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 > CONCEALED CARRY/LICENSE TO CARRY > Concealed Carry Discussion
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

Concealed Carry Discussion General discussion regarding CCW/LTC in California

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old 07-12-2017, 3:40 AM
rdtompki rdtompki is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Hollister, CA
Posts: 542
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Hutchens was interviewed last night on the Tucker Carlson show, the subject California's moving toward sanctuary state status. I wonder if this legislative initiative is part of her decision not to run again. Certainly, she believes such a move by the state is a disaster. My wife and I have heated up our seach for a new home (state).
__________________
San Benito County, CA
NRA Life Member
CRPA Life Member
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 07-12-2017, 8:35 AM
GregsCCW's Avatar
GregsCCW GregsCCW is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 196
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

I just received insider information about Harrington and Barnes from a very reliable source who knows them well. Harrington is going to be a problem for CCW, if you are pro CCW you should vote for Barnes. I'm trying to share this with as many CCW people as I can because it is legit info, want more details about the source PM me I'll share what I can. Barnes is even working with the CCW community or at least in contact with some of us, so hes the best bet. I see that the above article talks about Barnes some years ago, all I know is that his stance is more friendly than Harrington's from what I'm hearing today. The current regulations are more "may issue" maybe he would just leave it as is.
__________________

Last edited by GregsCCW; 07-12-2017 at 8:39 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 07-12-2017, 8:43 AM
Xstrada Xstrada is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Orange, Ca
Posts: 3
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Thank you for that information 😎
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 07-12-2017, 5:21 PM
baggss's Avatar
baggss baggss is online now
Stoopid American Redneck™
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Eastern Ventura County
Posts: 2,657
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tanks View Post
Under Hutchens policy of de facto "shall issue" anyone without a criminal history gets a CCW anyway.
Hutchins current policy is not really a "de-facto shall issue" policy. If it was, she would simply accept Self Defense = Good Cause, and not require anything other explanation to be listed. At best it's a reasonable may issue policy.
__________________
"The best gun is the one you'll have on you when you need it the most, the one you know how to use, the one that goes BANG every single time you pull the trigger. Whether that gun cost you $349 or $1,100 it's worth every penny if it saves your life, or the life of someone you love.” -Tim Schmit, CCW Magazine July 2015


Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 07-14-2017, 7:47 AM
Shadrac's Avatar
Shadrac Shadrac is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 12
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

I received a email from a friend that is a member of the Lincoln Club of Orange County and ran into Don Barnes at a recent event:

"Good news, {Wife's name} attended Lincoln Club meeting with Under Sheriff Don Barnes, he is running for OC Sheriff and is supporting the expansion of the CCWs in the OC."

for what it's worth...
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 07-14-2017, 3:30 PM
TurboChrisB's Avatar
TurboChrisB TurboChrisB is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Costa Mesa
Posts: 4,122
iTrader: 69 / 100%
Default

It all sounds good and is great for keeping the hope alive. Keep your fingers crossed.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 07-19-2017, 7:24 PM
CASoxFan CASoxFan is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 41
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

I just was renewed until June 2019. I hope by the next time one of 4 scenarios has occurred, listed in order of likelihood:

1 - The replacement Hutchins turns out to be equally or more lenient on permit issue.
2 - I finally had enough of CA and have moved to a state that recognizes the entire Bill of Rights
3 - Congress passes a reciprocity bill (that doesn't require home state permit) in case #1 turns out to be false
4 - Kennedy/RBG/Breyer are no longer on SCOTUS and we get 2A friendly justices and court relief.

Seeing as 2-4 are much longer putts, I am extremely hopeful we get a Pro-CCW sheriff in 2018
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 07-20-2017, 4:29 PM
Randy G.'s Avatar
Randy G. Randy G. is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 348
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CASoxFan View Post
I just was renewed until June 2019. I hope by the next time one of 4 scenarios has occurred, listed in order of likelihood:

1 - The replacement Hutchins turns out to be equally or more lenient on permit issue.
2 - I finally had enough of CA and have moved to a state that recognizes the entire Bill of Rights
3 - Congress passes a reciprocity bill (that doesn't require home state permit) in case #1 turns out to be false
4 - Kennedy/RBG/Breyer are no longer on SCOTUS and we get 2A friendly justices and court relief.

Seeing as 2-4 are much longer putts, I am extremely hopeful we get a Pro-CCW sheriff in 2018
Hope your wish list comes true.
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 07-21-2017, 6:47 AM
tanks's Avatar
tanks tanks is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 2,296
iTrader: 9 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by baggss View Post
Hutchins current policy is not really a "de-facto shall issue" policy. If it was, she would simply accept Self Defense = Good Cause, and not require anything other explanation to be listed. At best it's a reasonable may issue policy.
I'd call 95+% issue rate "de facto shall issue" regardless of extra time spent being creative about "good cause" during the application process.
__________________
For Sale - Reloading Supplies Powder and Xtreme bullets, For Trade Federal Primers
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s....php?t=1191755
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 07-21-2017, 9:32 AM
baggss's Avatar
baggss baggss is online now
Stoopid American Redneck™
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Eastern Ventura County
Posts: 2,657
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tanks View Post
I'd call 95+% issue rate "de facto shall issue" regardless of extra time spent being creative about "good cause" during the application process.
I'd like to see something to validate that 95+% issuance rate claim.
__________________
"The best gun is the one you'll have on you when you need it the most, the one you know how to use, the one that goes BANG every single time you pull the trigger. Whether that gun cost you $349 or $1,100 it's worth every penny if it saves your life, or the life of someone you love.” -Tim Schmit, CCW Magazine July 2015


Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 07-22-2017, 7:17 PM
FilmGuy's Avatar
FilmGuy FilmGuy is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 128
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

So I went to the Harrington4Sheriff Facebook page and sent them a message.

FilmGuy:

So word on the street is Harrington is not a big fan of civilians having CCW permits and will be far more restrictive on issuance compared to the current administration or the other candidate for sheriff. I'd like to bypass the usual and ambiguous political statements and request a clear and binding statement of your CCW policy and will self defense be a good and clear enough reason for issuance?

Harrington4sheriff:

I'm not sure what street you live on but Dave would be way more proactive in issuing ccw's then either of the two previous administrations. Thanks for the inquiry.


FilmGuy:

Well I was no fan of Hutchens and supported Bill Hunt as he was crystal clear in his stance and good cause requirement and would want someone in office who has that same stance and who is willing to put it in writing. Saying one will be more proactive still leaves wiggle room. And the street is the Calguns.net website.

(Awaiting a response)

Obviously this response if not from the candidate directly and isn't worth much. People need to pin all of the candidates down and demand a clear, concise answer to the CCW question and post it on their website. I would also like to see them make video statements to the voters and Board of Supervisors.
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 07-22-2017, 8:20 PM
TurboChrisB's Avatar
TurboChrisB TurboChrisB is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Costa Mesa
Posts: 4,122
iTrader: 69 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FilmGuy View Post

I'm not sure what street you live on but Dave would be way more proactive in issuing ccw's then either of the two previous administrations. Thanks for the inquiry.
(Awaiting a response)
Hmmm, I don't think I like this guy. Way more? Way more than 95%? Uhh, you can't get "way more" than 95%, therefore this guy is a dweeb and I await something more specific from "him"

Good luck and I hope he responds soon.
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 07-22-2017, 9:30 PM
baggss's Avatar
baggss baggss is online now
Stoopid American Redneck™
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Eastern Ventura County
Posts: 2,657
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

No matter what statement you get, nothing can or will be binding....
__________________
"The best gun is the one you'll have on you when you need it the most, the one you know how to use, the one that goes BANG every single time you pull the trigger. Whether that gun cost you $349 or $1,100 it's worth every penny if it saves your life, or the life of someone you love.” -Tim Schmit, CCW Magazine July 2015


Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 07-23-2017, 8:59 AM
FilmGuy's Avatar
FilmGuy FilmGuy is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 128
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

So I went to the Harrington4Sheriff Facebook page and sent them a message.

FilmGuy:

So word on the street is Harrington is not a big fan of civilians having CCW permits and will be far more restrictive on issuance compared to the current administration or the other candidate for sheriff. I'd like to bypass the usual and ambiguous political statements and request a clear and binding statement of your CCW policy and will self defense be a good and clear enough reason for issuance?

Harrington4sheriff:

I'm not sure what street you live on but Dave would be way more proactive in issuing ccw's then either of the two previous administrations. Thanks for the inquiry.


FilmGuy:

Well I was no fan of Hutchens and supported Bill Hunt as he was crystal clear in his stance and good cause requirement and would want someone in office who has that same stance and who is willing to put it in writing. Saying one will be more proactive still leaves wiggle room. And the street is the Calguns.net website.

(Awaiting a response)

(Obviously this response if not from the candidate directly and isn't worth much. People need to pin all of the candidates down and demand a clear, concise answer to the CCW question and post it on their website. I would also like to see them make video statements to the voters and Board of Supervisors.)


Response from Harrington

Dave H here, I walked precincts for Bill and have secured his endorsement for this race. I am pro 2A and a member of the NRA. I am a shall issue believer but understand the law. It is going to take innovation and an understanding of the current law to be able to effectively issue CCW to law abiding citizens. The law recently changing to "May" issue means you cannot ask for a CCW just because. It does not mean you have to have some long drawn out reason to get one. It is ridiculous, in my opinion, that a law abiding citizen has to petition the government to exercise a constitutional right given them by god. Period, end of statement.


FilmGuy

Well that is good to hear. But I still believe "self defense" is good enough reason as has been shown by other Sheriff's in neighboring jurisdictions accepting that as a good enough reason and have been issuing for it alone.
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 07-24-2017, 10:48 AM
baggss's Avatar
baggss baggss is online now
Stoopid American Redneck™
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Eastern Ventura County
Posts: 2,657
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tanks View Post
I'd call 95+% issue rate "de facto shall issue" regardless of extra time spent being creative about "good cause" during the application process.
Quote:
Originally Posted by baggss View Post
I'd like to see something to validate that 95+% issuance rate claim.
Additionally, if OC was truly a "defacto shall issue" county, there wouldn't be a 5 page thread (there are others) talking about "Good Cause" statements for OC. A "defacto shall issue" policy would not need that.
__________________
"The best gun is the one you'll have on you when you need it the most, the one you know how to use, the one that goes BANG every single time you pull the trigger. Whether that gun cost you $349 or $1,100 it's worth every penny if it saves your life, or the life of someone you love.” -Tim Schmit, CCW Magazine July 2015



Last edited by baggss; 07-24-2017 at 10:50 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 07-24-2017, 4:33 PM
SamsDX's Avatar
SamsDX SamsDX is offline
Signal Out of Banned
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Unincorporated South Orange County
Posts: 1,139
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Randy G. View Post
Didn't she do it to purge the Mike Carona pay back/buddy/pal permits in order to start from square one with everyone?
In terms of "favors" that a Sheriff can give back to wealthy "donors," CCWs and law enforcement credentials are the things that come to mind. There may be others, but I recall those being the main favors given by Carona.

This is pure speculation, of course, but maybe the initial reason Hutchens liberalized the CCW issuance policy was to take that corrupting influence away. A future administration would be able to change that, however, so I'm not sure what she stood to gain from expanding CCWs. I might be giving her too much credit for orchestrating this, but the large potential voting bloc of licensees could, in theory, minimize the possibility of future Sheriffs that could successfully run on a platform of reducing CCW issuance but in turn use them as cheap political favors as Carona did.
__________________
NRA Benefactor Life Member, SAF Life Member, CCRKBA Life Member

Gavin Newsom is a lying, cheating slickster and will be the worst mistake California has ever made if he gets elected Governor. Hollywood movie producers look to him and his oleaginous persona as a model for the corrupt "bad guy" politician character. This guy is so greasy, he could lubricate an entire arsenal of AR-15s just by breathing on them.
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 07-24-2017, 5:22 PM
Erion929's Avatar
Erion929 Erion929 is online now
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: So. Orange County, CA.
Posts: 2,713
iTrader: 52 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FilmGuy View Post
So I went to the Harrington4Sheriff Facebook page and sent them a message.

FilmGuy:

So word on the street is Harrington is not a big fan of civilians having CCW permits and will be far more restrictive on issuance compared to the current administration or the other candidate for sheriff. I'd like to bypass the usual and ambiguous political statements and request a clear and binding statement of your CCW policy and will self defense be a good and clear enough reason for issuance?

Harrington4sheriff:

I'm not sure what street you live on but Dave would be way more proactive in issuing ccw's then either of the two previous administrations. Thanks for the inquiry.


FilmGuy:

Well I was no fan of Hutchens and supported Bill Hunt as he was crystal clear in his stance and good cause requirement and would want someone in office who has that same stance and who is willing to put it in writing. Saying one will be more proactive still leaves wiggle room. And the street is the Calguns.net website.

(Awaiting a response)

(Obviously this response if not from the candidate directly and isn't worth much. People need to pin all of the candidates down and demand a clear, concise answer to the CCW question and post it on their website. I would also like to see them make video statements to the voters and Board of Supervisors.)


Response from Harrington

Dave H here, I walked precincts for Bill and have secured his endorsement for this race. I am pro 2A and a member of the NRA. I am a shall issue believer but understand the law. It is going to take innovation and an understanding of the current law to be able to effectively issue CCW to law abiding citizens. The law recently changing to "May" issue means you cannot ask for a CCW just because. It does not mean you have to have some long drawn out reason to get one. It is ridiculous, in my opinion, that a law abiding citizen has to petition the government to exercise a constitutional right given them by god. Period, end of statement.


FilmGuy

Well that is good to hear. But I still believe "self defense" is good enough reason as has been shown by other Sheriff's in neighboring jurisdictions accepting that as a good enough reason and have been issuing for it alone.

Sounds ok, I guess....seems similar, though slightly 'weaker' than what the current Sheriff's Department is effectively doing? It takes "innovation and an understanding"?

Not sure how our Constitutional right was given to us by God........

