PDA

View Full Version : 12050: No GC Explanation Needed?


choprzrul
04-06-2011, 5:12 PM
Copied directly from the DOJ standard application for CCW (http://calgunsfoundation.org/downloads/documents/DOJ_CCW_App_Fillable.pdf):

If the CCW license is desired for self-protection, the protection of others, or for the protection of large sums of money or valuable property, you are required to explain and provide good cause for issuance of the license. For example, has your life or property been threatened or jeopardized? Explain incidents and include dates, times, locations, and names of police agencies
to which these incidents were reported.


Details of Reason for Applicant desiring a CCW License (use additional sheets if needed).

Operative parts bolded above. I can read this no other way than "IF" you use self-protection, or protection of others, or protection of big $$, or protection of valuable property; then you must explain yourself.

The instructions make no mention of a requirement to explain yourself for any other reason. They do, in the last sentence, require "Details of Reason..." for CCW for what must be all the other reasons.



My question: If my reason for wanting a CCW is merely to exercise my civil rights, then I would only need to provide the details behind that reason? Would such details include the amendment outlining the protection of my civil right, SCOTUS rulings on that civil right, and of course a simple opening statement declaring my reason?



12050 simply states: (a) (1) (A) The sheriff of a county, upon proof that the
person applying is of good moral character, that good cause exists...

Can't argue that a good cause of "to exercise my civil rights" does not exist. Seems like denial due to lack of good cause goes flying out the window. 12050 ONLY requires A Good Cause to exist, not that YOUR good cause is good enough.

.

383green
04-06-2011, 6:10 PM
I don't have enough detailed knowledge of 12050 to answer your question, but I like this line of thinking. Getting the popcorn ready to see if this one holds water!

:popcorn:

PsychGuy274
04-06-2011, 6:14 PM
I don't have enough detailed knowledge of 12050 to answer your question, but I like this line of thinking. Getting the popcorn ready to see if this one holds water!

:popcorn:

Same here.

Tagged.

VAReact
04-06-2011, 6:25 PM
Makes sense to me.

taperxz
04-06-2011, 6:32 PM
This would bring us back to the scrutiny issue. Nordyke please.

dantodd
04-06-2011, 6:34 PM
Since the sheriff gets to decide if your "good cause" is adequate it is probably a good idea to write something down.

choprzrul
04-06-2011, 6:59 PM
dantodd: I contend that 12050 only requires a GC to EXIST, not be deemed by cleo to be 'good enough'. My GC exists the same as an already-issued person's GC exists. How can there be any debate as to whether or not it exists? The only way it wouldn't exist is if you leave that section blank, hence it would then be non-existant.

.

PsychGuy274
04-06-2011, 7:04 PM
dantodd: I contend that 12050 only requires a GC to EXIST, not be deemed by cleo to be 'good enough'. My GC exists the same as an already-issued person's GC exists. How can there be any debate as to whether or not it exists? The only way it wouldn't exist is if you leave that section blank, hence it would then be non-existant.

.

The reason I don't think this will help in anyway is because they could say, "Hmmm, that's a good point. Too bad I'm judging you as not having good moral character. Here's your denial."

wildhawker
04-06-2011, 7:11 PM
choprzul, you're making the same terminal assumption that the licensing authorities do: that the form a) complies with the law, and b) has force of law beyond that vested in it by 12050, et seq. The licensing authorities may [currently] require as little, or as much, "good cause" for any - and every - category of applicants as they wish, so long as those standards meet 14A EP under Guillory.

There are only a few sections of the form which are expressly substantiated in PC; everything else is a whole-cloth construct by a committee made up of the [old, bad] DOJ, Cal. Police Chief's Assoc., and Cal. State Sheriff's Assoc.

-Brandon

This would bring us back to the scrutiny issue. Nordyke please.

Nordyke and Richards, please - but do not expect those to be immediately bearing.

The reason I don't think this will help in anyway is because they could say, "Hmmm, that's a good point. Too bad I'm judging you as not having good moral character. Here's your denial."

Only until GMC = not prohibited, and even up to that point, it's a dangerous line for licensing authorities to take. I can make that a very uncomfortable and expensive option for them.

dantodd: I contend that 12050 only requires a GC to EXIST, not be deemed by cleo to be 'good enough'. My GC exists the same as an already-issued person's GC exists. How can there be any debate as to whether or not it exists? The only way it wouldn't exist is if you leave that section blank, hence it would then be non-existant.

Read it again:

12050(a)(1)(A)The sheriff of a county, upon proof that the person applying is of good moral character, that good cause exists for the issuance [] may issue to that person a license to carry a pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person...

choprzrul
04-06-2011, 7:33 PM
Thank you for weighing in Brandon.

Form verbage aside, can you explain penal code 12050 and "...that good cause exists..."? Would GC not exist via a fundamental civil right as addressed in McDonald?

.

RobG
04-06-2011, 8:02 PM
Non issuing sheriffs are going to continue to not issue until compelled to do so by court order/lawsuit. I would venture to say they have heard every excuse, er, good cause, to ccw at one time or another. Hell, Prieto is being sued (and we all pray that he loses, eventually) and he is still not compelled to issue. Its going to take more than "civil rights" talk to make headway with those particular sheriffs.

hoffmang
04-06-2011, 8:42 PM
Thank you for weighing in Brandon.

Form verbage aside, can you explain penal code 12050 and "...that good cause exists..."? Would GC not exist via a fundamental civil right as addressed in McDonald?

.

Again, this is the core point of Richards. Good Cause is "because it's my fundamental preexisting enumerated right." However, very few counties currently comply with the Constitution. We're suing Yolo county to prove that that formulation is correct.

-Gene

Blackhawk556
04-06-2011, 10:47 PM
^^^^That last sentence you wrote is the reason why I have money deducted automatically from my check for CGF. Thanks for putting up a good fight :-)

CHS
04-07-2011, 10:36 AM
Form verbage aside, can you explain penal code 12050 and "...that good cause exists..."? Would GC not exist via a fundamental civil right as addressed in McDonald?


It doesn't matter if good cause exists or not.

The Sheriff MAY issue a permit.

I have good cause. My good cause ABSOLUTELY exists due to a pre-existing fundamental right. This is not up for debate.

The problem is that the Sheriff, upon reading my undeniable good cause can still decide that he doesn't want to issue a permit. Because he MAY issue one.

Good cause isn't the problem. Good causes already exists for everyone. The PROBLEM with the law is that the Sheriff MAY issue.

The Sheriff can legally look you in the eye and go "Boy, you've got the most awesome undeniable good cause in the universe. You have better good cause than the president of the united states and the pope combined. I'm denying your permit." And the reason for that is that the law never says that he has to issue you a permit if you have good cause.

DeanW66
04-08-2011, 9:01 PM
Again, this is the core point of Richards. Good Cause is "because it's my fundamental preexisting enumerated right." However, very few counties currently comply with the Constitution. We're suing Yolo county to prove that that formulation is correct.

-Gene
^^^^That last sentence you wrote is the reason why I have money deducted automatically from my check for CGF. Thanks for putting up a good fight :-)

This kind of effort is also why I have money sent every paycheck via my online bill pay (as 'splained in my sig below).