Question on SB2 and CA state mandated updates to the CCW application process

[Kevin James]

Looking for some opinions on something. I have been considering applying for a CCW in Sacramento County, but was concerned due to an incident long ago in my past, which I was worried would be used to deny me under the "good moral character" requirement. Everyone has done at least SOMETHING dumb when they were young, and I definitely did and learned my lesson.

I have heard that SB2 removes the good moral character requirement, and instead establishes a specific list of things that would make someone a disqualified person who cannot receive or renew a license (CCW).

I am now concerned about one specific line item. The good news is that if the good moral character requirement is now removed, then the subjectivity that it creates surrounding my past incident is also gone, but the bad news is that since it is now very black and white with no grey area, it may just make it a flat out denial with zero hope of ever successfully applying.

The line item I am now concerned about is:
"Has engaged in an unlawful or reckless use, display, or brandishing of a firearm."

The question is though, do you have to be convicted of something for this to apply?
I guess my thought is it doesn't specifically say you have to be convicted of it, but then without a conviction, an arrest alone doesn't prove you actually did anything.

So, 27 years ago in 1996 when I was a young dumb 21 year old, I was arrested for a loaded concealed firearm in the parked vehicle I was sitting in while waiting for a friend. Unfortunately it also happened to be within 1000 feet of a school zone (although being near a school was completely coincidental, not intentional, and it was somewhere around 11:00PM at night, so the school was closed and not in session). Last, I may have also had a small amount of weed and/or a weed pipe in the car, I honestly can't remember but it wouldn't surprise me as I did smoke a little at that time. All of the charges were ultimately dropped, and the case was dismissed based on illegal search and seizure, so I was not convicted of anything. The PD even gave me my gun back after everything was said and done.

I completely understand that incident is a bad one, but fortunately I was not convicted and I DEFINITELY learned my lesson. It scared me straight and I have NEVER been in trouble with the law in any way in the 27 years since then. I am wondering though without a conviction, if this line item will still disqualify me, as I am well aware I will have to disclose it and I absolutely intend to.

I have really been torturing myself going back and forth trying to decide if I should even bother applying or not.

Any opinions would be greatly appreciated as, if I'm most likely just going to get denied, I'd rather not even apply because I really don't want a CCW denial in my record on top of this incident. And honestly, if it's a lost cause I get it, there are consequences for our actions, no matter how long ago, and I will accept that.

[DolphinFan]

No charges, dismissed.
It?s a non event.
It should have no effect on your issuance based on time and age alone.
Go apply.
If you can buy a firearm and ammo you should be approved.

[Kevin James]

No charges, dismissed.
It?s a non event.
It should have no effect on your issuance based on time and age alone.
Go apply.
If you can buy a firearm and ammo you should be approved.

Yes, I have bought/registered many firearms after that incident was cleared.

I also have worked in the financial services industry as a commercial underwriter/credit portfolio manager for going on 19 years, and when you apply for any job with a new/different bank in that industry you have to go through a full background check including both State and FBI information with LiveScan fingerprinting. Due to a recent layoff and a subsequent new job offer I just went through this process again and was notified this past Monday 12/18 that my background checks/fingerprinting came back clear and I am clear to start my new job on Jan 2nd.

There is also a second item I will need to disclose, but I am less worried as I was never charged with anything or accused of any wrong doing. While I was working at an indoor gun range 25 years ago, I was forced to fire a weapon and use deadly force in defense of both myself and another individual. It was a range customer who was trying to commit suicide and decided he was going to try and shoot my manager (a retired LEO) who was trying to talk him down. It was very unfortunate and I wish it didn't happen, but I didn't make that choice, he did.

[Preston-CLB]

I agree with DolfinFan: You should be good to go.

Just wondering if a little time spent with a lawyer who knows gun law/CCW issues would be prudent to be absolutely sure you're in the clear?

Best of luck, sir!
-P

[Kevin James]

Thanks, guys. I'd really like to hear a few more opinions if possible, so keep them coming. Thanks.

[mikee1]

You'll never know for sure until you apply. Do it.

[Jeepergeo]

Correction...most folks don't do anything quite as dumb (your word) as what you did.

Remember, if you apply, your past needs to be fully divulged, and if you get denied, forevermore you will need to declare that denial on future applications.

Think before applying.

[Kevin James]

Correction...most folks don't do anything quite as dumb (your word) as what you did.

