PDA

View Full Version : new sticky or "Guide", but for CA CCWs?


Paladin
06-26-2010, 4:21 PM
Perhaps CGN should add a sticky to this subforum or a new guide (then the Guides pulldown menu would read, "CCW, AW, and OLL Guides"), that will guide applicants through the CCW process AND have indicate the current issuance status of all 58 counties, from Virtually No Issuance to Reasonable Issuance (self-defense is "Good Cause"). Or instead, just ask a rep from www.CalCCW.com post their excellent map (see below) and allow them (and only them), to update it as counties go "reasonable issuance." That way newbies can be quickly and easily referred to the map so they can find out their (current) odds of getting issued.

IMO, this will be of particular importance over the next 3 years as county by county gives up the fight against us.

http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f337/clownburner/OCCCWS/ca_ccw_map-big.png

bigstick61
06-26-2010, 4:25 PM
Or perhaps even a guide for carrying overall. It's definitely one of the more common questions posed here.

Librarian
06-26-2010, 4:57 PM
Since CalCCW is already doing that, and there is some overlap of membership with CalGuns and CalCCW, duplicating their good work here seems unnecessary.

Just an opinion.

Gray Peterson
06-26-2010, 5:04 PM
I'm actually working on a wiki project for that. Unfortunately since I don't have the data for all of the sheriffs yet, it would be incomplete.

Paladin
06-26-2010, 5:54 PM
I know there are others who are doing much of the same thing. www.calccw.com as well as TBJ are great resources (sounds like Gray's will be too). I'm just thinking that CGN, being the size that it is, should have something to guide newbies. Maybe just leave it at referring them to the other sites, if CGN leadership thinks that best. (Although I think CGN should have a map (borrowed from one of the other sites?) so that Avg Joe inquirers will immediately know their odds.)

A related issue is when/who decides when a county has switched our way? As you can see from the above www.calccw.com map, they still show Sacto as dark red. TBJ also shows Sacto as being anti (http://www.californiaconcealedcarry.com/counties/countiesmap.html). Yet, recently, I've been reading in this subforum that Sacto has switched to "reasonable issue." But unless a SO makes some public statement re a change in policy, there will probably be a 6 months to 1 yr lag time between the quiet change in policy and us having proof (i.e., enough regular Joes are getting issued that the maps get updated). Who decides when a county is "good to go" apply to for Avg Joes?

I hope calccw, TBJ, and CGN are all on the same page so that when a county/city goes "reasonable issue," as many people as possible will find out at the same time and go and apply.

Gray Peterson
06-26-2010, 6:29 PM
I know there are others who are doing much of the same thing. www.calccw.com (http://www.calccw.com) as well as TBJ are great resources (sounds like Gray's will be too). I'm just thinking that CGN, being the size that it is, should have something to guide newbies. Maybe just leave it at referring them to the other sites, if CGN leadership thinks that best. (Although I think CGN should have a map (borrowed from one of the other sites?) so that Avg Joe inquirers will immediately know their odds.)

As I said, I am working on a wiki project to do that.

A related issue is when/who decides when a county has switched our way? As you can see from the above www.calccw.com (http://www.calccw.com) map, they still show Sacto as dark red. TBJ also shows Sacto as being anti (http://www.californiaconcealedcarry.com/counties/countiesmap.html). Yet, recently, I've been reading in this subforum that Sacto has switched to "reasonable issue." But unless a SO makes some public statement re a change in policy, there will probably be a 6 months to 1 yr lag time between the quiet change in policy and us having proof (i.e., enough regular Joes are getting issued that the maps get updated). Who decides when a county is "good to go" apply to for Avg Joes?

There are very particular reasons for the Sacramento situation which doesn't apply really anywhere else, given that they are currently under litigation due to their policies and procedures. This is why when someone asked a question about applying, I usually PM them with instructions. As of right now, they are currently a month behind on doing appointment times, and are only taking appointments for two hours a week, so if the dam breaks, it'll be quite the messy situation.

I hope calccw, TBJ, and CGN are all on the same page so that when a county/city goes "reasonable issue," as many people as possible will find out at the same time and go and apply.

I post over at CalCCW as well. Though the picture itself is copyrighted, the information is not. Someone can create their own map itself if they're smart enough and use the same coloring.

Paladin
06-26-2010, 6:49 PM
Thanks for the replies, all.

While offline, I was thinking of what I was trying to say or do w/this thread. I guess it boils down to is what Calgunners/CGN can do to speed up the total number of CCWs in CA. In another thread (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=315000), you'll see that there are ~40k CA CCWs and that to get where FL is currently, we need to increase that number 35x to 1.43 million CA CCWs!

If some counties start "reasonable issue" after McDonald (since we'll now have a 2nd A RKBA, the lack of which some CLEOs have used as an excuse for not liberally issuing), a few counties might start loosening issuance. Then, after Palmer, Sykes, Peruta, Peterson, a TBJ lawsuit or two, more counties will loosen issuance. I'm brainstorming how we can get that info out to residents of those counties as soon as they loosen issuance.

Perhaps, at the next forum software upgrade, our Profiles could have an option for selecting our county (but hidden), so that as soon as a county goes reasonable issuance, CGN will email all members in that county telling them they are good to go. CGN can do a mass email to all members after that software option is available. Since, strictly speaking, informing members that their county is now "reasonable issue" is not a political activity, I don't think there should be any legal restrictions on CGN doing this.

Anyone else have other ideas on how to quickly, efficiently, and effectively increase the number of CA CCWs 35 fold as more counties loosen up issuance over the next 3 years?

CSDGuy
06-26-2010, 7:11 PM
Sacramento has indeed gotten somewhat looser with issuance, but their official policy still has not changed. Their policy is printed on the pdf forms that are on their website. I suspect that is why it's still shown as dark red on the above picture. A friend of mine says he got approved... but I'll find out for certain when/if he actually shows me the rice paper.

Gray Peterson
06-26-2010, 10:55 PM
Thanks for the replies, all.

While offline, I was thinking of what I was trying to say or do w/this thread. I guess it boils down to is what Calgunners/CGN can do to speed up the total number of CCWs in CA. In another thread (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=315000), you'll see that there are ~40k CA CCWs and that to get where FL is currently, we need to increase that number 35x to 1.43 million CA CCWs!

If some counties start "reasonable issue" after McDonald (since we'll now have a 2nd A RKBA, the lack of which some CLEOs have used as an excuse for not liberally issuing), a few counties might start loosening issuance. Then, after Palmer, Sykes, Peruta, Peterson, a TBJ lawsuit or two, more counties will loosen issuance. I'm brainstorming how we can get that info out to residents of those counties as soon as they loosen issuance.

Perhaps, at the next forum software upgrade, our Profiles could have an option for selecting our county (but hidden), so that as soon as a county goes reasonable issuance, CGN will email all members in that county telling them they are good to go. CGN can do a mass email to all members after that software option is available. Since, strictly speaking, informing members that their county is now "reasonable issue" is not a political activity, I don't think there should be any legal restrictions on CGN doing this.

Anyone else have other ideas on how to quickly, efficiently, and effectively increase the number of CA CCWs 35 fold as more counties loosen up issuance over the next 3 years?

I've thought about this significantly in the last several weeks working on my statutory compliance project. First is that before we can really do ANYTHING, we need to get the counties in full compliance with Salute v. Pitchess and the letter of the penal code. Even if Sykes goes our way, we need to de-emphasize uses of stupid methods of giving normal applicants the runaround.

Due to the large minority population, we're going to need people to become firearms instructors who are fluent in the language and culture of many different groups, especially in the Los Angeles/SoCal and San Francisco Bay Area. We need to post fliers at strategy places in order to get the message out that CCW's are available. The other problem, of course, is that the current statute allows the sheriffs to determine which training course will suffice. Will recalcitrant sheriff use to do all training themselves and try to say that there's only 1 class every two years with limit seats? Perhaps. But they have to treat their "best friends forever" and campaign contributors the same way under Guillory v. Gates.

Hell, if we can buy advertising on the MUNI and Bart buses (they have to accept viewpoint neutral advisements) in multiple languages a website specifically dedicated to the issue.

-Gray

Paladin
06-27-2010, 7:13 PM
There are very particular reasons for the Sacramento situation which doesn't apply really anywhere else, given that they are currently under litigation due to their policies and procedures.Hmmm. Isn't Yolo Co. in a similar "situation"???

Do you know if Yolo Co SO has or will be loosening up issuance soon? :43:

Gray Peterson
06-27-2010, 7:38 PM
Hmmm. Isn't Yolo Co. in a similar "situation"???

Do you know if Yolo Co SO has or will be loosening up issuance soon? :43:

The answer to this is no, and what does Yolo County have that Sacramento County does not?

Paladin
06-27-2010, 7:51 PM
The answer to this is no, and what does Yolo County have that Sacramento County does not?
Ummm, tens of thousands of eager, young UCDavis CCW applicants, most of whom have clean criminal backgrounds and will be traveling throughout the state over vacations and will be the leaders of tomorrow? :43: :D

Gray Peterson
06-27-2010, 7:56 PM
Hmmm, tens of thousands of eager UCDavis CCW applicants? :43: :D

You got the UC-Davis part right. We're talking tens of thousands of voters in a small-population county who really hate the "gun owner culture" with a rabid passion.

Paladin
06-27-2010, 8:01 PM
You got the UC-Davis part right. We're talking tens of thousands of voters in a small-population county who really hate the "gun owner culture" with a rabid passion.Hmmm. While I'm sure most of the profs are antis, I don't know about the student population or what percentage of them changed their voter registration to Davis/Yolo Co.

Oh well. I guess Yolo will have to wait until we win McDonald and Sykes. After that, our RKBA, hopefully, will not be subject to local, popular approval.

Just trying to think of how to push things forward as fast as possible.

Roadrunner
06-27-2010, 8:30 PM
It certainly would be nice if every county in California was the same with standardized state regulations. Does anyone think McDonald will help deal with that ?

dantodd
06-27-2010, 9:33 PM
Hmmm. While I'm sure most of the profs are antis, I don't know about the student population or what percentage of them changed their voter registration to Davis/Yolo Co.

Oh well. I guess Yolo will have to wait until we win McDonald and Sykes. After that, our RKBA, hopefully, will not be subject to local, popular approval.

Just trying to think of how to push things forward as fast as possible.

The full time residents of Davis have traditionally been extremely liberal, when I was at school there part of the city called themselves "The Peoples Republic of East Davis.

From DavisWiki (http://daviswiki.org/People%27s_Republic_of_Davis)The term started in East Davis as the "People's Republic of East Davis" (PRED). PRED constituents had official meetings (parties) at various East Davis locations and even occasionally met at "PRED Embassies" (houses west of the tracks). There was even a flag and an official language, "Prethek," invented by one PRED member and linguist, Abram Jones. Prethek had no actual speakers, but that is beside the point. PRED also had a [WWW]camp at Burning Man in 2000.

Julie Partanksy (http://daviswiki.org/Julie_Partansky) is a pretty good example of the thought process in the city.

darkwater
06-27-2010, 9:51 PM
With regards to university students, isn't there the issue of residency when it comes to CCW permits? When I attended Davis, I still registered my vehicle and voted in the county where my parents lived, and I remained their dependent for tax and insurance purposes until after graduation, after which I moved out of Yolo county anwyay. Fortunately, my county of residence is on the opposite end of the CCW spectrum from Yolo county.

Gray Peterson
06-27-2010, 10:49 PM
With regards to university students, isn't there the issue of residency when it comes to CCW permits? When I attended Davis, I still registered my vehicle and voted in the county where my parents lived, and I remained their dependent for tax and insurance purposes until after graduation, after which I moved out of Yolo county anwyay. Fortunately, my county of residence is on the opposite end of the CCW spectrum from Yolo county.

Voting is different.