PDA

View Full Version : Sacramento Sheriff Candidate Favors Shall Issue


wuluf
04-19-2010, 5:10 PM
http://www.sacbee.com/2010/04/18/2686621/ex-deputy-bret-daniels.html

In an article on the three candidates the following quote is about Bret Daniels:

He also said he wants to allow more citizens to obtain concealed weapons permits. "If they live here and don't have a disqualifying factor like a drug history or history of violence" a permit should be issued, he said.

My question is this: IF (big if there) Daniels were to win the election, would the "Powers That Be" allow shall issue in Sacramento county. Is it possible?

Thoughts and comments.....

Dr.Lou
04-19-2010, 5:26 PM
I knew the current sheriff and Cooper as undergrauate students - all I will say is that they're not the sharpest knives in the drawer.

I have not been impressed with McGuiness, his predecessors and their stance on CCWs - way too liberal for this area. Ya got to love Chief Eugene Bird of Isleton for issuing countless permits to Sac County residents to help balance his City's budget. Boy, the sheriffs shut him down by authoring legislation that keeps us chiefs from issuing permits to those living outside our jurisdiction.

CSDGuy
04-19-2010, 5:46 PM
http://www.sacbee.com/2010/04/18/2686621/ex-deputy-bret-daniels.html

In an article on the three candidates the following quote is about Bret Daniels:

He also said he wants to allow more citizens to obtain concealed weapons permits. "If they live here and don't have a disqualifying factor like a drug history or history of violence" a permit should be issued, he said.

My question is this: IF (big if there) Daniels were to win the election, would the "Powers That Be" allow shall issue in Sacramento county. Is it possible?

Thoughts and comments.....
Daniels is outside the normal political $$$ system right now. If he were to be elected AND he can convince the DoJ that going essentially Shall Issue is a good thing (they won't make it easy...) and he thinks that he can be re-elected without help from the power brokers, then yeah, it's possible. Sheriff McGinness's platform was less restrictive than Blanas's was. Within a couple months, the same "old" process was still in effect.

thebronze
04-19-2010, 5:54 PM
The only thing Daniels has going for him is that he's pro-CCW.

I doubt he's even qualified to be Sheriff, since he's been out of LE since in 2000 and the rules for running for Sheriff require one to have been in LE within the past five years.

How does Daniels get around that requirement?

Having said that, these three are the BEST that Sacramento can come up with?

Pathetic...

wonsaponatime
04-19-2010, 6:23 PM
How hard is it it get a permit in Sacramento? Placer is not that hard.

CSDGuy
04-19-2010, 6:42 PM
CCW? Well, not quite as difficult as it used to be, but it's not cakewalk either. Basically, they took the process from "Very Difficult" to "Very Slightly Less than Very Difficult" by interpreting the rules they go by a little more loosely. Or so I hear.

HondaMasterTech
04-19-2010, 6:46 PM
What does the DoJ have to do with a Sheriff issuing Concealed Carry Permits ( aka License in the rest of the country )?

big red
04-19-2010, 6:56 PM
People I have talked to have not seen much of a change. The current sheriff threatened last year as a bargaining chip to keep deputies but this year the supervisors came back and hacked his department for more cuts anyway and the increase in CCW's was minimal. DOJ should have nothing to do with CCW's. I am not impressed with any of the current candidates and even Daniels has baggage from the past. In my personal opinion you can bet that Supervisor Roger Dickerson will be out defeat any candidate who might win on a platform of "Shall Issue".

socalblue
04-20-2010, 2:25 AM
What does the DoJ have to do with a Sheriff issuing Concealed Carry Permits ( aka License in the rest of the country )?

What they have done to others - refuse to process the applications as non-compliant with state law. DOJ does all the background work (criminal & fingerprint checks). Until they clear the applicant the issuing authority can't move forward.

Once we have a court ruling that 'self protection' is a valid good cause CA will become essentially shall-issue.

Sinixstar
04-20-2010, 3:41 AM
I guess the question is - what will he do once elected?

Kind of like that cop who pulled you over and really truly wants to let you off the a warning, but ya know, he just can't. He feels really bad about it - but he's just going to have to write you up. you can fight it in court though.

wanting to do something, and actually doing it - are two different things.

