PDA

View Full Version : DOJ joke of the day


jemaddux
07-13-2006, 12:47 PM
For those who keep saying that DOJ can't make up the laws as they go, well heres one for you.

I work for the studios full time and do the firearms part time. I sent in my AW permit, now mind you I have my FFL, State Pyro Card, Federal High Explosives Card and all my Federal letters for transport of explosives. I get a call from DOJ explaining that I need letters from employers. I explain I am self employed. Then they say I need letters then from studio heads saying they are willing to do business with me. So I explain I sent all my pay records showing everything and they reply that won't work for them. So I explain what the law says that I have to show and tell them that it is all there so they tell my that they have different rules of what they require then what is there in writing. So a this point in time I ask to speak with a supervisor, she gets on the phone and says it doesn't matter really any ways because they are only going to allow the 935 AW permits that are in the state right now anyways. When I ask where that is in writing she states in there own rules and its not in writing anyplace.

So, for the record, DOJ seems to be able to make rules as they go and can pervent someone from working as they see fit.:mad:

6172crew
07-13-2006, 1:00 PM
The DOJs hate for gun owners is worn like a badge of honor.:(

Paradiddle
07-13-2006, 1:11 PM
Have Johnny Cochran sue them. ;)

TheMan
07-13-2006, 1:12 PM
Can you request this same information via a certified letter? It seems they don't have any interest in following the state laws via the phone.

glen avon
07-13-2006, 2:12 PM
that is not making up laws. that is execution of laws.

this state, not just the DOJ, is known to be hostile to AWs etc.

it's a permit, you don't have a right to it. they can say there are enough out there already. it's a crappy decision, but it is not "making up laws as they go along."

jemaddux
07-13-2006, 2:31 PM
that is not making up laws. that is execution of laws.

this state, not just the DOJ, is known to be hostile to AWs etc.

it's a permit, you don't have a right to it. they can say there are enough out there already. it's a crappy decision, but it is not "making up laws as they go along."


It is making up the laws:

972.6. Commercial Motion Picture, Television Production, or Other Commercial Entertainment
Event.
(a) Documentation required to determine bona fide necessity for possession or manufacturing of
dangerous weapons for commercial motion picture, television production, or other commercial
entertainment event includes the following:
(1) If an agent of a studio, the applicant must provide a letter of need and verification of
employment from the studio.
(2) If an agent of a rental company or an independent property master, the applicant must
provide letters of interest from the studios.
(b) Persons attempting to establish a business in this area who have not yet been retained by clients
shall provide copies or business correspondence or other evidence of their activities which they
deem will show reasonable efforts to supply dangerous weapons for use in commercial motion
picture, television production, or other commercial entertainment event.


Establishing a business is what I am doing. I have already shown paycheck stubs, shown resumes and letters that have gone out. I have shown everything they are requesting for starting a business and they are saying they will not except it. They said they will ONLY except letters from known agents in the studios that they are willing to hire me. In other words I would have to get letters from someone that I would be competing for work with. So, in my opinion that is making up the laws. It also prevents me from furthering my career because the permit is required by OSHA and the studios to work with the weapons. Its just DOJ BS.:mad: I can get approval from ATF for everything but not a chance in hell with the Left Wing Nuts at DOJ.

glen avon
07-13-2006, 2:43 PM
is that a regulation, or a law?

and, is that an exclusive, or an inclusive list?

where is the "shall issue" provision?

that is NOT making up laws. the fact that you don't like the result does not mean they are making up laws.

50 Freak
07-13-2006, 2:44 PM
What they say over the phone and what is in writting is different. Get everything in writting from them and then you will have more ammunition for a possible case against the DOJ.

When I say case...I don't necessarily mean lawsuit. Present your findings to your local politicians and find someone to champion you. Afterall you are a business trying to do business in CA and due to overly unnecessary complications brought on by the DOJ is causing you problems. Most politicans don't care a squat about your firearms rights. They do care when business are leaving CA due to overly restrictive proceedures and codes.

jemaddux
07-13-2006, 2:57 PM
is that a regulation, or a law?

and, is that an exclusive, or an inclusive list?

where is the "shall issue" provision?

that is NOT making up laws. the fact that you don't like the result does not mean they are making up laws.


You seem to like to argue just to argue or better yet, you seem to side many times "WITH" the DOJ, you work for them or something? It is in the regs as shown. They are not going by what is written in the regs, therefor they are making their own set of rules. Rules in this country can also be considered laws in some cases.

REGULATIONS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE PERTAINING TO
DANGEROUS WEAPONS
CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS
TITLE 11. LAW, DIVISION 1. ATTORNEY GENERAL, CHAPTER 12.5. DANGEROUS WEAPONS

See the little word there right after Title 11, "LAW". That might mean this has something to do with the law. And when you go against what is written there and say it is something else you are making up your own regs or laws.

If you don't like what I write Glen, then don't read it and please don't respond because all it comes across as is your defending the DOJ actions which makes me wonder what side you are really on.

jemaddux
07-13-2006, 3:02 PM
What they say over the phone and what is in writting is different. Get everything in writting from them and then you will have more ammunition for a possible case against the DOJ.

When I say case...I don't necessarily mean lawsuit. Present your findings to your local politicians and find someone to champion you. Afterall you are a business trying to do business in CA and due to overly unnecessary complications brought on by the DOJ is causing you problems. Most politicans don't care a squat about your firearms rights. They do care when business are leaving CA due to overly restrictive proceedures and codes.

They have to send the application back with reasons why it is being sent. I want to see what they put. Its just they charge you money for this because you have to get your live scan done even knowing I already have a COE and FFL and every time they deny you you have to do these charges over. Its just BS and another reason the industry is leaving the state.

glen avon
07-13-2006, 3:45 PM
You seem to like to argue just to argue

no, I take my time to try and educate people here about how the law, and regulations, actually work. there is a difference. now, you may see that as argument, but that's your problem.

or better yet, you seem to side many times "WITH" the DOJ, you work for them or something?

well that didn't take long. within 3 more posts no doubt you will be resorting to reductio ad hitlerium

It is in the regs as shown.

WHAT is in the regs?

They are not going by what is written in the regs,

sure they are

therefor they are making their own set of rules.

who says they can't?

Rules in this country can also be considered laws in some cases.

not this case

REGULATIONS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE PERTAINING TO
DANGEROUS WEAPONS
CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS
TITLE 11. LAW, DIVISION 1. ATTORNEY GENERAL, CHAPTER 12.5. DANGEROUS WEAPONS

See the little word there right after Title 11, "LAW". That might mean this has something to do with the law.

it has something to do with law? and? that doesn't support your argument that "DOJ is making up the law as they go."

And when you go against what is written there and say it is something else you are making up your own regs or laws.

not true

If you don't like what I write Glen, then don't read it and please don't respond because all it comes across as is your defending the DOJ actions which makes me wonder what side you are really on.

I don't care about what you write. what I do care about is misinformation by those who do not understand what they are writing about. others may want to learn, even if you don't.

quit posting mistakes and I will quit responding to them.

and I could not possibly care less what you wonder about me.

Ford8N
07-13-2006, 3:50 PM
Have you tried the Freedom of Information Act to see who else in this state has an AW permit? And see what reasons they used to get one. This reminds me of getting a CCW in some counties. It doesn't matter why you need one, it will be denied. This whole thing sounds like an easy win for the NRA if they would help with the legal stuff. Ask the NRA and if they get hinky, let us know.

glen avon
07-13-2006, 4:04 PM
FOIA is for federal gov't records. state records require PRA requests under gov. code section 6250 et. seq.

bwiese
07-13-2006, 4:32 PM
JEMaddux,

Glen Avon is right. AW dealer/repair permits are issued on a discretionary basis, not shall issue.

Even if you 'show justification' (i.e, people wanting to do biz with you), they can decide there's enough permittees that no others need to be allowed...

There's nothing in the law or body regulation that says they HAVE to issue them, the stuff you showed is just under what grounds they can issue if they ever do/did decide to issue.

I know it sucks, but that's the way it is.

jemaddux
07-13-2006, 4:51 PM
JEMaddux,

Glen Avon is right. AW dealer/repair permits are issued on a discretionary basis, not shall issue.

Even if you 'show justification' (i.e, people wanting to do biz with you), they can decide there's enough permittees that no others need to be allowed...

There's nothing in the law or body regulation that says they HAVE to issue them, the stuff you showed is just under what grounds they can issue if they ever do/did decide to issue.

I know it sucks, but that's the way it is.


I guess I will have to make this more clear. I said that I sent in everything and they said it wasn't good enough and wasn't what the regs required. When I pointed out that it WAS what they required they suddenly changed the story to there was only 935 permits allowed, when asked where that was in writing (considering you have to request the forms from them and then pay for your live scan before sending back and all they would have had to do was state we are not excepting applications for permits at this time before I had spent the $65.00 dollars and lost work because they only give the live scans during the day) they stated it didn't matter that no matter what I was going to be denied.

