Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 28

Thread: Tomorrow, Tuesday 11/24/2009! Riv Co. Supervisors Meeting!

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    San Diego County, CA, California, USA
    Posts
    1,402

    Post imported post

    http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...d.php?t=243211

    Quote Originally Posted by chief003
    Riverside County Supervisor Jeff Stone is proposing the following as good cause for issuance of CCW permits in Riverside County:

    "With the State of California authorization for early release of up to 27,000 prisoners, a uniform policy for certification and issuance of a Concealed Weapon Permit should include the reason of "personal defense", in compliance with the State of California's "good cause" law, as a reason to carry a concealed weapon in Riverside County."

    This is on Tuesday 11/24/2009 Riverside County’s Board of Supervisor’s agenda, item number 3.128 under the Policy Section. Members of public are allowed to speak for 3 minutes on any item appearing on the board’s agenda.

    Here is the link to this item:
    http://www.clerkoftheboard.co.rivers...009/03.128.pdf

    Chief

  2. #2
    Regular Member coolusername2007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Temecula, California, USA
    Posts
    1,660

    Post imported post

    I wonder how much the open carry movement helped persuade Jeff to come to the table. He's seeking higher office...state senate...our state rep has termed out (he was previously a Temecula city counsel member and mayor-pro-tem).

    ETA: Not enough notice to be there tomorrow...work. By the way, even though I personally have no interest in concealed carry, if I could have attended I would have spoken in favor of it for those who do prefer this method of carry.
    "Why should judicial precedent bind the nation if the Constitution itself does not?" -- Mark Levin

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    San Diego County, CA, California, USA
    Posts
    1,402

    Post imported post

    That's the thing, I keep being told by people older than me that CCW permits are good for loaded open carry as well, as long as they do not prohibit it on the license.

    So if you want to LOC, support this.

  4. #4
    Regular Member coolusername2007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Temecula, California, USA
    Posts
    1,660

    Post imported post

    Don't know anything about that. I thought LOC permits were separate and different, but also that nobody has ever been issued a LOC permit. Again, don't know, just commenting.

    I fully support CCW for any and all who choose this method of carry, but not at the expense of open carry.
    "Why should judicial precedent bind the nation if the Constitution itself does not?" -- Mark Levin

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    San Diego County, CA, California, USA
    Posts
    1,402

    Post imported post

    coolusername2007 wrote:
    Don't know anything about that. I thought LOC permits were separate and different, but also that nobody has ever been issued a LOC permit. Again, don't know, just commenting.

    I fully support CCW for any and all who choose this method of carry, but not at the expense of open carry.
    CA_Libertarian wrote:
    You're actually correct here [N6ATF]. 12031(b)(3) exempts CCW holders:

    Code:
    (6) The carrying of pistols, revolvers, or other firearms capable of being concealed upon the person by persons who are authorized to carry those weapons pursuant to Article 3 (commencing with Section 12050) of Chapter 1 of Title 2 of Part 4.
    However, as ConditionThree can attest, the issuing authority may decide to pull your permit if you do anything they don't like.

  6. #6
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Stanislaus County, California, USA
    Posts
    2,586

    Post imported post

    N6ATF wrote:
    That's the thing, I keep being told by people older than me that CCW permits are good for loaded open carry as well, as long as they do not prohibit it on the license.

    So if you want to LOC, support this.
    You're actually correct here. 12031(b)(3) exempts CCW holders:

    Code:
    (6) The carrying of pistols, revolvers, or other firearms capable of being concealed upon the person by persons who are authorized to carry those weapons pursuant to Article 3 (commencing with Section 12050) of Chapter 1 of Title 2 of Part 4.
    However, as ConditionThree can attest, the issuing authority may decide to pull your permit if you do anything they don't like.
    Participant in the Free State Project - "Liberty in Our Lifetime" - www.freestateproject.org
    Supporter of the CalGuns Foundation - http://www.calgunsfoundation.org/
    Supporter of the Madison Society - www.madison-society.org


    Don't Tread On Me.

  7. #7
    Regular Member coolusername2007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Temecula, California, USA
    Posts
    1,660

    Post imported post

    Any updates to this county supervisor's meeting? Did anyone attend and/or speak?
    "Why should judicial precedent bind the nation if the Constitution itself does not?" -- Mark Levin

  8. #8
    Regular Member mjones's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    SoCal, , USA
    Posts
    979

    Post imported post

    I've been known to LOC in both incorporated and Gun Free School Zones with the intention of using the 12050 exemption if anything goes heinously wrong. I've also got 50 grand set aside for a defense if I ever need it.

    I am ready and willing to be a testcase for this.

    But, In general I have beenhonoring the CalGuns standown call on OC. If/When we get Shall Issue CCW in California, I'll proudly be a testcase.

  9. #9
    Regular Member coolusername2007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Temecula, California, USA
    Posts
    1,660

    Post imported post

    mjones wrote:
    I've been known to LOC in both incorporated and Gun Free School Zones with the intention of using the 12050 exemption if anything goes heinously wrong. I've also got 50 grand set aside for a defense if I ever need it.

    I am ready and willing to be a testcase for this.

    But, In general I have beenhonoring the CalGuns standown call on OC. If/When we get Shall Issue CCW in California, I'll proudly be a testcase.
    Be a test-case if you want. But do it after incorporation.
    "Why should judicial precedent bind the nation if the Constitution itself does not?" -- Mark Levin

  10. #10
    Regular Member mjones's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    SoCal, , USA
    Posts
    979

    Post imported post

    coolusername2007 wrote:
    mjones wrote:
    I've been known to LOC in both incorporated and Gun Free School Zones with the intention of using the 12050 exemption if anything goes heinously wrong. I've also got 50 grand set aside for a defense if I ever need it.

    I am ready and willing to be a testcase for this.

    But, In general I have beenhonoring the CalGuns standown call on OC. If/When we get Shall Issue CCW in California, I'll proudly be a testcase.
    Be a test-case if you want. But do it after incorporation.

  11. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    San Diego County, CA, California, USA
    Posts
    1,402

    Post imported post

    coolusername2007 wrote:
    Any updates to this county supervisor's meeting? Did anyone attend and/or speak?
    http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...d.php?t=243861

    Quote Originally Posted by 1923mack
    Good news. Riverside County Supervisors approved Resolution #2009-348. This resolution suggests to Sheriff Sniff that personal defense be a good reason for issuance of CCW's in Riverside County. Measure was approved 3/1. I wish that I could say it was approved because of good work by Calguns, CRPA or other pro CCW organizations, but I cannot. We had only 4 speakers in favor of the Resolution (and none against). The main reason it passsed was because of Chairman Stone. He initiated the Resolution, spoke well about it and convinced (behind closed doors I asume) his fellow Supervisors to support it. A positive step for Riverside county, but not the best showing of support by Riverside CCW'ers.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Harrah, Oklahoma
    Posts
    769

    Post imported post

    Congrats to riverside county.

    Unfortunately for my my father just moved out of Temecula where I always maintained a residence with him. No CCW for me.
    New to OPEN CARRY in California? Click and read this first...
    Stolen from ConditionThree because it can't be stressed enough.

  13. #13
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter Sons of Liberty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Riverside, California, USA
    Posts
    638

    Post imported post

    N6ATF wrote:
    coolusername2007 wrote:
    Any updates to this county supervisor's meeting? Did anyone attend and/or speak?
    http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...d.php?t=243861

    1923mack wrote:
    Good news. Riverside County Supervisors approved Resolution #2009-348. This resolution suggests to Sheriff Sniff that personal defense be a good reason for issuance of CCW's in Riverside County. Measure was approved 3/1. I wish that I could say it was approved because of good work by Calguns, CRPA or other pro CCW organizations, but I cannot. We had only 4 speakers in favor of the Resolution (and none against). The main reason it passsed was because of Chairman Stone. He initiated the Resolution, spoke well about it and convinced (behind closed doors I asume) his fellow Supervisors to support it. A positive step for Riverside county, but not the best showing of support by Riverside CCW'ers.
    Good news to hear that some of our supervisors are willing put forth a pro-CCW resolution.

    But does this resolution have a binding effect on the sheriff to issue for "personal defense"? Or is this just a "suggestion"?
    Clinging to God & Guns: The Constitution Restoration Project

  14. #14
    Newbie cato's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    2,335

    Post imported post

    Sons of Liberty wrote:
    But does this resolution have a binding effect on the sheriff to issue for "personal defense"? Or is this just a "suggestion"?

    Its just a "suggestion".


  15. #15
    Regular Member coolusername2007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Temecula, California, USA
    Posts
    1,660

    Post imported post

    Sounds like an organized effort to call Sheriff Sniff on this very subject is in order. He will be running for election (his first since he was originally appointed) and needs to know what his constituents expect, as well as determining what we can expect from him.
    "Why should judicial precedent bind the nation if the Constitution itself does not?" -- Mark Levin

  16. #16
    Newbie cato's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    2,335

    Post imported post

    coolusername2007 wrote:
    Sounds like an organized effort to call Sheriff Sniff on this very subject is in order. He will be running for election (his first since he was originally appointed) and needs to know what his constituents expect, as well as determining what we can expect from him.
    As much as I personallydisapprove ofsome of thoseat CalCCW.com, I would follow their lead on any 12050 issues. Might want to check in over there and see if anything for Riverside is being organized. Orange Co. has their attention right now but I'm sure they have people in Riverside and since this vote came up I suspect more to come out of the woodwork. It's all good in my book.

    But them getting Butchins for Sheriffwas karma big time.

  17. #17
    Regular Member demnogis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Orange County, California, USA
    Posts
    912

    Post imported post

    If this truly means that RVSD will recognize "self defense" as good cause on a CCW application, I may just have to move back in with the parents for a bit.
    Gun control isn't about guns -- it is about control.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Harrah, Oklahoma
    Posts
    769

    Post imported post

    demnogis wrote:
    If this truly means that RVSD will recognize "self defense" as good cause on a CCW application, I may just have to move back in with the parents for a bit.
    Do you need a roommate? I'll pay a bill. lol
    New to OPEN CARRY in California? Click and read this first...
    Stolen from ConditionThree because it can't be stressed enough.

  19. #19
    Regular Member coolusername2007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Temecula, California, USA
    Posts
    1,660

    Post imported post

    How's Mom's cookin' ? Can she bake? Three's not a crowd is it?
    "Why should judicial precedent bind the nation if the Constitution itself does not?" -- Mark Levin

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Vista, California, USA
    Posts
    516

    Post imported post


  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Harrah, Oklahoma
    Posts
    769

    Post imported post

    Hey cool you already live in Riverside county. You better watch out cool because if demnogis doesn't let me move in I'm sleeping on your couch.

    coolusername2007 wrote:
    [quote]How's Mom's cookin' ? Can she bake? Three's not a crowd is it? [img]/images/emoticons/
    New to OPEN CARRY in California? Click and read this first...
    Stolen from ConditionThree because it can't be stressed enough.

  22. #22
    Regular Member demnogis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Orange County, California, USA
    Posts
    912

    Post imported post

    Ah, you kids are funny. I can't recall if my registered address is at their house or not. I do have a drivers' license with my previous address on it.
    Gun control isn't about guns -- it is about control.

  23. #23
    Newbie cato's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    2,335

    Post imported post

    yelohamr wrote:

    Undersheriff Valerie Hill told supervisors..."We take it very seriously because every time we issue a permit there are liability issues for the county," she said.
    She is gravely mistaken!!! There is NO liability from the exercise of the Sheriffs discretion. There IS liability for not issuing fairly. And there will be UBER liability post McDonald!

  24. #24
    Regular Member coolusername2007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Temecula, California, USA
    Posts
    1,660

    Post imported post

    Can't post a comment to the news site discussion session, keep getting an error.

    ETA: got it sorted out with their webmaster and posted my comment.
    "Why should judicial precedent bind the nation if the Constitution itself does not?" -- Mark Levin

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Connecticut USA
    Posts
    1,247

    Post imported post

    I am very please wi6ththe decision made bythe Riverside County Board of Supervisors.

    This is exactly why I filed a Federal Lawsuit in San Diego against the San Diego Sheriff's Department.

    The California Penal Code requires applicants for CCWs to be a "RESIDENT" of the issuing authorities jurisdiction, NO MORE, NO LESS.

    The law and case decisions across the county hold that a person may have more than one RESIDENCE but ONLY ONE DOMICILE.

    Yes, individuals may establishresidence in more than onecounty or jurisdiction.

    I would argue that "GOOD CAUSE" is defined by a community standard and not by a single individual.

    With an elected body such as the Riverside County Board of Supervisors voting to establishthe community belief that self defense is GOOD CAUSE,makes it much easier to argue the fact that the applicant is not the only one to believe it.

    The Riverside County Sheriff's Department had proper notice in the form of a published agenda and the opportunity to present theirposition to theRiverside County Board of Supervisorsprior to their vote and chose not to.

    If the legislature wanted otherwise, they would have reduced it to black and white and published it in the California Penal Code.

    The issue of whether or not I am to be considered a RESIDENT of San Diego County while maintaining residences elsewhere will be the topic of a motion to dismiss my case on December 21, 2009 in the Federal District Court in San Diego.

    Here is the link to more information on this topic.

    http://ctgunrights.com/00.Webpages/C...to.Dismiss.htm

    Read and listen to the information at this website andJUDGE for yourself.

    edperuta@amcable.tv





Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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