In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
Proposed End To CCW
Josey1
Member Posts: 9,598 ✭✭
Proposed End To CCW
By Jim March, c 2002
Jim March has personally attacked California's unfair CCW system at much personal sacrifice in money and time. He's making headway in conjunction with NRA/CRPA and others and deserves any support we can provide. If there is an example of what one individual can do on his own, Jim is that example.
Ralph Weller
June 12, 2002 - Mr. Weller has quite appropriately pointed out that the CCW system as being maintained by California, is a bad joke and must be ended in its current form.
However, I believe he's made several tactical mistakes that must be pointed out.
In short:
1) Ending CCW will "screw over" a lot of armed people who are deservedly so armed, and/or who are vital as allies (or at least not enemies).
2) It might NOT disarm the worst of the "liberal elites", and thus spur them towards reform!
3) The CCW system we have can be fixed in court or via other means, more easily than we can get a full replacement passed in the legislature.
Section 1: Who Gets Hurt By Eliminating CCW?
The current 39,000ish permitholders include some of the wealthiest people in the state. People like Ken Behring, the Contra Costa County real estate developer, owner of the Behring auto museum, former owner of the Seattle Seahawks NFL team and builder of the wealthy enclave of Blackhawk. Dude is worth billions. His stated "good cause": "high profile.need protection". That is, verbatim, the entire "good cause statement" on file with the Contra Costa County Sheriff's office.
While an extreme example, he's not the only rich dude packin'. Gun rights activists should think twice, think three times before angering a potential ally of that sort.
But most of the 39k are by no means wealthy - they're simply living in rural shall-issue or near-shall-issue jurisdictions! Kern County has thousands of permits issued, although not to Bakersfield residents per a screwup on the Sheriff's part. The counties of Amador, Butte, El Dorado, Kings and several others are even better. In all cases, you should still come up with a "good cause statement" just to protect those good Sheriffs from media flak but that's a minor issue - no payoffs or connections are needed.
Throwing that away is silly - especially when the very existence of shall-issue enclaves within California proves that a statewide reform won't cause problems. And 30,000 or so armed rural-area allies are something else we shouldn't casually disgard.
Section 2: Would Don Perata Be Disarmed For Long?
In many zero-CCW states, "elite packing" still happens, usually under some sort of "special deputy status". This was a factor in the recent court wins in Ohio. I was able to document this in Florida pre-1987, when a whole series of criminal defendants screamed bloody murder on learning that their court-ordered public defender was also a "cop":
http://www.ninehundred.com/~equalccw/howardpearl.html
Is anyone here willing to bet Perata couldn't rig up something similar? And barring unusual circumstances such as the "Pearl appeals", membership lists are sealed. We'd have the same problem as today, but no way of documenting it and no way of hence making equal protection claims on that basis!
We also know that in Wash DC, legicritters have scored Federal carry rights as "Honorary Deputy US Marshalls". Queen DiFi The First (and hopefully last) is frequently linked to this in various rumors. The status itself is NOT just a rumor, see also: http://www.ninehundred.com/~equalccw/expose.html#feds (section on Federal discriminatory CCW - note that the membership info for this is totally sealed, if it spreads out here somehow there'll be no way in hell to track it.)
Finally, there are persistent rumors afloat of an "underground CCW system" in San Francisco and LA, based on people being able to tell cops to call specific members of the brass. Nothing I can pin down in detail yet. But the basic question should be asked: how many cops would bust a state senator for packin' heat? Seriously?
Section 3: CCW Can Be Repaired
As many of you know, I've fought two CCW lawsuits already on an "equal protection" basis. My entire website, the core of my thinking, is based on this concept - I will not tolerate being told I lack the connections, wealth or payoffs to defend myself.
But I didn't know enough about equal protection law. In short, to raise the issue to "strict scrutiny" you need a minority plaintiff or co-plaintiff. There is strong US Supreme Court precedent for removing or altering a state law that was founded with racist intent. California's 1923 CCW system used to contain overtly racist language barring legal alien residents from owning handguns, getting CCW permits and if they packed illegally, the penalty was "prior felon level" even if they had no criminal record. That racist garbage was stripped out of the CCW penal codes by the California courts in 1972 (People vs. Rappard). The court never deal with the racist history of the discretionary element because it just wasn't a factor in the Rappard case, but there clearly IS a racist history behind this "discretion" - for a full briefing on these cases and their implication for an equal protection challenge, see also:
http://www.ninehundred.com/~equalccw/practicalrace.html
OK, so let's say best case we get a court to "strip out the bad bits" of the CCW laws, eliminate the unfettered discretion, and leave us with the training and background check in a "shall issue" configuration. Won't the legislature hate that, and gut CCW?
If they do, then we're where Mr. Weller wanted us to go, except now it's the GRABBERS that have hosed people like Behring and the rural permitholders. Not us. The grabbers just ensured a mass flood of GOP support! Then again, if Simon wins, he won't sign any such critter and the legislature probably won't have a veto in `em on this.
There's yet another way to fix CCW that has recently opened up.
A group of us have been documenting the wrongdoing in CCW issuance at the local level. Counties such as Amador and Butte have proven that the system can be administered fairly, but jurisdictions such as Oakland City, Sacramento (city and county), Marin County, Contra Costa County and others have shown just how wildly things can go wrong. We've been compiling documentation on these at:
http://www.ninehundred.com/~equalccw/expose.html
In a complete surprise, we managed to prove that the incumbent state Attorney General, Lockyer, was personally involved in covering up the abuses among local "top cops". It's a long and detailed story, fully linked and documented at that URL. What matters is that within two days, the head of the DOJ Firearms division (Randy Rossi) contacted me by Email - several good conversations have lead to a meeting on this subject coming on the 19th of this month, with Rossi, his department attorney, Ed Worley and Chuck Michel of NRA, Sam Paredes of GOC, myself and others. If we can get DOJ to reverse course and help uncover local agency abuses, it could lead to real breakthroughs not only in exposing the problems, but convincing local agencies to voluntarily reform even short of court action.
Would the state AG/DOJ help in this fashion? They may have no choice! Basically, by helping hide the problems, they've opened themselves up to legal liability and reversing course may be the only way out for them. I won't go into more detail just now, expect more after the 19th.
It should also be noted that local government corruption is within the purview of the Feds, ultimately AG Ashcroft. Especially when problems go all the way to the state AG, who is the top law enforcement officer in California. Ashcroft's crowd are all we have left, unless Randy Rossi can engineer an about-face in light of the evidence gathered.
Conclusion: we have multiple paths available to fix the existing system outside of the legislature, before taking the radical step of scrapping it when we don't have the legislative support to rebuild it completely.
Jim March
Webmaster, Equal Rights for CCW Home Page
http://www.ninehundred.com/~equalccw
http://www.calnra.org/march061202.html
"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878
By Jim March, c 2002
Jim March has personally attacked California's unfair CCW system at much personal sacrifice in money and time. He's making headway in conjunction with NRA/CRPA and others and deserves any support we can provide. If there is an example of what one individual can do on his own, Jim is that example.
Ralph Weller
June 12, 2002 - Mr. Weller has quite appropriately pointed out that the CCW system as being maintained by California, is a bad joke and must be ended in its current form.
However, I believe he's made several tactical mistakes that must be pointed out.
In short:
1) Ending CCW will "screw over" a lot of armed people who are deservedly so armed, and/or who are vital as allies (or at least not enemies).
2) It might NOT disarm the worst of the "liberal elites", and thus spur them towards reform!
3) The CCW system we have can be fixed in court or via other means, more easily than we can get a full replacement passed in the legislature.
Section 1: Who Gets Hurt By Eliminating CCW?
The current 39,000ish permitholders include some of the wealthiest people in the state. People like Ken Behring, the Contra Costa County real estate developer, owner of the Behring auto museum, former owner of the Seattle Seahawks NFL team and builder of the wealthy enclave of Blackhawk. Dude is worth billions. His stated "good cause": "high profile.need protection". That is, verbatim, the entire "good cause statement" on file with the Contra Costa County Sheriff's office.
While an extreme example, he's not the only rich dude packin'. Gun rights activists should think twice, think three times before angering a potential ally of that sort.
But most of the 39k are by no means wealthy - they're simply living in rural shall-issue or near-shall-issue jurisdictions! Kern County has thousands of permits issued, although not to Bakersfield residents per a screwup on the Sheriff's part. The counties of Amador, Butte, El Dorado, Kings and several others are even better. In all cases, you should still come up with a "good cause statement" just to protect those good Sheriffs from media flak but that's a minor issue - no payoffs or connections are needed.
Throwing that away is silly - especially when the very existence of shall-issue enclaves within California proves that a statewide reform won't cause problems. And 30,000 or so armed rural-area allies are something else we shouldn't casually disgard.
Section 2: Would Don Perata Be Disarmed For Long?