So, so far, BOTH he and Barnes are Pro-2A?



*

Last edited by Erion929; 07-24-2017 at 5:25 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 07-24-2017, 10:23 PM
baggss's Avatar
baggss baggss is online now
Stoopid American Redneck™
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Eastern Ventura County
Posts: 2,657
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FilmGuy View Post
Dave H here, I walked precincts for Bill and have secured his endorsement for this race. I am pro 2A and a member of the NRA. I am a shall issue believer but understand the law. It is going to take innovation and an understanding of the current law to be able to effectively issue CCW to law abiding citizens. The law recently changing to "May" issue means you cannot ask for a CCW just because. It does not mean you have to have some long drawn out reason to get one. It is ridiculous, in my opinion, that a law abiding citizen has to petition the government to exercise a constitutional right given them by god. Period, end of statement.


FilmGuy

Well that is good to hear. But I still believe "self defense" is good enough reason as has been shown by other Sheriff's in neighboring jurisdictions accepting that as a good enough reason and have been issuing for it alone.
You hit it on the head FG. "May" issue, doesn't mean "Can Not" issue for Self Defense = Good Cause, but it seems that many Sheriffs in liberal counties choose to claim that is the case. The law clearly leaves the definition of "May" up to the IA without requiring that a license be issued, as he puts it "just because".

I'm also not sure what he means by the "recent" change to May issue, unless he is referring to Hutchins decision to pull back on the definition Good Cause. Either way though, the morals clause still gives the IA an out if they choose to go with SD=GC. Sort of check to make sure the "May" part stays put.
__________________
"The best gun is the one you'll have on you when you need it the most, the one you know how to use, the one that goes BANG every single time you pull the trigger. Whether that gun cost you $349 or $1,100 it's worth every penny if it saves your life, or the life of someone you love.” -Tim Schmit, CCW Magazine July 2015


Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 07-25-2017, 8:16 AM
FilmGuy's Avatar
FilmGuy FilmGuy is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 128
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by baggss View Post
You hit it on the head FG. "May" issue, doesn't mean "Can Not" issue for Self Defense = Good Cause, but it seems that many Sheriffs in liberal counties choose to claim that is the case. The law clearly leaves the definition of "May" up to the IA without requiring that a license be issued, as he puts it "just because".

I'm also not sure what he means by the "recent" change to May issue, unless he is referring to Hutchins decision to pull back on the definition Good Cause. Either way though, the morals clause still gives the IA an out if they choose to go with SD=GC. Sort of check to make sure the "May" part stays put.
He may be pro 2nd Amendment and Pro CCW, but it is still a non committal, politi speak, cowardly answer which still leaves me suspicious of what he will do. Hutchens used the same general line like other non issuing Sheriff's who hide behind the "I can't issue for Self Defense Alone" line even though many other jurisdictions do and have no legal problems. I would suggest potential voters need to just refuse to accept this type of response from any candidate.

Of course I am also suspicious of the other candidate and the rumor droppers pushing for him.
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 07-25-2017, 10:37 AM
maidenrules29 maidenrules29 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 195
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Maybe someone can compile statistics from San Bernardino County, ie; how many CCW holders have been involved in gang crime and/or robberies/unjustified homicide, and send him those stats. Without checking I'm pretty sure it's zero. That may ease his worry that "criminals who just haven't compiled a record yet" will be getting CCW's. How dumb is this guy?

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #61  
Old 07-25-2017, 10:54 AM
FilmGuy's Avatar
FilmGuy FilmGuy is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 128
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by maidenrules29 View Post
Maybe someone can compile statistics from San Bernardino County, ie; how many CCW holders have been involved in gang crime and/or robberies/unjustified homicide, and send him those stats. Without checking I'm pretty sure it's zero. That may ease his worry that "criminals who just haven't compiled a record yet" will be getting CCW's. How dumb is this guy?

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk
Any candidate spouting the "people obtaining CCW permits to hold guns for fellow gang members" theory is just using it as an excuse to hide their opinion CCW issuance should be more restrictive in general. Perhaps those candidates should push for more restrictions on off duty law enforcement. I suggest they get behind a law not allowing off duty police officers or deputies to consume any alcohol while they CCW. Seems to me like a lot of dumb off duty incidents with firearms involve drinking.

