Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

California moves to limit where firearms may be carried and who can have them
ktla ^

Posted on 06/30/2022 9:39:28 AM PDT by BenLurkin

California lawmakers on Tuesday moved to limit where firearms may be carried and who can have them, while struggling to stay within the high court’s ruling.

They aim to restrict concealed carry to those 21 and older; require applicants to disclose all prior arrests, criminal convictions and restraining or protective orders; require in-person interviews with the applicant and at least three character references; and allow sheriffs and police chiefs to consider applicants’ public statements as they weigh if the individual is dangerous.


TOPICS: US: California
KEYWORDS: banglist; california; guncontrol; scotus
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-47 next last
allow sheriffs and police chiefs to consider applicants’ public statements as they weigh if the individual is dangerous.

Violate both the Second and First Amendment in a single blow!

1 posted on 06/30/2022 9:39:28 AM PDT by BenLurkin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

Wanda Sykes likes it.


2 posted on 06/30/2022 9:41:44 AM PDT by TornadoAlley3 ( I'm Proud To Be An Okie From Muskogee)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

“The proposed legislation would bar concealed weapons from schools and universities, government and judicial buildings, medical facilities, public transportation, any place where alcohol is sold and consumed, public parks and playgrounds, and special events that require a permit.”


3 posted on 06/30/2022 9:42:33 AM PDT by BenLurkin (The above is not a statement of fact. It is either opinion, or satire, or both.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin
“They aim to restrict concealed carry to those 21 and older; require applicants to disclose all prior arrests, criminal convictions and restraining or protective orders; require in-person interviews with the applicant and at least three character references; and allow sheriffs and police chiefs to consider applicants’ public statements as they weigh if the individual is dangerous.”

What I want to know: Will applicants have to provide photo ID?

4 posted on 06/30/2022 9:43:09 AM PDT by jeffersondem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jeffersondem

Excellent question!


5 posted on 06/30/2022 9:44:07 AM PDT by BenLurkin (The above is not a statement of fact. It is either opinion, or satire, or both.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

And you can bet that if they want to deny you a permit, they will find some “public statement” to justify it.

It doesn’t even have to be Internet-based. “Sorry, pal. Your neighbor said that five years ago you put a Trump sign in your front yard. That makes you an insurrectionist. No permit for you.”


6 posted on 06/30/2022 9:45:03 AM PDT by Leaning Right (The steal is real.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

It was a matter of time before government said ‘the hell with it’ and just went rogue. The moment Jefferson warned us about draws ever closer.


7 posted on 06/30/2022 9:45:20 AM PDT by skeeter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

THIS is exactly how lefties are subverting court decisions, including those rendered by SCOTUS.

Now court cases will have to filed against these new “rules.”


8 posted on 06/30/2022 9:45:39 AM PDT by Bon of Babble (Rigged Elections have Consequences)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jeffersondem

So they just renamed “good cause” to “if the applicant is dangerous”


9 posted on 06/30/2022 9:46:36 AM PDT by SPDSHDW (Buy JHP ammo, Level 3/4 armor and rifles. Won’t be able to for much longer, and we’re gonna need em)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin
...require in-person interviews with the applicant and at least three character references; and allow sheriffs and police chiefs to consider applicants’ public statements as they weigh if the individual is dangerous.

That's clearly delineated in the Second Amendment, right?

Including scrutinizing anything anyone ever said on social media sites that might be interpreted as "dangerous" by our overseers.

California, with soaring crime rates, will do everything it possibly ca to make sure you cannot protect yourself, your loved ones, your animals and your property.

10 posted on 06/30/2022 9:48:10 AM PDT by Bon of Babble (Rigged Elections have Consequences)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: skeeter

If it is the LAW then the sheriffs need to cuff and arrest Newsom for breaking the law, if Newsom and his cronies decide the laws of the nation don’t have to be followed then arrest the bastards!!


11 posted on 06/30/2022 9:48:23 AM PDT by Trump Girl Kit Cat (Yosemite Sam raising hell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

Translation: We’re ignoring the ruling the Supreme Court just made.


12 posted on 06/30/2022 9:48:25 AM PDT by jimjohn (We're at war, people. Start acting like it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jimjohn

Looking like New York is going the same way. In 2009 I retired and moved from Michigan to Ohio. A good choice, that. Michigan used to have a “purchase permit” system to buy a handgun. I expect they’ll follow CA and NY. Ohio just became a Constitutional Carry state.


13 posted on 06/30/2022 9:54:56 AM PDT by Chad C. Mulligan (qd4)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

How about prohibiti anyone who entered the country illegally or aided others doing this.


14 posted on 06/30/2022 9:57:24 AM PDT by epluribus_2 (l)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

So if they say publicly, kill Trump they’re good to go. If they say, save defenseless babies and the elderly, they’re dangerous. Got it.


15 posted on 06/30/2022 9:57:25 AM PDT by jacknhoo ( Luke 12:51; Think ye, that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, no; but separation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jimjohn

The Democrat Party exists to serve only the Democrat Party, and the Democrat Party obeys no authority other than the Democrat Paty.


16 posted on 06/30/2022 9:59:17 AM PDT by BenLurkin (The above is not a statement of fact. It is either opinion, or satire, or both.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

California is going to be a target rich environment for gun rights lawyers for several years. The state will have to be slapped down several more times before they finally start to get it.


17 posted on 06/30/2022 10:05:39 AM PDT by FLT-bird
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: skeeter

Well if the average age of a civilization from birth to death is 250 years then we have about 3.5 years left.

That takes us just past the next presidential inauguration.

Interesting possibilities, are they not?


18 posted on 06/30/2022 10:08:16 AM PDT by packagingguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

Communist state. Already a giant loss to America.
Anyone who can is getting out of there asap


19 posted on 06/30/2022 10:09:31 AM PDT by faithhopecharity (“Politicians are not born. They're excreted.” Marcus Tillius Cicero (106 to 43 BCE))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bon of Babble
this stands to reason, because California Law Enforcement is all about harrassing the law abiding subjects under their dominion, writing traffic tickets to soccer moms, avoiding high crime areas and getting through the day safely so they can retire at 30 years old

F-- ALL police and politicians ( dem or repub), they are the enemy, of course they want us disarmed

20 posted on 06/30/2022 10:13:28 AM PDT by KTM rider (, or how Ambassador Stevens was killed because he was about to testify before the UN council )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-47 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson