't find it I'm not going to talk about what it covered as my memory gets murky if I go further in the past then today's breakfast.....

Here is the story if interested in learning about Hunt. God bless!
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/carona-hunt-county-2601200-sheriff-lawsuit
I followed Bill Hunt's career as it developed and he isn't as clean as he wants everyone to think. Look at this story
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/la-me-carona26-2008nov26,0,163121.story
A citation could have resulted in the revocation of Haidl's bail in the rape case. Roche said he wanted to cite Haidl for possession, but a supervising sergeant ordered him not to, and instructed him to drive Haidl home. Roche said that the next day, Lt. Bill Hunt asked him to write a report about the incident, but then asked him to sanitize it and make it appear that the marijuana belonged to one of Haidl's friends.

"He said what I had written was not what he was looking for," Roche said.

Anyways..... Didn't want to get on this tangent when I originally made my post. All I want to say is that it's dissapointing to see the video representing citizens organized efforts against current sheriff right next to an interview with former Lt Bill Hunt who sat quiet and did nothing at that same time. He is also a citizen of OC and I don't see any reason why he shouldn't have been there along with everyone else if he is as concerned for our CCW rights as he says he is. I believe that his voice as a former Lt of OCSD and a challenger to then Sheriff Carona would have carried a lot of weight.... though it seems that it was silent and he was not seen. Folks from NRA have showed up, folks from other counties have showed up to support the citizens of OC.... but former Lt Bill Hunt was not there and yet the video is side by side next to his interview..... oh yeah, lets not put this on the newsies that they conveniently had placed it there......

Anyways, I'm done with this topic for now... elections are couple months away and I'm hoping we'll have couple more folks throw their name into the hat for the position and I hope that the best candiate wins....

Hunt
10-21-2009, 8:38 AM
Le Suer has my vote in SD these communist gotta go

Huzar
10-21-2009, 8:40 AM
BILL HUNT FOR SHERIFF 2010!

Jamie,
Something just struck me as I looked at your profile and saw that you joined very recently and it seems that almost all your posts relate to Bill Hunt's campaign. Are you affiliated with his campaign? If not did you join Calguns only to promote his campaign? Reason I am asking is that I do like to know where folks are coming from with their posts and I don't like propaganda.... (not saying that you're posting propaganda..... but I'm curious as to your motives).

1BigPea
10-21-2009, 9:06 AM
I've spoken with Bill Hunt in person regarding his stance on RKBA and CCW in Orange County. I am 100% satisfied that he means what he says and CCW in OC will be available to law abiding citizens.

I also think his track record with OCSD speaks for itself and that should be respected. I hope there are not other candidates that come out of the wood work because that could be potentially more CCW trouble for us here in OC. Last thing we need is another Hutchens type running against someone with a great track record like Bill Hunt.

Bill Hunt has mine and my family's full support.

yellowfin
10-21-2009, 9:06 AM
Hutchens is out of step with her constitutents. This LA culture in OC needs to get packing. Great videoThe LA anti gun culture needs to be kicked out of LA too, while you're at it.

demnogis
10-21-2009, 9:27 AM
More than getting Lt. Bill Hunt in, I want Hutchens out. I was pleased to hear so many fellow Orange County residents voice their displeasure with the politics-playing Hutchens at that meeting.

Her saying that her job is to enforce the law, whether she agrees with it or not... Obviously she forgot about the part where if a LEO feels that a law in place is wrong, unjust or plain unconstitutional, they have a choice to enforce it. Sheriffs are by far the most powerful Law Enforcement Agency in a state. Their powers supersede federal officers and state officers in their jurisdiction. To claim that "my hands are tied" in regards to bad law is just plain ignorant of her responsibilities and the rights of those she serves.

Jamsie567
10-21-2009, 10:09 AM
Huzar,

I am a grassroots supporter of Hunt and an activist in the Freedom movement and I am proud to say it. This is a pro 2nd amendment website that I found because Hunt inspired me to fight for this cause. If people like yourselves do not promote him then who will?

Hunt is not the first one I have helped out nor will he be the last. I also do not swear allegiance to anyone but the constitution. If Hunt ever goes agasinst these values he speaks of I will be the first one to go after him. Count on that!

Also I was not the one who posted this video but I simply stated some facts when I heard someone call him a politician which is anything further from the truth. Politician is very dirty word to me their scoundrels HAHA.

glbtrottr
10-22-2009, 8:51 PM
Mr. Hunt may be a fine gentleman. He may also have been a good Sheriff for a good period of time, and he definately seems aligned with our RKBA rights and plight.

He was also appropriately demoted by the OCSD to a lowly patrolman, in a non retaliatory manner as determined by a court of law.

He lost his lawsuit...against a convicted felon, no less.

What do you think this will do for the Hutchens campaign against Bill Hunt?

Maybe nothing, maybe lots - but the public won't take too kindly to it, like it or not.

Would you bet your paycheck on Bill Hunt winning?

locosway
10-22-2009, 8:55 PM
Well, who else are we going to bet on? If he's running against Hutchens and that's it... Well, I'm going to have to vote for Hunt.

Now, if someone else steps up to the plate with a better record and the same RKBA support as well as supporting the rights of the citizens, then we'll talk about looking at changing a vote.

tango-52
10-23-2009, 5:13 AM
He was also appropriately fired by the OCSD pending a demotion to a lowly patrolman, as determined by a court of law.


Point of clarification: Hunt resigned rather than accept the demotion.

glbtrottr
10-23-2009, 5:58 AM
Hunt resigned rather than accept the demotion.

Fixed it. Thank you.

I posted this on CalCCW. The question was...why is it that simply because he lost his case in court can we infer that he will lose the election?

My reply here...

"I will also try to be objective without meaning to offend. Good, bad or indifferent, people *hate* or run away from LOSERS.

BILL HUNT is a LOSER. By definition. Look at the outcome of his case. Also, look at the decision made by the command staff at OCSD. He LOST his job, he LOST his rank, sued AFTER he got fired, he LOST his case, which amongst other things will lead to him LOSING the election.

Upstanding perhaps, in line with us perhaps, hardworking even...

But Sandy Hutchens never crusaded against her bosses that we know of. And lost. Being in foreclosure while pulling down a half a cool mill while her husband also makes money doesn't matter. She has the slot. Bill doesn't. Girls like Girls. That makes her a winner, and Bill a LOSER.

If you're going to take a policy to talk trash about your management, you better have your facts straight, or face dire consequences...in civilian life or otherwise. You better WIN. Use a federal whistleblower statute, sue BEFORE you get fired, etc.

Had Mr. Hunt WON, perhaps we could be able to capitalize on riding a wave, the snowball effect, you name it.

In addition to being a LOSER, he also demonstrated POOR JUDGEMENT. He talked trash about his boss. That's a No No. You only get to WIN if you line up your cards and get him FIRED. He LOST. Sandy gets to giggle. John Scott gets to snort, smoke another cigar. Mike Hillman gets to chuckle.

You only get to play Martyr if someone bigger than you agrees that you should have WON. The President, a Court of Law, a Court of Public Opinion...in this case, that someone larger spoke up, and Bill Hunt LOST.

The general public HATES losers.

Hunt will be seen as a relic of "boys will be boys" fighting with each other in the CARONA years.

They want a little taste of "HOPE" and "CHANGE".

Hunt isn't HOPE and CHANGE. He's a sore loser who talked trash about his boss, got demoted, ran away with what little was left of his dignity, tried to SUE after he got fired in a retaliatory basis, and LOST.

Selling the public on Hunt will be like trying to get Palin elected. She may have had a nice rack sometime ago, and perhaps we like her values, but girls are voting today and lots of em like a girl in office. You have created no compelling reason for them to dismiss her foibles with Bill Hunt, but you have introduced a multi-time LOSER in the race. The other side will bring up even more garbage to show this loss as part of a long losing streak. Infidelity? Sure. They'll find something somewhere to make him look bad. Lying somewhere? Just you wait. Favoritism? Absolutely. Hold your breath.

Hate the game, not the player.

Now - I have another question for you. Do you think Mr. Hunt has skeletons in his closet? Do you think he ever participated in cronyism? Do you think he ever did things considered to be illegal? Do you think he swept things under the rug? I do...and I think this is only round one of a very long fight for Mr. Hunt.

As I have asked before, if everyone feels SO positive on Mr. Hunt, are you all willing to bet your paycheck on his winning? I've made the offer before, lets bet your paycheck and mine, we'll put them in escrow, and use them in Mr. Hunt's celebratory party, or let me buy another gun with my winnings.

Takers?"

glbtrottr
10-23-2009, 6:06 AM
Well, who else are we going to bet on?

Now, if someone else steps up to the plate with a better record and the same RKBA support as well as supporting the rights of the citizens, then we'll talk about looking at changing a vote.

I've had this conversation with the peeps at SafeOC. This was a fairly predictable outcome, as are others which will happen in the months to come regarding Mr. Hunt.

I actually wanted to support Bill. I'm on record originally looking to support him, and being critical of his detractors so early on. Like you, I thought he'd make a fine Sheriff. I had also mentioned this to the SafeOC guys.

Then, a couple of smart people who play public politics for a living showed me why this wouldn't fly...and I saw the roadmap, and was disappointed.

...I want a candidate with a good RKBA record. I truly do. Bill Hunt was a candidate I wanted to believe in. I was happy to consider spending my money and support him. I didn't.

Are there other candidates out there? I think so. None that have announced. I expect in January we will hear. The longer your name is out there, the longer you also expose yourself to scrutiny and criticism. If you're flawless, you don't care...but Bill wasn't, and isn't. I guess most of us can't be "The One", "That One", without reproach.

HALO effect Sucks.

Has anyone else announced yet? Hmm...nope.

So my vote and my money stay in my pocket until I have someone I can believe in. And today, that's not Bill Hunt.

ZUMNDAD
10-24-2009, 7:42 PM
Then, a couple of smart people who play public politics for a living showed me why this wouldn't fly...and I saw the roadmap, and was disappointed.

Sounds like you have some interesting friends. Could you PM me with some of the details of 'the roadmap' that showed you Hunt's campaign is doomed. I am extraordinarily curious.

Thanks!

ontargetrange
10-24-2009, 9:11 PM
I've had this conversation with the peeps at SafeOC. This was a fairly predictable outcome, as are others which will happen in the months to come regarding Mr. Hunt.

I actually wanted to support Bill. I'm on record originally looking to support him, and being critical of his detractors so early on. Like you, I thought he'd make a fine Sheriff. I had also mentioned this to the SafeOC guys.

Then, a couple of smart people who play public politics for a living showed me why this wouldn't fly...and I saw the roadmap, and was disappointed.

...I want a candidate with a good RKBA record. I truly do. Bill Hunt was a candidate I wanted to believe in. I was happy to consider spending my money and support him. I didn't.

Are there other candidates out there? I think so. None that have announced. I expect in January we will hear. The longer your name is out there, the longer you also expose yourself to scrutiny and criticism. If you're flawless, you don't care...but Bill wasn't, and isn't. I guess most of us can't be "The One", "That One", without reproach.

HALO effect Sucks.

Has anyone else announced yet? Hmm...nope.

So my vote and my money stay in my pocket until I have someone I can believe in. And today, that's not Bill Hunt.


So I read this and I hear CCWInstructor almost verbatium -- why -- is there something about Bill NOT giving GB the same "rights" as Corona? After all, at one time GB declared he could roll his chair back and approve or disapprove an applicant -- way out of line on that statement for anyone to say.

Not everyone wins their lawsuits - I have sued and been sued a number of times. I didn't win and I didn't lose -- I just spent my money and hoped for the best based a flawed legal system.

I declared my support for someone at the great personal risk of my business and my income -- where are the rest of you -- are you waiting for someone to tell you what to do or do you want to go out and meet with Bill (he is VERY available) and ask him the tough questions -- he has handled them all so far and I think he will continue -- but that is just me talking.

I also have to ask if CCWI was at the all the meetings as well -- I was there (broken ankle and all), but was everyone there? I was there wearing my green button and talking with the many people I know and respect.

glbtrottr
10-24-2009, 10:38 PM
Not everyone wins their lawsuits - I have sued and been sued a number of times. I didn't win and I didn't lose -- I just spent my money and hoped for the best based a flawed legal system.

Slightly different.

You didn't sue your former employer and boss after accusing them of corruption while being part of their command staff. You didn't get punished with a demotion, run to your retirement before its leveled, and then sue the same employer for back pay and damages, only to run for political office with same said employer whom you'd have to ask money for in totality of your budget. You aren't asking for a job back at the same place that you defamed, wasting valuable county dollars for your personal financial gain, and then ask the same voters you're suing to elect you Sheriff of the County of the people who successfully had your lawsuit tossed out. That was Bill Hunt.

To further clarify, Hunt didn't lose his lawsuit - the Federal Judge threw it out of court. Huge Difference.

Most importantly, this isn't about you, Gregg, or Ontarget - the comments I have made so far are about Bill Hunt as a candidate.

So I read this and I hear CCWInstructor almost verbatium -- why -- is there something about Bill NOT giving GB the same "rights" as Corona? After all, at one time GB declared he could roll his chair back and approve or disapprove an applicant -- way out of line on that statement for anyone to say..

Here we go with the GB stuff again (first time from you, though). If I receive one more PM or post about being GB, I think I'll cry. Maybe. For a second.

Gregg, ask your employees who I am. I'm a customer of yours - not GB - with my very own distinct opinions, often in disagreement with Mr. GB. Isaac, Charlie and your lads know me well. I hang out at your range, pay for at least 2 memberships a year, buy your ammo, bring additional customers over regularly when I can, buy guns from you on occasion and more. I am not GB or CCWI. My family supports your business fairly substantially, and I have introduced my share of people to Ontarget to do the same.

I didn't live in OC when Carona was Sheriff and thus don't know what you're talking about regarding rolling chairs; heck, I didn't even know GB back then. Because some of your staff are casual friends of mine, they know this much about me. Really. :)

I declared my support for someone at the great personal risk of my business and my income -- where are the rest of you -- are you waiting for someone to tell you what to do or do you want to go out and meet with Bill (he is VERY available) and ask him the tough questions -- he has handled them all so far and I think he will continue -- but that is just me talking.

Gregg, your support to the community is *awesome*. Again, as I said, it's not about you.

A number of us went to the hearings, paid money, donate time and effort, spend a good amount of time on this cause...hardly waiting for someone to tell us "what to do" or "level accusations from a distance".

Some of us have met Bill...we simply didn't like his answers, his background, or think he'll win, that's all. We simply disagree on this topic. We don't disagree on wanting Sandy Sue out of office, and I have asked for a get together amongst all...which according to your founder, you all declined.

I also have to ask if CCWI was at the all the meetings as well -- I was there (broken ankle and all), but was everyone there? I was there wearing my green button and talking with the many people I know and respect.

Sorry about your broken ankle - you looked great on TV, though.

I couldn't make it since I was busy earning money (some of which goes to this cause or your business), but sent my favorite girl...and rumor has it she was even on TV, arguing the legality of what Sandy Sue was doing. CCWI? It wasn't my turn to watch him. But I do know he contributed a chunk of money for green and blue buttons, bowties, and a lot more for a lot of other things we all know about.

I've offered a get together with the groups to get aligned on the same vector...my offer stands, and my PM box still has room in it.

CharlieK
10-25-2009, 5:23 AM
Hey, that's me! #4 speaker at the begining of the video. The meeting was a lot more tense than the editing showed. Thinking about it now, that woman just makes my blood boil!

The Banana
10-25-2009, 7:48 AM
I am responding to this thread as well as the one entitled “Lawsuit brought by former Sheriff’s Lt. Bill Hunt thrown out.”

Some of you “men” are acting like emotional children, ranting and raving and waving your arms about without actually listening or thinking. The demands for censorship and belittlement of your peers is obscene particularly when you don’t actually take the time to read, let alone ponder or consider the opposing view points. You just wish to rage and puff up your ego’s pissing in the wind and not actually listen to people who are both educated and have your ultimate best interests at heart (winning an election against Sandy Sue). The opinions may not be 100% correct, but the dissent rationally exists and you can either hide your head in the sand and stamp your feet demanding that we all agree with you or else you’ll call us bad names (because calling a girl Greg Block really isn’t very pretty, and I too have been told that I was Greg on more than one occasion) OR you could listen because any contention you find on CalGuns will only be amplified by a couple of orders of magnitude in the press and in the minds of the voting public. For those who don’t know Greg Block, he’s a Law Enforcement and CCW instructor who posts here and at CalCCW.

Since (like the Democrats calling everyone a racists who does not support our fair and neet-o-keen president) this group is so rabid as to say anyone who does not like Bill Hunt is a mouth piece for GB, I will start there. I think GB may be a bit misogynistic, I think he’s a fine instructor and a fine talent and credit to instructing the blue stripes, but I openly disagree with him and have (though I have the wherewithall to do so to his face). Beyond that I am educated. I have an AB from one of the top ten universities in the world and an MBA from one of the top 3; I actually know how to think for myself, thanks. Moreover not being a native OC’er I recall with complete pain losing what we thought was the worlds most amazing senatorial candidate (due to a bad vetting process) at the 11th hour, know what that mistake cost us as Republicans? Yes, thank you we have President Obama! So when I speak I know a few things about a few things and they have zero to do with Greg Block.

1) Bill Hunt’s case was not lost. It was THROWN OUT of court. Had he actually gone to court and lost, well that means maybe the jury was a pack of idiots. No it was thrown out of court, to quote the OC Register, “A lawsuit brought by former sheriff’s Lt. Bill Hunt against ex-sheriff Mike Carona — which went to trial last week in Los Angeles — was thrown out this morning by a federal judge who granted Carona’s motion to dismiss the entire case.” There are very few reasons that a case gets thrown out but generally in civil cases there is exactly one reason: the case had no merit , in other words it was a waste of taxpayers money.
2) Now it doesn’t take a JD to know the case would have been thrown out, which makes Bill Hunt’s judgment extraordinarily questionable on this single point alone (not to worry, I have others), his lawyers if they in fact have JD’s would have known that because Mike Carona was sheriff at the time he was covered under ‘qualified immunity’ even a city dog catcher knows this because even they get sued all the time as well. If the police dog patrol knows this, why doesn’t Bill Hunt? So why did he file suit? Bluster and arrogance. Now I for one don’t want someone so imprudent running the Sheriffs department, because bluster and arrogance has no business wearing a badge let alone running the whole department.
3) Bill Hunt ran a 56 person department, he whined and mewed the entire time, he then publicly and against OC policy whined and mewed and now he’s upset when he was demoted for breaking the oath he swore to uphold, wow. But now suddenly he has the experience to run the entire sheriff’s office? Oh please. He was demoted for lack of judgment, and worse Carona (no matter what you think of the guy) had the foresight to back that up with independent review.
4) Some doof said that Bill Hunt was not a politician…ok wait he is running for political office which by definition makes him, wow yes, a politician.
5) BTW when Jonathan Swift made a Modest Proposal he didn’t ACTUALLY mean that people should eat their babies, it was done for effect he didn’t actually mean people should in reality eat their babies. I know it seems like an odd point to make but since people on the thread cannot distinguish between literary device and reality I thought they should be given the head’s up about the baby eating.
6) Halo effect. Millions of dollars have been spent on something called Halo effect, its real it exists and if beer and car companies spend billions of dollars trying to deal with it, its worthy for us to consider in a political campaign. The “theory” (which is tried true and very tested so more of a fact) is simple, you put a pretty girl next to a bottle of beer, the beer becomes more enticing. Its stupid, it also happens to be true. So any event, incident, or otherwise that can be attached to someone and sticks is a halo effect (even if they did nothing wrong). Bill Hunt LOST, however he lost stupidly and because of his own vanity, halo effect dictates he is a loser and a money waster and that is his halo. Good luck on ridding him of that, halo’s stick pretty hard.
7) Chick vote. I mean seriously, I saw droves of women cross the aisle to vote for Hillary. Hillary? OMG what a joke of a human, her claim to fame was being the First Lady (and not even a very good one) and then she is qualified to be president? Yes in droves Republicans, educated, astute women came to vote for Hillary. It’s an issue Sandy Sue is a woman and women have a noted tendency to vote as a block for other women. Stomping your feet isn’t gonna fix this, you all look like sour grapes doing it. It makes Sandy Sue look like a righteous awesome sheriff being held down by men. You just make yourself look bad. If you want to defeat Sandy a better tact than stamping your feet and mewing needs to be taken.
8) Vetting. To glbtrottr’s point what vetting have you actually done? The answer is NONE. So when a skeleton or six come out of his closet because of no vetting, you have yourselves to blame. The candidate was NOT vetted and god knows what will be found. I heard this same EXACT bs from supporters in the election referenced above. Just shows that history repeats itself.
9) Good gosh, I actually met Bill Hunt, I made a point of walking up to him and speaking for about an hour. He’s nice enough, I didn’t like his answers not even a little. I met him, I spoke to him and oh my golly I didn’t like him. If I wanted to buy a used car maybe, but I don’t, I want to feel safe in my home. So you can go on a rampage and scream at us, or his handler can take a second to ponder the issue that Bill Hunt actually isn’t adored by some and change his look and feel in a different way.

