SACBEE: Proposed easing of concealed-weapons law draws fire

This is a discussion on SACBEE: Proposed easing of concealed-weapons law draws fire within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; So I think the reporter did a decent job, but the comments from the Law Enforcement folks are pretty ridiculous, even for California... Proposed easing ...

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 19

Thread: SACBEE: Proposed easing of concealed-weapons law draws fire

  1. #1
    VIP Member Array BigEFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Central California
    Posts
    2,045

    SACBEE: Proposed easing of concealed-weapons law draws fire

    So I think the reporter did a decent job, but the comments from the Law Enforcement folks are pretty ridiculous, even for California...

    Proposed easing of concealed-weapons law draws fire

    Published Monday, Mar. 23, 2009

    What issue could unite a Republican lawmaker from Southern California and a 46-year-old lesbian from Natomas?

    Guns, of course.

    A bill introduced in the state Assembly last month aims to make it easier for Californians to obtain a concealed weapons permit.

    Assembly Bill 357 – yes, the number is right – would change a state law that currently gives county sheriffs or chiefs of police final say in who can carry a gun.

    By stripping the local law enforcement discretion, the bill would mandate that any Californian who passes a training course and demonstrates "good moral character" can tuck a pistol into his or her waistband.

    Even though the bill won't be heard in committee for a few weeks, it has raised ire among law enforcement officials, including Sacramento County Sheriff John McGinness. Police chiefs and sheriffs can be more effective at screening out people who shouldn't have concealed weapons, he said.

    If the changes proposed by the bill were already in effect, even O.J. Simpson would have been eligible for a concealed weapons permit in California – prior to his recent felony conviction in Nevada, McGinness said.

    But the aim of the bill is fairness, said the bill's author, Assemblyman Steven Knight of Palmdale. While some California counties are more liberal when it comes to issuing concealed weapons permits, others are "very strict, and they use that phrase 'good cause' to their benefit," Knight said.

    In addition, Knight said, there's an inherent unfairness in deciding that some people's perceptions of danger are more valid than others. "Lots of judges in California get permits," he said. "Does (the state) have the same amount of regard for the safety of a liquor store owner or a jewelry store owner?"

    Among supporters of Knight's bill is Deanna Sykes, co-founder of the Sacramento chapter of Pink Pistols, an international group that advocates gun ownership by gays and lesbians. Their slogan: "Armed gays don't get bashed."

    "I think it's a benefit to society if the good guys have the ability to protect themselves," Sykes said.

    Part of the mission of the Pink Pistols is to promote self-defense in the gay community, Sykes said.

    "(Gun ownership) minimizes that idea that gays are defenseless," she said. "When someone thinks about bashing some (gays), they might stop because he might be more prepared to defend himself. … If you can convince them that you're not weaker because you have an equalizer, you might not get picked on."

    McGinness said he was sympathetic to people concerned about their safety, but said a uniform approach isn't good for California. "Alpine County and Los Angeles County are vastly different," he said. "A one-size-fits-all is not in the best interest of public safety."

    Lt. Mark Reed, who reviews concealed weapons applications in Placer County, said local law enforcement often recommend alternatives to carrying a gun. For example, he said, many people apply because they carry around lots of money as part of their job. "If they could use a courier service, that'd be safer. … If I can offer a safer alternative, it negates the 'good cause.' "

    Both McGinness and Reed said that in their counties, simply wanting to carry a concealed weapon isn't good-enough cause.

    "Personal protection is insufficient," McGinness said.

    Sykes believes a pistol tucked into her purse might be the only thing that keeps her from becoming a victim of an anti-gay hate crime.

    But it's not like she's looking for a showdown, she said. Still, in an emergency, she said she'd like to know that her .45 is close at hand.

    "I have a fire extinguisher under my sink for the same reason," she said.
    Lex et Libertas Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus, et Fidelis!

    "Not only do the people who put their lives on the line to protect the rest of us deserve better, we all deserve better than to have our own security undermined by those who undermine law enforcement." -Thomas Sowell

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #2
    Senior Member Array Gun Bunny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    IN
    Posts
    759
    "Sacramento County Sheriff John McGinness said he was sympathetic to people concerned about their safety"
    "Personal protection is insufficient," McGinness said.
    What the heck???!!! Sorry, I like to be able to protect myself!!! Why shouldn't it be sufficient? Ain't that the reason we carry?

    Does this guy walk around unarmed when off-duty? Part of the reason LEOs carry off-duty is for personal protection!!! Right?
    Kahr CW9
    Sig P239/9mm
    Ruger LC9 (when the girlfriend lets me carry her gun)


    "First Duty is To Remember"

  4. #3
    VIP Member
    Array archer51's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    21,086
    Quote Originally Posted by Gun Bunny View Post
    What the heck???!!! Sorry, I like to be able to protect myself!!! Why shouldn't it be sufficient? Ain't that the reason we carry?

    Does this guy walk around unarmed when off-duty? Part of the reason LEOs carry off-duty is for personal protection!!! Right?
    I think any LEO who is against the average citizen being able to carry a weapon for self defense should have to lock their weapon up at the station at the end of each shift, and only be able to carry a knife and pepper spray. Wonder how long it would be before they started crying a different tune!

  5. #4
    Member Array lockdnloaded's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    94
    Quote Originally Posted by archer51 View Post
    I think any LEO who is against the average citizen being able to carry a weapon for self defense should have to lock their weapon up at the station at the end of each shift, and only be able to carry a knife and pepper spray. Wonder how long it would be before they started crying a different tune!
    +10!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  6. #5
    Senior Member Array Ivan4x4's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Fort Worth , Texas
    Posts
    505
    very well said archer51
    EDC's Colt Defender 45 acp and S&W 442 .38
    Springfield XD 45 acp
    Ruger SR9
    Ruger Super RedHawk .44 mag
    mossberg 590 12 gauge tactical
    bushmaster AR15-M4

  7. #6
    VIP Member Array rottkeeper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Upstate New York
    Posts
    3,194
    I agree archer but you will never see that happen.
    For as the lightning comes from the east and flashes to the west, so also will the coming of the son of man be. Mathew 24:27

    NRA Member

  8. #7
    Restricted Member Array SelfDefense's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Tucson
    Posts
    2,736
    What LE thinks or says is inconsequential. If the people of California want to live in a shall issue state then that is what they will do. This is EXACTLY the proper way to address the issue and the people in California should lobby their representatives with petitions, letters and phone calls. It is good to see this action rather than the typical court whining so many support.

    Good luck with Assembly Bill 357. It's about time.

  9. #8
    Member Array razz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    160
    Yea, they issue CCW to a moviestar like Sylvaster Stallone who is supporting the Brady Bunch and has called for door-to-door gun confiscations but not to a regular Joe.

    The Hypocrisy of Sylvester Stallone

  10. #9
    Ex Member Array PNUT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    TN
    Posts
    913
    Personal safety is not sufficient ?.......I'll bet that every Sheriffs wife and family members have permits.....hypocrites. I wouldn't be in L.A. unarmed, permit or not.

  11. #10
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    25,804
    McGinness said he was sympathetic to people concerned about their safety, but said a uniform approach isn't good for California. "Alpine County and Los Angeles County are vastly different," he said. "A one-size-fits-all is not in the best interest of public safety."

    "Personal protection is insufficient," McGinness said.
    To Mr. McGinness (who will not be reading this on DC) --
    Do you actually believe that citizens in Los Angeles County have no justifiable reason to be able to protect themselves and their families, yet Alpine County citizens do?

    God Almighty, pal. Who appointed you Pope to decree such a heinous distinction amongst upstanding people?

    To the extent the shreds of this fine country still exist in California, one would think citizens innocent until PROVEN guilty.

    Darned right, a person who later turns out to be a felon could, if desired, go through all the training, background checks and hoops to become identified as a card-carrying good guy. Reality is, most actual felons-at-heart will simply go be the criminals they are and get armed anyway, avoiding all that attention.

    The point being, issuing your type of moral straight jacket on what people MIGHT be capable of doing is AGAINST the rule of law, depriving people of the most important ability in their lives: the right to self-defense and the defense of their families. All because you're scared a small percentage of people who jump through hoops might end up felons.

    You would sacrifice millions to crime, all to avoid a few felons who end up getting caught late in the game after having deftly escaped notice through the validation process. Reality is, these dregs of our society have been doing so for years, so it's unsurprising they could escape notice one more time. But, that is quite simply NOT reason enough to deprive millions of the right to self-defense. Anyone claiming that would have to justify it.

    In short, when it comes right down to it, protection is THE only real purpose. To deny that as illegitimate or invalid is simply inhuman, tyrannical ... and unacceptable in the extreme.

    Step aside, and stop claiming people are felons merely for seeking to defend themselves against felons.

    Step aside. Now.
    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, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  12. #11
    VIP Member Array stormbringerr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Republic of Texas
    Posts
    2,207
    Quote Originally Posted by SelfDefense View Post
    What LE thinks or says is inconsequential. If the people of California want to live in a shall issue state then that is what they will do. This is EXACTLY the proper way to address the issue and the people in California should lobby their representatives with petitions, letters and phone calls. It is good to see this action rather than the typical court whining so many support.

    Good luck with Assembly Bill 357. It's about time.
    agree + 357
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
    ― Thomas Paine

  13. #12
    Ex Member Array JOHNSMITH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    somewhere
    Posts
    1,726
    Quote Originally Posted by Gun Bunny View Post
    What the heck???!!! Sorry, I like to be able to protect myself!!! Why shouldn't it be sufficient? Ain't that the reason we carry?

    Does this guy walk around unarmed when off-duty? Part of the reason LEOs carry off-duty is for personal protection!!! Right?
    Strictly speaking, its the same reason LEOs carry on duty, as well. What would the sheriff think if we took away his and his deputies' guns at all times, 24/7?

  14. #13
    VIP Member Array sgtD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    2,292
    The Cheif here is another example of the old saying:

    Gun control isn't about guns, it's about control.
    When you've got 'em by the balls, their hearts & minds will follow. Semper Fi.

  15. #14
    BAC
    BAC is offline
    VIP Member Array BAC's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Tampa, FL
    Posts
    2,292
    Quote Originally Posted by SelfDefense View Post
    What LE thinks or says is inconsequential. If the people of California want to live in a shall issue state then that is what they will do. This is EXACTLY the proper way to address the issue and the people in California should lobby their representatives with petitions, letters and phone calls. It is good to see this action rather than the typical court whining so many support.

    Good luck with Assembly Bill 357. It's about time.
    Agreed, to all of this.


    -B
    RIP, Jeff Dorr: 1964 - July 17, 2009. You will be missed.


    Defensive Carry Search Tips


    Step 1 - Choose a subforum on right side under "Search in Forum(s)"
    Step 2 - Type general topic of interest in "Search by Keyword" textbox.
    Step 3 - Read results and refine/repeat as necessary.

  16. #15
    Member Array KralBlbec's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    416
    "If the changes proposed by the bill were already in effect, even O.J. Simpson would have been eligible for a concealed weapons permit in California prior to his recent felony conviction in Nevada, McGinness said."


    Wow. That is retarded. What exactly is the connection to OJ? Every single criminial in the world would have been eligible for a weapons permit anywhere... prior to a felony convition.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

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
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Fire Mission: Poll - Should SC drop Concealed Weapons Permit Requirement?
    By JPCleary in forum In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: February 18th, 2011, 06:42 PM
  2. Fire Mission/poll --Should Gov. Bob McDonnell veto or approve a bill easing concealed
    By DaveH in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: March 20th, 2010, 12:18 PM
  3. U.S. Sen. Tom Coburn gun measure draws fire from foes
    By ccroom in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: May 19th, 2009, 08:24 PM
  4. Fire mission "Concealed Weapons on Campus?"
    By paramedic70002 in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: March 27th, 2009, 02:28 PM
  5. 'Gun ornament draws fire'....
    By goawayfarm in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: November 24th, 2006, 02:46 PM

Search tags for this page

how to convince placer county that you should have a conceal carry permit
,

john mcginness view on concealed

,
placer county concealed weapons permit
,
sacbee concealed carry
Click on a term to search for related topics.