GuyW
04-20-2010, 10:44 AM
I doubt he's even qualified to be Sheriff, since he's been out of LE since in 2000 and the rules for running for Sheriff require one to have been in LE within the past five years.


Never heard that - I thought possession of a POST Certificate was the main criteria....
.

thebronze
04-20-2010, 11:19 AM
Never heard that - I thought possession of a POST Certificate was the main criteria....
.

It looks like I was only partially (in)correct. According to Government Code 24004.3 the five year clock only applies to people with certain degrees.

Daniels satisfies the requirement solely by having an Advanced POST Certificate.

Sorry for the confusion.

Bret Daniels
04-23-2010, 9:40 AM
I would like to take a minute to address a few things.

Qualifications---more than qualified. I have an Advanced Post cetficate that I earned based on a combinations of experience, training and education. I have more direct law enforcement experience than my two opponents, the current Sheriff and the previous Sheriff combined. I have six years of political experience and the necessary relationships with the elected officials in the regions to get things done on the political side. And finally I have spent the majority of the past ten years in the private sector gaining the business sense that is missing from the department and essential to repairing what's wrong.

Camapign$$$$---I don't live in the world of developers and mucky mucks like my opponents so I am relying on the type of grassroots campaign that I successfully used to get elected to the Citrus Hts City Council. Those of you on this forum are essential to my success. We will win.

Shall/May Issue---I believe that the language of the law ("good cause") fully empowers me as the Sheriff to determine what is good cause. And if living in a county where we have laid off hundreds of deputies, let hundreds of criminals out of jail early, are surrounded by hundreds of CONVICTED sex offenders (ladies, please apply), have a crime rate that is soaring (murders are up over 100% this year), and on and on isn't good cause than I don't know what is. Self-defense is sufficient cause to justify allowing law abiding citizens to exercise their right to be armed. I will protect that right.

spegull03
04-23-2010, 10:01 AM
Bret,

Do you have any upcoming events or ways we can help support your campaign?

tiki
04-23-2010, 10:58 AM
...are surrounded by hundreds of CONVICTED sex offenders (ladies, please apply),...

I'm male and live near a priest. Can I apply? :)

On a serious note, Bret, please let us know how we can help.

SixPointEight
04-23-2010, 11:07 AM
Do any of you live near Sacramento? There will be a forum here locally that he will be attending, that would be a good chance to meet him and show support.
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=292887

fullrearview
04-23-2010, 11:25 AM
I have said since day one that Bret is the only guy that has a hope of turing things around in Sac County. Back when I worked for Sac, a lot of people thought that if Bret were to be elected, he would do away with pet projects such as a full time SWAT team and the like(by the way I think Bret suggested making a regional team so all dept. could share in costs).....Well, those things are gone anyways, along with about 600 employees. Yes, most of them are still on the books, but due to labor union laws and such, they are lucky to get to volunteer their time.

I hope Bret can turn the Dept. around. There are a lot of good people there and they deserve better(citzens and deputies both!!)

He does have a facebook page, so show some support there!

tiko
04-23-2010, 10:51 PM
I feel good to read things & facts about hopeful candidate Daniels.

ChrisTKHarris
04-23-2010, 10:58 PM
Mr. Daniels you have my vote. :)

Bret Daniels
04-24-2010, 12:09 AM
Bret,

Do you have any upcoming events or ways we can help support your campaign?

Thanks for all the kind words and support. There are many ways to help. If you are a Facebook user, please go to and join my Fan Page at Bret Daniels for Sacramento Sheriff.

If you want to help directly on the campaign, please send me an e-mail at Bret@BretDanielsForSheriff.com

If you really want to see a true pro-CCW candidate win this race, visit my website at www.BretDanielsForSheriff.com and make a contribution. We won't be the big-money campaign but the reality is every dollar makes a difference and is used to get the message to as many people as possible so contributions are needed.

And finally, spread the word. Tell your friends, your family, your co-workers, the guy standing in line behind you at Starbucks, your dentist and especially anybody that believes in the Constitution.

Bret

Doheny
04-24-2010, 12:15 AM
Bret,

If you win, would you consider, along w/ the other sheriffs pushing for CCW reform legislation?

Good luck you to.

Bret Daniels
04-24-2010, 12:16 AM
Oh and go to the Sac Bee website and voice your disgust at the editorial they just posted for Saturday, 4/24, where they leave me completely out of the article while mentioning that my opponents would "bring considerable to the job."

AyatollahGondola
04-24-2010, 5:32 AM
Daniels for Sheriff?
Gawd...Not that troublemaker again:p

I sincerely hope that CCW doesn't become the issue that dominates the race. Right now I think my right to have a "weapons cache" is threatened. So how do any of the candidates feel about the feds or the state booking thier constituents firearms into the lockup as evidence and then making them available to be redeemed without overly expensive and/or prohibitive measures? I know this may seem a bit premature to many, but I already passed up the right to carry issue as primary because I know it's pretty much been taken away from the majority. The next assault on our gun rights will be right to possess, and I'd like to know how the sheriff hopefuls will deal with other agencies asking for his officers to participate in raids on the counties citizens homes when his office has not been involved in the investigation and/or the warrant process.

I don't hate the current sheriff, but don't like the manner in which he manages the department. Also know that he issued a hit piece on Daniels last campaign, as well as don't think he handled Bret Daniels termination event with propriety. I think his motivations were not pure, and placed the deputy in a position where he could not defend himself publicly. Since then the current sheriff has not prosecuted other deputies for what I percieve as far greater improprieties, so I have little regard for his pick as recommended successor. The other one I'm still looking into.

Bret Daniels
04-28-2010, 10:33 PM
Bret,

If you win, would you consider, along w/ the other sheriffs pushing for CCW reform legislation?

Good luck you to.

Absolutely. I believe the McDonald v Chicago case currently pending review by the Supreme Court will affirm the 2nd Amendment as an individual right and at that point the Sheriffs in California will have an affirmative responsibility to work towards CCW reform legislation. I know that Bill Hunt when elected to Orange Co and I will do just that.

CSDGuy
04-28-2010, 11:24 PM
Daniels: I hope you DO get elected. You've got an uphill battle to fight though. Just an example: the last time you ran for Sheriff, I saw signs for McGinness outnumber yours by at least a 3-1 margin. He got the message out really well. In a 3-way race, you stand a MUCH better chance, IHMO, of getting elected.

Don't get me wrong. I have issues with the other candidates as well...

Bizcuits
04-29-2010, 3:10 PM
Daniels is outside the normal political $$$ system right now. If he were to be elected AND he can convince the DoJ that going essentially Shall Issue is a good thing (they won't make it easy...) and he thinks that he can be re-elected without help from the power brokers, then yeah, it's possible. Sheriff McGinness's platform was less restrictive than Blanas's was. Within a couple months, the same "old" process was still in effect.

Why would Daniels need to show the DOJ anything at all? If he was Sheriff he'd be the one responsible for Sacramento CCW's, not the DOJ.

thebronze
04-29-2010, 3:33 PM
Daniels is outside the normal political $$$ system right now. If he were to be elected AND he can convince the DoJ that going essentially Shall Issue is a good thing (they won't make it easy...) and he thinks that he can be re-elected without help from the power brokers, then yeah, it's possible. Sheriff McGinness's platform was less restrictive than Blanas's was. Within a couple months, the same "old" process was still in effect.


I don't see where DOJ would have any say in Sacramento's CCW issuance at all.

They either clear people or they don't and whatever the County Sheriff's CCW policy is, has no bearing on whether a person is cleared or not.

Unless you know something sinister that we don't.

SixtyDashOne
04-29-2010, 4:12 PM
I would like to take a minute to address a few things.

Qualifications---more than qualified. I have an Advanced Post cetficate that I earned based on a combinations of experience, training and education. I have more direct law enforcement experience than my two opponents, the current Sheriff and the previous Sheriff combined. I have six years of political experience and the necessary relationships with the elected officials in the regions to get things done on the political side. And finally I have spent the majority of the past ten years in the private sector gaining the business sense that is missing from the department and essential to repairing what's wrong.

Camapign$$$$---I don't live in the world of developers and mucky mucks like my opponents so I am relying on the type of grassroots campaign that I successfully used to get elected to the Citrus Hts City Council. Those of you on this forum are essential to my success. We will win.

