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 08-28-2011, 8:45 AM
Tacobandit Tacobandit is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 916
iTrader: 8 / 100%
Default Why dont we try and get a LTC friendly sheriff elected?

Wouldnt that be easier then suing constantly? Devote some of the funds used to fight these lawsuits and sponsor someone who will be more friendly towards 2A rights?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 08-28-2011, 8:54 AM
sirsloth sirsloth is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 238
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Who is we? I voted for a LTC friendly sheriff.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 08-28-2011, 8:54 AM
Paladin's Avatar
Paladin Paladin is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: SFBA
Posts: 7,817
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tacobandit View Post
Wouldnt that be easier then suing constantly? Devote some of the funds used to fight these lawsuits and sponsor someone who will be more friendly towards 2A rights?
Wow! Why didn't we think of that???

You should really go over to www.calccw.com and see what they say....

But seriously, that's MUCH easier said than done.

ETA: It will work ONLY where there isn't an incumbent running (unless he's under some sort of corruption investigation or said something not PC), or an "anointed" successor of a long-term incumbent AND there's a close race AND there's organized LTC activists AND being pro-LTC isn't a political killer, esp w/local media (IOW won't work in the major urban counties that are the anti holdouts), AND . . . by the time of the next sheriffs races, we should have won Shall Issue for the entire country via the federal courts, so why are you suggesting we switch back to a losing strategy???

Sheriffs come and go (your investment $$$ would have short-term impact), but SCOTUS declared "fundamental rights" last a looooong time.
__________________
Never mistake being delusional for being optimistic.

225+ examples of CCWs Saving Lives.


Last edited by Paladin; 08-28-2011 at 9:50 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 08-28-2011, 9:04 AM
epcii's Avatar
epcii epcii is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 587
iTrader: 12 / 93%
Default

Because there aren't too many of them out there.
__________________

Ask not for a lighter burden, but for broader shoulders
NRA Member
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 08-28-2011, 9:14 AM
hoffmang hoffmang is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Peninsula, Bay Area
Posts: 18,485
iTrader: 14 / 100%
Default

It is a viable strategy but in a very limited number of counties. Also, you'll usually find that the counties where this is a viable strategy - the current sheriff is usually pretty friendly.

-Gene
__________________
Gene Hoffman
Chairman, The Calguns Foundation

DONATE NOW
to support the rights of California gun owners. Follow @CalgunsFdn on Twitter.
Opinions posted in this account are my own and not the approved position of any organization.
I read PMs. But, if you need a response, include an email address or email me directly!


"The problem with being a gun rights supporter is that the left hates guns and the right hates rights." -Anon
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 08-28-2011, 9:36 AM
Tacobandit Tacobandit is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 916
iTrader: 8 / 100%
Default

Guys I am aware of the difficulty of this, I am just wondering why a portion of the strategy is not dedicated to trying to find a suitable candidate to run against someone like Baca and make a big issue out of the ccw permits and how he can justify that there have hired 1 new deputy in 18 months when they have a huge attrition rate and a response time of 10+ to try and yet state that we do not get the capacity to defend ourselves. It would make for an interesting election.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 08-28-2011, 9:44 AM
Paladin's Avatar
Paladin Paladin is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: SFBA
Posts: 7,817
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tacobandit View Post
Guys I am aware of the difficulty of this, I am just wondering why a portion of the strategy is not dedicated to trying to find a suitable candidate to run against someone like Baca and make a big issue out of the ccw permits and how he can justify that there have hired 1 new deputy in 18 months when they have a huge attrition rate and a response time of 10+ to try and yet state that we do not get the capacity to defend ourselves. It would make for an interesting election.
Yeah, I and another CNGer did just that about, oh, 5.5 years ago when we started the late www.californiaccw.org
ETA: that link now redirects to calccw.com, a different org (business) started by different folks (most of whom had been at the .org). I was NOT involved w/the founding of the .com

Go to my profile, look back for a thread I started titled something like "The LA CCW Challenge" (started one for OC too) back in early spring 2006, and you'll see what wasted about 2 yrs of my RKBA activism efforts. (But all was not wasted, TBJ folks got together there before breaking off as did calccw.com folks... Oh, never mind! LOL)

In a thread I started here about 3.5 years ago, I think it's title suggested passing *local* (i.e., county level) term-limits for specific anti counties' sheriffs, I laid out why incumbent sheriffs are sooo hard to replace -- basically set for life unless they really mess up. See what I ETA'ed in my 1st post above.

Outta here for the rest of today....
__________________
Never mistake being delusional for being optimistic.

225+ examples of CCWs Saving Lives.


Last edited by Paladin; 08-28-2011 at 10:04 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 08-28-2011, 9:50 AM
M. D. Van Norman's Avatar
M. D. Van Norman M. D. Van Norman is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: California refugee
Posts: 4,179
iTrader: 19 / 100%
Default

In fact, this was the strategy for many years, and it had significant success in the rural counties. See the recent debacle in Orange County to learn how the strategy came up short in urban areas.
__________________
Matthew D. Van Norman
Dancing Giant Sales | Licensed Firearms Dealer | Rainier, WA
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 08-28-2011, 9:50 AM
CitaDeL's Avatar
CitaDeL CitaDeL is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Redding, CA
Posts: 5,640
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hoffmang View Post
It is a viable strategy but in a very limited number of counties. Also, you'll usually find that the counties where this is a viable strategy - the current sheriff is usually pretty friendly.

-Gene
I disagree. Even where it is presumed that the sheriff is 'friendly' there is absolutely no way to ensure that they will follow the law in every circumstance.

Election can help position those who are 'open' to issuance, however even once elected, the only way sheriffs will be compelled to follow the law is to litigate.

I am not so concerned with those sheriffs who openly defy the law and prove it with their policies as I am with those who claim to follow the law, claim to love the 2nd amendment while surrepititiously undermining it.
__________________



Sometimes the law defends plunder and participates in it. Sometimes the law places the whole apparatus of judges, police, prisons and gendarmes at the service of the plunderers, and treats the victim -- when he defends himself -- as a criminal. Bastiat

“Everything the State says is a lie, and everything it has it has stolen.” Friedrich Nietzsche
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 08-28-2011, 9:57 AM
OleCuss OleCuss is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Kalifornia
Posts: 6,137
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Paladin's post is key.

Concentrate on the courts. The process is cheaper, has a higher probability of success (on average), and favorable outcomes are more durable.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 08-28-2011, 11:00 AM
RomanDad's Avatar
RomanDad RomanDad is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: 92 acres of free Kentuckiana
Posts: 3,482
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tacobandit View Post
Wouldnt that be easier then suing constantly? Devote some of the funds used to fight these lawsuits and sponsor someone who will be more friendly towards 2A rights?
No incumbent Sheriff has EVER failed to be reelected in the entire history of the state.
__________________
Life is too short to drive a Ferrari...

Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 08-28-2011, 11:08 AM
Crom Crom is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,621
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

I'll take binding litigation over politics every day of the week.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 08-28-2011, 11:21 AM
Tarn_Helm's Avatar
Tarn_Helm Tarn_Helm is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 2,112
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Post Ken Masse was LTC-friendly--got blindsided!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tacobandit View Post
Wouldnt that be easier then suing constantly? Devote some of the funds used to fight these lawsuits and sponsor someone who will be more friendly towards 2A rights?
Read this thread: http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...ad.php?t=32688

Read this article about Sheriff Moonbeam.

Also, within a day or two of defeating Ken Masse, Moonbeam's underlings stripped him of his LTC (CCW).

__________________
"The Religion of Peace": Islam: What the West Needs to Know.
". . . all [historical] experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms
[of governmental abuses and usurpations] to which they are accustomed."
Decl. of Indep., July 4, 1776

NRA Benefactor/Life Member; Lifer: CRPA, GOA, SAF & JPFO



Last edited by Tarn_Helm; 08-28-2011 at 11:32 AM.. Reason: corrected content
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 08-28-2011, 12:07 PM
Gray Peterson's Avatar
Gray Peterson Gray Peterson is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lynnwood, WA
Posts: 5,818
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Folks,

This is not an appropriate strategy in this era. In 2010, for example, individual members assisted in Lake and El Dorado counties, helping get current sheriff's Rivero and D'Agostini elected.

Sheriff Mitchell of Lake county, who was an incumbent, was brought down by numerous factors, such as a frame up of an innocent civilian with a boating accident and so on. However, Mitchell attempted to smear Sheriff Rivero as a "San Francisco Liberal" who would revoke people's carry licenses and clamp down.

Myself and others spread the word that Rivero was not like that, and that Mitchell flat out told me he would not eliminate the illegal requirements that his LTC unit has for carry license applicants unless ordered by a court. At that point, I declared Sheriff Mitchell to be anti-gun and told people on this forum to vote for Rivero. Sheriff Rivero eliminated nearly all of the illegal requirements, including reference letters and so on.

D'Agostini was the underdog candidate against the other candidate, Therkeldsen. Lots and lots of smearing there. Originally, the sheriff candidate thought he couldn't just issue for self defense. After having a long phone conversation with the candidate, he agreed and publicly announced he would issue for "self defense" as good cause. After that situation was published, numerous members from CalGuns started helping D'Agostini.

Compare and contrast Lake and El Dorado counties with Orange and you'll see why it's ineffective. No sheriff will be up for re-election until 2014. By that time, we will have a carry ruling and none of this will matter. 2010 is the last year sheriff electoral politics mean ANYTHING in the state of California....
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 08-28-2011, 12:58 PM
dantodd dantodd is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: San Carlos
Posts: 9,362
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tacobandit View Post
Wouldnt that be easier then suing constantly? Devote some of the funds used to fight these lawsuits and sponsor someone who will be more friendly towards 2A rights?
First andmforemost it is essentially a futile effort. My sheriff was literally caught in a whorehousecafter being appointed but before he ever stood for election. He ran unopposed the next round. It really is that bad.

Second. Focusing the fund raising efforts etc. toward litigation any success is good statewide, pouring that money into local elections would be getting less leverage. It also accepts the notion that the sheriff should have the auority to deny a law abiding Californian the right to bear arms.

This doesn't mean that one shouldn't support the sheriff candidate who is the most friendly to the RKBA when a seat is legitimately contested. Just don't expect a statewide group to pour money and out of area effort into the race.
__________________
Coyote Point Armory
341 Beach Road
Burlingame CA 94010
650-315-2210
http://CoyotePointArmory.com
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 08-28-2011, 1:10 PM
Fjold Fjold is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Near Bakersfield
Posts: 20,576
iTrader: 26 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RomanDad View Post
No incumbent Sheriff has EVER failed to be reelected in the entire history of the state.
Donny Youngblood beat the incumbent Mack Wimbish in Kern County in 2006.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 08-28-2011, 1:11 PM
morrcarr67's Avatar
morrcarr67 morrcarr67 is online now
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Ontario, CA
Posts: 9,521
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Default

@ Gray Peterson. Thank you for that info.

Also, thank you and all the others; like Gene, Brandon and those who I can't think of right now, for all that you do for all of the rest of us.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 08-28-2011, 2:00 PM
Andy Taylor Andy Taylor is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Colorado Rockies
Posts: 1,369
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

That strategey has been tried here in Sacramento county since at least 1994. There has always been at least one pro 2A/LTC candidate on the ballet. It didn't work. Sueing Sheriff McGuiness worked.
__________________
"Although personally I am quite content with existing explosives, I feel we must not stand in the path of improvement." Winston Churchill