Remember, if you apply, your past needs to be fully divulged, and if you get denied, forevermore you will need to declare that denial on future applications.

Think before applying.

This is exactly why I am being so cautious and really thinking about if I should bother applying.

I am not a prohibited person, and I can purchase and own guns without issue. This incident was also 27 years ago and I have never been in any trouble of any kind since then, but just not sure if that's enough or if I'm still screwed.

It would seem crappy to me to be denied over a very old arrest with no conviction which in my opinion is the equivalent of an unproven accusation, and with no further trouble with the law, but I recognize that it is a very possible outcome.

[Preston-CLB]

It would seem crappy to me to be denied over a very old arrest with no conviction which in my opinion is the equivalent of an unproven accusation, and with no further trouble with the law, but I recognize that it is a very possible outcome.

The part in bold is why I earlier suggested that you might want to speak with a lawyer. Your opinion may not be accurate.
-P

[Kevin James]

The part in bold is why I earlier suggested that you might want to speak with a lawyer. Your opinion may not be accurate.
-P

Yes, I agree with you and I am looking in to that. I guess what I mean is based on "innocent until proven guilty", a charge has to be proven in court resulting in a guilty verdict, if it's not, well then it's not actually proven you did anything. But to be clear, I'm not arguing against what you are saying at all. While I think it should be looked almost like an unproven accusation, that doesn't mean they look at it that way, and I fully understand that.

Either way I did speak with a lawyer briefly on Friday and I also told him I believe, but am not 100% sure, that my lawyer at the time had it expunged. This lawyer told me the first step is get a LiveScan and lets see what comes up. I still need to disclose either way, but the lawyer wants to see what comes up on the LiveScan.

Fortunately I just had a LiveScan done two weeks ago for a new job (which according to HR all background checks came back and I am clear to start the job), and the lawyer told me that by law I am entitled to a copy, so I requested that on Friday. I have not heard back from my HR recruiter though and I think she was already out on PTO for the holiday. So we'll see hopefully this coming week.

[66driver]

The best is to reveal everything. Put your mind at ease. I revealed some things in the past and received a permit. They know everyone is not a past angel. Some pd friends thought they were going to be denied and successfully joined a pd. So don't be too hard on yourself.

[Kevin James]

The best is to reveal everything. Put your mind at ease. I revealed some things in the past and received a permit. They know everyone is not a past angel. Some pd friends thought they were going to be denied and successfully joined a pd. So don't be too hard on yourself.

Thanks man, I appreciate it. And yes I know people have revealed things and still got a permit, and that they know not everyone has always been a perfect angel their entire life. My concern is more so just in the sense that I fully realize what I have in my, past no matter how you slice it, it's cringe worthy and looks really bad.

[Kevin James]

I tried unsuccessfully to talk to someone at the DOJ today (you can't even get a live person on the phone), but I did have two interesting conversations. One with the Placer County CCW Department and one with the Sacramento County CCW Department. This is because I currently live in Sacramento County, but may be moving in the next 12 months and could end up in Placer County when all is said and done. I explained both of my past incidents to both, in detail, and got two very different feelings based on what each told me.

Sacramento County asked if I am able to own firearms, to which I said yes, and he said ok, then your probably good, but he also said that in regards to SB2's new requirements with specific disqualifiers including "Has engaged in an unlawful or reckless use, display, or brandishing of a firearm", it doesn't have to be a conviction or even an arrest, that just if anything comes up in that regard at all it could indicate to them that you are not safe around firearms in general and you can be denied.

Placer County on the other hand, told me they didn't mean to make little of my concerns, but that frankly neither of my incidents even sound that bad, especially since they are so long ago, and they have heard FAR worse and still issued a permit. She actually kind of laughed a little said just make sure you disclose both. Then said she would not be very concerned and strongly suggested I apply.

So, I feel like if I apply in Sacramento County there is a good chance I would be denied. But if I do end up moving and end up in Placer County (only 2 miles from where I currently live) then I am probably fine. The only issue is I can't say with 100% certainty that I will be moving at all, or that I'll land in Placer if I do move (although that is most likely where I would land).

[benjamin101677]

I would just apply and see what happens. Nobody knows for sure what will happen until the agency sees your background. I am sure that many people call the departments and ask them what if questions which are impossible to determine without knowing all the details.

You could sit around and wonder with what if questions to departments and on here all day long but nobody knows until you apply.