What is the procedure for obtaining a CCW in Sacramento County?

[obeygiant]

Originally Posted by thebronze

So what if he works for SSD? That doesn't negate what he said. How is he being deceptive because he works for SSD? Who cares where he works?
Where do you work? What's your name and title where you work (since you asked him that)?

Am I being deceptive too, because I work for the State of California and sometimes post from work, also?

Kestryll didn't ask for his name and title, I did. The issue is not so much where he works but rather the fact that he was posting under the guise of being joe citizen when in fact he is a part of the department. Also, to clear up any other misconceptions, this is a LEO friendly community and I personally would welcome anyone from the various LEA's.

[thebronze]

Originally Posted by obeygiant

Kestryll didn't ask for his name and title, I did. The issue is not so much where he works but rather the fact that he was posting under the guise of being joe citizen when in fact he is a part of the department. Also, to clear up any other misconceptions, this is a LEO friendly community and I personally would welcome anyone from the various LEA's.

Then I'm sure you'd have no problem telling everyone your name and where you work and your title there, right?

There sure is a lot of hypocrisy on CalGuns...

[wildhawker]

Thebronze, you do acknowledge the difference between a public and private industry employee, right?

[obeygiant]

Originally Posted by thebronze

Then I'm sure you'd have no problem telling everyone your name and where you work and your title there, right?

There sure is a lot of hypocrisy on CalGuns...

My name and profession are already on this board,just do a search for "CRPA" or better yet wait for you next issue of The Firing Line to be delivered to your doorstep. You are still missing the issue though.

[Glock22Fan]

Originally Posted by thebronze

Then I'm sure you'd have no problem telling everyone your name and where you work and your title there, right?

There sure is a lot of hypocrisy on CalGuns...

There is a big difference between ObeyGiant and No Spin. ObeyGiant didn't come in here pretending to be someone he was not and pushing a biased agenda as if he were a disinterested bystander.

Furthermore, even before Kestryl revealed the origin of the posts, No Spin came over as a belligerant, unnecessarily rude poster with a bad attitude.

[thebronze]

Originally Posted by Glock22Fan

There is a big difference between ObeyGiant and No Spin. ObeyGiant didn't come in here pretending to be someone he was not and pushing a biased agenda as if he were a disinterested bystander.

Furthermore, even before Kestryl revealed the origin of the posts, No Spin came over as a belligerant, unnecessarily rude poster with a bad attitude.

We'll have to disagree on that. I don't see how he was pretending to be anything he wasn't. If he would've come on and said "I work for SSD and here's what I think..." would that have made you feel better?

So now everyone that posts on here has to state where they work and who they are, so we can make sure they have no personal agenda or bias or make sure they're not posting on company time?

That's ridiculous. EVERYONE on this board has an agenda AND a bias.

I'm done arguing about this. It's stupid.

[N6ATF]

Originally Posted by thebronze

We'll have to disagree on that. I don't see how he was pretending to be anything he wasn't. If he would've come on and said "I work for SSD and here's what I think..." would that have made you feel better?

So now everyone that posts on here has to state where they work and who they are, so we can make sure they have no personal agenda or bias or make sure they're not posting on company time?

That's ridiculous. EVERYONE on this board has an agenda AND a bias.

I'm done arguing about this. It's stupid.

Indeed. What about GOVERNMENT does not get through your skull?

[thebronze]

Originally Posted by N6ATF

Indeed. What about GOVERNMENT does not get through your skull?

Ohhh Scary! The GOVERNMENT is baaaaaaad!

Spare me.

[obeygiant]

Originally Posted by thebronze

I'm done arguing about this. It's stupid.

At least we can agree on that^^

[thebronze]

Originally Posted by obeygiant

At least we can agree on that^^

[N6ATF]

Originally Posted by thebronze

Ohhh Scary! The GOVERNMENT is baaaaaaad!

Spare me.

Fine.



NO BRAIN TRANSPLANT FOR YOU!

[Glock22Fan]

Originally Posted by thebronze

We'll have to disagree on that. I don't see how he was pretending to be anything he wasn't. If he would've come on and said "I work for SSD and here's what I think..." would that have made you feel better?

So now everyone that posts on here has to state where they work and who they are, so we can make sure they have no personal agenda or bias or make sure they're not posting on company time?

That's ridiculous. EVERYONE on this board has an agenda AND a bias.

I'm done arguing about this. It's stupid.

Definitely stupid, but not for the reason you think.

[thebronze]

Originally Posted by Glock22Fan

Definitely stupid, but not for the reason you think.

Right. I shall bow now...

[thebronze]

BTW, did you catch that other guy in the CCW section that "fell through the cracks"?

[Bizcuits]

Originally Posted by No Spin

OK, scratch my First Ammendment rights on a technicality, haha. My point is that pompous and nieve attacks on my FIRST POST on local politics from someone 1000 miles away are silly and hold no merit.

Now, you want to turn this into a JONES VS COOPER race. Let me respond from my FIRST post, however ROOKIE "ya'll mite thunk it mea bee":

The best indicator of the future is history...Hence.

Craig + Blanas + McGinness + Jones = Same Ole Same Ole...the maths pretty easy....

As far as Cooper, dont know. But, I do know his stated policy here is more complex than just "passing it to DOJ". Its uniformity to more CCW flexible Counties in the State and he doesnt lie to get a vote. Secondly, at least Cooper is a Cop, Jones, a lawyer.

And yes, he was Blanas's Legal Advisor and continues to be McGinness's.
And yes, he wrote the current policy to protect McGinness, not us. What do you think Legal Advisors do.

And yes, in the last 8 months more CCW's have been issued...whats changed. A "LEGAL" issue or an election...still waiting for that response...

Or, maybe he's treating us like fools to get elected...go ahead and be led down that road my friend, I wont be.

My Issue with Cooper is not his CCW policy as much as the tone he takes. Cooper strikes me as the cop who has been on the beat way to long. He strikes me as a man who views those who hate cops as either criminals or those with issues for authority. Cooper carries a very big "US vs THEM" attitude which is a problem often found amongst career cops. Is this a problem? Not if your career plan is to never do anything in a supervisor capacity and are happy patrolling South Sac or Oak Park, however if you are going to be put into a position where you will be making decisions that ultimately effect the entire population of your county, then you can't have the "US vs THEM" attitude.

Sadly you are right on one point. All of our previous Sheriffs have had the "US vs THEM" attitude, so they have all been the same. So Cooper will be another in the long line of Sheriff's who view their county residents as nothing, but potential suspects rather then law bidding citizens. I do not support Jones, because I believe he too carries the same career cop attitude that every citizen is a suspect. My candidate was Bret Daniels. He lost and now my vote will go to Jones, because of his CCW stance.

This being said, I believe the biggest problem with our Sheriffs Department is their lack of community service. Not every citizen is a suspect you need a plan to arrest or kill, they are the people you are suppose to be servicing. Take a page from Cpt Hahn with Sac PD and I think the Sheriffs Department will find themselves sitting in a much better boat.


off topic rant, over...

[harbinger007]

Not surprising or extremely and maybe not extremely significant to the CCW discussion at hand, but somewhat:

Sacramento County sheriff to cut up to 50 positions
By Robert Lewis
rlewis@sacbee.com
Published: Tuesday, Jul. 13, 2010 - 11:19 am

Sacramento County is cutting nearly 50 filled positions from the Sheriff's Department as a result of the budget the Board of Supervisors approved last month.

The cuts mean 23 deputies, a captain, six lieutenants, four sergeants and eight records officers will lose their jobs in the middle of August. Some higher-rank officers will be demoted to lower ranks.

The board restored tens of millions of dollars to the Sheriff's Department during budget hearings. Even with the extra funding, that department had a shortfall of nearly $20 million.