“Among the natural rights of the colonists are these: First a right to life, secondly to liberty, and thirdly to property; together with the right to defend them in the best manner they can” Samual Adams
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 08-28-2011, 2:16 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 Gray Peterson View Post
No sheriff will be up for re-election until 2014. By that time, we will have a carry ruling and none of this will matter. 2010 is the last year sheriff electoral politics mean ANYTHING in the state of California....
This is music to my ears even though I've already got my LTC due to living in Stanislaus Co. Great work by our CGF folk.
__________________
Things usually turn out best for those who make the best of how things turn out.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 08-28-2011, 2:19 PM
paul0660's Avatar
paul0660 paul0660 is offline
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Ukiah
Posts: 15,705
iTrader: 34 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tacobandit View Post
Wouldnt that be easier then suing constantly? Devote some of the funds used to fight these lawsuits and sponsor someone who will be more friendly towards 2A rights?
I am not paying attention to someone who, evidently, has managed to sell something here but who, evidently, cannot figure out how to tell us where he lives.

"More friendly", btw, means nothing. We aren't supposed to call out trolls anymore, so WHATEVER.
__________________
*REMOVE THIS PART BEFORE POSTING*
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 08-28-2011, 4:06 PM
sholling's Avatar
sholling sholling is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,320
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

As long as it's illegal for the peasantry to run for sheriff it's a lost cause to bother trying to toss out an incumbent sheriff. And that's been illegal since the legislature banned peasants from that office back in the 1980s to protect the unpopular incumbent Orange County sheriff from being defeated at the polls by a popular judge running for the seat. It is quite literally The Incumbent Sheriff Protection Act even if they don't call it that. But even if it were possible to run for sheriff the amount of money that a sitting sheriff can raise from well connected and well heeled donors seeking a LTC or hoping to keep theirs is pretty hard to beat. Finally the California RINO party would back Buford T. Justice for reelection just because they see backing incumbent sheriff as supporting law enforcement no matter how bad the choice.
__________________
"Government is the great fiction, through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else." --FREDERIC BASTIAT--

Proud Life Member: National Rifle Association and the Second Amendment Foundation.

Disappointed Life Member: California Rifle & Pistol Association

Last edited by sholling; 08-28-2011 at 4:08 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 08-28-2011, 4:12 PM
Cokebottle's Avatar
Cokebottle Cokebottle is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor - Lifetime
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Chino, CA
Posts: 30,479
iTrader: 14 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by M. D. Van Norman View Post
In fact, this was the strategy for many years, and it had significant success in the rural counties. See the recent debacle in Orange County to learn how the strategy came up short in urban areas.
+1

Unless something is codified in law at the state level, we are never more than one election or appointment away from losing our rights.

And even in counties with a permissive CLEO, we still have illegal requirements and fees added on. It's not that the CLEO imposed them... they've always been in place. Such is the case in the IE, where Rod Hoops will issue for personal protection, virtually nobody is denied, but you need multiple character references, they do an employer and a neighborhood check, and the total investment is around $250.

Neighborhood check? My neighbors are one of the reasons I want an LTC.
__________________
- Rich

Quote:
Originally Posted by dantodd View Post
A just gov't will not be overthrown by force or violence because the people have no incentive to overthrow a just gov't. If a small minority of people attempt such an insurrection to grab power and enslave the people the RKBA of the whole is our insurance against their success.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 08-28-2011, 4:15 PM
Cokebottle's Avatar
Cokebottle Cokebottle is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor - Lifetime
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Chino, CA
Posts: 30,479
iTrader: 14 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by paul0660 View Post
We aren't supposed to call out trolls anymore, so WHATEVER.
I didn't get that memo.

But I agree.... there have been a lot of legitimate posters being called "troll" simply because someone disagreed with them.
__________________
- Rich

Quote:
Originally Posted by dantodd View Post
A just gov't will not be overthrown by force or violence because the people have no incentive to overthrow a just gov't. If a small minority of people attempt such an insurrection to grab power and enslave the people the RKBA of the whole is our insurance against their success.
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 5:16 PM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, 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 2002-2018, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.