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
  #81  
Old 10-26-2018, 2:08 PM
BumBum's Avatar
BumBum BumBum is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: San Gabriel Valley
Posts: 1,622
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by taperxz View Post
In other words "the 2A is a lesser right than the rest"
Nope. That is not what I said. The levels of “discouragement” between the two situations are vastly different. If Riverside deputies were threatening to beat or lynch non-citizen CCW applicants as means of discouragement, then I’d say they had a good case here.
__________________

DISCLAIMER: The information contained herein is general in nature, which may not apply to particular factual or legal circumstances, and is intended for informational purposes only. Consistent with Calguns policy, the information does not constitute legal advice or opinions and should not be relied upon as such. Transmission of the information is not intended to create an attorney-client relationship. Readers should not act upon any information in my posts without seeking professional counsel.

Last edited by BumBum; 10-26-2018 at 2:13 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #82  
Old 10-26-2018, 2:14 PM
taperxz taperxz is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 17,096
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BumBum View Post
Nope. That is not what I said. The levels of “discouragement” between the two situations are vastly different. If Riverside deputies were threatening to beat or lynch non-citizen CCW applicants, then I’d say they had a good case here.
Its what you implied. The threat of lynching or beatings may not be there but the people who didn't want blacks to vote also did so via discouragement. In todays world the ONLY way to get LE to obey the law is with a lawyer and a lawsuit and you know that.
Reply With Quote
  #83  
Old 10-26-2018, 2:45 PM
wolfwood's Avatar
wolfwood wolfwood is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,280
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

https://ukenreport.com/lawsuit-sheri...gveEYrcP_rzqbA

New article came out
Reply With Quote
  #84  
Old 10-26-2018, 3:07 PM
BumBum's Avatar
BumBum BumBum is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: San Gabriel Valley
Posts: 1,622
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by taperxz View Post
Its what you implied. The threat of lynching or beatings may not be there but the people who didn't want blacks to vote also did so via discouragement. In todays world the ONLY way to get LE to obey the law is with a lawyer and a lawsuit and you know that.
Nor did I imply it. As has been repeated over and over, there is no allegation by the plaintiff himself that he was actually prevented from submitting an application. I won’t disagree that lawsuits are the way to get LE to comply with the law, but understand that lawyers are not magicians and lawsuits aren’t litigated in a vacuum. The facts are important and the client needs to take certain steps on their own in order to ensure a successful outcome.
__________________

DISCLAIMER: The information contained herein is general in nature, which may not apply to particular factual or legal circumstances, and is intended for informational purposes only. Consistent with Calguns policy, the information does not constitute legal advice or opinions and should not be relied upon as such. Transmission of the information is not intended to create an attorney-client relationship. Readers should not act upon any information in my posts without seeking professional counsel.
Reply With Quote
  #85  
Old 10-26-2018, 5:59 PM
alex1975 alex1975 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 76
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

I'm a naturalized immigrant with a CCW from Riverside. While submitting the application ("first interview") I was asked by the deputy to hand him my US passport card, and he made a copy of it.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #86  
Old 10-26-2018, 8:25 PM
R Dale R Dale is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 1,536
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

I find it strange that it was taking over two years to receive a CCW until Sniff runs for reelection and then all a sudden he finds money to reduce the wait to a few months.
Reply With Quote
  #87  
Old 10-26-2018, 11:38 PM
TurboS600's Avatar
TurboS600 TurboS600 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,118
iTrader: 8 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IVC View Post
Sniff could do things a bit differently, but he also must get his funding from a group of people who don't look kindly on CCW.
NOT true. The BoS had a meeting and voted 4:1 on a referendum to ask Sheriff Sniff to accept self defense as a valid good cause for the issuance of a CCW. I know because I was at that meeting and testified before the board.

It did not make a world of difference at that time (6-7 years ago). However, he now has a 98% success rate with his applicants. When I was issued my first CCW in Riverside county there were fewer than 400 valid 2-year permits in Riverside County (9 years ago). Today there are more than 3,600 valid permits in Riverside County. Yes, they HAVE ramped it up a bit. The only one in the CCW office when I first applied was Sgt Aguirre. All by himself.

I'm not a Sniff apologist but I believe that he is doing what he can with what he has. In the past few years he has made HUUUUGE strides in easing up the process. Could he improve? Maybe. But you have no idea what it takes to run a department that size. SO go ahead and apply for your permit and see what happens. You just never know.

You may be pleasantly surprised as I was.
__________________


Quote:
Originally Posted by Helmut Shmacher Space Chimp View Post
Where can I get a pair..?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ViPER395 View Post
I like it colored
Quote:
Originally Posted by SquidBilly View Post
I became mesmerized by a thick black shaft.
Reply With Quote
  #88  
Old 10-27-2018, 10:00 AM
alex1975 alex1975 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 76
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TurboS600 View Post
NOT true. The BoS had a meeting and voted 4:1 on a referendum to ask Sheriff Sniff to accept self defense as a valid good cause for the issuance of a CCW. I know because I was at that meeting and testified before the board.

It did not make a world of difference at that time (6-7 years ago). However, he now has a 98% success rate with his applicants. When I was issued my first CCW in Riverside county there were fewer than 400 valid 2-year permits in Riverside County (9 years ago). Today there are more than 3,600 valid permits in Riverside County. Yes, they HAVE ramped it up a bit. The only one in the CCW office when I first applied was Sgt Aguirre. All by himself.

I'm not a Sniff apologist but I believe that he is doing what he can with what he has. In the past few years he has made HUUUUGE strides in easing up the process. Could he improve? Maybe. But you have no idea what it takes to run a department that size. SO go ahead and apply for your permit and see what happens. You just never know.

You may be pleasantly surprised as I was.
The process improved. But it still has some issues that are not budget related: 1. The reference letters. It's nobody business that I have a concealed handgun. 2. The limitation of the gun caliber. I wanted to add a Tokarev, and was refused.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #89  
Old 10-28-2018, 12:12 PM
IVC's Avatar
IVC IVC is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Temecula
Posts: 14,580
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by alex1975 View Post
The process improved. But it still has some issues that are not budget related: 1. The reference letters. It's nobody business that I have a concealed handgun. 2. The limitation of the gun caliber. I wanted to add a Tokarev, and was refused.
These are completely valid points against Sniff's issuance policy (and I raise them often), but this lawsuit is addressing something completely different and at "politically convenient time."

If it walks like a duck, ...
__________________
NRA Benefactor Member
Reply With Quote
  #90  
Old 10-29-2018, 8:16 AM
taperxz taperxz is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 17,096
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IVC View Post
These are completely valid points against Sniff's issuance policy (and I raise them often), but this lawsuit is addressing something completely different and at "politically convenient time."

If it walks like a duck, ...
What’s wrong with playing politics to fix a wrong doing?

If this helps get Sniff out and a better 2A sheriff in, I fail to see a problem
Reply With Quote
  #91  
Old 10-29-2018, 1:23 PM
BumBum's Avatar
BumBum BumBum is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: San Gabriel Valley
Posts: 1,622
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by taperxz View Post
What’s wrong with playing politics to fix a wrong doing?

If this helps get Sniff out and a better 2A sheriff in, I fail to see a problem
There are a number of legal authorities that prohibit the filing of frivolous lawsuits for improper purposes (and playing politics does not count as a proper purpose). Hence, no one involved in the lawsuit would ever admit that this was the primary purpose. This is aside from the donor considerations as I mentioned above. I’m sure that Sniff supporters don’t appreciate their funds being used in such a way, not to mention donors who don’t reside in Riverside County.
__________________

