SB-918 Firearms Update

[wussery]

Just came across this article which provides a pretty good update around the failure to pass SB-918 Firearms. There is an update to what is the current status going forward which starts further down the article at "The Status Quo".

https://calmatters.org/politics/california-legislature/2022/09/california-concealed-carry-bill/

[AWE]

Great article it had all the players in it.
Adding this one with more tears for making the state less Commiefornia.

https://www.voiceofalexandria.com/california-gun-bill-fails-on-tactical-error-in-legislature/article_6aae5fe1-8d78-5134-a639-833a7d24147c.html

[ezaircon4jc]

Great article it had all the players in it.
Adding this one with more tears for making the state less Commiefornia.

https://www.voiceofalexandria.com/ca...a7d24147c.html

Yeah, the PRK is "less safe" because the millions of CCW holders are killing people and robbing banks and convenience stores left and right. Oh, wait... aren't CCW holders generally the most law abiding?

[AWE]

ezaricon4jc

Exactly it was shameful to read what Bonta and Portantino are saying I wanted to find the quote where most of the legislature said they both are annoying little tyrants and got tired of the threats for SB-918 and voted against them.

Attorney Chuck Michel, president of the California Rifle and Pistol Association, said the organization “is notifying local jurisdictions of their constitutional obligations to process applications quickly. We anticipate some stonewalling and game playing from certain localities hostile to gun ownership. We will see those holdouts in court.”

Another good quote is the attorneys are lining up on September 22 to file lawsuits.

[SandHill]

ezaricon4jc

Exactly it was shameful to read what Bonta and Portantino are saying I wanted to find the quote where most of the legislature said they both are annoying little tyrants and got tired of the threats for SB-918 and voted against them.




Another good quote is the attorneys are lining up on September 22 to file lawsuits.

Glad to see Chuck Michel out in front, although not surprised of course. What is the significance of Sept 22 date?

[AWE]

SandHill

Penal Code 26205.

90 Days post ruling Sep 22 they are out of compliance the counties that have not issued and in writing said they were awaiting the bill for guidance and is now in the trash SB-918.

[Quiet]

SandHill

Penal Code 26205.

90 Days post ruling Sep 22 they are out of compliance the counties that have not issued and in writing said they were awaiting the bill for guidance and is now in the trash SB-918.

Technically...
PC 26205 does not set a time limit to issue a permit.
PC 26205 sets time limits for a issuing agency to give an applicant a written notice on if their application is approved or denied.




Penal Code 26205
The licensing authority shall give written notice to the applicant indicating if the license under this article is approved or denied. The licensing authority shall give this notice within 90 days of the initial application for a new license or a license renewal, or 30 days after receipt of the applicant’s criminal background check from the Department of Justice, whichever is later. If the license is denied, the notice shall state which requirement was not satisfied.

[Usual_Suspect]

Technically...
PC 26205 does not set a time limit to issue a permit.
PC 26205 sets time limits for a issuing agency to give an applicant a written notice on if their application is approved or denied.




Penal Code 26205

Some Agencies are not even complying with the 30 days, which IMHO opinion should default to an automatic approval. DOJ should add to their website the date\time it was transmitted and received by teh requesting Agency.
LASD for example uses the excuse DOJ hasn't sent them the results, which is not correct. One of the folks in my signature reached out to his Assemblyman and asked for assistance. LASD said they had not been notified, DOJ told him to contact LASD. Come to find out LASD is notified the day it clears, if LASD doesn't acknowledge they have it within 12 hours, a human at DOJ will see what the issue is and try and resolve it. It is an automated process.
At the end of the day most folks get stuck between LASD and DOJ, they give up and wait. I told my buddy he needs to walk in and file a complaint with Internal Affairs, he was given false information and covering up the fact LASD is in violation of 26205. He doesn't want to do it, afraid they will bottom pile him or deny him.

[Quiet]

DOJ should add to their website the date\time it was transmitted and received by teh requesting Agency.

When you get live scanned, ask for your ATI number.
You can then go to the CA DOJ Applicant Background Check Status website and check your status.
^What you are asking for, already exists.

I told my buddy he needs to walk in and file a complaint with Internal Affairs, he was given false information and covering up the fact LASD is in violation of 26205. He doesn't want to do it, afraid they will bottom pile him or deny him.

File an official compliant to force changes within LASD.

About 5 days ago, LASD Internal Affairs busted (suspended pending investigation) two LASD deputies over CCW issuance issues.

[AWE]

Technically...
PC 26205 does not set a time limit to issue a permit.
PC 26205 sets time limits for a issuing agency to give an applicant a written notice on if their application is approved or denied.




Penal Code 26205
The licensing authority shall give written notice to the applicant indicating if the license under this article is approved or denied. The licensing authority shall give this notice within 90 days of the initial application for a new license or a license renewal, or 30 days after receipt of the applicant’s criminal background check from the Department of Justice, whichever is later. If the license is denied, the notice shall state which requirement was not satisfied.

Quiet

Those are valid points to issue the approval or denial notice that usually has a pickup date or to report to training depending on the agency which can extend the time to the applicant.