CCW at the courthouse?

[mjones]

Originally Posted by EM2

The same sheriff who issued your permit in the first place?

Unfortunately this is a byproduct of May Issue licensing. If we ever manage to get Shall Issue licensing all of these improper rules start getting pulled when the lawsuits roll in.

[G36 Steve]

Originally Posted by mjones

Unfortunately this is a byproduct of May Issue licensing. If we ever manage to get Shall Issue licensing all of these improper rules start getting pulled when the lawsuits roll in.

Most States that have shall issue CCW are more restrictive than California. I don't know anywhere besides California where CCW is legal in schools, police stations, sporting events or court houses. I think we'll see more restrictions on where we can CCW if we ever see shall issue here.

[Keith92555]

Originally Posted by Rob P.

I think I would do 2 things. Write an anonymous letter to the SO explaining that PC 171(b) authorizes CCW holders to carry inside a courthouse and that their local rule violates a state law.

When you get the letter back that says "we don't care" send a nice letter to the editor of your local newspaper and TV station along with copies of the law and your letter to the sheriff.

Secondly, I'd organize an empty holster march on the courthouse "for lunch" with a few gun friends Tell the TV news about it and see if they'll have someone cover the event.

Originally Posted by EM2

The same sheriff who issued your permit in the first place?

Originally Posted by mjones

Unfortunately this is a byproduct of May Issue licensing. If we ever manage to get Shall Issue licensing all of these improper rules start getting pulled when the lawsuits roll in.

First of all, the sheriff is USUALLY not the one who makes this rule, it is the presiding judge who comes up with that little ditty. Most Sheriffs are, however, more than happy to enforce the rule since the courtrooms can be very confrontational, adversarial, and emotionally charged. Not many LEOs see it as a benefit to add the element of a loaded gun into the mix. While I don't agreee with the rule in general, I can see their logic in principle.

However, the rationale for not allowing the CCW holder to put their gun in the secure storage at the court is beyond my comprehension. I was told the same thing in me CCW class in Riverside Co that was told to TaxMan, don't leave the weapon behind in the car unless you are going to a prohibited place (Federal building, gun show, etc...). Since I got that little piece of advice in Riverside Co, I thought I would be good showing up at the metal detectors with my piece and telling the guard that I need to secure it. They weren't accommodating and I ended up having to go back across the street to the DAs building and leaving it in a locked drawer with the door guard.

The anonymous letter will do NOTHING for you. Nor will addressing the Sheriff regarding a rule he did not initiate and over which he has no control. Oh...and inviting the (liberal) press to cover an issue where persons "gun rights" are being violated, please!!!

[Rob P.]

Why not? The news guys need both your letter to and the sheriff's letter from to have sufficient context for the story.

Perhaps it might be better to have the Calguns foundation do it if no one is willing to step up themselves. It's just a couple of letters and a press release. Maybe an on camera interview by an expert or 2. An interview with AG Brown and his opinion on whether the exemption applies to CCW holders would complete the story. It would certainly clarify the law.

[AC_CCW]

fmlyguy, you got some big balls cuz I feel most of us would not even think about upsetting, or testing the waters in fear of pissing off the wrong person and possibly losing their CCW.
Not sure about you guys but I go out of my way to constantly make sure I don't put myself in any questionable situations!

[G36 Steve]

The Sheriff is not going to argue with the Judge(s).
A couple thoughts come to mind.
1) The Sheriff giveth and the sheriff taketh away.
2) Don't bite the had that feeds you.

[sealbeach]

Originally Posted by G36 Steve

The Sheriff is not going to argue with the Judge(s).
A couple thoughts come to mind.
1) The Sheriff giveth and the sheriff taketh away.
2) Don't bite the had that feeds you.

I agree totally. Although you may be right in principle, and even by the letter of the law, I am not sure if that is a battle that is worth fighting.

[derringer]

Why would someone want to raise a big stink, just to end up getting more restrictions on CCW legislated? Do you really think an empty holster march and press coverage would work to our favor?

Trust me, the press would give you no sympathy, and neither would the reading public. May I suggest any doubters go do a street poll first, and see what percentage of people polled are in favor of civilians carrying loaded guns in court?

[G36 Steve]

Originally Posted by G36 Steve

The Sheriff is not going to argue with the Judge(s).
A couple thoughts come to mind.
1) The Sheriff giveth and the sheriff taketh away.
2) Don't bite the hand that feeds you.

