Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: New rules for Orange County Calif. CCW

  1. #1
    Regular Member rodbender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Navasota, Texas, USA
    Posts
    2,524

    Post imported post

    http://www.latimes.com/features/heal...0,284131.story

    O.C. sheriff tightens policy on concealed-weapons permits

    Applicants must prove there is a legitimate threat to their safety and agree to undergo psychological, polygraph or medical testing. The tightened rules also apply to those who already have permits.

    By Stuart Pfeifer, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
    August 12, 2008

    Orange County Sheriff Sandra Hutchens on Monday released a policy that could lead to the revocation of dozens, if not hundreds, of concealed-weapons permits issued by former Sheriff Michael S. Carona.

    Hutchens' new policy requires that to get a concealed-firearm permit, applicants must prove there is a legitimate threat to their safety and agree to undergo possible psychological, polygraph or medical testing.

    When she took office two months ago, Hutchens inherited the responsibility of overseeing about 1,100 concealed-weapons permits that Carona had issued. Many of the holders were businessmen, doctors, lawyers and dentists. Several were financial contributors to Carona's campaigns.

    Capt. Dave Nighswonger, who is overseeing the review, said sheriff's investigators would send letters to those in jeopardy of losing their permits and give them an opportunity to explain why they need to carry a concealed weapon. The first letters could go out in about two weeks, he said.

    In California, sheriffs and police chiefs have broad discretion to issue gun permits to the public; the number issued varies widely from county to county. Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca has issued fewer than 400 concealed-weapon permits.

    The permits allow the holder to carry concealed weapons in public places.

    Gun owners don't need the permits to keep weapons at their homes.

    Hutchens' new policy states that anyone with a previous felony conviction or a misdemeanor conviction involving violence will be ineligible for a weapons permit. In addition, anyone with a misdemeanor conviction of any kind within the previous five years will be denied a permit.

    "The good-cause threshold you have to meet has gone up," Nighswonger said. "The prior sheriff had more of a right-to-carry philosophy. Some of the things that were considered good cause won't be now."

    The first order of business for Nighswonger's staff will be to review pending applications and renewals to see if the applicants are eligible for permits. Once those decisions are made, investigators will look at the 1,100 active permits, probably starting in alphabetical order, he said.

    "We don't see the numbers dropping to a few hundred, but there will be some who don't apply and some who have their permits denied or revoked," Nighswonger said.

    In a letter to the public posted on the department's blog, Hutchens explained that she will issue the permits "to persons of good and upstanding character who possess credible, significant and substantiated cause to fear for their safety."

    Licenses "will not be issued for political, social or other reasons," she wrote.

    She cautioned that firearms should be used as a last resort and said anyone who misuses a weapon in public faces revocation of their permit and possible criminal prosecution.


    The thing about common sense is....it ain't too common.
    Will Rogers

  2. #2
    Campaign Veteran deepdiver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Southeast, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    5,974

    Post imported post

    rodbender wrote:
    O.C. sheriff tightens policy on free-speech permits

    Applicants must prove there is a legitimate need to publicly express their opinions and agree to undergo psychological, polygraph or medical testing. The tightened rules also apply to those who already have permits.

    By Stuart Pfeifer, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
    August 12, 2008

    Orange County Sheriff Sandra Hutchens on Monday released a policy that could lead to the revocation of dozens, if not hundreds, of free-speech permits issued by former Sheriff Michael S. Carona.

    Hutchens' new policy requires that to get a free-speech permit, applicants must prove there is a legitimate need to publicly express their opinions and a need to exchange information and agree to undergo possible psychological, polygraph or medical testing.

    When she took office two months ago, Hutchens inherited the responsibility of overseeing about 1,100 free-speech permits that Carona had issued. Many of the holders were businessmen, doctors, lawyers and dentists. Several were financial contributors to Carona's campaigns.

    Capt. Dave Nighswonger, who is overseeing the review, said sheriff's investigators would send letters to those in jeopardy of losing their permits and give them an opportunity to explain why they need to speak freely in public about political, social, economic and constitutional matters. The first letters could go out in about two weeks, he said.

    In California, sheriffs and police chiefs have broad discretion to issue free-speech permits to the public; the number issued varies widely from county to county. Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca has issued fewer than 400 free-speech permits.

    The permits allow the holder to speak freely about many issues including political, social, economic and constitutional matters in public places.

    Politically, socially and economically concerned citizens don't need the permits to speak freely in their homes.

    Hutchens' new policy states that anyone with a previous felony conviction or angry reactions from government involving negative comments about law enforcement, elected or appointed officials will be ineligible for a free-speech permit. In addition, anyone with a misdemeanor conviction of any kind within the previous five years will be denied a permit.

    "The good-cause threshold you have to meet has gone up," Nighswonger said. "The prior sheriff had more of a right-to-speak-your-mind philosophy. Some of the things that were considered good cause won't be now."

