Lords of Death Forums Lords of Death Forums LoD General Discussion Concealed Carry Now Legal in California

You kidding me? A retired peace officer just shot someone dead in a Colorado movie theater for texting before the movie started.

But, on point, I read the article and skimmed the ruling. I don't think the article accurately describes the ruling. In the ruling, the 9th Circuit pretty much says that you have to allow some form of "bearing arms" outside the home. Essentially, California can either permit the open carrying of firearms, or the concealed carrying of firearms -- but it has to give citizens some way to carry firearms. There are no other requirements.

Essentially, the 9th Circuit says:
(1) There is an individual right to "bear arms";
(2) "Bearing arms" includes carrying firearms outside the home;
(3) This right is not unlimited, standard of review based on nature of infringement of the right;
(4) Requiring citizens to show "good cause" for concealed carry permits equates to "destroying the right";
(5) Because the regulation destroys the right, it is subjected to the highest and strictest standard of review;
(6) Law is invalid based on above

Erwin Chemerinsky, who is quoted in the article, is one of the foremost experts on the Supreme Court and Constitutional law. If he thinks it will be short lived, you're probably fucked.

The decision did not seem well reasoned either, the weakest part being the Court's decision that the "good cause" requirement destroyed the 2nd Amendment right, thereby triggering strict scrutiny. Considering every other District court which has considered the issue (the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th Districts -- and the 4th District includes Virginia, North Carolina, and South Carolina) has issued a contradictory ruling, I think those in favor of this ruling will have an uphill battle.

The Case is Peruta v. County of San Diego

http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2014/02/12/1056971.pdf

That was in Colorado, not California. All the crazy public gun shooters seem to live there. Doesn't Trance live there? Coincidence? hmmmmm In all seriousness though, crazy people are everywhere. I'm never going to be afraid of being shot in public because the fear is irrational. Obs (and myself) should be far more worried about dying to people's wreckless driving than to gun violence.

Yea that's why I said it will end up in the US Supreme Court. The USSC kinda has to take it now because they have to resolve the contradiction in law. I'm kinda surprised these judges so went so far beyond other rulings.

I imagine it will probably go back to open carry in the end (which CA use to have), which I am fine with.

Any licensing test that can be administered by some fat rent-a-cop isn't going to be able to screen out everyone who might go full retard with their gun. If you want guns around, you're going to have to accept a certain amount of that. Particularly if guns are sexy and new where you live.

What makes me think this law isn't going to last is that they couldn't get around the challenge to the law without invoking its constitutionality. As far as I'm aware that's basically akin to waving your arms around and saying "overrule me". That said, I think to see if this really has a chance, you'd have to look at the opinions of the circuit courts in the other districts. If it's an apples to apples comparison of issues between all of them and they just flat out came up with a different answer to the same question, the law might stick around for a little while. If the 9th circuit just had shitty reasoning or a narrow construction of the issue, particularly when constitutionality is involved (courts will do absolutely anything to interpret a law as constitutional if at all possible), then don't expect this to hang around for long.

That said, if the actual opinion doesn't demand concealed carry, then this has nothing to do with concealed carry, they could just as easily interpret it to be really restrictive open carry.

opinions of appellate courts*

Colorado and Florida. Guy shot a kid dead for playing his rap music too loud!



Problem with that logic is that driving recklessly is illegal.



The cool kids say SCOTUS -- Supreme Court of the Unites States. And when Circuit Courts disagree, it is more likely they will take the case to resolve the conflict but there is no requirement that they do so. Sometimes they will wait to give other Circuit Courts the opportunity to issue rulings. SCOTUS sometimes likes to see how the Circuit Courts decide. Right now, the gun control advocates are winning but the Supreme Court is pretty conservative atm so anything is possible.



Judges probably did that to make SCOTUS review it. I think what you might see from SCOTUS is some sort of middleground, where they hold that States have the right to place "good cause" regulations on concealed/open carry permits, but that San Diego's specific policy went too far.

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Baffles me how this is up for any interpretation at all.. Im no scholar but i can understand this amendment and its purpose/meaning..

Oh well, I'm abandoning CA with the tens of thousands of others that already have.

It's punctuated all stupid, but it's easy to understand with some historical context.

Look here Mr./Mrs. Sonya, I know you're all amped up from your verbal victory over Domon yesterday but don't come out quoting me unless you quote me accurately. I said once sentence later that crazy people are everywhere.



And so is using a firearm unlawfully, as in outside defending yourself. I'm required to obtain a license and training to operate a vehicle. If I choose to operate that vehicle in an unsafe manner I am breaking the law and can be punished. The same is true for buying a gun and getting a CCW. What's your point here?

My point was simply that considering the I'm statistically many MANY times more likely to die in a car accident than from a gunshot wound, I'd be better off saving my fear for something that's more likely to happen. That's all.




I'm not a PART of your system.....MAN!!!!



I was wondering if that might have been why. Do they not put their careers at risk (ability to move up) when going so far outside the norms like that? I'm just happy we're seeing change. Obviously this is only my opinion but I'm glad to see that the current method for obtaining a CCW was struck down. It was bullshit.



Yea I agree and this is why I am for it. The same can be said with many laws in a free society where you enjoy a lot of individual freedoms and I wish more people understood this concept (not saying you don't Hexen). The more freedoms you're allowed, the more potential for bad guys to exploit those freedoms for criminal purposes.

The right to be free from illegal search and seizure is a great example. It means you don't have to be worried about cops demanding entry to your residence and rifling through your shit just because they want to. This also means your neighbor may have a meth lab in his house but the cops won't be able to check it out without a warrant. Freedoms come at a price.

This is what I see & unfortunately am in agreement with Sonya despite my personal thoughts/feelings.

I was able to obtain my CCW here in California because of the work that I am in.

I pretty much never ever do though.. even after a day where I've been pulled on I still don't go out with it.

Though I would be lieing if I said I didn't keep the 9 in the truck with a mag in the locker in the bed.

Specifically I only keep 8 rounds aswell.. if I need more than that there is something seriously wrong with the situation & I should be handling it differently