Wash Times: "California sheriffs see surge in concealed carry permits"

[CCWFacts]

You are getting ahead of the facts by what is likely to be a year or two, if not longer. It's going to take lawsuits to force sheriffs to accept that legal to buy/possess = GMC, and until then there are sheriffs that will refuse to issue to average citizens based on GMC.

GMC does not equal legal to possess. Someone with a few misdemeanor convictions, arrests, etc, may be legal to possess, but does not have GMC, and can be rejected for employment, and can be rejected for LTC. This is true in many other shall-issue states, including Utah I believe. Due to its connection to public service employment, GMC is not arbitrary. While it's not the same as not-disqualified, GMC involves objective standards which apply to all the agency's employees as well as LTC applicants.

Do we have reports of people in Sacramento being routinely rejected for parking tickets? No we don't.

[fizux]

GMC does not equal legal to possess. Someone with a few misdemeanor convictions, arrests, etc, may be legal to possess, but does not have GMC, and can be rejected for employment, and can be rejected for LTC. This is true in many other shall-issue states, including Utah I believe. Due to its connection to public service employment, GMC is not arbitrary. While it's not the same as not-disqualified, GMC involves objective standards which apply to all the agency's employees as well as LTC applicants.

Do we have reports of people in Sacramento being routinely rejected for parking tickets? No we don't.

So a lawyer might be able to purchase/possess, but get rejected due to their shady profession?

If it really comes down to GMC = legal to possess, GC = SD, 16+ hrs training, and firearm S/N registered in AFS, then it would seem that one should be able to carry with a COE + AFS printout + 2/4-day Front Sight or other training certificate + statement to police officer that you are carrying for lawful SD.

[CZ man in LA]

Why? Maybe because Merced STILL requires that you first be denied by your local police department... and who wants a DENIAL on their record?

In fact the Merced SO says it in big red bold letters at:

http://www.co.merced.ca.us/index.aspx?NID=1918

[COLOR=red]Good cause is still in there of couse, further, the Merced County CCW poicy also has some other 'gems' in it that might be making people not even try because they expect the subjective nature will produce an official denial of their right...
http://www.co.merced.ca.us/documents...W%20POLICY.PDF

CGF funded Lu v. Baca case took care of this. It should now be precedent so there should be a lawsuit against Merced County about this policy citing Lu v. Baca, much like "see Peruta" in the Richards case.

[CG of MP]

CGF funded Lu v. Baca case took care of this. It should now be precedent so there should be a lawsuit against Merced County about this policy citing Lu v. Baca, much like "see Peruta" in the Richards case.

calling CGF! Calling CGF?

Maybe one of the CGF lawyers could write a quick one page scare letter?