PDA

View Full Version : 6 June 2011: Ventura Co. PRA case?


Paladin
06-03-2011, 12:13 AM
Are things still on for Monday, 6 June, at 8:20 am in re. the Ventura County PRA case?

wildhawker
06-03-2011, 12:13 AM
Yep. Gene and I are both planning to be there.

bigcalidave
06-03-2011, 12:13 AM
Cross your fingers!

Funtimes
06-03-2011, 12:28 AM
Any expectations?

jdberger
06-03-2011, 12:28 AM
Go get 'em!

GOEX FFF
06-03-2011, 2:04 AM
I have the day off from work on the 6th. I'm planning to be there in support!
Suit and tie already back from the dry cleaners. :)

Maestro Pistolero
06-03-2011, 2:24 AM
This one isn't ringing a bell, anyone got a link handy?

Paladin
06-03-2011, 5:32 AM
This one isn't ringing a bell, anyone got a link handy?

Don't have a link, but the briefest of overviews: CGF submitted CA PRA requests for CCW apps w/Ventura Co sheriffs office; sheriff thinks he's above the PRA law and CBS v. Block and refuses; thus CGF filed this lawsuit.

socal2310
06-03-2011, 5:59 AM
This one isn't ringing a bell, anyone got a link handy?

http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/index.php/Calguns_Foundation_v._Ventura_County

choprzrul
06-03-2011, 8:27 AM
Yep. Gene and I are both planning to be there.

Any chance that one of you could attend the SLO Sheriff's town hall meeting Tuesday evening in Los Osos on your way back through? Member Kali-Jax can set you up at a ocean front resort in Pismo Beach and I'll buy you a steak and a beer after the meeting.

.

steelrain82
06-03-2011, 12:56 PM
i dont own a suit or a tie but i will try and go as dressed up as i can( jeans and a polo) if i can get finished with my drs appt.

ford_nut
06-03-2011, 1:01 PM
What court room will this be in exactly? I'd like to go if I have the opportunity.

J.D.Allen
06-03-2011, 1:01 PM
Don't have a link, but the briefest of overviews: CGF submitted CA PRA requests for CCW apps w/Ventura Co sheriffs office; sheriff thinks he's above the PRA law and CBS v. Block and refuses; thus CGF filed this lawsuit.

Ventura county isn't the only sheriff that thinks he's above the law in regards to this request...

rodeoflyer
06-03-2011, 1:01 PM
i dont own a suit or a tie but i will try and go as dressed up as i can( jeans and a polo) if i can get finished with my drs appt.

Are you still active? Your signature suggests you have something professional to wear. ;)

steelrain82
06-03-2011, 1:03 PM
haha no im not and i dont think all the tailoring in the world would fix a 50lb gain

Smokeybehr
06-03-2011, 1:09 PM
haha no im not and i dont think all the tailoring in the world would fix a 50lb gain

You need to get your ***** out of the rack a little earlier, Marine! PT, it's good for you; PT, it's good for me! :D

wildhawker
06-03-2011, 1:15 PM
Don't have a link, but the briefest of overviews: CGF submitted CA PRA requests for CCW apps w/Ventura Co sheriffs office; sheriff thinks he's above the PRA law and CBS v. Block and refuses; thus CGF filed this lawsuit.

Additionally, defendants argue that the CPRA imposes costs and economic hardships they cannot bear during their budget woes. This is the most interesting and important open-government argument in California right now.

-Brandon

atomicwedgy
06-03-2011, 1:21 PM
ill be stuck at my desk. Good luck.

socal2310
06-03-2011, 9:31 PM
I've got the day off, I'll be there.

Ryan

socal2310
06-03-2011, 9:55 PM
What court room will this be in exactly? I'd like to go if I have the opportunity.

http://www.ventura.courts.ca.gov/venturaMasterFrames18.htm

hoffmang
06-03-2011, 10:31 PM
If you're coming please come as close to a tie and slacks as a minimum as possible. Wildhawker and I will be there in suit and tie.

-Gene

wildhawker
06-03-2011, 10:37 PM
If you're coming please come as close to a tie and slacks as a minimum as possible. Wildhawker and I will be there in suit and tie.

-Gene

Crap, and I only packed my shorts and flip flops. :chris: I think I'll Gorski it and go full-cas[ual]! (THIS IS A JOKE. THIS IS *ONLY* A JOKE. DO NOT DO THIS. IT IS 100% JOKE.)

In any case, what Gene said - representing our community well in public and especially in court is tremendously important.

-Brandon

Blackhawk556
06-04-2011, 12:07 AM
Additionally, defendants argue that the CPRA imposes costs and economic hardships they cannot bear during their budget woes. This is the most interesting and important open-government argument in California right now.

-Brandon

if this is allowed, won't gov't officials use this to hide their dirty jobs?
.................................................. ......................................
Investigator: "Where's those documents we requested?"

Government official: "sorry our budget it tight so I can't provide them"

...
Investigator: "It's ok, may be next time"

Gov't official: :43:

wildhawker
06-04-2011, 12:31 AM
Yep.

if this is allowed, won't gov't officials use this to hide their dirty jobs?
.................................................. ......................................
Investigator: "Where's those documents we requested?"

Government official: "sorry our budget it tight so I can't provide them"

...
Investigator: "It's ok, may be next time"

Gov't official: :43:

Connor P Price
06-04-2011, 12:34 AM
I'll be there. I'm quite looking forward to it.

ford_nut
06-04-2011, 1:32 AM
http://www.ventura.courts.ca.gov/venturaMasterFrames18.htm

Thankyou :)

wildhawker
06-04-2011, 1:47 AM
FYI, case number is: 56-2010-00383664

atomicwedgy
06-04-2011, 9:59 AM
maybe I can take a break from work and come by.

Funtimes
06-04-2011, 11:37 AM
Don't you guys pay the fee's? How can it cost them money.

hoffmang
06-04-2011, 11:52 AM
Don't you guys pay the fee's? How can it cost them money.

It's an excuse. Here is our reply (http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/ventura/Ventura-CGF-Reply-2011-04-29.pdf) to them.

-Gene

Quser.619
06-04-2011, 2:25 PM
Man when do you guys have time to sleep? I can just barely keep up to date on what's going on.

I'm just glad all of you are on our side

choprzrul
06-04-2011, 5:13 PM
It's an excuse. Here is our reply (http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/ventura/Ventura-CGF-Reply-2011-04-29.pdf) to them.

-Gene

Ohhhhh, how very nice

Further, the circularity of Respondents arguments is chilling when considered against the reason that CBS mandated that good cause statements are public records. Respondents correctly note that Plaintiffis an entity that advocates for the civil rights of gun owners. Petitioner posits that no gun owner in Ventura County would be required to disclose "[s]ensitive information" in their good cause statements if the Respondents accepted the Constitutionally-appropriate good cause statement
of "I wish to carry a firearm for self-defense" (as the Sheriffof Sacramento County now does after coming to an amicable agteement with Plaintiffs and being removed from a federal challenge).
However, because Ventura SheriffBrooks requires an applicant to prove some undefined nature of "heightened risk" to exercise 14th and 2nd Amendment rights, Plaintiffs have no choice but to review and make public which types of heightened risks are deigned "good cause" enough to allow a
Ventura County resident to exercise their firndamental right of self-efense13.

Funtimes
06-04-2011, 7:24 PM
It's an excuse. Here is our reply (http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/ventura/Ventura-CGF-Reply-2011-04-29.pdf) to them.

-Gene

I was thinking so, my attorney general wanted almost 7,000 dollars just to find out if there was ever memorandum or ruling on magazine capacities lol.

atomicwedgy
06-05-2011, 9:36 AM
a question, slightly off topic, however I am in Ventura county. Upon the release of this information, would it be most advisable to state as good cause a like cause which the sheriff approved?

Lastly, what is the likelihood that Ventura county, now Sheriff Dean, will follow suit with Sacramento county to avoid further litigation?

Connor P Price
06-05-2011, 9:42 AM
a question, slightly off topic, however I am in Ventura county. Upon the release of this information, would it be most advisable to state as good cause a like cause which the sheriff approved?

So long as that good cause actually applies to you, it certainly couldn't hurt.

hoffmang
06-05-2011, 10:40 AM
a question, slightly off topic, however I am in Ventura county. Upon the release of this information, would it be most advisable to state as good cause a like cause which the sheriff approved?

Lastly, what is the likelihood that Ventura county, now Sheriff Dean, will follow suit with Sacramento county to avoid further litigation?

On the former, that's the point. On the latter, I personally don't have enough information yet to make a prediction. However that point is going to be made to the Sheriff's office.

-Gene

atomicwedgy
06-05-2011, 5:49 PM
Exactly what can be expected of this hearing? Are we going to see another motion, another postponement? Are we actually going to hear a response from our Sheriff?

uyoga
06-05-2011, 9:31 PM
Based on the papers filed with the court by both sides, the only reasonable outcome I see is that the Court will issue a Writ ordering the Sheriff to comply with CalGuns' request.

". . . . . reasonable outcome . . . ."

Connor P Price
06-05-2011, 10:18 PM
Based on the papers filed with the court by both sides, the only reasonable outcome I see is that the Court will issue a Writ ordering the Sheriff to comply with CalGuns' request.

". . . . . reasonable outcome . . . ."

But alas, we're quite used to unreasonable outcomes aren't we?

KarLorian
06-06-2011, 6:45 AM
Well I got here a bit early.
I didn't want to be stuck in traffic, so I started over around 5:20 from Glendora and got here about five minutes ago.

Ready and waiting to wait.

choprzrul
06-06-2011, 6:53 AM
Well I got here a bit early.
I didn't want to be stuck in traffic, so I started over around 5:20 from Glendora and got here about five minutes ago.

Ready and waiting to wait.

Thank you for being there for all of the rest of us than can't be. Let team CGF know that team CGN is behind them and wishing them well today.

.

socal2310
06-06-2011, 7:17 AM
Well I got here a bit early.
I didn't want to be stuck in traffic, so I started over around 5:20 from Glendora and got here about five minutes ago.

Ready and waiting to wait.

That's quite a drive! We appreciate your support.

Ryan

morfeeis
06-06-2011, 7:32 AM
Well I got here a bit early.
I didn't want to be stuck in traffic, so I started over around 5:20 from Glendora and got here about five minutes ago.

Ready and waiting to wait.
As stated thanks for being there for those of us who cant........

Connor P Price
06-06-2011, 7:44 AM
Here I am with karlorian, who else is coming?

Sent from my SGH-T959 using Tapatalk

GOEX FFF
06-06-2011, 7:54 AM
My Wife and I are in the car and on the way!

I'll be the guy in the tie. ;)

socal2310
06-06-2011, 8:29 AM
Here and waiting. Docket's not posted yet.

socal2310
06-06-2011, 8:30 AM
Just opened the courtroom.

notme92069
06-06-2011, 8:32 AM
in CBS the sheriff (Block) argued "In each case, there is a clear-and
present danger to the safety of these persons which cannot be protected by law
enforcement resources." So he is saying that there is a documented threat they know of and they still can't protect someone. How would they protect someone from random acts of violence that they don't have previous warning of??????

choprzrul
06-06-2011, 8:33 AM
GO TEAM CGF/CGN !!!

.

longhairchris
06-06-2011, 8:46 AM
Wish I could be there. Go get em!

CSACANNONEER
06-06-2011, 8:55 AM
Can't wait for an update

voiceofreason
06-06-2011, 9:42 AM
Those of us that can't make it appreciate the updates.

HowardW56
06-06-2011, 9:43 AM
I'm sure there is an update coming....

Connor P Price
06-06-2011, 9:47 AM
My impression: judge was not receptive to county arguments.

Sent from my SGH-T959 using Tapatalk

Pelicandriver
06-06-2011, 9:55 AM
Who's the judge?

HowardW56
06-06-2011, 9:58 AM
Who's the judge?

The guy in the black robe... :rolleyes:

OK, so I'm a wise ***.....

Pelicandriver
06-06-2011, 10:01 AM
10,000 comedians out of work:)...seriously, what's the judges name?

Connor P Price
06-06-2011, 10:03 AM
I don't even remember, I wasn't to concerned with who the judge was, more interested in the arguments.

Sent from my SGH-T959 using Tapatalk

HowardW56
06-06-2011, 10:05 AM
10,000 comedians out of work:)...seriously, what's the judges name?

I think it is Judge Henry J. Walsh, he is assigned to Department 42 where it was scheduled to be heard...

choprzrul
06-06-2011, 10:05 AM
Is it done or ongoing? Thoughts from Gene & Brandon? Rule from the bench, or :twoweeks:

HowardW56
06-06-2011, 10:08 AM
It was taken under submission....

Connor P Price
06-06-2011, 10:18 AM
I think it is Judge Henry J. Walsh, he is assigned to Department 42 where it was scheduled to be heard...

That is correct. I knew I'd remember it if I saw it.

GOEX FFF
06-06-2011, 10:21 AM
Just got back!
First and foremost..... Gene and Jason, it was a pleasure formally meeting you both!
My Wife who came with me is a paralegal and loved Jason's tear-away cards. :)

As far as the proceedings went...I'm no legal eagle, but I remain optimistic.

As Gene noted as we left the courtroom, it was great that the whole group of us supporting Calguns, stood up and followed Gene and Jason out. :thumbsup:

The woman representing VC, to me seemed a little stressed out during the whole thing. She started out calmly, then began shifting in her seat a bit and raised her voice a couple of times.
This was also telling by the disposition on her face I took notice to during her exit.
Brooks was NOT there.

Judge Walsh seems like a pretty decent fellow.


Good Luck CGF!

atomicwedgy
06-06-2011, 10:27 AM
great job guys.

under consideration? release of information required? future court date set?

Connor P Price
06-06-2011, 10:35 AM
great job guys.

under consideration? release of information required? future court date set?

He's taking some time to consider. Judge mentioned wanting to look at some of the good cause statements so he could have an idea of what he'd be releasing.

At one point he made it clear to the county that they would be doing whatever he tells them to do. County presumed that they would have to spend quite a bit of money paying a deputy overtime to redact good cause statements. Judge assured them that if he says they have to produce everything then that overtime pay will be of no concern. However I believe this was just to illustrate a point, I'd expect that he will allow redaction and omission of certain entire pages.

Connor P Price
06-06-2011, 10:40 AM
Judge Walsh seems like a pretty decent fellow.

He certainly does. His line of questioning suggested to me that he was quite familiar with the subject.

Connor P Price
06-06-2011, 10:47 AM
As Gene noted as we left the courtroom, it was great that the whole group of us supporting Calguns, stood up and followed Gene and Jason out. :thumbsup:


I found that particularly interesting because of a question the Judge asked of Jason. Something to the effect of "You represent yourself as the attorney for the CalGuns Foundation, I don't see how that is a public interest group, can you explain that?" (Not a direct quote, simply my approximate recollection.)

Jason answered by explaining what the foundation does as far as education and litigation, which is of clear benefit to the public. His answer seemed to be more than satisfactory but to me seemed strengthened when half of the court room walked out with him. It seemed quite clear at that point that the 8 or so members of the public were there particularly because they were interested in the matter.

hoffmang
06-06-2011, 10:52 AM
We think it went well and expect a decision from the court in the next few weeks.

Thanks to everyone who attended. I do think it underscored that this was a public interest case.

-Gene

GOEX FFF
06-06-2011, 11:02 AM
I found that particularly interesting because of a question the Judge asked of Jason. Something to the effect of "You represent yourself as the attorney for the CalGuns Foundation, I don't see how that is a public interest group, can you explain that?" (Not a direct quote, simply my approximate recollection.)

Jason answered by explaining what the foundation does as far as education and litigation, which is of clear benefit to the public. His answer seemed to be more than satisfactory but to me seemed strengthened when half of the court room walked out with him. It seemed quite clear at that point that the 8 or so members of the public were there particularly because they were interested in the matter.

^^^ Exactly

Not to mention other millions of law-abiding people in this state who would benefit from having their right to self-defense by actually wanting to preserve their own life.
Why this and the concurrence of that is frowned upon is beyond reason...

atomicwedgy
06-06-2011, 11:33 AM
sounds like I should have left work for a few hours. A showing of public interest making an impact is something I did not consider.

Bigtime1
06-06-2011, 1:35 PM
The guy in the black robe... :rolleyes:

OK, so I'm a wise ***.....

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

Andy Taylor
06-06-2011, 2:13 PM
Thanks to Jason and to Gene. Also to those who attended.

Paladin
06-06-2011, 4:02 PM
We think it went well and expect a decision from the court in the next few weeks.
I'll interpret that as sometime before the end of July (being "conservative").

Or will the judge take a summer recess/vacation before then?

AndrewMendez
06-06-2011, 6:03 PM
I have seriously been waiting for this since it was announced, and of course I miss the thread til now. We should have made this a fire drill, and had as many people come down as possible. Who can I blame this on?
Oaklander?
JDBerger?
Wildhawker?
AndrewMendez?

hoffmang
06-06-2011, 6:38 PM
I'll interpret that as sometime before the end of July (being "conservative").

Or will the judge take a summer recess/vacation before then?

I get the feeling and based on this being state court that we'll have a written decision in approximately two weeks. No really.

-Gene

jdberger
06-06-2011, 8:07 PM
I have seriously been waiting for this since it was announced, and of course I miss the thread til now. We should have made this a fire drill, and had as many people come down as possible. Who can I blame this on?
Oaklander?
JDBerger?
Wildhawker?
AndrewMendez?

I gave it a teeny bit of though - but between the LA Truth event, Pleasant Hill City Council, LB Pride, etc. - not to mention that everyone and their brother has decided that a cold spring makes the perfect weather to file lawsuits (and don't forget family obligations) - I'm freaking exhausted.

My next event is SF Pride....

CSACANNONEER
06-06-2011, 8:43 PM
I have seriously been waiting for this since it was announced, and of course I miss the thread til now. We should have made this a fire drill, and had as many people come down as possible. Who can I blame this on?
Oaklander?
JDBerger?
Wildhawker?
AndrewMendez?

I blame that TemporarilyIncognito guy. I will agree though. If there had been a call out, I might have rescedualed my vaction by adding one more day (today) and showing up there instead of at woek. It would have been a great way to end several days of loading ammo and a 3 day weekend at a 1000 yard match.

sneaker pimp
06-06-2011, 9:07 PM
Can someone explain briefly what the significance of this is if we 'win.'

Meplat
06-06-2011, 9:12 PM
haha no im not and i dont think all the tailoring in the world would fix a 50lb gain

Your last tour in Iraq couldn't have been THAT long ago!

wildhawker
06-06-2011, 9:21 PM
Can someone explain briefly what the significance of this is if we 'win.'

1. Ca. Const. in re public records/open government means something;
2. Cal. Public Records Act means something;
3. Cal. Govt. Code 6254(u) and CBS v. Block, Inc. are controlling law;
4. Governments may not exempt public records because the economy is poor or their staff is limited, especially in the case of records classified as in the public's interest by the Cal. Supreme Ct.

-Brandon

socal2310
06-06-2011, 9:45 PM
Can someone explain briefly what the significance of this is if we 'win.'

In addition to what Wildhawker noted, there is also the fact that a Ventura County resident desiring a CCW would be able to look at the list of acceptable good causes and know whether or not they were eligible. Of course, since I'm 99% certain that "self defense" has been deemed an acceptable good cause statement a few times, it would make Ventura County de facto shall issue (or we sue again for equal protection).

Ryan

wildhawker
06-06-2011, 9:48 PM
In addition to what Wildhawker noted, there is also the fact that a Ventura County resident desiring a CCW would be able to look at the list of acceptable good causes and know whether or not they were eligible. Of course, since I'm 99% certain that "self defense" has been deemed an acceptable good cause statement a few times, it would make Ventura County de facto shall issue (or we sue again for equal protection).

Ryan

I tried to imply that in the list, but thank you for making it more clear.

Yes, we seek to copy and publish the "good cause" statements so as to effectively define and promulgate the contours of the sheriff's policy.

AndrewMendez
06-06-2011, 9:49 PM
I blame that TemporarilyIncognito guy. I will agree though. If there had been a call out, I might have rescedualed my vaction by adding one more day (today) and showing up there instead of at woek. It would have been a great way to end several days of loading ammo and a 3 day weekend at a 1000 yard match.

What happened to that TI guy? Did he just disappear? He must have gone away with spell check on your computer. ;)


I gave it a teeny bit of though - but between the LA Truth event, Pleasant Hill City Council, LB Pride, etc. - not to mention that everyone and their brother has decided that a cold spring makes the perfect weather to file lawsuits (and don't forget family obligations) - I'm freaking exhausted.

My next event is SF Pride....

I couldn't imagine why anyone would be busy with that. :rolleyes:
Really though, I need to spend less time on gun stuff, and more time working. The misses wants a ring on her finger...badly.
A day off for me though is probably a good idea, after all I did do the mud run in SD on Saturday, the Raahages shooting event on Friday, and spent the better part of the week before that half dead in the hospital, but not before shooting that Monday and a skeet clinic the Sunday before.. To hell with it, I will sleep when I am dead.

Scarecrow Repair
06-06-2011, 10:17 PM
Your last tour in Iraq couldn't have been THAT long ago!

Maybe she left Iraq 9 months ago ....

Paladin
06-06-2011, 11:59 PM
I get the feeling and based on this being state court that we'll have a written decision in approximately two weeks. No really.

-GeneOkay, I'll compromise: I'm marking my calendar on the last day of this month -- 3 1/2 weeks. ;)

If my calendar is correct, we might be getting some news re. Heller II by then too.

And there's that little date of 11 June coming up re. SFSO & CCWs... :chris:

hoffmang
06-07-2011, 12:42 AM
And there's that little date of 11 June coming up re. SFSO & CCWs... :chris:

That may stretch to the 14th based on some... activity....

-Gnee

KarLorian
06-07-2011, 3:58 AM
Sorry for not posting anything up earlier today, but I needed to get some sleep after the 2 hr drive back home.

As I noted in my other post, I got there around 6:40 AM and waited in the truck for another 30 minutes. I went into the courthouse and got to room 42 (which still had the docket for Friday the 3rd posted) around 7:20 and started to wait, Connor P Price arrived in another 15-20 minutes and we introduced ourselves and started to talk about the case and other things. While we were waiting a couple people struck up conversation and while cordial we remained vague on our purpose for being there until we knew that they were not opposing counsel for our case. We even got mistaken as lawyers a few times...

As time got closer to 8:20 more people arrived and then Gene and Jason got out of the elevator and then you could tell who the CalGunners were as we all lined up to shake hands with two of "The Right People". Once they opened the court room we filed in and sat down and got to wait some more!

Two cases preceded ours, a simple name change that the judge approved (barely a minute spent on that), and a motion of continuation in which it appeared that one of the defendants experts had taken a four to six week vacation making it impossible for the plaintiffs to get a deposition from her (that took about 20-30 minutes).

Our case came up and as already noted the judge asked about the public interest in CalGuns and our PRA request which Jason (who could be described as a giant of a man) responded well to. The county counsel cited CBS v Block multiple times both in reference to the number of applications (making a cost case for denying our request here) and to the danger it might present to releasing this info to the public (she did this twice but from both sides of the argument and the judge called her out on it).
Throughout the preceding the judge seemed to be on the fence. I think the judge came onto our side once Jason informed the judge of the disclaimer on page 14 of the application that all information may be released to the public.

