Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Open Carry On The Way Out In California??

Collapse

300x250 Mobile

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Open Carry On The Way Out In California??

    http://cbs5.com/local/gun.open.carry.2.1645821.html

    Calif. Bill Would Prohibit Carrying Guns In Public

    SACRAMENTO (CBS 5 / AP) ―
    Siding with law enforcement authorities, California lawmakers on Tuesday advanced legislation that would make it illegal to openly carry a gun in public, even if it's unloaded.

    The bill cleared its first committee after an emotional debate that pitted public safety concerns against Second Amendment rights cited by gun owners.

    "I think it puts all of us at such great risk," said Assemblywoman Nancy Skinner, D-Berkeley, one of four Democrats who voted for the ban.

    Two Republicans on the Assembly Public Safety Committee voted against the bill, which now goes to the appropriations panel.

    Current California law allows gun owners to carry a rifle or handgun in a holster in public if it is unloaded.

    The bill's author, Assemblywoman Lori Saldana, D-San Diego, said unloaded guns pose a threat, in part because gun owners are allowed to carry ammunition and could load their weapon within seconds.

    To emphasize her point, she wore a bulletproof vest while testifying before the committee.

    Law enforcement also can't tell whether a gun is unloaded when approaching a person, said Lt. Wayne Bilowit, legislative advocate for the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department.

    "If you're carrying a gun and a magazine next to it, if you make a sudden movement, we don't know if the gun is loaded or unloaded," Bilowit said. "Sooner or later, someone is going to get hurt."

    Florida, Illinois, Texas and the District of Columbia have a similar open-carry ban, according to the Legal Community Against Violence, a public interest law center based in San Francisco.

    While California and 34 other states allow people to carry guns without a license, only California, North Dakota and Utah require that the weapon be unloaded.

    Republicans on the Assembly committee complained the Democratic-controlled Legislature already has adopted too many laws restricting legitimate gun ownership in the state.

    "Basically, the ones that are using these laws, the law-abiding citizens, are the ones being hurt here, not the criminals," said Assemblyman Curt Hagman, R-Chino Hills.

    In California, loaded weapons can be carried in public only by those who have a concealed-weapons permit, which would not change under the Saldana bill.

    Those permits are hard to obtain, requiring people to demonstrate they need to be armed. For that reason, gun owners say their only option is to carry an unloaded weapon as a way to deter trouble.

    "If this bill were to be passed, I would be less safe," said Walter Stanley of the San Francisco suburb of Livermore. "What we're talking about is a right to bear arms, not a privilege."

    Stanley, who began carrying his handgun about four months ago, is a member of the growing open-carry movement, which encourages gun owners to wear their weapons as they go about their daily lives.

    Gun advocates gathered Monday at rallies in Washington, D.C., and outside the state Capitol in Sacramento to demonstrate for their right to bear arms.

    A number of retailers have banned gun owners from bringing weapons into their stores. For example, California Pizza Kitchen issued a statement expressing concern "that the open display of firearms would be particularly disturbing to children and their parents."

    Others such as Starbucks have sparked controversy by allowing open-carry advocates to bring their weapons into its coffee houses in the states that allow it.
    Going too far is half the pleasure of not getting anywhere

  • #2
    Im sure many of you saw this coming. This is what you get when you gather at a Starbucks just to prove a point...

    Comment


    • #3
      .
      Depending on the decision in McDonald vs. Chicago, it will open a lot of doors for lawsuits and legal decisions.

      Comment


      • #4
        As a resident of CA, as well as AZ, I'd just like to say
        THANKS FOR EFFING IT UP FOR EVERYBODY GUYS, GOOD JOB!

        CLAP. CLAP. CLAP...
        "People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf." - Orwell

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by blargh
          Duh? What did these guys think would happen?
          They thought that people would find out that it is legal to wear a gun in California. They thought they would then be allowed to do what they were already supposed to be allowed to do, and that others in Callifornia would find out that they, also, were allowed to protect their own selves (or just wear their fancy holster and gun "because they like to"). There is no point in something being legal if everyone thinks it's illegal.

          EDIT: In explanation of what I mean by "because they like to," I once found myself wearing a new hat I had bought for sun protection while I drive, when I was going through a hotel halway to do laundry.. Why had I put it on?. Because I thought the yellow hat looked good with my blue on light blue dress?. I had picked it up and put it on my head, without even thinking, because I really like that hat.. No more or less mature than wearing a gun for the fun of it, and, in my mind, no more and no less wrong; as long as the gun owner is responsible in how he uses/stores/transports his gun, he can be as silly as he wants to.. I don't even care if he wears a worn out, brown, wild West style gunbelt, over a brand new blue business suit.


          .
          Last edited by pvtbuddie; 04-29-2010, 01:56 PM.
          .
          .
          lib'-er-ty: the freedom given to you to make the wrong decision, based on the reasoned belief that you will normally make the right one.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by AZLawDawg View Post
            As a resident of CA, as well as AZ, I'd just like to say
            THANKS FOR EFFING IT UP FOR EVERYBODY GUYS, GOOD JOB!

            CLAP. CLAP. CLAP...

            Yep, it was a nice loop hole when transporting a firearm. Now it’s going to be gone.

            It goes both ways politically. The liberals pushed their limits pushing their agenda and it steeled conservatives in the example of the right to gay marriage (or now is the case the lack of right), and now the conservative limit pushing agenda is going to be chopped off at the knees.

            There just isn't the momentum in CA to give gun right activists what they want, and by pushing what little they have the state legislatures will have no problem closing the loop holes one by one as the conservatives exploit them.

