Posted on 05/14/2011 5:21:12 AM PDT by marktwain
Los Angles, CA --(Ammoland.com)- Through their joint Legal Action Project, the NRA and CRPA Foundation are sponsoring two new legal actions to enforce a 16-year old court Order against the City of LA over its concealed weapons permit (CCW) issuance policies.
Under Penal Code § 12050, et seq., the LAPD has an obligation to process applications for CCWs, and to issue CCWs if the applicant has “good cause.” For many years, the City and the LAPD had a policy of not making applications available, never finding good cause to exist, and effectively prohibiting the issuance of any CCWs.
Two lawsuits filed in the 1990′s were supposed to change that. But despite a binding settlement in those suits that resulted in LAPD being ordered by a court to implement new policies, the LAPD has abandoned these court ordered policies for handling citizens’ applications for CCWs, and has fallen back on its old habits.
The City’s unlawful refusal to properly process CCW applications was challenged in two lawsuits in 1992 and 1994. To settle the suits the LAPD agreed to implement a specific and transparent court ordered procedure to provide clarity and fairness for citizens applying for CCWs. The LAPD agreed that all citizens who request a CCW permit application would be provided a CCW application at any LAPD station house, that the application would be accompanied by a written copy of the LAPD’s procedure for handling the application, and the applicants would be informed of the procedures for appealing the denial of a CCW application. The settlement also resulted in the establishment of a Citizens Advisory Review Panel, made up of appointed citizens who would review CCW applications denied by the LAPD and make recommendations regarding whether the LAPD should reverse its denial of the CCW application.
A memorandum discussing the suits and their history is posted here.
The LAPD has repeatedly failed to honor its legal obligations under the settlements. The LAPD no longer makes CCW applications and a written copy of the CCW policy and appeal process available at all station houses. And the LAPD is ignoring the recommendations of the Citizens Advisory Review Panel and has instead enacted a de facto policy of again issuing no CCWs, despite whatever showing of good cause the applicants might make.
So in a city with almost 4 million citizens, with some 300 CCW applications being made per year, LAPD has only granted 24 active CCWs. Citizens who have had credible and ongoing threats made against them and their families, and those who carry large sums of cash as part of job and are high-profile robbery targets, have been repeatedly denied CCWs despite meeting the “good cause” criteria for receiving CCWs that the LAPD was forced to agree to years ago.
To rectify this situation, two new legal actions are being pursued. The first new court action is a motion to enforce the court’s old order in the 1994 case, Assenza v. City of Los Angeles. Some of the original plaintiffs from that case seek to force the LAPD to reinstate its agreed-to policy of providing applications and copies of its written policy at all LAPD station houses. In support of its motion, NRA grassroots activist citizens who were recruited to investigate the LAPD’s practices have submitted declarations about their recent attempts to get CCW applications. They were frustrated by uncooperative officers at individual station houses, all of whom had a complete lack of understanding of the LAPD’s application process, and who in almost all instances could not provide a CCW application to the requesting citizen, much less a copy of the LAPD’s written policy. Perhaps most egregiously, LAPD officers bluntly told citizens that unless they were celebrities, they shouldn’t even bother filling out the CCW application because they would be denied a CCW as a matter of LAPD policy.
The second action is a new lawsuit, Davis v. City of Los Angeles. The nine plaintiffs in this new action, some of whom have had CCW applications pending and unresolved with the LAPD for years, have submitted sworn declarations attesting to a litany of missteps and abuses by LAPD in its handling of their CCW applications. These abuses include not only the failures to provide applications and copies of the written policies at stationhouses, but refusals to timely consider their applications, failures to respond to inquiries regarding the status of applications, failures to acknowledge the availability of the Citizens Advisory Review Panel as a method of appealing denial, and the failure to give any weight to recommendations by the Citizens Advisory Review Panel.
Second Amendment challenges may be incorporated into these lawsuits as the case law develops in the Ninth Circuit, where another NRA/CRPAF LAP case, Peruta v. San Diego, is currently being heard.
Seventeen years ago the NRA and CRPA joined forces to fight local gun bans being written and pushed in California by the gun ban lobby. Their coordinated efforts became the NRA/CRPA “Local Ordinance Project” (LOP) – a statewide campaign to fight ill conceived local efforts at gun control and educate politicians about available programs that are effective in reducing accidents and violence without infringing on the rights of law-abiding gun owners. The NRA/CRPA LOP has had tremendous success in beating back most of these anti-self-defense proposals.
In addition to fighting local gun bans, for decades the NRA has been litigating dozens of cases in California courts to promote the right to self-defense and the Second Amendment. In the post Heller and McDonald legal environment, NRA and CRPA Foundation have formed the NRA/CRPA Foundation Legal Action Project (LAP), a joint venture to pro-actively strike down ill-conceived gun control laws and ordinances and advance the rights of firearms owners, specifically in California. Sometimes, success is more likely when LAP’s litigation efforts are kept low profile, so the details of every lawsuit are not always released. To see a partial list of the LAP’s recent accomplishments, or to contribute to the NRA or to the NRA / CRPAF LAP and support this and similar Second Amendment cases, visit www.nraila.com and www.crpafoundation.org.
Los Angeles = Maryland with Palm Trees
Their premise seems to be that if you fail in a legislative effort, you can come back next year and start off where you left off. If you fail in court you can have case precedence set by some lefty judge that will leave you worse off than you were before.
Some have mistaken this for a lack of support for the 2nd Amendment. I don't really feel that way. If you look at the progression of CCW laws in the last 10 years, the NRA has been spectacularly successful.
This in no way excuses them from the slate of lefty candidates they supported in the midterm elections. Being a single issue organization doesn't explain supporting candidates that don't really support the 2nd Amendment.
So after reading this story how come so many Freepers still view the cops as the good guys. How come many Freepers still vote for Police sales tax extensions and increases. How come many Freepers still vote for property tax increases and extensions to fund their local Police.
The Police as an institution (de facto federalized) all across this country oppose 2nd Amendment freedoms.
De fund your city haul and you weaken the Federal Government. Sounds counter intuitive but with all the matching dollars going into your city hall you have lost control over policy in your village or city. De fund gubment at Federal, State, County, City and you remove the fangs of the beast.
The Police as an institution (de facto federalized) all across this country oppose 2nd Amendment freedoms.
I think that most freepers have little contact with the police. Police are still mostly local. A fair number of police will come out in favor of armed citizens. About 85 percent of street officers favor the idea of armed citizens, but that is a different matter from publicly letting your boss know that you disagree with the politics that he is pushing.
Still, the Chicago police lieutenants association came out in favor of the proposed Illinois shall issue CCW law, and several Wisconsin sheriffs have come out in favor of the proposed Constitutional carry law for that state.
I believe that most of the problem with the police lies with the higher administration of the police.
“I believe that most of the problem with the police lies with the higher administration of the police. “
That’s funny because last time I checked “cops” have wide discretionary powers. Yet they are the ones busting people for carrying. Carrying a weapon is a clear (The Clearest) constitutional right. Last time I checked “bear arms” means to carry. It doesn’t make any distinction between hidden or in the open. Union Thugs with guns want to be able to mow down compliant citizens as they please. With no distractions or resistance.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2719802/posts
If this were an isolated incident. Fine. But it’s not.
Yet cops want guns off the street... Wonder why?
Yet cops want guns off the street... Wonder why?
I agree that the problem lies mostly with the unions. Another aspect of it is training. Because of union influence most of the training is designed to protect the officer rather than the citizens. How often have we seen citizens, many of them innocent, snatched from their cars, thrown to the ground, jumped on by officers, usually with a knee in the back, and handcuffed while other officers are in a crouched position with guns at the ready and aimed at the citizen?
I am amazed that many people aren't accidentally shot during that process. If one is, there is usually a throw-down gun handy to CYA.
I strongly support the police, individually, and I have several friends who are LEO. Out of about five, only one is a good guy whose concern is the citizen. All are good guys socially, but on the job the others are not the best. They look out for themselves regardless of how it affects the citizen.
The problem does not “mostly lie with the Unions”.
The problem lies with my dumb azz neighbors and yours who vote to extend sales taxes and property milliages to support these clowns.
To hell with the village. De-fund city hall. Let cops go work at 7-11. That’s all they are otherwise qualified to do.
Dunkin Donuts?
Defunding by withholding taxes legally owed may be dramatic but it cannot be effective. It would require too many people cooperating in the effort and in the long run the government will win anyway.
I didn’t say withhold taxes legally owed. I said quit approving sales taxes and milliages. In my community they always pass if they say police/fire/emt or one eyed orphans of nuns killed when their busload of stray puppies went off the road.
De fund city hall at the ballot box. Quit voting “responsibly”.
Sorry for my misinterpretation. I am in complete harmony with you. They never say they will have to stop shoveling money under the table to their friends, awarding no bid contracts to those who rip off the tax payers, get rid of unnecessary secretaries and other friends they have put on the payroll. It is always as you say.
I agree. Just say no next time.
I have never voted for a police tax increase. Not once. Taxes are higher now in terms of constant dollars per citizen. The problem cannot possibly be taxes being too low. In fact, not only should we be getting a rate cut, but a refund of the overcharge during the interim.
I doubt that very much.
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.