Posted on 06/17/2006 2:41:08 PM PDT by SmithL
LOS ANGELES - Sheriff Lee Baca revoked the concealed weapons license of a retired captain from his department who ran against him unsuccessfully in the June 6 election.
Capt. Ken Masse, a 35-year veteran of the sheriff's department who retired last year, was notified two days after the election that his license had been revoked.
Undersheriff Larry Waldie notified Masse of the move, saying that his campaign "may have damaged the public's confidence in this agency."
Masse's lawyer called the revocation "blatant retaliation."
Law enforcement officers are generally given a concealed weapons license after retirement in California, but the credentials can be revoked after a showing of "good cause," usually for criminal misconduct.
"It happens when there's dangerous conduct, not when somebody is engaged in politics," Masse's attorney Dieter Dammeier told the Los Angeles Times . "I think it's absurd in this day and age that you'd have a public official who'd think you can retaliate against someone who opposed you. It's something you'd expect in junior high, not the L.A. Sheriff's Department."
Sheriff's spokesman Steve Whitmore said the decision was justified.
"This has nothing to do with retaliation or curbing one's democratic right to freedom of speech," he said. "This has to do with misusing department data and mechanisms."
In a letter revoking the permit, Waldie said Masse unlawfully sought contributions from deputies, and that he inappropriately used department data to contact them at home.
Masse acknowledged soliciting the donations, saying he was unaware of state campaign law prohibiting candidates from seeking contributions from those who would work under them.
Officials warned Masse during the election that he may have violated the law, but did not file charges.
Sucks to lose what? Your Constitutional rights? That sheriff belongs in jail.
He with the key gets to slam the door.
You are right of course but he's still the sheriff.
Isn't there a federal law which allows retired officers the ability[Right] to have a concealed weapon?
sounds like abuse of power to me. There are laws against that.
This is no reason to revoke a conealed carried permit, especially when no charges were filed. Sounds to me like just an excuse to get back at a rival. How petty. L.A. elected him, so they deserve him. I hope they are happy.
you,re right about the federal ccw law.
Absolute power corrupts. One supposes that conceal carry has personal parameters to it in LA.
If anything happens to him I hope that his family sues LA and the election winner for everything in the till.
Only chumps would want to live where this kind of thing goes on.
Is this funny or not?
No conflict of interest on the part of the sheriff,
I am sure.
LOL
So mush for 'shall not be infringed.'
Imagine Hillary with a badge.
Same thing just happened in Orange County - the sheriff got even with his opponents.
Oh, I know.
And the press would do very little.
So, Mr Clinton, just who did look at those FBI records and by the way, who did hire Craig Livingston?
If you read the contemporary writings of the framers of the Constitution and Bill of Rights, you'll see that they were not extremists. They had no thought of felons (which back then didn't mean your license to keep a gun in your home expired last week) or the insane having an unfettered RKBA. They rarely (but not never) spelled that out, because it was so obvious that it didn't need saying -- back then, the "death of common sense" had not yet occurred. Likewise back then, purveyors of various products did not see the need to plaster their products with warnings to protect themselves from liability, because the courts still had common sense, and sellers of hot coffee could have absolute confidence that if some klutz spilled the coffee on themselves and got burnt, the courts would not entertain any lawsuit for damages, despite the lack of statutory or common law explicitly holding hot coffee-sellers harmless for self-inflicted burns carried out with their coffee.
However, they DID intend that government agents attempting to impose tyranny on the citizens would be shot by said citizens. And so I'm actually being quite generous in suggesting that the sheriff should simply have his RKBA permanently revoked. If he protests that such a penalty is infringing on his Constitutional rights, then we can just go back to the original intent and shoot him :-)
What I've seen of politics it's dangerous for the average citizen.
Baca a Rat, Masse a Pub?
It's supposedly a non-partisan office. In California, that usually means D vs D.
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.