Last edited by FilmGuy; 07-25-2017 at 10:57 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 07-25-2017, 6:08 PM
Irvine Irvine is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Irvine, CA
Posts: 71
iTrader: 8 / 100%
Default

This article has nationwide data, not just California.... It shows very low crimes committed by CCW holders....

http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...g-law-abiding/
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 07-27-2017, 2:27 AM
glock21sf glock21sf is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Orange County
Posts: 227
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Saw this today from Harrington.

https://crshncrm.wixsite.com/harring...vid-Harrington
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 07-27-2017, 8:39 AM
FilmGuy's Avatar
FilmGuy FilmGuy is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 128
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

July 26, 2017
|
David Harrington

Let me be perfectly clear, I support an individual’s second amendment right. Period. I believe in “shall issue” as the standard for law abiding citizens when they apply for a CCW. Period. I believe “may issue” should have no more of a “good cause” test than an individual wants to protect themselves or their families. Period. These are the foundational beliefs forming my position and will be the foundation from which I approach the policy on issuing Carry Concealed Weapon permits (CCW) as the Sheriff of Orange County.

What is “shall issue?” This prefered standard means as long as you pass basic requirements set out by state law, the issuing authority shall issue you a permit. No good cause requirement. “May Issue” on the other hand, has the same requirements but mandates applicants show “good cause” beyond self-defense. It is important to note, the State establishes the requirement for “shall issue” or “may issue.” The Sheriff determines what qualifies as good cause and as far as I am concerned, there is no greater cause than wanting to protect yourself or your family.

The State of California’s constant attacks on gun rights for law abiding citizens is bizarre to say the least. Especially when you consider all the laws and propositions allowing violent felons out of prison before they do their time making all of us less safe. At the same time the Legislature is introducing laws to restrict lawful gun ownership, they are introducing legislation removing penalties against criminals who use firearms in their crimes. They make law abiding citizens less safe and refuse to allow us to defend ourselves while lessening the penalties for criminals using firearms in the commission of a crime.

The Supreme Court had a chance to clarify the constitutional issue of shall issue versus may issue in the Peruta v. California case. SCOTUS refused to hear the case allowing the 9th circuit decision to stand, reaffirming the State of California’s “may issue” law. Justice Thomas wrote in his dissent, “For those of us who work in marbled halls, guarded constantly by a vigilant and dedicated police force, the guarantees of the second amendment might seem antiquated and superfluous. But the framers made a clear choice: they reserved to all Americans the right to bear arms for self-defense. I do not think we should stand by idly while a state denies that right, particularly when their very lives may depend on it.” The majority on SCOTUS punted. Justice Thomas spoke about the court somehow viewing the second amendment as a “disfavored right” and how the court has heard 35 cases involving the first amendment and 25 cases involving the fourth amendment. The last time SCOTUS heard a second amendment case was 2010.

There is hope on the SCOTUS front and it comes in the form of Grace v. District of Columbia. The D.C. circuit court of appeals ruled the restrictive “may issue” law in D.C. was unconstitutional. Hopefully this case lands in the Supreme Court and clarity is provided as to the constitutionality of “shall issue.” Time will tell. There will be other cases (Flanagan v. Harris, a California lawsuit) challenging the “may issue” doctrine and the hope is SCOTUS will have to make a decision.

The data on restrictive gun laws for law abiding citizens shows there is more crime in areas with the most restrictions. This should not surprise anyone. The 18th century criminologist Cesare Beccarria wrote, "The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man." One need not look any farther than Chicago for proof.

As Sheriff, I will stand firm on my foundational beliefs grounded in the Constitution regarding the Second Amendment. I believe law abiding citizens have the right to protect themselves wherever they go. I will find innovative ways to bring efficiency to the process making sure to limit the time it takes to obtain a CCW. I look forward to working with those law abiding citizens who want to make themselves safer and by extension their communities safer.
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 07-27-2017, 8:57 AM
Erion929's Avatar
Erion929 Erion929 is online now
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: So. Orange County, CA.
Posts: 2,713
iTrader: 52 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by glock21sf View Post

Perhaps "Film Guy" spurred him on to produce a statement....great to see something concrete on paper/internet

Like
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 07-28-2017, 12:40 AM
Ricokane's Avatar
Ricokane Ricokane is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 68
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

I attended a meeting last week with Barnes. He spoke specifically about CCW licensing. Said he completely supports the exact same policy as Hutchens. Said he wouldn't make any changes to it, but that he would like to see some standardization in the required training.

I can't speak for any other candidate, but straight from the horses mouth, he told this audience that he would continue with existing licensing program. Heard it with my own ears, this was a non political and friendly audience.

Election still a long ways out, but take this for what it's worth.
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 07-28-2017, 7:49 AM
GlockN'Roll's Avatar
GlockN'Roll GlockN'Roll is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: SOUTHERN CAL
Posts: 2,284
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadrac View Post
I received a email from a friend that is a member of the Lincoln Club of Orange County and ran into Don Barnes at a recent event:

"Good news, {Wife's name} attended Lincoln Club meeting with Under Sheriff Don Barnes, he is running for OC Sheriff and is supporting the expansion of the CCWs in the OC."

for what it's worth...
I heard something similar from another Lincoln Club member.

