Los Angeles

[pacrat]

Originally Posted by Weyoun View Post
A sheriff deputy told me the CCW license will be much easier to get in about 6 months or so. We'll see.

Sadly the opinion of any individual Dep. means nothing. Check the Command Structure in the provided link.

Then take into account that as of last count. There are approximately 7,800 sworn Deps in LASD. Of those 7,800, only the Sheriff, Under Sheriff, and a handfull of Asst Sheriffs. Have any idea what is going to, or likely to, be promoted as New Policy from the Sheriff.

And those few in the "inner circle", don't talk out of school, without the Sheriff's blessing.

http://shq.lasdnews.net/shq/mpp/2-02.pdf

[Paladin]

Sadly the opinion of any individual Dep. means nothing. Check the Command Structure in the provided link.

Then take into account that as of last count. There are approximately 7,800 sworn Deps in LASD. Of those 7,800, only the Sheriff, Under Sheriff, and a handfull of Asst Sheriffs. Have any idea what is going to, or likely to, be promoted as New Policy from the Sheriff.

And those few in the "inner circle", don't talk out of school, without the Sheriff's blessing.


http://shq.lasdnews.net/shq/mpp/2-02.pdf

I figured I'd be generous and give him until the end of the year, Dec 31st, to see if his prediction comes true. While that seems like a long way away, it's just over 6 months.

Plus, I'm more optimistic after hearing that ALL the CA sheriffs got together in Feb to discuss CCWs (after NYSRPA was granted cert, not sure if before or after Rogers started being held by SCOTUS in Feb).

[kflakes]

I figured I'd be generous and give him until the end of the year, Dec 31st, to see if his prediction comes true. While that seems like a long way away, it's just over 6 months.



Plus, I'm more optimistic after hearing that ALL the CA sheriffs got together in Feb to discuss CCWs (after NYSRPA was granted cert, not sure if before or after Rogers started being held by SCOTUS in Feb).

Where did you read about this meeting of the CA sheriffs that took place in February? Do you have a link?

[Paladin]

Where did you read about this meeting of the CA sheriffs that took place in February? Do you have a link?

From the Yolo Co CCW thread:

In February every Sheriff in California met to discuss CCW's and each others methods of administering the program. Yolo County had three people present. I had the opportunity to speak with them and they are issuing. There has been several people apply but have not gotten to the "attend training" part of the process.

[Paladin]

Look what I forgot about.... A 2nd post by a 2nd CGNer re. a conference of all CA sheriffs to discuss CCWs.

I spoke with the LT in charge over the phone. He confirmed the good cause requirement will be significantly lower but would not confirm that simple self defense is sufficient. He seems to imply that some sort of articulate good cause would still be required.

He said they are attending a sheriffs conference this coming Wednesday dedicated to discussing ccw issuance and will update their website after the conference to decide how they want to deal with applications

This was posted back on Feb 15th and thus the meeting of all CA sheriffs re. CCWs was on Feb 20th.

NYSRPA was granted cert on Jan 22nd and on Feb 19th the Court told the state in Rogers to submit a Response. I wouldn't be surprised if the conference was in response to NYSRPA being granted cert. I'm sure it, and maybe even Rogers, were discussed at this conference. (Rogers is now being held by SCOTUS, along with several other 2nd A cases that have been neither denied or granted.)

Frankly, I hope the anti holdout sheriff continue to be antis so that once the serfs get a RBA (at minimum LOC), dozens of them will spontaneously do that when they want and where they want throughout every anti county, giving those sheriffs what they deserve -- the widespread chaos of a free people exercising their RBA!

[pacrat]

Look what I forgot about.... A 2nd post by a 2nd CGNer re. a conference of all CA sheriffs to discuss CCWs.



This was posted back on Feb 15th and thus the meeting of all CA sheriffs re. CCWs was on Feb 20th.

NYSRPA was granted cert on Jan 22nd and on Feb 19th the Court told the state in Rogers to submit a Response. I wouldn't be surprised if the conference was in response to NYSRPA being granted cert. I'm sure it, and maybe even Rogers, were discussed at this conference. (Rogers is now being held by SCOTUS, along with several other 2nd A cases that have been neither denied or granted.)

Frankly, I hope the anti holdout sheriff continue to be antis so that once the serfs get a RBA (at minimum LOC), dozens of them will spontaneously do that when they want and where they want throughout every anti county, giving those sheriffs what they deserve -- the widespread chaos of a free people exercising their RBA!

Just because CSSA scheduled a meeting, doesn't in any way mean that ALL Sheriffs or their Dept Reps attended. Sheriff V of LA is very busy running around pissing on political fires he himself has started, to spend any time making 800 mi round trips to discuss topics he doesn't G-A-S about. He is far to busy defending the non existent rights of illegal aliens by making speeches on their behalf. And promising to protect them from TRUMP> To worry about actual Citizens Rights.

