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 > CONCEALED CARRY/LICENSE TO CARRY > Calguns Concealed Carry County Information Forum
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

Calguns Concealed Carry County Information Forum Information on how to get a LTC in yourCounty

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #481  
Old 11-21-2014, 4:23 PM
DarkWolf13's Avatar
DarkWolf13 DarkWolf13 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 85
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default I dropped off my CCW application 11/19/14

I dropped my application off at the Sheriff's department. I guess its good faith that the Deputy will deliver it to the correct department but it would have been nice to at least receive some type receipt.

Anyone else apply this month? I think it will be interesting to see who is reviewed when.

It's also discouraging them waiting for every possible twist in the appeals process. I guess its a severe and harsh reminder to us if we get this portion of our 2nd Amendment Rights back to never let them take it again.
Reply With Quote
  #482  
Old 11-23-2014, 1:41 PM
bigred76 bigred76 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 139
iTrader: 9 / 100%
Default

The most recent update: http://www.sccgov.org/sites/sheriff/Pages/ccw.aspx

Quote:
Published on: 11/20/2014 11:16 PM
Print
On Wednesday, November 12, 2014 a 9th Circuit panel denied the request of the California Attorney General and several other groups including the Brady Campaign Against Gun Violence to intervene in and appeal the panel’s decision in the Peruta case permitting individuals to request CCW permits without establishing a “good cause” basis for the permit. The panel’s denial of the motions to intervene has not yet changed the status of the law. The intervenors may appeal this decision to a larger panel of the 9th Circuit or the larger panel could on its own review the decision. Thus, the recent decision has not really changed anything until the 9th remands the matter to the District Court to issue the mandate confirming the Peruta decision until then everything will remain status quo and the Santa Clara County Sheriff’s Office (SCCSO) will continue to collect applications until the law is completely settled. There are also two other cases addressing the same issue that the 9th Circuit may consider on appeal. As you can see this issue is in flux and until the law is settled the SCCSO will be accept your application. Thank you for your patience and cooperation.

In order to accommodate, and expedite, the large numbers of anticipated applications, the Sheriff’s Office and County Counsel are currently revising the process for issuing CCW permits.

If you are interested in applying for a CCW permit, please complete the application below and submit it either via mail or in person to:

Santa Clara County Sheriff’s Office
ATTN: CCW Unit
55 W Younger Avenue
San Jose, CA 95110


If you have any questions, please email CCW@sheriff.sccgov.org.
Reply With Quote
  #483  
Old 11-23-2014, 4:13 PM
NorCalAthlete's Avatar
NorCalAthlete NorCalAthlete is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: San Mateo
Posts: 1,796
iTrader: 19 / 100%
Default

Not holding my breath. Per your quote:

Quote:
Published on: 11/20/2014 11:16 PM
Print
On Wednesday, November 12, 2014 a 9th Circuit panel denied the request of the California Attorney General and several other groups including the Brady Campaign Against Gun Violence to intervene in and appeal the panel’s decision in the Peruta case permitting individuals to request CCW permits without establishing a “good cause” basis for the permit. The panel’s denial of the motions to intervene has not yet changed the status of the law. The intervenors may appeal this decision to a larger panel of the 9th Circuit or the larger panel could on its own review the decision. Thus, the recent decision has not really changed anything until the 9th remands the matter to the District Court to issue the mandate confirming the Peruta decision until then everything will remain status quo and the Santa Clara County Sheriff’s Office (SCCSO) will continue to collect applications until the law is completely settled. There are also two other cases addressing the same issue that the 9th Circuit may consider on appeal. As you can see this issue is in flux and until the law is settled the SCCSO will be accept your application. Thank you for your patience and cooperation.

In order to accommodate, and expedite, the large numbers of anticipated applications, the Sheriff’s Office and County Counsel are currently revising the process for issuing CCW permits.

If you are interested in applying for a CCW permit, please complete the application below and submit it either via mail or in person to:

Santa Clara County Sheriff’s Office
ATTN: CCW Unit
55 W Younger Avenue
San Jose, CA 95110


If you have any questions, please email CCW@sheriff.sccgov.org.
__________________
Your views on any given subject are the sum of the media that you take in, scaled to the weight of the credibility of the source that provides it, seen through a lens of your own values, goals, and achievements.

You Are All Ambassadors, Whether You Like It Or Not

Pain is the hardest lesson to forget; Ego is the anesthesia that deadens the pain of stupidity.

Bureaucracy is the epoxy that lubricates the gears of progress.
Reply With Quote
  #484  
Old 11-24-2014, 6:45 PM
Matt_yz125's Avatar
Matt_yz125 Matt_yz125 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Central Valley
Posts: 108
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

I am looking at starting my CCW process to get my spot in line. Where is a good place to take my CCW class?
Reply With Quote
  #485  
Old 11-25-2014, 6:50 AM
ironpegasus ironpegasus is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 578
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt_yz125 View Post
I am looking at starting my CCW process to get my spot in line. Where is a good place to take my CCW class?
Well, that's part of the problem. They're deliberately drawing it out as long as they can by not even providing that information. They don't have a list of accepted providers and likely won't do so until Scocca v Smith is probably settled. I'm hoping to be proven wrong, but I haven't heard a peep from them since before I turned my application in - this despite the fact that they said they would contact applicants with that information. It's one of their deliberate stalling tactics to keep us peons from being able to enjoy our natural human rights for as long as they can use the color of authority to do so.
/rant
Reply With Quote
  #486  
Old 11-25-2014, 12:29 PM
scootle's Avatar
scootle scootle is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 2,696
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt_yz125 View Post
I am looking at starting my CCW process to get my spot in line. Where is a good place to take my CCW class?
For the time being, there is nowhere to obtain SCC-approved training... there is no list, as of yet... likely because prior to Peruta, the SCCSO had no need for 3rd party trainers for CCW.

I can't imagine this will be remedied quickly even if the SCCSO decides to start issuing.
Reply With Quote
  #487  
Old 11-25-2014, 12:32 PM
tbombaci's Avatar
tbombaci tbombaci is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Northern Kalifornistan
Posts: 185
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by scootle View Post
For the time being, there is nowhere to obtain SCC-approved training... there is no list, as of yet... likely because prior to Peruta, the SCCSO had no need for 3rd party trainers for CCW.

I can't imagine this will be remedied quickly even if the SCCSO decides to start issuing.
Where did the handful of Laurie Smiths friends and high dollar donors obtain their training for their SCC CCW's?
__________________
FSC CARDS - I am a DOJ Certified Instructor ** Renewal or new FSC. Don't wait in line at the gun store to take the test or renew, drop me a PM **
Reply With Quote
  #488  
Old 11-25-2014, 1:24 PM
Flopper's Avatar
Flopper Flopper is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: San Jose
Posts: 1,280
iTrader: 11 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tbombaci View Post
Where did the handful of Laurie Smiths friends and high dollar donors obtain their training for their SCC CCW's?
If I'm not mistaken there's only one range that does it and it's run by the sheriff's department.
__________________
Gun Control: The theory that a woman found dead in an alley, raped and strangled with her panty hose, is somehow morally superior to a woman explaining to police how her attacker got that fatal bullet wound. -- L. Neil Smith

Reply With Quote
  #489  
Old 11-25-2014, 2:07 PM
QuarterBoreGunner's Avatar
QuarterBoreGunner QuarterBoreGunner is offline
Administrator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: West Oakland
Posts: 9,390
iTrader: 125 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tbombaci View Post
Where did the handful of Laurie Smiths friends and high dollar donors obtain their training for their SCC CCW's?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flopper View Post
If I'm not mistaken there's only one range that does it and it's run by the sheriff's department.
Well I'm neither high money nor her friend, but when I received my LTC back in '99 the prerequisite was a 16 hour handgun course given by a certified NRA Handgun instructor, then the range qualification was run through the SO's range, which included four hours of class time.
__________________
/Chris

I have a perfect Burning Man attendance record: zero.

You do know there are more guns in the country than there are in the city.
Everyone and their mums is packin' round here!
Like who?
Farmers.
Who else?
Farmers' mums.
Reply With Quote
  #490  
Old 11-25-2014, 2:56 PM
ColdDeadHands1's Avatar
ColdDeadHands1 ColdDeadHands1 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Santa Cruz Mountains
Posts: 3,385
iTrader: 73 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by QuarterBoreGunner View Post
Well I'm neither high money nor her friend, but when I received my LTC back in '99 the prerequisite was a 16 hour handgun course given by a certified NRA Handgun instructor, then the range qualification was run through the SO's range, which included four hours of class time.
Well, we just found the 3rd criteria necessary for getting a LTC in Santa Clara County (for now)...
1) Donate $10k or more to Laurie's campaign fund
2) Own a major corporation in the south bay (Cisco, etc)
3) Get in a shootout in your gun shop with a bad guy...