            The problem is the gun right agenda seeking folks just don’t have the coordination needed and a bunch of idiots are all trying to make the same point in uncoordinated ways without a sense of political navigation to get from point A to point B.

            It’s going to pass, and the Gov will sign it (he already signed the ceasing of importing ammo via mail and require registration at retail purchase outlets).

            One last loop hole is for a first time offense: It is a misd to carry a loaded firearm while concealed. It is a FELONY to carry a knife (over a certian length and certian kind). So if you are going to carry a weapon and have a clean record you are better off carrying a loaded gun than a bladed weapon of sorts.

            It's a tiny little loop hole and would only apply to those with clean records, but it is there.
            _____________
            "Corruptisima republica plurimae leges."

            "The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws."
            - Cornelius Tacitus

            Comment


            • #7
              http://forums.officer.com/forums/sho...post23sd222286
              Last edited by Nobody; 04-27-2010, 09:28 AM.

              Comment


              • #8
                open carry should not be legal, as it "frightens the horses" in the words of mas ayoob (as well as makes one an easy target).....ccw's should be available in cali to all who qualify....too bad the dems in the legislature wont go for it

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Nobody View Post
                  you think a wearing a hat requires the same level of maturity as wearing a gun?

                  fascinating

                  +1 to "no open carry" if this is the thought process of the 21st century urban cowboys.
                  No.. I just don't think that wearing a gun for the fun of wearing it proves irresponsibility.. Therefore, not having a heroic sounding reason such as "self protection" and "protection of family," not having a self-defense rights reason, should not negate the property rights reason for gun ownership, or for gun carry.. Why, for instance, does my (very mature) husband carry a gun?. Partly because we keep hearing about the violent crimes that occur in Lawton.. Partly because you never know what will happen.. Mostly?. Because he likes to.

                  My only design in using the hat analogy, was to help those who don't have any special preference for guns to relate to the “like to” reason for carry, and for open carry, and to show that it doesn't demonstrate some dangerous level of immaturity.


                  .
                  Last edited by pvtbuddie; 04-29-2010, 02:00 PM.
                  .
                  .
                  lib'-er-ty: the freedom given to you to make the wrong decision, based on the reasoned belief that you will normally make the right one.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by HEDP View Post
                    .
                    Depending on the decision in McDonald vs. Chicago, it will open a lot of doors for lawsuits and legal decisions.
                    +1 I almost hope it does pass just to see where it goes legally, if I am not mistaken cali is not a shall issue when it comes to concealed permits are they? If not then with the inability to carry concealed and the inability to carry openly I really think the lawsuits that would follow would help pave the way for them to exercise their rights to protect themselves.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by opencarry View Post
                      +1 I almost hope it does pass just to see where it goes legally, if I am not mistaken cali is not a shall issue when it comes to concealed permits are they? If not then with the inability to carry concealed and the inability to carry openly I really think the lawsuits that would follow would help pave the way for them to exercise their rights to protect themselves.
                      Nope.....CA is a 'may issue' state.......and then it is dependant on which county you live as to whether or not you have a chance in hell of getting a CCW......in some counties, you have a pretty decent chance of getting the permit.....in others, you are wasting your time even applying.....
                      The posts on this forum by this poster are of his personal opinion, and his personal opinion alone

                      "Politicians are like diapers. They need to be changed often and for the same reason"

                      "We fight not for glory; nor for wealth; nor honor, but only and alone we fight for freedom, which no good man surrenders but with his life"

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by LA DEP View Post
                        Nope.....CA is a 'may issue' state.......and then it is dependant on which county you live as to whether or not you have a chance in hell of getting a CCW......in some counties, you have a pretty decent chance of getting the permit.....in others, you are wasting your time even applying.....
                        then I think they have a good chance at winning a lawsuit, everybody that is law abiding should have the right to protect themselves and their family

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by opencarry View Post
                          then I think they have a good chance at winning a lawsuit, everybody that is law abiding should have the right to protect themselves and their family
                          I agree with that......but dont expect the politicians here to roll over and play dead.....there are more than a few that want to see firearms ownership completely abolished.....they seem to think that if all the evil guns where taken away that it would be all unicorns and rainbows.....and that everyone would just 'get along'.......

                          any lawsuits filed would be appealed as far as possible, no matter the cost to the taxpayers.....
                          The posts on this forum by this poster are of his personal opinion, and his personal opinion alone

                          "Politicians are like diapers. They need to be changed often and for the same reason"

                          "We fight not for glory; nor for wealth; nor honor, but only and alone we fight for freedom, which no good man surrenders but with his life"

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by LA DEP View Post
                            I agree with that......but dont expect the politicians here to roll over and play dead.....there are more than a few that want to see firearms ownership completely abolished.....they seem to think that if all the evil guns where taken away that it would be all unicorns and rainbows.....and that everyone would just 'get along'.......

                            any lawsuits filed would be appealed as far as possible, no matter the cost to the taxpayers.....
                            I agree, in the end the citizens pay either way it seems

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Pretty soon we will have signs posted at our borders that read:

                              Welcome to California - You have no rights. Please check all weapons at the next vehicle checkpoint!
                              Be courteous to all, but intimate with few, and let those few be well tried before you give them your confidence!

                              [George Washington (1732 - 1799)]

                              Comment

                              MR300x250 Tablet

                              Collapse

                              What's Going On

                              Collapse

                              There are currently 4374 users online. 175 members and 4199 guests.

                              Most users ever online was 19,482 at 11:44 AM on 09-29-2011.

                              Welcome Ad

                              Collapse
                              Working...
                              X