Los Angeles

[kjc625]

Time limit AND price limit. A fee for them to run the background check and cover the deputy's pay for an hour or two of work (which is more than it should take) is fair. No more than that.

90 days is on the longest end of reasonable in my opinion, and many may understandably think even that is not reasonable and it should be much shorter, but I could live with it in an otherwise shall-issue environment. At the end of 90 days, either they provide in writing why you aren't getting a permit (and really, very few things would qualify as good enough reasoning not to issue), or you get the permit.

Sadly, I doubt SCOTUS gives us this much detail. At this point, I'll be happy if they mandate shall issue, even if they leave time/money issues to the circuits to abuse. I'm concerned they will instead go very narrow and strike down NY's regime in a way that only marginally helps us. But that's just my paranoia. The Court is the best it will likely ever be in our lifetimes so it's now or never. (Unless Breyer doesn't retire soon, GOP takes Senate in 2022, and a Republicans wins in 2024. Then we could get a 7th.)

But anyway, we are getting off topic. Anyone get any calls today? I'm approaching 1.5 months since interview now....

At least you had your interview. LOL
I found out that many of my students haven't received their calls too. Some sent their apps in late March and have not received any calls.

[PenguinFipper]

At least you had your interview. LOL
I found out that many of my students haven't received their calls too. Some sent their apps in late March and have not received any calls.

Out of curiosity, what are your students GC color? I sent mine early April and got my interview early June.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[kjc625]

Out of curiosity, what are your students GC color? I sent mine early April and got my interview early June.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

All of them have strong work-related causes. Some work in LA jewelry district shops and some owns convenience stores in some questionable areas.

[bb557]

At least you had your interview. LOL
I found out that many of my students haven't received their calls too. Some sent their apps in late March and have not received any calls.

All of them have strong work-related causes. Some work in LA jewelry district shops, and some owns convenience stores in some questionable areas.

This is one of the things I find the strangest about this process. How random it seems to be. Very strange. Would love to know the selection process for the calls.

[pacrat]

"meanspartan" said;

Time limit AND price limit. A fee for them to run the background check and cover the deputy's pay for an hour or two of work (which is more than it should take) is fair. No more than that.

What would be "fair" is;

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed

Cops get paid a Big Fat Salary + OT. Whether they are riding a desk, answering calls, or eating donuts on duty. So WHY T_F should we as citizens pay them to ALLOW us OUR ENUMERATED RIGHTS!?

Since it BTW is not even mentioned in the Constitution or B0R.

What would be a FAIR FEE to pay to be allowed to VOTE?

[seaweedsoyboy]

This is one of the things I find the strangest about this process. How random it seems to be. Very strange. Would love to know the selection process for the calls.

[E.Daniel24]

[emoji36][emoji36][emoji36][emoji36]

[kjc625]

I wish someone who is going to have the interview ask the deputies how they select each file.

[Guninator]

While I was enraged at the time, in hindsight, I am glad this happened. That case wasn't even about carry really, it was about firearm transport. If the court ruled on that case, it would have given Roberts space to push for a narrow ruling that only really affected New York's weird draconian ordinance. And then they could have ignored 2A cases for another decade, because "we just did one".

Instead, they are now ruling on an actual carry case. Even if they go narrow on it, it should cut off some of the worst offending may-issue BS tactics, which would be progress. (Unless we get a surprise loss of course. Gulp.)

I do agree that there should be a rule that the last chance to moot a case is before SCOTUS grants cert. Once cert is granted, they will hear the case on the merits, unless the Petitioners also agree to dropping it. In my perfect world!

It could be worse. There is no mootness rule for abortion cases. In fact, the appellant in Roe v Wade - who later became pro life - petitioned SCOTUS for reversal on the 30th anniversary of Roe. The court had to entertain the petition, although of course they denied it.

90 days is on the longest end of reasonable in my opinion, and many may understandably think even that is not reasonable and it should be much shorter, but I could live with it in an otherwise shall-issue environment. At the end of 90 days, either they provide in writing why you aren't getting a permit (and really, very few things would qualify as good enough reasoning not to issue), or you get the permit.

Sadly, I doubt SCOTUS gives us this much detail.

Hey, if SCOTUS can invent "trimesters" out of whole cloth, why not reasonable time requirements for CCW processing?

[Lockdown.-]

@KJC I'm sure it's just random. You're giving LASD too much credit on how they pick the applications.

A bunch of applications get reviewed by the Lt on Monday. Hands out a stack to each deputy. Each deputy calls and sets up on their own interviews on their own schedule.

Each deputy works at a different pace. Some deputies have other duties and some are focused on CCW.

Again, I don't think they're spending time reviewing the application. They have over 4,000 to go over at the moment.

[kjc625]

@KJC I'm sure it's just random. You're giving LASD too much credit on how they pick the applications.

A bunch of applications get reviewed by the Lt on Monday. Hands out a stack to each deputy. Each deputy calls and sets up on their own interviews on their own schedule.

Each deputy works at a different pace. Some deputies have other duties and some are focused on CCW.

Again, I don't think they're spending time reviewing the application. They have over 4,000 to go over at the moment.

I worked in both departments and my dad retired after 43 years in LASD. I have greater respect for LASD than other agencies. LOL

[Chakachaka]

I honestly think LASD is issuing for work related reasons. On my license it lists my occupation and occupation address. I think this is why we haven’t seen many people confirm getting issued CCWs in recreation related risks

[Lockdown.-]

Fake news.

Drinking buddy applied w/o any work related risk. Only drinking related risks.
Waiting for pick up now.

Wife also didn't state any work related risk on application. To be fair, the interviewing deputy seemed like he was reading her application for the first time during the interview.

[TougeChis]

Been away for a few days. Seems like not much has changed here.

[bb557]

Fake news.

Drinking buddy applied w/o any work related risk. Only drinking related risks.
Waiting for pick up now.

Wife also didn't state any work related risk on application. To be fair, the interviewing deputy seemed like he was reading her application for the first time during the interview.