DISCLAIMER: The information contained herein is general in nature, which may not apply to particular factual or legal circumstances, and is intended for informational purposes only. Consistent with Calguns policy, the information does not constitute legal advice or opinions and should not be relied upon as such. Transmission of the information is not intended to create an attorney-client relationship. Readers should not act upon any information in my posts without seeking professional counsel.
Reply With Quote
  #92  
Old 10-29-2018, 3:50 PM
taperxz taperxz is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 17,096
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BumBum View Post
There are a number of legal authorities that prohibit the filing of frivolous lawsuits for improper purposes (and playing politics does not count as a proper purpose). Hence, no one involved in the lawsuit would ever admit that this was the primary purpose. This is aside from the donor considerations as I mentioned above. I’m sure that Sniff supporters don’t appreciate their funds being used in such a way, not to mention donors who don’t reside in Riverside County.
So you’re saying legal green card holders should in fact not be able to carry loaded and concealed via a CCW and the 2A doesn’t apply to them? Got ya.

Sniff could just as easily change his PERSONAL policy and make this go away. Balls in his court.

I will now send money to support this case ONLY because supposed pro 2A people believe these folks should have limited 2A rights.
Reply With Quote
  #93  
Old 10-29-2018, 10:02 PM
BumBum's Avatar
BumBum BumBum is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: San Gabriel Valley
Posts: 1,622
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by taperxz View Post
So you’re saying legal green card holders should in fact not be able to carry loaded and concealed via a CCW and the 2A doesn’t apply to them? Got ya.

Sniff could just as easily change his PERSONAL policy and make this go away. Balls in his court.

I will now send money to support this case ONLY because supposed pro 2A people believe these folks should have limited 2A rights.
This is now the second time you have attacked the straw man with me. Read my posts more carefully and you will see that I never said nor implied that. I have no problem with legal permanent residents obtaining CCWs. Instead, my problem is specific to the particular facts of this lawsuit, that the plaintiff did not bother to actually submit an application for a CCW. It cannot be reasonably disputed that the lawsuit would stand on much more solid footing had the application been submitted and subsequently denied.
__________________

DISCLAIMER: The information contained herein is general in nature, which may not apply to particular factual or legal circumstances, and is intended for informational purposes only. Consistent with Calguns policy, the information does not constitute legal advice or opinions and should not be relied upon as such. Transmission of the information is not intended to create an attorney-client relationship. Readers should not act upon any information in my posts without seeking professional counsel.
Reply With Quote
  #94  
Old 10-29-2018, 10:59 PM
IVC's Avatar
IVC IVC is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Temecula
Posts: 14,580
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by taperxz View Post
What’s wrong with playing politics to fix a wrong doing?
As long as politics is labeled as such, there is nothing wrong with playing politics.

The problem with this lawsuit is that it is NOT described as "politics." Instead, it's touted as some pro-2A groundbreaking lawsuit that will advance our rights in CA. Even you say "if it helps get Sniff out..." That's far cry from "look at all these permanent residents who will now have their right restored."

When the side effect of hurting Sniff turns out to be the primary motivator, it's just politics. As long as we admit that it's politics, I don't have a problem with the lawsuit itself, even if I do have a problem with using courts in this way. I'd prefer those who are against Sniff donate to Bianco or volunteer for him instead of borderline abusing the legal system.
__________________
NRA Benefactor Member
Reply With Quote
  #95  
Old 10-30-2018, 9:00 AM
taperxz taperxz is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 17,096
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BumBum View Post
This is now the second time you have attacked the straw man with me. Read my posts more carefully and you will see that I never said nor implied that. I have no problem with legal permanent residents obtaining CCWs. Instead, my problem is specific to the particular facts of this lawsuit, that the plaintiff did not bother to actually submit an application for a CCW. It cannot be reasonably disputed that the lawsuit would stand on much more solid footing had the application been submitted and subsequently denied.
How does one submit an application to someone that has a standing order to reject receiving the application without proof of citizenship?
Reply With Quote
  #96  
Old 10-30-2018, 10:47 AM
BumBum's Avatar
BumBum BumBum is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: San Gabriel Valley
Posts: 1,622
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by taperxz View Post
How does one submit an application to someone that has a standing order to reject receiving the application without proof of citizenship?
First off, remember that nowhere is such a policy set forth in the written policy that is attached to the complaint. As I noted earlier, this is critical in terms of pleading a complaint because allegations inconsistent with attachments will be disregarded by the court for purposes of a demurrer. Put another way, the court will view such an allegation as being speculative in the absence of an official act (such as an actual denial).