One of the counties arguments against the cost of the PRA was that they would need a sworn officer working on OT pay to redact the information. To which the judge did not agree was needed.
He stated that if he gave proper instructions as to what needed to be redacted that anybody could perform the task. And then asked the county counsel: "yes/no you will comply (redaction) with what I decide?" To which she said "Yes."

To echo what the others have already said it was very impact-full when all of us got up and walked out together.

The best way to describe today: Optimistic




One word to describe what we in the Pro Civil RIGHT groups are doing:




WINNING

wildhawker
06-07-2011, 4:09 AM
Thanks for this excellent recounting of your experience and for being there to support our efforts. I'm sorry I missed meeting you and the others yesterday, but it's very pleasing to know we were so well-represented in the gallery.

-Brandon

Sorry for not posting anything up earlier today, but I needed to get some sleep after the 2 hr drive back home.

As I noted in my other post, I got there around 6:40 AM and waited in the truck for another 30 minutes. I went into the courthouse and got to room 42 (which still had the docket for Friday the 3rd posted) around 7:20 and started to wait, Connor P Price arrived in another 15-20 minutes and we introduced ourselves and started to talk about the case and other things. While we were waiting a couple people struck up conversation and while cordial we remained vague on our purpose for being there until we knew that they were not opposing counsel for our case. We even got mistaken as lawyers a few times...

As time got closer to 8:20 more people arrived and then Gene and Jason got out of the elevator and then you could tell who the CalGunners were as we all lined up to shake hands with two of "The Right People". Once they opened the court room we filed in and sat down and got to wait some more!

Two cases preceded ours, a simple name change that the judge approved (barely a minute spent on that), and a motion of continuation in which it appeared that one of the defendants experts had taken a four to six week vacation making it impossible for the plaintiffs to get a deposition from her (that took about 20-30 minutes).

Our case came up and as already noted the judge asked about the public interest in CalGuns and our PRA request which Jason (who could be described as a giant of a man) responded well to. The county counsel cited CBS v Block multiple times both in reference to the number of applications (making a cost case for denying our request here) and to the danger it might present to releasing this info to the public (she did this twice but from both sides of the argument and the judge called her out on it).
Throughout the preceding the judge seemed to be on the fence. I think the judge came onto our side once Jason informed the judge of the disclaimer on page 14 of the application that all information may be released to the public.

One of the counties arguments against the cost of the PRA was that they would need a sworn officer working on OT pay to redact the information. To which the judge did not agree was needed.
He stated that if he gave proper instructions as to what needed to be redacted that anybody could perform the task. And then asked the county counsel: "yes/no you will comply (redaction) with what I decide?" To which she said "Yes."

To echo what the others have already said it was very impact-full when all of us got up and walked out together.

The best way to describe today: Optimistic




One word to describe what we in the Pro Civil RIGHT groups are doing:




WINNING

J.D.Allen
06-07-2011, 8:24 AM
In addition to what Wildhawker noted, there is also the fact that a Ventura County resident desiring a CCW would be able to look at the list of acceptable good causes and know whether or not they were eligible. Of course, since I'm 99% certain that "self defense" has been deemed an acceptable good cause statement a few times, it would make Ventura County de facto shall issue (or we sue again for equal protection).

Ryan

And a few other counties, I suspect, who until now have also been reluctant to tell us what their definition of good cause is...

CSACANNONEER
06-07-2011, 10:26 AM
What happened to that TI guy? Did he just disappear? He must have gone away with spell check on your computer. ;)



After a few Anchor Steams, my spell check never seems to function properly.:p

socal2310
06-07-2011, 1:50 PM
After a few Anchor Steams, my spell check never seems to function properly.:p

Paging Kestryll,

We demand Mail Goggles (http://arstechnica.com/web/news/2008/10/mail-goggles-a-breathlyzer-test-for-your-gmail.ars) for CalGuns!

Ryan

Connor P Price
06-07-2011, 2:01 PM
After a few Anchor Steams, my spell check never seems to function properly.:p

Good stuff! Just had anchor steam for the first time a couple days ago, I was pleasantly surprised.

Sent from my SGH-T959 using Tapatalk

Glock22Fan
06-07-2011, 3:18 PM
In addition to what Wildhawker noted, there is also the fact that a Ventura County resident desiring a CCW would be able to look at the list of acceptable good causes and know whether or not they were eligible. Of course, since I'm 99% certain that "self defense" has been deemed an acceptable good cause statement a few times, it would make Ventura County de facto shall issue (or we sue again for equal protection).

Ryan

This has in fact been the case with just about every case that has been undertaken by all the main actors, including those with a penchant for costume.

Unfortunately, there has not yet been a case (to the best of my knowledge) where the judge has actually agreed with that viewpoint. Invariably, there is some "other" factor that makes "Joe Millionaire"'s Self Protection more important (in the judge's eyes) than your "I have been beaten to death four times already and fear that next time it might be fatal".

atomicwedgy
06-08-2011, 8:31 AM
very hopeful we will follow suit with sacramento county

emcon5
06-08-2011, 8:51 AM
very hopeful we will follow suit with sacramento county

:confused: Sacramento county is pretty much shall-issue, isn't it?

Librarian
06-08-2011, 1:07 PM
:confused: Sacramento county is pretty much shall-issue, isn't it?

Yes, it is - see the thread in the CCW forum.

atomicwedgy
06-08-2011, 10:15 PM
virtual shall issue here we come! My application is waiting! Waiting for GC review that is

wildhawker
06-08-2011, 10:17 PM
virtual shall issue here we come! My application is waiting! Waiting for GC review that is

What GC review? In Sacto, "self-defense" is fine.

See: http://calgunsfoundation.org/resources/ccw-initiative/122-sacramento.html

Markus
06-09-2011, 1:44 AM
any love for orange county?

Mikedril
06-09-2011, 5:36 PM
I'm waiting to apply until I hear the outcome from this case. I've had a CCW in Kern county, but let it laps. Sure would like to get one here in VC and will support the cause in every way I can.

Meplat
06-09-2011, 6:28 PM
What happened to that TI guy? Did he just disappear? He must have gone away with spell check on your computer. ;)


The world is a much less stressful place when you don't know how to spell. That way you are not bothered by others' mistakes.




Really though, I need to spend less time on gun stuff, and more time working. The misses wants a ring on her finger...badly.


If you promise to show up when needed for the next year we could take up a collection for the ring.

Meplat
06-09-2011, 6:31 PM
Maybe she left Iraq 9 months ago ....

Smart ***. :p

Meplat
06-09-2011, 6:51 PM
We even got mistaken as lawyers a few times...


Wow! I'm an ag kind of guy. When I put on a suite I just look like a farm hand in a suite!:(

wildhawker
06-09-2011, 6:53 PM
Wow! I'm an ag kind of guy. When I put on a suite I just look like a farm hand in a suite!:(

That's just the right look, actually: people caring so much as to go beyond their norm and/or comfort zones to show the court and issue before it the respect we wish them to return.

Meplat
06-09-2011, 7:06 PM
That's just the right look, actually: people caring so much as to go beyond their norm and/or comfort zones to show the court and issue before it the respect we wish them to return.

Wow! Never thought of it that way, very perceptive!

Midian
06-09-2011, 8:31 PM
Boy, I'd be pleased as punch of Ventura County eventually went Shall Issue....or at least had the minimum respect for it's citizenry to grant CCW for self defense.

Or Elf Defense, if that's how you roll.

jdberger
06-10-2011, 2:17 AM
Wow! I'm an ag kind of guy. When I put on a suite I just look like a farm hand in a suite!:(

Remember, in Ventura County, you look at a person's boots first. The money's in the dirty ones. Ags are pretty darn respected in VC.

Of course, it does help a little to know the difference between a suite and a suit. ;)

hoffmang
06-10-2011, 11:57 PM
An update:


SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA,
MINUTE ORDER
TIME: 12:02:00 PM
Judicial Officer Presiding: Henry Walsh
COUNTY OF VENTURA
VENTURA
DATE: 06/09/2011 DEPT: 42
CLERK: Hellmi McIntyre
REPORTER/ERM:
CASE NO: 56-2010-00383664-CU-WM-VTA
CASE TITLE: The Calguns Foundation Inc vs. County of Ventura
CASE CATEGORY: Civil - Unlimited CASE TYPE: Writ of Mandate
STOLO
APPEARANCES STOLO
Stolo
Counsel for the Respondent County is requested to submit under seal, directly to courtroom 42, 10
randomly selected examples of question 13 as submitted by applicants for a concealed weapons permit.
The declaration of Deputy Robertson cannot be evaluated in a vacuum.
Clerk to give notice.

-Gene

GOEX FFF
06-11-2011, 12:29 AM
An update:



-Gene

Thanks Gene!

I recall Judge Walsh stating wanting to see examples of GC on pg 13.
Looks like he got right on that. :)

I have a VC CCW app in front of me to follow the page numbers.

anthonyca
06-11-2011, 12:52 AM
Go get em! I filed a PRA with the San Mateo PD and they just ignored me and did not respond in the time required by law. I live near the station so I stopped by in person and they wouldn't talk to me. They said the person in charge of that department was too busy. I then heard her say from the other room, that she knew who I was and she would get around to it. They used the excuse that they had just moved as the reason that they did not comply with the law as a response to my letter noting California law response times for a PRA request. Too bad we can't use that excuse to ignore the law.

They finally gave me a very limited amount of information that was conveniently missing the information I was seeking, there was a letter attached stating their reasons why they did not have to release the information.