Fixed it.

[glock4life]

Originally Posted by G36 Steve

Most States that have shall issue CCW are more restrictive than California. I don't know anywhere besides California where CCW is legal in schools, police stations, sporting events or court houses. I think we'll see more restrictions on where we can CCW if we ever see shall issue here.

You are saying that it is legal to ccw at a school?? I read the book "how own a gun a stay out of jail" I thought that was the case but I did not want to a test case.

[derringer]

Originally Posted by glock4life

You are saying that it is legal to ccw at a school?? I read the book "how own a gun a stay out of jail" I thought that was the case but I did not want to a test case.

http://www.calccw.com/Forums/where-c...niversity.html

[glock4life]

Originally Posted by derringer

http://www.calccw.com/Forums/where-c...niversity.html

Thank you Derringer very, very helpful info.

[fmlyguy]

Originally Posted by THaves

Thanks for sharing, my eye brows raised when I read you left your holster on, I was thinking OK here we go game on.

Did you do it just to mess with them ? Were you wondering about the reaction ?

Honestly, I had every intention of leaving it on and concealed(holster). It's leather, so I knew it wouldn't go off through the metal detectors. However, once I got to the front door and heard "Remove your belt" I made a split second decision to remove it as well too. I mean what could posibly happen? I had just got off the phone with the Sargent, and I knew I wasn't breaking any laws. Was I pushing the envelope? I don't think so. So to answer your question, I think a little of both

Originally Posted by Rob P.

Why not? The news guys need both your letter to and the sheriff's letter from to have sufficient context for the story.

Perhaps it might be better to have the Calguns foundation do it if no one is willing to step up themselves. It's just a couple of letters and a press release. Maybe an on camera interview by an expert or 2. An interview with AG Brown and his opinion on whether the exemption applies to CCW holders would complete the story. It would certainly clarify the law.

I think this is a bad idea. The Sherrif is our buddy, remember? Doing something to that effect might have a negative impact.

Originally Posted by AC_CCW

fmlyguy, you got some big balls cuz I feel most of us would not even think about upsetting, or testing the waters in fear of pissing off the wrong person and possibly losing their CCW.
Not sure about you guys but I go out of my way to constantly make sure I don't put myself in any questionable situations!

Why thank you!!

Originally Posted by G36 Steve

The Sheriff is not going to argue with the Judge(s).
A couple thoughts come to mind.
1) The Sheriff giveth and the sheriff taketh away.
2) Don't bite the had that feeds you.

My thoughts exactly. I don't believe I was doing any biting.

Originally Posted by derringer

Why would someone want to raise a big stink, just to end up getting more restrictions on CCW legislated? Do you really think an empty holster march and press coverage would work to our favor?

Absolutely Not.

[Rob P.]

So, IOW, you guys are perfectly OK with local rules that infringe on our limited abilities to carry to the point that you will not fight to keep them? You raise a big stink on the issue of "may issue" but don't care that locals just take that away by fiat?

State preemption is State preemption. If the Sheriff is breaking the law then the Sheriff needs to be made aware of that. NO JUDGE has the ability to make a local rule which violates the law as a "general policy." If I, as a CCW holder, have an exception to restrictions on where firearms can't be carried, then the STATE LEGISLATURE has made that decision and a judge cannot interfere with it.

[fmlyguy]

Originally Posted by sealbeach

I agree totally. Although you may be right in principle, and even by the letter of the law, I am not sure if that is a battle that is worth fighting.

Originally Posted by Rob P.

So, IOW, you guys are perfectly OK with local rules that infringe on our limited abilities to carry to the point that you will not fight to keep them? You raise a big stink on the issue of "may issue" but don't care that locals just take that away by fiat?

State preemption is State preemption. If the Sheriff is breaking the law then the Sheriff needs to be made aware of that. NO JUDGE has the ability to make a local rule which violates the law as a "general policy." If I, as a CCW holder, have an exception to restrictions on where firearms can't be carried, then the STATE LEGISLATURE has made that decision and a judge cannot interfere with it.

RobP, while I agree with you, I also agree with Sealbeach. I don't believe at this time it is a battle worth fighting. It is sad that we allow them to infringe on us, yes, but at the same time I could very well not have a CCW either. So, I go through all this drama of whats legal and whats not. Have a protest, alert the media, etc. etc. and for what? To prove that I was right? Come on? Let's be realistic RobP, I'm not ready to become a test case. ARE YOU??