San Diego CCW

[CessnaDriver]

Happily I can also report an approval letter received @ 85 days since the 2nd interview. It was effort and time so one feels happy achieving the goal, but also odd to feel happy about needing a CCW because of criminals. But that's reality.

I also want to remind anyone new to this that my first interview I got discouraging words from the clerk, this was with a good cause I was helped with by experts. I reassessed my good cause with same experts, stressed one aspect more than others and dropped the general self defense aspects, and pressed on and was far better received. So don't panic if the first interview is not all sunshine. Work the process! Having a "denial" on your "record" because your good cause was rejected in San Diego is nothing to be concerned about. Press on!

My advice to anyone is get the appointment now. The wait is so long.
You have a ton of time to take a seminar and research your good cause and
run it past experts.

My personal executive summary is to have a good cause that can provide them with good documentation, which I believe is so they can provide proof they did vet someone has elevated risk over the general public if audited.

I would strongly advise to not talk yourself out of what might be considered elevated risk. Research successful good causes, go to seminars and talk to the experts. I think many would be surprised that there is good
cause for them if they do their homework.
I did not donate to Gore, my good cause was not work related, nor because I had any reported threats against me.
Yes it should be like AZ but this is about how to walk the path we have now and continue to work towards general self defense as good cause.

[baranski]

Hi All,
I just received a SD CCW. [snip]
K

Congrats

[baranski]

I got my approval letter today!!! Well yesterday, but nobody checked the mail.

Congrats, may you enjoy your new freedom!

[nadodave]

Cool!

How long was it from the 2nd interview/livescan?

85 days.

[CessnaDriver]

I got my approval letter today!!! Well yesterday, but nobody checked the mail.

Cool!

How long was it from the 2nd interview/livescan?

[nadodave]

I got my approval letter today!!! Well yesterday, but nobody checked the mail.

[Kate]

Thanks, All.

I very much appreciate the information and your experience!

[ACfixer]

Perhaps adding to the confusion, when Bernardo went over the "be in a place" clause, he said, "like a bar, or the bar area of a restaurant." Presumably, the bar area of a restaurant has as its primary purpose serving alcohol.

So, I interpreted that to mean not only Cheers, but the bar area at TGIF.

Impermissibly vague or not, I think I know what they intend. For me, the first constraint, about consuming, is tougher than the second about place. That first constraint means I can't carry in a common situation for me, which means I have to accept higher risk than the general population. At least presumably higher risk, as the Sheriff's CCW panel accepted by GC.

The general consensus here Kate is that if they have a real kitchen (range hood and health dept. inspections etc.) which means Applebees and TGIF, you are good to carry but not drink. That is a restaurant, not6 a bar. A lot of threads on this, but it kind of boils down to the type of liquor license perhaps (type 47 or 48) and it's fairly easily separated by whether people under 21 are allowed on the premises. This is not to be construed as legal advice obviously, but that's how I personally decide. Other states have different rules.

[Kate]

Ok, I checked. The exact wording on my sheet says while carrying, I may not "consume any alcoholic beverage" or "be in a place having a primary purpose of dispensing alcoholic beverages for on site consumption".

But what is the primary purpose of a TGI Fridays? Lots of people go there to eat and not drink, and lots go to drink and not eat. How am I supposed to know if I am in compliance or not? Am I just supposed to guess and hope the LEO guesses the same way I do? This part seems impermissibly vague.

Perhaps adding to the confusion, when Bernardo went over the "be in a place" clause, he said, "like a bar, or the bar area of a restaurant." Presumably, the bar area of a restaurant has as its primary purpose serving alcohol.

So, I interpreted that to mean not only Cheers, but the bar area at TGIF.

Impermissibly vague or not, I think I know what they intend. For me, the first constraint, about consuming, is tougher than the second about place. That first constraint means I can't carry in a common situation for me, which means I have to accept higher risk than the general population. At least presumably higher risk, as the Sheriff's CCW panel accepted by GC.

[MajorCaliber]

Ok, I checked. The exact wording on my sheet says while carrying, I may not "consume any alcoholic beverage" or "be in a place having a primary purpose of dispensing alcoholic beverages for on site consumption".

I believe laws and regulations should be written clearly enough so that the average person can determine if a specific behavior violates the rule or not. I understand the first condition, that is pretty clear. The second one is less so. Leaving aside the issue that it makes no sense for me not to be able to carry in a bar if I'm not drinking alcohol, I can't always determine the "primary purpose" of an establishment. Taco Bell is pretty clearly OK, and a bar like Cheers is pretty clearly not. But what is the primary purpose of a TGI Fridays? Lots of people go there to eat and not drink, and lots go to drink and not eat. How am I supposed to know if I am in compliance or not? Am I just supposed to guess and hope the LEO guesses the same way I do? This part seems impermissibly vague.