Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Alameda

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Ferrum
    replied
    Originally posted by Suture1
    One cannot carry into federal buildings like courthouses or the US Post Office. Need to disarm to go in.

    Private property (Starbucks or Toys R Us) can get you for trespassing if you are seen carrying and refuse to leave.
    That is the first Alameda CCW that I have seen... It was my understanding to be valid throughout the state, the CCW had to be on the BOF 4501? Not on a CCW of the sheriffs own design.

    Am I missing something?

    ETA- Looks like some counties issue hard cards that don't comply with the state statute. Does Alameda at least give you a copy of the BOF 4501 to carry?
    Last edited by Ferrum; 10-21-2015, 11:05 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Paladin
    replied
    Originally posted by j-rod
    I got my "process discontinued" letter yesterday citing self defense was not sufficient and that the current status of Peruta justifies their "discontinuation"
    #1: I'd ask them to hold it pending finalization of Peruta. That way, if we do win it and you're still in Ala Co, you've saved your spot in line before the flood of unwashed, non-CGN masses apply.

    #2: Since we're no longer confident of winning Peruta, look into moving just over the border into Solano, Sac, San Joaquin, or Stanislaus county (which ever is closest to your job) and commute into work. Ahern is unlikely to get voted out of office, so unless he retires or dies or has a dramatic change of heart, we're not likely to get an pro CCW sheriff in Ala Co for the foreseeable future.



    Last edited by Paladin; 10-21-2015, 9:55 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • T Mac
    replied
    Time to move...

    Leave a comment:


  • j-rod
    replied

    Leave a comment:


  • j-rod
    replied
    Originally posted by BigART71
    What are they claiming as the current status?
    Included with the 'discontinued' letter was a copy of the court order dated Mar. 26 2015.

    Thomas, Chief Judge: Upon the vote of a a majority of nonrecused active judges, it is ordered that this case be reheard en banc pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 35(a) and Circuit Rule 35-3. The three-judge panel opinion and order denying motions to intervene shall not be cited as precedent by or to any court of the Ninth Circuit. (emphasis mine).

    Basically they cite the en banc wait status as reason for throwing out any idea that good cause = self defense.

    Leave a comment:


  • BigART71
    replied
    Originally posted by j-rod
    I got my "process discontinued" letter yesterday citing self defense was not sufficient and that the current status of Peruta justifies their "discontinuation"
    What are they claiming as the current status?

    Leave a comment:


  • j-rod
    replied
    I got my "process discontinued" letter yesterday citing self defense was not sufficient and that the current status of Peruta justifies their "discontinuation"

    Leave a comment:


  • Suture1
    replied
    Originally posted by XD40Kyle
    first off congrats! but reading the restrictions, does that mean if you go into a store that prohibits weapons you cant legally carry? or does it mean like federal buildings?
    One cannot carry into federal buildings like courthouses or the US Post Office. Need to disarm to go in.

    Private property (Starbucks or Toys R Us) can get you for trespassing if you are seen carrying and refuse to leave.

    Leave a comment:


  • j-rod
    replied
    Right delayed is right denied. My app is in the hold file.

    Leave a comment:


  • j-rod
    replied
    I dropped off my application 9/29. Apparently the one clerk who processes them is on vacation at this time.

    Leave a comment:


  • XD40Kyle
    replied
    Originally posted by Suture1
    Here it is:



    first off congrats! but reading the restrictions, does that mean if you go into a store that prohibits weapons you cant legally carry? or does it mean like federal buildings?

    Leave a comment:


  • Eljay
    replied
    That was always the rumor. The classic Oakland approval scenario was somebody who carries lots of cash to the bank after close of business. I have no idea if that's still true, if it ever was, but that's what people were saying back in the day.

    Leave a comment:


  • T Mac
    replied
    I could be wrong, but I do recall seeing that it was easier for a merchant in Oakland to obtain a CCW than the rest of the county...

    Leave a comment:


  • Reecek
    replied
    Suture1 Good for you! I would love to have a CCW since I own a business in Oakland. I guess I should give it a try and see what happens.

    Leave a comment:


  • T Mac
    replied
    Congrats to you Suture1. I'm happy to see that Alameda Co. has doubled their private citizen CCW count to over 200 (up from slightly over 100 a year or two ago). I any event, 200 CCW's out of 1.5 million population is a joke.

    Paladin hit the nail on the head that most other states are Shall Issue and enjoy a vastly lower crime rate. What is even sadder is that you can move over the hill to Tracy and face none of the scrutiny and denial of your Second Amendment rights in San Joaquin like the poor folks do in Alameda County. I know since I just moved to Tracy last year and expect my CCW shortly.
    Last edited by T Mac; 09-02-2015, 12:12 PM. Reason: spelling

    Leave a comment:

Working...
UA-8071174-1