Posted on 02/13/2014 12:43:07 PM PST by neverdem
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit handed gun rights advocates a major victory today by invalidating San Diego, California’s requirement that conceal-carry permits only be issued to those gun owners who have a “good cause” to carry a concealed gun in public. According to local officials, “one’s personal safety is not considered good cause.” In his opinion for a divided three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit, Judge Diarmuid F. O'Scannlain rejected the local government’s approach as an unconstitutional infringement on the Second Amendment.
“In California,” the ruling observes, “the only way that the typical responsible, law-abiding citizen can carry a weapon in public for the lawful purpose of self-defense is with a concealed-carry permit. And, in San Diego County, that option has been taken off the table.”
As Brian Doherty noted on Tuesday, the U.S. Supreme Court is currently considering whether it will take up two other cases that also center on the Second Amendment’s reach outside of the home. This new ruling from the 9th Circuit makes it all the more likely that the question of gun rights in public will soon be addressed by the Supreme Court.
Today's ruling by the 9th Circuit in Peruta v. County of San Diego is available here.
Baby Steps on the Road to Fusion Energy
Some noteworthy articles about politics, foreign or military affairs, IMHO, FReepmail me if you want on or off my list.
Thanks for the ping!
Satan has entered the ice skating competition in Sochi.
CA has mopped themselves into a box. Up until 2012, they allowed unloaded open carry, but their shall-issue scheme for ccw is issued by local jurisdictions at the descretion of sheriff’s and police chiefs. In much of CA, it is hard to impossible to get a ccw. So, in 2012 after banning most unloaded open carry and very restrictive ccw, they left much of the state in a position where NO bearing of arms is possible.
Which is exactly what they want. And they are not about to let a little thing like an unfavorable judicial decision interfere with their agenda. Look at what the Communists running Washington DC, Chicago, et al have done with the Heller and McDonald decisions.
Pre-Heller DC, it was impossible to get a handgun. Post-Heller, it is now only nearly impossible.
Thanks for identifying Maryland as the fascist state re innocent people with valid C&C permits.
Figures. Just remember to stay safe, ya gotta stay SOUTH of the Mason-Dixon Line!
I have friends in MA. While it is “may issue” by law, outside the major cities it is “shall issue” by practice. However, it is up to the local Issuing Authority, I.e. Chief of Police, etc. to decide if you get a permit that let’s you carry and home and range only, or anywhere allowed by law. Some towns will on,y issue the limited permit.
The 9th Circuit got another one right on the Second Amendment.
They ruled that the Second Amendment is an individual right, not a collective right some time ago. Went right back to Anglo-Saxon Law. A free man is an armed man. An unarmed man is a subject.
A permit is issued by the county or city you live or own a business in, but it’s good for whole state. Up until now it’s been up to the local government to issue or not as the choose.
I’m sitting here, stunned...
9th Circus...
Will wonders never cease.
Good on ‘em though, for getting it right.
That ‘s way too much discretion. While I personally believe that unrestricted carry without a tax is the only Proper Standard, I think permits (freely issued) are tolerable. For now. MA needs to get with the program.
Thanks for the clarification.
It is also true that three people have "decided" what is the true meaning of a right we already have by virtue of sucking air.
This sets a precedent, that three people can make that decision.
Depending on three people to protect basic rights enumerated in the Constitution is a dangerous game.
Don't put it that way, the lefties will then say the 2nd Amendment "be ray-ciss"
If you are without morals, your causes are by default NOT GOOD. The good cause argument for gun posession accidently spills into everything else. Limiting progressive amoral goals because their good is politicaly motivated will be the result of these "Good Cause" arguments.
And we all know progressives and liberals reboot their record every morning based on issued talking points. Up is down, green is red, understanding is confusion, enemies are allies, allies are enemies, and Oracle billionares build private golf courses to play with your trangender buddies out of the public's eye but deep in their wallet.
Neverdem: Pls pass this to any NJ Gunnies you might know:
To all New Jersey Gunnies....
If you haven’t seen it yet, here’s what the NJ Senate President thinks of your current struggle to gain your Right to Carry:
http://njgunforums.com/forum/index.php/topic/66323-sweeney-says-he-will-never-support-ccw-in-nj/
“...There are still draconian “may issue” states out there?...”
Yup. New Jersey is one of them.
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.