What is “mental health training?”
I’m around mental health professionals and they are imperfect people like you and me.
Most lean left.
Think hoplophobic.
I’m not trusting them with my right.
7 Likes
Never heard of this word. Had to look it up. Great description.
My step dad, great man he was, was a child psychologist that needed one. He was very loving and a fantastic man. Just had his quirks we still talk about after he passed. Maybe the class should be taught by child psychologists?
3 Likes
sorry you live in a communist state brother. Come to MS and throw that worthless POS permit in the trash when you cross the state line. None needed here.
4 Likes
All CCW permits are unconstitutional. Tell your state representatives to legislate for permitless carry. Criminals DON’T carry CCW permits. THEY JUST CARRY so WHY CAN’T LAW-ABIDING CITIZENS DO THE SAME! CCW permits are a form of GUN CONTROL on Law-Abiding citizens! IF STATES WANT CCW PERMITS, IMPOSE THESE PERMITS ON THE CRIMINALS OR DISARM THEM PERMANENTLY, AND LEAVE LAW-ABIDING CITIZENS ALONE! They are not the ones committing CRIME!
3 Likes
They’re wicked Democrat representatives you’re referring to 
2 Likes
I’m sure there’s Republican Representatives in CA that can challenge, it was tried in NM 2023 Legislation but was tabled (Permitless Carry), gonna try again in 2024, just gotta push it. Never give up. When they push, gotta push back.
1 Like
He has a place for you to sleep too. 
3 Likes
Happened like that here, Both the State House and State Senate passed Constitutional Carry but Governor Herbert wouldn’t sign it, next election cycle we voted in Governor Cox, one of the first things he did was sign the bill.
4 Likes
Completely agree with your statements. Problem is they have a super majority in state “leadership” and worse, Soros funded commie DA’s. The DA’s will prosecute a law abiding carrier for any infraction of their rules, but dismiss or plead down most criminals crimes and gun charges. And frankly I’m not wanting to be somebody’s bitch in prison so “just ignore the obviously unconstitutional laws” isn’t the right solution. This is a nightmare with very serious consequences of legal persecution and inability to protect ourselves. The SCOTUS must stop this once and for all.
5 Likes
The third is BSIS run by consumer affairs. These are the guys that issue certification for different things, one being security guard card and open carry for security. The requirements to pass the security is easier than my county and the county to the south.
I am certified through CA DOJ, which make sense because that is the department that does background checks when purchasing a firearm and is the only department, from my limited knowledge, that can authorize the right to carry concealed or exposed. Security guards have to fill with DOJ to carry exposed.
They have eliminated anyone certified through DOJ.
3 Likes
There are not enough Republicans in either the state house or senate. I do not remember the exact number but roughly 25% of the demoncrates would have to vote with all the republicans to have a chance to challange.
4 Likes
We just need people, and then the courts, to realize that requiring a permit to carry in the first place is an unconstitutional infringement and stop requiring a permit via court/SCOTUS declaring that the Second Amendment means what it says
4 Likes
“I might no longer renew because of the prohibitive requirements.”
CA has apparently appealed to the ninth circuit to stay the injunction, unfortunately the 9th circuit is not friendly to the 2nd amendment, I’m curious, if Ca becomes one big gun free zone, will USCCA continue to cover it’s members in the event we decide to continue carrying in the newly restricted areas considering they do not cover “criminal acts”.
3 Likes
That is not how the criminal acts exclusion works.
Violation of a state conceal carry or similar law is not itself an exclusion. As in, you could still potentially have a covered act of self defense despite carrying in an illegal location per state law.
There is an exclusion for federal law. Check page 4 of that self defense liability insurance policy members are additional insureds on for that.
"Unlawful Use or Possession of Firearm
Use or possession of a firearm or other weapon in violation of 18 U.S.C § 922 or other
applicable federal law. "
The membership benefits would not be covering your act of breaking the law to carry concealed where you are not supposed to, but for a state conceal carry law that doesn’t necessarily mean no coverage for the lawful act of self defense not otherwise excluded
2 Likes
An honest question: with the way DAs work with stacking up charges from greater to lower like our mall delivery driver. He was found innocent on aggravated assault ut guilof shooting in a mall. How does the USCCA divide the cost of defending him? Is there a scale or is it get off on the main charge you’re covered for everything?
1 Like
Interesting question, but, what we do know, is that he was never denied coverage and our current understanding is that membership benefits are providing for appeal on that one (illogical, seemingly) guilty charge. After all, the definition of conviction in the policy is “final non-appealable”
We also know that, to date, the USCCA’s insurer has never recovered any of the legal fees paid on behalf of members.
3 Likes
Thank you for the reply.
2 Likes
I guess my biggest concern came after I heard about the Alan Collie case, he had USCCA but was instead defended by a public defender.
Yes, What I see is the template of what they want the rest of the country to do. Wow is all I have on this one.
2 Likes
2 Likes