San Bernardino

[R Dale]

None. One property tax bill may show which one was your primary residence on January 1st (homeowner's exemption), but none will identify what your primary residence was for the other 182 days.

Utility bills also don't prove any residence; they just show that the bill was sent to you and what usage there was at the property.

Nothing proves anything 100% but there is a good chance if you or paying the utility bills you probably live there because few people pay all the utilities at a place they rent out and when take the utility bills along with the property tax bill that is a general indicator of where you reside. I have lived at the same location for over ten years and still don't know the first and last names of all my neighbors that live three to four houses on either side of me so to me the neighbor check doesn't really do anything for the GMC thing either and as I said before if someone is causing a
significant problem in the neighborhood a background check should reveal such.

[R Dale]

Random checks open up the possibility of claims of profiling unless those "randomly selected" are restricted to white middle-aged males (sooner or later we're going to grow the huevos to complain too).

Everyone needs to play by the same rules, and everyone needs to go through the same process.

Yes, it is a small number of denials, but there ARE denials.
While the county is indemnified, they are still not free from pressure from Sacramento.
State law says Good Cause and Good Moral Character, and 4-16 hours of training.
The county is already running the minimum requirements for Good Cause, split the difference at 8 hours of training.
If they were to simply gloss over GMC completely and effectively go "shall issue", and there were an incident with a carrier who had a long history of arrests (but no convictions) or problems with their employer or neighbors, as well as an MMJ card and a couple of ounces of weed, there would be a LOT of pressure on the county to either tighten up requirements, perhaps under threat of funding cuts.

Likewise for residency.
Residency of the county didn't used to be a requirement. Some of the central California counties were issuing to LA residents like Arizona, so the state imposed the county residency requirement.

Same situation... LA resident who owns a cabin that he rents in Big Bear gets into an incident... The LA prosecutor starts hammering SBSD about why they issued to an LA resident.

Proper background checks and proper review of tax and utility should catch both of the examples you cite.

[Cokebottle]

Off subject but anyone ever qualify with a 25 auto?

It is permitted.
Literally anything (other than an assault weapon) from .25acp to .45 is permitted.
If you can put 10 rounds into the upper torso from 5 yards, and can keep your finger off the trigger and not muzzle anyone, you'll qualify.

Minimum caliber .25acp, FN 5.7 not accepted. There were a few disparaging comments (from class members, not the instructor) about the efficacy of anything smaller than .380, and the instructor did encourage .380/.38spl as a minimum.
Some exceptions to the .25 minimum have been made for persons with disabilities, but it is absolutely going to be a case-by-case thing that I imagine would need to be discussed with the investigating detective prior to range day.

If the minimum caliber is a problem, let me know and I'll shoot my instructor a note with your contact info.

[Cokebottle]

I have lived at the same location for over ten years and still don't know the first and last names of all my neighbors that live three to four houses on either side of me

And that's not a bad thing...
"How long have you known Bob from 10-A?"
"I've seen him around as long as I've lived here but I never knew his name. Never had a reason to be concerned, they pretty much keep to themselves. No parties, rarely have any visitors, some cops talked to them when their neighbor got busted for drugs."

That's all my neighbors would be able to say.

Proper background checks and proper review of tax and utility should catch both of the examples you cite.

The arrest history, yes, BUT now we get back into the semantics of 2A where NOPAL is expressing an opinion (as far as I can tell) that a simple arrest is not sufficient for denial... it needs to be a prohibiting conviction... effectively applying a Constitutional-Carry standard without respect to limitations that may be placed on other elements of the Bill of Rights.

For residency? No, it's not sufficient.
Tax documents show ownership only, not occupancy. They to not reveal the lack of tax documents or lease agreements from other counties... and what county should the SD check? We are surrounded by counties that don't issue, MIGHT issue, or have a 12-36 month process.
What if I own a cabin in Big Bear, but I rent a condo in LA?

Likewise for utilities... they would work against you if you had the utility bills going to a PO Box in Upland, or LA County, but if you handle them electronically (I haven't had a paper utility bill in over 5 years, my HOA dues are the only thing that I still write a check for) then that is not proof that you are a resident of that location.
I've rented cabins and condos for short terms many times over the years and I've never once paid a utility bill unless I was moving into an actual permanent residence. The utilities were simply a part of the rental agreement.

That's why I specifically mentioned a cabin. There are a lot of them in San Bernardino and Riverside County.
Most that are not owner-occupied are rented for short-term stays. People rent them in the winter to ski, and they rent them in summer when they don't want to deal with camping or the crowds at hotels.

I'm upside down on my condo, and I work 40 miles away. It would not be unreasonable for me to rent the condo out to cover the mortgage until values recover, and move to a place north of Pasadena.

Two options for that... Talk to the neighbors, or put a deputy on the house for 5 days documenting who comes and goes.

[R Dale]

And that's not a bad thing...
"How long have you known Bob from 10-A?"
"I've seen him around as long as I've lived here but I never knew his name. Never had a reason to be concerned, they pretty much keep to themselves. No parties, rarely have any visitors, some cops talked to them when their neighbor got busted for drugs."

That's all my neighbors would be able to say.


The arrest history, yes, BUT now we get back into the semantics of 2A where NOPAL is expressing an opinion (as far as I can tell) that a simple arrest is not sufficient for denial... it needs to be a prohibiting conviction... effectively applying a Constitutional-Carry standard without respect to limitations that may be placed on other elements of the Bill of Rights.

For residency? No, it's not sufficient.
Tax documents show ownership only, not occupancy. They to not reveal the lack of tax documents or lease agreements from other counties... and what county should the SD check? We are surrounded by counties that don't issue, MIGHT issue, or have a 12-36 month process.
What if I own a cabin in Big Bear, but I rent a condo in LA?

Likewise for utilities... they would work against you if you had the utility bills going to a PO Box in Upland, or LA County, but if you handle them electronically (I haven't had a paper utility bill in over 5 years, my HOA dues are the only thing that I still write a check for) then that is not proof that you are a resident of that location.
I've rented cabins and condos for short terms many times over the years and I've never once paid a utility bill unless I was moving into an actual permanent residence. The utilities were simply a part of the rental agreement.

That's why I specifically mentioned a cabin. There are a lot of them in San Bernardino and Riverside County.
Most that are not owner-occupied are rented for short-term stays. People rent them in the winter to ski, and they rent them in summer when they don't want to deal with camping or the crowds at hotels.

I'm upside down on my condo, and I work 40 miles away. It would not be unreasonable for me to rent the condo out to cover the mortgage until values recover, and move to a place north of Pasadena.

Two options for that... Talk to the neighbors, or put a deputy on the house for 5 days documenting who comes and goes.

It is one thing to talk to the neighbors but they should not be told the reason the inquiry is being made other than its a background check. Also IMO if you can show you rent or own a property in the county and pay utilities at that address that is a pretty good indication that you are at that address some of the time and that be sufficient to get a permit and course you sign a document that you live there with the understanding that if you don't live where you say there will be a penalty.

[Cokebottle]

It is one thing to talk to the neighbors but they should not be told the reason the inquiry is being made other than its a background check.

I agree, and this can depend on the investigating deputy.
Some members have reported the deputy said something more along the lines of "Non criminal investigation" or "Background check for a county permit"

In the case of the latter, the neighbor poked around the SD site and figured it out

Also, one of my concerns, that of my drug-dealing neighbor being contacted, it is probably safe to assume that they pre-screen neighbors they intend to speak to and probably won't be talking to the guy who is awaiting arraignment on his 3rd strike. Likewise, such people generally don't open doors for uniformed cops.

[matix101]

What's up guys I applied for mine about a week ago and first available date was 10/11 haven't received an email yet.
One thing I am concerned about though, I read through about 50 pages from here back and didn't see the answer, I voluntarily attended a drug rehab program in 2009 and disclosed that on my application, I haven't had a single arrest or ticket or anything from then, but I also have a dui on my record in 2005, I hope the rehab thing or the dui for that matter doesn't disqualify me.
Any input from anyone with similar history would be appreciated, thanks guys.

Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk

[Cokebottle]

What's up guys I applied for mine about a week ago and first available date was 10/11 haven't received an email yet.
One thing I am concerned about though, I read through about 50 pages from here back and didn't see the answer, I voluntarily attended a drug rehab program in 2009 and disclosed that on my application, I haven't had a single arrest or ticket or anything from then, but I also have a dui on my record in 2005, I hope the rehab thing or the dui for that matter doesn't disqualify me.
Any input from anyone with similar history would be appreciated, thanks guys.

I don't think the DUI would be a problem.

The voluntary drug rehab may be a big help, especially since it worked and you've been clean for 7 years.
We've heard that the general guideline is any drug use within the last 10 years an an automatic DQ for GMC, but again, the voluntary rehab, AND the fact that you did not attempt to hide it, will certainly work in your favor.
It would certainly have resulted in a denial had you not disclosed it and it been discovered during the investigation. Remember, you're giving them a notarized document giving permission to look into anything and everything available... I'm not positive about HIPA, but medical records may be subject as well.

[matix101]

Gotcha ok thanks, fingers crossed!!

Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk

[Nopal]

I don't think the DUI would be a problem.

The voluntary drug rehab may be a big help, especially since it worked and you've been clean for 7 years.
We've heard that the general guideline is any drug use within the last 10 years an an automatic DQ for GMC, but again, the voluntary rehab, AND the fact that you did not attempt to hide it, will certainly work in your favor.
It would certainly have resulted in a denial had you not disclosed it and it been discovered during the investigation. Remember, you're giving them a notarized document giving permission to look into anything and everything available... I'm not positive about HIPA, but medical records may be subject as well.

Do you have a link to those guidelines?

[Cokebottle]

The voluntary drug rehab may be a big help, especially since it worked and you've been clean for 7 years.
We've heard that the general guideline is any drug use within the last 10 years an an automatic DQ for GMC, but again, the voluntary rehab, AND the fact that you did not attempt to hide it, will certainly work in your favor.
It would certainly have resulted in a denial had you not disclosed it and it been discovered during the investigation. Remember, you're giving them a notarized document giving permission to look into anything and everything available... I'm not positive about HIPA, but medical records may be subject as well.

Do you have a link to those guidelines?

There is nothing published.
This is based from statements made in this thread by applicants, and at least one of the instructors is active.

[G_Sanch88]

May be a dumb question. But I have my appointment for interview at the end of February, is it nessesary for me to make a Live Scan appointment for same day? Is this even possible?

[Nopal]

There is nothing published.
This is based from statements made in this thread by applicants, and at least one of the instructors is active.

Horray for transparency!

[Nopal]

May be a dumb question. But I have my appointment for interview at the end of February, is it nessesary for me to make a Live Scan appointment for same day? Is this even possible?

I believe that the Live Scan is taken care of after the interview, on site.

[Cokebottle]

I believe that the Live Scan is taken care of after the interview, on site.

Correct.
Interview > Livescan > Photo > return to counter to pick up info packet for class.
No appointment is needed... just make sure to have your separate money orders signed and in order.

I would assume that if the interview does not go well, that you don't move on to Livescan and thus won't pay for it, but I don't now and didn't ask.