Replies

California’s racist laws. They gave the police chiefs and sheriffs the discretion to issue permits almost 100 years ago thinking that the LEO bosses would never give permits to African Americans and Hispanics. (They also made it so that if you are caught with a concealed weapon, it is just a misdemeanor on the first offense, so people unlikely to be stopped and checked by the police could pretty much carry with impunity until they get caught).

Now, it is a power thing for leftists. They don’t like guns so they hire chiefs and back sheriffs who they know won’t issue permits (unless you are politically connected or help the sheriff get elected of course). In the populous counties they are very difficult to get, and the sheriffs have very high “good cause” requirements. In the rural counties almost anyone can get a permit - and permits are good statewide. So people who live in the sticks can walk the streets of san francisco packing, while san franciscans can’t even carry in the sticks.

There are a number of lawsuits going on. California law prohibits open carry, and concealed carry is legal only with a permit. One case went to the 9th Circuit but the court ruled that the Heller ruling didn’t affirm a right to concealed carry, so the state could ban open carry and keep ccw discretionary. Very bizarre ruling because it resolved nothing but the USSC refused to take the appeal. Now there are suits arguing the opposite - that with ccw being discretionary the ban on open carry should be overturned. A right you cannot exercise is not a right at all. A right delayed is a right denied. Some of these suits are on hold pending the ruling on the New York case at the USSC - which is one reason why a bunch of Dem Senators wrote that letter threatening the court... They fear that the court will kick out a ruling that strongly affirms an individual right to carry/transport a weapon that will tip the balance on these pending suits.