In many zero-CCW states, "elite packing" still happens, usually under some sort of "special deputy status". This was a factor in the recent court wins in Ohio. I was able to document this in Florida pre-1987, when a whole series of criminal defendants screamed bloody murder on learning that their court-ordered public defender was also a "cop":
http://www.ninehundred.com/~equalccw/howardpearl.html
Is anyone here willing to bet Perata couldn't rig up something similar? And barring unusual circumstances such as the "Pearl appeals", membership lists are sealed. We'd have the same problem as today, but no way of documenting it and no way of hence making equal protection claims on that basis!
We also know that in Wash DC, legicritters have scored Federal carry rights as "Honorary Deputy US Marshalls". Queen DiFi The First (and hopefully last) is frequently linked to this in various rumors. The status itself is NOT just a rumor, see also: http://www.ninehundred.com/~equalccw/expose.html#feds (section on Federal discriminatory CCW - note that the membership info for this is totally sealed, if it spreads out here somehow there'll be no way in hell to track it.)
Finally, there are persistent rumors afloat of an "underground CCW system" in San Francisco and LA, based on people being able to tell cops to call specific members of the brass. Nothing I can pin down in detail yet. But the basic question should be asked: how many cops would bust a state senator for packin' heat? Seriously?
Section 3: CCW Can Be Repaired
As many of you know, I've fought two CCW lawsuits already on an "equal protection" basis. My entire website, the core of my thinking, is based on this concept - I will not tolerate being told I lack the connections, wealth or payoffs to defend myself.
But I didn't know enough about equal protection law. In short, to raise the issue to "strict scrutiny" you need a minority plaintiff or co-plaintiff. There is strong US Supreme Court precedent for removing or altering a state law that was founded with racist intent. California's 1923 CCW system used to contain overtly racist language barring legal alien residents from owning handguns, getting CCW permits and if they packed illegally, the penalty was "prior felon level" even if they had no criminal record. That racist garbage was stripped out of the CCW penal codes by the California courts in 1972 (People vs. Rappard). The court never deal with the racist history of the discretionary element because it just wasn't a factor in the Rappard case, but there clearly IS a racist history behind this "discretion" - for a full briefing on these cases and their implication for an equal protection challenge, see also:
http://www.ninehundred.com/~equalccw/practicalrace.html
OK, so let's say best case we get a court to "strip out the bad bits" of the CCW laws, eliminate the unfettered discretion, and leave us with the training and background check in a "shall issue" configuration. Won't the legislature hate that, and gut CCW?
If they do, then we're where Mr. Weller wanted us to go, except now it's the GRABBERS that have hosed people like Behring and the rural permitholders. Not us. The grabbers just ensured a mass flood of GOP support! Then again, if Simon wins, he won't sign any such critter and the legislature probably won't have a veto in `em on this.
There's yet another way to fix CCW that has recently opened up.
A group of us have been documenting the wrongdoing in CCW issuance at the local level. Counties such as Amador and Butte have proven that the system can be administered fairly, but jurisdictions such as Oakland City, Sacramento (city and county), Marin County, Contra Costa County and others have shown just how wildly things can go wrong. We've been compiling documentation on these at:
http://www.ninehundred.com/~equalccw/expose.html
In a complete surprise, we managed to prove that the incumbent state Attorney General, Lockyer, was personally involved in covering up the abuses among local "top cops". It's a long and detailed story, fully linked and documented at that URL. What matters is that within two days, the head of the DOJ Firearms division (Randy Rossi) contacted me by Email - several good conversations have lead to a meeting on this subject coming on the 19th of this month, with Rossi, his department attorney, Ed Worley and Chuck Michel of NRA, Sam Paredes of GOC, myself and others. If we can get DOJ to reverse course and help uncover local agency abuses, it could lead to real breakthroughs not only in exposing the problems, but convincing local agencies to voluntarily reform even short of court action.
Would the state AG/DOJ help in this fashion? They may have no choice! Basically, by helping hide the problems, they've opened themselves up to legal liability and reversing course may be the only way out for them. I won't go into more detail just now, expect more after the 19th.
It should also be noted that local government corruption is within the purview of the Feds, ultimately AG Ashcroft. Especially when problems go all the way to the state AG, who is the top law enforcement officer in California. Ashcroft's crowd are all we have left, unless Randy Rossi can engineer an about-face in light of the evidence gathered.
Conclusion: we have multiple paths available to fix the existing system outside of the legislature, before taking the radical step of scrapping it when we don't have the legislative support to rebuild it completely.
Jim March
Webmaster, Equal Rights for CCW Home Page
http://www.ninehundred.com/~equalccw
http://www.calnra.org/march061202.html
"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878