He said that, OC CCW'ers should be treated at least as well as under the current Sheriff and likely quite a bit better under Barnes.
__________________
Carry Daily, Safely, Discreetly
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 07-28-2017, 11:51 PM
Shadrac's Avatar
Shadrac Shadrac is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 12
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Inspired by FilmGuy, I pinged Barnes' Facebook messenger and he replied.

Shadrac:
Hello, I wanted to see if I could get a clear statement of your CCW position and want to know if self defense would be considered good and clear enough reason for issuance?


Barnes:
Thank you for your email and your interest about my position about CCWs. Let me say that I pledge to follow the law and continue our Sheriff’s current practice, which I supported while I was the Assistant Sheriff over command of the CCW Unit. First, the OCSD has issued more CCWs post-Peruta (return to the “Good Cause” requirement) than it did during the Peruta period (no good cause). In fact, our CCWs have more than doubled since the appellate court overturned the Peruta ruling and has issued almost 11,000 CCWs.

Here are the number of CCW licenses issued during these periods:

• CCWs issued prior to Peruta (2013): 906 average per year

• CCWs issued during Peruta (February ’13 to March ’14): 5,164 was the highest number of licenses issued

• CCWs issued Post-Peruta (March ’14 to date): more than 10,700 CCWs

I am sure you are aware that the interpretation of the law has changed several times the past five years. Orange County was being sued similar to Peruta v. San Diego. Initially, the Sheriff was concerned with the shift per Peruta, as were most other sheriffs in the state. I was scheduled to testify at the Orange County case and filed a declaration with the court detailing various concerns. What I learned through the Peruta period was that our concerns had been allayed and have changed to full support of our current practice. If that were not so, the number of CCWs issued post-Peruta would have returned to less than 1,000 CCWs within two years as the Peruta-issued CCWs expired. One additional fact, once the Peruta ruling was overturned, the OCSD did NOT recall ANY of the Peruta-issued CCWs.

Regarding your question regarding self-defense as good cause, it would depend on the circumstances as it relates to meeting penal code required good cause, which remains the legal standard. I believe we have a reasonable interpretation of good cause as is evidenced by the number of CCWs that have been issued. I would recommend you contact our CCW unit for more specific details.

I hope I have answered your questions. I recently met with several gun enthusiasts and have been endorsed by Greg Bouslog of On Target and Firearms Instructor TJ Johnson, among others. I would appreciate your support.

Best of luck to you.

Don
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 07-29-2017, 8:06 AM
Erion929's Avatar
Erion929 Erion929 is online now
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: So. Orange County, CA.
Posts: 2,713
iTrader: 52 / 100%
Default

Good stuff from Harrington and Barnes
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 07-29-2017, 8:33 AM
baggss's Avatar
baggss baggss is online now
Stoopid American Redneck™
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Eastern Ventura County
Posts: 2,657
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadrac View Post
Regarding your question regarding self-defense as good cause, it would depend on the circumstances as it relates to meeting penal code required good cause, which remains the legal standard. I believe we have a reasonable interpretation of good cause as is evidenced by the number of CCWs that have been issued. I would recommend you contact our CCW unit for more specific details.
This line is the key, IMO, to his whole outlook on the CCW issue and the problem with many Sheriffs in this state. Yes, he will continue to be CCW friendly but somehow he believes the Penal Code does not allow for mere "Self Defense" to be sufficient good cause. There is no requirement to meet a minimum good cause in the Penal Code. The Penal code offers no litmus test for what constitutes good cause, it merely says that good cause must exist but does not say what does or does not constitute good cause. In other words, good cause is purely subjective under CA PC, yet too many Sheriffs (and CoP) want to believe the law says of implies something it doesn't.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CA PC 26150
(a) When a person applies for a license to carry a pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person, the sheriff of a county may issue a license to that person upon proof of all of the following:
(2) Good cause exists for issuance of the license.
If he would just come out and say "I will continue current the policy but I don't believe that Self Defense is Sufficient Good Cause", I'd have a lot of respect for his honesty. Instead he quotes numbers of permits issued under differing policies when the reality is that if SD = CG was the policy they would likely have issued more permits in the same time frame. Don't get me wrong, the numbers are good, but under a SD = GC policy they would probably be even better.
__________________
"The best gun is the one you'll have on you when you need it the most, the one you know how to use, the one that goes BANG every single time you pull the trigger. Whether that gun cost you $349 or $1,100 it's worth every penny if it saves your life, or the life of someone you love.” -Tim Schmit, CCW Magazine July 2015



Last edited by baggss; 07-29-2017 at 11:32 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #71  
Old 07-29-2017, 11:05 AM
FilmGuy's Avatar
FilmGuy FilmGuy is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 128
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadrac View Post
Inspired by FilmGuy, I pinged Barnes' Facebook messenger and he replied.

