CCW Contra Costa County

[john_marsten_1873]

!!?? " This is fantastic and horrifically poorly timed all in one. Hopefully the County caves or it will end up in the 9th making bad law.
The 9th already addressed this rationale. Accessories are not protected by and don’t implicate the 2nd. It’s that simple for the 9th. It’s toast before it begins. If it is not a “firearm” (here is the new two part test the 9th created to avoid SCOTUS’ new protections) then it doesn’t implicate the 2nd and Bruen is inapplicable.
Then we move to SCOTUS which, like the mag ban cases, will just ignore it. It’s not juicy. It’s not a handgun ban. It’s not anything they want to rule on as it requires too much minutia for four Justices who hate guns.
Bruen left far too much room in dicta about the State’s rights to regulate - but not ban - CCW rights to hang a beautiful noose around most CCW plaintiffs necks. In my humble opinion anyway.
If this backfires it will do so in a way that is bad for all firearm accessories in Cali - and not just for CCW.
This isn’t a firearm absolute ban case. CCW holders can carry just not with the “accessories” they want. This isn’t a good one to fight given SCOTUS recalcitrance to take any gun cases."

Facebook

www.facebook.com

Don’t think has to consider whether devices are Constitutionally protected is the correct framing.

But more so whether someone can have their Constitutional right to CCW revoked for running devices that improves their ability to identify a target and shoot more accurately, minimizing the potential danger to innocent bystanders.

Furthermore, there’s no state laws or restrictions on such devices. so can an issuing agency set such restrictions - inconsistent within the rest of the county and surrounding areas - solely based on opinions and no data to back it up.

 

[2muchsoysauce4allthisrice]

Lawsuit filed!

https://saf.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/06/Contra-Costa-complaint.pdf

So, let’s just say the optics portion passes since the argument is stronger than what they wrote about lights.

I’m guessing there might be some requirement about slide must be OR cut from the factory; can’t be third party cut. Some slides use the plate system instead of direct mount. Factory optic plates are usually plastic, based on online research, the plastic bosses/lugs on the plate, are known to be a possible shearing point under heavy use. Aluminum aftermarket plates can be a more durable option. I wonder if aftermarket aluminum plates from a reputable brand such as forward control designs or calculated kinetics will be considered a modification.

 

[kmoros]

!!?? " This is fantastic and horrifically poorly timed all in one. Hopefully the County caves or it will end up in the 9th making bad law.
The 9th already addressed this rationale. Accessories are not protected by and don’t implicate the 2nd. It’s that simple for the 9th. It’s toast before it begins. If it is not a “firearm” (here is the new two part test the 9th created to avoid SCOTUS’ new protections) then it doesn’t implicate the 2nd and Bruen is inapplicable.
Then we move to SCOTUS which, like the mag ban cases, will just ignore it. It’s not juicy. It’s not a handgun ban. It’s not anything they want to rule on as it requires too much minutia for four Justices who hate guns.
Bruen left far too much room in dicta about the State’s rights to regulate - but not ban - CCW rights to hang a beautiful noose around most CCW plaintiffs necks. In my humble opinion anyway.
If this backfires it will do so in a way that is bad for all firearm accessories in Cali - and not just for CCW.
This isn’t a firearm absolute ban case. CCW holders can carry just not with the “accessories” they want. This isn’t a good one to fight given SCOTUS recalcitrance to take any gun cases."

Facebook

www.facebook.com

Ya, I've given all of this plenty of thought, believe me. Without revealing a whole legal strategy, here's a few things I will say:

1. The damage from Duncan is done (barring SCOTUS granting cert and reversing it). Your concern that this will somehow make things worse...I get it, but that ship has sailed.

2. Other circuits will create splits with this, and in fact the Fifth Circuit just did last week in a suppressor case, where it ruled that such "Accessories" are protected arms because they are "instruments that facilitate armed self defense." So even if you are right that this wouldn't be the case the Court ultimately took, it would still benefit from that circuit split getting decided.

3. We need to roll back Duncan a bit, and have some level of protection for so-called "accessories." The most likely way to have that happen is with items that even some hostile judges will be sympathetic with. Because lights and red dots make you more likely to actually hit your target in a self-defense scenario, and only your target, I think they will qualify. They are legitimately safety-enhancing in a commonsense way.

Of course, for 1911s/2011s none of this even applies, those are just straight-up arms.

Also, all of the above may be moot if Contra Costa decides to just settle by repealing the rules rather than drag this out. But if they don't, then we certainly have a longer term view of things.

I'd love to say even more, but we'll save it for our motion practice.

 

[Trauma]

Anyone have an update in regards to Pinole ?

I reached out to an instructor and he said that CoCo was sitting down with Pinole PD to discuss the CCW process. That was about a month ago.

 

[2muchsoysauce4allthisrice]

Ya, I've given all of this plenty of thought, believe me. Without revealing a whole legal strategy, here's a few things I will say:

1. The damage from Duncan is done (barring SCOTUS granting cert and reversing it). Your concern that this will somehow make things worse...I get it, but that ship has sailed.

2. Other circuits will create splits with this, and in fact the Fifth Circuit just did last week in a suppressor case, where it ruled that such "Accessories" are protected arms because they are "instruments that facilitate armed self defense." So even if you are right that this wouldn't be the case the Court ultimately took, it would still benefit from that circuit split getting decided.

3. We need to roll back Duncan a bit, and have some level of protection for so-called "accessories." The most likely way to have that happen is with items that even some hostile judges will be sympathetic with. Because lights and red dots make you more likely to actually hit your target in a self-defense scenario, and only your target, I think they will qualify. They are legitimately safety-enhancing in a commonsense way.

