This Ping List is for all things pertaining to the 2nd Amendment.
FReepmail me if you want to be added to or deleted from the list.
Posted on 04/05/2017 10:04:30 AM PDT by PROCON
The Assembly Public Safety Committee on Tuesday rejected legislation to reform California’s strict “may-issue” concealed carry licensing practices and make permits more obtainable.
The bill, AB 757, aimed to amend state law to allow a desire for self-defense to be enough required “good cause” to obtain a permit. It failed 2-5 after a party-line vote.
The measure’s sponsor Assemblywoman Melissa Melendez, a Republican from Lake Elsinore, argued the legislation was needed to reign in some sheriffs and police chiefs who refuse to grant licenses for personal reasons.
“Today the Democrat majority spat in the face of the Constitution by killing this measure,” said Melendez in a statement. “The Constitution guarantees equal protection under the law, yet the current system we have for issuing CCWs in California is anything but equal. Rest assured, this fight for equality isn’t over.”
Melendez’s proposal would have inserted language into the current law so that those applying for a carry permit from their local sheriff or police chief could use a desire for “self-defense, defending the life of another, or preventing crime in which human life is threatened” as sufficient reason to obtain a licence without having to show further good cause.
California is just one of eight states that still practice may-issue permitting for concealed carry licenses and one of just five that ban open carry. A number of lawsuits including Peruta v. San Diego— now pending at the short-staffed U.S. Supreme Court– are underway fighting for shall-issue reform while other litigation including the NRA’s Flanigan v. Harris/Becerra and Nichols v. Brown are pending with the U.S. 9th Circuit on the subject of open carry.
Will passing a National Reciprocity law finally end this unconstitutional practice?
This Ping List is for all things pertaining to the 2nd Amendment.
FReepmail me if you want to be added to or deleted from the list.
They don't follow federal drug guidelines, what makes you think they'd abide by that?
the Demos import dangerous DANGEROUS IslamoNazi terrorist gang fighters by the hundreds of thousands
and
then try to (illegally) deprive good American citizens of their right and ability of self-defense
if you ever wanted to know who the real enemies of America (you, us, we, me) are...... its the IslamoNazis... and SorozNazis (including the DNC he’s purchased)...and of course the remaining communists (all of the above, aside from Shariah law subjugate/kill the Christians and Jews component, are essentially the same...extreme leftwing dictators)
it will be interesting to see if the communists can eventually win out over their IslamoNazi bff’s and allies
I doubt it.
the Demos import dangerous DANGEROUS IslamoNazi terrorist gang fighters by the hundreds of thousands
and
then try to (illegally) deprive good American citizens of their right and ability of self-defense
if you ever wanted to know who the real enemies of America (you, us, we, me) are...... its the IslamoNazis... and SorozNazis (including the DNC he’s purchased)...and of course the remaining communists (all of the above, aside from Shariah law subjugate/kill the Christians and Jews component, are essentially the same...extreme leftwing dictators)
it will be interesting to see if the communists can eventually win out over their IslamoNazi bff’s and allies
I doubt it.
Gun rights fall under a Constitutional Amendment.
For what it's worth.
The Second Amendment is a right granted to *all* Americans under the Constitution.Particularly after the two recent SCOTUS rulings confirming that that Amendment applies to individual citizens *as well as* the "militia" how is it that individual states are allowed to pass,in some states at least,horrendously restrictive laws/regulations?
I don't recall certain states having restrictive laws on the First (or Fifth) Amendment.I can go to any state in the union and start a political (or religious) newsletter and distribute it in various ways.No license...no approval from a police chief...no waiting periods.
I'm truly befuddled by this.
Again. They’re ignoring federal law. They’ve shown to be completely combative with the law of the land. What makes you think they’d abide by a federal reciprocity law? Technically reciprocity is already covered by the Second Amendment. The fact that we’re talking about having to pass a law to bolster a human right is disgusting.
—not until some authority forces California, New York, Connecticut, etc., to abide by a hypothetical reciprocity law-—
As long as the idiots in commiefornia continue to elect commies to public office, they are going to have a shiit govt.
Someone please explain time how shall-issue second amendment laws are not required everywhere but shall-issue gay marriage licenses are.
Why do state and local governments keep passing laws that are against the Constitution? If EVERY gun owner started carrying, license it not, the courts and cops would be overwhelmed and cops would stop arresting people. I said IF, NSA monitor.
If the penalty for carrying a concealed hand gun in California is a misdemeanor, I would carry if I wanted to. How could you get caught if you are not committing any other crimes?
And the sad spiral of a once great state continues to flush itself into irrelevancy.
I hope the left’s favorite weapon, the courts, can be used against it to make ‘may issue’ unconstitutional and ‘shall issue’ a basic right. There’s simply no reason to prevent law abiding non felons from carrying a self defense weapon; especially as our country becomes more violent in the cities. No reason at all.
As long as your masters have the illegal alien and dead people vote, they don’t have to care if you live or die.
Remember, these dems are nothing but power hungry tyrants who don't want to govern but to rule.
Because gay marriage isn't a threat to a tyrannical government.
Only if a California resident gets a permit from another state. Which is actually not uncommon. Utah is a frequent one to get.
The "may issue" law in California means that it's really up to each local jurisdiction. It's the big cities that are the problem. Many of the more rural counties practice "shall issue".
You're right, until the rule of law is actually enforced, as in these anti-constitutional tyrants are prosecuted and jailed, nothing will happen.
It would anger the Cali's greatly to have to allow non-residents (with permits from their home state) to ccw in CA. This doesn't mean they have to allow ccw for their own citizens. Of course CA residents could get non-resident permits from other states and maybe bypass this.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.