[Paladin]

Just because CSSA scheduled a meeting, doesn't in any way mean that ALL Sheriffs or their Dept Reps attended. Sheriff V of LA is very busy running around ...

I'm just going by what others have posted.

In February every Sheriff in California met to discuss CCW's and each others methods of administering the program. Yolo County had three people present. I had the opportunity to speak with them and they are issuing. There has been several people apply but have not gotten to the "attend training" part of the process.

(bolding and underlining added)

Back when he was campaigning, AV promised to issue more than McDonnell, but less than that other challenger (who said SD = GC). So far, I haven't heard of any changes yet. AV took office in early Dec. I'll give him the rest of the year to see if he's going to voluntarily liberalize issuance (to any degree). After that, we'll be awaiting SCOTUS' decision in NYSRPA case to force change, even if it is only a 2nd A RBA for LOC, which we'll be more than happy to do to force sheriffs to readily issue CCWs to get us to stand down. This is analogous to what happened in Ohio (in 2004?) after their state Supreme Court said they have a state constitutional RBA Openly.

[pacrat]

Because CSSA scheduled a meeting, and that meeting also possibly had CCW on the meeting agenda, and some guy in Yolo Cnty talked to a deputy. Still doesn't show that anybody from LASD was there.

Campaign promises from Liberal Democrats have historically amounted to less than nothing.

NYSRPA is a very narrow "TRANSPORT" case. Nothing to do with any aspect of CCW or LOC. Just unloaded LIB [locked in box] for city residents.

Again with the threadbare Ohio comparison?

I.04 Bearing arms; standing armies; military powers (1851)

The people have the right to bear arms for their defense and security; but standing armies, in time of peace, are dangerous to liberty, and shall not be kept up; and the military shall be in strict subordination to the civil power.

Ca has no such Bill of Rights and nothing analogous to Ohio's "1.04".

11 years ago today "Heller" was adjudicated and published. Yes, it affirmed an individual RKA [without the B]. But has done nothing to alleviate the oppression of 2A in Ca. yet. Maybe after I'm dead and gone enough cases will make it to SCOTUS to incrementally make the left coast a free part of America again.

Don't take any bets that the dickwad died in the wool Leftist Liberal Sheriff V will be of any help making that happen.

[Paladin]

Because CSSA scheduled a meeting, and that meeting also possibly had CCW on the meeting agenda, and some guy in Yolo Cnty talked to a deputy. Still doesn't show that anybody from LASD was there.

I didn't say it did. But it really doesn't matter. AV will do what he will do. The only relevant issue is whether he'll keep his campaign promise to issue more CCWs than McDonnell. So far, I've seen no indication that he will. But he's got 3.5 more years to go in this, his first term, so time will tell.

Campaign promises from Liberal Democrats have historically amounted to less than nothing.

Time will tell if that applies to AV too.

NYSRPA is a very narrow "TRANSPORT" case. Nothing to do with any aspect of CCW or LOC. Just unloaded LIB [locked in box] for city residents.

If the ruling gives us a RBA and/or strict scrutiny, that will have broad ramifications. The federal courts is where our last, and best, hope lies. But seeing that Roberts yet again joined the 4 "liberals" on SCOTUS to rule against Trump and the 4 "constitutionalists" on SCOTUS re. the census citizenship question, my hope there is diminishing too....

Again with the threadbare Ohio comparison?



Ca has no such Bill of Rights and nothing analogous to Ohio's "1.04".

Never said CA did. We're hoping for a federal Con 2nd A BoR RBA.

11 years ago today "Heller" was adjudicated and published. Yes, it affirmed an individual RKA [without the B]. But has done nothing to alleviate the oppression of 2A in Ca. yet. Maybe after I'm dead and gone enough cases will make it to SCOTUS to incrementally make the left coast a free part of America again.

Don't take any bets that the dickwad died in the wool Leftist Liberal Sheriff V will be of any help making that happen.

Time will tell.

If we don't get federal courts RBA recognition, your best hope is "local" (countywide) organizing and pressure on AV or sheriff's candidates. The next primary (which usually decides who wins), is less than 3 years away. IIRC, the cutoff for candidates is ~6 months before that, so 2.5 years away. Best to allow half a year to vet best viable candidate (electable, plus competent for all responsibilities, plus desires job, plus pro 2nd A), so that's 2.0 years away. So, if NYSRPA doesn't have a major impact on Carry rights, you've only got 2.0 years to establish and build a county-wide political organization, equivalent to San Diego Co Gun Owners PAC (https://sandiegocountygunowners.com/), to swing a county of >10M people.

I wish you the best!

