CCW: There is NO SUBSTITUTE!

[Paladin]

I had posted the below in another thread, but now see that it deserves its own, rather then keep taking that other thread OT.

I'll post my initial posting below and then my reply to Mike Haas in a second posting.

*****

Unfortunately the democratic process in this state has been totally circumvented by gerrymandering. We really don't have the politicians we deserve in Sacramento.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GerrymanderingLook on the bright side: gerrymandering does NOT affect sheriffs elections (next in 2010) and sheriffs elections determine whether you can easily get a CCW or not (assuming you've never been convicted of a felony, or a drug crime, or been institutionalized). Kern, OC, Fresno, Mendocino and I've even heard rumors that Riverside SOs are now CCW "friendly" (in addition to a LOT of smaller/rural counties).

Sure, keep fighting w/Mike Haas and the NRA/CalNRA in Sacto, but don't forget to organize at the local level for those sheriffs races. The primaries, which often determine the winner, are in 2 yrs. The candidates must file in 1 1/2 yrs. That means you've got less than 1 yr to target all the local ranges, gun shops, gun clubs, sportsmens clubs, etc in your and neighboring counties (since many on the fringes of your county may go to those places in the next county over) to hit w/flyers to start a local (i.e., countywide) organization and start fund raising. Plus, if your incumbent is an anti, you've got to find a viable pro-CCW candidate who's willing to enter the fight. There's no time to waste! You can USE www.californiaccw.org as a rallying point for your county (that's one of the reasons it was started). There's another forum, www.calccw.com, that may also be of help.

Remember, you're more likely to need a CCW than a AW. Plus, there are a lot of viable alternatives for an AW (OLLs, Minis, M1As, M1 carbine, LARs), but there really is NO SUBSTITUTE for having a CCW when you need it.

[Paladin]

The best place to organize locally - for sheriff/CCW and all gun issues - is your local NRA Members' CouncilNot quite true. Will the local NRA Members' Councils organize to recruit a pro-CCW sheriffs candidate to run against an anti-CCW incumbent? Will they then support that specific pro-CCW candidate w/their volunteers and fundraising? Will they produce bumper stickers, lawn signs and other signage to increase name recognition, and produce flyers to distribute at ranges, gun stores, and gun clubs for that one pro-CCW candidate? IIRC, due to their tax status, the NRA can do NONE of these vital campaign activities.

Besides, is it true that the NRA gave an "A" rating (http://independent.com/news/2007/apr/12/slow-draw/ and http://californiaccw.org/posts/list/1460.page) to Santa Barbara County Sheriff Bill Brown, a sheriff who now says:

"There has to be a reason other than ‘I want to protect myself.'" Brown remarked. "Were that the standard, arguably we'd be issuing thousands of concealed-weapons licenses, and I don't believe that would be a good public-safety policy." (http://www.santamariatimes.com/articles/2007/05/13/news/news02.txt).

What's even more interesting is that article goes on to say, "Brown has received some public backlash for his strict scrutiny of permit applications, even though he made it clear during his election campaign that 'my policy would be to issue licenses sparingly,' he said." That really makes me wonder standards the NRA uses when issuing ratings for sheriffs. If they gave Brown an "A" rating, a liberal CCW issuance policy sure didn't seem to have been a priority to the NRA in the Santa Barbara Co sheriff's race.

[Crazed_SS]

It doesnt matter who the sherriff is since you have to have good cause to get a permit. For the vast majority of us, "Self-defense" is our good cause.. that simply isnt good enough (for the authorities), even in a place like Orange County which issues more permits than other counties.

[M. Sage]

Self-defense is a perfectly good cause.

Some counties, the only good cause is "I'm a celebrity" or "I donated big $$$$ to your election campaign."

Or, the always-popular "I'm a politician."

Point is, we shouldn't HAVE to beg and plead our "cause." It should be shall-issue.

[Crazed_SS]

I agree 100%.

I think we'd have a better chance of getting Shall-Issue CCW passed as a proposition before we got Sherriffs to start handing them out like candy. If I win the lottery, Ill put in a couple million to work towards getting a CCW proposition on the ballot :)

[Paladin]

It doesnt matter who the sherriff is since you have to have good cause to get a permit."It doesnt matter who the sherriff" is just so wrong. If you don't believe me, go to www.californiaconcealedcarry.com and get in touch w/"Billy Jack" to ask him what it was like under Gates and how that compares to what it is like now under Carona. You can read about his case at: http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=58468

Sure you still need to have "good cause" but it is up to each county's sheriff to determine what they'll accept as "good cause." All you have to do is go to www.californiaccw.org to the various county subforums to see the wide range of "good causes" that fly with different sheriffs. Or just go to: http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/statistics.php and download the .pdf titled, "Carry Concealed Weapon Licenses Report" to see the wide range of issuance numbers and then compare that to those counties' population. You will see that who is sheriff is CRITICAL to determining how difficult it is to obtain a CCW in CA.

For the vast majority of us, "Self-defense" is our good cause.. that simply isnt good enough, even in a place like Orange County which issues more permits than other counties.Sure, a hyphenated word "self-defense" or the phrase "to exercise my Right to Keep and Bear Arms" will not fly as GC in OC, but virtually NOTHING will fly w/SF SO/PD. Look again at those issuance numbers.

Re. OC: go to: www.calccw.com to find out how to succeed there. OC is definitely doable by any lawabiding gun enthusiast. One of the founders at calccw was tasked by Carona to increase the numbers of OC CCWs so that OC will beat Kern as the most issuing county in the state. Did you hear that? Sheriff Carona is competing against Sheriff Youngblood to have the most CCW issuing county in the state! And you say it doesn't matter who is sheriff? Hello? :rolleyes:

http://www.fulldisclosure.net/flash/VideoBlogs/VideoBlog31.php
http://www.fulldisclosure.net/flash/VideoBlogs/VideoBlog3.php

[Crazed_SS]

"It doesnt matter who the sherriff" is just so wrong. If you don't believe me, go to www.californiaconcealedcarry.com and get in touch w/"Billy Jack" to ask him what it was like under Gates and how that compares to what it is like now under Carona. You can read about his case at: http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=58468

Sure you still need to have "good cause" but it is up to each county's sheriff to determine what they'll accept as "good cause." All you have to do is go to www.californiaccw.org to the various county subforums to see the wide range of "good causes" that fly with different sheriffs. Or just go to: http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/statistics.php and download the .pdf titled, "Carry Concealed Weapon Licenses Report" to see the wide range of issuance numbers and then compare that to those counties' population. You will see that who is sheriff is CRITICAL to determining how difficult it is to obtain a CCW in CA.

Sure, a hyphenated word "self-defense" or the phrase "to exercise my Right to Keep and Bear Arms" will not fly as GC in OC, but virtually NOTHING will fly w/SF SO/PD. Look again at those issuance numbers.

Re. OC: go to: www.calccw.com to find out how to succeed there. OC is definitely doable by any lawabiding gun enthusiast. One of the founders at calccw was tasked by Carona to increase the numbers of OC CCWs so that OC will beat Kern as the most issuing county in the state. Did you hear that? Sheriff Carona is competing against Sheriff Youngblood to have the most CCW issuing county in the state! And you say it doesn't matter who is sheriff? Hello? :rolleyes:

http://www.fulldisclosure.net/flash/VideoBlogs/VideoBlog31.php
http://www.fulldisclosure.net/flash/VideoBlogs/VideoBlog3.php

I been over to californiaccw.org .. in fact, I'm probably one of the first few people to register there. I've read all the posts by BJ and honestly, I dont have the time to go through all that craziness to get a permit. If the Sherriff wont give me one for my true good cause (which is self-defense), then screw him.

I have friends that live in OC and they havent applied because they simply dont have a good cause. They're just normal guys. They dont transport expensive stuff, hike alone in the woods, shoot in competitions, or anything like that. Just regular people who go to work and pay taxes. They're good cause statement should be a single sentence. "I am a law-abiding citizen who obeys the law and I should be able to legally carry a firearm to protect myself" .. Of course that wont fly..

Jumping through hoops and fabricating intricate good cause statements to get a permit isnt the solution IMO.

[Glock22Fan]

Some sheriffs/chiefs will accept "Personal Protection," some want "I'm a celebrity and I'll give your campaign big bucks if you will make an exception for me," and some, frankly, are "F*** off. No way, Jose." I won't mention names, but the last two are really big cities.

If this is fair, then I'm the Queen of Sheba.

Yes, getting the state to go "Shall Issue" is one way to fix it. Very hard, in my opinion. With a legislature that is currently supporting lunatic proposals such as micro-stamping and restricted ammo sales, how do you expect to get "Shall issue?" You need to replace dozens of politicians to stand a chance. Pretty well a revolution. Much like expecting Massachusetts to ditch Kennedy & Kerry in favor of Yosemite Sam and Charlton Heston. Unlikely to happen.

However, there's an old saying "How do you eat an elephant?" to which the answer is "bite by bite." Replacing one (or three) anti sheriffs is much easier (if we pick our fights right) than replacing half the legislature. Then we can pick off some more. Eventually, we will hopefully get it down to just a few bad sheriffs, and maybe then (with lots of peaceful carrying demonstrating the point) the legislature will be more likely to listen.

In the meantime, a lot of these sheriffs are acting illegally. It is an uphill battle to fight "I'm The Law Around Here," but at Team Billy Jack we are committed to doing just that. Again, just one bite at a time.

One analogy is guerilla fighting. You can oppose an enemy with massed tanks and a frontal attack. More effective, in manpower and in results, are sniping raids against small, easily defeated (because you concentrate your resources and pick your target), targets.

IMHO, Palladin has it right. But we mustn't just say "Vote for this candidate because he (she) will issue CCW's." It will be far more effective if we can fight on other issues, "Sheriff XYZ frequently speaks out in favor of a certain widely distrusted sect with strange beliefs. Do we really want him for another term?" or "Sheriff YYY can't tell the difference between a legitimate massage parlor and a brothel" (yes, this are both real examples.)


Go for it, and stop crying out for miracles.

[383green]

I've even heard rumors that Riverside SOs are now CCW "friendly"


Unless something has changed very recently, it's my understanding that establishing "good cause" to be issued a CCW permit in Riverside County consists of ensuring that your murder has been well-documented by filing the appropriate police reports.

Ok, I'm exaggerating a little bit... but only just a little bit.

[Glock22Fan]

Unless something has changed very recently, it's my understanding that establishing "good cause" to be issued a CCW permit in Riverside County consists of ensuring that your murder has been well-documented by filing the appropriate police reports.

Ok, I'm exaggerating a little bit... but only just a little bit.

I've also heard the rumor that Riverside has backed off slightly - don't know yet whether that is true.

If anyone knows for sure, please post it and email me, as we'd like to know.

However, on a lighter note, even that Good Cause wouldn't fly in Los Angeles County. "so, you're dead. That's tough. So, where's your evidence that you are going to be killed again?"

[nosewitdot]

riverside? CCW friendly? whats going on here? is this a dream?

[Punkermonkey]

Unless Riverside has made drastic changes since 2005, they are still about as hard to get as Sacramento, Los Angeles, and the other red cities.

[mikehaas]

Not quite true. Will the local NRA Members' Councils organize to recruit a pro-CCW sheriffs candidate to run against an anti-CCW incumbent?
Sure, why not? If the candidate can obtain an NRA endorsement (the Members' Council can help there), the MC can fully support ANY pro-gun candidate in a local election, for sheriff or dog-catcher.

Will they then support that specific pro-CCW candidate w/their volunteers and fundraising?
Yep, I have in my MC. Well, I haven't had a pro-CCW sheriff candidate (Rupf is entrenched in CoCoCo) but have supported endorsed candidates for other local elections. Checks have to be made out to the candidates campaign, but why not? MCs can hold "meet & greet"s where NRA-endorsed candidates can address members and accept donations.

Will they produce bumper stickers, lawn signs and other signage to increase name recognition, and produce flyers to distribute at ranges, gun stores, and gun clubs for that one pro-CCW candidate? IIRC, due to their tax status, the NRA can do NONE of these vital campaign activities.
No, because such would be a violation of campaign-finance laws, being "in-kind" contributions to a political candidate. But MCs can and will distribute the CAMPAIGN'S materials and even provide volunteers to work precincts, man phone banks - whatever grassroots activities that are needed. All of that is A-OK and have done it myself.

Besides, is it true that the NRA gave an "A" rating (http://independent.com/news/2007/apr/12/slow-draw/ and http://californiaccw.org/posts/list/1460.page) to Santa Barbara County Sheriff Bill Brown, a sheriff who now says:

"There has to be a reason other than ‘I want to protect myself.'" Brown remarked. "Were that the standard, arguably we'd be issuing thousands of concealed-weapons licenses, and I don't believe that would be a good public-safety policy." (http://www.santamariatimes.com/articles/2007/05/13/news/news02.txt)... (snip)
I have no idea. But having an MC involved will only insure that NRA is provided an even MORE ACCURATE VIEW of where a candidate REALLY stands, being right in the locale and possiblty having direct experience with the candidate (good or bad).

In fact, Members' Councils will VALIDATE the process and uncover BS. For example, last election, a wanna-be sheriff running against Mike Corona in Orange Co, stirred up stink charging anti-CCW practices, citing a very low number of approvals. But members' Councils folks (who know Mike Corona well) revealed the truth - that Corona has approved well over 90% of applicants and the reason so few are approved are that SO FEW APPLY. Not having an experienced pro-gun group involved leaves local gun-owners prey to such political "spin". (Thankfully, Corona won in a landslide. Gun-owners really need to be as loyal to him as he's been to us.)

You can't really trust candidates running for office, especially if they are NOT incumbents and have no voting record or ANY record. That's even true for those that SAY they are pro-gun. An NRA Members' Council can be a powerful tool in getting at the truth.

So I standby my original statement - NRA Members' Councils are the BEST VEHICLE TO ORGANIZE LOCALLY to protect your gun rights both in legislative AND elective issues. PERIOD.
http://calnra.com/volunteer/

Mike

[Paladin]

Thanks for taking the time for the thoughtful and thorough reply, Mike.

I'm glad to hear that I was wrong and that many of these vital political activities CAN be done the our local Members' Councils.

Re. Santa Barbara Sheriff Brown: If the NRA made a mistake in giving him an "A," we -- as the bumper stickers say, "I'm the NRA!" -- should just admit it and try to find a better candidate to replace him as sheriff in 2010.

Re. "You can't really trust candidates running for office, especially if they are NOT incumbents and have no voting record or ANY record. That's even true for those that SAY they are pro-gun." That can't be over emphasized. Politicians -- and sheriffs are both LEOs and politicians -- will say almost anything an audience wants to hear in order to get their votes. Once they're in office, that's when they show their true colors.

[Paladin]

I have no idea. But having an MC involved will only insure that NRA is provided an even MORE ACCURATE VIEW of where a candidate REALLY stands, being right in the locale and possiblty having direct experience with the candidate (good or bad).

Today I happened across:
http://waronguns.blogspot.com/2006/10/nras-rated-citizen-disarmament.html

As you can see (unless this is a Photoshop), the NRA ILA-PVF gave candidate Brown an "A." Also, as you can read, there is quite a fight going on re how that happened (http://waronguns.blogspot.com/2007/05/why-is-nra-ignoring-santa-barbara-gun.html).

Once an issuing sheriff gets in office and starts issuing, those CCW'ers have a vested interest in the sheriffs races and if someone gets elected that pulls their permits, that sheriff has just made permant political enemies who will fight him until they get rid of him. The more people that get CCWs in a county, the less likely that county will ever go back to restrictive issuance. It will be interesting to see if Brown gets reelected.

In fact, Members' Councils will VALIDATE the process and uncover BS. For example, last election, a wanna-be sheriff running against Mike Corona in Orange Co, stirred up stink charging anti-CCW practices, citing a very low number of approvals. But members' Councils folks (who know Mike Corona well) revealed the truth - that Corona has approved well over 90% of applicants and the reason so few are approved are that SO FEW APPLY. Not having an experienced pro-gun group involved leaves local gun-owners prey to such political "spin". (Thankfully, Corona won in a landslide. Gun-owners really need to be as loyal to him as he's been to us.)Yes, I remember the misinformation that was being bandied about by Carona's opponents. Seems like there were experienced and organized people in Santa Barbara Co, but something still went wrong. But that's not my fight, I don't live near there. I'll let them and the NRA work things out.

Does the NRA or their local Members Councils encourage their members to apply for CCWs in issuing counties (see CA county map link in my sig line)?

[Paladin]

Another example of why "Shall Issue" CCW reform is more important than OLLs or repealing the AWB: Last week, many students around the county at 110 colleges/universities wore empty holsters as a form of protest against bans on CCW'ing while on campus. That made me remember the origins of the CA and later federal AWB -- the Stockton schoolyard massacre. Again, it was a "gun-free" zone that was hit. If CA had been "Shall Issue" and a teacher, administrator or janitor was CCW'ing, that shooting may not have been as bad as it was and we may not have had the Feinstein state and federal "assault weapon" bans, one of which still oppresses us in the PRK.

[M. Sage]

I wouldn't say it's "more important," but it's right up there.

One of the things I'd call highly important is getting rid of that "safe handgun" list, and now the microstamping... CCW won't help if it's near impossible to get something to carry...

[gotgunz]

I support and commend you guys for going after the officials that are running blatantly illegal CCW policies but I also hope that your lawsuits don't have the opposite intended affect and screw it up for those of us that reside in "shall issue" counties.

[FreedomIsNotFree]

I support and commend you guys for going after the officials that are running blatantly illegal CCW policies but I also hope that your lawsuits don't have the opposite intended affect and screw it up for those of us that reside in "shall issue" counties.

There are no "shall-issue" counties. There are some counties that may be very liberal with their issuance, but none are shall issue. Shall issue is when its required, by law, to issue as long as the applicant doesn't have any felonies or other serious charges...

I would love to see CA as a shall issue state. I for one had some minor brushes with the law when I was young that would definitely keep me from receiving a CCW license, even in Orange or Kern counties. In any state that is "shall-issue" nothing in my past would prohibit me from getting a license.

On another note...I have an issue with asking the government for permission to protect my family and myself. I believe I have a god given right, obligation even, to protect what is dear to me....and no government bureaucrat can tell me otherwise. Of course, acting on what I believe is right would lead to me losing my guns and freedom.....what a great government we have....:rolleyes:

[N6ATF]

Unless something has changed very recently, it's my understanding that establishing "good cause" to be issued a CCW permit in Riverside County consists of ensuring that your murder has been well-documented by filing the appropriate police reports.

Ok, I'm exaggerating a little bit... but only just a little bit.

Hahahahaha.

[gotgunz]

There are no "shall-issue" counties. There are some counties that may be very liberal with their issuance,.......

yada, yada, yada; I know what shall issue means (how do you think I got a Florida CCW?), that is why I added the quotation marks to the phrase.


I would love to see CA as a shall issue state. I for one had some minor brushes with the law when I was young that would definitely keep me from receiving a CCW license, even in Orange or Kern counties. In any state that is "shall-issue" nothing in my past would prohibit me from getting a license.

So did I, but I still got that coveted piece of flimsy paper right here in California and I am not famous (welll, world famous locally only) and I do not contribute to any political factions, period.


On another note...I have an issue with asking the government for permission to protect my family and myself. I believe I have a god given right,....

Yeah, heard it before; agree with the thinking but also realize that the action needed to make all the changes necessary would probably cause the reverse effect personally.

All I am saying is I hope your (or whoevers) lawsuits don't ruin it for those of us fortunate enough to live where they are fairly easy to aquire.

[Paladin]

I support and commend you guys for going after the officials that are running blatantly illegal CCW policies but I also hope that your lawsuits don't have the opposite intended affect and screw it up for those of us that reside in "shall issue" counties.I understand your concern. Please read my first post at: http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?p=763544#post763544

Everybody with standing can have their day in court. TBJ is moving ahead w/those lawsuits. All CGN'ers and PRK gunowners need to get on board and in lockstep w/CalNRA so that when the CCW issue comes up in Sacto, we're strong enough to push for "Shall Issue." Just sitting on our hands for the next couple of years will guarantee defeat, perhaps even "No Issue." Print out those business cards (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?p=803206#post803206) and put up those fliers (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=72830).

You see, there is a method to my postings. ;)

[M. Sage]

I really don't see how these lawsuits could "ruin" issue in better areas. The way they're targeting the policies that don't comply with the letter of the law can only have a positive effect, IMO.

[CCWFacts]

I really don't see how these lawsuits could "ruin" issue in better areas. The way they're targeting the policies that don't comply with the letter of the law can only have a positive effect, IMO.

Unfortunately, some of the strongly pro-CCW counties do have illegal policies. For example, some require US citizenship. Those counties, which are friendly and on our side, could find themselves being sued. I hope that doesn't happen. I hope that those counties get a friendly suggestion to get strictly legal. Suing pro-CCW counties would be very counter-productive.

[supersonic]

Unless something has changed very recently, it's my understanding that establishing "good cause" to be issued a CCW permit in Riverside County consists of ensuring that your murder has been well-documented by filing the appropriate police reports.

Ok, I'm exaggerating a little bit... but only just a little bit.

uhhhhh........nnnnot rrreally. I live in Sacramento. Sheriff mcGuinness & his predecessor both have / had BIG TIME POLITICAL / B*****IT AGENDAS. Yeah, people like you and I have to have our death certificate SIGNED & NOTARIZED 3 FU**ING TIMES FOR THESE .............."individuals."