Years ago I had a CA CCW. It was "easy" to get, you just have to pay a lot of taxes (theft) and go through range training. It's not constitutional carry but its a step in the right direction. The most beneficial part of the "certification" course was that the teacher would talk us through historical and hypothetical scenarios of what has/could happen to you in court in the event of a CCW shooting.
It wasn't a required part of the course, but the teacher was telling us he has seen, despite the shooting being justified, the civil/criminal case where the prosecution has argued that the defendant "was intentionally looking to shoot someone" because of customizations made to the handgun. Our teacher told us to keep everything stock, and keep receipts of all ammo, holsters, and gear you carry. No engravings on the firearm or trigger jobs, etc. as a way to CYA in the event of a CCW shooting. I think it's ridiculous for a judge to let a prosecuting DA bring arguments like that into a hearing but being CA it doesn't surprise me. Anything for the DA to get his prosecution rate up.
