[hoffmang]

To answer some questions that (keep) coming up:

1. Can't Sac just change policy?

Both candidates have fought hard with each other to be even more pro issuance for self defense than the other. I have many good reasons to believe that both candidates are honestly committed to maintaining and even improving the system for average citizens. Also note that when we win against Yolo, that will bind Sac. Further, based on equal protections law it will be very hard for them to go back from self-defense = good cause. Also, if they change policy, we did not give up the right to sue them again on any issue.

2. Why won't Yolo settle?

Yolo can't settle. They denied Brett Stewart. We will settle for nothing less than a legally binding final judgment.

3. What about good moral character?

Sac does retain some ability to deny based on good moral character. Things I have reason to believe they would deny for are lieing on a previous application, having a recent DUI (less than 5 years.) I don't think that's fully constitutional but we're not going to let the perfect be the enemy of the good in Sac when we can make the legal points in Yolo.

4. When are you coming to my county?

There are about four main thrusts here. We have the high level Federal cases (Richards, Peruta), we can force counties under equal protection to issue to other's who meet an already issued good cause, we will force compliance with the Penal and Government Code, and we'll have an exhaustive list of granted good causes. It's a complex matrix we have to balance to figure out which county goes in what order. Note that we do not have to take every county through every step to get counties into a place where most everyone can get a permit.

5. What do I write on my Sacramento app for good cause?

There are two good cause statements on the calgunsfoundation.org Sacramento page (linked handily in the OP...) that we know have been issued against. Just use the one sentence. Please don't over think it.

-Gene