5 ms·

I would agree if California was a shall-issue state for CCW, but it's a may-issue state. Essentially it's arbitrarily up to the sheriffs department if you can g

I would agree if California was a shall-issue state for CCW, but it's a may-issue state. Essentially it's arbitrarily up to the sheriffs department if you can get a CCW. Personally, I chose to live in shall-issue states.

kmonsen 6y ago
That is just bullshit. May issue does not mean may according to bribe.
- giantg2 6y ago
  How do you explain denials in a may-issue system if the individual meets statutory requirements?
  - tshaddox 6y ago
    Does the driving test requirement to receive a driver’s license mean that driver’s licenses are may-issue?
    - giantg2 6y ago
      Nope, that's also shall-issue in most states. If you meet the statutory requirements (passing the test, age, etc), then they must issue the license.
      - tshaddox 6y ago
        But the test is necessarily subjective. The instructor can determine, for instance, whether the applicant drove recklessly during the exam.
        giantg2 6y ago
        Sort of. I kind of hate that reckless driving law since it is somewhat subjective. Each state should have case law about it and allow you your due process rights to challenge it too. But yeah, I can see in the context of the test that it could be a problem. If you record the test, then you should be able to challenge it (sad it sometimes comes to that). I'm in a similar situation, actually. I had a trooper lie in court and even admit to it in the complaint investigation, but the investigator (another trooper) said it must be a misunderstanding. I'm curious how intentionally lying to cover up your mistake (exculpatory evidence) is a misunderstanding as a civil rights violation under Brady v MD, but I also don't want to get 'suicided'.
        tshaddox 6y ago
        It would be extremely difficult to define all driving rules objectively even if you had extremely high resolution data of the car and its surroundings. Approximately as difficult as programming a fully autonomous car, I reckon.
        giantg2 6y ago
        Not really. The driving laws except for recklessness are very well defined.
        tshaddox 6y ago
        That’s not the case. There are tons of driving laws that are based essentially on a subjective idea of what is safe or reasonable. Laws about cargo being secured safely. Laws about the driver’s view not being unreasonably obstructed. Laws about the driver being distracted. Laws about exercising appropriate caution in response to traffic, weather and road conditions, the presence of pedestrians and other dangers and obstacles, etc. There are tons.
        giantg2 6y ago
        Not when you look at case law. Also some of that varies from state to state.
        samatman 6y ago
        The part of the test administered by the state is objective, in all three states in which I've obtained a license. The part which is subjective is deputized to instructors, and one can shop around for a willing one. The moral hazard you're alluding to is completely absent.
  - geofft 6y ago
    It's just like employment discrimination. In an at-will-employment jurisdiction, my boss is free to arbitrarily fire me, but cannot specifically fire me for e.g. my race. (How do you tell the difference? Well, as in this case, usually people leave some sort of evidence, and the legal system has a process for demanding evidence and evaluating it. It's not perfect, but it's certainly not unenforceable.)
    - ummonk 6y ago
      You’ve got it backwards. Instances where they do leave evidence are the exception, not the norm. Which is why the anti discrimination laws are somewhat toothless and the government tries to look for statistical evidence of discrimination.
giantg2 6y ago
I can't see how any may-issue schemes are legal when it comes to equal protection rights.
- jkaplowitz 6y ago
  If may-issue schemes are applied in a way that evaluates the individual case on neutral and non-discriminatory criteria, even if a subjective element of judgment exists, it certainly can comply with equal protection rights. If they're applied in an unequal way, of course that's different.
  - giantg2 6y ago
    If the criteria isn't codified, then how can it be equally applied?
    - jkaplowitz 6y ago
      Courts are very familiar with adjudicating such ambiguity and have been throughout history. They simply have to avoid discriminating in ways that violate the law, but other forms of subjectivity. As a stupid but illustrative hypothetical example, if the official decides each morning whether he will approve all CCW applications he sees that day or none of them based on a die roll before leaving home, and then unilaterally changes it a month later to go based on whether the last digit of the local CBS affiliate's high temperature forecast from the 7am newscast is odd or even, these stupid rules and rule changes would be completely compliant with the equal protection clause.
      - giantg2 6y ago
        They have to provide legal reasoning. Simply using an arbitrary die roll would not be lawful, unless the legislature specified it.
        Reelin 6y ago
        Using a die roll would be arbitrary and capricious (and thus I assume illegal), but would it violate equal protection specifically? I suspect not.
jkaplowitz 6y ago
The sheriff's department wasn't allowed to refuse the permit for this reason, as evidenced by the fact that the officials involved are also being criminally charged for the bribery scheme.
- R0b0t1 6y ago
  They're being charged because it looks like they accepted a bribe, not because they refused a permit. If they hadn't paid there'd be nothing to charge them with.
  - zepto 6y ago
    For all the people saying - ‘he should have gone to the FBI’ this is a key point. If he didn’t pay the bribe there would have been nothing to report.