Shadrac:
Hello, I wanted to see if I could get a clear statement of your CCW position and want to know if self defense would be considered good and clear enough reason for issuance?


Barnes:
Thank you for your email and your interest about my position about CCWs. Let me say that I pledge to follow the law and continue our Sheriff’s current practice, which I supported while I was the Assistant Sheriff over command of the CCW Unit. First, the OCSD has issued more CCWs post-Peruta (return to the “Good Cause” requirement) than it did during the Peruta period (no good cause). In fact, our CCWs have more than doubled since the appellate court overturned the Peruta ruling and has issued almost 11,000 CCWs.

Here are the number of CCW licenses issued during these periods:

• CCWs issued prior to Peruta (2013): 906 average per year

• CCWs issued during Peruta (February ’13 to March ’14): 5,164 was the highest number of licenses issued

• CCWs issued Post-Peruta (March ’14 to date): more than 10,700 CCWs

I am sure you are aware that the interpretation of the law has changed several times the past five years. Orange County was being sued similar to Peruta v. San Diego. Initially, the Sheriff was concerned with the shift per Peruta, as were most other sheriffs in the state. I was scheduled to testify at the Orange County case and filed a declaration with the court detailing various concerns. What I learned through the Peruta period was that our concerns had been allayed and have changed to full support of our current practice. If that were not so, the number of CCWs issued post-Peruta would have returned to less than 1,000 CCWs within two years as the Peruta-issued CCWs expired. One additional fact, once the Peruta ruling was overturned, the OCSD did NOT recall ANY of the Peruta-issued CCWs.

Regarding your question regarding self-defense as good cause, it would depend on the circumstances as it relates to meeting penal code required good cause, which remains the legal standard. I believe we have a reasonable interpretation of good cause as is evidenced by the number of CCWs that have been issued. I would recommend you contact our CCW unit for more specific details.

I hope I have answered your questions. I recently met with several gun enthusiasts and have been endorsed by Greg Bouslog of On Target and Firearms Instructor TJ Johnson, among others. I would appreciate your support.

Best of luck to you.

Don
Blah Blah Blah.. More political / bureaucratic / non-committal speak. Accepting "Self Defense" as good cause is more than enough of a good cause statement when it comes to the requirement. Although agreeing so removes any type of wiggle room for a bureaucrat to suddenly change the game should political winds change.
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 07-29-2017, 11:40 AM
baggss's Avatar
baggss baggss is online now
Stoopid American Redneck™
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Eastern Ventura County
Posts: 2,657
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadrac View Post
Here are the number of CCW licenses issued during these periods:

• CCWs issued prior to Peruta (2013): 906 average per year

• CCWs issued during Peruta (February ’13 to March ’14): 5,164 was the highest number of licenses issued

• CCWs issued Post-Peruta (March ’14 to date): more than 10,700 CCWs
So lets do the math:

Feb 13 tp Mar 14 with SD = CG they issued 5,164 CCWs. Thats an average of 397 a month (over a 13 month period).

March 14 to July 17 they issued 10,700. I think that is the total number of active CCWs, not the total number issued which would be 10,700 - 5,164 = 5,536 or 133 a month (over a 40 month period). Even if we assume they issued 10,700 between 14 and 17 the total is still only 267 a month. Regardless of his fuzzy math, both are FAR less than the 397 a month they issued under the SD = GC policy.

Lots of double talk and fuzzy numbers in his statement.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadrac View Post
Inspired by FilmGuy, I pinged Barnes' Facebook messenger and he replied.
Can you share the link to the fb page?
__________________
"The best gun is the one you'll have on you when you need it the most, the one you know how to use, the one that goes BANG every single time you pull the trigger. Whether that gun cost you $349 or $1,100 it's worth every penny if it saves your life, or the life of someone you love.” -Tim Schmit, CCW Magazine July 2015



Last edited by baggss; 07-29-2017 at 12:02 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 07-29-2017, 4:12 PM
R Dale R Dale is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 1,206
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FilmGuy View Post
Blah Blah Blah.. More political / bureaucratic / non-committal speak. Accepting "Self Defense" as good cause is more than enough of a good cause statement when it comes to the requirement. Although agreeing so removes any type of wiggle room for a bureaucrat to suddenly change the game should political winds change.
I think you are on point, from a common sense point of view any so called good cause anyone can come up with still boils down to self defense.
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 07-29-2017, 9:02 PM
Shadrac's Avatar
Shadrac Shadrac is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 12
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

The FB Page is not "Public" - which I think means you need to be logged into FB to see it.

https://www.facebook.com/don.barnes.39545
Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old 07-31-2017, 3:10 PM
rd2play rd2play is offline
--
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Orange County
Posts: 241
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

