Good Moral Character

[axel4488]

I think what it needs to come down to is what actually defines a good moral character.

[SoCal Bob]

I wonder if "good moral character" equally applies to the sheriff's deputies as it does citizen's applying for CCWs? Being people, LEO's occasionally stray and are disciplined by their agency but are allowed to remain on the job. If say, a DUI, causes a citizen to be considered to not have "good moral character" while a deputy, who has had a DUI, is allowed to remain on the job, then it would appear that there are two sets of standards.

[alfalfa]

And could "good moral character" be construed to include credit worthiness? With the economy as it is, imagine all the good folks who could be denied a CCW because they've had a foreclosure, short sale, or high-debt load! It would be a great tool for the anti-CCW Sheriff or COP.

[Rossi357]

Maybe we will get a official US Government definition of good moral character. That would be a hoot.

[Kharn]

I'm worried about MD (and other states) turning to moral character when they can't use good cause. IIRC MD currently requires 3 non-family MD residents to vouch for you, what happens when they increase it to 10 references you have known for five years?

[Flying Sig]

Maybe we will get a official US Government defination of good moral character. That would be a hoot.

Well, apparently a branch of the US government has already done so....

http://allaboutairplanes.wordpress.com/2011/07/14/good-moral-character-for-airline-transport-pilots/

Interesting....

[Glock22Fan]

So advise us. What do you think about this? What denials for good moral character have been successfully appealed that your aware of?

.. snip ..

I'm not personally aware of any denials on the grounds of moral character that have been taken to court, successfully or otherwise.

[pitchbaby]

Does this really happen? A denial based on a person not meeting the requirement of being of "good moral character"? I can't imagine that they could get away with that unless you have a criminal record.

Yes, if you would like some examples... take a look at the Placer County thread of the Sunshine Initiative. Mine is not the only example and I have personal knowledge of others who do not post here with experiences of being denied with far less to be worried about than what Placer SO say's is a concern in my case.

I am not trying to out anyone or any SO, just responding to your question. It does indeed happen. I am sure there are other counties with similar "rules" but I am not personally aware of them.

[Glock22Fan]

Does this really happen? A denial based on a person not meeting the requirement of being of "good moral character"? I can't imagine that they could get away with that unless you have a criminal record.

Depending upon the Sheriff's particular criteria, there have been people denied for too many, too recent traffic offenses (showing lack of judgement). Also, if you have been involved in a few bar brawls, or domestic disturbances, whether charges have been brought or not. Anything really that the sheriff believes marks you as a possible risk with a firearm, whether it is a criminal offense or not. After all, O.J. was found innocent, but many of us would not be happy to have him armed. OTOH, we have all heard of Hollywood actors with a terrible reputation for drugs, drink and fighting that do have a CCW.

[Kid Stanislaus]

I think what it needs to come down to is what actually defines a good moral character.

Golly Axel, do ya really think so?

[wildhawker]

I think what it needs to come down to is what actually defines a good moral character.

No, what needs to happen is the good moral character prior restraint stricken as unconstitutional in Federal court.

I don't know of this happening, but there isn't anything in the statute to prevent it. I don't know much about the appeals process though. Since sheriffs have fairly unlimited latitude on the issue they could deny based on parking tickets from years ago if they wanted. Granted it would look very bad, wouldn't likely hold up to a legal challenge, etc.

There is no appeals process under the statute. Those in place today are entirely whole-cloth constructs by the licensing authority.

And could "good moral character" be construed to include credit worthiness? With the economy as it is, imagine all the good folks who could be denied a CCW because they've had a foreclosure, short sale, or high-debt load! It would be a great tool for the anti-CCW Sheriff or COP.

Under current law, I believe a licensing authority could consider breaches of contract and similar in making a moral character determination (the application does ask about litigation the applicant is party to) - as long as the standard was equally applied to all applicants. Under a constitutional system such a condition would not be permissible.

I wonder if "good moral character" equally applies to the sheriff's deputies as it does citizen's applying for CCWs? Being people, LEO's occasionally stray and are disciplined by their agency but are allowed to remain on the job. If say, a DUI, causes a citizen to be considered to not have "good moral character" while a deputy, who has had a DUI, is allowed to remain on the job, then it would appear that there are two sets of standards.

Indeed it would... now let's not go down this road any further at this time.

Maybe we will get a official US Government defination of good moral character. That would be a hoot.

Who cares what they think? My constitution doesn't.

I'm not personally aware of any denials on the grounds of moral character that have been taken to court, successfully or otherwise.

There have been.

Depending upon the Sheriff's particular criteria, there have been people denied for too many, too recent traffic offenses (showing lack of judgement). Also, if you have been involved in a few bar brawls, or domestic disturbances, whether charges have been brought or not. Anything really that the sheriff believes marks you as a possible risk with a firearm, whether it is a criminal offense or not. After all, O.J. was found innocent, but many of us would not be happy to have him armed. OTOH, we have all heard of Hollywood actors with a terrible reputation for drugs, drink and fighting that do have a CCW.

Last I checked some ad hoc standard for "lack of judgment" is not an area of discretion under 12050. Moral character, however the licensing may define it, must be equally applied to all applicants, as you know.

[pitchbaby]

Brandon is a breath of fresh air. Mind you, I carry in states where I travel... I haven't slipped up once and shot anyone pointing a garden hose nozzle at me.

[Anchors]

Isn't this how Team Billy Jack made money?

Is that guy actually a practicing attorney that actually has a Juris Doctor?
Hmm...

I think it is funny (in a cynical way) that we are judged for 'Good moral character' by elected officials that often demonstrate corruption and poor moral character.

Quiet ironic, imo.

Quote for the ages^

[sighere]

I think that when Good Cause is put to bed, some recalcitrant counties (read: L.A. S.F. and Alameda) will pull out the Good Moral Character card. They will stop at nothing. Note how the Williams v Maryland case requests that SCOTUS clearly spell out what "bear" means, when in McDonald and Heller they made it pretty damned clear. So when Good Cause is dispensed with, Sheriffs will find any blemish on an applicant's record as reason for denial. Mark my words!

You might think, heck, how can they do that? They'll lose in court. Yes, they will lose, but it will take an additional 2 years. (the "2 weeks" cheer, probably needs to be changed to "2 years") Naturally, if police can carry with minor blems on their records, then the exercise of a fundamental right certainly cannot be denied for the same. The arrogance of some of these sheriffs leads me to no other conclusion.

[wildhawker]

Our case of Richards v. Prieto challenges GC and GMC specifically because both impose the subjective standards and prior restraint that is disallowed under developing 2A jurisprudence and the 1A framework SCOTUS instructed lower courts to use for this core fundamental right.

I think that when Good Cause is put to bed, some recalcitrant counties (read: L.A. S.F. and Alameda) will pull out the Good Moral Character card. They will stop at nothing. Note how the Williams v Maryland case requests that SCOTUS clearly spell out what "bear" means, when in McDonald and Heller they made it pretty damned clear. So when Good Cause is dispensed with, Sheriffs will find any blemish on an applicant's record as reason for denial. Mark my words!

You might think, heck, how can they do that? They'll lose in court. Yes, they will lose, but it will take an additional 2 years. (the "2 weeks" cheer, probably needs to be changed to "2 years") Naturally, if police can carry with minor blems on their records, then the exercise of a fundamental right certainly cannot be denied for the same. The arrogance of some of these sheriffs leads me to no other conclusion.