At the end of the day, all of the foot stomping, trying to get posters censored and pretending that there's no dissent may silence many people. Silence is not agreement; silence is silence. I just won't vote for Bill Hunt...I will just be silent about it.

glbtrottr
10-25-2009, 7:53 AM
Back on the topic of Mr. Hunt and Sandra Hutchens...

Will Mr. Hunt go on record that he never violated any departmental policy?
Will Mr. Hunt go on record that he never did any favors for any other officers or their families by sweeping things under the rug? Ever?
Can Mr. Hunt categorically state that the only disciplinary action against him revolved around speaking against his boss, or were there other incidents during his tenure at OCSD that were investigated?
Will Mr. Hunt answer why, when today he states that he is such a CCW proponent, he didn't issue any CCW's during his stint in San Clemente? Please answer in detail. If you had the power to issue and didn't, why would rewarding you with the job of Sheriff make you different?
Can Mr. Hunt explain why he believes that after running a detachment of 56 people, he is qualified to run so large a law enforcement organization?
Will Mr. Hunt tell us how he expects to petition the Board for budget money for the department when he sued the very same taxpayers and had his suit thrown out? How does Mr. Hunt reconcile sour grapes with the taxpayer including lost wages, and still ask for the job. This would require a human incapable of resentment; his lawsuit is evidence that Bill Hunt is not that kind of an individual.
If Mr. Hunt were to become Sheriff, can he spefically make commitments to the individuals that were part of his demotion hearing that they would keep their rank and job?
Mr. Carona had affairs around his wife during his tenure, and it became an embarrassment for him. Can Mr. Hunt go on record that he has never been unfaithful? This goes to integrity, as many of the previous questions...

glbtrottr
10-25-2009, 7:56 AM
I gave this some thought. I have been getting some PM's here and at other places, some very supportive, some curiously taunting.

I'll put my money where my mouth is...again.

How about I pay for Pizza for an OCCCWS gathering, and OnTarget or someone from SafeOC pick the venue, including the Ontarget range.

I bring my friends, you bring your friends. Hopefully when done we will all have new friends.

Invite some special guests, have some surprise guest appearances.

Mr. Hunt is welcome to attend.

I can kidnap Mr. GB and any other members of his posse that I can throw into a big Ford Excursion.

Ideally, things would go fabulously.

Let's see how committed we are to the "United we stand, divided we fall" mentality.

The Director
10-25-2009, 8:47 AM
Wow. Some serious hating on Hunt going on here. Any of you have a better candidate? Anyone?

The Banana
10-25-2009, 11:04 AM
Oddly enough, candidates traditionally announce in January. Its sort of a tradition because the longer a candidate is announced the longer the opposition has to sling mud. So, yes, by January, no doubt, there will be other candidates, qualified and not so qualified.

The Banana
10-25-2009, 11:27 AM
Oddly enough, candidates traditionally announce in January. Its sort of a tradition because the longer a candidate is announced the longer the opposition has to sling mud. So, yes, by January, no doubt, there will be other candidates, qualified and not so qualified.

glbtrottr
10-25-2009, 3:25 PM
Some of the additional reasons why I think Mr. Hunt may not do so well against Mrs Sandra Hutchens in the Sheriff's race:


http://totalbuzz.freedomblogging.com/2008/11/25/carona-trial-prosecutor-to-question-haidl-again-today/8904/

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-carona26-2008nov26,0,4275870.story

http://tinstarblog.blogspot.com/2005/07/hunting-for-cover-from-attorney.html

"...Roche told jurors he wanted to cite Haidl, but was directed not to cite Haidl or write a report. Sgt. Richard Downing also told him to drive Haidl home, Roche said.

Roche said he wrote a generic log entry about the incident. Later, Roche testified, Lt. Bill Hunt asked him to write a report about the incident — then asked him to amend it.“He said what I had written was not what he was looking for,” Roche said. “He basically wanted everything left out that had Greg Haidl as the possessor of the marijuana. He told me to point the possession of marijuana towards (another) juvenile.”

“Is this the santized version of the report?” federal proscutor Ken Julian asked.

“It is,” Roche said.

Hunt was later reprimanded for his handling of the incident.“Did you give Greg Haidl preferential treatment?” Julian also asked.

“In my opinion, yes … he didn’t end up receiving a citation and I ended up driving him home,” Roche replied"...

There you have it, folks.

Cronyism towards Don Haidl by ignoring his Greg Haidl's marijuana issues.
Misrepresenting events by rewriting a report that would have otherwise pointed at Greg Haidl. They call this lying where I come from
Accusing the innocent...pointing blame at the other juvenile? It makes me wonder how many criminal cases Mr. Hunt also treated in this manner, either by augmenting the events that took place, or pointing them at someone else.
Reprimanded.

Do people really change? I invite Mr. Hunt, who posts in this forum, to respond as to his reasoning behind the event that took place above. Please help clarify it for us. Do you think the opposition, Sandy Hutchens, who has access to your complete and total personnel file, will not know about this, or do you hope that if you stick your head in the sand it will go away? Is this the person we're pinning our hopes on for election against Sandy Sue? Do we want to wait until the bad guys bring all this crud up at the last minute?

Huzar
10-25-2009, 4:25 PM
LOL Good catch on the issue but if you notice it was already brought up (though not maybe to this extent) and it was for the most part ignored by the suporters.

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showpost.php?p=3247586&postcount=17

Mstrty
10-25-2009, 6:22 PM
If we could only find someone in Sacramento that is a winnable CCW candidate I would be happy. Not sure about the old Citrus Heights counsel member is the one. (winnable)?????

The Banana
10-25-2009, 8:43 PM
Hunt is not a politician he is a career cop that worked his way up through the ranks and was the only one who stood up to ex-sheriff Carona and his thugs in the 2006 sheriff race. He was demoted to patrol by Carona the day after the election after losing by 1%. He was forced to retire.

Skipping all the other obvious fallacies in this statement, I wanted to point out that Hunt didn't lose the last election by 1%, he lost by almost 30%. He lost the chance at a run off and if you do some of that "new math" he lost that by 1%. There is a universe of difference between losing an election and losing a run off.

Dr. Peter Venkman
10-25-2009, 9:43 PM
Hutchens has no control over issuance of CCWs due to "California law", but she controls who gets permits? :confused:

MP301
10-25-2009, 10:31 PM
First, I live in Northern Ca and have no "personal stake" in this election. I do have a huge soft spot for Orange County and have had a lot of god times there.

But, after reading this thread, I would like to make an observation about this up coming election for Sheriff. I hope no one gets offended, but here is the reality of things...

IF some of you dont get your head out of your A**, your going to get stuck with Hutchins and it will be your own damn fault. Period.

I dont have to go in to whats wrong with her, you already know that.

And, I dont have to go in whats right or wrong with Hunt....because it doesnt matter.

Use some common sense here. What matters is disposing of Hutchins, correct? This either means finding a new candidate NOW who has a reasonable chance of unseating Hutchins OR supporting and electing Hunt. if thats what needs to happen, then thats what needs to happen.

Unfortunately, sometimes its just like many elections. Which candidate sucks less? Which can do more damage in office? If you want to "protest vote" (you know, like voting libertarian because its what seems best, knowing full well your wasting a vote that could go for the lesser evil?), and Hutchins remains Sheriff, make sure you tell everyone how you helped keep her in office.....

Priorites here....whats important to you?

glbtrottr
10-26-2009, 6:32 AM
And, I dont have to go in whats right or wrong with Hunt....because it doesnt matter.

Which candidate sucks less?

It does matter. There are limits...and I regret your viewpoint since I think it's what gets us intro trouble. You really believe it's ok to allow corruption, lying, and criminal behavior into the Sheriff's top office when it's this blatant?

Here's an interesting video from KCAL 9 news where one of Mr. Hunt's contributors in the previous campaign gets pulled over for being drunk. As the deputies are about to arrest him, Robert Stevenson says he wants to talk to "Bill Hunt." It's not long before the deputies turn off their microphones on the video, and drive him home instead of jail. Nice, eh? He not only sweeps things under the rug like the Greg Haidl stuff, but also pays people in politics special favors.

Bill Hunt has drunk driving contributor taken home instead of arrested or to jail...as reported by the news.
http://cbs2.com/video/?id=10772@kcbs.dayport.com

Cool.

Anyone but Hutchens? Not so much.

I had originally asked about cronyism and sweeping things under the rug, and people were kind enough to send me videos and testimony showing Bill Hunt is far worse than Carona ever was. Amusingly all of this stuff is out there on Hunt in the public airwaves...

Where is Bill Hunt to respond to all of the items above? Crickets so far...(chirp...chirp...)

locosway
10-26-2009, 6:39 AM
It does matter. There are limits...and I regret your viewpoint since I think it's what gets us intro trouble. You really believe it's ok to allow corruption, lying, and criminal behavior into the Sheriff's top office when it's this blatant?

Here's an interesting video from KCAL 9 news where one of Mr. Hunt's contributors in the previous campaign gets pulled over for being drunk. As the deputies are about to arrest him, Robert Stevenson says he wants to talk to "Bill Hunt." It's not long before the deputies turn off their microphones on the video, and drive him home instead of jail. Nice, eh? He not only sweeps things under the rug like the Greg Haidl stuff, but also pays people in politics special favors.

Bill Hunt has drunk driving contributor taken home instead of arrested or to jail...as reported by the news.
http://cbs2.com/video/?id=10772@kcbs.dayport.com

Cool.

Anyone but Hutchens? Not so much.

I had originally asked about cronyism and sweeping things under the rug, and people were kind enough to send me videos and testimony showing Bill Hunt is far worse than Carona ever was. Amusingly all of this stuff is out there on Hunt in the public airwaves...

Where is Bill Hunt to respond to all of the items above? Crickets so far...(chirp...chirp...)

I'd rather have a corrupt 2A supporter than a corrupt anti.

Until there's a more viable candidate than Hunt against Hutchens I'm going to stand behind him.

It's sad that we expect corruption from elected officials. In a perfect world there would be no corruption, but as I tell the anti's, it's not a perfect world.

The Director
10-26-2009, 8:40 AM
Given the choices I'd take Hunt. If he wants to let his drunk friends off the hook, it's sad, but not as sad as never being able to CCW in the OC.

The Banana
10-26-2009, 8:49 AM
And I hate to say this, I'll take the devil I know versus the devil I don't. Hunt handed out no CCW permits when he was running San Clemente and as far as I can tell, his promises to be pro-CCW are similar to promises made by others in their runs to land SF and Sacramento...there is no proof. I hope to god that others throw their hat in the ring in January or before.

steadyrock
10-26-2009, 8:57 AM
Hutchens has no control over issuance of CCWs due to "California law", but she controls who gets permits? :confused:

The Sheriff has wide discretion on this matter. :rolleyes:

smokingloon
10-26-2009, 9:38 AM
It does matter. There are limits...and I regret your viewpoint since I think it's what gets us intro trouble. You really believe it's ok to allow corruption, lying, and criminal behavior into the Sheriff's top office when it's this blatant?

Here's an interesting video from KCAL 9 news where one of Mr. Hunt's contributors in the previous campaign gets pulled over for being drunk. As the deputies are about to arrest him, Robert Stevenson says he wants to talk to "Bill Hunt." It's not long before the deputies turn off their microphones on the video, and drive him home instead of jail. Nice, eh? He not only sweeps things under the rug like the Greg Haidl stuff, but also pays people in politics special favors.

Bill Hunt has drunk driving contributor taken home instead of arrested or to jail...as reported by the news.
http://cbs2.com/video/?id=10772@kcbs.dayport.com

Cool.

Anyone but Hutchens? Not so much.

I had originally asked about cronyism and sweeping things under the rug, and people were kind enough to send me videos and testimony showing Bill Hunt is far worse than Carona ever was. Amusingly all of this stuff is out there on Hunt in the public airwaves...

Where is Bill Hunt to respond to all of the items above? Crickets so far...(chirp...chirp...)

The news report states that Stevenson did call Hunt that night. However, what is not known is if he actually talked to Hunt and what role, if any did Hunt play with Stevenson being driven home.

I am curious as to how you came to your conclusion.

CWM4A1
10-26-2009, 9:43 AM
And I hate to say this, I'll take the devil I know versus the devil I don't. Hunt handed out no CCW permits when he was running San Clemente and as far as I can tell, his promises to be pro-CCW are similar to promises made by others in their runs to land SF and Sacramento...there is no proof. I hope to god that others throw their hat in the ring in January or before.

Hunt was Lt. of OCSD at the time and was pointed to run San Clemente, it's not an elected position and he had no power to issue CCW permit. So your point is?

There was rumor that Paul Walters, Santa Ana PD Chief at one point was consider running for 2010 election. If you replace Bill's name with Paul than that would fit perfectly as a candidate NOT to be supported by pro 2A/RKBA group. How many CCW was coming from city of Santa Ana?

The Banana
10-26-2009, 10:54 AM
Hunt was given full discretion to sign off on permits and did not do so, that has been stated and confirmed by many in the sheriffs department. I do not know Paul Walters and since he is obviously not running, I have no clue why this would even be mentioned.

What I do know is that Hunt's last campaign last campaign was riddled with lying by his campaign manager and since Hunt endorsed that man's statements, Hunt lied by extension. If Hunt choses Whitacre again that would be even more indefensible. I know that supporters of Hunt have been changing facts (like his losing an election by 1% when it was around 30%). I have read in the newspaper and in sworn court testimony that Hunt changed police documents to wrongfully implicate an innocent party. I know that Hunt was wasteful with taxpayers money in a lawsuit that was thrown out and should never have been brought to bear. I know Hunt did not ask for a Scully hearing, making a lawsuit even more inane. I know that when I speak nay a word about Hunt in a negative light on this or other sites that Hunt supporters try to quell my freedom to speech by demanding that admins censor anything against this candidate. I know that at the two BOS meetings Hunt was no where to be found, which is a double kick in the teeth to gun rights. The NRA was there as were other lobbying groups, but not Hunt. I know that BOS approved the sheriff's budget and while Sandy Sue is no darling to the BOS, Hunt supporters have made a point of insulting the BOS, making us all wonder just how savvy or intelligent Hunt is. I also know that I made about twelve points about Hunt and so far only one was considered and then brushed aside.

Men are about deeds. Its crude but as my grandma always said, "a man will say anything to get into bed with you" So when you have some actual actions by Hunt that show that he is in fact pro CCW and gun rights, then you have a point. So far its a lot of hot air and a lot of political ugliness.

CWM4A1
10-26-2009, 1:45 PM
Hunt was given full discretion to sign off on permits and did not do so, that has been stated and confirmed by many in the sheriffs department. I do not know Paul Walters and since he is obviously not running, I have no clue why this would even be mentioned.

Please provide documented proof that Hunt was given full discretion to sign-off on CCW permit. Otherwise I found it hard to believe Sheriff would give out this power to a Lt. in the same organization and let him make the call separate from Department's policy. Paul was being place as a comparison based on your statement, as he did seem interested in the race at one point.

What I do know is that Hunt's last campaign last campaign was riddled with lying by his campaign manager and since Hunt endorsed that man's statements, Hunt lied by extension. If Hunt choses Whitacre again that would be even more indefensible. I know that supporters of Hunt have been changing facts (like his losing an election by 1% when it was around 30%). I have read in the newspaper and in sworn court testimony that Hunt changed police documents to wrongfully implicate an innocent party.

I sent a PM to Hunt himself and invite him to respond on all of the above. He's a member of this forum as well, and I encourage you to do the same. As far as I can recall he did explain this issue before with satisfactory answer, but I will let him explain as I can't remember all the details.

I know that when I speak nay a word about Hunt in a negative light on this or other sites that Hunt supporters try to quell my freedom to speech by demanding that admins censor anything against this candidate.

Again, please show proof such thing is conducted here, or anywhere else. I can't speak for others, but at least I have never engage in such activities. OTOH, I have documented proof at certain other forum that Hunt supporter's post was being removed because "there are no freedom of speech at privately owned forum". Would you care to explain why you seem to be okay with the double standard?

So far its a lot of hot air and a lot of political ugliness.

Indeed. I sure hope there are better candidate that would emerge and meets your criteria that: 1. He/She was there at BOS meeting to defend our right. 2. Have strong pro 2A/RKBA background. 3. Have a good plan to reform the department and 4. No shady back-door dealing like Carona had. You and glbtrottr suggest that earlier a candidate announces his/her candidacy, the more scrutiny there will be, which in my opinion is a good thing. He/she by announcing early could also start establishing his or her support base. Hutchens already have a lot of establishment support as well as campaign contribution as we know, and will be a big uphill battle for any late runners to go up against. For me, Mr. Hunt remains to be the only viable candidate to this point.

The Banana
10-26-2009, 2:13 PM
You are more than welcomed to go to CalCCW and see people demanding that links be closed and censored because the discussion is anti-Bill Hunt. When conversations are anti-Sandy Sue on the same site, they are never questioned. I have personally received incredible hate mail with words that cannot be repeated where little ones might read that would make your head spin from a Hunt supporter screaming at me, a donor of his actually. That was before I even started looking at any candidate seriously and I was ranting about someone else who might be running. Oh and then there was that whole making up stories about OCCCW not wanting to meet with Safe OC drama that was proven beyond a shadow of a doubt as lies made up by SafeOC How much proof do you people need? I mean seriously. Its a diversion tactic.

You AGAIN brush under the carpet some serious issues...I dunno like tampering with a police statement and his complete lack of prudence in filing a lawsuit as he did. You neglected to mention why he opted out of a scully hearing, why he didn't join us all at the BOS hearings, Whitacre as his campaign manager, and a whole slew of issues I mentioned in my first post on this thread. I believe Glbtrotter asked for Bill Hunt to come out publicly and in no uncertain way on a handful of questions and that's fair. So far the new stories paint a VERY different picture that's out there and real and not going away.

As I said before you can all yell and scream and stamp your feet or you can listen and either dump him as a candidate or fix the issues that can be fixed. You might have a perception problem or a reality problem, only Bill Hunt would know that as Safe OC didn't actually vet him at all. In any event your candidate has some very real issues and you can get mad or you can fix, your choice.

dantodd
10-26-2009, 3:11 PM
I'd rather have a corrupt 2A supporter than a corrupt anti.


I detest Hutchens' policy as much as the next guy but I have not seen any indication of corruption. Do you know something I don't?

locosway
10-26-2009, 3:12 PM
I detest Hutchens' policy as much as the next guy but I have not seen any indication of corruption. Do you know something I don't?

She doesn't support the constitution, doesn't that qualify for corruption?

IrishPirate
10-26-2009, 3:29 PM
sweet video. Glad to see that people down south are sticking up for their rights. Seems like the fate of our second ammendment right to bear arms is on the horizon...hopefully it's going to be good news. :chris:

OrangeCountyCCW
10-26-2009, 3:40 PM
I am one of the co-founders of the SAFE OC political action committee and I am going to make a limited post here to address some of these issues.

1. Regarding "hate mail," I want to personally state that none of the founders of SAFE OC has sent "hate mail" to anyone pro or con CCW, pro or con Bill Hunt, or pro or con Sandra Hutchens, and we categorically reject such behavior. Banana, I am sorry you received hate mail, and I certainly hope it was not from any of our supporters although we cannot control that. I can promise you will always be treated with respect by the leadership of SAFE OC.

2. Regarding Bill Hunt, I want to make an important clarification, once again, that while SAFE OC has endorsed Bill Hunt for Sheriff of Orange County, we are not his campaign nor have we "sponsored" him to run for office. We are an unconnected PAC, and we have a professional treasurer who ensures that our receipts are accounted properly and we stay within the campaign finance laws. Because of this, we at SAFE OC cannot comment on each and every issue (allegation or hypothetical) raised about Mr. Hunt here. We will suggest to him that it makes sense for him to answer, himself, some of the questions and concerns being raised.

3. Regarding any other groups, I must clarify that no one at SAFE OC has "refused" to meet with OCCCWS much less "lied" about that. I personally was contacted by someone involved with OCCCWS and the conversation was at all times gracious and productive. The offer of a meeting was declined "at that time" for several reasons -- one of which was that OCCCWS insisted on some conditions before the meeting could take place. However, everything was done graciously and politely, and the door is still open for future contacts and collaboration if the groups' views and goals begin to converge.

4. Regarding candidacy, while it is correct to say that candidates may not file specific legal paperwork until 2010, it is incorrect to say that candidates ordinarily or usually wait until January to declare their candidacy. Indeed, that leaves an exceptionally short period of time to fundraise and campaign. There may be other candidates who emerge, but to be blunt, that is growing more unlikely with each passing day -- and if another candidate did emerge in January, he or she would probably be at a great disadvantage for having inexplicably waited so long.

