CCW in San Bruno

[ronlglock]

I sent my paperwork to the San Mateo County sheriffs office and got a call from them that I needed to submit to San Bruno first. A friend in San Mateo city got his directly from the sheriff. Any input on why I was kicked back?

My good cause is due to my business, just like my friend.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[taperxz]

Originally Posted by ronlglock

I sent my paperwork to the San Mateo County sheriffs office and got a call from them that I needed to submit to San Bruno first. A friend in San Mateo city got his directly from the sheriff. Any input on why I was kicked back?

My good cause is due to my business, just like my friend.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

They may have an agreement with San Bruno that anyone asking for a CCW for a business needs to be handled by the local chief. Business CCW's may bind you to only carrying while conducting business too.

Personally, i would go straight to the Sheriff and apply for yourself and not for the business.

[ronlglock]

I just had my interview at San Bruno PD with a Lt. that I work with on a city board as a volunteer. He said that the San Mateo County process changed recently after the SM County Police Chief’s Association complained that CCWs were being issued in their cities without their knowledge.

According to the Lt., the new procedure requires the first interview and background check to be done by the local jurisdiction before being forwarded to the sheriff’s office. Since I work with this officer personally I have no reason to doubt what I was told. Can anyone else confirm or deny?

[DaveInOroValley]

San Bruno's chief is notoriously against any CCW. My Dad has personal experience with him.

[Paladin]

Originally Posted by ronlglock

He said that the San Mateo County process changed recently after the SM County Police Chief’s Association complained that CCWs were being issued in their cities without their knowledge.

Ah, the little tin gods (CoPs), had a hissy fit because the sheriff was issuing CCWs to their serfs?

Originally Posted by ronlglock

According to the Lt., the new procedure requires the first interview and background check to be done by the local jurisdiction before being forwarded to the sheriff’s office.

Of course the little tin gods (CoPs), don't care whether what they want is illegal or not....

We can't get a decision in Lu fast enough.

Thx for the info. If we win Lu, CGF will need to slap down San Mateo SO right along with Merced SO....

[Paladin]

Originally Posted by ronlglock

I just had my interview at San Bruno PD with a Lt. that I work with on a city board as a volunteer. He said that the San Mateo County process changed recently after the SM County Police Chief’s Association complained that CCWs were being issued in their cities without their knowledge.

According to the Lt., the new procedure requires the first interview and background check to be done by the local jurisdiction before being forwarded to the sheriff’s office. Since I work with this officer personally I have no reason to doubt what I was told. Can anyone else confirm or deny?

I think I read this too fast.

You are saying that you have to got thru a preliminary interview and background check w/the PD of the city of your residence, NOT that you have to initially apply w/them, get rejected, then submit that letter of rejection along w/a new application to apply with the sheriff. Hmm. That is different. The latter is a greater waste of time, money, and effort on the behalf of the applicant than the former.

Going to:
http://calgunsfoundation.org/carry-i...eport-2013.pdf

I see they do NOT list San Bruno, so I assume that means that SB is either a contract city (but that raises the Q of why go to them as well as the sheriff since they are one and the same), or that San Bruno PD has a Memorandum of Understanding with the sheriff saying that the sheriff issues all CCWs for San Bruno residents. If the latter, they don't want to mess w/CCWs, yet they do want to be able to torpedo an applicant....

It still stinks IMO.

[taperxz]

Looks like things have changed!!

Concealed Weapon Permit
The San Mateo Police Department's policy and guidelines regarding the issuance of Concealed Weapons Permits comply with California Penal Code Sections 12050 through 12054 governing the issuance of such permits, and reflect the policy established within San Mateo County regarding the processing of applications.

Who may apply:
Any citizen residing within the City of San Mateo, over the age of 18 years, having a valid reason for obtaining a CCW permit may make application to the San Mateo Police Department. Only residents of this City will be considered.

Fees for service:
For each new application there is a non-refundable fee charged to process the background investigation, fingerprint cards, and other involved procedures. This fee is determined by the City of San Mateo to defray the personnel cost of processing an application, and is not returned if the applicant is denied a CCW permit. An additional state fee is charged to issue the permit.

Application process:
San Mateo County has developed a uniform application form for use throughout the various policing jurisdictions within the county. This application must be completed and submitted, along with the fee for service. The application must include a written explanation regarding the need to carry a concealed weapon.

The application will be reviewed during a personal interview with Support Services' staff at the time of submittal. Following the interview, an appointment for fingerprint submission will be obtained. An additional fee will be collected by the technician to pay for the processing of the print cards by the State of California, as part of the background investigation. This may take 6 to 8 weeks to process.

Upon determination that the issuance of a CCW permit is in order, the Chief of Police will forward a recommendation to issue the permit to the San Mateo Sheriff's Office, along with copies of the application and background investigation. The Sheriff's Office will continue the processing of the permit for issuance, and impose any clearly stated (if any) restrictions and/or condition the Chief has determined regarding the carrying of a concealed weapon. Reasonable limitations and restrictions imposed on an individual's CCW permit affect the time, place, and other restrictions under which the permittee may carry a concealed weapon.

Contact San Mateo Police Department Support Services at (650) 522-7620 for further information.

[ronlglock]

Originally Posted by Paladin

I think I read this too fast.

You are saying that you have to got thru a preliminary interview and background check w/the PD of the city of your residence.

Exactly. It’s a linear process, starting with local PD then continuing with SO.

[taperxz]

Originally Posted by ronlglock

Exactly. It’s a linear process, starting with local PD then continuing with SO.

Basically, You need to OK from the COP and then the Sheriff will issue the actual permit.

I don't know if this is legal or not.

[ronlglock]

Originally Posted by taperxz

Basically, You need to OK from the COP and then the Sheriff will issue the actual permit.

I don't know if this is legal or not.

Whether legal or not, it’s the only game in town...

[Librarian]

PC grants the powers to each of Chiefs of Police and Sheriffs; it says nothing about requiring both.

[taperxz]

Originally Posted by Librarian

PC grants the powers to each of Chiefs of Police and Sheriffs; it says nothing about requiring both.

My question of legality would be that the Municipal police dept is making all the calls in respect to good cause, moral character, and restrictions. Then after all that is determined, The Sheriff is just going to issue based on what the COP recommended.


This seems to be a strange turn of events.

I guess now the Sheriff is actually "shall issue" on his record

[taperxz]

http://calgunsfoundation.org/wp-cont...0/SanMateo.pdf

[taperxz]

WOW it appears in reading that they also require a $1,000.000 insurance policy now too.

[Librarian]

Originally Posted by taperxz

WOW it appears in reading that they also require a $1,000.000 insurance policy now too.

PC 26190 (g)

(g) Except as authorized pursuant to this section, no requirement,
charge, assessment, fee, or condition that requires the payment of
any additional funds by the applicant, or requires the applicant to
obtain liability insurance, may be imposed by any licensing authority
as a condition of the application for a license.

Now, is that policy a condition of the 'application' or of the 'license'?

[taperxz]

Originally Posted by Librarian

PC 26190 (g) Now, is that policy a condition of the 'application' or of the 'license'?

Instead of going back and forth, i updated San Mateo County in the LTC forum.

Both links are there. CGF and the City of San Mateo which spells out the new rules. Can't find anything on other city sites.

The insurance thing is on the CGF update. Take a look

[Paladin]

Originally Posted by ronlglock

Exactly. It’s a linear process, starting with local PD then continuing with SO.

Question becomes: if you get rejected with this process, will the sheriff then accept an application directly from the applicant?

[taperxz]

Originally Posted by Paladin

Question becomes: if you get rejected with this process, will the sheriff then accept an application directly from the applicant?

No the decision is left up to the local dept. If you are approved it then goes to the Sheriff for issue.

[taperxz]

Now that the San Mateo Parks lawsuit was a failure. I am wondering if this is the response from the county and its chiefs to fend off more lawsuits.

By taking this stand, you can't sue one agency now for discretion and condition of issuance. You would now have to sue each individual city.

[edwardm]

Originally Posted by taperxz

Now that the San Mateo Parks lawsuit was a failure. I am wondering if this is the response from the county and its chiefs to fend off more lawsuits.

By taking this stand, you can't sue one agency now for discretion and condition of issuance. You would now have to sue each individual city.

SMCSO has only so many people in the office to do interviews, schedule livescan, process apps, etc. This might be an attempt to streamline the function, rather than act as a gatekeeping exercise.

[titan2]

Originally Posted by taperxz

WOW it appears in reading that they also require a $1,000.000 insurance policy now too.

And....only allowing 1 gun to be listed......that sucks!!

[ronlglock]

As the OP let me state that other than being surprised by having to clear my local PD first, I have been treated with the utmost respect and concern for my time. My interview with San Bruno PD was handled expeditiously and courteously.

There does seem to be come confusion over the next steps. SBPD asked me to be fingerprinted but SMSO says that they need the paperwork first. SMSO offered to call SBPD for me to handle it. The CCW liaison is off on Friday and I am at the SHOT show next week, so I guess I will know more after I get back.

I have 3 guns listed and didn't get any pushback.

[Paladin]

Looks like we won the Lu case and ALL sheriffs will have to accept CCW applications -- none of this apply with or give it to your CoP first illegality stuff anymore!

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...545848&page=16

[ronlglock]

Does anyone know whether or not getting printed is tacit approval of my good cause and morals?

That is, is the approval a serial process? (Good cause and morals pass, now do fingerprint and background) or does the file need to have everything in it first?

[edwardm]

Originally Posted by ronlglock

Does anyone know whether or not getting printed is tacit approval of my good cause and morals?

That is, is the approval a serial process? (Good cause and morals pass, now do fingerprint and background) or does the file need to have everything in it first?

It looks to be more of a parallel process. Do all the preliminary steps to gather all the necessary background data and then proceed to the GMC/GC step(s).

I don't know how the process has run for each and every SMC applicant, but I've had face-to-faces with a good number of them, and with only one exception, the printing was done immediately after the interview process. The one who came back did so because of a staffing shortage.