California concealed weapons instructors pushed out by new rules, causing shortage

Many California firearms instructors who teach a class required to get a state concealed weapons permit are no longer certified, at least for now, under new state Department of Justice regulations.

The rules were issued as part of the DOJ’s implementation of Senate Bill 2, a controversial new state law that went into effect on Jan. 1 and that widely limits where concealed weapons can be legally carried and by whom. The law has been the subject of several recent and dueling judicial rulings. The latest ruling, from an appeals court, blocks the state from restricting concealed weapons from “sensitive places,” including churches, parks, restaurants, and stores.

The new instructor certification rules effectively limit the pool of allowable instructors to those who can teach at police academies, train armed security guards, or instruct higher education students developing careers in law enforcement.

Opponents of the new regulations say the situation is creating a shortage of certified instructors and will make it difficult or even impossible for Californians to go through the steps necessary to acquire or renew a concealed weapons permit.

The state DOJ describes the new regulations as necessary due to what it described as a public safety emergency of people not allowed to carry concealed weapons still getting permits. But several Fresno-area instructors say they are left on uncertain ground.

“Why all of the sudden did this come up when I’ve been teaching this course for 15 years?” said Curt Hamett, of the Police Science Institute, a Fresno-based organization that offers concealed carry permit classes and other specialized training for security guards and other private security jobs.

Said Sam Carter, another Fresno-area instructor: “We still haven’t got the guidelines required for us to re-qualify.”

SB 2 limits where concealed weapons may be carried by permit holders. It identifies no-go areas that include state buildings, courts, hospitals, schools, parks, doctor offices, and anywhere alcohol is sold or served.

Federal Judge Cormac J. Carney issued an injunction against the law on Dec 20, but the federal Ninth Circuit Court of appeal issued a stay of the injunction Saturday, and the law went into effect Jan. 1.

There is no definitive timeline on the length of the stay.

The DOJ said it issued the SB 2-related regulations to establish qualifications necessary to become an instructor as well as grounds to revoke certifications.

“The legislature deemed the Department’s regulations necessary to address an emergency because of the public’s safety interests in preventing persons who are prohibited from owning or possessing a firearm from obtaining a CCW licenses,” the DOJ wrote.

State Senator Anthony Portantino, author of SB 2, said of the DOJ regulations:

“Clearly, appropriate training is important whether flying a plane, driving a car or using a firearm and shouldn’t be partisan or controversial. SB 2 seeks to enhance training to make California safer.”

Same Paredes, of Gun Owners of California, who opposes the rules, said “kicked out” instructors included those trained by the National Rifle Association and the United States Concealed Carry Association.

“A guillotine has dropped on the process,” he said.

Paredes said instructors trained by the two organizations make up the great majority of those teaching CCW classes. He added that now, it appeared the only certified instructors would be those teaching firearm classes for armed security guards under a state Department of Consumer Affairs program, and those certified in the Peace Officer Standards and Training program, which is primarily intended for police officers and students studying for careers in law enforcement .

He also said he believes the regulations are a political overreach that will be rejected in federal courts on constitutional grounds,

“They (supporters of SB 2) have so amped this thing up that I believe we will be completely victorious,” he said.

Efforts to reach the state DOJ for comment about the regulations were unsuccessful.