Bill Hunt Talks About Concealed Weapon Permits (CCW)

As part of an ongoing report, March 1, 2010, FFFF’s Travis Kiger, Fullerton businessman Larry Lazar and myself sat down with Bill Hunt, 2010 candidate for Orange County Sheriff. The roundtable discussion was an opportunity to ask some important questions that we think are on the minds of voters. No topic was off-limits.

We had some questions about CCW’s for the man whose slogan has been “The Sheriff should be in the business of protecting people’s rights, not restricting them.”

We asked Bill Hunt how his stance was different from his opponent’s. Hunt told us that he is a constitutionalist and believes that the current system lends itself to corruption. Hunt believes that the statistics from 39 “Shall Issue” states, is proof that CCW’s lower crime rates. Further, he believes that an armed citizenry will help keep the peace at a time when the Sheriff’s Department is looking to lay off sworn deputies.

We also asked Hunt to lay out the process that an applicant can expect if he is elected Sheriff. Hunt said, “If we have someone come in and they are a range owner and maybe they have own of these reciprocal CCW’s that’s good in thirteen states, and they’re in good standing in those states, then I think we need to shorten up that process. We need to verify that the permit is legitimate and have had backgrounds on them, and then do an updated background to make sure there have been no problems in the interim. Then we check their training. If they’re proficient, we have our range master check them out. If they’re proficient, sign them off. If it’s a new person with no current CCW then we need to do the full background check, send them through the full NRA familiarization course, and get them through the process!”

Hunt also wants to waive or at least reduce fees for low-income applicants. The logic is simple: low-income areas have higher crime rates thus more victims. Lowering fees would put the odds back in the hands of citizens rather than the criminals.

A cookie-cutter approach is the wrong way to handle it. There is no one-size-fits-all when it comes to CCW’s, crime victims, and high propensity targets.

“When seconds count, cops are minutes away!” – Bill Hunt

 Read the transcript...

Transcript

TK: “Your view on CCW’s (concealed Weapon Permits) is different than either of your opponents’. Can you elaborate on that?”

Hunt: “Yeah, I’m a straight constitutionalist. Fundamentally, one person having the authority to arbitrarily decide the issue of CCW’s is problematic. Primarily because the older sheriffs used it to manipulate contributions. If you issue them sparingly a wink-wink nod-nod, you don’t see it publically. But with a little support for the sheriff and a wink-wink nod-nod, you get a CCW and it becomes corrupt. But more than that, fundamentally, its right. When you look at the history and progression of CCW’s in this country, we began to give up those rights in the 1960’s. We have 39 ‘Shall Issue’ states in this country right now. If you look at the data in states where law abiding citizens are allowed to carry guns, crime goes down significantly. Crooks are just like anyone else, they’re playing the odds. If they walk into a room and they don’t know who is armed, they know that they have less chance for success. And unless they are crazy – and you can’t stop a crazy person anyway – you have less likelihood that they’ll cause a problem. So, if it’s a fundamental right and it lowers crime, what business ultimately is the sheriff in? The crime fighting business. And in our economy where it’s going to be tougher to put [deputies] on the streets because of money, I think we ought to create a citizen’s auxiliary. They are armed, paying their fees, going through training, buying products, and they are supporting free enterprise. That’s what government is supposed to be doing.”

GS: “Can you outline the overall process that an applicant will need to go through to obtain a CCW under your leadership?”

Hunt: “I think you’ll find this consistent with the way I think. It’s the government’s job to inconvenience itself for the service of the People.

Here is the process for a CCW right now: You come in the front door, fill out your application, pay your fees, you get your fingerprints, you do your background check, you take this training that ever body has to have regardless of who you are. Then you are out the backdoor and in two years, you get to do it all again.

Here is what I want to do: It is very costly to go through that process. So if we have someone come in and they are a range owner and they have own of these reciprocal CCW’s that’s good in thirteen states, and they’re in good standing in those states, then I think we need to shorten up that process. We need to verify that the permit is legitimate and have had backgrounds on them, and then do an updated background to make sure there have been no problems in the interim. Then we check their training. If they’re proficient, we have our range master check them out. If they’re proficient, sign them off. If it’s a new person with no current CCW then we need to do the full background check, send them through the full NRA familiarization course, and get them through the process!

Another thing I want to do is waive or substantially reduce fees for those who qualify as low income law abiding citizens. A person who lives in the poorer high-crime neighborhoods who is more likely to be a victim of crime than you or I in our nice neighborhoods cannot afford the expensive fees typically associated with a CCW. I want to partner up with ranges to provide free or substantially reduced training for these people that really do need it."