FReepmail me if you want to be added to or deleted from the list.
More 2nd Amendment related articles on FR's Bang List.
Posted on 07/02/2022 4:24:43 AM PDT by marktwain
On June 24th, 2022, one day after the long-awaited Supreme Court decision in the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen case, the Office of the Attorney General of California sent out a legal alert about how the case affects the issue of concealed carry permits in the state.
Justice Clarence Thomas, in Bruen, set out considerable guidance about how “shall-issue” regimes need to issue permits in order to be considered abiding by Second Amendment. From page 36, footnote 9:
Rather, it appears that these shall-issue regimes,which often require applicants to undergo a background check or pass a firearms safety course, are designed to ensure only that those bearing arms in the jurisdiction are, in fact, “law-abiding, responsible citizens.” Ibid. And they likewise appear to contain only “narrow, objective, and definite standards” guiding licensing officials, Shuttlesworth v. Birmingham, 394 U. S. 147, 151 (1969), rather than requiring the “appraisal of facts, the exercise of judgment, and the formation of an opinion,” Cantwell v. Connecticut, 310 U. S. 296, 305 (1940)—features that typify proper-cause standards like New York’s. That said, because any permitting scheme can be put toward abusive ends, we do not rule out constitutional challenges to shall-issue regimes where, for example, lengthy wait times in processing license applications or exorbitant fees deny ordinary citizens their right to public carry.
The Attorney General of California appears to advise permit issuers in California to go considerably beyond those guidelines. The AG claims that only the “good cause” is affected by Bruen, other criteria such as “good moral character” are not affected. From CA AG Legal Alert page 1:
(Excerpt) Read more at ammoland.com ...
In California, you’ve got to get permission to get permission.
Do what else is new? And for Kalifornia to have a “good morals” criteria is like having Brandon determine cognitive mind.
The same idiot Leftist AG that purposely released, err leaked, gun owners data?! Yeah, okie dokie......
New York just passed a law in an emergency session, or whatever they call it to address their loss. Now, they demand four References, social media history among other things to get the permit. Then, they took it one step further And instead of the Previous law where a business required a no gun sign, they changed it so it is assumed every business does not permit guns unless they post a sign saying they are permissible. So, in essence, If you don’t see the sign saying you can carry a gun, you can’t, and that is a felony.
CA translation of “good moral character” = you must believe in gaia , child sacrifice, and anything else OTHER than CHRIST, the founding fathers, and the Constitution.
and an abortion or 2 helps also...
proves the applicant has the same mindset as the ones who set these rules ...
FReepmail me if you want to be added to or deleted from the list.
More 2nd Amendment related articles on FR's Bang List.
This is deliberately flouting the kaw.
It looks like the AG is worried that ‘exorbitant’ fees will keep ‘peoples of color’ from getting gun permits.
1. The AG is racist to claim peoples of color are all poor
2. California just needs to make sure the permit fee is kept very low
At least the AG didn’t say people of color won’t be able to get permits because they all committed felonies.
Maybe Kalifornia should apply the same standards for voting to gun permits? Any suggestion that people need to do anything other than lift a finger to vote (heaven forbid they have to show an ID, for instance) is called voter suppression and an illegal abrogation of voting rights.
How about being able to buy and carry weapons without the need to show an ID? For something expressly codified as a bona fide right like bearing arms? Be consistent, Kalifornia!
I wonder if there’s any way that we could contact the SCOTUS and ask if this might be nuked early instead of waiting years for these infringements to be addressed...
Get an Independent Governor (a tyrannical strongman) and let’s bar women from exercising their voting rights. Eliminate the exercise of the 14th Amendment, while we’re at it.
Works for me
one day after the long-awaited Supreme Court decision in the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen case......
Which hochul refuses to abide by by unconstitutionally making every public place a “sensitive area” where guns “can’t be carried”, and who will use social media sites to refuse people their inalienable right to self defence
Allow ehich unduly,prohibits people from the right to self defence, and puts a huge burden on the people to own a gun for,the right to self defence.
She knows it is unconstitutional and will not stand, but she has gone ahead with it knwoing that it will take years and be very costly to fight her mandates.
Hey ny... are you gonna vote her in in Nov? (The damage Wil. Already be done if she isn’t voted in, and they likely will have some provision in the “law” thst makes it illegal to undo it for a certain amount of years or whatever. I’m guessing they have some sneaky clause or something to make it near impossible to undo.
Yup and she doesn’t care because she knows it will take years and a lot of money for the opposition to fight it
When they can’t think of anything it’s always Unconstitutional
Yeah, but you know d**n well that he/she/it/ze/zir... believes it.
Excellent alancarp, “Maybe Kalifornia should apply the same standards for voting to gun permits?”
Only legal gun owners get the right to Vote! I think that would be an awesome way to preserve our Republic.
Or getting kickback from the cartels no reason to help the people money first.
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.