This is America, and everyone's vote and conscience is free. SAFE OC has endorsed Lt. Bill Hunt. We did not do so impulsively or without vetting. SAFE OC is certainly aware of some of the issues that have been raised here about Mr. Hunt, and he has explained himself to our satisfaction (and we've noticed that at public events, Mr. Hunt is more than willing to explain himself to other inquirers also). Some of the other issues raised here are too shrouded in vagueness and allusion right now to be either easily understood or addressed. As at least one poster pointed out, some of the criticisms of Mr. Hunt are taken solely from press reports which are themselves unclear (much less conclusive).

I hope this clarifies some of these matters in a respectful and productive way.

The Director
10-26-2009, 4:20 PM
^^^^^^Great freaking post. About time we heard the other side of this.

CWM4A1
10-26-2009, 4:40 PM
No, I have not "brush under the carpet", please re-read my post. We did ask Mr. Hunt about this particular issue (Greg Hidel's possession case), and he did respond with satisfactory answers as what had happened. Since my memory didn't serve me too well, so I will ask him to respond instead of myself, same deal with the law-suit as I don't know enough regarding the legal procedure to comment so I have sent in a request for clarification. On the other hand, Where is the documented proof that Hunt was authorized by Carona to issue CCW permit while he was acting as San Clemente Police Chief? I am anxiously awaiting your response.

It must also escape from me, as I didn't catch anything in these posts that indicated any "making up stories about OCCCW not wanting to meet with Safe OC drama". Where did you get this one?

I am not yelling or screaming, and based on previous feedback from Mr. Hunt regarding the Hidel case, I believe there are no wrong-doing from Mr. Hunt's part. While I do not agree with glbtrottr publicly calling Mr. Hunt a "LOSER" as this is borderline personal attack, it's your 1st amendment right. The fact the post still stay up there speaks volumes on CALGUNS' tolerance on issues like this.

nick
10-26-2009, 5:54 PM
I detest Hutchens' policy as much as the next guy but I have not seen any indication of corruption. Do you know something I don't?

If I recall the accounts of the OC BOS meetings correctly, she used cameras OCSD was entrusted with to spy on supervisors' notes; and she put up quite a show of abuse of power during those meetings. There're a few threads on that around here.

ontargetrange
10-26-2009, 6:41 PM
If I recall the accounts of the OC BOS meetings correctly, she used cameras OCSD was entrusted with to spy on supervisors' notes; and she put up quite a show of abuse of power during those meetings. There're a few threads on that around here.

I will go you one better -- the Folks at CCCCWS we able to serve them with a freedom of information and bagged knuckle dragger Mike writing on his OCSD blackberry very derogatory remarks about some of the speakers AND they were able to get some of the video published from the illegal acrtivity of the Deputy controlling the cameras -- which are as I understand it still being reviewed for "security" reasons and have not been released by the Appointed one.

If we all work together and quit trying to run any candidate down except the appointed Sheriff we can make a big difference here in OC.

locosway
10-26-2009, 6:44 PM
I sent Bill Hunt a PM on Facebook and he responded promptly answering my questions. I urge anyone who does have questions to either ask him directly, or ask someone in his campaign who can provide the appropriate information.

Huzar
10-26-2009, 6:57 PM
I sent Bill Hunt a PM on Facebook and he responded promptly answering my questions. I urge anyone who does have questions to either ask him directly, or ask someone in his campaign who can provide the appropriate information.

Why doesn't he post here and address everyone?

locosway
10-26-2009, 7:02 PM
Why doesn't he post here and address everyone?

Why don't you ask him, or was my post just a waste of space on here?

Huzar
10-26-2009, 7:08 PM
Why don't you ask him, or was my post just a waste of space on here?

OK, here's the deal: if someone is running for an office and wants to run on a particular platform (in this case firearms) he seeks out the groups that he wants to gain support from and he interacts with them. Quite a few folks mentioned that Mr Hunt is a member of this forum. There were pointed questions that were asked of him in public and with the fact that he is running for public office I think it's not too much to expect for him to address them in public.

locosway
10-26-2009, 7:14 PM
OK, here's the deal: if someone is running for an office and wants to run on a particular platform (in this case firearms) he seeks out the groups that he wants to gain support from and he interacts with them. Quite a few folks mentioned that Mr Hunt is a member of this forum. There were pointed questions that were asked of him in public and with the fact that he is running for public office I think it's not too much to expect for him to address them in public.

I made him aware of the discussion, but did not give any details. If you feel it's important for him to respond on a public internet forum, then go ask him to respond. I already got my answer, and I'm satisfied with it.

You can't expect everyone to do your research. If you're interested in finding out what's going on, then do some work and contact him. Ask him questions, or ask him to address this public forum.

toopercentmlk
10-26-2009, 7:53 PM
"There is a law in the state of CA, and that law makes my interpretation over this law out of my control."

glbtrottr
10-26-2009, 8:29 PM
On the other hand, Where is the documented proof that Hunt was authorized by Carona to issue CCW permit while he was acting as San Clemente Police Chief? I am anxiously awaiting your response.


Charlie, California State Law requires that every incorporated city must have a Chief of Police.

Now...

Penal code 12050:

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

Bill Hunt was the Contracted Chief of Police. He had the legal authority to issue CCW permits.

glbtrottr
10-26-2009, 8:53 PM
I'd rather have a corrupt 2A supporter than a corrupt anti.
It's sad that we expect corruption from elected officials. In a perfect world there would be no corruption, but as I tell the anti's, it's not a perfect world.

Wow. :) that statement gives me pause.

Wasn't Haidl the one who threw Carona under the bus?
Wasn't it Haidl's son who Hunt asked to be let off?
Did Mr. Hunt receive a reprimand for the Haidl incident?
How close to the Carona corruption was Mr. Hunt, specially since he was the one getting Haidl's son off the hook? If he was so intent on fighting corruption in the department, why let Haidl's son off the hook? This means he was either Carona's errand boy, or made his own unethical...or corrupt choices.

Wasn't Mr. Stevenson one of Mr. Hunt's campaign contributors?
Did Mr. Hunt ask that Mr. Stevenson be let off?
Was Mr. Hunt reprimanded for the Stevenson incident?

While we've discussed Mr. Hunt quite a bit here, the real issue is CCW issuance. All of us seem to want a proCCW elected Sheriff. Sandy Sue is not the person we want. Bill Hunt is the only candidate for now. It may be a sad state of affairs, when some people out there are willing to accept corruption and dishonesty for personal gain simply so it eases people's ability to obtain a CCW.

SafeOC and OCCCWS are certainly aligned and working towards the same goals, just going about it differently. In my opinion, pinning our hopes on Mr. Hunt may result in a doomed election with Sandy as the de facto choice. Hopefully other candidates will throw their name in the hat in the very sort next few weeks.

I look forward to Mr. Hunt's reply on here.

locosway
10-26-2009, 9:02 PM
I don't think it's about personal gain for myself. While I'd like SI CCW, I'd also like a non-corrupt Sheriff. Can both go together? Maybe, but who knows. Hutchens was not elected, and she has done nothing to uphold the oath she took to protect the rights of the people. In my book, I'm going to pick the lesser of two evils.

If tomorrow a saint appears who is a candidate, well, I'll change my vote that way.

Just so we're clear about this "single issue" voting. An armed public has a much better chance to resist corruption from within. We need police reform, and until the police see us as equally armed and equally respected it won't happen.

CWM4A1
10-26-2009, 9:08 PM
Thanks Lloyd, it provides some answer but not all of them. Since it was a contracted position, organization-wise it's still under OCSD; even the patrol car still said "Sheriff" on the back, unlike Irvine, Tustin, Santa Ana, Anaheim, (just a few examples) which actually have their own police department. So while the penal code may have provide a go around way for "contracted" chief of police to issue CCW, was there any explicit rules within OCSD to allow these contracted chiefs to issue CCW?

U2BassAce
10-26-2009, 9:16 PM
Thanks Lloyd, it provides some answer but not all of them. Since it was a contracted position, organization-wise it's still under OCSD; even the patrol car still said "Sheriff" on the back, unlike Irvine, Tustin, Santa Ana, Anaheim, (just a few examples) which actually have their own police department. So while the penal code may have provide a go around way for "contracted" chief of police to issue CCW, was there any explicit rules within OCSD to allow these contracted chiefs to issue CCW?

ughghghghghghghhghghghghg

He was Chief of Police Services, San Clemente. He could issue.

Maybe you need to show documented proof that if he issued CCW's it would have been outside OCSD policy? If there was a written OCSD policy in place prohibiting him from issuing as Chief of Police Services, then I am sure it will be easy to find.

The point being........was there any explicit rules against it???

locosway
10-26-2009, 9:18 PM
I thought CCW issuance was a county issue, not a city issue, as per how the law is written.

U2BassAce
10-26-2009, 9:19 PM
I thought CCW issuance was a county issue, not a city issue, as per how the law is written.

Nope. ;)

locosway
10-26-2009, 9:25 PM
Nope. ;)

You're correct...

CPC 12050 (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:
(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 in which the city is
located 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.

Edit: I actually asked Bill Hunt about this issue earlier, but there has been no response yet. Hopefully there is a good reason for his lack of issuing CCW's.

kcbrown
10-26-2009, 9:27 PM
Nope. ;)

Then how is it that the entirety of Santa Clara county is, essentially, a "no issue" county, if it's up to the individual cities to issue? There are quite a number of cities within Santa Clara county. How is it that none of them are willing to issue CCWs to anyone?

locosway
10-26-2009, 9:29 PM
Then how is it that the entirety of Santa Clara county is, essentially, a "no issue" country, if it's up to the individual cities to issue? There are quite a number of cities within Santa Clara country. How is it that none of them are willing to issue CCWs to anyone?

Perhaps a Sheriff takes precedence over cities, but the law doesn't read that way for the PC.

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/waisgate?WAISdocID=6210547238+3+0+0&WAISaction=retrieve

dantodd
10-26-2009, 9:31 PM
Then how is it that the entirety of Santa Clara county is, essentially, a "no issue" county, if it's up to the individual cities to issue? There are quite a number of cities within Santa Clara county. How is it that none of them are willing to issue CCWs to anyone?

There may be one or two cities that do issue. Have you applied? Have you looked at the CCW forum here and at other sites to ask about your city in particular? Also, the sheriffs are required to manage CCW issuance but cities can "opt out" of issuance by taking advantage of 12050(g) which says:
12050(g) Nothing in this article shall preclude the chief or other head of a municipal police department of any city from entering an agreement with the sheriff of the county in which the city is located for the sheriff to process all applications for licenses, renewals of licenses, and amendments to licenses, pursuant to this article.

