Denied / Rejection Letters hit the mailboxes today

[Gladiator]

"The Orange County Sheriff's Department has implemented new polices for the issuance and maintenance of Carry Concealed Weapons (CCW) Licenses issued by this agency. CCW licenses will be issued to residents and business owners of the County of good and upstanding character who posses credible, significant, and substantiated cause to fear for their safety. CCW Licenses will not be issued for political, social or other reasons.

The Department has conducted a review of current license holders to ensure their good cause and background meets new policy requirements. The Department has determined that your identified risk does not meet the good cause threshold as required under the new CCW policy based upon the information you provided. As a result of this determination, the Department's present intention is to deny your CCW license."

IF YOU RECEIVED ONE OF THESE, YOU NEED TO BECOME A MEMBER AND PRIVATE MESSAGE ME!

A SOLUTION TO THIS PROBLEM IS IN THE WORKS.

[Gladiator]

Moorlach: "Why I Voted For Sandra Hutchens" - OC BLOG, Part of the Red County Network


Moorlach: "Why I Voted For Sandra Hutchens"

Posted by: Jubal | 06/11/2008 9:51 AM

This is from Supervisor John Moorlach's "Moorlach report" e-newsletter that just came over the transom. Better late than never, but as Steve Greenhut pointed out, why couldn't he have said all this before the vote to appoint Hutchens? It's not as if Supervisor Norby didn't practically beg the appointing majority to make more than a desultory, pro forma case for Hutchens:

Why I Voted For Sandra Hutchens

After interviewing both Chief Hutchens and Chief Paul Walters for about an hour and a half each, my staff unanimously felt that Chief Hutchens made an overall stronger impression as a potential Sheriff.

The County would have been well served with either choice. I felt Sandra was the better candidate.

Overall, Sandra is strong and ethical. She will be able to command the respect of the staff of the department and their union representatives. And she will gain the public's trust.


Sandra strikes a balance between being an insider and an outsider. Her varied career with the Los Angeles Sheriff's Department, the nation's largest, provides her with the intricate knowledge of the workings of the Orange County Sheriff's Department, including its jails.

Having a total career in the Sheriff's Department makes her keenly aware of all the aspects involved in such an operation and allows her to bring true reform to the jails. She came up through the ranks and worked in the jails as a line staff member to a supervisor to a manager. As much as people have touted the need for jail reform, her experience is far greater than operating a much smaller city jail that cannot be compared to the county jail system. She understands the jails from the bottom up. She fully understands contract city relationships and working with the State's Courts.

She is an expert in Emergency Management and Homeland Security, specialties critical to the position of Sheriff.

By the end of her career she oversaw more employees than Chief Walters does now, which reveals the breadth of her experience.

Sandra is removed from the political machinations in the County.

Although she did not run for the position of Sheriff in an election, she admitted to considering it and applied on the County's website for the position on her own volition. She was not pushed by any group of individuals. She was not coached by political consultants. And she did not rely on a power base to get her over the top. In fact, her friends and colleagues rallied around her once they discovered she was in the mix.

Sandra is unpretentious, unassuming and hands on. This will be a helpful antidote to "America's Sheriff" and the related absentee management-style of the past.

She acknowledges the work of her support staff and is more concerned that others receive the praise.

She has a plan with specific goals and objectives that are quantifiable and measurable. She will strike the balance of acquiring proper data and making appropriate assessments and decisions.

She was at ease during a difficult private interview and confident in her responses.

I felt she had a better position on carrying concealed weapons. Her approach more closely mirrored the current policies and legal standards, which are working well.

She was not being crammed down our throats by any Board office or interest group.

Sandra will do a wonderful job in addressing the culture issues within the department and providing the necessary leadership at the top to restore the shine to this award-winning agency.

With her thoughtful demeanor she will act rationally and thoroughly on turning around the Sheriff's Department. She will not be rash or impetuous.

We have a genuine public safety professional willing to step out of her quiet retirement to address critical issues in the County she calls home.

Once she initiates her action plan and builds a good rapport with the citizens of the County, she will be an incredible candidate for the permanent position.

[Ciderbite]

I just about threw up after reading that. How much would a recall election cost for nguyen, cambell, and this tool?

[CCW Please]

I got my Denial/rejection letter today! booooo this! basically said, thanks but no thanks. gotta love the last sentence in the letter; "if your license is denied, you should be aware that state law allows you to carry a concealed weapon in your home or place of business" GEE THANKS!

let me know if there is anything i can do or any more info needed. PM was sent to Gladiator.

Thanks fellas!

[Gladiator]

Originally Posted by CCW Please

let me know if there is anything i can do or any more info needed. PM was sent to Gladiator.

Thanks fellas!

PM replied.

[CCW Please]

Am I the only one who has received a letter so far on this forum?

[THE Gimper]

Originally Posted by CCW Please

Am I the only one who has received a letter so far on this forum?

No.

[Ciderbite]

Originally Posted by THE Gimper

No.

I wonder when im gonna get mine

[naganthunter]

Oh good lord. I go travelling for a few weeks and the whole place goes to hell in a handbasket. Sorry to hear about these letters going out. However, it's good to see that there is something being done about it - at least from some of the other posts I've seen.

I was a hair away from putting my paperwork in. I guess I would have most likely been denied, so I'm glad I saved the money. I'll use it toward supporting someone's political campaign come 2010 - not sure to whom it will go, I just know where it WON'T go.

[Jared]

You all know you can sue to get your permit renewals.

You have a property interest in your permits. The burden of proof is on the sheriff to say why you can not be reissued a permit. If you good cause was valid when initially issued, it's still valid, unless it was a specific threat that has been negated (not the case with most permit holders).

There is tons of case law from state courts.

U.S. v Medina in the first circuit.

Board of Regents et all v Roth SCOTUS.

You entitled to a hearing and your entitled to her reasoning and she must prove why your good cause is no longer valid.

[Harry Carry]

Unfortunately, in California, that won't fly. Not that we wouldn't like it to.

Originally Posted by Jared

You all know you can sue to get your permit renewals.

You have a property interest in your permits. The burden of proof is on the sheriff to say why you can not be reissued a permit. If you good cause was valid when initially issued, it's still valid, unless it was a specific threat that has been negated (not the case with most permit holders).

There is tons of case law from state courts.

U.S. v Medina in the first circuit.

Board of Regents et all v Roth SCOTUS.

You entitled to a hearing and your entitled to her reasoning and she must prove why your good cause is no longer valid.

[Jared]

Originally Posted by Harry Carry

Unfortunately, in California, that won't fly. Not that we wouldn't like it to.

It would fly because it's national decision. You have property interest in anything the government gives you except for a security clearance.

You have property interest in a business license, retail license, gun license, drivers license etc.

It's an issue for a federal court and someone should push the issue.

If not, then get use to unloaded open carry and hoping you don't get hassled or arrested.

[akulahawk]

Originally Posted by Harry Carry

Unfortunately, in California, that won't fly. Not that we wouldn't like it to.

Originally Posted by Jared

It would fly because it's national decision. You have property interest in anything the government gives you except for a security clearance.

You have property interest in a business license, retail license, gun license, drivers license etc.

It's an issue for a federal court and someone should push the issue.

If not, then get use to unloaded open carry and hoping you don't get hassled or arrested.

Besides, there's likely going to be Incorporation of the 2A against the states within the next 18-24 months... which would probably be quicker than starting a property interest case as those cases are already in the Federal Court system now. After that, the whole lawsuit ballgame changes dramatically.

[gravedigger]

Originally Posted by Gladiator

"For political reasons, CCW Licenses will not be issued."

This is all they really had to say.

[Harry Carry]

If that would have worked it would have been done already. California is a nutty place, and since we have the 9th Circuit things stay nutty at the Fed level. But, with Heller, things will eventually change.

Originally Posted by Jared

It would fly because it's national decision. You have property interest in anything the government gives you except for a security clearance.

You have property interest in a business license, retail license, gun license, drivers license etc.

It's an issue for a federal court and someone should push the issue.

If not, then get use to unloaded open carry and hoping you don't get hassled or arrested.