California gun owners press the case for hidden weapons

dailyherald.com ^ | 23 February, 2012 | Carol J. Williams

[marktwain]

LOS ANGELES (MCT) — Chuck Michel’s strategy for crime-fighting rests on the element of surprise: Keep the bad guys guessing who’s armed and who’s not.

“If 5 percent of the ducks could shoot back, you’re not going to go duck hunting,” said the Long Beach lawyer representing many Californians denied concealed weapons permits and, in his view, their constitutional right to self-defense.

For decades, that argument has fallen flat in the courtroom. Judges have routinely held that denying permits to carry loaded firearms in public does not infringe on gun owners’ right to keep and bear arms.

But now, some gun owners hope that courts will soon reverse course and find that they have a right to secretly tote their weapons in public. Ironically, their optimism stems from a piece of gun control legislation that took effect last month and bans them from openly carrying even unloaded handguns.

Courts have upheld local law enforcement officials’ authority to deny concealed weapons permits in part because “you had the opportunity to openly carry an unloaded weapon and in the event of an emergency you can quickly load and defend yourself,” said Adam Winkler, a UCLA law professor and author of “Gunfight: The Battle Over the Right to Bear Arms in America.” “Now that option has been taken off the table.”

[marktwain]

Adam Winkler has become the new face of gun control in America. He is a bit more subtle in the erosion of our constitutional rights, and more dangerous because of it.

[yefragetuwrabrumuy]

I think the only argument that could be made in favor of limiting gun rights in California, is that, *as a people*, the majority of Californians are *defective*.

That is, if you look at the other generally regarded as legitimate reasons for denying gun rights, felony conviction and serious mental illness, the only conclusion that can be reached is that the majority of Californians are mentally ill criminals.

This would explain their government in general, and much of their behavior in particular. Thus, their justice system is not there to prevent and solve crimes, but as a prison authority, to keep these mentally ill criminals from escaping their state.

[paul51]

I think the only argument that could be made in favor of limiting gun rights in California, is that, *as a people*, the majority of Californians are *defective*.

Ha Ha. Funny but also persuasive. I posted an article the other day about the Monterey county sheriff and his anti gun strategy. I think the defective basis is his argument seeing that he requires in depth psycho exam for a permit