Gun permits a loaded issue

[CA CCWInstructor]

News: Gun permits a loaded issue | ccws, county, ccw, sheriff, carry - OCRegister.com

Tuesday, July 8, 2008
Gun permits a loaded issue
GORDON DILLOW
GORDON DILLOW
Register columnist
GLDillow@aol.com
Comments 0 | Recommend 6

Last month the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that individual Americans have a constitutional right to own a gun. But will Orange County's new sheriff tighten the rules on who can actually carry one?

At issue here is "carry concealed weapon" permits, or "CCWs," which allow a citizen to carry a loaded firearm under a jacket or in a purse or glove compartment. Currently about 1,100 people in Orange County (not including police officers) have such permits – which is more CCWs than any other urban county in the state. And while some people think the requirements for obtaining a CCW are too restrictive, others believe they're not restrictive enough.

New Orange County Sheriff Sandra Hutchens appears to be leaning toward the latter group.

Soon after being appointed last month, Hutchens announced plans to review all CCWs issued by her predecessor, indicted former Sheriff Mike Carona, to determine if the permit holders had a legitimate need or "good cause" to carry a gun. If in her view they don't have that need, their permits will be revoked. She plans to have a new CCW policy in place by the end of this month.

"I probably will tighten it up a bit, but probably not as drastically as some people might assume," Hutchens told me. But Hutchens also indicated that she envisions a higher threshold on the "good cause" necessary for a citizen to have a CCW.

Hutchens noted that before her appointment as sheriff, when she was a retired Los Angeles County law enforcement officer living in Dana Point, she had a legal right to carry a concealed weapon. But she added, "Did I carry a gun everywhere I went? No. I feel pretty safe in Orange County."

That's not the sort of thing that the Orange County "CCW community" wants to hear.

CCWs have long been a contentious issue, largely because under state law a county sheriff or local police chief can pretty much set his or her own rules as to who gets one and who doesn't. Years ago, Orange County Sheriff Brad Gates was criticized for allegedly handing out CCWs to political supporters (Carona has been accused of the same thing) while denying them to others. When Gates left office, fewer than 200 county residents had CCWs.

Carona vowed to change that when he ran for sheriff in 1998. In a politically popular move, he promised to make CCWs available to any citizen who met the requirements (pass an extensive background check, undergo firearms training and so on) and who could show a legitimate need.

As it turned out, even under Carona it generally wasn't enough to simply be a law-abiding citizen who wanted to carry a firearm for personal protection. Instead, to qualify for a CCW you had to fall into one of several specific categories.

Some of those categories were traditional for CCW holders: judges and prosecutors, reserve police officers, business people who routinely carry large amounts of cash or jewelry.

But Carona did ease the restrictions to allow CCWs to be issued to people involved in "transportation of valuable equipment" – which could be anything from computers to other firearms. In fact, about half of the 1,100 current CCW holders in Orange County are in that category.

The question now is whether Hutchens will decide that's not a legitimate "good cause" and pull those CCWs.

Greg Block of Huntington Beach thinks that would be a serious mistake.

Block is a certified firearms instructor and long-time CCW holder who helped draft the Carona-era CCW guidelines. He's also one of the founders of a website – California Concealed Weapon (CCW) Forum – that offers information on CCW issues and applications. He thinks Hutchens' stance on CCWs will be a big issue in the next election for sheriff.

"For most gun owners I know in Orange County, the only direct impact the sheriff's office has on them is CCWs," Block told me. "And that's how they're going to vote."

Now, I don't have room here to go into all the pro and con arguments about CCWs, and how they have worked in other states where access is much easier. (For the record, I have never applied for a CCW.)

Still, it seems to me that in light of the Supreme Court decision, public officials should be figuring out how to make firearms rules less restrictive rather than more restrictive for law-abiding citizens, especially those who have been thoroughly screened and trained.

Because the 2nd Amendment doesn't simply give law-abiding Americans the right to keep arms. With some reasonable restrictions, it also gives us the right to bear them.

CONTACT THE WRITER 714-796-7953 or GLDillow@aol.com

[HK4U]

But Hutchens also indicated that she envisions a higher threshold on the "good cause" necessary for a citizen to have a CCW.

Iwould think a "good cause" would be not wanting to be killed by some thug. I prefer to win in a deadly confrontation.

Hutchens noted that before her appointment as sheriff, when she was a retired Los Angeles County law enforcement officer living in Dana Point, she had a legal right to carry a concealed weapon. But she added, "Did I carry a gun everywhere I went? No. I feel pretty safe in Orange County."

Perhaps she is just not to smart.

[tattedupboy]

Personal protection, whether you carry large amounts of money or not, seems to me to be a good reason.

[Glock Fan]

At this point I think it's best to wait and see what the new policy is. She seems like a reasonable LEO as she didn't say she wanted to revoke all of the permits. I'm a firm believer in allowing all citizens to be allowed to legally exercise their 2A rights. Having permits issued to some folks is better than nobody getting them. It's a step in the right direction. If the permit holders do the right thing (which I'm sure they will), this will demonstrate that citizens can be responsible with firearms and could possibly lead to the number of permits issued expanding.

JMHO



gf

[netentity]

I left CA back in 1992. Ironically the first pistol I bought is illegal in CA because it's not on the CA DOJ approved list and it has a standard magazine capacity of 15 rounds.

[McCreary]

Originally Posted by Glock Fan

Having permits issued to some folks is better than nobody getting them. It's a step in the right direction. If the permit holders do the right thing (which I'm sure they will), this will demonstrate that citizens can be responsible with firearms and could possibly lead to the number of permits issued expanding.

gf, the new policy is out, and guess what? It's more restrictive than we feared. It's a HUGE step BACKWARDS. More people were getting them under the previous Sheriff. Permit holders WERE doing the right thing, and now they are not being renewed. Folks that've had their permits for years are being unarmed for no reason other than the new Sheriff wants more restrictions. 80% of the counties in this state are less restrictive than Orange County has become under Sheriff Hutchens.

[DeepWaters]

Ah yes, and the difference between "May Issue" and "Will Issue" is wielded like Thor's axe. The "May" states make me sick.