Shall/May Issue---I believe that the language of the law ("good cause") fully empowers me as the Sheriff to determine what is good cause. And if living in a county where we have laid off hundreds of deputies, let hundreds of criminals out of jail early, are surrounded by hundreds of CONVICTED sex offenders (ladies, please apply), have a crime rate that is soaring (murders are up over 100% this year), and on and on isn't good cause than I don't know what is. Self-defense is sufficient cause to justify allowing law abiding citizens to exercise their right to be armed. I will protect that right.

Well Bret, you've got my vote if I'm still in the area when the election takes place. And ironic you mention the laid off deputies, because I was just telling a friend the other day about what I've seen in the news a few times recently; They'll be talking about burglaries, home invasions, hold-ups or things of that nature, and on more than one occasion, I've seen the reporter ask the LEO spokesman something along the lines of "what are you doing to try to prevent this from happening?" and on more than one occasion I've seen the guy say "nothing. Absolutely nothing. We just don't have the manpower due to budget cuts." Yet we still can't get CCW, even though our local PD spokesman is publicly admitting on prime time news that he doesn't have enough people to do anything about anything. So I guess we're all supposed to just let ourselves become victims of violence first, and hope we're still around to read the police report after the fact. Having come from Oregon where if you were legally able to own a gun, you were legally able to get a CHL, this state's CCW restrictions are just sickening. And you're right about the sex offenders as well. It's alarming how many of these cases have been in the news lately. It seems like there's at least two new stories in the news every night, and you have to wonder how many more there are that don't get coverage.

thebronze
04-29-2010, 4:27 PM
Well Bret, you've got my vote if I'm still in the area when the election takes place. And ironic you mention the laid off deputies, because I was just telling a friend the other day about what I've seen in the news a few times recently; They'll be talking about burglaries, home invasions, hold-ups or things of that nature, and on more than one occasion, I've seen the reporter ask the LEO spokesman something along the lines of "what are you doing to try to prevent this from happening?" and on more than one occasion I've seen the guy say "nothing. Absolutely nothing. We just don't have the manpower due to budget cuts." Yet we still can't get CCW, even though our local PD spokesman is publicly admitting on prime time news that he doesn't have enough people to do anything about anything. So I guess we're all supposed to just let ourselves become victims of violence first, and hope we're still around to read the police report after the fact. Having come from Oregon where if you were legally able to own a gun, you were legally able to get a CHL, this state's CCW restrictions are just sickening. And you're right about the sex offenders as well. It's alarming how many of these cases have been in the news lately. It seems like there's at least two new stories in the news every night, and you have to wonder how many more there are that don't get coverage.

At this point, the administration at SSD is a complete disgrace. They should all resign because they suck so bad.

Basically, they're telling the law-abiding citizens of this county "Too bad, go p*ss up a rope".

haveyourmile
04-29-2010, 5:56 PM
Um... "Daniels was fired from the Sheriff's Department for dishonesty in 2000. Sheriff's officials have said his dismissal came after a trip to Arizona during which he asked an officer to use a police computer to look up the address of a female friend."

http://www.sacbee.com/2010/04/18/2686621/ex-deputy-bret-daniels.html#ixzz0mXZbpUce

Havoc70
04-29-2010, 6:24 PM
Um... "Daniels was fired from the Sheriff's Department for dishonesty in 2000. Sheriff's officials have said his dismissal came after a trip to Arizona during which he asked an officer to use a police computer to look up the address of a female friend."

http://www.sacbee.com/2010/04/18/2686621/ex-deputy-bret-daniels.html#ixzz0mXZbpUce

While that seems troubling on the surface, I wonder how many members in the LE community do that? Did the female friend press stalking charges? I don't see any mention of that.

Not that I condone the abuse of police resources, but this seems to me that it was more of a politically motivated firing than a disciplinary one.

Hell, anyone can pay $40 and find out any one's address. However, I'm pretty sure Bret will speak to it here, he seems to be unafraid to air out any dirty laundry.

Mstrty
04-30-2010, 4:54 PM
Bret,

Do you have any upcoming events or ways we can help support your campaign?
He does May 12th Click Here (http://www.elkgrovepost.net/2010/04/sacramento-county-sheriff-candidates-to.html)
Absolutely. I believe the McDonald v Chicago case currently pending review by the Supreme Court will affirm the 2nd Amendment as an individual right and at that point the Sheriffs in California will have an affirmative responsibility to work towards CCW reform legislation. I know that Bill Hunt when elected to Orange Co and I will do just that.
Wish I had more money to give this guy a push.
At this point, the administration at SSD is a complete disgrace. They should all resign because they suck so bad.

Basically, they're telling the law-abiding citizens of this county "Too bad, go p*ss up a rope".
This is where we come in at. We get the vote the bum's out.
Um... "Daniels was fired from the Sheriff's Department for dishonesty in 2000. Sheriff's officials have said his dismissal came after a trip to Arizona during which he asked an officer to use a police computer to look up the address of a female friend."

http://www.sacbee.com/2010/04/18/2686621/ex-deputy-bret-daniels.html#ixzz0mXZbpUce

Seriously. This is all you got on Daniels. I got that much info in the research department at Placer County Courthouse today. Be surprised what you can find out on a public County computer. Look at the other guys running and tell me Bret isnt the best thing going. We got our work cut out because he wont get the air time that the others will get due to the fact he doesnt conform with the lame-stream media or crappy Sacramento BOS.

CSDGuy
04-30-2010, 5:08 PM
Even though you can pay $40 and get info on just about anyone, LEOs aren't allowed to use the CLETS system to get that info on just anyone they want to look up. More than one Chief has become "former" Chief by looking up people on CLETS for personal reasons.

NorCalMama
04-30-2010, 5:14 PM
Seriously. This is all you got on Daniels. I got that much info in the research department at Placer County Courthouse today. Be surprised what you can find out on a public County computer. Look at the other guys running and tell me Bret isnt the best thing going. We got our work cut out because he wont get the air time that the others will get due to the fact he doesnt conform with the lame-stream media or crappy Sacramento BOS.

+1

I had the honor of meeting him at this last CalExpo gun show and am very impressed with his stance on the RKBA in CA. He's the best guy and I HOPE he wins! :)

Bret Daniels
04-30-2010, 11:53 PM
I think it's important to address my termination because I feel people should be fully informed. While on a trip to AZ in 2000, I asked an officer there if he could help me find a friend that I hadn't seen in abt 10 years. He ended up providing me with no information and I actually found my friend later on my own. Two months later, I was brought into Internal Affairs and asked abt the contact. I admitted to asking the officer to help me find my friend and learned there had been a check of computer systems by the officer. I was unaware he had done that and he eventually testified in my termination hearing that I had not asked him to do so.

During the IA, I was asked a slew of questions abt minor points such as was it dark when I arrived, what rental car company I used, what color of shirt the officer was wearing, and on and on. I could not clearly remember the information the IA investigators were requesting and did not want to guess so I told them I could not remember when in fact I could not. I was subsequently charged with numerous allegations and terminated for dishonesty.

Essentially, all the charges were dismissed during the appeal processes with the exception that I was dishonest when I said I could not remember if I had given the officer in AZ my address, phone number and social. I subsequently took a sophisticated lie detector test (Voice Stress Analysis) and passed it. That didn't matter to the sheriff, who I had run against in a heated election before being fired.

I leave it to the reader to decide. I know that I did not lie during the IA, that I passed a lie detector test to prove my innocense, and unlike my two opponents, I have never been the subject of a Grand Jury investigation into allegations that I commited multiple felonies. My records are open to not just the media but to any citizen who would like to read them.

spegull03
05-01-2010, 8:51 AM
Thank you for being open about that. Hopefully you can avoid the blanas/jones/cooper/mcginness mess going on right now and emerge as a better looking candidate because of it.

thebronze
05-01-2010, 11:52 PM
Here (http://hoguenews.com/?p=9976) is a radio forum that all three candidates did on KTKZ yesterday.

I'm pretty sure that Scott Jones outright lied about what he said in re: CCW's.

CABilly
05-02-2010, 12:23 AM
Any sheriff/CLEO who would 'threaten' the issuance of CCWs in the face of budget cuts needs to be run out of town. My rights are not a political trump card to be pulled at any time.

"If you don't give me my money, I'm going to have to stop infringing on the people's rights for you."

Pure bollocks.