1 & 2 apply to probably 50 or so individuals in Santa Clara County. Three applies to 1. The rest of us are currently SOL.
__________________


"Let me guess... This isn't about the alcohol or tobacco?"
Reply With Quote
  #491  
Old 11-25-2014, 6:17 PM
scootle's Avatar
scootle scootle is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 2,696
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ColdDeadHands1 View Post
Well, we just found the 3rd criteria necessary for getting a LTC in Santa Clara County (for now)...
1) Donate $10k or more to Laurie's campaign fund
2) Own a major corporation in the south bay (Cisco, etc)
3) Get in a shootout in your gun shop with a bad guy...

1 & 2 apply to probably 50 or so individuals in Santa Clara County. Three applies to 1. The rest of us are currently SOL.
Truth.
__________________
SCC CCW *326 Days*
Application: 2/27/2023 ($72.33)
Original Interview: 12/21@1030|Actual: 4/13@0900
'Informal" email Background complete: 9/19
Email to schedule Psych: 10/27@1539 ($150)
Psych Test: 11/3@0800|Psych Interview: 11/9@0900 (Dr.McKenzie)
LiveScan: 11/9 (UPS Store $93+$25)|Livescan cleared: CA/FBI 11/9, Firearms 11/20
LiveScan Email: 11/17@0842
Training Email: 11/29@1007|Instructor: 1/10/2024 SaberTactics ($399+40)|Docs: 1/12
Approval: 1/17@1346 ($264+$7.96)|Pickup: 1/19@1030
Reply With Quote
  #492  
Old 11-25-2014, 6:22 PM
QuarterBoreGunner's Avatar
QuarterBoreGunner QuarterBoreGunner is offline
Administrator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: West Oakland
Posts: 9,390
iTrader: 125 / 100%
Default

Yeah, mine was not the recommended process.
__________________
/Chris

I have a perfect Burning Man attendance record: zero.

You do know there are more guns in the country than there are in the city.
Everyone and their mums is packin' round here!
Like who?
Farmers.
Who else?
Farmers' mums.
Reply With Quote
  #493  
Old 12-06-2014, 6:45 PM
crazyScott90's Avatar
crazyScott90 crazyScott90 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Santa Clara County
Posts: 467
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

Just checking in. I emailed them a few months ago asking for any update on what their application process would look like, if they had a list of instructors, etc. etc.

Nothing. No response. I was completely ignored.

I suggest people keep emailing the CCW unit (CCW@sheriff.sccgov.org) and asking for basic info about the application process, instructor list, etc. We are finally winning some gun rights back and I think we need to keep the pressure on.

Also, @QuarterBoreGunner: Is your permit current or did she refuse to renew it for you at some point? Just wondering. Also, your description of the training requirements in the 90's appears to exceed statutory requirements (at least for today). 16 hours + 4 hour course would exceed the max of 16 hours.
__________________
Sic Semper.

Last edited by crazyScott90; 12-06-2014 at 6:47 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #494  
Old 12-06-2014, 9:05 PM
mzagg mzagg is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Silicon Valley
Posts: 214
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
...The panel’s denial of the motions to intervene has not yet changed the status of the law. The intervenors may appeal this decision to a larger panel of the 9th Circuit or the larger panel could on its own review the decision. Thus, the recent decision has not really changed anything until the 9th remands the matter to the District Court to issue the mandate confirming the Peruta decision until then everything will remain status quo...
Is there a set or estimate date for this to happen?
Reply With Quote
  #495  
Old 12-06-2014, 9:28 PM
crazyScott90's Avatar
crazyScott90 crazyScott90 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Santa Clara County
Posts: 467
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mzagg View Post
Is there a set or estimate date for this to happen?
As of December 3rd we have heard this from the court:



What happened: Harris got denied intervenor status and now she gets to appeal THAT. They gave her 21 days to file the appeal. 21 days from 12/03 would be 12/24 (unless I missed something). So don't expect to hear anything from the court about her status on the case until sometime next year. Additionally, one of the judges in 9CA asked for en banc appeal. So both parties have to file briefs on whether or not they think the case should go to en banc appeal. That is also 21 days from the order (again, 12/24) and means you can expect to hear something from them sometime next year. When exactly we will get decisions is anyone's guess. It could be TWO WEEKS or three months or longer. Our court system moves at a glacial pace (just look at Palmer v DC, that complaint was originally filed in 2009!), and we just have to be patient.

Summary: The 9th CA has no real time limit (other than the limits that they impose on themselves) for deciding these things. They've asked for further briefings to resolve the issue of en banc and Harris' attempt at getting involved. That means we won't have news from them till at least after new years.
__________________
Sic Semper.
Reply With Quote
  #496  
Old 12-08-2014, 11:05 AM
scootle's Avatar
scootle scootle is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 2,696
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Follow the monster thread and it becomes clear that the next briefings are due on 12/24/2014... but the 9CA can take a while afterwards to disposition the pending motions. The big one will be if the sua sponte call for an en banc rehearing of the entire case is approved... if so, we are likely talking years before anything happens.

I found this to be a good summary/analysis of what is happening most recently, written pretty plain English: http://www.law.com/sites/jamesching/...20141105215543

Given the SCCSO is not going to do anything in our favor until Peruta is dispositioned and the law is on the books by mandate, I'd just forget about that SCC application for the forseeable future. No joke, it's probably easier to move from SCC to another CCW-friendly county in the meantime and establish residency, given the timelines.
Reply With Quote
  #497  
Old 12-19-2014, 9:12 AM
mzagg mzagg is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Silicon Valley
Posts: 214
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by scootle View Post
Given the SCCSO is not going to do anything in our favor until Peruta is dispositioned and the law is on the books by mandate, I'd just forget about that SCC application for the forseeable future. No joke, it's probably easier to move from SCC to another CCW-friendly county in the meantime and establish residency, given the timelines.
Thanks for the link. Yes, that's the same conclusion I came to.
Reply With Quote
  #498  
Old 12-23-2014, 3:39 PM
crazyScott90's Avatar
crazyScott90 crazyScott90 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Santa Clara County
Posts: 467
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

Just a friendly reminder to all that the next round of briefings in Peruta are due tomorrow. Hopefully we will get to see them right away.

As far as further action; I wouldn't hold my breath for any news from 9CA till the end of winter/start of spring. They will take their time as they always do.
__________________
Sic Semper.
Reply With Quote
  #499  
Old 12-31-2014, 8:39 AM
Venomns Venomns is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Lower Oregon / Bay Area, Ca
Posts: 141
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Any update on this?
Reply With Quote
  #500  
Old 12-31-2014, 9:38 AM
tabrisnet tabrisnet is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Detroit, formerly Mountain View CA
Posts: 526
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

afaiui, there is no writ of mandamus yet. And various parties have so far made that difficult in the short term.
__________________
Life SAF Member
Life GOA Member
EFF Member
x7
Reply With Quote
  #501  
Old 12-31-2014, 10:20 AM
Paladin's Avatar
Paladin Paladin is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: SFBA
Posts: 12,284
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Venomns View Post
Any update on this?
Nothing is likely to change until Peruta changes.

Easiest way to follow Peruta is by checking this thread as often as you want/need to:
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...d.php?t=893452
Reply With Quote
  #502  
Old 03-21-2015, 12:06 PM
2euro's Avatar
2euro 2euro is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 135
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Reviving...

Any new news? I haven't heard anything whether they have enforced it?
__________________
Mark
Reply With Quote
  #503  
Old 03-21-2015, 8:23 PM
kcbrown's Avatar
kcbrown kcbrown is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 9,097
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2euro View Post
Reviving...

Any new news? I haven't heard anything whether they have enforced it?
Enforced Peruta? In the anti-rights stronghold that is Santa Clara County? Don't be silly.
__________________
The Constitution is not "the Supreme Law of the Land, except in the face of contradicting law which has not yet been overturned by the courts". It is THE SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND, PERIOD. You break your oath to uphold the Constitution if you don't refuse to enforce unadjudicated laws you believe are Unconstitutional.

The real world laughs at optimism. And here's why.
Reply With Quote
  #504  
Old 03-22-2015, 1:15 AM
crazyScott90's Avatar
crazyScott90 crazyScott90 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Santa Clara County
Posts: 467
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

Wow, funny you should be asking for an update. Your post in this thread prompted me to go check the CCW section of the Sheriffs Website.

As luck would have it, there IS a bit of an update.

There is now a notation at the top of the page suggesting an edit was made on 3/18/15. The only change to the text that I can find is two extra lines near the bottom:

Quote:
Currently, we are accepting and processing applications. However, due to a large number of applications we have received, there is a tremendous backlog. Please be patient as we work our way through the backlog.
So it sounds like they are back to processing applications? AFAIK, they weren't processing them before, everyone was applying and never hearing back. Of course, that doesn't necessarily mean anything as they can technically just deny every single one of them. I guess the practical upshot of this is that we may actually start to get people checking in saying they were denied and that their GC was this or that, etc.


The tiniest little step in the right direction. Hell, if they are actually processing applications now I might even try my luck.
__________________
Sic Semper.

Last edited by crazyScott90; 03-22-2015 at 1:18 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #505  
Old 03-22-2015, 9:04 AM
Arrieta578 Arrieta578 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 497
iTrader: 6 / 88%
Default

I wonder if "they" know something about Peruta that "we" don't know yet?
Reply With Quote
  #506  
Old 03-22-2015, 4:54 PM
crazyScott90's Avatar
crazyScott90 crazyScott90 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Santa Clara County
Posts: 467
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arrieta578 View Post
I wonder if "they" know something about Peruta that "we" don't know yet?
Oh good point. Maybe the county attorneys finally got around to fully reviewing the case and they saw the wtiting on the wall! (Well, I can hope, at least)
__________________
Sic Semper.
Reply With Quote
  #507  
Old 03-22-2015, 8:25 PM
crazyScott90's Avatar
crazyScott90 crazyScott90 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Santa Clara County
Posts: 467
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Beatone View Post
No updates other than this from 3/1,

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...8&postcount=10
That is an old update from March 2014. There has been much more movement on peruta since then. See here: http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...8&postcount=32
__________________
Sic Semper.
Reply With Quote
  #508  
Old 03-22-2015, 8:34 PM
Beatone's Avatar
Beatone Beatone is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Not California
Posts: 4,053
iTrader: 127 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by crazyScott90 View Post
That is an old update from March 2014. There has been much more movement on peruta since then. See here: http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...8&postcount=32
I stand corrected. Thanks for current info. I guess the other thread id dead.
__________________
NRA Life Member
Reply With Quote
  #509  
Old 03-22-2015, 8:52 PM
Paladin's Avatar
Paladin Paladin is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: SFBA
Posts: 12,284
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by crazyScott90 View Post
Wow, funny you should be asking for an update. Your post in this thread prompted me to go check the CCW section of the Sheriffs Website.

As luck would have it, there IS a bit of an update.

There is now a notation at the top of the page suggesting an edit was made on 3/18/15. The only change to the text that I can find is two extra lines near the bottom:



So it sounds like they are back to processing applications? AFAIK, they weren't processing them before, everyone was applying and never hearing back. Of course, that doesn't necessarily mean anything as they can technically just deny every single one of them. I guess the practical upshot of this is that we may actually start to get people checking in saying they were denied and that their GC was this or that, etc.


The tiniest little step in the right direction. Hell, if they are actually processing applications now I might even try my luck.
I'm not sure how to interpret that part you quoted since the end of the paragraph right before it is as I've included below (emphasis added):

Quote:
Thus, the recent decision has not really changed anything until the 9th remands the matter to the District Court to issue the mandate confirming the Peruta decision until then everything will remain status quo and the Santa Clara County Sheriff’s Office (SCCSO) will continue to collect applications until the law is completely settled. There are also two other cases addressing the same issue that the 9th Circuit may consider on appeal. As you can see this issue is in flux and until the law is settled the SCCSO will be accept your application. Thank you for your patience and cooperation.

Currently, we are accepting and processing applications. However, due to a large number of applications we have received, there is a tremendous backlog. Please be patient as we work our way through the backlog.
My GUESS is they're still doing what I posted in the OP: they give you the option of either submitting an app to be processed right now under their pre-Peruta GC standard (i.e., highly restrictive), or to submit an app to be held for finalization of Peruta and Richards and Baker and processed after the mandate issues on all 3 of those cases.
Reply With Quote
  #510  
Old 03-22-2015, 10:37 PM
crazyScott90's Avatar
crazyScott90 crazyScott90 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Santa Clara County
Posts: 467
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paladin View Post
My GUESS is they're still doing what I posted in the OP: they give you the option of either submitting an app to be processed right now under their pre-Peruta GC standard (i.e., highly restrictive), or to submit an app to be held for finalization of Peruta and Richards and Baker and processed after the mandate issues on all 3 of those cases.
Well like I said in the post you quoted, we still aren't guaranteed to be issued.

Please, someone correct me if I'm wrong but, once a mandate is issued in Peruta, wouldn't they have to start playing ball at that point? I don't see how they could possibly justify waiting for a mandate in Richards and Baker since presumably they will follow whatever precedent is established in Peruta.
__________________
Sic Semper.
Reply With Quote
  #511  
Old 03-22-2015, 10:40 PM
crazyScott90's Avatar
crazyScott90 crazyScott90 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Santa Clara County
Posts: 467
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Beatone View Post
I stand corrected. Thanks for current info. I guess the other thread id dead.
No problem.
__________________
Sic Semper.
Reply With Quote
  #512  
Old 03-23-2015, 6:46 AM
Paladin's Avatar
Paladin Paladin is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: SFBA
Posts: 12,284
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by crazyScott90 View Post
Well like I said in the post you quoted, we still aren't guaranteed to be issued.
All Peruta will do is force issuing agencies to accept mere "self-defense"/"personal protection" as adequate Good Cause. GMC will remain an issue, albeit a much smaller issue. (IIRC, there are already cases in the pipeline that deal with GMC which are also awaiting finalization in Peruta.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by crazyScott90 View Post
Please, someone correct me if I'm wrong but, once a mandate is issued in Peruta, wouldn't they have to start playing ball at that point? I don't see how they could possibly justify waiting for a mandate in Richards and Baker since presumably they will follow whatever precedent is established in Peruta.
I used to follow the Peruta discussion threads until several months ago. IIRC, the best thinking is that once Peruta is finalized and the mandate issues, it's the law of the 9th Circuit.

If the 9th decides to accept the appeal in either Richards (Yolo Co), or Baker (HI), at WORST that will stay enforcement of Peruta in those respective jurisdictions. IOW, Richards would only affect Yolo Co applicants, not anyone in the other 57 CA counties, and Baker would only affect Hawai'ian applicants, not anyone on the mainland.

Think of it like abortion (w/o getting into whether you're pro-abort or anti): after Roe a number of federal court cases have gone up the circuits (and even been granted cert and decided by SCOTUS), trying to overturn Roe, yet NONE of them caused abortion providers/mills to stop performing abortions while those cases were being decided. Peruta is our Roe.

Last edited by Paladin; 03-23-2015 at 2:28 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #513  
Old 03-24-2015, 11:44 AM
crazyScott90's Avatar
crazyScott90 crazyScott90 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Santa Clara County
Posts: 467
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paladin View Post
All Peruta will do is force issuing agencies to accept mere "self-defense"/"personal protection" as adequate Good Cause. GMC will remain an issue, albeit a much smaller issue. (IIRC, there are already cases in the pipeline that deal with GMC which are also awaiting finalization in Peruta.)


I used to follow the Peruta discussion threads until several months ago. IIRC, the best thinking is that once Peruta is finalized and the mandate issues, it's the law of the 9th Circuit.

If the 9th decides to accept the appeal in either Richards (Yolo Co), or Baker (HI), at WORST that will stay enforcement of Peruta in those respective jurisdictions. IOW, Richards would only affect Yolo Co applicants, not anyone in the other 57 CA counties, and Baker would only affect Hawai'ian applicants, not anyone on the mainland.

Think of it like abortion (w/o getting into whether you're pro-abort or anti): after Roe a number of federal court cases have gone up the circuits (and even been granted cert and decided by SCOTUS), trying to overturn Roe, yet NONE of them caused abortion providers/mills to stop performing abortions while those cases were being decided. Peruta is our Roe.
You missed my point. I was saying that as of right now, we are not guaranteed to be issued under the Peruta standard, even though SCC is apparently processing applications again. They have said as much on their website.

At this point, I'd be surprised if they didn't start to abuse GMC to deny permits (already happening in other counties). Do you know which case(s) exactly are supposed to deal with GMC? Seems like I never got a clear answer on that from anyone.
__________________
Sic Semper.
Reply With Quote
  #514  
Old 03-24-2015, 6:44 PM
Paladin's Avatar
Paladin Paladin is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: SFBA
Posts: 12,284
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by crazyScott90 View Post
At this point, I'd be surprised if they didn't start to abuse GMC to deny permits (already happening in other counties). Do you know which case(s) exactly are supposed to deal with GMC? Seems like I never got a clear answer on that from anyone.
Yes.














http://michellawyers.com/birdt-v-san...fs-department/
Reply With Quote
  #515  
Old 04-26-2015, 7:49 PM
patriot_man's Avatar
patriot_man patriot_man is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 2,632
iTrader: 62 / 100%
Default

Any updates?
Reply With Quote
  #516  
Old 04-26-2015, 8:19 PM
ColdDeadHands1's Avatar
ColdDeadHands1 ColdDeadHands1 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Santa Cruz Mountains
Posts: 3,385
iTrader: 73 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by patriot_man View Post
Any updates?
You clearly have not been paying attention...
__________________


"Let me guess... This isn't about the alcohol or tobacco?"
Reply With Quote
  #517  
Old 04-26-2015, 8:25 PM
SonofWWIIDI's Avatar
SonofWWIIDI SonofWWIIDI is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Santa Clara county
Posts: 21,541
iTrader: 8 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by patriot_man View Post
Any updates?
Quote:
Concealed Carry Permits (CCW)
Published on: 4/13/2015 8:07 AMPrint
In November of 2014, a 9th Circuit panel denied the request of the California Attorney General and several other groups including the Brady Campaign Against Gun Violence to intervene in and appeal the panel’s decision in the Peruta case permitting individuals to request CCW permits without establishing a “good cause” basis for the permit. The panel’s denial of the motions to intervene has not yet changed the status of the law. The intervenors may appeal this decision to a larger panel of the 9th Circuit or the larger panel could on its own review the decision. Thus, the recent decision has not really changed anything until the 9th remands the matter to the District Court to issue the mandate confirming the Peruta decision until then everything will remain status quo and the Santa Clara County Sheriff’s Office (SCCSO) will continue to collect applications until the law is completely settled. There are also two other cases addressing the same issue that the 9th Circuit may consider on appeal. As you can see this issue is in flux and until the law is settled the SCCSO will be accepting your application. Thank you for your patience and cooperation.

Currently, we are accepting and processing applications. However, due to a large number of applications we have received, there is a tremendous backlog. Please be patient as we work our way through the backlog.

If you are interested in applying for a CCW permit, please complete the application below and submit it either via mail or in person to:

Santa Clara County Sheriff’s Office
ATTN: CCW Unit
55 W Younger Avenue
San Jose, CA 95110


If you have any questions, please email CCW@sheriff.sccgov.org.
Forms
CCW Application
http://www.sccgov.org/sites/sheriff/Pages/ccw.aspx
__________________
Sorry, not sorry.
🎺

Dear autocorrect, I'm really getting tired of your shirt!
Reply With Quote
  #518  
Old 04-26-2015, 11:57 PM
patriot_man's Avatar
patriot_man patriot_man is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 2,632
iTrader: 62 / 100%
Default

Whoops, must've scrolled past it.

Reply With Quote
  #519  
Old 04-27-2015, 10:57 AM
heyjerr's Avatar
heyjerr heyjerr is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor - Lifetime
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Woodside, CA
Posts: 1,149
iTrader: 36 / 100%
Default

I come here quite frequently and it's easy to miss things. I, personally, think you received a very discourteous response from ColdDeadHands1. He took more time looking up the emoji than just posting a link.

On the other hand, SonofWWIIDI posted a very helpful response for which I am grateful.

If we could all just get along and remember that this is a community, well that'd be just shiny.
__________________
Do not try and bend the spoon, that's impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth...there is no spoon.
Reply With Quote
  #520  
Old 04-28-2015, 9:30 AM
SonofWWIIDI's Avatar
SonofWWIIDI SonofWWIIDI is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Santa Clara county
Posts: 21,541
iTrader: 8 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by heyjerr View Post
I come here quite frequently and it's easy to miss things. I, personally, think you received a very discourteous response from ColdDeadHands1. He took more time looking up the emoji than just posting a link.

On the other hand, SonofWWIIDI posted a very helpful response for which I am grateful.

If we could all just get along and remember that this is a community, well that'd be just shiny.
__________________
Sorry, not sorry.
🎺

Dear autocorrect, I'm really getting tired of your shirt!
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 10:38 AM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, 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 2002-2021, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.
All opinions, statements and remarks made by Calguns.net on this web site and elsewhere are solely attributable to Calguns.net.



Seams2SewBySusy