|
Calguns Concealed Carry County Information Forum Information on how to get a LTC in yourCounty |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#161
|
||||
|
||||
Wow, after reading the posts here, it seems that Placer Co. S.O. flat doesn't want to issue CCW's. I had two redlight violations in 2008 and I still got approved for my CCW in Sac Co. Granted, I have a LE and Military background that may have countered those two cites, but the stuff I'm seeing here is ridiculous to deny over.
And to call up a CCW applicant about some b.s. that happened 24 years ago when the applicant was a juvenille? wtf? I was arrested when I was a juvenile for theft, and I still was able to get a DoD TS/SCI clearance and make it through two LE background investigations and get hired by the respective agencies. I thought the Placer Co. Sheriff was a 2A guy and CCW friendly. Looks like I was wrong about that, eeesh. Move to Sac Co. gents, the sheriff here is great.
__________________
Former political prisoner who escaped on 9-24-23. |
#162
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Having said that, I am glad that Sacramento has fallen to common sense.
__________________
|
#163
|
||||
|
||||
I'm sorry if I missed something here. If I do apply but, after the process is complete, am denied, are the application fees refundable?
I feel I have legitimate reasoning, good demeanor, a clean record, etc that my chances are probably pretty high for acceptance, but I don't want to waste the time and, especially, the money if I wind up denied for some obscure reasoning. |
#164
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
It is disheartening though that we live in a county where we have to be worried about this sort of stuff.
__________________
Last edited by pitchbaby; 02-24-2011 at 8:31 AM.. Reason: spelling correction |
#165
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
#166
|
||||
|
||||
Ok, did my interview. My thoughts:
Sheriff was a very nice guy. He came off as reasonable and fair....the type of LEO that I highly respect. He also seemed very pro-2A and positive on self defense/family defense being good cause for issuance. While not explicitly stating this in those words, during my interview process, he made comments that indicated as such. Things like, "no amount of money is worth your life, or the bad guys life", or, "CCW should only be used should you absolutely need to defend yourself or your family". Again, these are not verbatim, but things like this were said and I was a bit surprised. The general feeling I got was that the Sheriff understands what a CCW is really needed for, and that CA's "good cause" necessity was not his main concern. Having said that, I got a STRONG impression that they take very seriously the actions on an applicant and their past history. The Sheriff/county views things such as traffic violations, run-ins with the law, lawsuits, illegal substance abuse, breaking other laws outside of gun related laws, etc, as making a CCW applicant more likely to break the law if carrying concealed.....and that, to them, is a liability to the public which they are not willing to risk. In other words, they really scrutinize the character of the applicant. They will review your application, hold the interview and inquire about things on it. Then they will run a background check on you from multiple state and federal sources. If they find something on there that you failed to disclose, be sure that they will follow up on why you did not tell them about that. Failure to disclose information that could affect their decision WILL BE FOUND in the background check, so DONT LIE or WITHHOLD ANYTHING, otherwise they will see this as a Character issue; namely that you lack good character. Good Character is something that I sensed was much more important to them than CA's accepted Good Cause (this may still be necessary...I dont know). When I was being interviewed, I made sure I told them about anything and everything that might even possibly show up on my background check. Even things that were completely out of my control, things I spoke to an officer about and was never written up for, trespassing on property that I did not know was private, etc. The Sheriff told me that he has denied people in the past because they failed to disclose (intentionally) some relatively inconsequential event, and when it came up in the background, he asked them about it and ended up denying them for it. But had they disclosed it when they had the opportunity, he would have approved them because it would have been no big deal. It was the lying/withholding information that caused him to deny, not the event itself. So in a nutshell, if you dont follow the law on other areas outside of gun related issues, or are found lying or misrepresenting information or events, they see good reason to deny issuing a CCW to you, due to their belief that you will not be able to follow the rules/laws when CCW'ing (being a responsible and trustworthy CCW'er). Oh, one other thing: I did ask him if being asked to pay up front after the interview indicated a better chance of issuance. He said that he will never tell someone after the interview if they will certainly be issued a permit. He said if there is something in the interview that will most certainly deny the person, he said he will tell them up front that they shouldn't pay the money because they will more than likely be denied. He then said that if there is a potential issue in the interview process, he said that he will tell you, "it is your choice" (it's a 50/50). If he asks you to pay up front after the interview, that means that there was nothing inherently wrong from the interview, and should the background check be found as represented in the interview process, then there shouldnt be anything that would prevent you from being issued a permit. I am stating these things as to the impression that I got, not as fact or law. I think, given the nature of our "May Issue" laws in CA, the Sheriff/Placer County seemed pretty fair on the way they scrutinize issuance. I'm sure there have been things that have been unfairly treated and such, but I would imagine that, by and large, it's not very common. He mentioned Calguns and how he has seen in the past that when a person is denied, they will come on here and not tell the whole story of why they were denied to make it seem that Placer is unfair. He said that what they typically fail to mention is that they withheld information in the interview process or were caught misrepresenting or lying about something. We'll see how it turns out for me. I was as honest as possible and represented everything as truthfully as I could. My conscience bears witness Hope this helps someone who might be thinking of applying.
__________________
www.FirearmReviews.net |
#167
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
It's refreshing to see a positive post in the Placer county sub forum. |
#168
|
||||
|
||||
This is exactly the impression I got during my interview.....and I received my permit in the mail yesterday.
I was rather shocked at how well received I was during the entire process. Very professionally handled and I commend the Placer County Sheriff's Office. They do a lot for our local community regardless of what some people think.
__________________
Progress comes to those who train and train; Reliance on secret techniques will get you nowhere. - Morihei Ueshiba |
#169
|
||||
|
||||
I know it is pretty obvious that some of us aren't fans of the issuing policies here in Placer... but they have always been professional and courteous. That is not the issue, not even by a long shot. We just want what is acceptable for issuance in Butte, Yuba, Sutter, and now even (by some recent comparisons) in Sacramento ( and numerous other close-by counties) to be acceptable for issuance in Placer as well. This will either happen voluntarily by policy of the sheriff or in the courts as it is already at issue in the 9th district judicial system, but one way or another, it will happen. I for one, however would prefer a voluntary policy change. It's less frustrating to all involved, most especially at the SO when it is voluntary rather than compelled.
__________________
|
#170
|
||||
|
||||
Have a friend applying today. Doubt he will get his. Reading these post refering to driving records. He also has a medical mary jane lic/. Would that also be grounds for denial? He doesn't use, only got it for a source of income down the road if it became legal. Read the app it mentions NO MEDS??? How about high blood pressure. Very poorly worded. He has took a ccw course in Yuba city and discussed all these issues with the guy running the class. Any feed back thanks.
|
#171
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
|
#172
|
||||
|
||||
Thanks will update when this runs its course. The girlfriend will be applying aswell. She has property in different counties. Sac/Lassen/Siskiyou/Placer. Which one would you recommend? And if being denied in Placer can appling elsewhere matter? She has nada zilch infractions or run ins.
|
#173
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
|
#174
|
||||
|
||||
Define primary? The biggest reason for her to carry is her rural property. We can be out in the middle of nowhere working on things. We have a house in Tenant (Weed). four thousand acres. Tree farm. There is a real threat of cougars. And ofcourse TWEAKERS. Guess I will get her to inquire.
|
#175
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
www.FirearmReviews.net |
#176
|
|||
|
|||
Can anyone confirm if carry is permitted at the Placer County Fairgrounds in Roseville? Not during the county fair but just for shows. I looked over their website but no info.
Thx! |
#177
|
||||
|
||||
dgoodale,
You might want to check out their website for a number to call...dunno. How about cal expo? Perhaps a certain gun show? I thought I read somewhere that you can't carry at a gun show.?.? I won't be carrying mine because there will be a beer garden or fest or something that involves alcohol. I won't touch my gun even if I've had a sip. |
#178
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
as for other events....i don't see why you couldn't ccw(unless otherwise posted). state parks are restricted, but cities and counties are pre-empted, so i would think regular events are fine. IANAL I have looked for this info myself, but found nothing specific to the county fairgrounds. i also do not have my ccw yet.
__________________
x2 Quote:
Quote:
|
#179
|
||||
|
||||
This was taken from here.
page 3 towards the bottom. http://www.handgunlaw.us/states/california.pdf California Codes Penal Code 12071.4. (a) This section shall be known, and may be cited as, the Gun Show Enforcement and Security Act of 2000. (c) All firearms transfers at the gun show or event shall be in accordance with applicable state and federal laws. (d) Except for purposes of showing ammunition to a prospective buyer, ammunition at a gun show or event may be displayed only in closed original factory boxes or other closed containers. (g) No person at a gun show or event, other than security personnel or sworn peace officers, shall possess at the same time both a firearm and ammunition that is designed to be fired in the firearm. Vendors having those items at the show for sale or exhibition are exempt from this prohibition. |
#180
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
|
#181
|
||||
|
||||
That's a great question. Unfortunately, that's all that was listed on the law, so ofcourse, it's most likely up to "interpretation"
I, myself haven't been to a gun show in a long time. I have however been to several gun shops. All or most of the employees of those gun shops are open carry. I wonder if they can open carry while working their booths?? |
#183
|
|||
|
|||
To dakine07: I have the same question. Who knows? In another generic thread where I asked, no less an authority than hoffmang said a sheriff would have no way to know that's how you acquired said pistol. In that sense it should be no different than listing an off-roster pistol you acquired via ppt that was never modified, which should not be an issue. And if there were a question regarding modification of said pistol, you are in fact reverting it from a modified state to a factory state. I think it should be fine but there's only one way to find out for sure. Regardless, if you try please let us know the outcome as I'd like to do the very same thing myself. If you don't try it first, I may. I just have to wait for my new CDL before I can make any purchases.
|
#184
|
||||
|
||||
Nothing in the PC prevents it.
|
#185
|
|||
|
|||
To jb7706: That may be true, but in CA sheriffs have very broad discretion to, it sometimes seems, do as they damn well please. Nothing in the PC limits you to three handguns on your permit or says "no modifications allowed," but PCSO has both of those policies. Presumably the only way to fight those policies would be to complain, but as a current ccw holder I don't really want to rock the boat. Heck, it seems from reading this thread that people are being denied for lack of moral character in Placer for speeding tickets, ancient misdemeanor convictions, and other trivial stuff, so I would not consider it outside the realm of possibility to have trouble at renewal time be the result of any such complaint. Remember that the PCSO's policy for modifying an approved weapon is revocation.
|
#188
|
||||
|
||||
Ya, ^^^ Literally denied for a few traffic tickets. I feel worst for "ThatRogue" Considering how many miles he drives... I drive a lot, more than most... but at 70K per year, he has more almost doubled.... it is utterly ridiculous that he can't get a permit considering his line of work... especially being that only one of his tickets was actually a "moving" violation. The other 2 were for a single chain on an empty trailer and no headset while on the phone... or something like that.
Time for a new policy or a new sheriff.
__________________
|
#189
|
||||
|
||||
I'm going to be going in soon, and am worried because I get a speeding ticket(usually always on the freeway heading down south) about once every 3 years.
__________________
x2 Quote:
Quote:
|
#190
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
#191
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
#192
|
||||
|
||||
All due respect... don't talk to me like I don't know my own past bro. I am what I say I am. I was told I was denied for traffic tickets. It really is like that. Even Jessica at their office confirmed for me that this is common as well as Lt. Minton-Sander. If you don't believe it, perhaps you need to do your own homework.
__________________
|
#193
|
||||
|
||||
What makes you think I'm referring to you? But since you brought it up, lets see how well I've done my home work.
By your own admission you've had a TRO, lost your rights for 3 years, escalated a road rage incident to the point you had to have a local CCW instructor intervene, and have traffic tickets on top of it all. I'm no expert on good moral character, but I'm certain all that was taken into consideration when the final decision was made. Do you disagree? |
#194
|
||||
|
||||
It is also well documented that the TRO was issued by the judge who admitted in the courtroom that I was not and never was a threat to the girl and he knew it, but decided to issue it anyway as a measure to help the "emotional" well being of the girl requesting it. Feel free to check out the court reporter tape up in Humboldt, it is there plain as day.
Also, I did not escalate anything on the side of any road, in fact, I was the one who talked the guy down and gave the signal to the CCW instructor NOT to intervene... since we are bringing that one up... I may have posted something about it here, but do not recall doing so. I am beginning to think you must be someone with privileged information at the Sheriff's office. Through all of that, I am currently a Cubmaster, have been a sunday school teacher, I am an Elder in my church, and have been called to several callings of leadership and example in church and in scouting. If all of the other bits of stuff that have happened were indicative of my character, I doubt I would be allowed anywhere near children or have been called to be a leader in a religious setting. I personally am far more willing to call myself out on my faults and it is uncomfortable for me to cite my positive accomplishments, but if a broad picture of moral character is something to be determined, than I believe that all facets of someones life should be brought into serious consideration, not just the stuff that happens on the side of the road or when someone decides to lie about you to meet their own less than savory objectives. Speaking of traffic tickets... It has been almost 3 years at this point since I have had one. Just sayin'... That has little to do with my desire for a CCW and more to do with me just deciding my kids were old enough now to notice what I was doing behind the wheel and me wanting to be a better example to them.
__________________
|
#195
|
||||
|
||||
I am not privy to any privileged information. I'm only repeating what you posted, on this forum. I have no choice but to take what you say on it's merits, since I don't have the slightest interest if it's true or not.
But that brings me back to my original post about people saying their being denied for "only traffic tickets" and not looking at the whole picture. Which I'm sure we both know Placer Co. did. I'm sure you're a decent person, and I'm sure you'll get a permit provided Richards goes our way. But lets not sit here and scream impropriety on the part of the PCSO issuing policy. |
#196
|
||||
|
||||
Like I said bro... I am more concerned about Thatrogue... Honestly though... if they are denying for anything more than traffic tickets, but then just specifically stating in the letters that we get that they are denying for traffic tickets... why not just say there is something more? We were honest in our applications, why shouldn't they be held to the same standard?
__________________
|
#197
|
||||
|
||||
Yes...we have it better than some counties(there is a chance we may get a CC permit). However, it is not guaranteed. Legally speaking it should be shall issue statewide. I think you will find more people being vocal about may issue counties than no issue(since you don't even have a shot in a no issue county). So when one gets denied for what could be argued as irrelevant to good cause, you're going to hear about it.
__________________
x2 Quote:
Quote:
|
#198
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Placer County gave me the nod, and said my approval hinges on my background check. Robbed me of $210 finger printed me and then issued a denial using irrelevant PC in a badly written letter. After a ridiculously pointless phone call by Mittensander. Wtf is the point of calling me to tell me your denying me? Bad logic if you want my opinion. I will be requesting my money back soon. I would just like to understand why collect all the fees and run a background on someone whom your are going to deny... are they hoping for a skeleton like Anti-hero claims all denials seems to have. Btw... If anyone would like to help formulate a request for a review of the denial, I am looking for help in what this needs to look like. please advise.
__________________
"You will see us move very quickly to gut the remnants of the assault weapon ban in California"- Gene Hoffman Last edited by thatrogue; 03-14-2011 at 11:46 PM.. |
#199
|
||||
|
||||
Well, I wanted to let everyone know that I RECEIVED MY PERMIT YESTERDAY!!!
WOO HOO!!!! And the cherry on top is that I also received an email yesterday from Tucker Gun Leather that they will be shipping out my HF-1 holster today!!! Yesterday was a great day!
__________________
www.FirearmReviews.net |
#200
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Congrats!
__________________
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|