California gun owners fighting back.

Calguns.net foundation has started a movement to make CA a shall issue state regarding ccw.

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=353861

I hope this goes through fairly quick.

 

Yes. We're finally winning after all those terrible years of loosing. I'm in San Diego and expect to have CCW after the Peruta case is resolved.

 

Perulta case???? *edit* n/m, looked it up. Sounds interesting, wonder if they shoulda opened it up for other plaintiffs to join.

I went in to Sheriffs Dept. Was told by the initial interviewer that unless I carried a gun on-duty on a daily basis I was almost certainly not going to get a CCW... WTF?!?!?!?!?

 

Sounds good to me!

 

That will be nice to be able to get a CCW without jumping through a bunch of hoops. It's over $2200 to try and get one in my county and most people get denied.

 

I wouldn't hold my breath on it. California is right up there with New York, Massachusettes, and Connecticut in liberal flakes per capita, believing that gun control is the same thing as crime control. Facts make no impact.

 

There was an amended complaint with multiple plaintiffs and there is one institutional plaintiff, California Rifle Pistol Association Foundation. Read here for a full description of the case: Peruta v County of San Diego

The San Diego Sheriff's office has a horrible case because of all the illegalities that have happened over the years. They will loose.

Historically yes. However things are changing. We gun rights advocates are working hard to restore our civil right around the country. There is right-to-carry litigation in many of the federal courts. Here is a summary:

1. Maryland (4th Circuit), Woolard v. Sheridan
2. Washington D.C. (Federal), Palmer v. District of Columbia
3. California (9th Circuit), Sykes v. McGinness & Peruta v. County of San Diego
4. New York (2nd Circuit), Kachalsky v. Cacace
5. Illinois (7th Circuit), Mishaga v. Monken
6. Colorado (10th Circuit), Peterson v. LaCabe

​

Also, in your home state Nevada, you may now carry in State Parks thanks to Baker v. Biaggi

 

Were getting one step closer

Second Amendment Rights Are Reaffirmed After Sacramento County Sheriff's Office Changes Carry

Case Continues Against Yolo County to Secure Right to Self-Defense​

Bellevue, WA and San Carlos, CA (October 25, 2010) - The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) and the Calguns Foundation have dismissed their case against Sacramento County, California and its Sheriff, John McGinness, after the Sheriff modified his handgun carry permitting policy. Law-abiding Sacramento County residents may now successfully apply for permits to carry handguns by asserting self-defense as a basis for carry permit issuance. A one-year residency requirement has been eliminated, as has policy language that tied selfdefense
to arbitrary geographic factors.

While Sacramento County has changed its policies, other counties still fail to recognize that self-defense is a legally sufficient reason for issuance of a handgun carry permit. The litigation will continue against Yolo County and its Sheriff, Ed Prieto, on behalf of SAF, Calguns, and Davis resident Adam Richards. Additionally, this past March, Calguns supporter Brett Stewart unsuccessfully asserted self-defense as a basis for seeking a carrying license from
Sheriff Prieto . The Sheriff’s written policy states that “self protection and protection of family (without credible threats of violence)” are insufficient reasons to exercise Second Amendment rights. Mr. Stewart will seek to join the litigation as a plaintiff in this case, now styled Richards v. Prieto.

“We are very happy to have been able to work with Sheriff McGinness to assist Sacramento County in revising their policies and practices,” said Gene Hoffman, Chairman of the Calguns Foundation. “Over the past year, more than 30 of our law abiding members and supporters have received licenses to carry firearms with ‘good cause’ statements that are simple variations of self-defense. Even though the Sheriff is retiring at the end of the year, both candidates
to replace Sheriff McGinness have publicly stated their support for Second Amendment rights and that they consider self-defense a compelling reason for issuance of gun carry permit.”

“The Second Amendment Foundation will continue working with the Calguns Foundation and keep funding attorney Alan Gura’s lawsuits in California until everyone’s firearms civil rights are fully protected,” added SAF founder Alan Gottlieb. “Together, we will see many more legal victories.”

For those who wish to apply for a CCW permit, the Calguns Foundation maintains an informational portal to assist applicants in all 58 California counties as part of its recently announced Carry Licensing Compliance and Sunshine Initiative. The Sacramento County page has details on the actual procedure and successful good cause statements
and is available at http://bit.ly/CGFSacCarry
___
The Second Amendment Foundation (www.saf.org) is the nation’s oldest and largest tax-exempt education, research, publishing and legal action group focusing on the Constitutional right and heritage to privately own and possess firearms. Founded in 1974, the Foundation has grown to more than 650,000 members and supporters and conducts many programs designed to better inform the public about the consequences of gun control.

The Calguns Foundation (www.calgunsfoundation.org) is a 501(c)3 non-profit organization which serves its members by providing Second Amendment-related education, strategic litigation and the defense of innocent California gun owners from improper or malicious prosecution. The Calguns Foundation works to educate government and protect the rights of individuals to acquire, own, and lawfully use firearms in California.

 

^ I read that, congrats. ^

 

Rep for you sir (sorry, it made me happy all over!). C'mon San Diego!!!!!

 

Damn, thats unreal. I pay $5.00 dollars a year, yep 20 quarters, per year for a CCW.

 

charging a fee to exercise a right makes my blood boil....how would you feel if someone made you take a class and get training and pay a fee to attend church or buy a newspaper....

 

For arguments sake:
You have a right to bear arms, not to carry concealed. Here in CA it's legal to walk around with an exposed weapon as long as it's unloaded (ammo can be in your pocket). There's no charge for that. However, if you wish to have the privilege of carrying concealed you must prove that you are able and willing to take on the responsibility that comes along with that - hence the training and fees.

As far as fees go, I can see doing so to cover the cost of manpower, paperwork, and the like. If the state is charging enough to make money on it then that I have a problem with.

Fortunately for us who are waiting for the laws to change (or those elected to the Sheriffs dept) the bad guys don't care and will continue to give others a reason to fight for gun restriction or an outright ban (to call it control is absurd).

 

so for a single mother who is being stalked by her bf she should have to wait for a permit to carry concealed and pay a fee before she can do so...??

 

good with all the crazy people out there law abiding citizens should be able to exercise their 2nd amendment rights and defend themselves

 

I didnt say it was right but the only issue you brought up was being charged a fee for your rights. I just pointed out that concealed carry is not a right. The right is for you to be able to bare arms.

As far as single mother being stalked. Theres a lot involved there. I would think it would be much more feasible for her to carry pepper spray or a taser. Reason being:
- age of the child: hard to shoot a pistol off-hand while holding onto an infant or the hand of a toddler. Taser (due to lack of recoil and ability to use in close quarters) and pepperspray (especially those that allow for multiple shots) are much easier to use in this circumstance. Even much harder to reload single handed.
- most men that go after women are cowards or psychopaths (at least they've been so in my experience) and don't do the Freddy Kruger thing and walk straight at you. If grabbed from behind I would prefer a bottle of pepper spray as an area weapon (or martial arts training). Yeah, I'll get sprayed as well but I only need that split second of being released to get away from someone.
- guns are meant to stop action. If your crazy ex is coming straight at you you have the ability to run away: unfortunately most juries would convict if she shot and killed him from 10 yards away especially if he was unarmed.
- Again, it is legal in CA to open carry a weapon as long as its not loaded. The magazine can be in your pocket ready to go. I think that an unloaded weapon (against a DV coward) is much more of a deterrent then a hidden one somewhere on the body. Even more so if, in the face of danger, the single mother can lock and load quick. (When I lived in Pittsburgh a woman in a neighboring county started open carrying locked and loaded - completely legal. HUGE UPROAR because of it but nobody messed with her - I believe this was DV issues as well but may be mistaken)
- If shes the type to leave weapons out in the open it's less lethal to leave pepper spray or a taser out then a weapon in case her child got a hold of it: of course that all depends on age and developmental stage of the child as well.

If you really want to get into the psychology of domestic violence we can do that but it's for another thread.

BTW, I do have my CCW for WA state and am planning on getting one here in CA asap - and would have it already if not for the San Diego Sheriffs Office.

 

i get what you are saying about the concealed part(traditionally concealed carry has been held a privilege by different state courts)...but when we start letting government dictate what our rights are they infringe more and more...like the unloaded Open Carry thing...that was done in response to the black panthers when they marched into the state house right?? where did government get the privilege to make that law(remember all political power is inherent in you and i) what good is an unloaded pistol you might as well carry a brick and for the unloaded part if i am carrying loaded what if i refuse it to be "E" checked?? i have the right to not incriminate myself and remian silent etc. or is that too just a privilege in California?

 

Oh the moronic halfwits here in the People's Republik of Taxachusetts despise firearms.

However, the vast amount of communities have no problem issuing a License to Carry. A "Class A" LTC here is essentially a CCW permit.

Costs $100, and you have to take a hunter safety course. Not that difficult in the grand scheme of things, however it can easily take you a couple months just to find an open seat in a safety course (if you don't want to drive out here to the sticks), as well as waiting a couple months for the state to do a second background check on you.

Boston is the most notorious city in the state. Extremely difficult to get a LTC in the city. Has been for years. Yet they just clocked their 57th murder of the year last week. Love how the moronic half wits (usually Democrats) love to restrict the law-abiding folks' rights.

Fortunately, I'll be moving out of this freaking state within the next few months (God willing anyway.)

 

Actually Sir, here in CA I believe it is inaccurate for now. I'm not sure if they may have changed some things due to recent rulings in the courts, but I believe it is now illegal to carry an unloaded weapon on person, in view that's not concealed, and that's not loaded.


The latest on California politics and government

June 1, 2010

Assembly passes ban on carrying unloaded handguns in public
Legislation to outlaw the carrying of unloaded handguns in public was passed Tuesday by the Assembly.

The measure, Assembly Bill 1934, received the bare-minimum number of votes necessary, passing 41-25, with Republicans opposed.


Opponents countered that AB 1934 would infringe on Californians' right to bear arms and to protest peacefully in whatever manner they choose.

AB 1934 would make it a misdemeanor, punishable by up to six months in jail, to carry an exposed, unloaded gun in a public place or on a public street inside a city or in prohibited unincorporated areas of a county.

The bill contains numerous exceptions, including display of a firearm by a peace officer, authorized military organization, firearm dealer, or by a licensed hunter while engaged in that sport.

 

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
http://nramemberscouncils.com/legs.shtml?summary=ab1934.1&year=2010