Not sure if the original was posted where a guy coming home from the gym was attacked in his front door, defended himself with a firearm successfully albeit no bad guy hurt.




WELL, since he is now a "BAD GUY" in California now they revoked his carry license.
Not sure how this desperado even got a license anyway.
We can't have him shooting up hoodied-gang-bangers to protect his wife and baby.



Massachusetts and California are two great places ain't it.
How anyone can choose that tyranny over freedom is a mystery to me.

quote:

Massachusetts and California are two great places ain't it.
How anyone can choose that tyranny over freedom is a mystery to me.

Why, so they can say “my side won!” of course.

I generally like CN, but he describes the agency involved as the "LAPD Sheriff's Department", when in fact these are two different agencies. Was it LAPD (a Los Angeles City department run by an appointed chief of police) or the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department (an agency run by the elected Sheriff of the County of Los Angeles). Give credit or blame where credit or blame is due please. Confusing situations like this can and does lead to a lack of confidence in the reporter.

I carried several guns in California. Carried them right to the border and kept on going.

quote:

Originally posted by pulicords:
I generally like CN, but he describes the agency involved as the "LAPD Sheriff's Department", when in fact these are two different agencies.

OK, I guess if you are in one agency or another it might ruffle your feathers.
However, most people consider the Sherriff's Office and the Local PD to be basically> the same.
Sure they may be built differently and have some different duties but both are cut from the same cloth to most everybody.
To focus on this and even try to discredit the messenger is disingenuous at best.

No matter WHO, this is an outrage and blatant infringement the 2th amendment.


Another interview:

quote:

Originally posted by smschulz:

quote:

Originally posted by pulicords:
I generally like CN, but he describes the agency involved as the "LAPD Sheriff's Department", when in fact these are two different agencies.

OK, I guess if you are in one agency or another it might ruffle your feathers.
However, most people consider the Sherriff's Office and the Local PD to be basically> the same.
Sure they may be built differently and have some different duties but both are cut from the same cloth to most everybody.
To focus on this and even try to discredit the messenger is disingenuous at best.

No matter WHO, this is an outrage and blatant infringement the 2th amendment.

I believe he was pointing out the lazy YouTube videos that are all about stoking outrage, and little about being factually correct. Kinda like posting something about “outrage and the ‘2th’ Amendment”.

Lazy reporting is an outrage whenever CNN does it. Perfectly acceptable when it’s something we agree with. While we’re at it, we seem to also be upset about double standards. Well, sometimes.

quote:

Originally posted by smschulz:
However, most people consider the Sherriff's Office and the Local PD to be basically> the same.
Sure they may be built differently and have some different duties but both are cut from the same cloth to most everybody.

If you're willing to accept this, then you shouldn't ever object to folks calling the AR-15 an Assault Weapon

It is the same laziness that can be used to attack the creditability of the reporter.

FWIW: No one in the LE community considers LAPD and LASO anything close to being the same either in culture or policies

quote:

Originally posted by 9mmepiphany:

quote:

Originally posted by smschulz:
However, most people consider the Sherriff's Office and the Local PD to be basically> the same.
Sure they may be built differently and have some different duties but both are cut from the same cloth to most everybody.

If you're willing to accept this, then you shouldn't ever object to folks calling the AR-15 an Assault Weapon

C'mon man, that makes no sense at all.

quote:

Originally posted by smschulz:

quote:

Originally posted by 9mmepiphany:

quote:

Originally posted by smschulz:
However, most people consider the Sherriff's Office and the Local PD to be basically> the same.
Sure they may be built differently and have some different duties but both are cut from the same cloth to most everybody.

If you're willing to accept this, then you shouldn't ever object to folks calling the AR-15 an Assault Weapon

C'mon man, that makes no sense at all.

Sure it does. Precision in language is important. All he's saying is that any blame should be laid at the correct doorstep and while "most people" may not see the difference, that doesn't make them right.

OK guys, this is my thread, I do so stipulate there is a difference of a Sherriff and a Police Officer.
NOW, the point is the man's 2nd amendment right was violated after a clearly lawful engagement.
This not right and the point of this thread in general.
If ya'll want to discuss the differences of Sherriff's and PD's please do in your own thread, thank you.

quote:

Originally posted by smschulz:
OK guys, this is my thread, I do so stipulate there is a difference of a Sherriff and a Police Officer.
NOW, the point is the man's 2nd amendment right was violated after a clearly lawful engagement.
This not right and the point of this thread in general.
If ya'll want to discuss the differences of Sherriff's and PD's please do in your own thread, thank you.

Well, if we want to parse words, it is really a “right protected by the second amendment”, not a “2nd amendment right.”



Just joshing you!

My understanding is that it is the Sheriff's Departments in California that issue concealed carry permits. So while the incident took place in LAPD's jurisdiction, it was the Sheriff's Department that decided to revoke his carry permit.

quote:

Originally posted by 2000Z-71:
My understanding is that it is the Sheriff's Departments in California that issue concealed carry permits. So while the incident took place in LAPD's jurisdiction, it was the Sheriff's Department that decided to revoke his carry permit.

Just making an educated guess here.

His interaction with LAPD cause the responding officers to file a complaint with the CCW's issuing Agency...which would be the LASO. I figure LASO has a policy of responding to complaint filed by an outside LE agency of suspending the CCW in question. That's fairly typical

I have no idea what type of investigation took place for it to be withdrawn or what sort of appeal/hearing rights are involved...it is usually spelled out during the application process and agreed to prior to issuance

In my CCW, it been pounded into our head that you’re to be extra cooperative with LEO. They say as a CCW holder you’re held to a higher standard.

I thought his CCW permit had been taken as part of a normal investigation. However I had to watch the CN video to understand that LASO had revoked it. In a county where a CCW is a little more difficult to get, maybe the sheriff is a little more sensitive (and succumbs to pressure) to revoke the permit.

Similar situations have taken place in friendlier CA counties. The sheriff usually give the CCW holder a high five. Not the case with LASO.

quote:

Originally posted by 2000Z-71:
My understanding is that it is the Sheriff's Departments in California that issue concealed carry permits. So while the incident took place in LAPD's jurisdiction, it was the Sheriff's Department that decided to revoke his carry permit.

Depending on the jurisdiction, carry permits are issued by either chief of police, or county sheriff, in California.

quote:

Originally posted by bcereuss:Well, if we want to parse words, it is really a “right protected by the second amendment”, not a “2nd amendment right.”

I've been reminding Americans and telling everybody that fact for more years than I can recall.

I'm still 'corrected' on occasions by your fellow-countrymen.

Seems odd to grant a person a license to carry a concealed firearm only to take the license away if the person uses that concealed firearm in self-defense. That’d be like granting someone a driver’s license only to take it away because they drove a car.

Is there more to the story? I’m really curious why this guy was targeted. He doesn’t seem like a random, soft target.

The leo agency responsible for revoking his rights is just petty. Bunch of children entrusted with the power to fuck your life up. That's some scary shit.

In the state of CA, the county sheriff is who issues conceal carry licenses, however within cities, the police department may require citizens go through them instead of the sheriff or, you can go through either, I know in San Francisco you can apply via either department, SFPD with larger resources than the SO, seems to be processing them faster than the SO.

This homeowner lives in the heart of Los Angeles, West of DTLA and a section north of I-10. The giant swath just South of this area, that runs along I-110 is bad guy-land, lots and lots of perpetrators come out of this section seeking 'opportunities' to prey upon surrounding neighborhoods. Sounds like LASO issued his CCL permit and LAPD is the lead investigating agency. LASO has a new sheriff, who's nowhere close to being understanding and as accommodating to citizen self-defense and the 2A as the last sheriff, who often clashed with LA officials and city council during COVID lockdowns. As for culture, LASO generally is much more conservative than LAPD which tends to be a tool of the LA city council.