Unlike in other departments, the sheriff -- as an elected official -- controls his own budget and doesn't need to tell the rest of county administration how he will use the money he receives. Therefore, it wasn't clear until this week how the funding reduction would impact the department.

The cuts shouldn't affect patrol services and instead will mean closure of some detention facility units.

Read more: http://www.sacbee.com/2010/07/13/288...#ixzz0tamtZYlC

[haveyourmile]

I just got back from my appointment with Amber Wong. It was painless and extremely easy.

I made sure to dress nicely. Black button down, khakis, dress shoes. I gave myself plenty of time because parking around there is OFTEN a big pain (and was especially so today because there's a lot of construction going on). I found a parking spot and went into 711 G St. The guy who helped me up front was very nice. He asked for my ID and asked to see my written statement, then gave me a visitors pass and had me take a seat. I was told I could go up to Amber's office a few minutes later (3rd floor, turn right, first door on left and ring the little bell). Amber was awesome. She was nice, made friendly conversation, and was very pleasant to deal with. She asked all the questions on the application that are considered the "interview questions". Address, have you ever been convicted of mental illness, ever had a firearm incident, etc. I asked how long she thought it would be from today until I actually heard a decision, she said a detective would be calling me in the next few weeks to ask me some more questions, and then they were doing a committee meeting in August so I should know sometime next month. She took my check and paperwork, I thanked her and I was on my way. From the time I arrived (I was there about 15 min before my appt) til the time I left was about half an hour.

[Gofasterdammit]

To those that have tried to schedule an appointment to turn in a completed CCW packet, how long has Officer Wong's voicemail box been full? I have called and tried to leave a message nearly five times over the past two weeks.

[dantodd]

Originally Posted by Gofasterdammit

To those that have tried to schedule an appointment to turn in a completed CCW packet, how long has Officer Wong's voicemail box been full? I have called and tried to leave a message nearly five times over the past two weeks.

Is documenting this now going to be an important issue? I can imagine that if the sheriff isn't adequately staffing his CCW department today it will get worse, not better, if they lose Sykes. It would certainly be good if this could be brought before the judge somehow so his decision can address this issue.

Otherwise it might be necessary to have everyone submit their apps via certified mail after Sykes.

[N6ATF]

Originally Posted by dantodd

Is documenting this now going to be an important issue? I can imagine that if the sheriff isn't adequately staffing his CCW department today it will get worse, not better, if they lose Sykes. It would certainly be good if this could be brought before the judge somehow so his decision can address this issue.

Otherwise it might be necessary to have everyone submit their apps via certified mail after Sykes.

Or process server...

[jb7706]

Originally Posted by Gofasterdammit

To those that have tried to schedule an appointment to turn in a completed CCW packet, how long has Officer Wong's voicemail box been full? I have called and tried to leave a message nearly five times over the past two weeks.

Check your PM.

[harbinger007]

I need to call Amber this week or next. If someone has an easier way of calling her than calling the number on their web site, please send it to me via PM. Thanks.

[hoffmang]

One has to catch her live. She does not seem to respond to email or voicemail.

-Gene

[N6ATF]

Auto-responder: Your e-mail has been automatically deleted, and not read by the recipient.
Voicemail greeting: Please hang up before the beep.

[tiki]

I called one time and got an appt.

[dantodd]

Originally Posted by hoffmang

One has to catch her live. She does not seem to respond to email or voicemail.

-Gene

Assuming we win. Would this be legal post-Sykes, or is there a minimal required effort to serve such requests? Not that there is any positive that can be done by rocking the boat at this time.

[hoffmang]

Originally Posted by dantodd

Assuming we win. Would this be legal post-Sykes, or is there a minimal required effort to serve such requests? Not that there is any positive that can be done by rocking the boat at this time.

It's not appropriate post Sykes behavior but its not yet worth chasing down. It will be in the near future.

-Gene

[harbinger007]

Got lucky and got through on the phone and made an appointment. Amber indicated her mail box gets full a couple of times a day.

[jb7706]

Originally Posted by harbinger007

Got lucky and got through on the phone and made an appointment. Amber indicated her mail box gets full a couple of times a day.

[haveyourmile]

I just got a phone call from a detective about my CCW. I called him back and left a message. What kind of questions can I expect?

[hoffmang]

Originally Posted by haveyourmile

I just got a phone call from a detective about my CCW. I called him back and left a message. What kind of questions can I expect?

Very routine. It's usually meant to check that your employer really is your employer for example if they called your work number.

-Gene

[jb7706]

Originally Posted by haveyourmile

I just got a phone call from a detective about my CCW. I called him back and left a message. What kind of questions can I expect?

Interesting, they are not processing apps FIFO. You submitted your app after mine had been in for a week + I think. I have not had a call yet.

[Anothercoilgun]

Originally Posted by CSDGuy

Wildhawker has posted all 3 things that Sheriff McGinness wants you to read. FOLLOW THE PROCEDURE outlined. I've heard of several CCW's being issued in Sacramento County in the past few months, so they ARE issuing them.

Issuing is not in question. There is always an approval. But to whom? That's dogma in its self.

[dantodd]

Originally Posted by Anothercoilgun

Issuing is not in question. There is always an approval. But to whom? That's dogma in its self.

It is important to know what you are talking about before posting. Do you have some inside information about CCW issuance in Sacramento that causes you to believe that they are not being issued for relatively straight forward "good cause?"

[haveyourmile]

Originally Posted by jb7706

Interesting, they are not processing apps FIFO. You submitted your app after mine had been in for a week + I think. I have not had a call yet.

The detective did make a comment about how he had about 5 or 6 applications in front of him. My guess is he waits until they get to a certain point and then makes all his phone calls. He said they were having a committee meeting mid-August to decide...I would assume as long as you get a phonecall before then you're good to go

[Lone_Gunman]

well, I have my appointment tomorrow. Wish me luck. BTW what did you guys use for your second form of ID?

[Mstrty]

Originally Posted by Lone_Gunman

well, I have my appointment tomorrow. Wish me luck. BTW what did you guys use for your second form of ID?

I brought in my DMV reg. But never presented it. The receptionist will ask for your Drivers license and your good cause statement. He is prepared to turn you away if your good cause is not listed on a seperate sheet. He will take your ID as collateral for the visitor pass he will give you. When you go upstairs no one up there will ask for anymore ID. So you will only use one ID even though they ask for two. The Sac Sheriff application process is down to a science. As far as issuance, The jury is still out for me.

[Lone_Gunman]

Originally Posted by bombmaster

I brought in my DMV reg. But never presented it. The receptionist will ask for your Drivers license and your good cause statement. He is prepared to turn you away if your good cause is not listed on a seperate sheet. He will take your ID as collateral for the visitor pass he will give you. When you go upstairs no one up there will ask for anymore ID. So you will only use one ID even though they ask for two. The Sac Sheriff application process is down to a science. As far as issuance, The jury is still out for me.

Thanks for the info and good luck to you.

[derek@thepackingrat.net]

Just came back from the Sheriff's Department. Check in process was similar to bombmaster's. I presented the Deputy my driver's license. He didn't specifically ask for my good cause statement, but I presented it to him anyway based on bombmaster's experience. He handed my good cause statement back. I received my visitor's badge, and had a seat.

When Amber is ready, the Deputy will call you up and allow you to proceed through the secured doors and up the elevator.

Pretty straight forward. Amber estimates that I will receive a phone call within a couple of weeks. A time line has yet to be determined when it may be approved or denied. It was related to me that a committee member is preparing to retire and may take sometime for the Sheriff to appoint another.

Amber was very nice. So far, it has been a smooth experience.

[Lone_Gunman]

Just got back too. The most difficult thing about the whole experience was getting the kiosk to print out my parking permit. Super quick. I was in with Amber less than 5 minutes.