Calguns.net

Calguns.net (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/index.php)
-   Calguns Concealed Carry County Information Forum (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/forumdisplay.php?f=116)
-   -   Tehama *** TIME TO APPLY!!! *** (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=352814)

Gray Peterson 10-14-2010 11:26 PM

Tehama *** TIME TO APPLY!!! ***
 
UPDATE (2015 Feb 05):

Quote:

Sheriff-Coroner Dave Hencratt supports the right of law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms. In this regard, all qualified residents of Tehama County are eligible to apply for a permit to carry concealed weapons.

The criteria for this permit are as follows:

Must be 21 years of age (Exception: May be 18 years of age if you can lawfully own a weapon).
Must be a full-time resident of Tehama County, however not a resident of the city limits of Red Bluff or Corning.
Approved Firearm Safety Courses (see list below)
Must have no felony convictions, convictions of any offense involving the use of a firearm, or any convictions for any offense involving the use of force or violence

Those interested persons meeting the above qualifications may obtain an application in person at the Tehama County Sheriff’s Department, Records Division, located at 22840 Antelope Boulevard in Red Bluff; between the hours of 9:00 A.M. and 4:00 P.M. Monday though Friday.
The above from the sheriff's CCW webpage at: http://tehamaso.org/concealed_weapons_permit.htm

Conspicuous by its absence is any mention of a Good Cause requirement. Given Tehama's relatively high issuance in CGF's 2013 statewide survey of CCW issuance by counties, I'm changing Tehama to "Time to Apply!". If anyone gets denied by the Tehama sheriff for insufficient or lack of GC, PM me ("Paladin"), and I look into changing the status of Tehama again.

...

Huntnfooltwo 02-27-2011 8:15 AM

Guns On Permits
 
Is it True that if one of your current Firearms falls off of the California Roster you can no longer have it on your Permit? It seems to me that if it was once approved it should always be approved asuming manufacturer doesnt make any changes.

RP1911 02-27-2011 8:30 AM

FUD

Who said that? Two of my guns are not on the roster. Never were. Third one is but I've owned it before the roster came about.

CSACANNONEER 02-27-2011 8:35 AM

I think it depends on the issuing agency's criteria (for now).

wildhawker 02-27-2011 9:34 AM

If there is such a policy, please let me know ASAP.

CSDGuy 02-27-2011 9:40 AM

I think it was Fresno or Kings county that had that requirement. I don't think they have such a policy now, or have had such a policy in the past few years. If it wasn't Fresno, it was a county in that general area. I distinctly recall a county or two having such a policy...

Huntnfooltwo 02-27-2011 9:55 AM

I happen to Be in Tehama County And i am getting two different reports up Here.

paul0660 02-27-2011 10:12 AM

Quote:

two different reports
From whom? Bubbas A and B? Please contact the Sheriff and figure this out, because this would be an important point to be made as CCW becomes more usual and the individual preferences of issuing agencies get normalized.

wildhawker 02-27-2011 10:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Huntnfooltwo (Post 5899360)
I happen to Be in Tehama County And i am getting two different reports up Here.

http://calgunsfoundation.org/downloa...nts/Tehama.pdf

paul0660 02-27-2011 10:41 AM

So, what Wildhawker linked to says that Tehama requires that handguns be checked for serial number and "safety features" before being listed on or added to a permit. Maybe they do refer to the list, maybe not.

rudigan 02-27-2011 10:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CSDGuy (Post 5899288)
I think it was Fresno or Kings county that had that requirement. I don't think they have such a policy now, or have had such a policy in the past few years. If it wasn't Fresno, it was a county in that general area. I distinctly recall a county or two having such a policy...

Yes. Fresno used to require the guns to be on the list for when you applied for or added to your CCW, not sure that they became invalid on your permit as soon as they fell of the list though. Either way since Sheriff Mims took over there is no such requirement now.

As others stated, best to contact your issuing agency to confirm.

wildhawker 02-27-2011 10:44 AM

Mandating the use of on-Roster guns is absolute crap, and I'd love to challenge a licensing authority on it. It will fail for the same reasons we're going to win Peņa, and a few others.

wildhawker 02-27-2011 10:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by paul0660 (Post 5899546)
So, what Wildhawker linked to says that Tehama requires that handguns be checked for serial number and "safety features" before being listed on or added to a permit. Maybe they do refer to the list, maybe not.

First, the policy DOES NOT reference the Roster. It's not reasonable for the policy to be whatever the licensing authority wants it to be that day, and for them to say that they meant the Roster is improper. If that's what they mean, then they should say (in their policy) what they mean.

Second, the policy fails to articulate a definition of "safety features", nor is there a definition (or requirement) in the Penal Code. It's entirely arbitrary.

More, if they require a Rostered firearm, but an applicant does not own one, it would be a "requirement, charge, assessment, fee, or condition that
requires the payment of any additional funds by the applicant", expressly prohibited by PC 12054(d).

Lastly, the policy also mentions checking for "verification of serial numbers"; this is likely allowable, since they would presumably check the firearm and application against the other to ensure that the firearm(s) they are entering into AFS is, indeed, the firearm(s) the applicant intends to carry. However, that's where their authority ends, as the state has pre-empted the field of firearm registration and the local authority cannot assert a registration requirement (nor would they have a rational basis, as CCW weapons entered into AFS effectively become "registered" to the CCW holder).

Window_Seat 11-01-2011 1:30 PM

Does anyone know whether the Sheriff issues based on GC being defined as SP/SD? Are there GC statements on the way, or is Tehama "one of those counties"?

Erik.

Huntnfooltwo 11-01-2011 6:29 PM

PS/SD ?

You are required to have a good cause statement on your application but I Tehama count is a shall issue county and as long as you have now reason in your background check to disqualify you and you make a good impression in the interview processes there should be no reason why they wouldn't issue you a CCW.

Window_Seat 11-03-2011 6:02 PM

SP/SD: Self Protection/Self Defense.

And THANKS!

Erik.

Jeepers 07-18-2013 10:53 PM

what happen to all the "good cause" examples for the other counties ?

i am not real good composing a letter for the good cause so was going to look at some of the examples of other counties self protecting causes but all the links are dead :confused:... did i miss something as i dont follow this subforum all that much , is the info gone for good or just moved and links broken ?

have about saved enough $$$ to start my LTC process and now lost can't find the info i need to complete my app for the city of Red Bluff :(

anyone that saved all the info care to share the wealth ?

thanks for any info folks

CitaDeL 07-19-2013 6:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeepers (Post 11853259)
what happen to all the "good cause" examples for the other counties ?

i am not real good composing a letter for the good cause so was going to look at some of the examples of other counties self protecting causes but all the links are dead :confused:... did i miss something as i dont follow this subforum all that much , is the info gone for good or just moved and links broken ?

have about saved enough $$$ to start my LTC process and now lost can't find the info i need to complete my app for the city of Red Bluff :(

anyone that saved all the info care to share the wealth ?

thanks for any info folks

The CGF website underwent some reconstruction in the past year and resources were moved and deleted. Im not sure where that information can be found again.

But I believe that the Sheriff issues for personal protection, so I'm not sure developing a good cause based on prior sucessful good cause statements is even necessary.

Scott Connors 11-16-2013 11:50 AM

Residents of the cities of Red Bluff and Corning have to apply to their local police departments. Here in Red Bluff the police require an interview before taking the course, ostensibly to "save" the prospective applicant the cost if they're not going to be approved. Word is that the local chief of police is not on our side, although the sheriff is pretty decent. However, the SD won't approve residents of those two cities.

CitaDeL 11-17-2013 7:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scott Connors (Post 12778808)
Residents of the cities of Red Bluff and Corning have to apply to their local police departments. Here in Red Bluff the police require an interview before taking the course, ostensibly to "save" the prospective applicant the cost if they're not going to be approved. Word is that the local chief of police is not on our side, although the sheriff is pretty decent. However, the SD won't approve residents of those two cities.

If the 'interview' precedes the submission of a standard application and the initial application fees (DOJ LiveScan and first 20% of the local fee) the issuing agency is skirting the statute. They are obligated to consider every application that is submitted and communicate their determination, approving or denying the application.

If the interview is after the application and fees are submitted but before the mandated training they are complying with current law- though, they are also required to inform applicants in writing whether or not you are approved and if denied, they must indicate the reason why. These reasons must be due to not meeting requirements of residency, good cause, or good moral character.

Tehama S/O denying residents of incorporated cities of the county doesn't make them 'decent'. It makes him a bit of a political turd. wasn't he one of those 'Constitutional Sheriff's' the tea party wets their pants for?


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 2:47 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.