Posted on 12/24/2007 2:14:03 PM PST by steveo
...a lawsuit accusing former Sheriff Lou Blanas of favoring campaign contributors in decisions on concealed weapon permits wends its way through federal court, The Bee examined public records on more than 550 permits issued since 1996, all but 37 of them under Blanas' terms as sheriff and undersheriff.
(Excerpt) Read more at sacbee.com ...
McGinness:"If someone has a fear for their safety and I don't have enough officers in the field," he said, "I'm troubled to say, 'You can't carry a gun.' "
Troubled I say! From the county that citizens can't carry but 16-yr old gangbangers can kill sheriff deputes.
You mean cash donors influence decisions? I am stuned.
The lesson is contribute to your local sherriff. If two are running donate to both.
I’m in Kern County. I think we have the record for CCW’s issued. It’s nearly “shall issue”. During campaigns, all the sheriffs candidates campaign at out local gun shows. It’s a given that if a a sheriff running for election doesn’t support gun issues, he’s not gonna get elected.
One of the problems with requiring permits.
There is no way in hell I can get a CCW in Sacramento county. NOT unless I want to pay $$$ for it. Judged by 12 better than carried By 6.
Incidentally, isn’t it interesting that the gun grabbers want “open records” and “accountability” in shall-issue locations, to know who has been given carry permits, but in may-issue locales, where this sort of corruption is likely, there is no corresponding curiosity. In other words, cronyism is ok with them, but having regular people be able to carry isn’t.
-—The lesson is contribute to your local sherriff. If two are running donate to both.-—
That’s the way the big guys do it! I just cut out the middle man and moved to a free state.
To my way of thinking, requiring a “permit” is an unconstitutional infringement, but it’s even worse when money and/or connections play into it.
All aboot the $$$.
How nice of your sherriff.
He will allow some to exercise their constitutionally guaranteed right the keep and bear arms.
If that was a typo, it shouldn't have been.
California Penal Code § 12026(b) provides:
No permit or license to purchase, own, possess, keep, or carry, either openly or concealed, shall be required of any citizen of the United States or legal resident over the age of 18 years who resides or is temporarily within this state, and who is not within the excepted classes prescribed by Section 12021 or 12021.1 of this code or Section 8100 or 8103 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, to purchase, own, possess, keep, or carry, either openly or concealed, a pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person within the citizen's or legal resident's place of residence, place of business, or on private property owned or lawfully possessed by the citizen or legal resident.
Not a typo, fully intended. If you open a can of tomato sauce it was probably grown around here.
The ways things are in California that is fine with me. I would gladly donate for a CWP.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.