Calguns.net  

Home My iTrader Join the NRA Donate to CGSSA Sponsors CGN Google Search
CA Semiauto Ban(AW)ID Flowchart CA Handgun Ban ID Flowchart CA Shotgun Ban ID Flowchart
Go Back   Calguns.net > POLITICS, LITIGATION AND ACTIVISM > California 2nd Amend. Political Discussion & Activism
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

California 2nd Amend. Political Discussion & Activism Discuss gun rights activism and 2A related political topics here. All advice given is NOT legal counsel.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 02-24-2012, 1:02 PM
moleculo moleculo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 710
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default "Good Moral Character"

We now have a situation where the SF Sheriff is no longer qualified (as of right now) to possess firearms because of a DV charge. Yet, this is the same government official that the legislature has chosen to decide if an individual has "Good Moral Character" when a citizen applies for a LTC. The irony is obvious to everyone, but is there an angle here that can be exploited in a legal challenge to the "Good Moral Character" clause of the statute so we can ask the court to define "Good Moral Character" for the State so we can take this decision out of the Sheriff's hands? How can a person be tasked on behalf of the County to define "good moral character" for LTC's if that same person has been determined by the Court to not have good enough moral character to begin with? Surely there's some legal precedent that can be used to help us here?
__________________
Quote:
Those acting in the public interest assume obligations of accountability and transparency. Retroactively redefining goals while claiming — yet refusing to disclose — some “master plan” is just the opposite. So is viciously trashing anyone who questions your judgment. -navyinrwanda
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 02-24-2012, 1:10 PM
wildhawker's Avatar
wildhawker wildhawker is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: California
Posts: 14,419
iTrader: 84 / 100%
Default

Don't go out and get lost in the weeds on the issues.

In our case of Richards v. Prieto, Alan Gura has brilliantly shown how GC and GMC requirements (facially, and as-applied) are unconstitutional prior restraints.

There are other arguments (none as proper or direct as Alan's) re moral character, but those would require litigation. Such would be unnecessarily duplicative and detractory.

-Brandon
__________________
Brandon Combs

I do not read private messages, and my inbox is usually full. If you need to reach me, please email me instead.

My comments are not the official position or a statement of any organization unless stated otherwise. My comments are not legal advice; if you want or need legal advice, hire a lawyer.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 02-24-2012, 1:10 PM
23 Blast's Avatar
23 Blast 23 Blast is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Orange County
Posts: 3,451
iTrader: 85 / 100%
Default

In San Francisco, being a Democrat qualifies you as having "Good Moral Character," and since people of good moral character love everybody and don't need or want guns, clearly only people who want guns are by definition not of good moral character.

J/K - ill be interested to see what happens with this. SF is one of the most anti-gun municipalities this side of Pyongyang, so it would be interesting to see how this plays out.
__________________
"Two dead?!? HOW?!?"
[sigh] "Bullets, mortar fire, heavy artillery salvos, terminal syphilis, bad luck --- the usual things, Captain."
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 02-24-2012, 1:11 PM
Just Dave's Avatar
Just Dave Just Dave is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Hiding behind Camp Pendleton
Posts: 9,483
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Good point.
What is the criteria for "good moral character" as defined by the state? That's what I would like to know.
__________________


Quote:
Originally Posted by Kestryll View Post
This is a discussion forum, that's what happens on a discussion forum.
People talk, discuss, speculate and share information.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 02-24-2012, 1:35 PM
Connor P Price's Avatar
Connor P Price Connor P Price is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Littleton, CO
Posts: 1,900
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Just Dave View Post
Good point.
What is the criteria for "good moral character" as defined by the state? That's what I would like to know.
There isn't a criteria as defined by the state. There is no definition of good cause either. That's what enables sheriffs to issue so differently from one another. Look for both of those issues to be solved by pending litigation. Richards, which Brandon mentioned above is the one looking to change both of those problems.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by wildhawker
Calguns Foundation: "Advancing your civil rights, and helping you win family bets, since 2008."

-Brandon
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 02-24-2012, 1:51 PM
Anti-Hero's Avatar
Anti-Hero Anti-Hero is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 1,573
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by moleculo View Post
We now have a situation where the SF Sheriff is no longer qualified (as of right now) to possess firearms because of a DV charge. Yet, this is the same government official that the legislature has chosen to decide if an individual has "Good Moral Character" when a citizen applies for a LTC. The irony is obvious to everyone, but is there an angle here that can be exploited in a legal challenge to the "Good Moral Character" clause of the statute so we can ask the court to define "Good Moral Character" for the State so we can take this decision out of the Sheriff's hands? How can a person be tasked on behalf of the County to define "good moral character" for LTC's if that same person has been determined by the Court to not have good enough moral character to begin with? Surely there's some legal precedent that can be used to help us here?
Which could easily be worded to show how GMC applied is the right thing to do.

Example: The Sheriff didn't demonstrate good moral character - and thus his right was denied.
__________________
IPSO FACTO
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 02-24-2012, 1:53 PM
wildhawker's Avatar
wildhawker wildhawker is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: California
Posts: 14,419
iTrader: 84 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anti-Hero View Post
Which could easily be worded to show how GMC applied is the right thing to do.

Example: The Sheriff didn't demonstrate good moral character - and thus his right was denied.
Well, no. The Sheriff is denied access to firearms by operation of his being a prohibited person, just like anyone else. He is not a carry license applicant.

-Brandon
__________________
Brandon Combs

I do not read private messages, and my inbox is usually full. If you need to reach me, please email me instead.

My comments are not the official position or a statement of any organization unless stated otherwise. My comments are not legal advice; if you want or need legal advice, hire a lawyer.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 02-24-2012, 5:41 PM
Wherryj's Avatar
Wherryj Wherryj is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Livermore
Posts: 8,903
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by moleculo View Post
We now have a situation where the SF Sheriff is no longer qualified (as of right now) to possess firearms because of a DV charge. Yet, this is the same government official that the legislature has chosen to decide if an individual has "Good Moral Character" when a citizen applies for a LTC. The irony is obvious to everyone, but is there an angle here that can be exploited in a legal challenge to the "Good Moral Character" clause of the statute so we can ask the court to define "Good Moral Character" for the State so we can take this decision out of the Sheriff's hands? How can a person be tasked on behalf of the County to define "good moral character" for LTC's if that same person has been determined by the Court to not have good enough moral character to begin with? Surely there's some legal precedent that can be used to help us here?
There's no irony here. I believe that this was covered in first grade: "It takes one to know one."? How else can he know who is a scum-bag undeserving of the right to self-protection unless he IS one?
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 02-24-2012, 6:11 PM
NoJoke's Avatar
NoJoke NoJoke is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,539
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

I'm sorry, but the whole "good moral character" thing is such a sham it's shameful. It is so intellectually disingenuous to be able to purchase a gun and in the same breath, state that you cannot have what you have purchased with you. That, right there is the clear definition of insanity.

On an unrelated note, it was GREAT to see someone wearing a "right to bear arms"....a bear with a gun....walking through Costco in Oceanside (Hacienda) tonight!
__________________

NO ISSUE / MAY ISSUE / SHALL ISSUE - LTC progress over time since 1986

Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 02-24-2012, 6:51 PM
Gray Peterson's Avatar
Gray Peterson Gray Peterson is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lynnwood, WA
Posts: 5,819
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NoJoke View Post
I'm sorry, but the whole "good moral character" thing is such a sham it's shameful. It is so intellectually disingenuous to be able to purchase a gun and in the same breath, state that you cannot have what you have purchased with you. That, right there is the clear definition of insanity.

On an unrelated note, it was GREAT to see someone wearing a "right to bear arms"....a bear with a gun....walking through Costco in Oceanside (Hacienda) tonight!
With an EBR, right?
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 02-24-2012, 7:03 PM
Old_Bald_Guy's Avatar
Old_Bald_Guy Old_Bald_Guy is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: California
Posts: 2,617
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 23 Blast View Post
In San Francisco, being a Democrat qualifies you as having "Good Moral Character," and since people of good moral character love everybody and don't need or want guns, clearly only people who want guns are by definition not of good moral character.
Ha ha! I don't know from San Francisco, but I'm a Democrat of good moral character and I'm licensed to carry three guns here in Sacramento County.
__________________
“Every reform movement has a lunatic fringe.”
― Theodore Roosevelt
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 02-24-2012, 7:34 PM
Darklyte27's Avatar
Darklyte27 Darklyte27 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: East Bay Area USI Range
Posts: 9,368
iTrader: 59 / 100%
Default

Its pretty crazy we are even allowing "these" people to decide what we can and cant do.
Who are they to judge? Why are we letting them control how we protect our lives from non law abiding citizens?
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 02-24-2012, 7:40 PM
scarville's Avatar
scarville scarville is offline
Senior Member
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Glendora, CA
Posts: 2,306
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darklyte27 View Post
Its pretty crazy we are even allowing "these" people to decide what we can and cant do.
Who are they to judge? Why are we letting them control how we protect our lives from non law abiding citizens?
Because gun control laws are enforced by men with guns.
__________________
Politicians and criminals are moral twins separated only by legal fiction.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 02-24-2012, 9:01 PM
Kid Stanislaus Kid Stanislaus is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Oakdale, CA
Posts: 4,420
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wherryj View Post
There's no irony here. I believe that this was covered in first grade: "It takes one to know one."? How else can he know who is a scum-bag undeserving of the right to self-protection unless he IS one?
Ah, I just LOVE impeccable reasoning!
__________________
Things usually turn out best for those who make the best of how things turn out.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 02-24-2012, 9:04 PM
Kid Stanislaus Kid Stanislaus is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Oakdale, CA
Posts: 4,420
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Old_Bald_Guy View Post
Ha ha! I don't know from San Francisco, but I'm a Democrat of good moral character and I'm licensed to carry three guns here in Sacramento County.
I don't know guys, should Democrats be allowed to carry guns?!
__________________
Things usually turn out best for those who make the best of how things turn out.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 02-24-2012, 9:04 PM
NoJoke's Avatar
NoJoke NoJoke is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,539
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gray Peterson View Post
With an EBR, right?
Yeah...was that you? 20 something looking guy....
__________________

NO ISSUE / MAY ISSUE / SHALL ISSUE - LTC progress over time since 1986

Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 02-24-2012, 10:57 PM
KGenter KGenter is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Central Valley
Posts: 37
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

I believe the “good moral character” clause as illustrated in the CalGuns model carry guidelines is “not otherwise prohibited” thus if you are not excluded by current legislation from owning a firearm you by default have such required good moral character. Seems the SF Sherriff is lacking at the moment.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 02-24-2012, 11:18 PM
Gray Peterson's Avatar
Gray Peterson Gray Peterson is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lynnwood, WA
Posts: 5,819
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NoJoke View Post
Yeah...was that you? 20 something looking guy....
I haven't been to San Diego in over 20 years. I'm 30 years old. That should tell you something....also, "good looking"? I shatter mirrors with my ugly...

Last edited by Gray Peterson; 02-24-2012 at 11:34 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 02-24-2012, 11:31 PM
rp55's Avatar
rp55 rp55 is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 1,590
iTrader: 9 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Just Dave View Post
What is the criteria for "good moral character" as defined by the state? That's what I would like to know.
When the law was originally written it was the code for not African American, Latino or Asian.
__________________
http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j302/rpwhite55/guns/member13443.jpg
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 02-25-2012, 7:51 AM
QQQ's Avatar
QQQ QQQ is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Chino Hills
Posts: 2,246
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darklyte27 View Post
Its pretty crazy we are even allowing "these" people to decide what we can and cant do.
Who are they to judge? Why are we letting them control how we protect our lives from non law abiding citizens?
Damn good question.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 02-25-2012, 8:07 AM
Gray Peterson's Avatar
Gray Peterson Gray Peterson is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lynnwood, WA
Posts: 5,819
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darklyte27 View Post
Its pretty crazy we are even allowing "these" people to decide what we can and cant do.
Who are they to judge? Why are we letting them contofl how we protect our lives from non law abiding citizens?

Quote:
Originally Posted by QQQ View Post
Damn good question.
Because the 1923 Legislature decided this to be so, and until the good cause & good moral character struck by order if federal or state judge, they will continue to so what they are doing.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 02-25-2012, 8:13 AM
SanPedroShooter's Avatar
SanPedroShooter SanPedroShooter is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Los Angeles Harbor
Posts: 9,739
iTrader: 25 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gray Peterson View Post
Because the 1923 Legislature decided this to be so, and until the good cause & good moral character struck by order if federal or state judge, they will continue to so what they are doing.
jim crow gun control a progressive policy plank in California... Who knew?
__________________
Join the NRA
https://membership.nrahq.org/forms/signup.asp
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 02-25-2012, 10:07 AM
Gray Peterson's Avatar
Gray Peterson Gray Peterson is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lynnwood, WA
Posts: 5,819
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SanPedroShooter View Post
jim crow gun control a progressive policy plank in California... Who knew?
People need clue bats.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 02-25-2012, 11:13 AM
NoJoke's Avatar
NoJoke NoJoke is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,539
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

In my mind, their "good moral character" requirement would be analogous to:

You could buy but not drink:


You can own but are prohibited from using outside your home:



You may posses but cannot make reference to (in thought or word):

__________________

NO ISSUE / MAY ISSUE / SHALL ISSUE - LTC progress over time since 1986

Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 02-25-2012, 12:01 PM
SilverTauron SilverTauron is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 5,705
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NoJoke View Post
In my mind, their "good moral character" requirement would be analogous to:

You could buy but not drink:


Containers over 12 ounces are considered assault cups and must be registered or transported out of state.I thought everyone knew this?


Quote:
Originally Posted by NoJoke View Post
You can own but are prohibited from using outside your home:


...unless you donate to the political campaign of the current politician.


Quote:
Originally Posted by NoJoke View Post

You may posses but cannot make reference to (in thought or word):

Didn't you know only approved Bibles can be possessed in the state? The King James Bible is not approved as it does not possess a "Page Read Indicator".
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 4:12 AM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Proudly hosted by GeoVario the Premier 2A host.
Calguns.net, the 'Calguns' name and all associated variants and logos are ® Trademark and © Copyright 2002-2016, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.