The Conservative Cave
Current Events => The DUmpster => Topic started by: franksolich on February 22, 2014, 12:40:49 PM
-
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014735635
Oh my.
I was hoping to see the cousin covering this.
<<<hopes dashed.
Jesus Malverde (3,553 posts) Sat Feb 22, 2014, 01:29 PM
San Diego sheriff won't fight concealed-weapon ruling
In an unexpected action, the San Diego County sheriff said Friday he will not seek a rehearing of last week's federal appeals court ruling that would eliminate most local restrictions on concealed-weapons permits in California.
Although state Attorney General Kamala Harris or the court itself could still intervene, the decision by Sheriff Bill Gore increases the possibility of a proliferation of handguns on the streets of San Francisco and other urban areas that now severely restrict them.
"We're concerned," said Deputy City Attorney Christine Van Aken. If the ruling stands, she said, "San Francisco officials are going to have to grant more permits and won't really have the discretion to make judgments about whether people should have concealed weapons."
The Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 2-1 on Feb. 13 that the Constitution's Second Amendment entitles law-abiding citizens to carry handguns in public for self-defense.
Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/San-Diego-sheriff-won-t-fight-concealed-weapon-5257815.php
Too bad for the anti-Second Amendment nutters.
Hoyt (15,462 posts) Sat Feb 22, 2014, 01:34 PM
1. But, the court's idiotic ruling doesn't require yahoos to tote guns in public. So, we can expect gun fanciers to be as responsible as they say they are by leaving them at home. That'll be the day.
-
Hopefully, when this case reaches the SCOTUS (because someone in California will have it appealed), the whole 2nd-Amendment-outside-the-home issue will be decided once and for all, and it will probably go as a pro-2nd victory. This might be exactly what NYS needs to get rid of the whole permit system.
-
The whole San Diego law was a sham.
The lead plaintiff in the case unsuccessfully sought a permit to carry a concealed firearm. In California, obtaining such a permit is (as the judge noted in his ruling) "the only way that the typical responsible, law-abiding citizen can carry a weapon in public for the lawful purpose of self-defense." Applicants for concealed-carry permits in California must demonstrate "good moral character," complete a specified training course, and establish "good cause." Then the State left the interpretation of those provisions to local authorities.
San Diego County adopted a policy that interpreted the "good cause" requirement as "a set of circumstances that distinguish the applicant from the mainstream and causes him or her to be placed in harm's way." The judge noted that the "concern for one's personal safety alone is not considered good cause" in the San Diego policy.
But the requirement for "good cause," at least as interpreted by San Diego County, is flagrantly unreasonable. By stipulating that an applicant must "distinguish" himself "from the mainstream" -- that ordinary people need not apply -- the county transmutes a right into a privilege or dispensation.
At least in most good and decent corners of the USA, that's still considered to be wrong.
.
-
Put it another way: California, according to their stats, have 35,000 CCW permit holders state-wide. This in a state of 38,000,000, for a rate of less than 0.1 percent.
Florida has over 1.2 MILLION in a state of 19.2 million, for a rate of almost 7 percent. How would states like NH do? Hard to say, considering it's ILLEGAL to publicize records of who has or doesn't have a CCW permit.
159:6-a Confidentiality of Licenses. – Notwithstanding the provisions of RSA 91-A:4 or any other provision of law to the contrary, all papers and records, including applications, pertaining to the issuance of licenses pursuant to RSA 159:6 and all licenses issued pursuant to said section are subject to inspection only by law enforcement officials of the state or any political subdivision thereof or of the federal government while in the performance of official duties or upon written consent, for good cause shown, of the superior court in the county where said license w\\Seemsas issued.
-
OTOH, this is also a back-door to gun registration.
-
OTOH, this is also a back-door to gun registration.
How so? I can have a permit and not even own a gun, however unlikely.
Oh, wait--THOSE guns? What a coincidence...I was out rowing on the lake the other day and they all fell overboard. Damn shame, really.
-
If the state issues a CC, they automatically know which doorbell to ring......hint, don't register in CT.
-
Ahhhh yes.
Hoyt (15,462 posts) Sat Feb 22, 2014, 01:34 PM
1. But, the court's idiotic ruling doesn't require yahoos to tote guns in public. So, we can expect gun fanciers to be as responsible as they say they are by leaving them at home. That'll be the day.
Good old Hoyt, the gift that just keeps on giving to the pro 2A side.
I mixed it up with this fanatical asshole several times before I was booted off of Skins island.
What a ****ing moron.
-
OTOH, this is also a back-door to gun registration.
Too late in the PRoC. We now have to register new long guns.
-
I demand equal rights.....criminals carry concealed weapons without a permit. Why can't I?
-
I demand equal rights.....criminals carry concealed weapons without a permit. Why can't I?
Good point.