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 > 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

Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-05-2023, 5:48 PM
Tankerman777 Tankerman777 is offline
Junior Member
Join Date: Nov 2022
Posts: 44
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default Moral character

Hello everyone, can we start discussing the good moral character requirements for getting a concealed carry permit?. There are good people out there that have made some stupid mistakes 5,10,20,30 plus years ago that will no doubt be denied their concealed carry permit. I would like to know about any in pertaining to the abolishment of the GMC requirements. Happy new year everyone ��������������������
Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2023, 5:52 PM
TKM's Avatar
TKM TKM is offline
Bring back the Lions.
CGN Contributor
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Out in the yard, shaking my fist at the sky.
Posts: 10,053
iTrader: 74 / 100%

The search function can't possibly be that bad.
The constitutions of most of our states assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves, in all cases to which they think themselves competent, or they may act by representatives, freely and equally chosen; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed; that they are entitled to freedom of person; freedom of religion; freedom of property; and freedom of the press.

Thomas Jefferson.
Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2023, 6:01 PM
Calbix Calbix is offline
Junior Member
Join Date: Feb 2021
Posts: 78
iTrader: 0 / 0%

It's a combination of your issuing agency and their decision on a case by case basis. As long as you're not a prohibited person and the incident was a long time ago and you disclose it upfront, you probably have a decent chance. But again, without knowing specifics it is impossible to say anything for certain.

Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2023, 8:27 PM
Tankerman777 Tankerman777 is offline
Junior Member
Join Date: Nov 2022
Posts: 44
iTrader: 0 / 0%

I own multiple firearms, I have been purchasing firearms for over fifteen years now. I live in Solano County a dark green country. Thank you so much for your opinions. ��������
Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2023, 10:31 AM
mikeyr's Avatar
mikeyr mikeyr is offline
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: SB
Posts: 1,475
iTrader: 3 / 100%

my question is not about any issues in my past, but its that I don't have any friends. I play with old (1930s) British cars in my garage, all my friends are on the net in other countries since that is where the cars are. And when not in the garage, I am at work. I work on the other side of the DMZ (a university) so I can't ask any co-workers to write me a letter they are anti-gun. With the exception of family, I really don't have anyone to ask to write me a good moral character letter. I will have to figure that out when I apply in a few months.

NRA Benefactor Member
. CRPA Member
Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2023, 4:45 PM
L84CABO's Avatar
L84CABO L84CABO is offline
Calguns Addict
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Orcas Island, WA and San Diego
Posts: 7,281
iTrader: 1 / 100%

GMC is patently illegal/unconstitutional.

Some corrupt, authoritarian, tyrannical sheriffs have simply replaced "good cause" with "good moral character." They are BOTH unconstitutional for the exact same is not an objective standard and allows the Sheriff to deny purely on subjective opinion. There is also no text, history, or tradition to support it.

It will fall eventually. But it may take some lawsuits.
"Kestryll I wanna lick your doughnut."

Fighter Pilot
Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2023, 5:27 PM
clb's Avatar
clb clb is offline
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Nannyfornia
Posts: 321
iTrader: 12 / 100%

And some have not...
When frisco issues, it will be final...
The lunatics ARE running the asylum.
Screw fotofukkit
Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2023, 3:23 PM
Chewy65 Chewy65 is offline
Veteran Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 4,625
iTrader: 0 / 0%

The requirement that proof be shown of GMC is patently unconstitutional for two reasons.

1. At least so for and to my knowledge, neither the text of the 2A nor the history of the nation indicates that any sort of requirement was contemplated, but even if they did

2. California statutes permit extremely broad discretion to be applied in the investigation and interpretation of GMC and there is no national historical tradition of firearm regulatory schemes which permits administrators wide discretion. See the following from Sudaby quoting Bruen.

More plainly stated, although the Court in no way suggests that America lacks a historical tradition of firearm-licensing schemes, it finds (based on the current briefing of the parties) that America lacks a historical tradition of firearm-licensing schemes conferring open-ended discretion on licensing officers. See NYSRPA, 142 S. Ct. at 2123 (“But the vast majority of States—43 by our count—are ‘shall issue’ jurisdictions, where authorities must issue concealed-carry licenses whenever applicants satisfy certain threshold requirements, without granting licensing officials discretion to deny licenses based on a perceived lack of need or suitability.”) (emphasis added). Indeed, in his concurring opinion in NYSRPA, Associate
Justice Kavanaugh (joined by Chief Justice Roberts) stated as follows:
As the Court explains, New York's outlier may-issue regime is constitutionally problematic because it grants open-ended discretion to licensing officials and authorizes licenses only for those applicants who can show some special need apart from self-defense. Those features of New York's regime—the unchanneled discretion for licensing officials and the special-need requirement—in effect deny the right to carry handguns for self-defense to many “ordinary, law-abiding citizens.’ . . . Going forward, therefore, . . . the 6 States including New York potentially affected by today's decision may continue to require licenses for carrying handguns for self-defense so long as those States employ objective licensing requirements like those used by the 43 shall-issue States.

NYSRPA, 142 S. Ct. at 2162 (Kavanaugh, J., concurring) (emphasis added).

Last edited by Chewy65; 01-14-2023 at 3:22 PM..
Reply With Quote

Thread Tools
Display Modes

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

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

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -8. The time now is 4:32 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2023, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Proudly hosted by GeoVario the Premier 2A host., the 'Calguns' name and all associated variants and logos are ® Trademark and © Copyright 2002-2021, an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.
All opinions, statements and remarks made by on this web site and elsewhere are solely attributable to