Alameda

[Teacher Sp Ed]

Observation... having read through the entire file there seems to be a common thread and I am assuming that all that I read were granted. I could fashion a GC statement that accurately paraphrased the ones reviewed. But I think that I should wait...Someone tell me when would be the appropriate time to apply for the best group effect.

[wildhawker]

Hold tight all...

[Paladin]

Hold tight all...

[Davidwhitewolf]

What I didn't see is if any of those have "business use only" restrictions.

I didn't either, but about a third of the way through the first pdf there's a couple of 'em asking for the business restriction to be removed, with statements as to why.

ETA: On the business restriction waiver, I'm referring to the letter dated 11/17/08 and it's halfway through the first pdf file, not a third as I thought before.

He says,

A personal visit to a friend on a weekend can also quickly become a meeting with a potential client if they express some interest in one of my properties -- when someone does, I immediately try to show them a home. When showing and inspecting homes I often run into squatters. Is that work related? If so, I would have inevitably left my firearm at home because of the work restriction and the original "personal" nature of the visit to a friend.

Something as simple as a trip to the mall can quickly become an encounter with a person I have evicted -- this recently occurred....

If this fellow's work restriction was waived on these grounds, this an opening for us?

[Davidwhitewolf]

General question: one of our employees approached me with a situation. His wife has a stalker in Georgia who in the past has come out to California (generally around the holidays) and threatened (online) to rape her and her daughters. The employee suspects from online activity that the stalker might be gearing up for another visit. The couple has had a restraining order against him in the past but it expired; they're going to look into getting another in place.

Aside from the other measures they're taking (they don't yet own a gun, for one thing, but are working on it) they're interested in the possibility of an Alameda CCW. I'm not sure they could afford the insurance requirement and/or app fees.

All that said, would it be wise/foolish for them to go through the Alameda CCW application process at this point in time? I'd hate to see them spend time/money on something so important if it's likely they'll be denied.

[wildhawker]

They should definitely apply. The insurance is a non-issue (they should contact me if Alameda were to try and assert it), and I'm fairly certain that psych is a non-issue also.

With a TRO in place there is an exemption to 12031 they may consider.

A violation of this section is justifiable when a person who
possesses a firearm reasonably believes that he or she is in grave
danger because of circumstances forming the basis of a current
restraining order issued by a court against another person or persons
who has or have been found to pose a threat to his or her life or
safety. This paragraph may not apply when the circumstances involve a
mutual restraining order issued pursuant to Division 10 (commencing
with Section 6200) of the Family Code absent a factual finding of a
specific threat to the person's life or safety. It is not the intent
of the Legislature to limit, restrict, or narrow the application of
current statutory or judicial authority to apply this or other
justifications to defendants charged with violating Section 12025 or
of committing other similar offenses.
Upon trial for violating this section, the trier of fact shall
determine whether the defendant was acting out of a reasonable belief
that he or she was in grave danger.

General question: one of our employees approached me with a situation. His wife has a stalker in Georgia who in the past has come out to California (generally around the holidays) and threatened (online) to rape her and her daughters. The employee suspects from online activity that the stalker might be gearing up for another visit. The couple has had a restraining order against him in the past but it expired; they're going to look into getting another in place.

Aside from the other measures they're taking (they don't yet own a gun, for one thing, but are working on it) they're interested in the possibility of an Alameda CCW. I'm not sure they could afford the insurance requirement and/or app fees.

All that said, would it be wise/foolish for them to go through the Alameda CCW application process at this point in time? I'd hate to see them spend time/money on something so important if it's likely they'll be denied.

[Davidwhitewolf]

Many thanks!

[Teacher Sp Ed]

Now that the opinion in Peruta issued is there any reason for not designing a good cause statement along the lines of business and personal safety that seems to be successful in Alameda County?

[Window_Seat]

Now that the opinion in Peruta issued is there any reason for not designing a good cause statement along the lines of business and personal safety that seems to be successful in Alameda County?

Do not take any action regarding this issue.

-Brandon

Hold tight all...

And best of all...:

I strongly urge those in Alameda to remain patient as we might just have some additional instructions for volunteers... in two weeks soon.

Nuff said?

Erik.

[Teacher Sp Ed]

Nothing better to do but wait. Going to go live the rest of my life, which is a good one.

[Window_Seat]

BTT, just to let everyone know that I'm back at home to help out with the volunteer effort to take place.

Erik.

[ForceofNations]

down to go

[wildhawker]

Hold steady on the line. Waiting for a couple of other issues to move.

[Window_Seat]

Hold steady on the line. Waiting for a couple of other issues to move.

I like the sound of that.

Erik.

[ForceofNations]

I like the sound of that.

Erik.

+one