CALIFORNIA: Assembly passes bill to ban open carry of unloaded rifles

SacBee: Capitol Alert ^ | 5/3/12 | Jim Sanders

[SmithL]

Legislation that bans carrying unloaded rifles in public was passed Thursday by the Assembly.

The measure, Assembly Bill 1527, cleared the lower house 44-28 with no Republican support.

Proposed by Assemblyman Anthony Portantino, D-La Cañada Flintridge, the bill is similar to a new state law banning the open carry of handguns that took effect Jan. 1.

AB 1527 takes aim at a movement that encourages people to show up at public places with unloaded weapons. Supporters contend that openly displaying firearms can startle onlookers, scare children and provoke violence.

Portantino said the appearance of gun-wielding people in public can escalate tensions and spark tragedy.

"We in this chamber have the ability to prevent that tragedy," he said.

[Mr Rogers]

I consider this a good thing. The more Californians become terrified of guns, the less likely they are to move to Arizona and ruin MY state.

I think we need to build a border fence - between California, and Arizona & Nevada. Let California, once the greatest state in America, fulfill its destiny:

to be the first state that looks completely like Detroit!

[OneWingedShark]

>And the sudden appearance of gun wielding thugs committing a crime with those guns is not escalating and sparking tragedies in your state???

No, it’s not; it’s what the SWAT does.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pV7u91A3KGQ

[OneWingedShark]

(The CA Supreme Court once denied standing to the owner of an “assault” weapon because the rifle itself wasn’t a person!)

Dang! Do you have a link for that?

But it [denying standing] won’t fly in a Federal court; not even the 9th Circus.

I don't know about that, I mean look at what the USSC has done.

[Last Dakotan]

Thanks for spamming the thread. Some of us are on blackberries.

Is that a slang term for a drug I'm not aware of?

[Redcloak]

I'll have to do some digging for that cite. I remember being shocked as I read it. It started out with a "but it would be silly to deny standing because a rifle isn't a person" tone, and then did precisely that! But like I said, that was a State court. In the several Federal challenges to local CCW policies, standing was never denied to the plaintiffs. Saying that plaintiffs weren't the National Guard would have been an easy way out for the courts; but they didn't take it. All of them allowed the cases to move forward, but found that capricious CCW policies did not violate the 2nd Amendment since CCW isn't necessary for self defense with a firearm outside the home. They all cited legal open carry as an alternative that satisfies the State's obligation under the Federal Constitution. And now that the Democrats seem determined to remove that option...

[Redcloak]

Thanks for spamming the thread. Some of us are on blackberries.

Is that a slang term for a drug I'm not aware of?

Some would say so. : )