Los Angeles

[seaweedsoyboy]

I found this upload of the stream: https://youtu.be/iExLHpB6eVk

[prkcty]

Way to go!

[prkcty]

for concealed weapons


one hour fifty three minutes and 38 seconds mark when the question comes in

[Paladin]

Can someone work up a transcript of what he in the times I bolded below?

As best as I could make out:

1: 53 :40 to 1: 53 :52 reads viewer submitted Q about issuing CCW to average person

1: 53 :52 to 1: 54 :03 I can't understand this part, if you can please transcribe it in a post

1: 54 :03 to 1: 54 :50 talks about "citizen in good standing," not have felonies, pass background check, training, register firearm; no need for CCW at place of business or home; no 2nd A Right to Bear Arms in public, only place of employment or home provided you are not a prohibited person (felony, DUI, mental health issues)

1: 54 :50 to 1: 55 :05 I couldn't hear or understand

1: 55 :05 to 1: 55 :40 talks about varying his standard depending upon the time for LE to respond; apply if you think you deserve one, we're adding more staff to process so people who should have one can get one

[prkcty]

This is hard to hear because of poor connection, but here is what I can gather. THIS MAY NOT BE 100% ACCURATE. I advise you all to watch and listen for yourselves so please don't get upset if I make a mistake. Anything in parenthesis or brackets is my best guess as to what was said and/or my personal commentary.


These are the replies to a citizen's question. It is unclear if this was directly related to a citizen of the Antelope Valley specifically or for LA County residents in general.


"well all I'm asking for is good cause for the standard for granting a ccw permit ..."


"we've been issuing quite a few lately.."


"we are going to be continuing issuing as long as you satisfy a good cause standard..."

"first, you have to be a citizen in good standing, cant have a felony conviction, you have to pass background, go through training process, register your firearm all the things you are required. and this is all for carrying a concealed weapon in public, you do not need to have that at home. . . "

- - - - This is what I think is the critical part, I believe he is stating that for those in areas farther away from concentrated areas of law enforcement, he will modify the standard. Again, watch the video, do not rely on my transcription - - - -

[I think here he is referring to Antelope Valley or surrounding LA areas, basically not in the LA basin is the example he gives]

"....are not as concentrated as they are in the basin (LA Basin?) so an emergency call might take us a lot more than 2-3 minutes like if you're down in the basin, my standard is going to be slightly different based on the ability of local law enforcement to respond to that emergency so I encourage you if you believe you deserve one, please apply for one, we have added additional personnel now to our ccw permitting process to pick up the pace and i know its always been a burning issue and um (unintelligible) paying attention and we are making sure that the ones that should have one that they have the ability to get one through the proper permitting process.

[Paladin]

All in all, I'm underwhelmed. I shouldn't have been surprised or disappointed.

The question is always, what will he accept for Good Cause? It sounds like now, working and maybe just living in a rural part of LA Co qualifies.

When that LA Times comment said something about issuing to everyone I was hoping for SD = GC (dark green). My guess is Light Red, maybe even Yellow for people in rural areas.

[prkcty]

Same thoughts here. Definitely underwhelming to say the least, but hopefully some more can get it once we see what the good cause standard is. Something is better than the current status of virtually not issuing at all.


For the next virtual conference/ meeting we should have people actively asking about ccw

[Paladin]

Don't get me wrong: when you're talking a county with 10,000,000 people, just going from Dark Red to Light Red or Yellow is a great improvement (gets us closer to green), and will result in going from a few hundred CCWs to several thousands, maybe even tens of thousands. But for the vast majority of LA residents, I didn't hear anything to give them optimism. Maybe in a few years he'll liberalize even more. But as far as I can tell, that day is not today.

I still look forward to hearing what that CGNer who has a friend who knows AV will tell us, hopefully later tonight.

[Paladin]

For the next virtual conference/ meeting we should have people actively asking about ccw

They post them on the LASD FB page. Probably on their own site too. IIRC, they say they're limited to people living in the featured city for that virtual town hall. I don't know if/how they police that.

[Paladin]

You know, I shouldn't get too down. I was looking over my post explaining the colors of the CA CCW GC map, and what AV described sounds like Yellow. Sure, that one yellow GC applies for people who live in remote areas. But that was the only example he was dealing with. When one yellow GC qualifies (#8 in the AV example), the other yellow GCs usually also qualify (#9 - 12). Plus, if he was describing #8, that's the weakest Yellow GC: it's right next to Light Green, so the strongest Light Green (#7 obvious physical vulnerability) is worth applying with.

The below GC categories are listed from, roughly, weakest to strongest. Note well there's a range within each category. For example, someone who's work equipment is worth $10,000 (might pass Light Red) is assumed to be more at risk than someone who's equipment is worth only $1,000 (might pass Yellow). Plus, remember that equipment that cost you $1,000 isn't equivalent to someone making $500 cash deposits. Your equipment is not only used (let's say it would fetch $600), but also it's stolen (might then drop that to $300). Similarly, someone who walks with a slight limp (might pass Dark Green), is not as vulnerable as someone who requires a cane (might pass Light Green) and they're not as vulnerable as someone who requires a wheelchair (might pass Yellow). Evaluation of GC isn't black and white, but often shades of gray, a judgment call. That's one of the reasons why we say the map may be off by 1 color in either direction. So, if you have a GC that is listed under Light Green below it might pass in a Yellow county. Apply if you really want a CCW and can afford to waste the time, money and effort in applying since you're most likely to be denied. (Going through the process might be good practice.) Remember: we should win a robust 2nd A RBA from SCOTUS by 2021 July 01, maybe even by 2020 July 01.

All the below Good Causes will likely pass in a Dark Green county. This is Virtual Shall Issue because virtually all of us can get issued here.

(1) "Self Defense"/"Personal Protection"

(2) Regularly gets cash at ATMs or fills up at gas stations late at night in rough parts of town and has proof of that (e.g., receipts). Avid shooter who often goes to a range before or after work, as seen by club membership card, receipts and photos.

(3) You have a medical condition (e.g., heart disease, elderly) that makes running, hiding or fighting unrealistic.

All the below will likely pass in a Light Green county. Most of us can get issued here.

(4) Live and/or work in a dangerous area as seen by crime stats (provide crimemapping maps, news stories, gov't stats)

(5) Recreational activities in remote locales with little or no cellphone coverage and/or long LE response times (e.g., amateur wilderness photography, target shooting, hunting, fishing, hiking, mountain biking, motorcycling, backcountry skiing, etc.). (Use trail maps, calendars, log books, receipts from campgrounds and photos as proof.)

(6) Recreational activities that put you at a heightened risk due to the property's value or equipment's inherent danger (e.g., Craig's List seller/buyer, avid shooter who transports several semi auto pistols, rifles and/or shotguns and hundreds of rounds to various ranges or C&R collector). (For proof use photos of activities, value of equipment/property, sales receipts, copy of club membership card, photos of trophies won, training certificates, C&R license.)

(7) There's something obvious about applicant that makes them particularly vulnerable to attack and thus an attractive target (e.g., an obvious physical handicap or medical issue that makes fleeing, hiding, or fighting impractical. Provide note from MD and/or PT on letterhead explaining condition, etc.)

All the below will likely pass in a Yellow county Some of us can get issued here.

(8) Lives in a remote area with little or no cellphone coverage and/or long LE response times. (Provide proof of residence location, photos of your acreage, of you farming/ranching, etc) N.B. While this may work with SLO Co SO, it will not with Alameda Co SO; not sure re. Napa and Yolo Co SOs.

(9) Employees required to work in remote locales at all hours with little or no cellphone coverage and/or long LE response times (e.g., wilderness photographer, surveyors, construction workers). (Get letter from employer supporting the application and willingness to accept liability, copies of relevant certificates/licenses, provide photos of you doing job, value of equipment). N.B. Your CCW may be restricted to on-the-job only.

(10) Employees at heightened risk due visiting isolated locations required by their employment (e.g., female RE agents showing houses to strangers at all hours while alone). (Get letter from employer supporting the application and willingness to accept liability, copies of relevant certificates/licenses, provide photos of you doing job, etc) N.B. Your CCW may be restricted to on-the-job only.

(11) Employees (e.g., business managers, property managers) who are at heightened risk due to valuables associated with their employment (e.g., Au/Ag, jewelry, pharmaceuticals, firearms, ammo or gunpowder ("inherently dangerous property"), cash sales or rental deposits). Get letter from employer supporting the application and willingness to accept liability, copies of relevant certificates/licenses, provide photos of you doing job, etc N.B. Your CCW may be restricted to on-the-job only.

(12) The nature of the business or occupation of the applicant is such that it is subject to personal risk and / or criminal attack, greater than the general population (e.g., private investigators, process servers, plain clothes security guards, bodyguards, taxi drivers). (Get letter from employer supporting the application and willingness to accept liability, copies of relevant certificates/licenses, photos of you on the job, etc.) N.B. Your CCW may be restricted to on-the-job only.

All the below will likely pass in a Light Red county. Few of us can get issued here.

(13) Business owners required to work at all hours in remote locales with little or no cellphone coverage and/or long LE response times (e.g., professional farmer or rancher, wilderness photographer, surveyor, contractor). (copies of relevant certificates/licenses, provide photos of you doing job at remote locations, value of equipment, etc) N.B. Your CCW may be restricted to on-the-job only.

(14) Business owners who are at heightened risk due to valuables associated with their profession or business activities (e.g., Au/Ag dealers, jewelry dealers, MD/pharmacists/pharma sales rep, business owner or landlord making cash sales or rental deposits, maybe NRA Instructor, RSO and FFL dealers due to regularly transporting "inherently dangerous property"). (written description of your business activities, copies of relevant certificates/licenses, provide photos of you doing job, etc) N.B. Your CCW may be restricted to on-the-job only.

The below Good Cause will likely pass in a Dark Red county. This is Virtual No Issue because virtually none of us can get issued here. There are 3 levels in Dark Red (from most restrictive to least): actual No Issue. SF and Santa Clara, for awhile, were once this. Next, Corrupt Issue. LASD under Sheriff Jim McDonnell was like this per the CSA's report: 25 out of 25 audited files did not follow their own CCW policy re. residency and 24 out of 25 did not follow their own policy on GC. (Links at bottom.) Last is Virtual No Issue: this is where they issue for category #15 below and only for that.

(15) They are at heightened risk due to a documented "clear & present danger to life, or great bodily harm" against them or an immediate family member (e.g., crazy ex- or disgruntled fired employee, stalker, anonymous nut case/evildoer, etc.). These GC policies are usually based upon CA State AG John Van de Kamp's early 1980s Opinion letter and require a number of additional conditions be present. (Proof includes police reports (if BG unknown), permanent restraining order (if BG known), evidence of current threats (e.g., audio recordings, video/pictures, written threats, etc).) (SF, LA and Alameda have this as their only acceptable GC, but I've heard Alameda & LA do not approve or deny not in conformity to their published policy. (See Calif State Auditor's report re. LA: 1 page Fact Sheet: http://www.auditor.ca.gov/pdfs/factsheets/2017-101.pdf Audit Summary: http://www.auditor.ca.gov/reports/2017-101/summary.html Full, 88 page report: http://www.auditor.ca.gov/pdfs/reports/2017-101.pdf One year later, LASD under Sheriff AV has still not complied with the CSA's recommendations. See ~2/3rds down at: https://www.auditor.ca.gov/reports/s...019-041/table3)

[baggss]

I really want to have someone in say the Antelope Valley apply and get approved with a reasonable GC (Bad neighborhood, more remote, gangs, etc.) before I’m buying any of this. Something that shows that he’s serious about at least issuing to folks out of the basin (what about the valley?).

[Paladin]

- - - - This is what I think is the critical part, I believe he is stating that for those in areas farther away from concentrated areas of law enforcement, he will modify the standard. Again, watch the video, do not rely on my transcription - - - -

[I think here he is referring to Antelope Valley or surrounding LA areas, basically not in the LA basin is the example he gives]

"....are not as concentrated as they are in the basin (LA Basin?) so an emergency call might take us a lot more than 2-3 minutes like if you're down in the basin, my standard is going to be slightly different based on the ability of local law enforcement to respond to that emergency so I encourage you if you believe you deserve one, please apply for one, we have added additional personnel now to our ccw permitting process to pick up the pace and i know its always been a burning issue and um (unintelligible) paying attention and we are making sure that the ones that should have one that they have the ability to get one through the proper permitting process.

For the next virtual conference/ meeting we should have people actively asking about ccw

What we need is for CGNers who live in the LA Basin to call in/online when his virtual town hall is focused on an area within the Basin and ask him what is acceptable GC for people living in the basin.

[prkcty]

Agreed. Especially after seeing how quickly LE was overwhelmed in densely populated urban areas a short distance from law enforcement stations, and seeing people being dragged out of their cars and beaten.

If there ever were a time for calgunner participation to assist in getting ccw issued more frequently in LA, now is the time. The ccw standards may be subject to a slight change in a limited capacity, but at least ccw has been openly discussed in a public forum. Many people not in our community are seeing for the first time how dangerous things turn in a moment's notice. The public's interest in safety, including but not limited to ccw, is important to highlight. We need to be using those phone lines during these meetings or even calling directly outside of the meetings to ask about it; if they get enough calls they will have to at least take note of the call volume.

[Paladin]

Cross posting these here:

I talked to my daughter's fiance today about CCWs in LA County. We weren't able to have much of a conversation because the whole family was there celebrating Father's Day. Sheriff Villanueva wants to start accepting applications and is talking with others in the department about how to proceed. One issue is how to deal with the large number of applicants that they are anticipating. The sheriff said in a public address that anyone interested in applying should go the the LASD website and download the form, fill it out and mail it in or scan it into your computer and attach it to an email.

(The department's website has a list of requirements for applicants and as far as I know these requirements will not change. I'm going to remain positive about this because to my knowledge it's been years since any other sheriff has considered doing this.)

Sheriff Villanueva wants to start accepting applications and is talking with others in the department about how to proceed. One issue is how to deal with the large number of applicants that they are anticipating. The sheriff said in a public address that anyone interested in applying should go the the LASD website and download the form, fill it out and mail it in or scan it into your computer and attach it to an email.

The Sheriff should have his CCW unit contact the CCW units of OC and San Diego: both have had experience in issuing lots of CCWs. OC even helped SD ramp up their process when Sheriff Gore liberalize issuance a 2 or 3 years ago.

(The department's website has a list of requirements for applicants and as far as I know these requirements will not change. I'm going to remain positive about this because to my knowledge it's been years since any other sheriff has considered doing this.)

This is the link to the LASD CCW webpage (https://lasd.org/ccw_info.html) w/links to, among other things, their "CCW Licensing Policy" (dated 2019 April) and their "LASD CCW Policy." The latter, when you open it up, right in the middle of its first page has their extremely restrictive GC policy.

From the LASD CCW Policy (bolding added):

In addition, good cause for the purposes of Penal Code section 26150 shall exist only if the following prevails:

•convincing evidence of a clear and present danger to life or of great bodily harm to the applicant, his spouse or dependent child, which cannot be adequately dealt with by existing law enforcement resources and which danger cannot be reasonably avoided by alternative measures, and which danger would be significantly mitigated by the applicant's carrying of a concealed firearm.

Thanks for the intel!

[gobler]

Cross posting these here:

Wasn't there something about not needing to spend money till you're accepted? Is that still a part of the process?