This was nothing to do with trying to help RKBA or anything like that. Long story short, someone can file a police report against you (it's usually an ex wife or gf) that report can be used to defame you, cause you employment problems when you have never had any before and just really &$"! You off and the police say you have no right to see the report.

/rant.

Thank you calguns for all you do.

hoffmang
06-11-2011, 12:57 AM
Skip San Mateo City PD and just go to the County Sheriff. If you have any level of good cause above "self defense" you can get a permit from him.

-Gnee

Connor P Price
06-11-2011, 1:05 AM
This is good to see so soon after the case was heard. Thanks for the update Gene.

I'm reasonably confident we'll be seeing good cause statements in the near future from Ventura, I'm just wondering what the level of redaction will be. It seems that 10 is a rather small sample size for Judge Walsh to select as they are usually fairly short. I cant imagine much more redaction being called for than addresses, names, business names, or specific locations.

On the bright side, the more redaction there is, the more fun the statements will be to use as mad-libs.

anthonyca
06-11-2011, 1:14 AM
Skip San Mateo City PD and just go to the County Sheriff. If you have any level of good cause above "self defense" you can get a permit from him.

-Gnee

I was just trying to get a police report released. I wasn't trying to get a CCW.

My brother just moved back from Colorado where he had a CCW and he feels naked now with out one. What would be good cause in San Mateo county?

hoffmang
06-11-2011, 1:22 AM
My brother just moved back from Colorado where he had a CCW and he feels naked now with out one. What would be good cause in San Mateo county?

He'd need something more than that for now.

-Gene

GOEX FFF
06-11-2011, 1:23 AM
So, I do have some questions per -
"10 randomly selected examples of question 13 as submitted by applicants for a concealed weapons permit."

1.) How are these examples randomly selected?
Close their eyes and pick from a bin?

2.) Is the county selecting these examples by reading each one and picking out which example would most benefit their case?

Does it matter or not in "this" case if those examples have "self-defense" in them?
I'm kinda thinking not, since this is review of the GC statements to basically to see if they jeopardize the "safety" of the applicant and what if anything needs to be redacted or not for that purpose.
Which leads me back to my questions.

Maestro Pistolero
06-11-2011, 1:32 AM
So, I do have some questions per -
"10 randomly selected examples of question 13 as submitted by applicants for a concealed weapons permit."

1.) How are these examples randomly selected?
Close their eyes and pick from a bin?

2.) Is the county selecting these examples by reading each one and picking out which example would most benefit their case?

Does it matter or not in "this" case if those examples have "self-defense" in them?
I'm kinda thinking not, since this is review of the GC statements to basically to see if they jeopardize the "safety" of the applicant and what if anything needs to be redacted or not for that purpose.
Which leads me back to my questions.

THIS ∆

That was first thing that popped into my head, too. They should have ask for all of the last 50 applications, in consecutive order by date.

Connor P Price
06-11-2011, 1:37 AM
So, I do have some questions per -
"10 randomly selected examples of question 13 as submitted by applicants for a concealed weapons permit."

1.) How are these examples randomly selected?
Close their eyes and pick from a bin?

I wondered the same thing at first, I wouldn't be surprised if its less than random.

2.) Is the county selecting these examples by reading each one and picking out which example would most benefit their case?

Maybe so, although maybe my tinfoil hat is on to tight, I'm not usually much of a black helicopter type so I'm not certain. However, even if they hand picked the most detailed 10 out of the entire batch it really doesn't help them that much. The judge may recognize from them that sometimes specific information is used and needs to be redacted, but do we care? I don't mind if names and addresses are left out.

Does it matter or not in "this" case if those examples have "self-defense" in them?
I'm kinda thinking not, since this is review of the GC statements to basically to see if they jeopardize the "safety" of the applicant and what if anything needs to be redacted or not for that purpose.
Which leads me back to my questions.

Operating on the assumption that we'll get redacted statements I dont think it matters if self defense appears in every example or none. Either way the words "self defense" or the general concept for that matter isn't something that will be removed. Therefore we still end up with our equal protection argument.

My thoughts in bold.

bigcalidave
06-11-2011, 1:38 AM
I would hope that the judge would recognize the filtering of an attempt to not submit random examples.

GOEX FFF
06-11-2011, 1:49 AM
Thanks Conner for your input. You make good points.

I also agree with Maestro, that that would be the most predominant way to get to best "randomness" out of the apps.

Connor P Price
06-11-2011, 1:58 AM
Thanks Conner for your input. You make good points.

I also agree with Maestro, that that would be the most predominant way to get to best "randomness" out of the apps.

I'm with you there, saying "random" without any real oversight to be sure its random doesn't necessarily yield random results. Maestro's idea would probably work better to ensure a more representative sample.

Either way, I'm of the impression that we're getting what we want out of this one. We'll all owe CGF, Jason Davis, and any others involved a big thanks if I'm right.