[RKV]

It ain't over until March 7th, but unless a judge from the 9th Circus asks for an en banc hearing, California just went "Shall Issue!" Thanks to Ed Peruta and the NRA.

[dragnet2]

Bookmark

[RKV]

Soon I hope guys. Then we cut the fees, weird requirements and speed up the process. THEN Constitutional Carry. Eat the apple one bite at a time.

[dragnet2]

Link not worky

[Balding_Eagle]

Bad link

[dragnet2]

http://www.sdsheriff.net/index.html

3/4 way down, left side

[chrisinoc]

Downloading my application for Orange County tonight. The OC Sheriff has decided to follow the ruling and “shall issue” CCWs unless stopped by another ruling.

[Salvavida]

Idiot Sheriff. He took an oath to defend the Constitution, not follow blindly to legislators or justices that might cause violence to it. He is the final elected official to guarantee our rights.

[umgud]

It ain't over until March 7th,

What happens March 7th? If not appealed or reheard, when will all counties have to allow a self defense good cause statement?

[umgud]

This is a Calguns thread started by Ed Peruta just a while ago.

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=897115

[TheDon]

So....are these sheriffs up for election this year? Or do they just not want to lose the whole enchilada at the SC?

[andyk]

i.e., “please let me keep my job”

[nvscanman]

NOTHING IS GOING TO CHANGE AND NO FLOOD OF PERMITS WILL HAPPEN.....and this is why.

Ca Penal Code Section 12050

12050. (a) (1) (A) The sheriff of a county, upon proof that the person applying is of good moral character, that good cause exists for the issuance, and that the person applying satisfies any one of the conditions specified in subparagraph (D) and has completed a course of training as described in subparagraph (E), may issue to that person a license to carry a pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person in either one of the following formats:

The Subsections to this article address other issues but
Paragraph A is the guiding directive. The KEY word in this
paragraph is the word “MAY”....the code says the chief LEO
“MAY” issue a permit. It does not say “SHALL”. All the
9th circus courts ruling did was to delete the phrase regarding “good cause” from this code. It does not change
the word “MAY” to “SHALL”. Only the legislature can make that change. Unless and until such a change IS made, and that is VERY unlikely California remains a “MAY ISSUE” state not a “SHALL ISSUE” state. That means that the decision to issue or not issue is at the SOLE discretion of
the chief LEO involved. The recent court decision ONLY means that said LEO may not use the phrase regarding “good
cause” as a reason to refuse to issue. He can still refuse
to issue a permit....and he isn’t required to give a reason.