• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

LA county CCW lawsuit filed

EXTREMEOPS1

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2010
Messages
248
Location
Escondido CA
This is one of the "First Shots" in the War on our Freedoms.

Given that the lawyer has posted it on his website for the world to see,
no harm posting the link now.

His sole interest is in obtaining a CCW and not to make a 2nd
Amendment case out of it by challenging the legality of any statute or
provision thereof.

This is a simple 14th Amendment type case. Anyone in
the 9th Circuit can file an equivalent case in their district.
Fortunately, a lawyer beat us to it. If he wins, we all win as his
victory is applicable to everyone in the Federal Central District of
California. If he loses, it doesn't affect us one bit because it does
not set a precedent.

Ain't Declaratory Judgments grand?


http://www.jonbirdt.com/images/filed047.pdf
 

Gundude

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 30, 2009
Messages
1,691
Location
Sandy Eggo County
I think this one is a Pro Per suit. I don't know if he is a lawyer. I saw him posting on CalCCW about it. The big guys are watching it.
 
Last edited:

Coded-Dude

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2010
Messages
317
Location
Roseville
wouldn't this apply to everyone(not just those in the central district)? i'm not clear on how case law would affect other federal districts.
 

mjones

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2008
Messages
976
Location
Prescott, AZ
I think this one is a Pro Per suit. I saw him posting on CalCCW about it. The big guys are watching it.

Yes, definately a Pro Per suit see Box I(a)

...sadly already with some errors in his documents...

edit to add: though apparantly he is a lawyer.
 
Last edited:

Gundude

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 30, 2009
Messages
1,691
Location
Sandy Eggo County
My local gun store owner said he was a lawyer. I schooled him about UOC, and some other gun laws. Maybe he is a divorce lawyer?
I hope this isn't one of the lawsuits that Alan Gura mentioned. Illconceived, ill timed, by someone that doesn't know what they are doing.
 
Last edited:

mjones

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2008
Messages
976
Location
Prescott, AZ
My local gun store owner said he was a lawyer. I schooled him about UOC, and some other gun laws. Maybe he is a divorce lawyer?
I hope this isn't one of the lawsuits that Alan Gura mentioned. Illconceived, ill timed, by someone that doesn't know what they are doing.

Definately a lawyer according to the suit and to his resume ... http://www.jonbirdt.com/resume.html

Considering a 5th grader could likely correctly fill out a court cover sheet, I don't have my hopes up too high.
 

Gundude

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 30, 2009
Messages
1,691
Location
Sandy Eggo County
On that other site, I posted a link to Gura's speech. He came back and said Gura wasn't the be all to end all and that he was going ahead with his suit. It really bothers me that people won't listen to the experts. Sounds like he has a bad case of arrogance syndrome.
 

mjones

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2008
Messages
976
Location
Prescott, AZ
On that other site, I posted a link to Gura's speech. He came back and said Gura wasn't the be all to end all and that he was going ahead with his suit. It really bothers me that people won't listen to the experts. Sounds like he has a bad case of arrogance syndrome.

I completely understand the guys frustration...and his willingness to try to do something about it.

My current hope/desire is that he links up with the CGF/CRPA in some fashion.
 
K

kittyhawk63

Guest
The Sheriff and Chief of Police determined their refusal based on the failure to produce "good cause" since he could not show "imminent threat."

Oh I see, it takes imminent threat. OK, I am being held up at gun point and I remember the reason for the refusal of CCW. I say to the person causing "imminent threat" to my well-being to wait until I get back. I need to go and call the Chief of Police and the Sheriff to come and see my "imminent threat." Then they will issue me a CCW and you can continue to rob me...if I don't first try to stop you with my firearm.

This is crazy thinking. Every American is potentially in imminent threat. That is why LEOs carry. They don't know when threat will come but it is always potentially imminent. They are prepared for it. We are not. They don't want us to be. They are our "protectors." Bah, humbug. LEOs are never there when you need them. They are always arriving at the scene after the dastardly deed is done.
 

foghlai

New member
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
2
Location
, ,
As the old adage goes...

"A lawyer who represents himself has a fool for a client."

That pretty much sums up the idiocy of this lawsuit.
 
Last edited:

Gray Peterson

Founder's Club Member - Moderator
Joined
May 12, 2006
Messages
2,236
Location
Lynnwood, Washington, USA
Open letter to Jon Birdt....

Jon,

My name is Gray Peterson, and just to give you my bona fides I have done for 2A and gun rights:

1) I am the plaintiff in Peterson v. LaCabe, a RKBA/right to travel case in Colorado, a state which has conceded that concealed carry for the purpose of self defense. You can look at my signature line and see it for yourself.

2) I am one of the plaintiffs in Chan et al v. City of Seattle et al, a state court case which successfully challenged and struck down the City of Seattle (WA)'s guns in parks rule.

3) I am one of the Project Coordinators for the Firearms License Reform and Education Program, a group of individual volunteers who are working on fixing the policies of all 58 counties, including Los Angeles County and their unlawful policies in terms of requiring you to apply to your city of residency first.

4) I was the original founder of the modern Open Carry movement in Washington State and in Oregon. Washington State had continual horrific police contacts until I did the research into the state law that the LEO's were citing for their harassment of open carriers and determined that the law was never meant to apply to peaceable open carry. Oregon had it disappear due to shall-issue, but it was brought back more widely.

5) Despite residing in Washington State, my second part to full time job is helping California residents with the above project and answering questions (which I don't get paid to do). I have family and close friends who live in California and who have benefited from my subject matter expertise on California's carry law.

Mr. Birdt, as you probably can figure out, I am skeptical of your lawsuit (which you're filing pro per) will be helpful to the cause of getting california PC12050 licenses shall-issue. I respect the fact that your rights have been violated. A few things I ask that you consider before you file (I checked PACER before PM'ing me here).

Also, a warning, I do not speak for Calguns Foundation as I am not a director. My own knowledge on the subject is based on my own litigations as well as my knowledge of the Perry case (which is directly applicable here to the relief you're asking for).

First. A federal district court ruling on a state statute is valid and has statewide effect. See Perry v. Schwarzenneger. Before the 9th Circuit put in a stay on the judgement in that case, every county in the state was preparing to issue marriage licenses to same gendered couples. It wasn't merely limited to the Northern District of California jurisdiction.

You stated that you intended to file a motion for summary judgement once Peruta or Richards goes through. This the incorrect method of dealing with LA being recalcitrant, assuming of course that Richards or Peruta do not make it to the 9th Circuit after the plaintiffs win (the two defendants could decide to throw in the towel at that point). When you ask for an MSJ, you are asking for an independent decision on the law by whoever is assigned to your case as a judge. Again, see Perry.
 

Mike

Site Co-Founder
Joined
May 13, 2006
Messages
8,706
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
This is one of the "First Shots" in the War on our Freedoms.
This is a simple 14th Amendment type case. Anyone in
the 9th Circuit can file an equivalent case in their district.
Fortunately, a lawyer beat us to it. If he wins, we all win as his
victory is applicable to everyone in the Federal Central District of
California. If he loses, it doesn't affect us one bit because it does
not set a precedent. http://www.jonbirdt.com/images/filed047.pdf

Huh?

"no" precedent? Yeah right - other state and federal courts cite to and often follow trial court rulings - and if the ruling goes bad for us, for any number of reasons, then subsequent courts will likley do same.

Strategic litigation means cases, plaintiffs, and venue chosen carefully, and managed by skilled attorneys.

pro-se cases are the LAST thing we need right now - they are the biggest threat to development of sound Second Amendment law.
 

jonbirdt

New member
Joined
Nov 16, 2010
Messages
7
Location
Porter Ranch
The Policy in LA county is that there is evidence of a clear and present threat or danger. My goal is to change that. None of the groups were willing to take on LA County. Peruta won't have any effect on LA until it comes back from the 9th Circuit, but Nordyke will, and much sooner. With the reality that Central District litigation was at least 3 years away I decided to educate myself, reach out the the groups, meet with the lawyers and file the lawsuit. I have and continue to offer to pay the filing fee and donate my time to a more qualified plaintiff willing to step up, but until them, and not wanting to wait another 3-4 years, I filed this suit.
 

oc4ever

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2009
Messages
280
Location
, ,
Good Luck

I also wish you good fortune with your case. The only thing that will bring change to LA County/City CCW policies will be lawsuits. Look at Sacramento's latest . It just was going to become very expensive to defend and wiser county officials than the sheriff prevailed. Now Sacramento is where every county should be as a "shall issue" county. The lawsuit was the only reason for this much needed change.

It is only a matter of time (and winning lawsuits), that Los Angeles will be dragged into the real world. Maybe Jon's efforts will help speed this up, or be a prevailing case. The LA officials involved will do everything possible defending their non-issuance CCW polices to keep the local populace disarmed and undefended against criminals to promote large police department staff/budgets to "defend us from the criminal element", and of course" save the children".
 
Last edited:

oc4ever

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2009
Messages
280
Location
, ,
Jon, Your amended complaint seems more clear, concise and to the point from a laymen point of view .. As the San Diego Peralta case has shown, I am sure favoritism will be the rule of the day when you do your discovery at LASD, and that the law is not applied evenly or fairly for CCW permit issuance. Since LAPD has almost no permits , the ones they have issued should also be interesting for what constitutes good cause.

Thank you for spending your time on this matter.
 

mjones

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2008
Messages
976
Location
Prescott, AZ
Status Update

Birdt loses in federal court
 

Attachments

  • Birdt Trial Court Ruling.pdf
    50.1 KB · Views: 204
Top