[CCWFacts]

My impression is that AV is an extreme progressive. He may very well start issuing more, but if he does, my guess is that it will be to people well-connected to the Democratic machine here. Think successful attorneys, wealthy non-profit staffers, wealthy union officials, that kind of thing. At least that's my guess of what he meant about issuing more. Time will tell.

[pacrat]

"V" is a lifelong Democrat.

His lips moved when he made that campaign promise.

Not hard to discern what value that promise has.

[kflakes]

Well, joking a bit here, if AV issues only one CCW more than McDonnell did, technically he has kept his campaign promise.

[Paladin]

From the Off Topic forum:

Here is a video posted by Katman from Onus News Service of Los Angeles County Sheriff Alex Villanueva being asked during a Q & A session by a citizen about why it is next to impossible to get a CCW in Los Angeles County. Watch the video and the smugness and attitude by this top law enforcement officer in the most populated county in the country and how he TALKS DOWN to all of us. The video will turn your stomach.

My reply:

This was painful to watch, not because of what the Sheriff AV says (which is disappointing, but not surprising), but because of the sincere, but ignorant fighter for our side.

Some observations:

0:15 "swore to uphold the Constitution to the United States..." If he had only read the first 3 posts of my CoCoCo CCW Advice thread (actually just the first few paragraphs of the first post http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s....php?t=1482924), he would have better equipped and made a better argument.

1:35 "we've reduced the standard from impossible to 'Good Cause' ... a particularized reason that is specific to you, not generalized fear of crime ... it could be your occupation, it could be (mumbled, something re. the time of the day), it could be you've been a victim of violent crime, you could have a stalker from hell and they're out and about, not in prison, ... so we've changed the standard but you have to apply for it." Under AV's GC standard, thousands of small business owners (sandwich shops, gas stations, etc.) could probably get issued to protect themselves because they regularly make cash deposits. Even people who live and/or work out in rural areas where there are long response rates by the sheriffs sound like they have a solid chance. But NOBODY wants to do ANYTHING if it won't GUARANTEE that they themselves will get a CCW....

3:25: AV is WRONG when he says SCOTUS has "already decided" public carry can be restricted. They have NOT decided anything re. it. They've only declined to review lower courts' decisions re. it. Hopefully, that will change sometime between 2019 Oct 01 and 2020 July 01.

3:35 Again, "our guy" thinks our 2nd A RBA is the basis of our state's CCW law -- it isn't.

4:35 "Rural counties is a different equation": "Rural counties" like San Diego, Orange and Sacramento?

At 5:00 he says someone way out in Lake Los Angeles, because of long response times, he'll have a "different equation" (i.e., different GC requirement), than someone in a more urban part of LA Co.

Our guy claims Mayor Paris (City of Lancaster) (~5:10), wants his city to issue CCWs. But currently, Lancaster does NOT have it's own PD (and thus it's own Chief of Police to legally issue CCWs), but rather uses LASD for police services. https://www.cityoflancasterca.org/re...f-s-department IOW, "our guy" may have just tipped Sheriff AV off to the beginnings of an attempt to get around his restrictive CCW policy (by forming their own PD and hiring their own CoP)!

Like I said: "our guy" may be well meaning, but he is ill informed and painful to watch.

All in all, AV is what we predicted when we revised the CA CCW GC map after his taking office: he's using McDonnell's GC standard, but actually issuing under it (vs McDonnell who pretty much ignored his own CCW policy and just issued or denied as he saw fit -- 25 out of 25 CCW apps audited by the state auditor did NOT comply with McDonnell's own policy).

I'm going to cross post the OP and my post in the LA Co thread in the CA Counties CCW Info forum since they'll want to see this.

Hopefully, by this time next year, SCOTUS will have made a decision in a 2nd A case that will force CA law and sheriffs to issue more CCWs.

For those who think nothing's changed in the past 10 years (since McDonald case), compare these 2 CA CCW GC maps -- we've kicked butt! We're now down to the most hardcore anti counties.

[Paladin]

It sounds like what we figured his GC standard would be: light red, possibly even yellow.

Literally thousands could qualify under this: small business owners (sandwich shops, fast food franchise, gas stations, convenience stores, etc) who make regular, large cash deposits, or transport valuables/valuable equipment for the job, etc.

Female RE agents (probably a few thousand of these alone in LA Co), who show homes to strangers at all hours of the day or evening, may also qualify ("a particularized reason that is specific to you").

That long LE response times GC might even work for camping, hiking, backpacking, motorcycling in the wilderness, if backed by evidence proving that you regularly do those (camping receipts, photos, maps, etc).

AV said you've got to apply to find out if you can get issued. I'd recommend using the advice I complied in my "CoCoCo CCW Advice" thread stickied/pinned at the top of this forum. https://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/....php?t=1482924

[pacrat]

he's using McDonnell's GC standard, but actually issuing under it

REMAINS TO BE SEEN!

Parroting campaign promises. Does not make them true.