|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
March 18, 2002, 04:49 PM | #1 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 14, 1999
Location: Pittsburg, CA, USA
Posts: 7,417
|
Well, it's official, I'M A GUN NUT! 'Cuz my local paper says so!
From:
http://www.trivalleyherald.com/Stori...468915,00.html Sunday, March 17, 2002 - 3:47:49 AM MST Sheriff says 'gun nut' concealing the truth Being in the Posse doesn't guarantee weapons permit By Dwight King-Leatham STAFF WRITER Jim March is a self-described "gun nut," frustrated because the Contra Costa County Sheriff's office won't give him a concealed-weapons permit. The towering redhead from Pittsburg has taken his beef with the sheriff over the permit to federal court, saying county Sheriff Warren Rupf and a few police chiefs in 2000 violated his constitutional rights. Last September a federal judge ruled March had no case. Last month, March stood before the county Board of Supervisors, unloading some of his frustration. He said he believes that membership in the Contra Costa Sheriff's Posse pretty much guarantees someone getting a concealed weapons permit. For those not in the Posse, however, a permit is harder to come by, he said. "He's one of those people who once he grabs onto a fact, he builds a fantasy around that," said Sheriff Warren Rupf. The longtime sheriff who is head of the auxiliary group, the Posse, said fewer than half the 380 Posse members hold concealed weapon permits. In preparation for court, March said he researched county elections records and looked at who had made campaign contributions to the sheriff. He also looked into the sheriff's practice of issuing concealed weapons permits. March concluded membership in the Posse seemed practically to guarantee getting a permit, he said. "The real problem is the law," said David Beauvais, a Berkeley lawyer who brought March's unsuccessful suit. "All the unfettered discretion is with the sheriff to issue or not issue a permit," he said. Beauvais said he believes the permits are granted without applying any standard. "They're issued for (Rupf's) supporters, his boosters or to wealthy and connected people," Beauvais said. "There's enough there to be concerned how even the process is," he said. The lawyer said his own politics "are not centered around ever having a gun. I am sympathetic, however, with people who see this system working in a way that is not really appropriate." "The harm is really driven by patronage, where people who have connections can get a permit, while others can't. "If you live in a nice area with a lot of money, and occasionally travel to Richmond, you can get a permit. But if you live in Richmond, forget it," he said. Federal District Judge William Alsup threw March's claim out before it got to trial, noting that March had also been denied permits by the cities of Richmond and Pittsburg. The judge called March's research "opinionated" and "not appropriate for consideration." "Nor do these records demonstrate on their face a causal connection between wealth, employment status or donations to Sheriff Rupf's campaign and issuance of a concealed weapons license." The way Rupf's office handles concealed-weapons permits is not that unusual in the state, said state Department of Justice spokesman Michael Van Winkel. He said attorneys with the California Department of Justice have described the power the law gives sheriffs and police chiefs as "unfettered discretion." Still, applicants must first pass a background check -- the same one used on anyone wanting to buy a gun, and then must still win the approval of the police chief or sheriff with the permitting power, Van Winkel said. Van Winkel said he knows nothing about the Contra Costa Sheriff's Posse. "Without saying it hinges on joining a particular group, there's total discretion after passing the background check -- it's totally up to them," Van Winkel said. That freedom accounts for some of the variation in permit numbers, he said. For instance, San Francisco issues five to 15 permits a year, while "in Kern County -- little Nashville -- the law enforcement heads, the sheriff or police chief, grant about 4,000 a year. Shasta County issues 3,000 in any given year. "I think Los Angeles County with all its millions only approves 1,000 a year," he said. Van Winkel provided a list of concealed weapons permits issued county-by-county that showed Contra Costa County's permits dropped from a total of 314 in 1987 to 163 in 1999, the last year complete records are available. During the same period, Alameda County's permit totals dropped from 158 to 143; Kern County's, from 3,943 to 2,961; San Diego's, from 2,042 to 1,268; and rural Shasta County's from 2,958 to 2,377. Five years ago the former police chief of Isleton was typically issuing about 1,000 permits a year to residents from all over Sacramento County -- at a charge of $150 apiece. That brought in about $150,000 -- "that's $150,000 -- the whole city budget was about $300,000," Van Winkel said. The Legislature soon thereafter amended the law to limit the fee to the reasonable cost of administering the program, he said. Meanwhile, Contra Costa County currently has a total of 179 concealed- weapons permits outstanding, said Contra Costa County Sheriff's Lt. Dale Varady. Varady, who heads the professional standards unit and administers the permits program, said his office takes applications only from those living in contract cities like Danville and San Ramon along with those in unincorporated parts of the county. He said applicants must pass a background check, which can include a psychological review and are tested on gun handling and gun safety. About 80 permit-holders are reserve officers, working as reinforcements doing certain types of police work, he said. Other permit-holders include judges or former law enforcement officers -- for whom the usual $265 fee is waived. "There's no profit in it, it's all to cover the administrative process," Varady said. Varady said he knows little about the Sheriff's Posse. "It's a private organization, much like the Elks or Lions, and is separate from the office of sheriff. I believe Sheriff Rupf is the president." "I don't know what their makeup is, I don't go to their functions. Membership in the Posse isn't considered in applying," Varady said. ------------------------------------------- Jim again: Hilarious sidenote: Rupf is adamant about "less than half the Posse having CCW". We also learn there's 380 Posse members, and 163 CCW permits as of '99. Do the math . Rupf might as well have admitted what's up. What caused all this freakout was paper copies of this at my local board of supes meeting: https://www.keepandbeararms.com/march/posse.asp
__________________
Jim March |
March 18, 2002, 05:49 PM | #2 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 9, 1999
Location: Mivonks, Michigan
Posts: 1,846
|
Quote:
Jim, I wish you the best in your fight for a CCW.
__________________
"ACCEPT NOTHING LESS THAN FULL VICTORY!" General Dwight D. Eisenhower June 6, 1944 ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ! |
|
March 18, 2002, 06:03 PM | #3 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 18, 1999
Location: Arizona
Posts: 2,729
|
Jim,
I hope you have him by the short hairs, soon! |
March 18, 2002, 06:28 PM | #4 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 11, 2001
Location: Free Plains of Texas
Posts: 446
|
Good luck Jim.
I still think we need a class action suit for having to have a CCW. I have one and call it my "rights taxation permit."
__________________
Tyrants prefer: an unarmed and gagged peasant. Malo mori quam foedari. Malon Labe. |
March 18, 2002, 06:36 PM | #5 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 7, 2000
Location: Idaho
Posts: 6,073
|
FWIW, here's my translation of the Judge's comments:
The judge called March's research "opinionated" and "not appropriate for consideration." "Nor do these records demonstrate on their face a causal connection between wealth, employment status or donations to Sheriff Rupf's campaign and issuance of a concealed weapons license." Translation: He might have something here, but I have the power to kill it here, so I will. No one else gets to render a judgement on it. The way Rupf's office handles concealed-weapons permits is not that unusual in the state, said state Department of Justice spokesman Michael Van Winkel. Translation: Everyone does it that way here, so we got too, also.
__________________
I am Pro-Rights (on gun issues). |
March 18, 2002, 07:23 PM | #6 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 22, 2000
Location: Peoples Commonwealth of Massachusetts
Posts: 1,562
|
Quote:
__________________
~USP "[Even if there would be] few tears shed if and when the Second Amendment is held to guarantee nothing more than the state National Guard, this would simply show that the Founders were right when they feared that some future generation might wish to abandon liberties that they considered essential, and so sought to protect those liberties in a Bill of Rights. We may tolerate the abridgement of property rights and the elimination of a right to bear arms; but we should not pretend that these are not reductions of rights." -- Justice Scalia 1998 |
|
March 18, 2002, 08:37 PM | #7 |
Staff Emeritus
Join Date: March 9, 2000
Location: Virden, IL
Posts: 5,917
|
So, either Jim really is a complete idiot with a rich fantasy life . . . . or he's touched a nerve here.
__________________
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Don Gwinn: Chicago Gun Rights Examiner |
March 18, 2002, 09:36 PM | #8 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 4, 1998
Location: Hayden, ID, USA
Posts: 1,102
|
So, by the sheriff's reasoning, if you were to examine any homogenous, identifiable group or community in Contra Costa County, one would find that slightly less than half have concealed weapons permits. How large was Contra Costa county's population did you say?
That is if Sheriff Rupf is being fair and impartial. |
March 18, 2002, 10:50 PM | #9 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 9, 2001
Posts: 410
|
Jim, keep up the good work, sounds like you have them nervous.
Adept |
March 18, 2002, 11:19 PM | #10 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 13, 2001
Posts: 450
|
LOL I hope you didn't expect them to say nice things about you.
Keep up the good work. |
March 18, 2002, 11:19 PM | #11 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 8, 2001
Location: MA
Posts: 565
|
Good work, Jim! When they start to attack you instead of ignoring you, you know you've become a threat to them. Keep up the good fight.
__________________
Skip Pacheco, Libertarian for State Representative Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation, that we can not be trusted with arms for our own defense? Where is the difference in having our arms in possession and under our direction, and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands? -Patrick Henry |
March 19, 2002, 02:13 AM | #12 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 14, 1999
Location: Pittsburg, CA, USA
Posts: 7,417
|
What happened in court was that without a minority co-plaintiff, I couldn't raise the serious racial issues otherwise obvious with Rupf's policies. That meant the issue was to be decided on a "rational basis" standard of court scrutiny versus "strict scrutiny" - and the Judge didn't think we could win on "rational basis".
I think he was wrong, but whatever. We'll try again at some point, with a minority or three . To fully understand this issue, see also: https://www.keepandbeararms.com/info...em.asp?id=3202 BUT the whole thing may not even get to court, if we can drag Ashcroft in . We're not ready for that step yet, we need just a few more exposes first, but getting Ashcroft's attention will happen soon.
__________________
Jim March |
March 20, 2002, 11:17 PM | #13 |
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 15, 1999
Location: Ohio
Posts: 7,558
|
Good luck getting Ashcroft involved. If the members of TFL can help out, just let us know.
Keep up the good work, Jim!
__________________
-Dave Miller ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ! NRA Certified Instructor: Pistol, Rifle, Shotgun, Home Firearms Safety, Personal Protection. Tick-off Obama - Join the NRA Today - Save $10 |
March 21, 2002, 12:44 AM | #14 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 14, 1999
Location: Pittsburg, CA, USA
Posts: 7,417
|
We're not ready for that step yet. Wait for it though, it'll happen soon and you bet it'll be all over TFL .
Update: the paper is being flooded with letters to the editor, virtually all of 'em in support of me . I'm being told they'll be published, apparantly in next Sunday's edition. Should be fun.
__________________
Jim March |
March 21, 2002, 09:46 AM | #15 |
member
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 8,462
|
Hey Jim, please let us know when the letters run. That should be fun reading as well.
|
March 21, 2002, 10:34 AM | #16 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 12, 2000
Location: Birmingham, AL
Posts: 1,124
|
Can't remember who said it here first, but I think it's applicable:
"If you're taking flak, you must be over the target!" G'luck. If we can help, let us know how.
__________________
"First, the freedom to own and carry the weapon of your choice is a natural, fundamental, and inalienable human, individual, civil, and Constitutional right -- subject neither to the democratic process nor to arguments grounded in social utility" -- L. Neil Smith ' I have an [in]alienable right to bear arms. I will exercise my own judgement in their use and accept responsibilty for the consequences' - Oakleaf |
May 5, 2002, 06:39 AM | #17 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 14, 1999
Location: Pittsburg, CA, USA
Posts: 7,417
|
My various documents are being moved to new locations on my own website - the first round of edits are done. See also:
http://www.ninehundred.com/~equalccw - the Posse report is under the "Expose Project" link.
__________________
Jim March |
May 5, 2002, 07:10 AM | #18 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 24, 2002
Location: Northern California
Posts: 238
|
Arbitrary refusals
Good Work Jim:
I hope that you win on appeal. these arbitrary refusals of our rights have got to come to an end. Also those licensing fees seem outrageously high. Call it a tax on a constitutional right. I've seen fees in my state rise from $3.50 back when my Dad had one to $35.00 and they doubled from that a couple of years ago. Always with the passage of new gun control regulations. We don't have as much of a problem with the refusals though. If you pass the background check you get the permit. |
May 5, 2002, 01:31 PM | #19 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 7, 2001
Location: Washington State
Posts: 2,166
|
Thankfully, Washington is a shall issue state.
Give them hell, Jim.
__________________
Hiding in plain sight... |
May 5, 2002, 07:09 PM | #20 |
Member in memoriam
Join Date: April 26, 2002
Location: Colorado
Posts: 1,649
|
The lack of a shall issue law is one of the main reasons I'm leaving the People's Republic of California this year to return to the United States.
__________________
No tyrant should ever be allowed to die of natural causes. |
May 5, 2002, 07:34 PM | #21 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 7, 2001
Location: Washington State
Posts: 2,166
|
Well, come on up, about 300 miles past your northern border.
All shooters welcome, 60 dollars, about a week for NCIC due to the backlog, and you too shall have the CCW. The only downside is that Washington is NOT a Class III State. Ownership of full-auto is downright illegal. But, move on up and welcome!!
__________________
Hiding in plain sight... |
May 5, 2002, 09:03 PM | #22 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 6, 2002
Location: Aloha, Oregon
Posts: 759
|
Standing Wolf,
Do your former state a favor and vote for Bill Simon before you go. As the Presidential elections showed us, a vote CAN make a different. |
May 7, 2002, 03:21 PM | #23 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 12, 1999
Location: Oklahoma City, OK, USA
Posts: 3,624
|
"We also learn there's 380 Posse members, and 163 CCW permits as of '99."
And of the remaining 217, I would bet you could count on one hand the number of those who applied for a permit. The relevant number is how many posse members among those who have applied, have received them. Sure as heck ain't gonna get one if you don't apply. Great job, Jim. |
May 7, 2002, 08:04 PM | #24 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 14, 1999
Location: Pittsburg, CA, USA
Posts: 7,417
|
It gets better.
The "Posse" is top-heavy with people in real estate sales and major development. Both of the major real estate investors in the county are Posse and Permitholders: * Ken Behring built the upscale town of Blackhawk, among the most posh addresses in Northern California. Not only a gated privately secured area on county land, one which requires interaction with a guard to even enter, it also has extra Sheriff's department patrols. Behring used to own the Seattle Seahawks NFL team. He still owns the Behring Auto Museum in Danville, one of the finest collections of cars in the world. Dude is worth billions. His attorney back when he was building Blackhawk was Dan Van Voorhis, now a Judge. Thomas Van Voorhis, his brother, scored CCW after writing a letter to Sheriff Rupf outlining his various connections, including personal friendships with a then-current state Senator, another Judge, a former Congressman, etc. * The Seeno family are the biggest home-builders in Contra Costa County, and own the Peppermill chain of restraunts and the Peppermill casino in Reno. Seeno Jr. has a permit now, his pop did before his death. I keep getting weird rumors about this bunch. Anyways. There was a scandal a few years back in Sacramento County under the previous Sheriff (Craig) that's rumored to be the real reason he retired. The scam involved selling signatures on environmental impact reports for construction projects. The EIRs include a traffic analysis and crime impact analysis, both of which get signed off on by the Sheriff...Craig was supposedly selling easy access to those sign-offs. Hmmm. And the Contra Costa Posse is full of...real estate developers. Not a HUGE amount, but way more than you'd expect at random. The Posse also has a lot of ranchers. Who frequently deal with crime problems, and might be looking to get extra patrol services? I found one rancher in the campaign contribution logs who gave $250 to Rupf, on the same day that his wife, several kids and multiple employees did too. Obviously, this rancher was getting around the $250-per-person-max campaign finance rule. He was NOT a permitholder, and never got one, but for some reason he was risking an obvious stretch of the rules to shovel money in Rupf's direction. Why? Damned if I know. I know of at least one gun dealer who joined the Posse so he could sell guns to the biggest gun buyer in the county: Sheriff Rupf. The dealer TOLD me that. And that dude didn't get a permit, because somebody who'd been Posse for much longer didn't like him and told Rupf not to issue to him. Real estate agents need to do evictions fairly often. How? They go to the Sheriff's office. Would a Posse member real estate agent get a deputy faster? Dunno. But there's sure a hell of a lot of 'em with permits, which we now know pretty much means Posse. What I'm saying here is that there's a LOT of reasons beyond CCW that would cause somebody to want to "snuggle up close" to the Sheriff. What we may be seeing is people who've gotten clo$e to him also getting easy access to a permit while they were at it, even though that wasn't their prime goal all along. Others may not care at all about CCW, they're in it for whatever financial game they've got going. It's crazy. CCW abuse is probably just the tip of a very large iceberg of corruption.
__________________
Jim March |
May 7, 2002, 10:49 PM | #25 |
Member In Memoriam
Join Date: November 29, 1999
Location: west of a small town, CO
Posts: 4,346
|
Old saying down south - one term as Sheriff & you're set for life.
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|