Concealed Apps FLooding into California

Concealed Apps FLooding into California

This is a discussion on Concealed Apps FLooding into California within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Surge in concealed weapon permits follows California court Second Amendment decision | Fox News For now, we’re going to accept applications with self-defense and/or personal ...

Results 1 to 13 of 13
Like Tree18Likes
  • 4 Post By Rob99VMI04
  • 3 Post By heritage1865
  • 1 Post By ccw9mm
  • 1 Post By BenGoodLuck
  • 3 Post By ccw9mm
  • 2 Post By Crescentstar
  • 2 Post By ccw9mm
  • 1 Post By Aceoky
  • 1 Post By MrBuckwheat

Thread: Concealed Apps FLooding into California

  1. #1
    VIP Member Array Rob99VMI04's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    NOVA...200 square miles surrounded by reality
    Posts
    3,417

    Concealed Apps FLooding into California

    Surge in concealed weapon permits follows California court Second Amendment decision | Fox News

    For now, we’re going to accept applications with self-defense and/or personal protection as just cause,” said Hallock, adding that Hutchens is still encouraging applicants to submit a statement of good cause.

    If I was one of these applicants...I would put in this box.....POUNDING SAND. So many years they gave to the elite and denied the common folks. Go...... I really don't want to finish that statement
    “Are you a thermometer or a thermostat, do you reflect or become what is happening in the room or do you change the atmosphere, reset the temperature when you come into the room”?--Chuck Swindoll

    Its not about guns...Its about Freedom!


  2. #2
    Member Array heritage1865's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Greenville, SC
    Posts
    171
    Good.

    "A three-judge panel of the court ruled 2 to 1 that the Second Amendment bars California counties from requiring law-abiding gun owners who want to carry concealed firearms to demonstrate special, individualized needs for protection."

    My special, individualized need is for my Constitutional Right to not be infringed upon. Ridiculous rules created by people who only want control and power...
    ccw9mm, gatorbait51 and Aceoky like this.
    Nations crumble from within when the citizenry asks of government those things which it might better provide for itself... Man is not free unless government is limited... As government expands, liberty contracts.
    -Ronald Reagan

  3. #3
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    27,335
    Quote Originally Posted by From the article
    He said Hutchens didn't wait for the decision to be further tested in order to "show respect to the court’s opinion while demonstrating her responsiveness.”
    Now, that's a politically-motivated statement right there, liberally daubed with a dose of practical reality. No wonder nobody ever took seriously "to protect my life and the lives of my loved ones" as sufficient need.


    Quote Originally Posted by From the article
    More than 500 applications have poured in to the Orange County Sheriff’s Department in just two weeks — roughly the total number of applications filed in 2013, a spokesman said. Orange County Sheriff Sandra Hutchens announced on the department's website that the county will comply with the federal court's order immediately, sparking the wave of applications.

    “We’ve received as many or more in the last week in a half than we did in the whole calendar year [of 2013],” OCSD Lt. Jeff Hallock told FoxNews.com by phone early Thursday.
    I think they underestimated the pent-up "need" for defensive carry.

    So did every underhanded, politically-motivated, citizenry-controlling politician in the state of California.

    Now we'll see how many people actually find they have utility in defending themselves, in the late, great state of California. And perhaps the citizens can begin taking back what was once theirs (from the felons, cartels and other bad actors who'd strip them of everything).

    Congratulations, CA citizens, on a hard-won victory!
    gatorbait51 likes this.
    Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Thoughts: Justifiable self defense (A.O.J.).
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos).
    NRA, SAF, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  4. #4
    VIP Member Array BenGoodLuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    3,278
    The 'flood' will soon become a deluge as Californians exercise their Constitutional right to carry.
    gatorbait51 likes this.
    Ben

    Cogito, ergo armatum sum. I think, therefore I am armed. (Don Mann, The Modern Day Gunslinger; the ultimate handgun training manual)


  5. #5
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    27,335
    Quote Originally Posted by BenGoodLuck View Post
    The 'flood' will soon become a deluge as Californians exercise their Constitutional right to carry.
    That would be nice, if it were Constitutional and recognized that way. But, I digress.

    The CA citizens still need to wend their way through a morass of chuck holes for the new carrier, ranging from sticky little twists in the use-of-force statutes and case law as well as criminalizing failure to lock up everything, etc etc.

    Hopefully, the anti-gunner counties will begin to settle down over the next 18mos or so, as they get used to the fact of hundreds of thousands of people in those counties carrying.

    And, hopefully, sink holes and irredeemable places like the uglier spots in Oakland (and elsewhere) will begin to be a bit safer as people start having practical means of withstanding the violence swirling around them.



    Question, for those in CA with CHL's: Can't recall, but does CA have state preemption and fully disallow the San Francisco ordinances that they've erected there? Or, is that mostly glossed over and allowed to be the bludgeon on upstanding CHL-toting citizens' heads anyway?
    Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Thoughts: Justifiable self defense (A.O.J.).
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos).
    NRA, SAF, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  6. #6
    Senior Member Array Crescentstar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    656
    California Challenges Concealed Weapons Ruling - ABC News

    Looks like California's AG is running on hysteria.............
    gatorbait51 and Aceoky like this.
    "Clearly that's a YOU problem not a ME problem."

  7. #7
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    27,335
    Quote Originally Posted by Crescentstar View Post
    California Challenges Concealed Weapons Ruling - ABC News

    Looks like California's AG is running on hysteria.............
    Quote Originally Posted by From that article
    San Diego County Sheriff Bill Gore had said he wouldn't appeal the decision but Harris said there was a safety issue at stake.

    "Local law enforcement must be able to use their discretion to determine who can carry a concealed weapon," she said in a statement. "I will do everything possible to restore law enforcement's authority to protect public safety."
    There is indeed a safety issue, and it's a matter of life and death for those criminalized and disallowed from the use of effective means of self-defense. Police, quite simply, no matter how honorable and magically quick in their squad cars, cannot be on-scene at each and every deadly violent assault upon citizens on the instant such crimes occur. And without the means of surviving such incidence, innocents will ... well, fail to survive such crimes in high numbers. This is one of the unassailable reasons the 2A exists, in protection of the simple fact that on the instant of crime finding them that people have few options but what they have with them at the moment.

    Hopefully the CA AG will get off the high (immoral) horse and stop stepping in the 'apples.' The people need to cease being criminalized and marginalized, for daring to protect their very lives. The courts need to cease supporting the ludicrous notion that 'defense of life and limb' does not constitute a valid need for having effective means of defense on one's person. And, despite the Heller ruling technically only covering the DC gun ban in the home and addressing only the "in the home" aspects, the courts need to cease supporting the ludicrous notion that such need only exists within one's residence and fails to exist outside wherever the person goes.

    Hopefully SCOTUS will stop screwing around and judge this issue for the moral and legal right of all people that it is, instead of for the political punching bag is has long been. And hopefully they'll rule 9:0 in favor of striking down the "needs" infringement AS an infringement in absolute violation of the 2A's prohibition on infringements. Not likely at all, given how many "deep" thinkers there are in robes, there, but as with the civil rights crap that existed on the books everywhere through the 1950's (and beyond), it's vital this garbage be struck down for what it is.
    gatorbait51 and Aceoky like this.
    Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Thoughts: Justifiable self defense (A.O.J.).
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos).
    NRA, SAF, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  8. #8
    VIP Member Array Aceoky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    4,883
    Just remember Madigan tried that in IL also-
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In Gibson v. Commonwealth, 237 Ky. 33, 34 S.W.2d 936 (1936), the High Court stated:  “[I]t is the tradition that a Kentuckian never runs.   He does not have to.”

  9. #9
    VIP Member
    Array MrBuckwheat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Down Incognito
    Posts
    6,640
    From a geographic point CA is great, I would hope they would redeem themselves but I would not hold my breathe on that.
    Plan to split California into six states closer to vote a bit off topic but CCM9MM asked about San Fran got me thinking;
    Question, for those in CA with CHL's: Can't recall, but does CA have state preemption and fully disallow the San Francisco ordinances that they've erected there? Or, is that mostly glossed over and allowed to be the bludgeon on upstanding CHL-toting citizens' heads anyway?

    so what is the answer? I'm guessing that it does not but please enlighten me.
    Fast is fine, but accuracy is everything.
    Wyatt Earp

  10. #10
    VIP Member Array Aceoky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    4,883
    Quote Originally Posted by ccw9mm View Post
    That would be nice, if it were Constitutional and recognized that way. But, I digress.

    The CA citizens still need to wend their way through a morass of chuck holes for the new carrier, ranging from sticky little twists in the use-of-force statutes and case law as well as criminalizing failure to lock up everything, etc etc.

    Hopefully, the anti-gunner counties will begin to settle down over the next 18mos or so, as they get used to the fact of hundreds of thousands of people in those counties carrying.

    And, hopefully, sink holes and irredeemable places like the uglier spots in Oakland (and elsewhere) will begin to be a bit safer as people start having practical means of withstanding the violence swirling around them.



    Question, for those in CA with CHL's: Can't recall, but does CA have state preemption and fully disallow the San Francisco ordinances that they've erected there? Or, is that mostly glossed over and allowed to be the bludgeon on upstanding CHL-toting citizens' heads anyway?
    I found this :

    California law (§53071 GC) restricts county and city authorities from enacting firearm regulations. This provides for uniform firearm laws and prevents situations found in other states (such as New York) where traveling with an otherwise legal firearm could put a citizen at risk of violating local city ordinances.[7]

    Because of their inability to regulate firearms directly some cities, such as Los Angeles, have enacted ammunition regulations.
    Gun laws in California - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    MrBuckwheat likes this.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In Gibson v. Commonwealth, 237 Ky. 33, 34 S.W.2d 936 (1936), the High Court stated:  “[I]t is the tradition that a Kentuckian never runs.   He does not have to.”

  11. #11
    VIP Member
    Array MrBuckwheat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Down Incognito
    Posts
    6,640
    ammunition regulations..........., you see you can carry a gun just can't carry any live ammo????? or you can apply for your carry permit but it will not cover concealed ammo. I guess there are just some cites you just don't need to visit.
    Aceoky likes this.
    Fast is fine, but accuracy is everything.
    Wyatt Earp

  12. #12
    VIP Member Array NONAME762's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    About 235M out of The Palouse WA
    Posts
    8,133
    Carrying a holstered handgun whether semi or revolver concealed or OC without a full mag or cylinder would be the same as driving my truck somewhere just on the fumes or writing a check with insufficient funds in the account.

    Any anti what would disagree is dumber than a bag pf pine cones no ifs ands or butt's about it.
    I'm just a spoke in the wheel but not a big deal.
    America...a Constitutional Republic. NOT a democracy as the liberals would have us believe.
    Give me Liberty or give me BACON!!!
    You know that look women give you when they want some sugar? Me neither

  13. #13
    Distinguished Member Array zamboni's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    North of the Line
    Posts
    1,206
    Quote Originally Posted by MrBuckwheat View Post
    ammunition regulations..........., you see you can carry a gun just can't carry any live ammo????? or you can apply for your carry permit but it will not cover concealed ammo. I guess there are just some cites you just don't need to visit.
    Gives a new meaning to the need of carrying a Block..... I mean Glock

    just twak um with it

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •