Originally Posted by candidviews
I keep coming back to this message and think about it...hard. Being in the military should have no bearing. Being an upstanding law abiding citizen with no disqualifications as a matter of law should be it. Likewise, since it shouldn't be a game of favorites or a lottery, trying your "luck" should be wholly unnecessary. Just reminding us all that we so easily lapse into thinking we have to "prove something" beyond our basic qualifications, clean record and good character. Anything more is games by the powers that be. And from Monterey county's gauntlet, it appears they have gone WAY beyond what the law requires to chill applicants.
I completely agree with you candidviews and I too hope that simply being a honest, respectable and law abiding citizen would be enough to qualify for a CCW. As you have said, being a current or former member of the military should have no bearing one's ability to obtain a CCW.
I would rather not have to prove anything and I am certainly not going to lapse into that mentality. That said, I am faced with a difficult choice, to apply for a CCW and tacitly accept this kind of scrutiny into my life or to not apply and continue to fight for more sane standards. I can't honestly fault anyone for their decision one way or the other but it is a difficult choice and one that I should not have to make in the first place.
As long as these onerous "good character" requirements are in place however, it is my firm belief, unfortunately, that members of the military will get a significant leg up in their applications, simply because their character will not face as much initial suspicion as that of an average citizen of this county. I believe that within the MCSO especially and all law enforcement agencies more generally (where their are naturally fair number of ex-military folks) there is a general assumption that simply being a current or former member of the military attaches an aura of infallibility to one's "good character" requirement on a CCW application.
Of course, it is a very sad day that I have to even give credence to the idea that one faces "initial suspicion" in one's right to defend oneself.