I admit I never cared to vote for any sheriff, but not anymore. I will follow each candidate's position on CCW and vote accordingly.
Reply With Quote
  #76  
Old 07-31-2017, 8:13 PM
Mibairho Mibairho is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 38
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

If he continues the current policy and good cause requirement , we are all good to go. I heard there's something like 2500-3000 appointments scheduled for new applicants over the next several months. They approve like 98-99% of all applicants and let's just be honest, the investigator helped me right through it. Call it what you want, but I think if Don Barnes continues what's in place, that's great news for OC.
Reply With Quote
  #77  
Old 09-12-2017, 8:15 PM
Pingo Ringo Pingo Ringo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 116
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FilmGuy View Post
July 26, 2017
|
David Harrington

Let me be perfectly clear, I support an individual’s second amendment right. Period. I believe in “shall issue” as the standard for law abiding citizens when they apply for a CCW. Period. I believe “may issue” should have no more of a “good cause” test than an individual wants to protect themselves or their families. Period. These are the foundational beliefs forming my position and will be the foundation from which I approach the policy on issuing Carry Concealed Weapon permits (CCW) as the Sheriff of Orange County.

What is “shall issue?” This prefered standard means as long as you pass basic requirements set out by state law, the issuing authority shall issue you a permit. No good cause requirement. “May Issue” on the other hand, has the same requirements but mandates applicants show “good cause” beyond self-defense. It is important to note, the State establishes the requirement for “shall issue” or “may issue.” The Sheriff determines what qualifies as good cause and as far as I am concerned, there is no greater cause than wanting to protect yourself or your family.....
He is giving us the answer right here. He is not going to accept "self-defense" but what is in bold is saying the same thing but in a different way.

Why it has to be this way, I don't know. Probably politics because as many have already stated in this thread and Hutchinson himself stated in the above quote, the sheriff decides what qualifies as good cause so he can decide that self-defense is good cause.
Reply With Quote
  #78  
Old 09-12-2017, 10:03 PM
ShotgunPreacher's Avatar
ShotgunPreacher ShotgunPreacher is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Seal Beach
Posts: 448
iTrader: 28 / 100%
Default

Any Calgunner who is a peace officer (required) and pro 2A has my vote
__________________
Practical APPLICATION is the best training!
Reply With Quote
  #79  
Old 09-13-2017, 8:45 AM
glbtrottr's Avatar
glbtrottr glbtrottr is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: By the Beach, Baby!
Posts: 3,500
iTrader: 47 / 88%
Default

In response to this thread, I created an invitation to Harrington's Campaign Kickoff -

Please post on the following thread to try to keep a count of attendees - thank you!

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...9#post20641489

Let's get an early start:

I'd like to surprise Aliso Viejo Mayor Dave Harrington who is running for Orange County Sheriff with a larger than average contingent of Calgunners welcoming his candidacy for his birthday and campaign kickoff. We keep discussing that 12,000 people make a difference - let's see how many can support this gentleman's campaign.

1) Please post on this thread your intention to attend.
2) Go to the Facebook page and express your interest in attending
3) Join the group for an evening of comradery, and supporting a standup candidate for Sheriff! Bring an open wallet

Mayor Harrington has mortgaged himself $40k to run his campaign - let's help him offset that.

www.tiyurl.com/ocsd

The event will be held:

SEPTEMBER 19th - 5:30 to 7:30 TUESDAY
The Winery Restaurant & Wine Bar
2647 Park Ave, Tustin, California 92782
__________________
Visit http://www.policemisconduct.net to learn more about "isolated incidents"
Reply With Quote
  #80  
Old 09-17-2017, 9:28 PM
Randy G.'s Avatar
Randy G. Randy G. is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 348
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by glbtrottr View Post
In response to this thread, I created an invitation to Harrington's Campaign Kickoff -

Please post on the following thread to try to keep a count of attendees - thank you!

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...9#post20641489

Let's get an early start:

I'd like to surprise Aliso Viejo Mayor Dave Harrington who is running for Orange County Sheriff with a larger than average contingent of Calgunners welcoming his candidacy for his birthday and campaign kickoff. We keep discussing that 12,000 people make a difference - let's see how many can support this gentleman's campaign.

1) Please post on this thread your intention to attend.
2) Go to the Facebook page and express your interest in attending
3) Join the group for an evening of comradery, and supporting a standup candidate for Sheriff! Bring an open wallet

Mayor Harrington has mortgaged himself $40k to run his campaign - let's help him offset that.

www.tiyurl.com/ocsd

The event will be held:

SEPTEMBER 19th - 5:30 to 7:30 TUESDAY
The Winery Restaurant & Wine Bar
2647 Park Ave, Tustin, California 92782
Second link doesn't work.
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 2:18 PM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, 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.