Roadrunner
10-26-2009, 9:51 PM
I knew that broad was trouble as soon as I heard she was from L.A. county.

Brianguy
10-26-2009, 9:51 PM
Then how is it that the entirety of Santa Clara county is, essentially, a "no issue" county, if it's up to the individual cities to issue? There are quite a number of cities within Santa Clara county. How is it that none of them are willing to issue CCWs to anyone?

Why would the Chief want to bother himself when he can pawn it off on the Sheriff. I think the cities only issue for reserve officers or city officials and avoid the public in general. I know LAPD can issue ccw's, i was just reading a thread about their 1990s lawsuit on here:D

U2BassAce
10-26-2009, 10:14 PM
Why would the Chief want to bother himself when he can pawn it off on the Sheriff. I think the cities only issue for reserve officers or city officials and avoid the public in general. I know LAPD can issue ccw's, i was just reading a thread about their 1990s lawsuit on here:D

Why would the Sheriff of (I believe the 7th largest) LE agency in the nation want to issue CCWs to regular folks, when historically that county never issued to regular folks? Because he/she believes in the cause! Like Calguns....if you believe in the cause and you can stay within the law while doing it....YOU FIND A WAY!

Brianguy
10-26-2009, 10:17 PM
Why would the Sheriff of (I believe the 7th largest) LE agency in the nation want to issue CCWs to regular folks, when historically that county never issued to regular folks? Because he/she believes in the cause! Like Calguns....if you believe in the cause and you can stay within the law while doing it....YOU FIND A WAY!

A renegade you say?! we can only hope

glbtrottr
10-27-2009, 6:22 AM
This thread started on 10/21/2009.
It is 10/27/2009.

By all reports, a number of the posters have asked questions of Bill Hunt, and made him aware of the thread dating at least as far back as 10/22 - 10.23.

For 3-6 days, Mr. Hunt, who signed up on this board to earn our advocacy, has not responded to the questions in this thread.

If a candidate signs up on this forum for constituency, I would expect he would want to keep tabs to continue garnering support.

I'm not on facebook, myspace, twitter, or any other application where I will be chasing Mr. Hunt to get answers to our questions. It is implied based on his original postings that he wants our support but so far has failed to assuage concerns.

His silence so far is deafening...could it be indicative of his character? apathy? or his schedule?

Again, since we're pinning our hopes of CCW issuance increasing in this county on Mr. Hunt, these questions are important. The voters will be exposed to the same, and it would be nice to know how he intends to handle them.

GuyW
10-27-2009, 9:53 AM
6) Halo effect. Millions of dollars have been spent on something called Halo effect, its real it exists and if beer and car companies spend billions of dollars trying to deal with it, its worthy for us to consider in a political campaign. The “theory” (which is tried true and very tested so more of a fact) is simple, you put a pretty girl next to a bottle of beer, the beer becomes more enticing. Its stupid, it also happens to be true. So any event, incident, or otherwise that can be attached to someone and sticks is a halo effect (even if they did nothing wrong). look and feel in a different way.



Kool - photograph Hunt next to one or more pretty girls..."problem" solved.

.

OrangeCountyCCW
10-27-2009, 10:54 AM
Penal code 12050: (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 [. . .]

Bill Hunt was the Contracted Chief of Police. He had the legal authority to issue CCW permits.

Note the first sentence: "The chief or other head of a municipal police department of any city . . ." San Clemente does not have a municipal police department. Lt. Bill Hunt was therefore not the "head of a municipal police department." The statutory provision therefore does not apply.

The Director
10-27-2009, 1:38 PM
Note the first sentence: "The chief or other head of a municipal police department of any city . . ." San Clemente does not have a municipal police department. Lt. Bill Hunt was therefore not the "head of a municipal police department." The statutory provision therefore does not apply.

Yep. I applied for my CCW (never got it) in one of the cities run by OCSD - spoke to the lieutenant in charge when I applied. He said I had to go to Santa Ana to apply, and that the LTs in each city had no power to issue even though they were referred to as "chiefs of police".

Foulball
10-27-2009, 9:47 PM
Note the first sentence: "The chief or other head of a municipal police department of any city . . ." San Clemente does not have a municipal police department. Lt. Bill Hunt was therefore not the "head of a municipal police department." The statutory provision therefore does not apply.

Also, cities can "opt-out" of issuing CCW's themselves and instead route the applicant to the county sheriff for approval. This is done by the vast majority of California cities.

Foulball
10-27-2009, 9:47 PM
Agreed, if Mr. Hunt is looking for voters, he should be responding.


This thread started on 10/21/2009.
It is 10/27/2009.

By all reports, a number of the posters have asked questions of Bill Hunt, and made him aware of the thread dating at least as far back as 10/22 - 10.23.

For 3-6 days, Mr. Hunt, who signed up on this board to earn our advocacy, has not responded to the questions in this thread.

If a candidate signs up on this forum for constituency, I would expect he would want to keep tabs to continue garnering support.

I'm not on facebook, myspace, twitter, or any other application where I will be chasing Mr. Hunt to get answers to our questions. It is implied based on his original postings that he wants our support but so far has failed to assuage concerns.

His silence so far is deafening...could it be indicative of his character? apathy? or his schedule?

Again, since we're pinning our hopes of CCW issuance increasing in this county on Mr. Hunt, these questions are important. The voters will be exposed to the same, and it would be nice to know how he intends to handle them.

locosway
10-27-2009, 9:50 PM
Also, cities can "opt-out" of issuing CCW's themselves and instead route the applicant to the county sheriff for approval. This is done by the vast majority of California cities.

Yes, but the argument was if he did have the capacity to issue CCW's and did not do so, how does that show he's in favor of supporting the 2A and a SI CCW policy?

Hunt still has not responding to my inquisition on this matter, hopefully he will soon, or even better, perhaps he will show up here and speak on the matter in detail.

Foulball
10-27-2009, 10:22 PM
Yes, but the argument was if he did have the capacity to issue CCW's and did not do so, how does that show he's in favor of supporting the 2A and a SI CCW policy?

Hunt still has not responding to my inquisition on this matter, hopefully he will soon, or even better, perhaps he will show up here and speak on the matter in detail.

True.

U2BassAce
10-27-2009, 10:50 PM
A renegade you say?! we can only hope

Well not sure about a renegade. But from comments in the article quoted in this thread it looks like we might have a third "horse" looking into the possibly of running for the position?

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=235689

glbtrottr
10-28-2009, 6:36 AM
As I mentioned, we may have other horses in the race. Mr. Jack Anderson may enter the race, he may not. Who knows.

Again, no comments or replies directly from Mr. Hunt on this or other threads. I guess he isn't interested in answering questions in a public forum anymore, but rather expects others to answer for him so far. Has anyone seen Mr. Hunt lately? Is he still interested in running for office? Is he still gathering the vote?

Time to start vetting Mr. Jack Anderson...

dantodd
10-28-2009, 6:38 AM
Why would the Chief want to bother himself when he can pawn it off on the Sheriff. I think the cities only issue for reserve officers or city officials and avoid the public in general. I know LAPD can issue ccw's, i was just reading a thread about their 1990s lawsuit on here:D

Chiefs do not have that luxury legally. While they may recommend one apply at the Sheriff's office they must review submitted applications unless they enter into an agreement with the sheriff to do ALL their CCW issuance.

dantodd
10-28-2009, 6:41 AM
As I mentioned, we may have other horses in the race. Mr. Jack Anderson may enter the race, he may not. Who knows.

Again, no comments or replies directly from Mr. Hunt on this or other threads. I guess he isn't interested in answering questions in a public forum anymore, but rather expects others to answer for him so far. Has anyone seen Mr. Hunt lately? Is he still interested in running for office? Is he still gathering the vote?

Time to start vetting Mr. Jack Anderson...

I think everyone is well aware of your objections to Mr. Hunt. It is really not necessary to make every the same accusations/point in every third post in the thread. It's really gone past the point of a question and has become an annoying badgering. I'm sure that those of us who have read your numerous posts and his lack of a direct response can draw our own conclusions.

smokingloon
10-28-2009, 9:48 AM
As I mentioned, we may have other horses in the race. Mr. Jack Anderson may enter the race, he may not. Who knows.

Again, no comments or replies directly from Mr. Hunt on this or other threads. I guess he isn't interested in answering questions in a public forum anymore, but rather expects others to answer for him so far. Has anyone seen Mr. Hunt lately? Is he still interested in running for office? Is he still gathering the vote?

Time to start vetting Mr. Jack Anderson...

I will have to agree with Dantodd. Now all of your posts seems as if you have a personal vendetta against Mr Hunt. As was mentioned before, if you want to contact Mr. Hunt about a certain question, just go directly and ask him. He has responded to a calgunner and I"m sure he will respond to you also.

Huzar
10-28-2009, 11:22 AM
I will have to agree with Dantodd. Now all of your posts seems as if you have a personal vendetta against Mr Hunt. As was mentioned before, if you want to contact Mr. Hunt about a certain question, just go directly and ask him. He has responded to a calgunner and I"m sure he will respond to you also.

So does this mean that as a group there is no interest in potential transgressions (lets call them that for now) on Mr Hunt's part? That the group as a whole is accepting Mr Hunt and does not care about the information that was presented here?

Just curious ;)

locosway
10-28-2009, 11:34 AM
So does this mean that as a group there is no interest in potential transgressions (lets call them that for now) on Mr Hunt's part? That the group as a whole is accepting Mr Hunt and does not care about the information that was presented here?

Just curious ;)

There's really no evidence against Hunt. A few accusations have been made, and there have been counter arguments. There's no black and white issues here, and I think that's why we are encouraging people to contact Hunt personally with any questions they may have.

Responding to a message board on a forum is an open invitation to attack from anyone. Words can be taken out of context, and if you can't understand the reasons not to respond here, then I don't know what else to say.

The fact that Hunt does indeed have an account here goes far beyond any other politician I know.

wksun88
10-28-2009, 11:35 AM
Few months ago, two young men broke into my next door neighbors apartment (front doors face each other) at approximately 2:30pm. I don't recall the exact time. My neighbor returned home from a walk shortly thereafter with her 2 year old son, she was 8 months pregnant. She found two men in her apartment, obviously there to steal items from her home. They roughed her up a bit then fled the scene. To the credit of the police, there was a helicopter overhead within 10 minutes, officers in a bit less than that. The bad guys did get away as far as I know. Thankfully she did not sustain serious injuries, though she did receive a laceration to her head, her child and unborn child were not hurt. She had a rather large, but friendly, pet dog that they had locked in a closet. Henceforth, I give my dog a treat when she barks at passers by.

