Appeal Restrictions?

[pointerman]

UPDATE BELOW:Curious if anyone knows if there is a process to appeal the restrictions on your permit. The restrictions listed are so ridiculous that I would only be able to carry when transporting rent to my bank. Like that's the only time anyone would ever rob me. Permit issued in San Joaquin County.

UPDATE: Well, it took 8 months, a chunk of change and 3 burned vacation days, but I finally have a permit without restrictions. Long journey that started in mid-June with my initial interview. Glad to have it, but frustrated by the process. After sending in my appeal form I had a 1:1 interview with Sheriff Moore. Honestly, after leaving the meeting I would have sworn my appeal was going to be denied and was a tad surprised when it went my way.

[ASD1]

sounds like the good cause you listed may have been to specific

[pointerman]

sounds like the good cause you listed may have been to specific

Nope. Sheriff just chose one portion for his reason to issue.

Need guidance on appeal process. Anyone?

[oldwilly51]

Nope. Sheriff just chose one portion for his reason to issue.

Need guidance on appeal process. Anyone?

Here is a link to the form to use. Good luck. I have tried having my restriction removed and did not succeed. Best thing to do is get Moore out of office and a new pro 2a sheriff in. Moore is putting these restrictions on new ccw's as a way of screwing cal guns foundation. Wish they would look into this matter. He use to give them without the restrictions for the same good causes.

http://www.co.solano.ca.us/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?blobid=14575

[pointerman]

Looks like that form does not go to the Sheriff's office, but rather a state agency. Is this the correct path? Do they forward the request to the local Sheriff?

[oldwilly51]

send the form to

San Joaquin Sheriff's Office
Professional Standards Division
7000 Michael N. Canlis Blvd.
French Camp, Ca. 95231

[ArcherDog]

Talk about best of both worlds....making it functionally useless to carry, and at the same time, pad the numbers about how many LTC's he is issuing.

[pointerman]

Talk about best of both worlds....making it functionally useless to carry, and at the same time, pad the numbers about how many LTC's he is issuing.

Exactly what it would seem he is doing. I will appeal, but this situation has got me riled up and has motivated me to get involved in Withrow's campaign at some level. Already sent in a contribution and am waiting to hear back on what I can do to help.

[Hopalong]

Talk about best of both worlds....making it functionally useless to carry, and at the same time, pad the numbers about how many LTC's he is issuing.

What's the big surprise?

Isn't that what politicians do?

[pointerman]

What's the big surprise?

Isn't that what politicians do?

Might be what they do, but that doesn't mean we need to stand by and let it go without a fight. Plan to make as big a stink as I can about this Sheriff this election cycle. Hopefully everyone I know will vote for Withrow. Get enough people doing that and a grass roots swell can take Moore out of office. Going to annoy some people on Facebook for sure.

[pointerman]

Posted an update in the original message.

[ArcherDog]

What happened? How did the interview go? What did he ask?

[EM2]

awesome, I like it when some one stands up and makes a difference.
Good Job

[pointerman]

What happened? How did the interview go? What did he ask?

It was mostly me talking and making a case for why the permit with the restrictions listed did not solve my problem. The Sheriff asked if I had read the 1977 DA opinion on Good Cause (which I had not) since that is the "guidelines he follows. He invited me to read it and get back to him with questions or updates. I went home and Googled it (pasted below for reference). I figured I was going to be declined when I left based on the general coolness of his demeanor.

OPINION NO. CR. 77/30 I.L. 'the issuing authority must determine whether the threat to the applicant (or other causal situation) is as real as the applicant asserts (e.g., is there a clear and present danger to the applicant, his spouse, his family or his employees)? Finally, if the danger is manifest, the authority should determine whether that danger cannot be significantly alleviated by alternative means of security and whether in fact can be lawfully mitigated by the applicant's obtaining a concealed weapon license.'

http://www.californiaconcealedcarry.com/legal/cag_opinion.html

After reading this statement I was a bit confused since to me this merely states does the threat exist and will a CCW reduce the threat. Many folks would argue "yes, I go outside sometimes so therefore there is a threat and to deny that a threat exists means you must have your head in the sand". Additionally, leveling the playing field with the bad guys is achieved when you allow a citizen to go outside armed. The main issue with this DA statement is "whether that danger cannot be significantly alleviated by alternative means of security". Most Sheriffs are looking for any possible reason this clause might be relevant.

Honestly, I am happy I have my permit. It solves my problem. I am hopeful for the day when any reasonably trained individual that does not have a non-qualifying event can get their permit in a much shorter time period.

Vote Withrow for Sheriff.

[oldwilly51]

Posted an update in the original message.

Sent you a PM about this. Please respond as I am in the same situation. Thanks.