I did not know about it, but it does not surprise me at all.
Well, if I was to walk into a fast food establishment and a nut came in and started shooting patrons, I'd be very happy to find several people who either were OC or CC to put him down before he got to me. But in California, they prefer to just die.
Reason number 20 for me not to return to my roots. Its really a shame even though I'm not interested in open carry. The conceal carry permit for California is what I would like but the chances of getting one is tough. Oh well, Arizona works for me.
Nope...nothing surprising here. Doesn't sound like they are losing much, the "right" to carry an unloaded gun.
CHOICE = unloaded gun vs. no gun Hmmmmm..... :confused:
"Komrad...vee MUST eliminate the zee firearms from zee hands of the proletariat and keep zem ONLY in zee hands of the State!"
"Ya Komrad!...vee MUST!"
Well, I'm 60 years old and never lost anything in CA. Can't see a reason for going there period.
On a side note, I wonder what they would do if all the OC crowd started carrying a claw hammer in they belt now. Never mind, they'd just outlaw that too.
There are places where common sense isn't common enough to prevail.
California, Illinois, New Jersey, Maryland, Massachusetts, all you can do is shake your head,
and do your best not to spend any money in those places, or do business with companies in those states.
It appears they have been surrendered to the "Antis". IMO :yup:
reason #355 not to set foot in CA...
Were gonna have to extend the Border wall from Arizona up to the Utah border
It's California, the land of Fruits, Nuts, Flakes and weepy eyed liberals. And really, if we didn't have that bunch, we "Zonies" would have nothing to poke fun at.
I was born in CA. Got the heck out when I was 3 months old - dang I was smart. :image035:
The bill was approved 21-18, with three Democrats joining Republicans in opposing the measure. This is no landslide, and the trend is positive with eventual victory for 2A. For one thing, the gun grabbers are painting themselves into a corner.
Briefly, you may recall that last December, a U.S. District Court:
Peruta v. San Diego seeks to overturn and is getting a lot of traction with Amici briefs from the likes of the Center of Constitutional Jurisprudence (CCJ), Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership, and the Law Enforcement Alliance of America, represented by constitutional law scholar and former Dean & Henry Salvatori Professor of Law & Community Service at Chapman University, School of Law, Dr. John Eastman. The brief refers to Heller and its acknowledgement of the right to bear.Quote:
upheld San Diego Sheriff William Gore’s restrictive and unfair policies in issuing permits to carry concealed firearms.... The District Court held that people do not need a CCW to "bear arms"-at least not loaded arms-for self-defense purposes. The court found that, "as a practical matter," California allows you to carry an unloaded handgun openly in a holster (Penal Code Section 12025(f)) and, if attacked, you can simply load it to defend yourself (Cal. Pen. Code section 12031(j)).
The kind of hodgepodge that is California's scorn for 2A can not stand.Quote:
Renowned civil rights activist and attorney Don B. Kates filed an amicus brief on behalf of Gun Owners of California and Senator H. L. Richardson, discussing the history of California’s firearms laws regulating concealed and loaded carry, and how its leaving lawful the open carry of unloaded firearms was a loophole, never intended as a means of self-defense carry as the lower court concluded. It also addresses the trend of liberal CCW issuance from a criminological perspective.
Alan Gura authored an amicus brief generally in support of Plaintiffs on behalf of the Second Amendment Foundation, Calguns Foundation and two individuals weighing in with their view of the proper standard of review in this case....
As the legal briefs filed on appeal point out, and as the ILEETA videos clearly show, there is nothing "practical" about the court's finding. In addition to the various legal restrictions on openly carrying an unloaded firearm, which require one to be in “immediate and grave danger” before a gun can be loaded, the time needed to load it makes it useless in a self-defense emergency. In short, unloaded open carry does not allow for effective self-defense, nor is it an effective way to exercise your fundamental right to be ready and able to defend yourself under the Second Amendment. Plaintiffs are asking the Ninth Circuit to overrule the district court's decision.(