.

It Just Got Easier to Get a Concealed Carry Permit in O.C.

The Orange County Sheriff's Department will loosen its requirements in response to a recent federal appellate court ruling.

In response to a recent federal appellate court ruling, the Orange County Sheriff's Department is loosening the requirements for a concealed carry permit. Patch file photo.
In response to a recent federal appellate court ruling, the Orange County Sheriff's Department is loosening the requirements for a concealed carry permit. Patch file photo.

The Orange County Sheriff's Department has relaxed the requirements for obtaining a concealed-weapons permit, reflecting a recent federal appellate court decision that deemed many urban counties in California to be overly restrictive in saying who can carry a concealed weapon and who can't.

Local applicants seeking a permit to carry a concealed weapon now only have to say they need one for self-defense or personal safety in the aftermath of Wednesday's decision. Previously, applicants were required to prove “good cause,” a standard that typically limited concealed weapons in Orange County to people who carry large sums of cash or valuables or who could prove an existing mortal threat, the Orange County Register reported.

“Bottom line is the sheriff is going to abide by the law,” Lt. Jeff Hallock, a spokesman for Sheriff Sandra Hutchens, told the newspaper.

“Before the court's decision, good cause was something that was evaluated by the sheriff. What she considers good cause may not be same as Los Angeles, Riverside or San Diego as good cause. But in looking at the decision, some of the subjectiveness is taken out of it.”

The Feb. 13 ruling by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals was widely seen as the court's attempt to unify the vast differences in how the state's urban and rural counties issue concealed weapons permits. Urban counties have tended to be much tighter in issuing permits while rural counties were more expansive in interpreting an applicant's “good cause” assertion.

San Diego County, which was the defendant in the case, hasn't filed an appeal of the 9th Circuit 2-1 decision, though the deadline is Feb. 27.

--City News Service

Homer February 20, 2014 at 09:20 PM
Wow. How many people here understand what a "CCW" or conceal carry permit is, and the process to obtain one?
Jason Fong February 21, 2014 at 01:25 AM
Finally, I can somewhat shy away from calling this state Commiefornia, the amount of liberal brainwash here is immense.
Miles Green February 21, 2014 at 01:29 AM
Now Santa Ana can be a safe place to reside. I'm pretty sure those gangbangers will get a kick out of some good 'ol SELF DEFENSE!
South Bay Nra February 21, 2014 at 03:03 AM
It is obvious that there are quite a few uninformed anti-gunners in Newport Beach. While they have a right to their misguided opinions, we must not allow them to dictate public policy. If you are a gun owner, please join the fight against the anti-gunners. http://www.nramemberscouncils.com/cgi-bin/haasmcshowwebpage.cgi?mc=southorangecounty
Jacob Cherub February 21, 2014 at 12:03 PM
South Bay Nra nails it. "...please join the FIGHT against the anti-gunners" Yes, by all means define even the debate as a Fight. Sheesh.
Joker Joe February 21, 2014 at 12:41 PM
A lot of naive and people afraid of their own shadow on this site. They don't trust them selves with a gun or prescription meds or a car. Maybe Obama and the Democrats are right. Send them your money and just obey. World's Greatest Quote "Negotiating with Obama is like playing chess with a pigeon. The pigeon knocks over all the pieces, shits on the board and then struts around like it won the game." …Vladimir Putin-2013
Joker Joe February 21, 2014 at 12:50 PM
What sheriff's location do you apply at?
Mike B February 21, 2014 at 01:24 PM
The only effect of more regulations/restrictions/bans is that law abiding people are denied their rights. Those who are intent on doing harm or lack control and respect will and do victimize others. By enabling those of us who are capable and want the means to protect ourselves and others from harm, the playing field is being leveled so to speak. A more constitutionally correct CCW process will make a person think twice about the vulnerability of his/her potential victim. Bad guys prefer knowing they have the upper hand and are likely to come out on top.
MFriedrich February 21, 2014 at 01:45 PM
I'm not opposed to CCW. What I do oppose is that this process is not as encumbering as you seem to believe. Here's another reality:A lot of untrained, ignorant Barney Fifes and Calamity Janes out there ALREADY have a CCW. We don't have time for that kind of crap. I'm a CA licensed rifle owner myself. You don't see me parading around my yard brandishing a Mossberg 500 to protect my homestead like it's 1874. That's bs. Some people are more than qualified for a CCW. Fine. But most - the vast majority - are not. Most cannot anticipate, read and react properly to dangerous situations. I'd much more prefer we load up the streets with cops who ARE professionally and vigorously trained on handling and discharging a weapon. I mean, just ask any police officer. Do they want more ccw's out there. I think the answer will surprise people.
Mike T February 21, 2014 at 02:46 PM
Now it will finally be worth my while to buy a handgun now that I'm allowed to protect myself and my family as guaranteed by the 2nd amendment without having to jump through unnecessary hoops.
Jacob Cherub February 21, 2014 at 03:01 PM
Not for nothing, a year and a half ago a murderer shot dead a co-worker in midtown Manhatten and when trained police officers shot at the perp they shot and wounded nine innocent bystanders. These are trained shooters with regular visits to ranges and situational shooting. http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/08/25/nypd-shooting-bystander-victims-hit-by-police-gunfire/
Chris Schear February 21, 2014 at 04:49 PM
@ MFriedrich : RE - "Some people are more than qualified for a CCW. Fine. But most - the vast majority - are not. " The right to self-defense does not contain any clause which denotes how well you are able to do so. Myself - as a U.S. Marine, a black belt in Taekwondo with over 29 years training and experience on a national and international level, have more small arms and hand to hand training than the 65 year old grandmother. However, her and I are on equal footing in terms that our rights to self-defense are the same. I'm more capable. That doesn't mean she is less entitled. CCWs in almost every other state has seen a surge, doubling, more than doubling the number of concealed carry individuals in the past two years. You haven't seen news describing an increase of "danger in the streets" as the "unprofessional" weapons owners are walking about.
Homer February 21, 2014 at 08:53 PM
I would like to know how the process is now less cumbersome.
Jacob Cherub February 21, 2014 at 09:21 PM
There has been a fundamental shift in the gun lobbies and their minions in which ALL regulations pertaining to firearms are forcefully resisted. Unless you think polls are fixed the vast majority of of the population welcomes sensible gun regs. As recently as 1999 during congressional testimony following the Columbine High School shooting, LaPierre called it "reasonable" to conduct a background check "for every sale at every gun show. No loopholes anywhere for anyone." What makes the situation much worse is the proliferation of "stand your ground laws" that embolden shooters to blast away instead of de-escalating. And to Chris S., that elderly grandmother and you have to submit to a written and use test to demnstrate proficiency before receiving a drivers license. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2013/apr/18/barack-obama/barack-obama-says-nra-used-support-expanded-backgr/
Jacob Cherub February 21, 2014 at 09:23 PM
Great. More gunsadded to the approx 300 million guns in the US. Keep in mind the likelihood of you or you loved ones increases whe * n there i a firearm in the house: http://nyagv.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Accidental-Shootings-NYAGV.pdf Recommend
Carl Gennaro February 22, 2014 at 07:32 AM
Bad guys could care less. Do you really think they were sitting at home writing letters to their representatives?
Mike Proctor February 22, 2014 at 03:26 PM
I love how the uninformed anti gun crowd comes out of the woodwork like cockroaches when it comes to CWP.
Jacob Cherub February 23, 2014 at 12:21 AM
Really, "cockroaches"? ...Nice, especially from one who apparently wants to carry a gun in public. Pathetic.
nobody February 23, 2014 at 11:58 AM
Getting shot in the butt a common problem among ‘responsible gun owners.’ _________________________________________________ "On December 26, 2013, an unidentified man was checking out at a Home Depot, in Brighton, Michigan. When reaching for his wallet, he accidentally grabbed his gun instead. The gun went off in his pocket, shooting the man in the butt. The man was taken to the hospital to receive treatment for the butt hurt. The police were called and the ‘responsible gun owner’ was taken to the University of Michigan Hospital, where he was able to have the bullet removed from his butt. As it turns out the man had a permit, and the loaded gun in his pocket was perfectly legal. Since no-one else was injured and no damage was done to the store, police say they won’t be pressing charges against the 32-year-old gun owner.
nobody February 23, 2014 at 11:58 AM
Like the Nevada man who shot himself in the butt, after accidentally dropping a loaded gun in a movie theater. The gun landed under his own seat, sending the bullet upward, into his own rear end. While such incidents are becoming more and more common, the reason that story drew national media attention was because the incident occurred in a movie theater, less than a month after the Aurora theater massacre.
nobody February 23, 2014 at 11:59 AM
Nothing says ‘responsible gun owner’, quite like a bullet wound to the butt. It doesn’t have happen because you mistook your gun for your wallet or because it fell out of your pocket, either. As it turns out there are a whole lot of ways to get yourself shot in the butt. A Labrador Retriever shot a man in the butt. For instance, an Arizona man thought taking a three-year old out target shooting was a good idea. He left the loaded rifle where the toddler could then pick it up, and shoot him in the butt. He’s lucky that kid didn’t kill him or accidentally harm himself.
nobody February 23, 2014 at 12:00 PM
The real problem is that innocent bystanders get shot too. While it’s fortunate that no-one else was injured during the Home Depot catastrophe, there have been many similar incidents which did result in injury to others. For example, last year a Walmart shopper in Waco, Texas accidentally mistook his gun for his wallet, just like the Home Depot guy. The 52-year-old shopper shot himself in the butt too. During that incident however, after the bullet went through the butt of the ‘responsible gun owner,’ it ricocheted off the floor, hitting a woman and her 5-year-old daughter, sending both to the hospital.
nobody February 23, 2014 at 12:00 PM
Common sense gun measures can help reduce the number of ‘responsible gun owners’ who shoot themselves in the butt and elsewhere. In spite of the NRA hype over the president’s plan for sane gun control measures, it’s clear that putting some of the proposed policies into effect would reduce the number of accidental gun injuries in the US. The plan would include money to be used for educating gun owners on how to safely store, handle and carry guns. It would require gun manufacturers to improve safety features, maybe even making them so that they don’t go off when dropped and can’t be fired by three-year-old kids or Labrador Retrievers. Instead of putting more guns in the hands of more morons, we need to pass these and other common sense measures."
nobody February 23, 2014 at 12:01 PM
now here we have examples of how lame accidents happen, unfortunately the ones that plan on murder and mayhem are the norm and not the exception, gun control needs to happen somehow!!!!
Shripathi Kamath February 23, 2014 at 03:00 PM
Sorry nobody, the time for using gun control to curb gun violence is long gone. 300 million guns are in circulation, no gun control law will change that since you cannot retroactively make all of them illegal or disable them. In fact, I'd go the opposite direction and suggest that everyone be allowed to possess, transport and use guns more easily, and remove all the restrictions on the type and quantity. Starting with state and national capitols.
Sir Pablo Alvarez February 23, 2014 at 06:28 PM
Wow there sure is lots of misinformed folks here. To those of you that talked about making fun of people with guns at a bar... first of all CCW stands for "Concealed Carry Weapon." The emphasis in on "concealed." If can see it, that would be "open carry" which is not allowed under California law. Secondly, a CCW license is not valid in MANY locations including "establishments whose primary purpose is to serve alcohol" (e.g. a bar). Lastly, to the person that said, " I'm a CA licensed rifle owner myself." No you aren't! California doesn't license people to own guns. You now have to register them upon purchase, yes. However, prior to this year, long guns (rifles and shotguns) did not even get registered when you purchased them from gun shop.
Homer February 24, 2014 at 11:50 AM
Despite the examples of stupidity, they do not prove that the right should be taken away from the remaining citizens of the US. Also: 1. CA has a drop test for new guns. It is part of the manufacture's registration process and is (onerously) enforced for every model, regardless if the physical design is identical between models. 2. No regulation will ever prevent an accident. 3. No regulation will ever be adhered to by a true criminal. Criminals do not typically purchase their firearms from the corner store. One notable source of stolen firearms has been found to be from the cars of members of our police forces.
JFreeman February 24, 2014 at 10:55 PM
there's a lot of great points on here, for both sides. The training process to earn a CCW is going to weed out the gang bangers and 80 year old grandmas who won't be able to use it when that worst case scenario arises. Do you really think the angry, hot-head criminals are going to apply for a CCW? No, those people are already carrying, albeit illegally. There is a huge responsibility that comes with carrying a lethal weapon. Personally, I've been in law enforcement (cadet) and was terrified when I had to draw down on a woman and her gang-banger boyfriend. My only thought was "please...PLEASE do point your gun at me". Most everyone talks a big game, but when you have a loaded pistol in your waistband you actually avoid confrontation. Nobody get's into a fist fight or argument when they're carrying...you just don't want to chance it. I personally feel if you want to lower crime rates and assault cases by 90%, allow OPEN carry in all of California. Just like an empty police car parked on a busy residential street, the mere presence of the weapon is a huge deterrent. It's not the wild wild west anymore, people don' t pick fights with armed citizens.
Shripathi Kamath February 24, 2014 at 11:11 PM
JFreeman February 24, 2014 at 10:55 PM there's a lot of great points on here, for both sides. The training process to earn a CCW is going to weed out the gang bangers ___________________________________________________ LOL
Homer February 25, 2014 at 10:40 AM
If you are laughing at the process requirements to obtain a CCW in OC or LA, then you are truly naive.

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something