Sheriff's Department handling of concealed weapon permits fine for Placer police chiefs

[MikePapa1]

http://www.sacbee.com/2012/06/27/4591589/sheriffs-department-handling-of.html

Some common sense in California. Very rare and welcome.

[TMF]

I'm kinda confused by this article. So, as I understand it, the Grand Jury wants there to be a written agreement between local PDs and the County SO that indicates permit issuing will be deferred to the SO? I mean, I guess admin-wise it makes sense to have procedures in writing, but I don't see why a Grand Jury is the one telling them to do it. That's like a Grand Jury convening to discuss how the PD decides to organize case files.... alphabetically or chronologically. That seems like administrative business to me.

The other part is regarding the SO to report who has permits within the PD's jurisdiction. That doesn't make much sense either. Why do they need a list of who has a permit and who doesn't? I would assume in CA there is a state database or something that can be checked when called in, like in a traffic stop. I dunno, I don't think I understand what the purpose is of law enforcement having a "list" of who has what. The Sheriff sounds like he has the right idea though.

[Cherokee Slim]

You see the same thing here in Tennessee. The Grand Jury meets then tells the sheriff the jail is dangerous, too small or whatever. I think they can investigate, or at least hear complaints about anything and they frequently "recommend" the County or sheriff or whoever do something. I don't think they can force an action other than true or no true bill, but what happens when some inmate dies from lead poisoning that the Grand Jury recommended be removed? Lawsuit.

Cherokee Slim