Calguns.net

Calguns.net (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/index.php)
-   Concealed Carry Discussion (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/forumdisplay.php?f=179)
-   -   san bernardino changes reference requirements? (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=714150)

Mtn folk 02-28-2013 6:32 AM

san bernardino changes reference requirements?
 
I just had my interview yesterday 2-27. the interviewer still wanted my 3 letters but said, starting two weeks ago, they no longer contact the 4 people you list on the application.

Calplinker 02-28-2013 7:53 AM

Interesting. Do the four on the application have to be different people than the three who write letters,

If so, it would seem that the only difference is that they don't send letters/questionnaires to the four on the app.

Still, this is an improvement and should speed things along.

Are they still doing 15-20 minute, 1:1 interviews? Someone else posted recently that they may
move to group interviews, whatever that is.

Jeepergeo 02-28-2013 10:18 AM

Sounds like progress. Hopefully, it will evolve to a rubber stamp after a standard DOJ check since really, what do they learn from anyone writing a letter or those being listed on the application? Who would list someone that would be a contrary reference? And what about folks new to the community?

winnre 02-28-2013 10:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeepergeo (Post 10673840)
Sounds like progress. Hopefully, it will evolve to a rubber stamp after a standard DOJ check since really, what do they learn from anyone writing a letter or those being listed on the application? Who would list someone that would be a contrary reference? And what about folks new to the community?

I know people who can legally own a weapon but shouldn't. No way would I be anywhere near them if they had a CCW. I am sure there are denials for cause where guns are not taken away.

Mtn folk 02-28-2013 11:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Calplinker (Post 10672424)
Interesting. Do the four on the application have to be different people than the three who write letters,

If so, it would seem that the only difference is that they don't send letters/questionnaires to the four on the app.

Still, this is an improvement and should speed things along.

Are they still doing 15-20 minute, 1:1 interviews? Someone else posted recently that they may
move to group interviews, whatever that is.

i'm not sure if you even list 4 people on the app anymore, but to answer your question, yes they had to be different people. My wife is going to pick up her app next week, i will know more then.

the interview and the live scan, along with the waiting room times was an hour and a half total. not bad at all. and yes it is 1:1.

john67elco 02-28-2013 12:48 PM

I'm going to donate to sheriff at election time. He is right for our county.

Quiet 02-28-2013 11:05 PM

From other forums...
San Bernardino County Sheriff John McMahon has recently changed the issuance policy again and no longer accepts "personal protection/self-defense" as a reasonable good cause for issuance. Need to articulate something more than just a simply self-defense statement.

Kid Stanislaus 02-28-2013 11:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quiet (Post 10681181)
From other forums...
San Bernardino County Sheriff John McMahon has recently changed the issuance policy again and no longer accepts "personal protection/self-defense" as a reasonable good cause for issuance. Need to articulate something more than just a simply self-defense statement.

Ya gotta wonder why an otherwise pro-2A sheriff would backtrack like that.:confused:

Brian1979 03-01-2013 6:42 AM

I have a great GC more extensive then just personal protection but never listed it due to the current requirements. If it has changed I am confident I will still be fine but this sucks if its true.

Calplinker 03-01-2013 8:52 AM

Good cause
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Quiet (Post 10681181)
From other forums...
San Bernardino County Sheriff John McMahon has recently changed the issuance policy again and no longer accepts "personal protection/self-defense" as a reasonable good cause for issuance. Need to articulate something more than just a simply self-defense statement.

I don't believe that is accurate. My understanding is they won't allow you to write ONLY "personal protection/self defense". You can still write this, but they now want you to also write a paragraph or two explaining what this means to you.

I could be wrong, but I don't believe that the threshold for approval has changed. They just want more than a few words in the good cause section.

In other words, your explanation of why you feel the need to protect yourself doesn't seem to have to meet a threshold that is higher than what they used in the past. This was explained to me in a recent renewal class. They didn't critique what we wrote. They just didn't want two words "personal protection" to be the only thing written in the good cause section.

If people are writing their explanation on the form and getting denied for this sole reason, that is news to me and would represent a definite change in approach. Historically, they approve virtually everyone who is not prohibited.

If someone has recently been denied, I would very much like to hear about it.

EDIT: Our new Sheriff was specifically asked about this very recently and emphatically stated that he strongly believes that non-prohibited residents in his county should be allowed to get an LTC and carry, and that he would be making no changes other than trying to clear up the back log and streamline the process. This is exactly the message we were given in our renewal class. New LTC's showed up in the mail shortly afterwards. :)

Mtn folk 03-01-2013 10:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Calplinker (Post 10683503)
I don't believe that is accurate. My understanding is they won't allow you to write ONLY "personal protection/self defense". You can still write this, but they now want you to also write a paragraph or two explaining what this means to you.

I could be wrong, but I don't believe that the threshold for approval has changed. They just want more than a few words in the good cause section.

In other words, your explanation of why you feel the need to protect yourself doesn't seem to have to meet a threshold that is higher than what they used in the past. This was explained to me in a recent renewal class. They didn't critique what we wrote. They just didn't want two words "personal protection" to be the only thing written in the good cause section.

If people are writing their explanation on the form and getting denied for this sole reason, that is news to me and would represent a definite change in approach. Historically, they approve virtually everyone who is not prohibited.

If someone has recently been denied, I would very much like to hear about it.

EDIT: Our new Sheriff was specifically asked about this very recently and emphatically stated that he strongly believes that non-prohibited residents in his county should be allowed to get an LTC and carry, and that he would be making no changes other than trying to clear up the back log and streamline the process. This is exactly the message we were given in our renewal class. New LTC's showed up in the mail shortly afterwards. :)

and it is obvious they ARE clearing up and streamlining the process.:D

fyrguy 03-01-2013 6:48 PM

You are required to explain why you need the CCW over and beyond Personal Protection for SB County now but the explanation doesn't have to be extensive. As long as you have a reasonable thought process you can explain personal protection. What makes you a target? As Mtn folk says the sheriff likes the thought of an armed public, as long as you are armed legally.

TrapperP2005 03-02-2013 9:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mtn folk (Post 10671797)
I just had my interview yesterday 2-27. the interviewer still wanted my 3 letters but said, starting two weeks ago, they no longer contact the 4 people you list on the application.

are you sure your info isnt backwards? my interview was on the 26th and they told me they didnt need the 3 reference letters, that the 4 people they contact by mail were the important ones. if that were the case, they wouldnt have anyone to get ahold of regarding my application. please let me know, want to make sure the process isnt delayed more than it has to be.

Thanks!

HighLander51 03-03-2013 7:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quiet (Post 10681181)
From other forums...
San Bernardino County Sheriff John McMahon has recently changed the issuance policy again and no longer accepts "personal protection/self-defense" as a reasonable good cause for issuance. Need to articulate something more than just a simply self-defense statement.

What they want is more than just the 2 words that can be eloquently and succinctly articulated in front of a judge in the event you ever get dragged into a wrongful death civil court case. For example: I want a CCW permit to protect myself, and my family, against the ever increasing number violent criminals, who have no absolutely no qualms about killing uniformed police officers, let alone civilians, during a time when many departments are reducing the number of officers available.

This is also new, "Not to be used for employment purposes"

http://www.californiavtxriders.com/p...image36102.jpg

Mtn folk 03-04-2013 4:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TrapperP2005 (Post 10698630)
are you sure your info isnt backwards? my interview was on the 26th and they told me they didnt need the 3 reference letters, that the 4 people they contact by mail were the important ones. if that were the case, they wouldnt have anyone to get ahold of regarding my application. please let me know, want to make sure the process isnt delayed more than it has to be.

Thanks!

i guess it could be backwards but only if the interviewer misunderstood my question. He looked over my 3 ref. letters and just glanced at the 4 on the app. at the end of the interview he asked if i had any questions. i asked, " how long until the people listed on the app recieve their letters, I want to give them an idea?" His repy was "as of two weeks ago, we no longer do that". I have 3 ref letters and 4 refs listed on my app as that was the instructions at the time. But i do believe the ref letters had phone # and address requirements.

Mtn folk 03-04-2013 4:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quiet (Post 10681181)
From other forums...
San Bernardino County Sheriff John McMahon has recently changed the issuance policy again and no longer accepts "personal protection/self-defense" as a reasonable good cause for issuance. Need to articulate something more than just a simply self-defense statement.

isn't self defense the only reason to ccw? I articulated my personal reason for wanting to carry, and from all accounts it was reasonable according to the interviewer. it was the truth, i used the whole page provided on the app to explain some details, but in no way was it iron clad. i doubt it would have been strong enough in some other counties. the jury is still out though.

winnre 03-04-2013 11:46 AM

Miss-use?????

Steph 03-04-2013 12:00 PM

My bf has an appt on the 15th and he called them and yes they no longer need the letters, but they still want the 4 people to contact.

tjcoker 03-05-2013 8:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by john67elco (Post 10675156)
I'm going to donate to sheriff at election time. He is right for our county.

I agree!

c483125117 03-14-2013 11:50 AM

Off topic, but does anyone know if SBC still has a 1-year residency requirement?

jenericsig 03-14-2013 11:52 AM

Yes. SB does have a one year residence policy.

winnre 03-14-2013 11:56 AM

I wonder if that means you can get your application after 4 months and then wait for the 8-month process.

Kid Stanislaus 03-14-2013 11:05 PM

The whole notion is silly. I can find four people who'll swear I walk on water and feed a multitude with a few fishes and loaves!

glockcougar 04-30-2013 2:31 PM

Reference Letters
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by TrapperP2005 (Post 10698630)
are you sure your info isnt backwards? my interview was on the 26th and they told me they didnt need the 3 reference letters, that the 4 people they contact by mail were the important ones. if that were the case, they wouldnt have anyone to get ahold of regarding my application. please let me know, want to make sure the process isnt delayed more than it has to be.

Thanks!

You no longer need reference letters nor references as of March 2013.

glockcougar 04-30-2013 2:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quiet (Post 10681181)
From other forums...
San Bernardino County Sheriff John McMahon has recently changed the issuance policy again and no longer accepts "personal protection/self-defense" as a reasonable good cause for issuance. Need to articulate something more than just a simply self-defense statement.

If you would take a look at the Old or New CADOJ form (page 10 of 13) towards the bottom of the page--- you will notice the following paragraph:

"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 you life or property been threatened or jeopardized? Explain incidents and include dates, times, location, and names of police agencies to which these incidents were reported.

Details of Reason for Applicant Desiring a CCW license. Use additional pages if necessary.

So, this is not the Sheriff changing his mind, it is the State of California requiring the additional information.

Sheriff McMahon is 100 % behind the issuance of CCW permits.

Librarian 04-30-2013 3:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by glockcougar (Post 11230200)
If you would take a look at the Old or New CADOJ form (page 10 of 13) towards the bottom of the page--- you will notice the following paragraph:

"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 you life or property been threatened or jeopardized? Explain incidents and include dates, times, location, and names of police agencies to which these incidents were reported.

Details of Reason for Applicant Desiring a CCW license. Use additional pages if necessary.

So, this is not the Sheriff changing his mind, it is the State of California requiring the additional information.

Sheriff McMahon is 100 % behind the issuance of CCW permits.

It's lovely that CA-DOJ is paying some attention to the application, but language on the app is not either Penal Code or regulation.

Since there have been no changes in those, the applicable consideration is PC 26150 (a)(2) "(2) Good cause exists for issuance of the license." and the issuing agencies remain free to assess 'good cause' in whatever way the CLEO feels is adequate.

glockcougar 05-01-2013 9:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Librarian (Post 11230729)
It's lovely that CA-DOJ is paying some attention to the application, but language on the app is not either Penal Code or regulation.

Since there have been no changes in those, the applicable consideration is PC 26150 (a)(2) "(2) Good cause exists for issuance of the license." and the issuing agencies remain free to assess 'good cause' in whatever way the CLEO feels is adequate.

I agree, but you still have to follow the directions on the "official document." This form is what will be brought into court. I know. I have been there and it wasn't pretty. Nothing like having an attorney asking why the form wasn't completed as directed. "Personal protection" is valid but it is not a complete thought, according to the court system. When everything u own, including your freedom, is being judged on two words, it is scary. How easy is it to explain in a short sentence why you want this. What is sad is to read why people don't know why they want it. Guess a jury of "not your peers" would love to hear why you are feel the need why u want to carry a gun and you say " I don't know why!" Guess what California is not gun friendly if you haven't figured it out yet. We need to protect ourselves with education and intelligence not just because we can attitude. This is how we lost our open carry, is because we could. Now we can't !!!

Librarian 05-01-2013 3:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by glockcougar (Post 11236793)
I agree, but you still have to follow the directions on the "official document." This form is what will be brought into court. I know. I have been there and it wasn't pretty. Nothing like having an attorney asking why the form wasn't completed as directed. "Personal protection" is valid but it is not a complete thought, according to the court system. When everything u own, including your freedom, is being judged on two words, it is scary. How easy is it to explain in a short sentence why you want this. What is sad is to read why people don't know why they want it. Guess a jury of "not your peers" would love to hear why you are feel the need why u want to carry a gun and you say " I don't know why!" Guess what California is not gun friendly if you haven't figured it out yet. We need to protect ourselves with education and intelligence not just because we can attitude. This is how we lost our open carry, is because we could. Now we can't !!!

I think you are overly concerned on the point re: application language.

The applicants are not responsible for issuing the licenses. Any question on the appropriateness of a 'good cause' statement is on the issuing agency - and those agencies are exempted by Government Code from any liability from issuing or failing to issue a license. An application is not likely to be "brought into court".

HighLander51 05-02-2013 8:28 AM

[QUOTE=glockcougar;11236793]I agree, but you still have to follow the directions on the "official document." This form is what will be brought into court. I know. I have been there and it wasn't pretty. QUOTE]

You were actually invovled in a shooting and then taken to civil court for a wrongful death suit and the lawyer asked you about your CCW reason???


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:51 AM.

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