CCW Renewel Declined After 6 Years Of Carry

[THE Gimper]

Originally Posted by derringer

If you have a link to that other thread, that might help me with my question.

This is all new to me, so please bear with me.
With whom is one making the "contract" for issuance of the CCW? It's a no-brainer that one is in contract with the State when one is issued a driver's license. As long as California remains a State, then the contract remains in force under the terms of the contract.

But, was it Sheriff Carona or the Orange County Sheriff's Department with whom you have (had?) the contract for CCW?
If the answer is Sheriff Carona, then how can the "contract" be binding when one of the parties is no longer participating? If it is with the whole of the Orange County Sheriff's Department, then your point is good. I thought, though, that the reason it was left up to the Sheriff's discretion was because the Sheriff was held responsible to some degree by the State for the decision to issue to that particular individual. If that is the case, how would it be right or fair for an incoming Sheriff to be forced to have approved by default issuance to people he has never personally approved himself? On the other hand, what happens when the permit is issued a month before elections, but is good for two years? (I'm thinking to myself here) In a way, I can understand your point in that case. Hmmmmmm. Now I'm really wondering....where is that other thread?!

You need to do a little research. Read Penal Code Sections 12025 and 12050. A CCW license is a State of California CCW license. It is issued either by the Chief of Police of your city of residence, or the Sheriff of your county of residence. They are acting as the legal representative of the State when they issue the license. It doesn't matter if the Sheriff retires, resigns, dies, or loses an election. The license is governed by the terms of the contract and remains valid. Just the same as your driver's license remains valid even if the person at the DMV who issued it no longer works there.

[Glock32]

Originally Posted by derringer

How is the revocation "against the law" if it is up to the Sheriff's discretion whether to permit one to carry or not (notwithstanding the Constitutional issue of infringement)?

Does derringer work for OCSD?

[Ken_In_Colo]

Originally Posted by Glock32

Does derringer work for OCSD?

Exactly what I was thinking. I think he/she' a mole/troll.

He's only been a member since March.

[Barky]

Originally Posted by Ken_In_Colo

Exactly what I was thinking. I think he/she' a mole/troll.

He's only been a member since March.

My olfactory senses remains of an expired rodent.

[derringer]

Whatever.

Just because a guy wants to know the facts you assume he's a mole/troll? I have alot to say about your accusations, but I keep having to edit them since I'm so P.O.ed right now. I thought we were on the same side.

Feel free to see my post on the "Question on Contracts- CCW".

[RedsLaw]

Originally Posted by THE Gimper

You need to do a little research. Read Penal Code Sections 12025 and 12050. A CCW license is a State of California CCW license. It is issued either by the Chief of Police of your city of residence, or the Sheriff of your county of residence. They are acting as the legal representative of the State when they issue the license. It doesn't matter if the Sheriff retires, resigns, dies, or loses an election. The license is governed by the terms of the contract and remains valid. Just the same as your driver's license remains valid even if the person at the DMV who issued it no longer works there.

Rico,

You correctly identify the CCW as a license. Then your train goes off the rails when you say it is "governed by the terms of the contract." If I may point out.

"LICENSE: A right granted which gives one permission to do something which he could not legally do absent such permission; 'leave to do a thing which the LICENSOR [the party granting the license] could prevent.'" Blacks Law Dictionary.

“[G]enerally speaking, [it] means a grant of permission to do a particular thing, to exercise a certain privilege, or to carry on a particular business or to pursue a certain occupation.” 160 P.2d 37, 39.

CONTRACT: "a promise, or set of promises, for breach of which the law gives a remedy, or the performance of which the law in some way recognizes as a duty.” I Williston, Contracts § 1, 4th ed..

The essentials of a valid contract are 'parties competent to contract, a proper subject-matter, consideration, mutuality of agreement, and mutuality of obligation.' 286 N.W. 844, 846.

First, the Sheriff is not competent (nor authorized) to bind the State in a contractual obligation.

Second, a license by the state is not the proper subject-matter of a civil contract. By law, the terms of a license may be altered by the issuing authority unilaterally, subject only to proper notice.

While this debate may well continue on, I must respectfully disagree with the assertion that the CCW is a contract. The law of contracts apply to contracts and the laws for license apply to licenses, you can't apply one to the other.

[EM2]

Originally Posted by RedsLaw

While this debate may well continue on, I must respectfully disagree with the assertion that the CCW is a contract. The law of contracts apply to contracts and the laws for license apply to licenses, you can't apply one to the other.

Understood.
It is still the understanding of quite a few on this forum that what the "appointed sheriff" is doing is wrong and possibly illegal.
Do you have any recommendations as to a legal course of action that would bring about an outcome which could satisfy those OCCCW persons affected?