Peruta v. San Diego – Challenge To Good Cause Requirement

The San Diego Union-Tribune posted a story yesterday on the challenge to the requirement to show “good cause” to obtain a CCW in San Diego County, California. This is one of the first times that a major California newspaper has recognized the battle to have self-defense recognized as a “good cause”.

Ed Peruta and his wife Lois.

The basis of the suit that Ed Peruta and others have brought in Federal court is this:

What constitutes “good cause” is at the heart of the debate and the one element that is considered on a case-by-case basis.

“Essentially, an applicant must demonstrate facts that show him to be a specific target or subject of a threat,” said Sanford Toyen, the sheriff’s legal adviser. “Simply stating that one needs a CCW for personal protection or safety will not be sufficient.”

Peruta, by the way, has CCW permits in Florida, Connecticut, and Utah. He lives in his RV and is an independent journalist and resides part of the year in San Diego County. The rest of the litigants include a retired MD who’s had death threats in the past, a retired Navy officer, a psych RN who has been threatened by patients, a young hair salon owner who makes large cash deposits late at night, and the California Rifle and Pistol Association.

This thread started by Ed Peruta on the CalGuns Forum notes that some of the facts in the article are off a bit. Nonetheless, they are happy to see the issue getting coverage in a major paper. The best thing about the article, in my opinion, is the picture above of Ed and Lois Peruta. It shows that people wanting a CCW to protect themselves are just ordinary, everyday people.


2 thoughts on “Peruta v. San Diego – Challenge To Good Cause Requirement”

  1. Correct me if I am wrong, but doesn't an actual threat constitute an actionable reason to engage the police? The San Diego Sheriff is basically saying that the citizen has no right to self defense, and that until the citizen is harmed to the point where he would be bound to engage, the sheriff will not do so. We already know that Self Defense is considered a Constitutionally just reason, under Heller and McDonald. How long until these cretins in Law Enforcement are finally forced to relent?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *