![]() It doesn’t prove causation, but concealed-carry hasn’t led to blood in the streets. But a Washington Times report from August headlined, “Chicago crime rate drops as concealed carry applications surge,” is consistent with news from the rest of the country. In a statement after the initial Peruta ruling, Harris vowed to pursue an appeal – describing it as a matter of public safety. “I would join her in that request,” he said. Attorney General Harris should just petition the high court directly. Likewise, the plaintiff’s attorney Chuck Michel of Long Beach would prefer to skip the en banc process. “We want this issue settled nationally,” said Brandon Combs, executive director of the Calguns Foundation. And appeals courts in other parts of the country have upheld these highly restrictive concealed-carry standards, leading to widespread confusion. ![]() And another one in Hawaii, which also is part of the 9th Circuit’s jurisdiction. There’s still a Yolo County case that’s arguing the same basic issue. Sacramento County already moved to a “shall issue” standard - i.e., issuing permits to any citizens who meet basic standards (background check and training). San Diego County is waiting for the 9th Circuit case to be official, whereas Orange County now is using looser standards. Peruta applies to San Diego County, but is being used to challenge other counties’ permitting rules. Commentary: More Steven Greenhut columns about California Her goal is to let sheriffs continue requiring proof of threats - rather than general self-defense reasons – to approve giving Californians a permit to carry a handgun. On Wednesday, the AG’s office said it would ask the court to refer that decision to an 11-judge “en banc” panel. In addition, justices found no exceptional need to grant the state such standing given the specific case is about the enforcement of a local regulation. The state had expected Gore to appeal and when he didn’t, that left it flat-footed. But earlier this month, a divided 9th Circuit panel denied Harris and the others standing to be a party in the case. ![]() Sheriff Bill Gore chose not to appeal, which led to a belated response by gun-control advocates, including police and sheriffs’ organizations, an activist group and California Attorney General Kamala Harris. “Because the Second Amendment ‘confer(s) an individual right to keep and bear arms,’ we must assess whether the California scheme (in light of San Diego County’s policy) allows some people to bear arms outside the home in some places at some times instead, the question is whether it allows the typical, responsible, law-abiding citizens to bear arms in public for the lawful purpose of self-defense,” ruled the court. Circuit Court of Appeals sided with the gun owners. #Korean idol manager self defense free#The result in restrictive counties is a small number of residents - people connected to law enforcement, lawyers, business people facing security risks and influential people - were free to exercise such “rights.” Actually, it became a “privilege.” In February, the 9th U.S. State law gives sheriffs the power to determine “good cause” – and San Diego County required documentation showing the applicant faced some sort of specific threat to merit one. The case started in 2008 in San Diego County, when Edward Peruta and other gun owners challenged San Diego County’s process for issuing concealed-carry permits. Yet an ongoing court battle examines whether similar rules regarding the carrying of firearms is an equally outrageous violation of the Second Amendment. It would be a violation of our First Amendment rights. The federal courts would never uphold a law requiring people to show “good cause” before they could speak in public or march in a parade. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |