PDA

View Full Version : CCW permit application delays


nicki
10-26-2010, 12:19 PM
At gunshop in Fresno last night, word I got is interviews for CCW permits are now being scheduled out to Apr 2011.

Other counties have backlogs close to 1 year.

Fees collected should be enough to process applications unless they are doing things like sending deputies out and doing things like interviewing neighbors. This type of action would make CCW permits a money losing proposition for sheriffs.

All government agencies are feeling a budget crunch. CCW permits should result in a positive cash flow for sheriff departments unless they are actually sending out deputies to talk to people's neighbors, visit people at home, etc etc.

Seems to me that the real reason for sheriffs spending resources to check addresses is not public safety, but to keep sheriffs from other counties who violate rights of their citizens happy.

When former West Isleton Police Chief Gene Byrd was issuing CCW permits to any Sacramento resident before the law changed, his department was running a surplus.

Nicki

Untamed1972
10-26-2010, 12:31 PM
[QUOTE=nicki;5192524]At gunshop in Fresno last night, word I got is interviews for CCW permits are now being scheduled out to Apr 2011.

Other counties have backlogs close to 1 year.

Fees collected should be enough to process applications unless they are doing things like sending deputies out and doing things like interviewing neighbors. This type of action would make CCW permits a money losing proposition for sheriffs.

All government agencies are feeling a budget crunch. CCW permits should result in a positive cash flow for sheriff departments unless they are actually sending out deputies to talk to people's neighbors, visit people at home, etc etc.

Seems to me that the real reason for sheriffs spending resources to check addresses is not public safety, but to keep sheriffs from other counties who violate rights of their citizens happy.

ETA: In all reality the things that an investigator really needs to "investigate" should be able to be done from a computer terminal in no more than 1 hour...2 tops if they need a coffee break. For the $100 maximum fee they're allowed to charge, if they're spending more then about 3 hours total on the entire process including interviews then they're ending up in the whole.

I could see in the past why they felt the need to do residency checks. When you had one county that was liberal issue and the next county over wasn't you had to make sure people weren't "renting a room" from a local just to claim residency to get a permit easier. But if everyone was issuing liberally then that would be less of a concern. There would be no need for anyone to try and game the next county over to get a permit when he can easily get one from his own county.

thebronze
10-26-2010, 12:46 PM
Funny....I was thinking last that if Sheriffs get on board and start getting backlogged why wouldn't city Police Chiefs get on the band wagon and take back their authority to start issuing permits so they could get some of that revenue too?

Fact is if SO's are back logged it because they're wasting time with unnessecary intruvise investigations. There is nothing they need to investigate that can't be done from a desk chair and a computer terminal.


Excellent points!

Gray Peterson
10-26-2010, 1:00 PM
This is exactly the point I was talking about. Btw, it's not $100 they can take up front, it's $20. The problem is that no organization or groups of individuals have held the sheriff's agencies accountable, until now.

Untamed1972
10-26-2010, 1:22 PM
This is exactly the point I was talking about. Btw, it's not $100 they can take up front, it's $20. The problem is that no organization or groups of individuals have held the sheriff's agencies accountable, until now.

I meant a $100 if they actually issue the permit, which if they are essentially being "shall-issue" I would think the number of denials would be fairly minimal. So assuming they're up in the high 90% approvals they'd be getting their $100 from most applicants but if they're spending more then 3hrs doing it they're wasting time and money.

And even for the the initial $20, the majority of things that would likely DQ someone could be found by quick, easy, simple database searches that would take less then an hour, so if they find something and deny the app, then they haven't really lost anything at that point.

Gray Peterson
10-26-2010, 1:46 PM
I meant a $100 if they actually issue the permit, which if they are essentially being "shall-issue" I would think the number of denials would be fairly minimal. So assuming they're up in the high 90% approvals they'd be getting their $100 from most applicants but if they're spending more then 3hrs doing it they're wasting time and money.

And even for the the initial $20, the majority of things that would likely DQ someone could be found by quick, easy, simple database searches that would take less then an hour, so if they find something and deny the app, then they haven't really lost anything at that point.

They most they can do up front is:

1) Ask for up to 20 percent of the local licensing fee. If it's $100, it's $20 max. If it's $65, it's $12 or something up front (not sure of my direct math here).

2) Do a Livescan for $95, but they can't Livescan you again for an initial application per PC12052(b). None of this money goes to the licensing authority. It is solely to the Department of Justice.

nicki
10-26-2010, 2:46 PM
Sometimes all it takes to get something is to just ask for it.

Many cities are hurting for cash and many do have police departments that could issue CCW permits right now.

It could be as simple as going to a city council member, give him a proposed new city CCW policy and have a vote.

Now of course we would need what I call a FAQ dealing with the concerns and destroying all the bs arguments against non discriminatory CCW.

We may find that we may have some cities in even anti gun counties that would issue.

It would be sweet if cities adopted such policies because they publically state that they can no longer sit by while the sheriff abuses his public trust.

We are looking at 2 to 5 years to fix the whole state, this is something that could help some people now.

p7m8jg
10-26-2010, 2:51 PM
I've heard Merced County doesn't process them, period. Claiming manpower shortages & nobody to handle the paperwork. FWIW.

AJAX22
10-26-2010, 3:10 PM
Justice delayed is justice denied

wildhawker
10-26-2010, 3:19 PM
P7,

Oh, we're aware of Merced's 'issues'. More fun to come. :43:

-Brandon

Smokeybehr
10-26-2010, 3:35 PM
P7,

Oh, we're aware of Merced's 'issues'. More fun to come. :43:

-Brandon

Sounds like Pazin needs to get his s**t together before he needs to spend money defending a lawsuit.

jb7706
10-26-2010, 3:36 PM
They most they can do up front is:

1) Ask for up to 20 percent of the local licensing fee. If it's $100, it's $20 max. If it's $65, it's $12 or something up front (not sure of my direct math here).

2) Do a Livescan for $95, but they can't Livescan you again for an initial application per PC12052(b). None of this money goes to the licensing authority. It is solely to the Department of Justice.

Wonder how Sac is charging over $120 for Live Scan then? Where is the extra cash going, and why is it charged? It will be nice when things settle down enough to give us time to track that kind of stuff down.

adrenalinemedic
10-26-2010, 3:41 PM
This is exactly the point I was talking about. Btw, it's not $100 they can take up front, it's $20. The problem is that no organization or groups of individuals have held the sheriff's agencies accountable, until now.

Wait, what?

I've been off of CalGuns for a while, so maybe I missed something thats ongoing, but Placer charges $210. Up front.

And unless something recently changed, they use any prior rejected CCW app as grounds for automatic and permanent rejection.

Munk
10-26-2010, 3:50 PM
I meant a $100 if they actually issue the permit, which if they are essentially being "shall-issue" I would think the number of denials would be fairly minimal. So assuming they're up in the high 90% approvals they'd be getting their $100 from most applicants but if they're spending more then 3hrs doing it they're wasting time and money.

And even for the the initial $20, the majority of things that would likely DQ someone could be found by quick, easy, simple database searches that would take less then an hour, so if they find something and deny the app, then they haven't really lost anything at that point.

I can attest to the quickness of performing a database search. I performed locates under a licensed PI for a while, and it was a relatively fast process... if you know what you're doing. After a bit of practice, and knowing how shady a person can be, I got a bit oc a knack for tracking people down. I had a rather remarkable success rate, considering these were locates that were kicked to us after another firm had already failed.

Considering MOST applicants will be upstanding, law-abiding people, the locate process would be REMARKABLY fast, and inexpensive. Verifying their addresses would take very little time. It's also easy to spot someone who's acting shady by their histories and other info, which would warrant a closer inspection; and that is where the sheriff's investigation would come in.

For the most part, they could easily make a profit on their 100$ fees and only a few applicants would warrant the investigation necessary to eat up that money.

Gray Peterson
10-26-2010, 3:50 PM
Wait, what?

I've been off of CalGuns for a while, so maybe I missed something thats ongoing, but Placer charges $210. Up front.


Placer must only take up to $20 in local application fees, $95 in DOJ Fee, and the regular fingerprinting roll fee if they charge one generally (Placer apparently doesn't charge one for CCW). So the max they can take is $115 up front.

And unless something recently changed, they use any prior rejected CCW app as grounds for automatic and permanent rejection.

That's nice....

While a court cannot compel a public officer to exercise his discretion in any particular manner, it may direct him to exercise that discretion. [1b] We regard the case at bench as involving a refusal of the sheriff to exercise the discretion given him by the statute. Section 12050 imposes only three limits on the grant of an application to carry a concealed weapon: the applicant must be of good moral character, show good cause and be a resident of the county.

-Salute v. Pitchess, 61 Cal.App.3d 557

adrenalinemedic
10-26-2010, 4:03 PM
Placer must only take up to $20 in local application fees, $95 in DOJ Fee, and the regular fingerprinting roll fee if they charge one generally (Placer apparently doesn't charge one for CCW). So the max they can take is $115 up front.



That's nice....

While a court cannot compel a public officer to exercise his discretion in any particular manner, it may direct him to exercise that discretion. [1b] We regard the case at bench as involving a refusal of the sheriff to exercise the discretion given him by the statute. Section 12050 imposes only three limits on the grant of an application to carry a concealed weapon: the applicant must be of good moral character, show good cause and be a resident of the county.

-Salute v. Pitchess, 61 Cal.App.3d 557

So help me out here, what do I do with this information? Because I can see myself going in and getting the blank stare in return. Then subsequently getting denied because I suddenly 'lack good moral character' in the subjective opinion of the interviewing officer who doesn't appreciate a barracks lawyer trying to get a CCW in his county.

Not trying to come off as an ***; I'm genuinely curious as to the next step I should take. From reading around the forum, I haven't seen Placer County on anyones radar.

Gray Peterson
10-26-2010, 4:13 PM
So help me out here, what do I do with this information? Because I can see myself going in and getting the blank stare in return. Then subsequently getting denied because I suddenly 'lack good moral character' in the subjective opinion of the interviewing officer who doesn't appreciate a barracks lawyer trying to get a CCW in his county.

Not trying to come off as an ***; I'm genuinely curious as to the next step I should take. From reading around the forum, I haven't seen Placer County on anyones radar.

Every county's violations of state law and of Salute is on our radar. :43:

keneva
10-26-2010, 5:07 PM
Here is a link to KMJ radio interview with Sheriff Pazin. It's about 57 min. into it. I remember him saying something like some people think that the 2nd amendment gives them the right to carry concealed? Were gona find out!

http://www.kmj580.com/pages/archive?app=podcast&podcastID=2175&aft=1286769600&bef=1286856000

The Cable Guy
10-26-2010, 5:18 PM
Question on LiveScan. Is this a one time deal? If I had a livescan done several years ago for something else, would that count towards CCW application?

2Bear
10-26-2010, 5:18 PM
IT'S ALIIIIIVE!!!

CGF Request - Need Volunteers in Every County *ASAP* (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=353115)

AJAX22
10-26-2010, 5:48 PM
So, would it be illegal to advertize on the radio to ask people to apply for their CCW permits as part of the registration drive?


kind of a get-out-the-vote thing, but for applying to cary guns?

Munk
10-26-2010, 6:45 PM
So, would it be illegal to advertize on the radio to ask people to apply for their CCW permits as part of the registration drive?


kind of a get-out-the-vote thing, but for applying to cary guns?

It's not illegal to encourage people to exercises rights and to apply for legal certifications/permissions.

AJAX22
10-26-2010, 6:57 PM
It's not illegal to encourage people to exercises rights and to apply for legal certifications/permissions.

I'm unsure of what activities are allowed under 501c3 (I probably should find out though for a number of reasons)

I was mostly just wondering alloud.

bussda
10-26-2010, 7:11 PM
Here is a link to KMJ radio interview with Sheriff Pazin. It's about 57 min. into it. I remember him saying something like some people think that the 2nd amendment gives them the right to carry concealed? Were gona find out!



History: Back in the 1800's, before the civil war and the 14th amendment, courts held there was no right to carry concealed. My information is based on NRA mailings and that is why the NRA pushed so hard to get CCW legislation through state legislatures. I am not trying to be pessimistic, just realistic.

But that does predate Heller and McDonald, so there is hope.

hoffmang
10-26-2010, 9:54 PM
History: Back in the 1800's, before the civil war and the 14th amendment, courts held there was no right to carry concealed. My information is based on NRA mailings and that is why the NRA pushed so hard to get CCW legislation through state legislatures. I am not trying to be pessimistic, just realistic.

Not exactly correct. Quite a few state supreme courts in the 19th century ruled that prohibitions on concealed carry were legal where open loaded carry was unregulated were constitutional. Loaded open carry is illegal in the vast majority of California...

-Gene

NiteQwill
10-26-2010, 11:00 PM
Question on LiveScan. Is this a one time deal? If I had a livescan done several years ago for something else, would that count towards CCW application?

No.

Each livescan is independent.

Such as having two livesscans for a CCW and COE, for example.

greasemonkey
11-10-2010, 9:46 PM
Bump for big news in Merced. Merced County residents: CGF needs YOUR help in the CCW Initiative. We've got a project that needs to be completed by December. You need only be not a 'prohibited person'.

See the CCW Initiative thread here. (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=352767)


:D

yellowfin
11-10-2010, 10:03 PM
How many Sacramento permits have been issued since the correction of things and/or how many in progress?

hoffmang
11-11-2010, 8:34 PM
How many Sacramento permits have been issued since the correction of things and/or how many in progress?

A whole lot. 99% of applications.

-Gene

yellowfin
11-12-2010, 5:13 AM
Which is how many, quantity wise? Are we talking ten, fifty, a couple hundred, thousand, three thousand, ten thousand?

jb7706
11-12-2010, 9:51 AM
Which is how many, quantity wise? Are we talking ten, fifty, a couple hundred, thousand, three thousand, ten thousand?

According to McGinness on the Armstrong and Getty show a few weeks ago there were in the area of 220 newly issued permits in 2010.

I'd guesstimate that the total in the county at that time was around 500 if past reported numbers held, but that number is a total SWAG. If I were a betting man I'd say we should have 750-ish permits by the end of the year.

yellowfin
11-12-2010, 11:25 AM
That's it?! Out of THAT big of a population?!? Places 1/10th that size do that many a month, and lots of states do that every week, some per day. I know you've gotta start somewhere but that's digging the Panama Canal with a teaspoon.

Gray Peterson
11-12-2010, 11:35 AM
That's it?! Out of THAT big of a population?!? Places 1/10th that size do that many a month, and lots of states do that every week, some per day. I know you've gotta start somewhere but that's digging the Panama Canal with a teaspoon.

Most people in Sacramento don't know that CCW's are issued for self defense.

Untamed1972
11-12-2010, 11:36 AM
That's it?! Out of THAT big of a population?!? Places 1/10th that size do that many a month, and lots of states do that every week, some per day. I know you've gotta start somewhere but that's digging the Panama Canal with a teaspoon.

I think as sheriffs start getting more and more apps, they're realize they need to streamline the process alot more and that most of what they did in the past is unnessecary and wase of Dept time and resources.

For example: Why the need for a FTF or phone interview if everyone is using personal protection as GC? Take the app, run the criminal history. If it's clean send the guy for prints and training and be done with it. That is essentially how shall-issue works on most states.

Librarian
11-12-2010, 11:41 AM
That's it?! Out of THAT big of a population?!? Places 1/10th that size do that many a month, and lots of states do that every week, some per day. I know you've gotta start somewhere but that's digging the Panama Canal with a teaspoon.

Seems that only about 4% of eligible people bother, based on information from states that go shall-issue.

Sacramento County has about 1.4 million. About 26% are under 18, so ineligible. Figure another 5% are 'prohibited persons' (just a guess). So, eventually, something like 38,000 CCW licenses should be expected in the county.

That's only 633/month for the next 5 years, a mere 30 per business day ...

Gray Peterson
11-12-2010, 11:44 AM
Seems that only about 4% of eligible people bother, based on information from states that go shall-issue.

Sacramento County has about 1.4 million. About 26% are under 18, so ineligible. Figure another 5% are 'prohibited persons' (just a guess). So, eventually, something like 38,000 CCW licenses should be expected in the county.

That's only 633/month for the next 5 years, a mere 30 per business day ...

Drop that to around 2-3 percent. The license is expensive so 4 percent is not a reasonable level.

Sacramento is the first "urban" county to go VSI. Simply put, lots of folk in Sacramento don't know.

Librarian
11-12-2010, 12:15 PM
Also note that, since the licenses are good for just two years, starting at about 1 year and 10 months there will be an equal number of renewal applications (on average) each month.

Streamlining the process and extending the term seem like good things to do.

Just looked at Texas (http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/administration/crime_records/chl/chlsindex.htm) data; fee is $140 new, $70 renew, valid 4 years. Their data don't break out new/renewal, but the 4 most recent years of issuance add up to about 3% of the 16 million or so people probably eligible, so 4% probably is high for California.

GrizzlyGuy
11-12-2010, 4:05 PM
See here (http://blogostuff.blogspot.com/2004/12/percentage-of-adults-with-carry.html), it is a summary of the percentages of people in each state who have a CCW license, as of 2004. The percentages are understandably low, even in shall issue states. Ex:

1.76% Arizona
1.70% Montana
1.62% Texas


I say "understandably" because carrying a concealed gun around in public is a hassle. Many people will conclude that the benefits aren't worth the costs and inconveniences.