This happened in La Jolla Colony, San Diego, California. Supposedly a nice, safe neighborhood.

It could have been much worse. What if she miscarried? What if, when she was stunned and not lucid, her 2 year old son had wandered away into the loading lane behind the apartments (where cars drive way too fast).

My wife was pregnant at the time (still is, expecting in January), she was home in our apartment at the time and didn't realize anything was happening until the helicopter showed up. It could have been her. My wife qualified at the last IDPA event as marksman, she has taken several of the local IDPA training seminars, been to the high dollar academy in the desert, she can shoot. YET the local sheriff won't issue CCW permits to law abiding citizens unless they fit some arbitrary definition of just cause. Just cause? How about, "I'm pregnant and just want to protect my child."

Sorry for the rant.
Wow, I live in this area and I didn't know these kinds of crimes happened here.
Thanks for bringing it up

Huzar
10-28-2009, 11:44 AM
There's really no evidence against Hunt. A few accusations have been made, and there have been counter arguments. There's no black and white issues here, and I think that's why we are encouraging people to contact Hunt personally with any questions they may have.
You are kidding right? There were articles (though I do admit that press skews things a bit) linked here with statements by deputies referring to instructions there were given by Hunt and there is no evidence? I would have imagined that as a group "we" (gunowners) would be interested rather then as few individuals. I am not saying that he is guilty but I am saying that there are questions and I think those questions (or doubts if you want to call them that) should be enough for an answer to the group and that the group should not accept a candidate as being good candidate if there are doubts. But that brings me back again to what has me concerned: taking away the personal feelings of some of the posters pro or against a candidate don't you think that there is enough that was provided to make you wonder if there is any truth to those incidents that were presented?

Responding to a message board on a forum is an open invitation to attack from anyone. Words can be taken out of context, and if you can't understand the reasons not to respond here, then I don't know what else to say.
Then he should have NEVER signed up for the boards because to me this is the same as going to a room full of people and answering their questions in the public forum. This just stretches out and is typed versus spoken.

The fact that Hunt does indeed have an account here goes far beyond any other politician I know.
Jay LaSeur( SP?) out of San Diego has done that long time before Hunt as did many others.

The Banana
10-28-2009, 1:21 PM
Umm..Gosh I wouldn't want to oh my golly over-post, even though my points were wholly ignored, and swept under the rug, but point of clarity... so *I* need to find Hunt and quietly ask him these large and pressing issues? He is too good to answer my questions in a public forum and worse the onus is on me to get answers to these very serious questions. WOW! Great marketing for Hunt.

The Banana
10-28-2009, 1:41 PM
Huzar, I am sorry to correct you, there were court documents (not press articles) about at least one of these. I am curious if we can petition to find out how many reprimands were handed out as well.

Also, since my points have not been answered in any way. I am going to add to them...

I want to point out that Bill Hunt sued for 4 million dollars. *$4 million* that is obscene. As a business woman I know how these cases are handled. Its a fast formula to settle a case like that (even if it isn't valid) because often a pay out by the county would be cheaper to the taxpayers than a winning the lawsuit due to legal fees and tying up the courts. So for a county to not settle it means he was probably unreasonable in settlement, for a case he should have known he couldn't win. Moreover he sued because he felt that what he learned during the day as command staff, he could talk about off duty on his own time. Much like working at a top secret job during the day, yet talking about it in the press at night. Oh the pain and suffering.

locosway
10-28-2009, 4:16 PM
I don't speak for Hunt, obviously. So no one should take any of my posts as the word of Hunt himself.

A few people seem to have issues with him, yet they have not asked him to clarify except for here on this board in a not so nice manner. I had questions, so I asked him and within 24 hours I had a personal response from Hunt. His answer went along with what I read online about the allegations and I feel comfortable with his explanations. Now, since I'm not part of his campaign or authorized to speak for him I'm going to keep the conversation I had with him private, as it was intended to be.

I never called his attention to this thread, or asked him to respond here. Has anyone else done so? I'm sure he's busy enough to not troll the forums here looking for discussions on his candidacy.

As I said before, if you would like to get an answer, ask him for a formal explanation. If you want to make the answers public, let him know that you intend to do so.

locosway
10-28-2009, 5:25 PM
He did respond to my questions regarding CCW issuance when he was heading up the San Clemente department. I again found satisfaction in his answers. I made him aware of this specific thread, and told him I would not make any of our conversation public without his approval, since I respect him for being truthful.

So, he now knows, and if he chooses to act in a public forum then good for him. If not, I'll understand as well.

Huzar
10-28-2009, 5:28 PM
So, he now knows, and if he chooses to act in a public forum then good for him.
Thanks. I hope he replies as I am curious as to his answers so that I could form an opinion (I have almot 8 more months to do so).
If not, I'll understand as well.
That would also be an answer in itself ;)

bomb_on_bus
10-28-2009, 6:32 PM
WOW! great vid and hopefully the rest of CA will wake up at the atrocities done throughout the state.

glbtrottr
10-28-2009, 7:19 PM
There's really no evidence against Hunt. A few accusations have been made, and there have been counter arguments. There's no black and white issues here, and I think that's why we are encouraging people to contact Hunt personally with any questions they may have.

Responding to a message board on a forum is an open invitation to attack from anyone. Words can be taken out of context, and if you can't understand the reasons not to respond here, then I don't know what else to say.

The fact that Hunt does indeed have an account here goes far beyond any other politician I know.

As has been mentioned, many a politician have accounts here and post here frequently - not just Jay, fine gentleman that Jay is.

"Accusations" are one thing. I don't think anyone was "accusing" Hunt of anything, but rather responding to his claims that he is different than previous regimes and not corrupt as he stated. Mr. Hunt being guilty of rewriting reports, accusing the innocent, and showing favoritism towards his political contributors would mean he is just the same or worse than the previous regime, and would reduce our chances of CCW since the public electing him after this came out would be unlikely.

I think the events took place 2003 -2005, before any election took place.

Personally, I think, but I don't know, that Mr. Hunt may have been formally reprimanded for both events.

Can Mr. Hunt tell us that he was never reprimanded for his actions? If so, then I can withdraw my interest.

Or he can share with us that he was reprimanded and reconsidered his actions, commiting to never do it again...

locosway
10-28-2009, 8:27 PM
He did give me permission to quote him, and to speak on his behalf here. I don't know why I would get that honor, but I will ask him about the reprimands and see if he responds. If he does respond, I'll form something using his responses to answer some of the looming questions I've seen in this thread.

As for him not responding here, he says:

"I am spread too thin right now and I can't really deal with everybody from state to national right now."

So, if he says he is short on time to deal with a public forum at this time in his campaign then I'll believe him. Whether or not everyone feels that's a good enough reason to not post is another story.

6172crew
10-28-2009, 8:44 PM
He did give me permission to quote him, and to speak on his behalf here. I don't know why I would get that honor, but I will ask him about the reprimands and see if he responds. If he does respond, I'll form something using his responses to answer some of the looming questions I've seen in this thread.

As for him not responding here, he says:



So, if he says he is short on time to deal with a public forum at this time in his campaign then I'll believe him. Whether or not everyone feels that's a good enough reason to not post is another story.
QFT, another CGnr getting the 411 to us;)

U2BassAce
10-28-2009, 9:10 PM
He did give me permission to quote him, and to speak on his behalf here. I don't know why I would get that honor, but I will ask him about the reprimands and see if he responds. If he does respond, I'll form something using his responses to answer some of the looming questions I've seen in this thread.

As for him not responding here, he says:



So, if he says he is short on time to deal with a public forum at this time in his campaign then I'll believe him. Whether or not everyone feels that's a good enough reason to not post is another story.


I say just don't bother. Hearsay from an unaffiliated individual, in a public campaign, for a major public office, is just not going to hack it IMHO.

But sincerely thank you very much for the effort.

As far as him being too busy to respond. That makes no sense to me at all. He can respond to individual emails, but not to a large group of prospective voters in one shot? He could spend 10 minutes here and answer the lingering questions in one post......

Ok I am done with this thread. I wish Mr. Hunt the very best of luck going forward.;)

Huzar
10-28-2009, 9:12 PM
As far as him being too busy to respond. That makes no sense to me at all. He can respond to individual emails, but not to a large group of prospective voters in one shot? He could spend 10 minutes here and answer the lingering questions in one post......


x 2

locosway
10-29-2009, 8:52 PM
Ok, with Bill Hunt's approval to quote him in our conversation, I'm going to do just that. Some people may find the information useful, and others won't be swayed. I'm going to take some of the more important questions that were asked in this thread and form a response using Bill Hunt's own words.

Q. During your time as Chief of Police in San Clemente, is it true you had the power to issue CCW permits and did not do so?

A. My title was "Chief" of police services in San Clemente. That title was figurative of local management for the most part as there were "Chiefs" assigned by the department to Dana Point, San Juan, Laguna Woods, etc. All of which, however, were under the umbrella of The Orange County Sheriff's Department. We were not Chiefs of a Department as is commonly understood. We did not have the statutory authority to issue CCWs. As is common elsewhere, Chiefs of city departments are authorized to issue CCWs. Here in Orange County, there is an agreement among all the departments that the Sheriff would have the sole responsibility to issue CCWs except in the case of retiring law enforcement within their respective jurisdictions.


Q. Were you ever accused and/or reprimanded for re-writing reports?

Q. Were you ever accused and/or reprimanded for accusing the innocent?

A. The only issue that I am aware of concerning any alleged re writing of a report concerns the Haidle matter. I was for the most part out of the loop when that incident went down. It was Carona and Jarmillo that recognized the political implications and intervened. The political implications didn't really occur to me at all. As it turned out they didn't have to intervene because an individual other than Haidle claimed ownership of the dope. The reporting officer opined that it was Haidle's dope. Supervisors are required to review reports to insure that they will not be rejected by the DA as a result of poor report writing. Even in an accident report you will see a "reviewers" signature. Usually a Sgt or above. Officers "opinions" are inadmissible as they are not the triers of fact. Thus the report was re written to comport with the facts absent an opinion. I was commended by my supervisors for the manner in which I handled the event. Carona, however, had a different plan and that was to criticize. That reporting went up to the AG's office and based on the Carona inspired reporting I was criticized by the AG. My function at that stage was discretionary and a proper exercise of my authority.

I'm sure someone will have more questions, and I'll be happy to ask Bill Hunt the questions if they seem to fall inline with something that's reasonable. Also, if you do have some sort of facts to base the question on that would help as well.

Huzar
10-30-2009, 6:20 AM
Thanks for posting those. Now I gotta review my notes as I do have a question that relates to the above but I do want to support it with some evidence.

