Calguns.net  

Home My iTrader Join the NRA Donate to CGSSA Sponsors CGN Google Search
CA Semiauto Ban(AW)ID Flowchart CA Handgun Ban ID Flowchart CA Shotgun Ban ID Flowchart
Go Back   Calguns.net > POLITICS, LITIGATION AND ACTIVISM > 2nd Amend. Litigation Updates & Legal Discussion
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

2nd Amend. Litigation Updates & Legal Discussion Discuss California 2A related litigation and legal topics here. All advice given is NOT legal counsel.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old 07-11-2019, 9:09 PM
pyromensch's Avatar
pyromensch pyromensch is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: sacratomato
Posts: 6,876
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

but reasonable questions, go unanswered in cali
__________________
That may be a CG first!



Spyder

"You guys need to take more drugs. Then you can TASTE the sound, and HEAR the light!"
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 07-11-2019, 10:10 PM
sirgrumps's Avatar
sirgrumps sirgrumps is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,592
iTrader: 98 / 100%
Default

Quote:
"Technology has improved tremendously in the last 24 years which has enabled individuals to instantly communicate with law enforcement via cellphones from anywhere and at any time should they feel threatened," Moore said.
Chief Moore, based on your logic, officers don’t need weapons either.

DISARM THE LAPD!!!!!!
__________________
“Unless a law-abiding individual has a firearm for his or her own defense, the police typically arrive after it is too late. With rigor mortis setting in, they mark and bag the evidence, interview bystanders, and draw a chalk outline on the ground. But the victim, nevertheless, is dead, or raped, or robbed, or traumatized.” ......
“The Second Amendment does not exist to protect the right to bear down pillows and foam baseball bats.”
—————————————————-
The Honorable Roger T. Benitez
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 07-11-2019, 11:05 PM
tenemae's Avatar
tenemae tenemae is offline
Code Monkey
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: ҚФꙦꙦѤ ꙆꚈҊԂ ™
Posts: 1,153
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pyromensch View Post
I would think, that the point would be, has any of these "24 year" CCW holders done anything with their firearms, that would bring into question, their (have to say "privilege" in LA). to have the CCW
Yes, but that argument cuts both ways. Peons are not allowed to carry firearms because they pose a danger to the public. Clearly, in the case of these CCW holders, that's not demonstrably true. So I don't see how someone can argue it's in the public interest to divest them of their licenses.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 07-11-2019, 11:44 PM
pacrat pacrat is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Socialist Republic of SoCal
Posts: 6,300
iTrader: 11 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sirgrumps View Post
Chief Moore, based on your logic, officers don’t need weapons either.

DISARM THE LAPD!!!!!!
I agree, since CLEO of LA insists on following the British mantra that 'subjects" don't need firearms for protection.

It will only be fair that he also disarm his officers in the British Bobby tradition.

Lets see ALL LAPD officers patrolling So Central, Grape St, Jordan Downs, Wilmington, Pacoima, and every other scummy corner of city of Lost Angels.

With nothing but a yellow vest, a whistle, and a stick.

After all, they don't need weapons for protection when they hide in their stations while the city goes to hell like in 1992!
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 07-19-2019, 9:08 PM
GiveMeMo2A GiveMeMo2A is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Posts: 13
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pacrat View Post
It will only be fair that he also disarm his officers in the British Bobby tradition.

Lets see ALL LAPD officers patrolling So Central, Grape St, Jordan Downs, Wilmington, Pacoima, and every other scummy corner of city of Lost Angels.

With nothing but a yellow vest, a whistle, and a stick.
Sticks and knives are weapons, and so those too should not be allowed.
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 07-20-2019, 9:53 PM
SnWnMe's Avatar
SnWnMe SnWnMe is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: The 951
Posts: 6,427
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Default

Quote:
his discretion in deciding who is entitled to a CCW license
A very high ranking LEO who has control issues and can't handle power.
__________________
Frank Da Tank
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 07-21-2019, 2:14 PM
chris's Avatar
chris chris is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: In Texas for now
Posts: 18,802
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pacrat View Post
FIFY

BOTTOM LINE..............Moore is just more of the same ole ch!t as Beck. He spent 36 yrs following Beck like a puppy begging for bones.

Another political butt puppet dancing to the tune of Garcetti who is just an extension of Viagragrosa.

Some things never change
Democrats doing what Democrats do disarm the public.
__________________
http://govnews.ca.gov/gov39mail/mail.php

Thank your neighbor and fellow gun owners for passing Prop 63. For that gun control is a winning legislative agenda.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z6Dj8tdSC1A
contact the governor
https://govnews.ca.gov/gov39mail/mail.php
In Memory of Spc Torres May 5th 2006 al-Hillah, Iraq. I will miss you my friend.
NRA Life Member.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 09-18-2019, 11:02 AM
Paladin's Avatar
Paladin Paladin is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: SFBA
Posts: 9,417
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Seems like this slipped by our eagle eyed LA folk....

Back on 2019 April 03:
Quote:
A judge in Los Angeles has declined a request from LAPD Chief Michel Moore to cancel a decades-old agreement that granted concealed weapons permits to a handful of citizens.

The decision means those citizens will continue to be issued permits to carry guns, at least temporarily.

...

Only a few so-called "CCW" permits remain in private hands in the city of LA, and the permit holders were notified in recent months the city intended to cancel them, even though the city had agreed to issue and renew the permits in order to settle a lawsuit in 1994.

Chief Michel Moore said in a sworn declaration filed last month he did not believe the plaintiffs in that lawsuit were still entitled to the permits, because it was unlikely the individuals still faced extraordinary physical danger to their lives.

"I do not believe the continued wholesale allowance for each to possess a CCW license based on circumstances that may have existed 24 years ago is in the best interest of the public," Moore said.

...

The plaintiffs in the 1994 case, called Assenza, et al. v. City of Los Angeles, et al., sued because the LAPD had a prior, long-standing practice of simply denying every applicant.

The city settled the case and promised in 1995 the LAPD would issue permits to the 30 plaintiffs, according to court records. The city and Moore asked the judge to vacate, or undo, that settlement, arguing that it was now restricting Moore's ability to exercise his discretion in deciding who is entitled to a CCW license.

...

The plaintiffs' attorneys said the permit holders were individuals who, because of extraordinary life circumstances, could be in peril with no other reasonable means of self-defense. They said state law allows the permits for that exact reason.

...
From: https://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/l...508068821.html

The text I bolded makes it sound like the terms of the Assenza settlement apply only to the parties of the settlement and were not a required change to the LAPD CCW GC policy for non-party applicants.

ETA: Or have I conflated two distinct requirements of the settlement: (1) that all the plaintiffs to the original lawsuit get issued CCWs and (2) that LAPD conform it's GC/GMC requirements to those agree to in the settlement. Any CGN lawyers familiar with the exact terms of the settlement? (I'd expect those in LA Co, or at least the City of LA would be. CD Michel/Associates?)
__________________
Never mistake being delusional for being optimistic.

230+ examples of CCWs Saving Lives.

KnifeRights.org/images/KRbanner_468x60-1.gif

Last edited by Paladin; 09-18-2019 at 11:21 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 09-18-2019, 12:30 PM
splithoof splithoof is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 1,908
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Likely the terms of the settlement were arrived at specifically to NOT allow others not in the class to receive said permits.
No police chief for the City of Los Angeles will ever agree to willingly issue any CCW permits; the mayor and his thirteen clowns simply won't have it. Any chief even thinking about it will be gone before lunchtime.
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 09-20-2019, 9:32 AM
AdamVIP AdamVIP is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 390
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

I'm ashamed to say I was not aware of this case when I lived in LA.

Surely a car is indeed valuable property that cannot be transported via an armored car service. Especially having to stop at lights in questionable neighborhoods with higher than average crime rates.
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 09-20-2019, 10:06 AM
Paladin's Avatar
Paladin Paladin is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: SFBA
Posts: 9,417
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by splithoof View Post
Likely the terms of the settlement were arrived at specifically to NOT allow others not in the class to receive said permits.
In hindsight, it makes no sense to require a change to LAPD's GC requirements if the settlement was just to ensure the plaintiffs were issued CCWs. Plus, it would be a slam dunk 14th A Equal Protection lawsuit.

Quote:
Originally Posted by splithoof View Post
No police chief for the City of Los Angeles will ever agree to willingly issue any CCW permits; the mayor and his thirteen clowns simply won't have it. Any chief even thinking about it will be gone before lunchtime.
That's what Chief Moore was trying, unsuccessfully, to avoid. But he, and whoever was before him from the time of the settlement, ALL FAILED and had to issue CCWs. If any CGNers meeting the qualifications (see link in OP), go and apply and get your LAPD CA CCWs. If they refuse, sue 'em under Assensa settlement terms. (Best to start whole process with legal counsel if you are serious.)
__________________
Never mistake being delusional for being optimistic.

230+ examples of CCWs Saving Lives.

KnifeRights.org/images/KRbanner_468x60-1.gif
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 09-20-2019, 10:41 AM
vino68's Avatar
vino68 vino68 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 655
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

The LAPD Chief said the same thing or very similar last week on KTLA during a morning interview. Plebs do not need military type weapons to defend themselves. They can call 911 using their cell phones.
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 09-20-2019, 12:48 PM
Kyle1886's Avatar
Kyle1886 Kyle1886 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: N. San Diego Co.
Posts: 2,003
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vino68 View Post
The LAPD Chief said the same thing or very similar last week on KTLA during a morning interview. Plebs do not need military type weapons to defend themselves. They can call 911 using their cell phones.
I may be the only person that does not have a cell phone stitched to my hand in CA. I've never owned one and being retired and out of the work force don't see the need for an extra expense.

My safety is my responsibility in the "now" and not waiting 'x' number of minutes. Thank you very much Mr. LAPD Chief.

Respectfully
Kyle
__________________
Take responsibility for your own actions!

WE are the NRA.

"The enemy is anybody who's going to get you killed, no matter which side he's on". -Joseph Heller, novelist (1 May 1923-1999)
_________+__________
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 09-20-2019, 4:33 PM
CCWFacts CCWFacts is online now
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 5,839
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle1886 View Post
My safety is my responsibility in the "now" and not waiting 'x' number of minutes.
I think everyone knows how long LAPD's response times are. If there isn't someone down and bleeding they will take many minutes or perhaps hours to arrive. I can't understand how LAPD can even argue that 911 is an effective action at this point. Maybe one of the CCW suits should introduce evidence about the reality of response times in LA these days.
__________________
"H--l, yes, we're going to take your AR-15"
- Robert "Beto" O'Rourke

Math denialism: We can have free, universal healthcare, $15/hr minimum wage, and open borders.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 8:58 PM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Proudly hosted by GeoVario the Premier 2A host.
Calguns.net, the 'Calguns' name and all associated variants and logos are ® Trademark and © Copyright 2002-2018, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.
Calguns.net and The Calguns Foundation have no affiliation and are in no way related to each other.
All opinions, statements and remarks made by Calguns.net on this web site and elsewhere are solely attributable to Calguns.net.