Sorry, but I call that making up your own rules in my opinion. My pyro card has levels, 3, 2 and 1. You start as a 3 card, after two years you can test and go to a 2 card. Now, 1 cards are your highest point and only so many are allowed in the state at one time, you are not permited to apply, test or anything until they open more spots. I know that from day one and won't end up spending money for something I won't get. Now DOJ on the other hand sends it out, take your money because part of that $65.00 goes to them, then tells you that your denied but you can apply again and pay the $65.00 again and they will reconsider maybe. Thats a BS making the rules as we go game no matter how you look at it.:mad:

glen avon
07-13-2006, 5:00 PM
...Sorry, but I call that making up your own rules in my opinion. ....

but that is different from making up the law. rules are not the same as law. that was my point. see? now I shared something useful with you. :D

and nobody said that the people who spoke to you did a good job, or that it's a good idea to let DOJ accept applications for permits they know they will deny.

but they have the right to do it. whether they should have that right is a different matter.

bwiese
07-13-2006, 5:02 PM
I guess I will have to make this more clear. I said that I sent in everything and they said it wasn't good enough and wasn't what the regs required.

Fine, that's an entirely valid challenge.


When I pointed out that it WAS what they required they suddenly changed the story to there was only 935 permits allowed, when asked where that was in writing (considering you have to request the forms from them and then pay for your live scan before sending back and all they would have had to do was state we are not excepting applications for permits at this time before I had spent the $65.00 dollars and lost work because they only give the live scans during the day) they stated it didn't matter that no matter what I was going to be denied.

They started out with BS, but they landed on something kinda valid. There's nothing that says they have to issue or not issue. If DOJ Firearms Div thinks that 935 is OK, that's legal. All AW permits are entirely discretionary.


Sorry, but I call that making up your own rules in my opinion.

Yup, and they are allowed to - because the statuory law gives them discretion to do so!


My pyro card has levels, 3, 2 and 1. You start as a 3 card, after two years you can test and go to a 2 card. Now, 1 cards are your highest point and only so many are allowed in the state at one time, you are not permited to apply, test or anything until they open more spots.

Does your pyro card come from DOJ Firearms?

Whatever, that's totally aside from the AW laws. Bottom line: even if you have all your i's dotted and t's crossed you they do NOT have to issue. They can decide there's enough, and that's that.

They can deny you for no reason at all. The only reason they cannot deny you is if they say it's because you're a blind transvestite Ethiopian Mormon veteran.

Now, if they take your money first, without advising you that permits are not, or not likely, gonna be issued, then you might have a possible due process issue. If you scream enough you might get your money back. But you'll burn up $300 of time to get $65 back.

xenophobe
07-13-2006, 5:18 PM
I think they were blowing smoke up your arse to get you to not send in all of the requested paperwork again. Submit again. If you're really after one like you can't handle not having it, hire a lawyer and ask for mediation. In the end, they can still deny you, but of course you may be able to hassle them into giving you one.

jemaddux
07-13-2006, 5:27 PM
Fine, that's an entirely valid challenge.



They started out with BS, but they landed on something kinda valid. There's nothing that says they have to issue or not issue. If DOJ Firearms Div thinks that 935 is OK, that's legal. All AW permits are entirely discretionary.

Yup, and they are allowed to - because the statuory law gives them discretion to do so!

Does your pyro card come from DOJ Firearms?

Whatever, that's totally aside from the AW laws. Bottom line: even if you have all your i's dotted and t's crossed you they do NOT have to issue. They can decide there's enough, and that's that.

They can deny you for no reason at all. The only reason they cannot deny you is if they say it's because you're a blind transvestite Ethiopian Mormon veteran.

Now, if they take your money first, without advising you that permits are not, or not likely, gonna be issued, then you might have a possible due process issue. If you scream enough you might get your money back. But you'll burn up $300 of time to get $65 back.

My Pyro card comes from the state Fire Marshall office that have to work with DOJ.

I understand what you are saying but when you read the regs:

975.4. Denial of Application, Reasons, Reconsideration.
(a) Applications for permits/licenses shall be denied for the following reasons:
(1) Applicant fails to establish good cause for issuance of the permit or license.
(2) Applicant does not meet security requirements.
(3) Applicant makes false statements on application.
(4) Applicant fails to establish that issuance of the permit or license would not endanger the
public safety.
(5) Applicant fails to notify the Department of any changes in information as required by
section 973.1.
(b) When an initial application is denied, the applicant may file, within 30 days, a written request
for reconsideration by an Administrative Hearing Officer. Such request may include any and all
evidence and legal arguments which applicant feels is relevant to a reconsideration of the
application. The Department shall provide the applicant with a written notice of its final
decision within 60 days of the time the request for reconsideration is filed.
(c) When an application is denied after reconsideration a new application may be filed pursuant to
section 975.6.

No place here does it say that only so many will be allowed in the state. So how can you just suddenly say with nothing backing you that this is the number and this is all we will allow? I will bet right now if you were to call tomorrow they will tell you that there is no max number allowed.

bwiese
07-13-2006, 5:33 PM
No place here does it say that only so many will be allowed in the state. So how can you just suddenly say with nothing backing you that this is the number and this is all we will allow? I will bet right now if you were to call tomorrow they will tell you that there is no max number allowed.

The number is a moot point - they can say whatever they want, including that they don't like too many AW dealers. It is up to them, as long as they don't discriminate based on favoritism, race, age, or other 'protected species'.

Bottom line, they do NOT have to issue you a permit no matter how 'gold plated' you are. It is DISCRETIONARY.

If you hammer them hard enough you might have luck. Sometimes the squeaky wheel needs grease and they count on folks not wanting to do that. Call a gun lawyer that is familiar w/DOJ policies and procedures - they might fold. How much is it worth to you? Might be a coupla grand with the lawyers - I am not touting for them but I think Chuck Michel/Jason Davis would be ones to talk to.

50 Freak
07-13-2006, 5:41 PM
Going back to my original post. Try to get a politician involved on the grounds that the DOJ by making you jump through so many hoops is causing you to lose business or may force you out of business.

Politicians care about MONEY and the business that bring in tax revenues. Not your 2nd amendment right to arm bears.:D

You're not going to win by insisting the DOJ approve your permit because you went through all the proceedures...It's a losing arguement. The DOJ (unfortunately) have too much power when it comes to firearms/permits/licenses in this state.

artherd
07-13-2006, 6:05 PM
Start dealing with DOJ EXCLUSIVELY via certified mail. DOJ agents or clerks (usually clerks) can say anything over the phone, and none of it will hold up anywhere.

They have decided to be legal adversaries, so it is time to treat them as such, certified mail only!. It will slow down the progress of your business, but you will get your desired permits in the end.

And/or; retain Chuck Michel's law firm, they are very good at dealing with DOJ in a fair and reasonable manner.

jemaddux
07-13-2006, 6:19 PM
Start dealing with DOJ EXCLUSIVELY via certified mail. DOJ agents or clerks (usually clerks) can say anything over the phone, and none of it will hold up anywhere.

They have decided to be legal adversaries, so it is time to treat them as such, certified mail only!. It will slow down the progress of your business, but you will get your desired permits in the end.

And/or; retain Chuck Michel's law firm, they are very good at dealing with DOJ in a fair and reasonable manner.


And how do I get a hold of the law firm for some information?

bwiese
07-13-2006, 6:49 PM
And how do I get a hold of the law firm for some information?

http://www.tmllp.com

adamsreeftank
07-13-2006, 11:05 PM
I know the DOJ is jerking you around, but they DID tell you a way that you would probably get an AW permit! You also have a permit to work with explosives. I'm already jealous, and if you jump through their hoops and get an AW permit, I'll be REALLY REALLY jealous! Most of us subjects have 0% chance of ever getting an AW permit.

Also, Glen Avon may be perceived as a contrarian, but he really is on our side. Don't look down your nose at free legal advice.

Wulf
07-14-2006, 6:42 AM
One angle you might persue is the "right to work" angle.

The professional registration I work under formerly had a very difficult exam. The exam was offered infrequently and had a very low pass rate. The exam was purposfully made difficult by the appointed members of the state board (all practicing professionals) to protect the value of the registration by limiting the numbers. Since the registration was require to do some phases of work in the state, the difficult exam was viewed as an unreasonable barrier to persueing an career and a court ordered the exam to be made easier to achieve a reasonable pass rate.

In your case the lack of this state required permit is a barrier to you working in this field. The fact that you have people willing to employ you suggests that the exist base of permits is not sufficient to service the market.

This all boils down to a question of reasonableness. Is 935 enough, perhaps, if all of them were active. How many of these permits are held by people who are retired in place, or are no working the AW angle of their business actively; apparently not enough to do the available work. Does the state's compelling interest in limiting these permits at 935 a outweigh your right to work?

shango
07-14-2006, 7:12 AM
I've heard a story of a studio employee who was seeking his AW docs and was given a hard time. The studio threatened to take business out of the state (several million worth I imagine) if their guy wasn't given what he needed. The state complied and the guy got what he needed. So the story goes.

SemiAutoSam
07-14-2006, 7:29 AM
A source might be helpful names dates location and any other pertinent information ?