SteveH
10-30-2009, 9:39 PM
Wow. :) that statement gives me pause.

Wasn't Haidl the one who threw Carona under the bus?
Wasn't it Haidl's son who Hunt asked to be let off?
Did Mr. Hunt receive a reprimand for the Haidl incident?
How close to the Carona corruption was Mr. Hunt, specially since he was the one getting Haidl's son off the hook? If he was so intent on fighting corruption in the department, why let Haidl's son off the hook? This means he was either Carona's errand boy, or made his own unethical...or corrupt choices.

Wasn't Mr. Stevenson one of Mr. Hunt's campaign contributors?
Did Mr. Hunt ask that Mr. Stevenson be let off?
Was Mr. Hunt reprimanded for the Stevenson incident?

While we've discussed Mr. Hunt quite a bit here, the real issue is CCW issuance. All of us seem to want a proCCW elected Sheriff. Sandy Sue is not the person we want. Bill Hunt is the only candidate for now. It may be a sad state of affairs, when some people out there are willing to accept corruption and dishonesty for personal gain simply so it eases people's ability to obtain a CCW.

SafeOC and OCCCWS are certainly aligned and working towards the same goals, just going about it differently. In my opinion, pinning our hopes on Mr. Hunt may result in a doomed election with Sandy as the de facto choice. Hopefully other candidates will throw their name in the hat in the very sort next few weeks.

I look forward to Mr. Hunt's reply on here.

I live in OC and i remember the haidle incident. The little scum bag was skateboading with some friends. The cops found a little weed in their car. someone else claimed ownership. The DA made political hay claiming Haidle should have been taken into custody and had his bail revoked.

Of course the DA should know that H&S 11357(b) is not even a bookable offense in Orange county. Its not like a cop on the street can call the DA or a Judge and have someones bail revoked. Would be great if they could, but AFAIK the DA still hasnt handed out his home phone number to the street cops so they can wake him up at 3am everytime they contact a defendant out on bail. Hell the DA doesnt even revoke bail if a defendant is ARRESTED and booked for a new charge, unless its the same charge as he is out on bail for.

In otherwords the haidle weed ticket caper was a big nothing.

locosway
10-31-2009, 12:18 AM
Yep, under the H&S laws it's hard to get busted for recreational weed in OC. We would routinely have people destroy their weed instead of calling the cops, simply because the cops wouldn't even ticket them.

Reloaderx2
10-31-2009, 8:27 AM
Just a big nothingburger. Hunt wasn't reprimanded for anything. I don't think Hunt is going to want to respond to semi-hysterics.

glbtrottr
10-31-2009, 8:49 AM
Hunt wasn't reprimanded for anything.
Alrighty then :) No reprimands, and Hunt is a saint...

I find it interesting how a good number of people are ignoring the original problem of LYING, SHIFTING BLAME, and DISMISSING unethical and criminal behaviour purely for the sake of backing a candidate you think will further the CCW agenda.

It's not about how kooky the H&S laws are. Strike out Pot, replace it with a gun charge; ignore the fact that he did a favor for Haidl's kid, and replace it with the son of your favorite political contributor. Heck, for that matter, we have the Stevenson case where he had the deputies drive him home due to Stevenson's access...which most of us typically wouldn't have.

Equally interesting is how Hunt enjoys a good number of you to make statements for him, but ignores the question altogether.

So...you all insist it's okay to be unethical and a a liar, expect that the general public will elect him inspite of his past sins, and pin your hopes of a better Sheriff issuing CCW on him...

No reprimands...:)

locosway
10-31-2009, 9:37 AM
Alrighty then :) No reprimands, and Hunt is a saint...

I find it interesting how a good number of people are ignoring the original problem of LYING, SHIFTING BLAME, and DISMISSING unethical and criminal behaviour purely for the sake of backing a candidate you think will further the CCW agenda.

It's not about how kooky the H&S laws are. Strike out Pot, replace it with a gun charge; ignore the fact that he did a favor for Haidl's kid, and replace it with the son of your favorite political contributor. Heck, for that matter, we have the Stevenson case where he had the deputies drive him home due to Stevenson's access...which most of us typically wouldn't have.

Equally interesting is how Hunt enjoys a good number of you to make statements for him, but ignores the question altogether.

So...you all insist it's okay to be unethical and a a liar, expect that the general public will elect him inspite of his past sins, and pin your hopes of a better Sheriff issuing CCW on him...

No reprimands...:)

All you have is hearsay, nothing concrete. Bring something concrete to the table and we'll talk about it some more.

As for the weed. It's not a big deal, and it's not even ticket-able in most cities. Irvine will not ticket someone for weed if it's under an ounce, they simple just have you poor it out and destroy it.

Show me where he was convicted of lying, shifting blame, or using unethical behavior. It sounds like you're out for blood for a personal reason without much else to support your cause.

U2BassAce
10-31-2009, 10:19 AM
Originally Posted by SteveH In otherwords the haidle weed ticket caper was a big nothing.


As for the weed. It's not a big deal, and it's not even ticket-able in most cities. Irvine will not ticket someone for weed if it's under an ounce, they simple just have you poor it out and destroy it.
:rolleyes:

Unless there was a cover up. BTW I have no idea if there was. But IMHO the line of questioning is relevant. You can't just say "ahhhhh it was a possible weed ticket....who cares if he was treated preferably?" OR NOT.

I know from other cases, people who cover up small insignificant things, end up getting in trouble in a big way.

Bill Clinton, has an affair. Sitting President with lots of smoke, but who really cares? Then Bill Clinton, "allegedly" lies under oath about affair. Investigation is opened up and next thing you know he is impeached and his presidency is sitting on the Senate floor on trial.

Martha Stewart gets a phone call from her broker as she travels on her private plane telling her that he heard from a CEO bad things are coming and she should sell her stock in that CEO's company. (a very insignificant amount of money for her) Airhead Martha, with a billion things on her mind says sell it already and goes on with her busy day. (pretty much perfectly defensible) Oh wait until the cover up hits. She ends up being convicted of not insider trading, but obstruction of justice, a Felony and spends 6 months in Federal prison. Plus loses tens of millions of dollars in her company and can't even sit on it's board, or act in the capacity of CEO for ANY company for life.

It is not about the insignificant wrongdoing, or even what ends up in the end being perfectly legal. If a person believes that there was wrongdoing when they acted and in the heat of the moment they takes steps to cover it up, then it's the cover up that counts and at the VERY LEAST, that person's character should be questioned. So yeah the question is relevant. ESPECIALLY when they are running for public office.

Reloaderx2
10-31-2009, 3:17 PM
C'mon. Glbtrottr is throwing it out to see what sticks. Carona was out to get Hunt in the worst way. If Carona couldn't nickle up something up on Hunt no one can. Glgtrottr is unable to provide substanciating factual proof of his allegations. Pure hearsay. I would agree, however, there is something intensly personal and obsessive about his continued behavior which, if you ask me, is not reasonable.

glbtrottr
10-31-2009, 6:53 PM
Reloader,

You can demonize me all you want. This isn't about me. Simply because you don't like the questions I ask doesn't mean that this thread is unreasonable. I think we're entitled to ask questions of a candidate and have them be answered directly.

I will scan some of the material I have at home and post it when I get a chance. It's Halloween, so other things take precedence.

What is important is this: Mr. Hunt was in fact found to have influenced a deputy in the Haidl case into rewriting a report that changed material facts in an investigation and omitted facts intentionally. An internal investigation was conducted...long before Mr. Hunt ran for office. A grand jury was convened. The Attorney General was involved. The vast majority of those documents are public domain, or easily obtainable through PRA. Mr Hunt was reprimanded for his actions. Several recommendations were made as a result of what became known as a "tempest in a teapot" involving Mr. Hunt, Mr. Jaramillo and others.

In the Stevenson case. Mr. Hunt decided to go public with the events that transpired that evening, which ultimately compromised the investigation and resulted in Mr Stevenson not being prosecuted for his drunk driving.

Mr Hunt appears to have also participated in significant fundraising and campaigning while on taxpayer time with deputies supporting him using county resources.

Chief Gascon, professionally engaged to arrive at an opinion regarding how to deal with the Hunt matter, referred to him as a "cancer" in the organization. Different ways to deal with the matter were recommended to help the department "heal". Mr Hunt's termination was discussed.

Most recently, Mr. Hunt sued the taxpayers for $4M dollars, and given the evidence and testimony provided, the case was thrown out. Still, Mr Hunt now wants the taxpayers to let him run the department he seems to have so many personal issues against.

As recent as August 2008, Mr Hunt stated to some of our members he had no interest in running for the office. I guess he changed his mind.

Now, you can talk about "hearsay" all you want, but Mr. Hunt has copies of the documents I am talking about...and somehow in my mailbox I seem to as well.

So...again, this is *not* a personal matter. I have said this repeatedly. My question remains, do we think the general electorate of Orange County will let us elect Mr Hunt given his strong pro 2a beliefs as claimed, or will he be plagued by his past? Do we really want to take that gamble?

More to follow, if necessary, when I have time.

ontargetrange
10-31-2009, 9:26 PM
[QUOTE=glbtrottr;3297585]Reloader,

You can demonize me all you want. This isn't about me. Simply because you don't like the questions I ask doesn't mean that this thread is unreasonable. I think we're entitled to ask questions of a candidate and have them be answered directly.

I remember when you and Banana met with Bill at the Gunshow and spent most of an hour with him --did you not get the answers to your questions then???

Based on all that I have read I see you never being happy with any answer he gives you - it will always be another question or some obsure fact you deem worthy of an answer -- get over it. He is not perfect and in the end he has every right to sue about getting ripped off about his job and career. Just the same as you do, and if you feel that is wrong then you haven't lived in Kalifornia very long. Everyone sues about anything

He has been an up front person each and every time he has addressed any group or just a few people. Yes he said he was not really planning on running last year - he had Corona telling all manner of lies to the AG and the feds that he had to go to defend his record -- kinda like you -- lots of alleged items and "I Heard" and unsupstanciated allegations for all manner of conduct --

So do as any real concerned citizen would do and call him or email for a meeting -- join the group at an event or town meeting. To sit back and say there is a better candidate at this late time is hard to imagine. Walters bailed on GB and Anderson is on video calling the entire CCW community a bunch of nuts for making problems for the appointed one. Who's left??

I have yet to meet anyone running for ANY office that was perfect or had never made a mistake somewhere -- But I try to choose wisely based on the information I gather personally for myself -- I ask you to do the same and start working for a better OC.

locosway
11-01-2009, 9:53 AM
^^ Well said...