2022 Santa Clara County Sheriff election mega thread

[Paladin]

A longtime CGN member reached out to me and assured me that Jensen is the candidate to actively, not passively, support.

[rp55]

A Mercury News editorial on 9 April has endorsed Jonsen. Based on 30+ years of experience with the Merc I'll be voting for Jensen.

Mercury News editorial endorsing Jonson.

[NorCalBusa]

Originally Posted by rp55

A Mercury News editorial on 9 April has endorsed Jonsen. Based on 30+ years of experience with the Merc I'll be voting for Jensen.

Mercury News editorial endorsing Jonson.

^ this. Whatever the Murky News says- don't.

[sixtus]

I sent an email to Jensen’s staff, and got this in response:

“Hello [REDACTED],

Thanks for your valid inquiry.

Kevin will definitely change the way the process has been handled. Permit applications will be accepted, applicants will be notified of acceptance, and per the CA Penal Code, an applicant will be apprised of an approval or denial within the mandated time frame. If a denial is issued, a reason will be stated and the applicant will have an opportunity to appeal. As for the way California's law is written, applicants must state a "good cause" for the permit as well as be of "good moral character" per the Penal Code, thus why California is not a "Shall Issue" state - i.e. issuance must be given if an applicant is otherwise not restricted to own a firearm.

That being said, the process will be greatly improved and there will be an assessment of the current holders, and "cause" for new issuance may include reasons stated by current holders. Business people/staff who handle cash/valuables, certified security professionals, people under active physical threat or with restraining orders against another, may allow those in similar circumstances to have issuance.

Kevin and his supporters recognize that for a successful campaign, votes must be garnered from people who do not have a strong belief in the lawful civilian ownership of firearms aside from those who do. In the past voting cycles, the candidates who stated they would be "Shall Issue '' garnered around 10% of the total vote combined. In this region, a "Shall Issue" candidate will not win as the ratio is three/four to one in our county of those of not having a strong 2A view to those who are strong 2A. Kevin attained 40% of the past vote in balancing his approach and he is a strong supporter of lawful and safe firearm ownership and we believe if he can continue to have a balanced approach, fairness will come in regards to the CCW issue in our county.

In a recent public forum questionnaire, Kevin and his other candidates answered the following 2A question in regards to the City of San Jose ordinance that taxes and required insurance for lawful gun owners.

13. The city of SJ recently passed several gun control measures but critics have stated these laws unfairly target law abiding gun owners and do nothing to address violence in the city. If elected, how would you respond to these laws and what will you do to reduce major violent crimes in SCC?

Candidate Chief Jonsen in his answer was: "I have always advocated for greater gun control"

Candidate Nagaye wrote: "This is coming from life-long Democrat and a gun control advocate. I don't believe these laws will stand up to the legal challenge even with a very liberal 9th Circuit. I advocate for common sense gun control measures. I believe the NRA creates more problems than they fix, but I also believe law abiding citizens have their 2nd Amendment rights as much as I may disagree with their need to express themselves that way."

Candidate Allen: "I do support the ban on ghost guns as there is no reason for law-abiding citizens to have them. I support
common-sense gun laws."

Candidate Kevin Jensen: "I am not convinced that the recent liability insurance requirement and fee will stand due to constitutional challenges, and they don't provide any solution to the huge problem of guns obtained illegally."

Kevin is being supported by many local firearm enthusiasts, hunters, sportsmen, firearm training groups, and gun ranges not just based on his 2A view but because he is a complete candidate. He will improve the jails, be sure officers are held accountable for their actions, create community outreach in regards to firearm safety and storage, ensure they have firearm experts who understand the 2A laws to avoid poor/false firearm arrests, better training in the handling of persons with mental illness, better management practices to improve morale, and many more elements that can be only handled by someone that has his background. None of the other candidates are getting this type of support.

I am personally deeply vested in the 2A safety training community and am supporting Keven because of all of his experience, skills, and dedicated personality to improve things. I've known him for over a decade and hope you will consider to support him.

Let me know if you have any further questions or thoughts.

Bests,

Robert”

[sixtus]

In regards to CCW issuance, he didn’t say if he would accept “Self Defense” as Good Cause, and his refusal to state that he would be pro Shall Issue says a lot…

[cz74]

It comes down to Jensen vs. Jonsen, Kevin is smart and clever the way he conducts this campaign. Hope he wins, but this is santa clara county, the suckers have supermajority.

[MountainLion]

Originally Posted by sixtus

Kevin and his supporters recognize that for a successful campaign, votes must be garnered from people who do not have a strong belief in the lawful civilian ownership of firearms aside from those who do. In the past voting cycles, the candidates who stated they would be "Shall Issue '' garnered around 10% of the total vote combined. In this region, a "Shall Issue" candidate will not win as the ratio is three/four to one in our county of those of not having a strong 2A view to those who are strong 2A. Kevin attained 40% of the past vote in balancing his approach and he is a strong supporter of lawful and safe firearm ownership and we believe if he can continue to have a balanced approach, fairness will come in regards to the CCW issue in our county.

A candidate who gets it. This states very clearly: If this candidate comes out in favor of shall-issue style CCW issuance, they will lose the election, guaranteed. And this Kevin seems to understand that.

Now, the $64000 question is: Is candidate Kevin saying that he won't issue many permits? Or is he saying that talking about CCW issuance during the campaign is suicidal, but once elected he'll start issuing them like candy, but let's be quiet about it until the election is over? I have no idea.

[NorCalBusa]

Looks to me the only CCW's getting issued are to those listed (bolded), this county is staying red

Originally Posted by sixtus

I sent an email to Jensen’s staff, and got this in response:

“Hello [REDACTED], Thanks for your valid inquiry.

Kevin will definitely change the way the process has been handled. Permit applications will be accepted, applicants will be notified of acceptance, and per the CA Penal Code, an applicant will be apprised of an approval or denial within the mandated time frame. If a denial is issued, a reason will be stated and the applicant will have an opportunity to appeal. As for the way California's law is written, applicants must state a "good cause" for the permit as well as be of "good moral character" per the Penal Code, thus why California is not a "Shall Issue" state - i.e. issuance must be given if an applicant is otherwise not restricted to own a firearm.

That being said, the process will be greatly improved and there will be an assessment of the current holders, and "cause" for new issuance may include reasons stated by current holders. Business people/staff who handle cash/valuables, certified security professionals, people under active physical threat or with restraining orders against another, may allow those in similar circumstances to have issuance.

Kevin and his supporters recognize that for a successful campaign, votes must be garnered from people who do not have a strong belief in the lawful civilian ownership of firearms aside from those who do. In the past voting cycles, the candidates who stated they would be "Shall Issue '' garnered around 10% of the total vote combined. In this region, a "Shall Issue" candidate will not win as the ratio is three/four to one in our county of those of not having a strong 2A view to those who are strong 2A. Kevin attained 40% of the past vote in balancing his approach and he is a strong supporter of lawful and safe firearm ownership and we believe if he can continue to have a balanced approach, fairness will come in regards to the CCW issue in our county.

In a recent public forum questionnaire, Kevin and his other candidates answered the following 2A question in regards to the City of San Jose ordinance that taxes and required insurance for lawful gun owners.

13. The city of SJ recently passed several gun control measures but critics have stated these laws unfairly target law abiding gun owners and do nothing to address violence in the city. If elected, how would you respond to these laws and what will you do to reduce major violent crimes in SCC?

Candidate Chief Jonsen in his answer was: "I have always advocated for greater gun control"

Candidate Nagaye wrote: "This is coming from life-long Democrat and a gun control advocate. I don't believe these laws will stand up to the legal challenge even with a very liberal 9th Circuit. I advocate for common sense gun control measures. I believe the NRA creates more problems than they fix, but I also believe law abiding citizens have their 2nd Amendment rights as much as I may disagree with their need to express themselves that way."

Candidate Allen: "I do support the ban on ghost guns as there is no reason for law-abiding citizens to have them. I support
common-sense gun laws."

Candidate Kevin Jensen: "I am not convinced that the recent liability insurance requirement and fee will stand due to constitutional challenges, and they don't provide any solution to the huge problem of guns obtained illegally."

Kevin is being supported by many local firearm enthusiasts, hunters, sportsmen, firearm training groups, and gun ranges not just based on his 2A view but because he is a complete candidate. He will improve the jails, be sure officers are held accountable for their actions, create community outreach in regards to firearm safety and storage, ensure they have firearm experts who understand the 2A laws to avoid poor/false firearm arrests, better training in the handling of persons with mental illness, better management practices to improve morale, and many more elements that can be only handled by someone that has his background. None of the other candidates are getting this type of support.

I am personally deeply vested in the 2A safety training community and am supporting Keven because of all of his experience, skills, and dedicated personality to improve things. I've known him for over a decade and hope you will consider to support him.

Let me know if you have any further questions or thoughts.

Bests,

Robert”

[Paladin]

Originally Posted by sixtus

I sent an email to Jensen’s staff, and got this in response:

“Hello [REDACTED],

Thanks for your valid inquiry.

Kevin will definitely change the way the process has been handled. Permit applications will be accepted, applicants will be notified of acceptance, and per the CA Penal Code, an applicant will be apprised of an approval or denial within the mandated time frame. If a denial is issued, a reason will be stated and the applicant will have an opportunity to appeal. As for the way California's law is written, applicants must state a "good cause" for the permit as well as be of "good moral character" per the Penal Code, thus why California is not a "Shall Issue" state - i.e. issuance must be given if an applicant is otherwise not restricted to own a firearm.

Obeying state law regarding CCWs would be a major improvement compared to Smith.

That being said, the process will be greatly improved and there will be an assessment of the current holders, and "cause" for new issuance may include reasons stated by current holders. Business people/staff who handle cash/valuables, certified security professionals, people under active physical threat or with restraining orders against another, may allow those in similar circumstances to have issuance.

This is his GC standard. Physical Threats/ROs is Dark Red on the CA CCW GC map. Business Owners is Light Red. Employees is Yellow. Going from Smith’s Dark Red “corrupt issuance” standard to Jensen’ Yellow standard will be a MAJOR improvement even if you wouldn’t be approved.

Besides he did NOT say he wouldn’t issue for more reasons.

Plus he can change his policy at any time to liberalize issuance further. When LA Sheriff Villanueva first liberalized issuance it was to Light Red business owners/professionals and he denied Yellow employees. Several months later they broadened acceptable GC to Yellow and called up those previous denials to ask them if they wanted to deactivate their applications!

Kevin and his supporters recognize that for a successful campaign, votes must be garnered from people who do not have a strong belief in the lawful civilian ownership of firearms aside from those who do. In the past voting cycles, the candidates who stated they would be "Shall Issue '' garnered around 10% of the total vote combined. In this region, a "Shall Issue" candidate will not win as the ratio is three/four to one in our county of those of not having a strong 2A view to those who are strong 2A. Kevin attained 40% of the past vote in balancing his approach and he is a strong supporter of lawful and safe firearm ownership and we believe if he can continue to have a balanced approach, fairness will come in regards to the CCW issue in our county.

Politics is the art of the possible. Personally I’d rather have half a loaf than none. This public statement gets SC to Yellow: any further liberalization gets you to Green!

In a recent public forum questionnaire, Kevin and his other candidates answered the following 2A question in regards to the City of San Jose ordinance that taxes and required insurance for lawful gun owners.

13. The city of SJ recently passed several gun control measures but critics have stated these laws unfairly target law abiding gun owners and do nothing to address violence in the city. If elected, how would you respond to these laws and what will you do to reduce major violent crimes in SCC?

Candidate Chief Jonsen in his answer was: "I have always advocated for greater gun control"

Candidate Nagaye wrote: "This is coming from life-long Democrat and a gun control advocate. I don't believe these laws will stand up to the legal challenge even with a very liberal 9th Circuit. I advocate for common sense gun control measures. I believe the NRA creates more problems than they fix, but I also believe law abiding citizens have their 2nd Amendment rights as much as I may disagree with their need to express themselves that way."

Candidate Allen: "I do support the ban on ghost guns as there is no reason for law-abiding citizens to have them. I support
common-sense gun laws."

Candidate Kevin Jensen: "I am not convinced that the recent liability insurance requirement and fee will stand due to constitutional challenges, and they don't provide any solution to the huge problem of guns obtained illegally."

Kevin is being supported by many local firearm enthusiasts, hunters, sportsmen, firearm training groups, and gun ranges not just based on his 2A view but because he is a complete candidate. He will improve the jails, be sure officers are held accountable for their actions, create community outreach in regards to firearm safety and storage, ensure they have firearm experts who understand the 2A laws to avoid poor/false firearm arrests, better training in the handling of persons with mental illness, better management practices to improve morale, and many more elements that can be only handled by someone that has his background. None of the other candidates are getting this type of support.

I am personally deeply vested in the 2A safety training community and am supporting Keven because of all of his experience, skills, and dedicated personality to improve things. I've known him for over a decade and hope you will consider to support him.

Let me know if you have any further questions or thoughts.

Bests,

Robert”

Jensen is the strongest candidate that can win, can do the job and has the best pro 2A/CCW position.

[NorCalBusa]

Methinks he's playing both sides- and I get that.

Internally, he may feel more 2A policies and action is the right thing, but knows his base isn't going to be into that and would lose votes. Nothing changes without getting elected, so walk the red line to do so, then perhaps ya know, follow the pesky that constitution. We'll see.

[Paladin]

Originally Posted by Paladin

Jensen is the strongest candidate that can win, can do the job and has the best pro 2A/CCW position.

I’ve revised my signature line. If you agree, I suggest you do the same.

Don’t forget to contact his campaign to ask how you can support him (besides “the mother’s milk of politics”, donations): yards signs, window signs, bumper stickers, canvassing neighborhoods, volunteer phone banking, flier distribution, etc.

[GregW948]

Originally Posted by NorCalBusa

Retired San Jose Assistant (and Acting for a time) Chief Dave Knopf has also filed paperwork and is in it. Reportedly "a good guy", not heard his stance on 2A as yet.

Knopf withdrew. Came to his senses on the BS that comes with being Sheriff.

Yup.. they know that if you push that Conservative line too much, these Ca Commies in SAC will ruin your life. LITERALLY ... they will find a way

[sixtus]

From another email when I asked what would constitute “good cause” for him:

“ Hi REDACTED,
Kevin has researched and in some cases, has spoken to other large agencies to seek the best policy, practices and fit for our county. Sacramento does have a proven program. Most more amicable counties do not just take a simple "self defense", two word "good cause" phrase as sufficient, but rather require more specifics. We recently have found some of LA County's known issued "good cause" - "self-defense" verbiage that have been successfully used to attain a permit there. These are some of the things Kevin is seriously considering without saying "shall issue" or just "self-defense" is ok.

Hope this helps you.

Bests,

Robert”

[NorCalBusa]

The utter silence and lack of action with Smith makes me wonder- did she cut a deal to retire in exchange? It's just too odd it's not moved ahead- what's there to do/check etc.?

[NorCalBusa]

I think they are reading this forum & got the hint, this AM:

“I deny all counts,” Smith said in a brief court statement Tuesday morning, before waiving her right to a speedy trial.

The corruption accusation process is not criminal and cannot result in jail time, but follows a similar structure as a criminal proceeding. After being arraigned Tuesday, Smith and her attorney will face trial at a to-be-determined date. If convicted, Smith will be removed from office.

Before entering a plea, Smith lost her first legal battle: A series of objections to the charges, filed last month by her attorney, which argued the grand jury used ambiguous language and failed to specify when and how she committed misconduct.

Smith had already announced she will not be running for a seventh term of office, meaning that whether the charges or sustained or not this is her final year as sheriff. She cited what she called “specious” attacks on her — including the gun-permit scandal — as a factor in her decision.

Last December, a civil grand jury in Santa Clara County charged Smith with seven corruption-related acts. Six involve ongoing criminal indictments alleging Smith engaged in political favoritism and traded favors by leveraging her control over issuing concealed-carry weapons permits. The seventh accuses her of failing to cooperate with the county law-enforcement auditor in an investigation into negligence allegations stemming from a 2018 jail inmate’s injury that led to a $10 million county settlement.

The case is being handled in San Mateo County Superior Court, and is being prosecuted by the San Francisco District Attorney, to avoid potential conflicts of interest.

https://www.mercurynews.com/2022/04/...ption-charges/

[Paladin]

Anyone know the status of the *criminal* grand jury investigation?

[NorCalBusa]

Originally Posted by Paladin

Anyone know the status of the *criminal* grand jury investigation?

See post #54...

[Paladin]

Originally Posted by NorCalBusa

See post #54...

That did not say if it was in regards to the civil or criminal grand jury. I guess the criminal grand jury is still investigating.

[NorCalBusa]

And here we go;

https://www.sanjoseinside.com/news/j...s-all-charges/

https://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/...s-seek-top-job

Besides this Laurie, you're fine;

The case against the sheriff will proceed because San Mateo County Superior Court Judge Nancy Fineman, in a ruling filed Thursday, rejected Smith’s requests that misconduct charges be dismissed.

At a Tuesday arraignment via Zoom, Los Gatos attorney Allen Ruby made an unsuccessful case for dismissal, and the sheriff, in a brief statement, denied all charges against her.

Because of potential conflicts, the San Francisco District Attorney’s Office, represented by Brian Bringardner and Gabriel Markoff, is handling the case, which also is the reason it will be tried in San Mateo County.

In overruling Smith’s objections, Fineman affirmed that an accusation for “willful or corrupt misconduct in office” can be issued.

Citing previous California court cases, Fineman wrote, “Misconduct in office is broad enough to include any malfeasance, misfeasance or nonfeasance in office. “It is not necessary that the misconduct be a crime in order for the misconduct to be the basis of an accusation.”

She also rejected Smith’s claim that the accusation that the sheriff handed out permits to carry weapons only to VIPs was “ambiguous. “The accusation alleges that the defendant had a policy of only providing certain categories of people with a permit,” Fineman wrote, saying this is sufficient to make the allegation of Smith’s “abuse of discretion.”

Smith’s lawyer also argued that Smith is accountable for abuses in the system of gun permits. Fineman said this argument ignores a 1976 case Court of Appeals ruling that stated “It is the duty of the sheriff to make such an investigation and determination, on an individual basis, on every application [for a permit].”

In Thursday’s ruling, Fineman also rejected Smith’s claim that her due process rights had been violated, and that stated she had a duty to cooperate with investigations of her office.

[BCA142]

Ballots are arriving in the mail. Make sure you are talking up Kevin Jensen to all your family, friend's and everyone you meet in firearm stores and ranges. You would be surprised how many firearm owner's are clueless when it comes to these important issues. Also let people know he is the best candidate to make changes at all levels not just carry permits. Kevin is third on the ballot below Allen and Nagaye. Impress upon everyone Jensen "KJ" not Jonsen.

[arster]

2A People - I was the owner of Templar in LG, I managed many 2A Shops in the Bay Area and had tables at every gun show for 30 years.

Kevin Jensen is our only real candidate to vote for. A "Shall Issue" person will not win in our county if you have half a brain to see the anti 2A out number our beliefs.

Give Kevin a chance. Chief Jonsen has said, he is a believer in more gun control, Nagaye is a Dem who is truly anti gun, Kevin is the qualified guy. We only have this one chance to get this done. Let's not get buyers remorse by having many saying "I should of voted for him" next year and we get a true anti 2A person again in as head LEO in SCC for decades. You will only have yourself to blame for voting for a non 2A person or not voting at all!

[YeloSub]

Also to note for the newcomers here. Kevin already ran once. I'm not sure he'll run again.

I've spoken with him in person on many occasions. He has a passion for Santa Clara as the county he served for 28 years, and really wants to do his best to fix it. He doesn't come across as some power hungry type doing this for the fame and glory.

As many have said before. He is a good guy, and right now he's the best choice we have. And not just for 2A rights.

[arster]

2A People - I am risking a lot to put myself out here, but I was the owner of Templar in LG, I managed many 2A Shops in the Bay Area and had tables at every gun show for 30 years.

Kevin Jensen is our only real candidate to vote for. A "Shall Issue" person will not win in our county if you have half a brain to see the anti 2A out number our beliefs.

Give Kevin a chance. Chief Jonsen has said, he is a believer in more gun control, Nagaye is a Dem who is truly anti gun, Kevin is the qualified guy. We only have this one chance to get this done. Let's not get buyers remorse by having many saying "I should of voted for him" next year and we get a true anti 2A person again in as head LEO in SCC for decades. You will only have yourself to blame for voting for a non 2A person or not voting at all!

[DontWorryScro]

please tell me how else i should be voting for the rest of the ballot in santa clara county. i dont have the willpower to read up on each person and deduce on my own. give me the cliffs notes version. thanks.

Edit: im not trolling. im serious. i know a lot of you do your due diligence when it comes to advantageous California candidates. Id prefer to fall back to trusting your research in order to vote in a way that best reflects my beliefs.

[cz74]

So most likely Jonsen and Jensen will advance to Nov general election right?

[NorCalBusa]

Originally Posted by cz74

So most likely Jonsen and Jensen will advance to Nov general election right?

Yep- runoff time

[-hanko]

Originally Posted by DontWorryScro

please tell me how else i should be voting for the rest of the ballot in santa clara county. i dont have the willpower to read up on each person and deduce on my own. give me the cliffs notes version. thanks.

Edit: im not trolling. im serious. i know a lot of you do your due diligence when it comes to advantageous California candidates. Id prefer to fall back to trusting your research in order to vote in a way that best reflects my beliefs.

Welcome to California. Why even vote?

[Paladin]

Originally Posted by -hanko

Welcome to California. Why even vote?

This is why you vote

Originally Posted by arster

… Give Kevin a chance. Chief Jonsen has said, he is a believer in more gun control, Nagaye is a Dem who is truly anti gun, Kevin is the qualified guy. We only have this one chance to get this done. Let's not get buyers remorse by having many saying "I should of voted for him" next year and we get a true anti 2A person again in as head LEO in SCC for decades. You will only have yourself to blame for voting for a non 2A person or not voting at all!

[SonofWWIIDI]

Originally Posted by DontWorryScro

please tell me how else i should be voting for the rest of the ballot in santa clara county. i dont have the willpower to read up on each person and deduce on my own. give me the cliffs notes version. thanks.

Edit: im not trolling. im serious. i know a lot of you do your due diligence when it comes to advantageous California candidates. Id prefer to fall back to trusting your research in order to vote in a way that best reflects my beliefs.

[NorCalBusa]

Ruh-row.

Santa Clara County sheriff's candidate Anh Colton charged with perjury

https://www.sfgate.com/news/bayarea/...y-17247011.php

[cz74]

Yeah this is a weird one. Why would she risk jail time and legal troubles for pulling this stunt?