kmonsen 6y ago

That is just bullshit. May issue does not mean may according to bribe.

giantg2 6y ago
How do you explain denials in a may-issue system if the individual meets statutory requirements?
- tshaddox 6y ago
  Does the driving test requirement to receive a driver’s license mean that driver’s licenses are may-issue?
  - giantg2 6y ago
    Nope, that's also shall-issue in most states. If you meet the statutory requirements (passing the test, age, etc), then they must issue the license.
    - tshaddox 6y ago
      But the test is necessarily subjective. The instructor can determine, for instance, whether the applicant drove recklessly during the exam.
      - giantg2 6y ago
        Sort of. I kind of hate that reckless driving law since it is somewhat subjective. Each state should have case law about it and allow you your due process rights to challenge it too. But yeah, I can see in the context of the test that it could be a problem. If you record the test, then you should be able to challenge it (sad it sometimes comes to that). I'm in a similar situation, actually. I had a trooper lie in court and even admit to it in the complaint investigation, but the investigator (another trooper) said it must be a misunderstanding. I'm curious how intentionally lying to cover up your mistake (exculpatory evidence) is a misunderstanding as a civil rights violation under Brady v MD, but I also don't want to get 'suicided'.
        tshaddox 6y ago
        It would be extremely difficult to define all driving rules objectively even if you had extremely high resolution data of the car and its surroundings. Approximately as difficult as programming a fully autonomous car, I reckon.
        giantg2 6y ago
        Not really. The driving laws except for recklessness are very well defined.
        tshaddox 6y ago
        That’s not the case. There are tons of driving laws that are based essentially on a subjective idea of what is safe or reasonable. Laws about cargo being secured safely. Laws about the driver’s view not being unreasonably obstructed. Laws about the driver being distracted. Laws about exercising appropriate caution in response to traffic, weather and road conditions, the presence of pedestrians and other dangers and obstacles, etc. There are tons.
        giantg2 6y ago
        Not when you look at case law. Also some of that varies from state to state.
      - samatman 6y ago
        The part of the test administered by the state is objective, in all three states in which I've obtained a license. The part which is subjective is deputized to instructors, and one can shop around for a willing one. The moral hazard you're alluding to is completely absent.
- geofft 6y ago
  It's just like employment discrimination. In an at-will-employment jurisdiction, my boss is free to arbitrarily fire me, but cannot specifically fire me for e.g. my race. (How do you tell the difference? Well, as in this case, usually people leave some sort of evidence, and the legal system has a process for demanding evidence and evaluating it. It's not perfect, but it's certainly not unenforceable.)
  - ummonk 6y ago
    You’ve got it backwards. Instances where they do leave evidence are the exception, not the norm. Which is why the anti discrimination laws are somewhat toothless and the government tries to look for statistical evidence of discrimination.

giantg2 6y ago

I can't see how any may-issue schemes are legal when it comes to equal protection rights.

jkaplowitz 6y ago
If may-issue schemes are applied in a way that evaluates the individual case on neutral and non-discriminatory criteria, even if a subjective element of judgment exists, it certainly can comply with equal protection rights. If they're applied in an unequal way, of course that's different.
- giantg2 6y ago
  If the criteria isn't codified, then how can it be equally applied?
  - jkaplowitz 6y ago
    Courts are very familiar with adjudicating such ambiguity and have been throughout history. They simply have to avoid discriminating in ways that violate the law, but other forms of subjectivity. As a stupid but illustrative hypothetical example, if the official decides each morning whether he will approve all CCW applications he sees that day or none of them based on a die roll before leaving home, and then unilaterally changes it a month later to go based on whether the last digit of the local CBS affiliate's high temperature forecast from the 7am newscast is odd or even, these stupid rules and rule changes would be completely compliant with the equal protection clause.
    - giantg2 6y ago
      They have to provide legal reasoning. Simply using an arbitrary die roll would not be lawful, unless the legislature specified it.
      - Reelin 6y ago
        Using a die roll would be arbitrary and capricious (and thus I assume illegal), but would it violate equal protection specifically? I suspect not.

jkaplowitz 6y ago

The sheriff's department wasn't allowed to refuse the permit for this reason, as evidenced by the fact that the officials involved are also being criminally charged for the bribery scheme.

R0b0t1 6y ago
They're being charged because it looks like they accepted a bribe, not because they refused a permit. If they hadn't paid there'd be nothing to charge them with.
- zepto 6y ago
  For all the people saying - ‘he should have gone to the FBI’ this is a key point. If he didn’t pay the bribe there would have been nothing to report.