But to answer your question, it is simple. You fill out the paperwork, gather your documents, and walk the application in to the front desk. If the application is received by RSD, a decision can subsequently be rendered. If RSD refuses to accept the application, as you seem to suggest might occur, understand that this is still different than what the complaint alleges. The allegation is that the plaintiff was “dissuaded and discouraged” from applying, not that his application was refused.

To sum up, any of these scenarios would make for a better pleaded complaint:
- RSD refuses to accept the application;
- RSD refuses to render a decision on the submitted application;
- RSD denies the application.

Any of these scenarios resolve the pleading issue outlined above. But not even attempting to apply makes the complaint vulnerable to an early dismissal. That’s simply bad strategy from a litigation standpoint, period.
__________________

DISCLAIMER: The information contained herein is general in nature, which may not apply to particular factual or legal circumstances, and is intended for informational purposes only. Consistent with Calguns policy, the information does not constitute legal advice or opinions and should not be relied upon as such. Transmission of the information is not intended to create an attorney-client relationship. Readers should not act upon any information in my posts without seeking professional counsel.
Reply With Quote
  #97  
Old 10-30-2018, 11:10 AM
Kestryll's Avatar
Kestryll Kestryll is offline
Head Janitor
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Occupied Reseda, PRK
Posts: 21,088
iTrader: 23 / 100%
Blog Entries: 3
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by taperxz View Post
I will now send money to support this case ONLY because supposed pro 2A people believe these folks should have limited 2A rights.
Proceeding as planned....


Speaking of 'supposed pro 2A people' how much money did you and others give four years ago to 'FixRiverside'?

Asking for a friend...
__________________
NRA Benefactor Life Member / CRPA Life Member / SAF Life Member
Calguns.net an incorported entity - President.
The Calguns Shooting Sports Assoc. - Vice President.
The California Rifle & Pistol Assoc. - Director.
DONATE TO NRA-ILA, CGSSA, AND CRPAF NOW!
Opinions posted in this account are my own and unless specifically stated as such are not the approved position of Calguns.net, CGSSA or CRPA.
Reply With Quote
  #98  
Old 10-30-2018, 11:14 AM
taperxz taperxz is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 17,096
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BumBum View Post
First off, remember that nowhere is such a policy set forth in the written policy that is attached to the complaint. As I noted earlier, this is critical in terms of pleading a complaint because allegations inconsistent with attachments will be disregarded by the court for purposes of a demurrer. Put another way, the court will view such an allegation as being speculative in the absence of an official act (such as an actual denial).

But to answer your question, it is simple. You fill out the paperwork, gather your documents, and walk the application in to the front desk. If the application is received by RSD, a decision can subsequently be rendered. If RSD refuses to accept the application, as you seem to suggest might occur, understand that this is still different than what the complaint alleges. The allegation is that the plaintiff was “dissuaded and discouraged” from applying, not that his application was refused.

To sum up, any of these scenarios would make for a better pleaded complaint:
- RSD refuses to accept the application;
- RSD refuses to render a decision on the submitted application;
- RSD denies the application.

Any of these scenarios resolve the pleading issue outlined above. But not even attempting to apply makes the complaint vulnerable to an early dismissal. That’s simply bad strategy from a litigation standpoint, period.
California law says all applications must be accepted and written notice in the event it was not accepted. Riverside subsequently, is not following this law by not allowing the applicant to submit the application without proof of citizenship
Reply With Quote
  #99  
Old 10-30-2018, 11:14 AM
taperxz taperxz is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 17,096
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kestryll View Post
Proceeding as planned....


Speaking of 'supposed pro 2A people' how much money did you and others give four years ago to 'FixRiverside'?

Asking for a friend...
What friend?
Reply With Quote
  #100  
Old 10-30-2018, 11:23 AM
Kestryll's Avatar
Kestryll Kestryll is offline
Head Janitor
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Occupied Reseda, PRK
Posts: 21,088
iTrader: 23 / 100%
Blog Entries: 3
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by taperxz View Post
What friend?
Bully!!
__________________
NRA Benefactor Life Member / CRPA Life Member / SAF Life Member
Calguns.net an incorported entity - President.
The Calguns Shooting Sports Assoc. - Vice President.
The California Rifle & Pistol Assoc. - Director.
DONATE TO NRA-ILA, CGSSA, AND CRPAF NOW!
Opinions posted in this account are my own and unless specifically stated as such are not the approved position of Calguns.net, CGSSA or CRPA.
Reply With Quote
  #101  
Old 10-30-2018, 11:35 AM
taperxz taperxz is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 17,096
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kestryll View Post
Bully!!
As you know by now, I am not a fanboy of any organization. I will take a lawsuit by any organization putting it forward to advance gun rights as a plus.

Look at some of the other cases that are going forward that were not popular here and are gaining traction. Then look at some of the others that were popular and a slam dunk and fell flat on their face.

This is a tough business! I now salute anyone that tries to gain our right back. Especially in this state.

I support the NRA, CRPA, 2AF, FPC, CGF, GOA ECT. We all just want a win somewhere.

Sometimes the smaller BS lawsuits that people don't care about might be the way up. The bigger more popular lawsuits after Heller and McDonald have all failed to this point.

Thats my answer to your friend
Reply With Quote
  #102  
Old 10-30-2018, 12:47 PM
BumBum's Avatar
BumBum BumBum is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: San Gabriel Valley
Posts: 1,622
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by taperxz View Post
California law says all applications must be accepted and written notice in the event it was not accepted. Riverside subsequently, is not following this law by not allowing the applicant to submit the application without proof of citizenship
Read the complaint again, the plaintiff never alleges that he was not allowed to apply. Just that he was “dissuaded and discouraged”. His words, not mine.
__________________

DISCLAIMER: The information contained herein is general in nature, which may not apply to particular factual or legal circumstances, and is intended for informational purposes only. Consistent with Calguns policy, the information does not constitute legal advice or opinions and should not be relied upon as such. Transmission of the information is not intended to create an attorney-client relationship. Readers should not act upon any information in my posts without seeking professional counsel.
Reply With Quote
  #103  
Old 10-31-2018, 7:57 AM
bigcasino's Avatar
bigcasino bigcasino is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 279
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

wouldn't the fact that the CCW application asks " Have you ever applied for and been denied a CCW license? If yes, please enter the agency name, date, and the reason for denial." be reason to NOT apply and be denied as it would affect your chance of later being granted a CCW?
__________________
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." -Ben Franklin
NRA Patron Life Member
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
SAF Member
CCRKBA Member
CRPA Member
JPFO Member
#BlackGunsMatter #Glocks&Bagles
Reply With Quote
  #104  
Old 11-01-2018, 4:06 PM
IVC's Avatar
IVC IVC is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Temecula
Posts: 14,580
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

The "as it would affect your chance" is a speculation.

This is a legal case and it requires certain level of precision. That's why the plaintiff doesn't even claim he was denied.
__________________
NRA Benefactor Member
Reply With Quote
  #105  
Old 11-01-2018, 6:50 PM
Fjold's Avatar
Fjold Fjold is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Near Bakersfield
Posts: 21,219
iTrader: 28 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BumBum View Post
Read the complaint again, the plaintiff never alleges that he was not allowed to apply. Just that he was “dissuaded and discouraged”. His words, not mine.
Kind of like how minority citizens were “dissuaded and discouraged” from voting from the 1860's through the 1960's.
__________________
Frank

One rifle, one planet, Holland's 375

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v214/Fjold/member8325.png

Life Member NRA, CRPA and SAF
Reply With Quote
  #106  
Old 11-07-2018, 8:09 AM
taperxz taperxz is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 17,096
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Default

Looks like this is a dead lawsuit now. This needs a Staples button.

“Wow that was easy”. .
Reply With Quote
  #107  
Old 11-07-2018, 9:17 AM
Bargearse's Avatar
Bargearse Bargearse is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Moreno Valley, CA
Posts: 111
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

So now, Chad Bianco wins the Riverside Sheriff and is wondering whats gonna happen to the lawsuit? Personally, I think the lawsuit will continue until to the point that Chad Bianco agrees to do a shall issue permits to all US citizens and legal & permanent US residents.
__________________
Quote:
On Second Amendment:

You won’t get gun control by disarming law-abiding citizens. There’s only one way to get real gun control: Disarm the thugs and the criminals, lock them up, and if you don’t actually throw away the key, at least lose it for a long time… It’s a nasty truth, but those who seek to inflict harm are not fazed by gun controllers. I happen to know this from personal experience.”

President Reagan
Reply With Quote
  #108  
Old 11-07-2018, 10:20 AM
BumBum's Avatar
BumBum BumBum is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: San Gabriel Valley
Posts: 1,622
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Crazy, a sitting sheriff has never been unseated in over 100 years in California, and now we have two in the same election cycle. Personally, I certainly hope that Bianco follows through on his CCW promises. I am not so hopeful for Los Angeles, but McDonnell wasn't issuing, so maybe there is a long shot with Villanueva.
__________________

DISCLAIMER: The information contained herein is general in nature, which may not apply to particular factual or legal circumstances, and is intended for informational purposes only. Consistent with Calguns policy, the information does not constitute legal advice or opinions and should not be relied upon as such. Transmission of the information is not intended to create an attorney-client relationship. Readers should not act upon any information in my posts without seeking professional counsel.
Reply With Quote
  #109  
Old 11-07-2018, 10:42 AM
taperxz taperxz is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 17,096
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BumBum View Post
Crazy, a sitting sheriff has never been unseated in over 100 years in California, and now we have two in the same election cycle. Personally, I certainly hope that Bianco follows through on his CCW promises. I am not so hopeful for Los Angeles, but McDonnell wasn't issuing, so maybe there is a long shot with Villanueva.
Lake County Sheriff "Rivero" was unseated 4 years ago by Brian Martin.
Reply With Quote
  #110  
Old 11-07-2018, 11:35 AM
Kestryll's Avatar
Kestryll Kestryll is offline
Head Janitor
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Occupied Reseda, PRK
Posts: 21,088
iTrader: 23 / 100%
Blog Entries: 3
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BumBum View Post
Crazy, a sitting sheriff has never been unseated in over 100 years in California, and now we have two in the same election cycle. Personally, I certainly hope that Bianco follows through on his CCW promises. I am not so hopeful for Los Angeles, but McDonnell wasn't issuing, so maybe there is a long shot with Villanueva.
By all accounts Villanueva is actually worse than McDonnell if that's possible.

I'm curious to see how Bianco does and if he can follow through with his promises once he runs up against the budgetary issues and County Suprvisor's obstructions Sniff was dealing with.

Either way congrats to Bianco and no matter what happened you Riverside residents were guaranteed to be better off than us L.A. residents.
__________________
NRA Benefactor Life Member / CRPA Life Member / SAF Life Member
Calguns.net an incorported entity - President.
The Calguns Shooting Sports Assoc. - Vice President.
The California Rifle & Pistol Assoc. - Director.
DONATE TO NRA-ILA, CGSSA, AND CRPAF NOW!
Opinions posted in this account are my own and unless specifically stated as such are not the approved position of Calguns.net, CGSSA or CRPA.
Reply With Quote
  #111  
Old 12-09-2018, 6:52 AM
Mp5marley's Avatar
Mp5marley Mp5marley is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Inland empire x OC
Posts: 1,131
iTrader: 44 / 100%
Default

I wonder how many people here actually printed out the ccw application and started the process? Just curious
Reply With Quote
  #112  
Old 04-09-2019, 7:16 PM
pacrat pacrat is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Socialist Republic of SoCal
Posts: 6,273
iTrader: 11 / 100%
Default

Did "van Nieuwenhuyzen" Ever get a permit? Or at least be allowed to apply?

Or was the case mooted when Sniff got voted out?


Inquiring minds inquiry follow up thingy questions
Reply With Quote
  #113  
Old 04-14-2019, 8:44 PM
pacrat pacrat is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Socialist Republic of SoCal
Posts: 6,273
iTrader: 11 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pacrat View Post
Did "van Nieuwenhuyzen" Ever get a permit? Or at least be allowed to apply?

Or was the case mooted when Sniff got voted out?


Inquiring minds inquiry follow up thingy questions

NUFFIN?
Reply With Quote
  #114  
Old 05-23-2019, 7:23 PM
taperxz taperxz is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 17,096
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Default

Permanent injunction issued against Riverside County. Permanent residents qualify for CCWs
Reply With Quote
  #115  
Old 05-24-2019, 12:22 AM
pacrat pacrat is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Socialist Republic of SoCal
Posts: 6,273
iTrader: 11 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by taperxz View Post
Permanent injunction issued against Riverside County. Permanent residents qualify for CCWs

Kewl, as it should have been from git-go.
Reply With Quote
  #116  
Old 05-24-2019, 4:07 PM
Ron-Solo's Avatar
Ron-Solo Ron-Solo is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Classified
Posts: 8,567
iTrader: 16 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kestryll View Post
By all accounts Villanueva is actually worse than McDonnell if that's possible.

I'm curious to see how Bianco does and if he can follow through with his promises once he runs up against the budgetary issues and County Suprvisor's obstructions Sniff was dealing with.

Either way congrats to Bianco and no matter what happened you Riverside residents were guaranteed to be better off than us L.A. residents.
Villanueva is worse than Baca and McDonnell combined. He had to sue to make Lieutenant, whereas the rest of us did it by hard work and studying. I had more “command” experience with LASD than he did, and I don’t feel I was qualified to be Sheriff other than I’m more honest and I’m pro 2A.

Villanueva is an anti gun über liberal with aspirations for higher office. He’s chummy with Gavin NewScum.
__________________
LASD Retired
1978-2011

NRA Life Member
CRPA Life Member
NRA Rifle Instructor
NRA Shotgun Instructor
NRA Range Safety Officer
DOJ Certified Instructor
Reply With Quote
  #117  
Old 05-25-2019, 4:45 PM
FirearmFino FirearmFino is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Posts: 155
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

The injunction:

Quote:
Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that this Judgment for a Permanent Injunction shall be entered as to and against the defendants in this action, who are now and hereby enjoined from enforcing, and continuing to enforce, implement or abide by any policy regarding the issuance of permits to carry concealed weapons (CCWs) to the extent that such policy prohibits non-U.S. citizens who are otherwise qualified, lawful permanent residents of the County of Riverside, and who are not otherwise prohibited from owning firearms, from applying or obtaining a permit to carry a concealed weapon under state law, Cal. Pen. Code § 26150, et seq. Defendants have waived any requirement of a bond for the injunctive relief granted herein. Defendants shall have thirty (30) days to finalize all changes to their CCW policy, and eliminate any and all U.S. Citizenship requirements from the Riverside County Sheriff Department’s website describing the CCW process, and from its CCW application forms.
Reply With Quote
  #118  
Old 06-02-2019, 3:04 PM
BumBum's Avatar
BumBum BumBum is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: San Gabriel Valley
Posts: 1,622
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

A little more clarity here on CGF’s victory against the Riverside County Sheriff. The County filed a non-opp to a preliminary injunction and settled the case by agreeing to a permanent injunction.

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/...26265.33.0.pdf

Sue over a non-issue, Defendant responds, “sure, whatever,” and declare victory.

So the County rolled over and stipulated to an injunction that prevents the County from not accepting CCW applications from non-citizen legal residents because essentially “this wasn’t our policy anyway so we don’t care if we’re enjoined from not doing something we weren’t doing in the first instance.”

I stand by what I said earlier, I think this effort was a huge waste of money. This probably could have been solved with a demand letter, but I guess that doesn't generate headlines like a lawsuit does. You know, the kind of headlines that get used for political purposes right before an election and also to solicit donations. Meanwhile, I am still sitting here in LA County with no chance at a CCW, but it's all good because resident aliens in Riverside County can get a CCW.
__________________

DISCLAIMER: The information contained herein is general in nature, which may not apply to particular factual or legal circumstances, and is intended for informational purposes only. Consistent with Calguns policy, the information does not constitute legal advice or opinions and should not be relied upon as such. Transmission of the information is not intended to create an attorney-client relationship. Readers should not act upon any information in my posts without seeking professional counsel.

Last edited by BumBum; 06-02-2019 at 3:07 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #119  
Old 06-02-2019, 4:18 PM
pacrat pacrat is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Socialist Republic of SoCal
Posts: 6,273
iTrader: 11 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BumBum View Post
A little more clarity here on CGF’s victory against the Riverside County Sheriff. The County filed a non-opp to a preliminary injunction and settled the case by agreeing to a permanent injunction.

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/...26265.33.0.pdf

Sue over a non-issue, Defendant responds, “sure, whatever,” and declare victory.

So the County rolled over and stipulated to an injunction that prevents the County from not accepting CCW applications from non-citizen legal residents because essentially “this wasn’t our policy anyway so we don’t care if we’re enjoined from not doing something we weren’t doing in the first instance.”

I stand by what I said earlier, I think this effort was a huge waste of money. This probably could have been solved with a demand letter, but I guess that doesn't generate headlines like a lawsuit does. You know, the kind of headlines that get used for political purposes right before an election and also to solicit donations. Meanwhile, I am still sitting here in LA County with no chance at a CCW, but it's all good because resident aliens in Riverside County can get a CCW.
Is it ever a waste of time to right wrongs where Enumerated Rights are concerned. Definitely NOT.

Political move. IMO, absolutely. Another "political" nail in the coffin of a two faced Ahole? YES.

Could monies be better spent elsewhere? Maybe. But considering the ease of compliance with minimal expenditure. Money well spent.

Sniff was long gone before this document was finalized. And it is unlikely that it was enforced by Bianco. I asked quite a while ago without answer.

Anytime 2A is improved anywhere in Ca it is a plus for us all. Even us unfortunate souls behind enemy lines in LACO. Because it brightens the light shone on the lies of our oppressors regarding "Blood In The Streets" falacy preached by the leftist grabbers.
Reply With Quote
  #120  
Old 06-04-2019, 9:31 AM
taperxz taperxz is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 17,096
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BumBum View Post
A little more clarity here on CGF’s victory against the Riverside County Sheriff. The County filed a non-opp to a preliminary injunction and settled the case by agreeing to a permanent injunction.

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/...26265.33.0.pdf

Sue over a non-issue, Defendant responds, “sure, whatever,” and declare victory.

So the County rolled over and stipulated to an injunction that prevents the County from not accepting CCW applications from non-citizen legal residents because essentially “this wasn’t our policy anyway so we don’t care if we’re enjoined from not doing something we weren’t doing in the first instance.”

I stand by what I said earlier, I think this effort was a huge waste of money. This probably could have been solved with a demand letter, but I guess that doesn't generate headlines like a lawsuit does. You know, the kind of headlines that get used for political purposes right before an election and also to solicit donations. Meanwhile, I am still sitting here in LA County with no chance at a CCW, but it's all good because resident aliens in Riverside County can get a CCW.
Totally ridiculous response! Thoughts like yours is why the 2A is so infringed in this state. This lawsuit probably nudged Sniff out of winning the race and had he won, would the county have caved like they did?

The people spoke, New Sheriff in town and the new sheriff didn’t want to fight the old policy because he didn’t like it. A win is a win.

Are you saying that if you were a green card holder who was denied, you wouldn’t be happy now?

Do you have any idea how many guns I sell to permanent residents? I bet at least one per day!
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 1:03 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.