[CheapBloke]

Originally Posted by cz74

Yeah this is a weird one. Why would she risk jail time and legal troubles for pulling this stunt?

CCP in-disguise?

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[Paladin]

Primary Results: https://results.enr.clarityelections...5569/#/summary

Votes
Robert “Bob” Jonsen 100,128
Kevin Jensen 95,446
Christine Nagaye 60,548
Sean Allen 43,316
Any Colton 13,673

[BCA142]

Now the work begins for November. More voters will turn out in November but we all need to do our part to get Kevin's name out there to everyone you talk to. It doesn't help when the Mercury News endorses Jonsen because you know there are voters that vote the way the paper tells you to vote. Kevin's campaign will need money and volunteers to spread the message. Tell your party to support Kevin. This is our last chance to get CCW in Santa Clara county. Jonsen is NOT 2A friendly!!!! Tell your friend's JENSEN not Jonsen!!!!!

[dfens]

I voted for Kevin and got everyone I know to vote for him as well.

But after looking at those results this state is a lost cause. A democrat won every category. And you think we will get CCW in Santa Clara keep on dreaming.

I'm leaving this hell hole in a few years

[TapTapToad]

My wife gave me the OK for a Jensen yard sign. We both voted for him in the June elections. Since she's very politically active, I get her blessing first since you never know who might drop by. We'll host Matt Mahan here early July for a front yard meet and greet. Was hoping Dev Davis got into the runoff, but Matt is my solid second choice for mayor. Supporting Johnny Khamis for Dist. 1 Co. Supervisor. I supported him when he ran for state senate in 2020.

[Paladin]

Originally Posted by dfens

I voted for Kevin and got everyone I know to vote for him as well.

But after looking at those results this state is a lost cause. A democrat won every category. And you think we will get CCW in Santa Clara keep on dreaming.

I'm leaving this hell hole in a few years

Yes, and sooner than you think….

[NorCalBusa]

Today's MurkyNews (sorry, paywall and I ain't paying);

https://www.mercurynews.com/2022/07/...ptember-start/

This worked;
https://entertainment--news.com/2022...ptember-start/

[NorCalBusa]

San Jose Murky News
As California starts over on concealed gun law, another sheriff faces permit questions
Golden State misfires in attempt to redo gun permit law
By JOHN WOOLFOLK | jwoolfolk@bayareanewsgroup.com | Bay Area News Group
PUBLISHED: September 18, 2022 at 5:50 a.m. | UPDATED: September 18, 2022 at 3:23 p.m.

California has been hailed as a model for gun laws by those who favor tough restrictions, but the Golden State’s effort to limit who can carry a concealed weapon in public has looked more like a misfire.

Since the U.S. Supreme Court in June ruled the state’s concealed gun laws run afoul of the Second Amendment right to bear arms, California lawmakers have tried and failed to pass an alternative. In the meantime, a second sheriff now faces questions about whether favoritism influenced who got licensed to pack heat, fueling perceptions the state’s rules were not only unconstitutional but also recipes for corruption.

As Santa Clara County Sheriff Laurie Smith faces trial later this month on charges of tying concealed carry weapon permits, or CCWs, to political favors and donations, similar questions now swirl around Los Angeles County Sheriff Alex Villanueva. Meanwhile, anxious lawmakers are attempting a do-over on the licensing rules.

State Senator Anthony Portantino, D-Burbank, said the state is seeking to devise “objective criteria” for concealed weapons permits that “will both comply with the Supreme Court and make the system uniform and less likely to be prone to cronyism.” But Portantino’s concealed weapons bill died last month because some legislators who worried the new criteria still went too far to limit the permits wouldn’t support it.

More behind paywall, but give it a try;
https://www.mercurynews.com/2022/09/...mit-questions/

[ProLibertate]

"later this month" is actually Wednesday. Santa Clara Superior Court has the jury trial of The People of The State Of California vs. Laurie Smith scheduled for 9/21, 9/22, 9/28 and 9/29.