Of course, for 1911s/2011s none of this even applies, those are just straight-up arms.

Also, all of the above may be moot if Contra Costa decides to just settle by repealing the rules rather than drag this out. But if they don't, then we certainly have a longer term view of things.

I'd love to say even more, but we'll save it for our motion practice.

Do you think they will increase the ccw costs on us because of this lawsuit? It’s only been $80 for app and $80 for issue so far.

 

[john_marsten_1873]

So, let’s just say the optics portion passes since the argument is stronger than what they wrote about lights.

I’m guessing there might be some requirement about slide must be OR cut from the factory; can’t be third party cut. Some slides use the plate system instead of direct mount. Factory optic plates are usually plastic, based on online research, the plastic bosses/lugs on the plate, are known to be a possible shearing point under heavy use. Aluminum aftermarket plates can be a more durable option. I wonder if aftermarket aluminum plates from a reputable brand such as forward control designs or calculated kinetics will be considered a modification.

Doubt CoCo will even know enough about optics to make that argument.

 

[2muchsoysauce4allthisrice]

Doubt CoCo will even know enough about optics to make that argument.

Their deputies have been carrying on duty with optics and lights for about 1.5-2 years now? Right?

 

[john_marsten_1873]

Their deputies have been carrying on duty with optics and lights for about 1.5-2 years now? Right?

What's the likelihood that enough of them are mounting their own optics and fooling around with plates versus just using what the department issues?

 

[2muchsoysauce4allthisrice]

What's the likelihood that enough of them are mounting their own optics and fooling around with plates versus just using what the department issues?

Most agencies have only about at least 1-3 armors or certified Glock armorers within the department; right?

Anyways, my point or end goal is leading to the question of; do you think it’s worth it for us or a waste to have a compact or subcompact set up now with a red dot in preparation?

I was thinking of mounting a holosun 509t to a calculated kinetics dog plate to a m&p 2.0 metal compact, since it accommodates the LcI. Otherwise I would just use the factory plastic plates to accommodate the LcI but probably would just go with an trijicon rmr or Holosun 508t.

I only have full size handguns with optics for home defense.

 

[2muchsoysauce4allthisrice]

What's the likelihood that enough of them are mounting their own optics and fooling around with plates versus just using what the department issues?

Do you think they will care about aftermarket optic cuts? Such as getting a gen 3 Glock slide cut for a specific optic? I noticed one IA (I think it was placer); doesn’t allow aftermarket optic cuts. They state must be cut from the factory.

 

[2muchsoysauce4allthisrice]

For those of us with only full size frame handguns with optics, do you think it’s worth it for us or is it a waste of time; to set up a compact or subcompact with a red dot in preparation? Or too early?

 

[Gawernator]

For those of us with only full size frame handguns with optics, do you think it’s worth it for us or is it a waste of time; to set up a compact or subcompact with a red dot in preparation? Or too early?

def get a subcompact or compact for daily carry

 

[2muchsoysauce4allthisrice]

def get a subcompact or compact for daily carry

I already but they only have trijicon tritium HD XR sights; for the ones on the permit.

I’m asking about if it’s worth it for us to get a separate subcompact or compact, that’s not on the permit, set up with dot; in preparation of the outcomes of this lawsuit? But then we don’t even know what the policy will be like. Or even if there will be restrictions on aftermarket cuts? What if someone wants to carry g19 gen 3 with aimpoint coa or Holosun 509t with a aftermarket optic cut on Oem slide?

Again with not knowing what the policy will be like. We don’t even know if the part about fighting about SAO firearms will help us get the win on the restrictions on carrying other pistols. We don’t even know if they will remove the barrel length and caliber restrictions; so we can finally be able to have bag gun pdw’s on the permit such as for long drives in the passenger seat leg area.

 

[Gawernator]

I already but they only have trijicon tritium HD XR sights; for the ones on the permit.

I’m asking about if it’s worth it for us to get a separate subcompact or compact, that’s not on the permit, set up with dot; in preparation of the outcomes of this lawsuit? But then we don’t even know what the policy will be like. Or even if there will be restrictions on aftermarket cuts? What if someone wants to carry g19 gen 3 with aimpoint coa or Holosun 509t with a aftermarket optic cut on Oem slide?

... time to buy a Walther PDP compact brother

 

[2muchsoysauce4allthisrice]

... time to buy a Walther PDP compact brother

Our Ia doesn’t allow removal of MD.

 

[Gawernator]

Our Ia doesn’t allow removal of MD.

It's ok, they are hard to remove on that gun lol

 

[john_marsten_1873]

Do you think they will care about aftermarket optic cuts? Such as getting a gen 3 Glock slide cut for a specific optic? I noticed one IA (I think it was placer); doesn’t allow aftermarket optic cuts. They state must be cut from the factory.

that’s a good point. I can see them restricting something like that. Just depends how crazy they want to get to make it difficult to run an optic..

 

[DIYPSCM]

Just did my online change of address. Filled out form, uploaded 3 utility bills, paid $35. Less than 5 minutes later I had an email to select a pickup date.

 

[DIYPSCM]

Just did my online change of address. Filled out form, uploaded 3 utility bills, paid $35. Less than 5 minutes later I had an email to select a pickup date.

Well, I missed my 4:00 pickup appointment. My fault, no excuses. Be warned they close at 4:00. So I emailed for how to proceed... a very nice lady named Cece replied... you can pick it up anytime m-f 8-4.

 

[kmoros]

It's not over until it's over, but hopefully will have good news for you guys sometime in the next few weeks.