    The first order of business for Nighswonger's staff will be to review pending applications and renewals to see if the applicants are eligible for permits. Once those decisions are made, investigators will look at the 1,100 active permits, probably starting in alphabetical order, he said.

    "We don't see the numbers dropping to a few hundred, but there will be some who don't apply and some who have their permits denied or revoked," Nighswonger said.

    In a letter to the public posted on the department's blog, Hutchens explained that she will issue the permits "to persons of good and upstanding character who possess credible, significant and substantiated cause to be outspoken about politics, economics, social and constitutional issues or about elected and appointed officials."

    Licenses "will only be issued for political, social or other reasons," she wrote.

    She cautioned that free-speech should be used as a last resort and said anyone who misuses free-speech in a public place by making any other citizen, elected or appointed official uncomfortable in public faces revocation of their permit and possible police brutality or trumped up charges.
    Yeah, I wonder how that would fly if they went after the 1A instead ...
    Bob Owens @ Bearing Arms (paraphrased): "These people aren't against violence; they're very much in favor of violence. They're against armed resistance."

  3. #3
    Regular Member rodbender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Navasota, Texas, USA
    Posts
    2,524

    Post imported post

    In California they are probablytrying to figure outhow they can get by with it. Nowhere but the cereal state. What ain't fruits and nuts is flakes.
    The thing about common sense is....it ain't too common.
    Will Rogers

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,422

    Post imported post

    *

  5. #5
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Graham, Texas
    Posts
    313

    Post imported post

    There's a link on the Blog page to a forum that sends her email, apparently. You know what to do, fellas.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,422

    Post imported post

    *

  7. #7
    Campaign Veteran deepdiver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Southeast, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    5,974

    Post imported post

    Pointman wrote:
    DopaVash wrote:
    There's a link on the Blog page to a forum that sends her email, apparently. You know what to do, fellas.
    Move to a county that issues more than 1,100 permits?
    Move en masse to one of the free states?
    Bob Owens @ Bearing Arms (paraphrased): "These people aren't against violence; they're very much in favor of violence. They're against armed resistance."

  8. #8
    Founder's Club Member - Moderator Gray Peterson's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Lynnwood, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,238

    Post imported post

    Ah, welcome to Brad Gates territory. There's a little schadenfreude on this situation due to the OC CCW movement bashing open carry so viciously. Now they're going to have to Unloaded Open Carry as well.

    -Lonnie

  9. #9
    State Pioneer ConditionThree's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Shasta County, California, USA
    Posts
    2,231

    Post imported post

    rodbender wrote:
    In California they are probablytrying to figure outhow they can get by with it. Nowhere but the cereal state. What ain't fruits and nuts is flakes.

    Excuse me?

    Just how would you like to classify me? A fruit, nut, or flake?

    Take care with what broad brush you paint with.

    (Edited to add) And I also take exception to the idea that I have to move to another state to enjoy freedom... IF anything, I should gain the sympathies of liberty minded patriots for standing my ground, fighting in what is usually characterized as enemy territory. For me, fleeing is not an option. My rights, my liberty, right here, right now.

    Now, back to the topic at hand. The new Orange County Sheriff has unwittingly opened a #10 can of worms. The open carry movement has steadily gained traction since the begininng of the year culminating with an interdepartemental memo issuedfrom the Sacramento PD, acknowledging the lawfulness of open carry and the necessary care to limit a search to a loaded weapons check.

    After our breif hiatus concludes on August 31st, there will be no doubt many who, in defiance to these new policies, will excersize their civil rights openly. Were I in Orange County, I would be making my point on as many occasions as circumstances permitted. If given the opportunity, I would gladly travel.

    New to OPEN CARRY in California? Click and read this first...

    NA MALE SUBJ ON FOOT, LS NB 3 AGO HAD A HOLSTERED HANDGUN ON HIS RIGHT HIP. WAS NOT BRANDISHING THE WEAPON, BUT RP FOUND SUSPICIOUS.
    CL SUBJ IN COMPLIANCE WITH LAW


    Support the 2A in California - Shop Amazon for any item and up to 15% of all purchases go back to the Calguns Foundation. Enter through either of the following links
    www.calgunsfoundation.org/amazon
    www.shop42a.com

  10. #10
    Regular Member demnogis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Orange County, California, USA
    Posts
    912

    Post imported post

    Awwwwwww @#$%. :X

    This is the person in charge of the same sheriff's department that told me Unloaded Open carry would get me drawn on and shot, no questions asked (til after the fact).

    I'm glad she's taking the time to disarm law-abiding citizens while Santa Ana is still a crime-ridden, gang-infested @#$%hole.

    And I work there.

    Edit:
    Blog link here. Notice there's no forum for discussion, just a contact page.
    http://blog.ocsd.org/

    rodbender wrote:
    http://www.latimes.com/features/heal...0,284131.story

    O.C. sheriff tightens policy on concealed-weapons permits [...]
    Gun control isn't about guns -- it is about control.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •