|
Concealed Carry Discussion General discussion regarding CCW/LTC in California |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
||||
|
||||
If your IA violates the law as written, what next?
Pursuant to 26205. The licensing authority shall give written notice to the
applicant indicating if the license under this article is approved or denied. The licensing authority shall give this notice within 90 days of the initial application for a new license or a license renewal, or 30 days after receipt of the applicant's criminal background check from the Department of Justice, whichever is later. If the license is denied, the notice shall state which requirement was not satisfied. Pursuant to 26190. (a) (1) Each applicant for a new license or for the renewal of a license shall pay at the time of filing the application a fee determined by the Department of Justice. The fee shall not exceed the application processing costs of the Department of Justice for the direct costs of furnishing the report required by Section 26185. Pursuant to 26165. (d) The applicant shall not be required to pay for any training courses prior to the determination of good cause being made pursuant to Section 26202. Hypothetically speaking, if my issuing agency violates each and every one of the listed statutes, what recourse do I have? |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
Most IA do not consider the 90 day clock to start until the completion of the background check or livescan.
Some IA's have been violating a lot more then this for a very long time.
__________________
Only slaves don't need guns We stand for the Anthem, we kneel for the cross We already have the only reasonable Gun Control we need, It's called the Second Amendment and it's the government it controls. What doesn't kill me, better run |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Thank you, but the question is, what recourse do you have? For example, if they require training prior to determination, and then deny you based on insufficient good cause, then they made you spend money you would otherwise not have spent. That is illegal, and so the question is, what can you do about it? |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
And, you should plan that the assessment of your application with that agency might discover some negative elements bearing on whether it might be issued.
__________________
ARCHIVED Calguns Foundation Wiki here: http://web.archive.org/web/201908310...itle=Main_Page "The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane."Ann Althouse: “Begin with the hypothesis that what they did is what they wanted to do. If they postured that they wanted to do something else, regard that as a con. Work from there. The world will make much more sense.” Not a lawyer, just Some Guy On The Interwebs. |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
Not sure I understand what you mean here. In my 2nd post, I indicated that the "good cause", was not sufficient, so it was already denied. I am seeking reliable information, on what the legal ramifications for the city are, given it can be shown that they violated the law, several times during the process, and required me to spend money BEFORE finding on my stated good cause.
|
#7
|
||||
|
||||
Hypotheticals are slippery, no?
Bad behavior from issuing agencies is nothing new. If you sued and won, what would you expect? I don't think there would be any chance at all that you would ever get CCW from that agency, nor a lot of others. And it seems unlikely you could be awarded any kind of damages - there's that pesky 'may issue' language in Penal Code. But that's why there are courts and lawyers. It's tough to make predictions, especially about the future. - Yogi Berra
__________________
ARCHIVED Calguns Foundation Wiki here: http://web.archive.org/web/201908310...itle=Main_Page "The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane."Ann Althouse: “Begin with the hypothesis that what they did is what they wanted to do. If they postured that they wanted to do something else, regard that as a con. Work from there. The world will make much more sense.” Not a lawyer, just Some Guy On The Interwebs. Last edited by Librarian; 05-11-2017 at 10:59 PM.. |
#8
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
On a side note: Training is never a bad thing to have under your belt. Try to take it as a learning experience and not lost money.
__________________
NRA Lifer |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Especially here in CA, we are destined to accept a version of the 2nd Amendment that does not coincide with what is written. Our government does have the majority of the power and they use it very often against us. Which to me was the intent of the 2nd to start with - allow the people to protect themselves from their government's outreach as well as other opposing governments invasions.
|
#11
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
PM sent. |
#12
|
||||
|
||||
Yep, in Ventura the Sheriff's office said do not take the training until they approved you to take the training.
|
#13
|
||||
|
||||
If your IA violates the law as written, what next?
Quote:
Exactly. Win or lose your case, you will never get a CCW in CA. Not right but true. |
#15
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|