During the second weekend of October 2011 democratic Governor of California, Jerry Brown, signed into law (AB144) the ban on “Open Carry,” the right of law abiding citizens to carry an “exposed” hand gun (provided the gun is not loaded). As of Jan 1st, 2012 it will be a misdemeanor to carry an exposed and unloaded handgun in public. The consequences of doing so could mean spending up to a year in prison or potentially being fined $1,000. The reasoning for the ban: the police chiefs throughout the state were not comfortable with “Open Carry.” Quoting the president of the California Police Chiefs Association, David Maggard Jr. (above, right), “the bill will help assure that felons and gang members cannot openly carry an unloaded gun with impunity.” Really, Mr. Maggard?
Has logic and reason completely flew the coop? I don’t believe I have ever heard of gang members “openly carrying,” let alone felons targeting themselves by carrying an exposed weapon. Shouldn’t the law specifically target the gang members and felons….and aren’t there already laws that prohibit felons from owning guns? Come now, Mr. Maggard, since when have “Open Carry” gang members and “Open Carry” felons ever been a problem for California? It’s completely backward logic like this that has been eroding the rights (and threatening the safety) of the average law-abiding citizen.
With explanations of wasted resources to investigate a few anti-gun and overly frantic people’s calls to their departments over law-abiding citizens legally carrying handguns, the police chiefs convinced Gov. Brown to make life easier for them, at the expense of the masses.
Today, law enforcement has virtually made it impossible for law-abiding citizens to legally acquire a concealed carry permit (CCW) for protection in the state of California because they (the police) can’t “see” the weapon and thereby wanted to eliminate that concern. Now, they’re not comfortable seeing “anyone” with a side weapon at all because they’re unsure if the weapon is loaded or not. So, soon another right of self-protection will be stripped from the American people.
It’s incomprehensible (and not logical) to suggest that the illegitimate concern of 9, 10,000 or 100,000 policemen should impose on the rights, safety and concern of virtually 34 MILLION citizens of the State of California. Considering the fact that statistics show police do not normally prevent crime but basically serve to pick up the pieces after a crime has concluded. Moreover, statistics also show that the states which have less gun control also have less crime.
Statements such as “the streets will be safer for law enforcement and families,” made by Assemblyman Anthony Portantino, who authored the bill, has no merit when you factor in the logic: criminals are criminals because they do not follow the law. So, logically how is this ban going to make it any safer for the community?
The irony is this law will make the streets less safe since the only ones who will abide by the law are the law-abiding citizens, not the gang-bangers. Further, the criminals will now be given a free hand in knowing whoever they choose to victimize will most likely not be carrying any protection, concealed or otherwise.
Assemblyman Portantino continued, stating “Main Street California is not the Old West, and you don’t need a gun to buy a cheeseburger.” That’s right, Mr. Portantino, it’s not the Old West, it’s worse. Just today, in sunny Southern California, a lone deranged gunman shot-up a hair salon, killing eight people and critically wounding one. Where were the police today? And you want to strip the people of their right to self defense?
Logic and reason is simply not being displayed when you have people like Brian Malte, local director for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, stating “California families will now be able to take their families to the park or out to eat without the worry of getting shot by some untrained, unscreened, self-appointed vigilante.”
I don’t believe anyone has ever had a problem taking their families to a local park with concerns that a self-appointed “Open Carry” fellow citizen-turned-vigilante might start blazing away. In fact, a first responder citizen armed with a handgun has saved lives and property numerous times. The internet is full of examples.
Even the attempt to assassinate Arizona Representative Gabrielle Giffords may have possibly been foiled if an armed citizen was by her side. Unfortunately, the only armed citizen at the time, Joe Zamudio, was in a nearby store and arrived too late. But he was still able to assist in subduing the shooter.
Mr. Malte, I submit to you that it is illogical thinking by people such as yourself that contribute to the insanity of all this. Instead of making a case to protect the public from themselves by trampling on their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms, you should be focusing your energy on the political system that tries to free Jim Brady’s shooter, John Hinckley Jr. Clean up the political idiocy and I assure you there will be less crime. Infringing upon the rights of the law-abiding citizen will not help your case.
When we have people like Gov. Jerry Brown, Brian Malte, David Maggard Jr., and Assemblyman Anthony Portantino dictating gun regulations to the masses, incidents like the one that took place in Killeen, Texas in 1991 are more likely. I’m referring to the “Luby Massacre,” where two dozen innocent people died in a restaurant and another two dozen were wounded, by a lone gunman. All-the-while, a customer obeying local gun laws, had her gun locked (outside) in her car.
For Gov. Brown to deduce that by imposing more self-defense burdens on the average citizen will result in greater safety for them is not logical. In fact, it appears the Governor’s only safety concern was for his police chiefs’, and not for the people.
Logically, I would deduce on average more crime occurs toward the common citizen than does to an armed police officer, yet the officer has priority over their own self-defense, well above the average law-abiding American citizen. Does that make sense?
Despite the officer’s job-risk factor, honestly, how many crimes have been committed by citizen’s practicing their right to “Open Carry?”
In no way am I trying to belittle our law enforcement, but simply presenting my case logically. History and case study indicate that the police cannot prevent crimes from happening nor can they fully protect the people but in actuality, as I stated before, serve to pick up the pieces of any given crime.
Again, I ask has logic flown out the window? Did Gov. Brown at least take into account that 45 of the 50 states (57 if you believe President Obama) allow for some form of “Open Carry” or concealment. How difficult was it to examine what works and doesn’t work in other states and apply the logic.
I guess equality and the rights granted to us by our forefathers in the Second Amendment need only apply to law enforcement who seem to make up the rules as they please in California. Once again the bureaucratic system made up of so few overrides the logic and will of so many.
Sent from my iPad
Son, I am dissapoint.
All Californicators can rest easy tonight knowing that the only armed people on the street are the one’s who beat the living sh!t out of Rodney King.
More recently, and more tragically, Fullerton police fatally beat Kelly Thomas. Reverence for police or police policy stances, like reverence for any group of people, is ridiculously misguided. The police do not, as a group, have the best interests of society at heart, they are as self-interested as the rest of us. Granting privileges to one group at cost to another should always be exposed as the violation it is.
JSG
ok im lost. its illegal to open carry only if its unloaded? so you can OC if it is loaded? and who the hell open carries with an empty gun?
When I lived in CA never carried one on the hip, didn’t need all the attention. At least I could carry one in the car, not so obvious to the casual observer. If needed, it would take a few seconds to load up. Better than nothing.
Everybody can thank the OC activists for grabbing the tail of the tiger. Not like the outcome wasn’t predictable.
In before the mikeb comment
how much more mass killings are the people of california going to take till they say “enough is enough” just look at the recent mass shooting that happened yesterday in a beauty salon if just one person had the right to carry (ccw) it probably would have had a totaly different outcome the people of california have to start pushing back on there government or they will be nothing more that sheep being led to the slaughter house …..
Testify, brother Zimmerman! Amen! Hallelujah!
(No, really, that could be a sermon delivered at a tent meeting. A good one. I half expected a choir to sing “Praise the Lord, and Pass the Ammunition” when I got to the end.)
Is any wonder why Californias are leaveing California live in Texas, Nevada and Arizona . Let see no work in California . Cost to much money live in California. Each year get hard be gun owner there. One many reason I left California was I get sick Sacramento passing stupid gun laws each year that do not make any won one safer in California . There fact cash straped Sacramento has very nasty habit let people out of jails prisons when they do not have money keep them in. Reason I like Arizona no here send people like Nancy Pelosi to Washington DC.
As long as Californians leave their bullshit politics at the border I welcome them with open arms to my state of Arizona (I’m born and raised 40 years). Unfortunately we get too many that want to turn my beloved, free state into another cesspool of liberalism. They get sick of the high prices and taxes in California yet don’t seem to realize that their idiotic liberal policies are a serious part of California’s financial woes. Hell, they just passed legislation to give college grants to illegals. Plenty of college kids whose American parents have worked and paid taxes their entire lives will now get cheated out of already scarce funds in favor of kids whose parents basically shit on out laws with the argument being the anchor babies have so much to offer as if born and bred Americans don’t. Only in California does that make sense.
“Today, law enforcement has virtually made it impossible for law-abiding citizens to legally acquire a concealed carry permit (CCW) for protection in the state of California”
Not all.
The decision who can carry CCW is made by county sheriffs. Some counties are impossible to get one. Others are practically shall issue.
http://www.calccw.com/Forums/county-faq/7158-county-map-california-ccw-issuance.html
The impossible counties are for the most part Democratic, heavily populated, Gov.Browns base.
Your comment is well taken.
Recently, there have been several cases of an armed father/husband going violent with rage after experiencing the justice of the Family Courts over divorce and child custody issues. Nothing logically or ethically validates such violence. A small percentage of fathers are unbalanced and should be kept away from their kids. Probably kept away from guns too. Same with some mothers. However, there is also much legal bias against men by the Family Courts and victim grievance industry. Sometimes, that bias can push a stressed-out good man who believes he is being screwed way over the edge by the Courts into murder. I certainly do not trust the mass media to write a thorough, insightful, and balanced story.
I very much agree.
When you look at the fact that almost everyone that OCed were OFWGs, it throws the felon argument out the window. My biggest issue with this ban is that it pretty much outlaws taking a handgun outside of the house unless you are going to or from the range.
Aside from the fact that I believe Jerry (Governor Moonbeam) Brown to be one of the least qualified idiots to ever occupy the Governor’s Mansion (Twice, which speaks volumes about Kalifornia), I’ve got a practical question: what does the law do about people who own guns and need to take them in for repair? I mean if it’s virtually illegal to conceal a gun, and you can’t carry it openly, what do you do when you have to transport a handgun to a gunsmith for work? Call UPS for a home pickup?
Sadly, I have a lot of friends who live in the Peoples Republik. I hate they have to live in that Gulag masquerading as paradise. (You can check out any time you like, but you can never leave.) But if someday the San Andreas fault had everybody (else) surfing to Denver, not sure I’w work up much of a sweat nor cry a tear.
Brad, I assume (hate to assume anything) that it is legally ok to transport the gun to the gunsmith same as you would do to go to the range or to go hunting. In Kalifornia, a gun can legally go into a car trunk unloaded. If you are in San Fransicko it may also need to be kept locked and probably everyone places the gun into some sort of carrying case.
That is covered by a different section of the law, i.e. locked container carry or transport and is unaffected.
As for progress on changes to California laws, visit http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/index.php . But set aside some spare time. You have been warned.
I can’t get worked up about this. For all practical purposes most of California is part of the United States in name only. It used to be that California was a trend setter in social and cultural norms. Now they are a negative example of what not to do. I am sure
the Brady bunch sees a trend here but the rest of the country doesn’t give a rats a$$ about what goes on in the state. California is our Greece. It will collapse in the next couple years. Californians like to claim that if they were a country they would have the world’s 8th largest economy. The truth is that if we gave California it’s independence they would end up looking like North Korea within five years.
So sad. But agree 100%.
While at first glance it seems illogical, there is some logic. Unloaded open carry (UOC) is more of a political statement than a defensive action. And a couple of cases in the court system denied carry license (LTC) reform because UOC was available. Now the court needs a different excuse.
There is a plan…
Dear California,
You get what you vote for dumb asses.
Please forward this message to Chicago as well.
Sincerely,
The ARMED citizens of the UNITED States
There might still be a glimmer of hope. There was a Cali Supreme Court case that said concealed carry was unnecessary because open carry was already allowed, and that one option for carry has to be legal for an average person. It also clearly says in the constitution of California that every citizen has a right to self defense. So maybe Cali will get concealed carry (?).
If that argument does not work then maybe we should push that state into the ocean or sell it to Mexico.
This is the same BS excuse as to why you cannot use your electronics during take off or landing. It is an excuse so that they can control the crowd. The issue is that open carry scares people which makes them call 911 which makes the police have to run from the donut shop to go investigate what amounts to nothing. The excuse is for another purpose having nothing to do with reality.
For example, just happened in CT
http://www.wtnh.com/dpp/news/new_haven_cty/man-uses-shotgun-to-fix-traffic-tribulations
The ex-marine, in his own yard, with a legal “unloaded” shotgun over his shoulder and not pointing it at anyone was arrested because someone saw a person with a gun. Even the Judge (see the link) said he did nothing wrong — BUT — the public having no logic or common sense called the police and they took his guns away until a future court date.
The stupidity does not end, my dad who uses a cane to walk around was home with the dog and the dog tripped him up going down the stairs. He cursed out the dog and threw his cane breaking a vase, the idiot neighbors called the cops saying it was a domestic violence case and cops came in guns blazing for my dad home alone with the dog. BTW: my dad is 85yrs old!! Common sense — gone!
It seems as though the man was attempting to intimidate drivers, with the appearance of the gun, to stop driving so fast down his street. He admitted it was not a wise move. The judge said it is not illegal to have an unloaded gun in his yard. Yet context is also important. The gun owner could have used a speed scanner with a camcorder to record license plates and a sign warning drivers to slow down.
I don’t blame him one bit. I live on a 25 mph secondary street that is a straight half-mile shot to the next 4 way stop and despite the fact that there are kids up and down my street a-holes simply punch it to 40 or 50 all day long. A retired Air Force Master Sergeant down the street is constantly calling the local PD to send an officer with a radar gun to slow people down. I can completely sympathize with Mr. Sporko because I’ve often wanted to park my ass in a lawn chair with my 590 cradled in my lap. I don’t do it because my impulse control when it comes to idiots is painfully low.
Have a better one. While walking my son to school one day, wearing a side-leg fanny pack, a woman had reported to the principle that I had brought a gun to the school. I found this out 3 hours later into the day. My son (an honor student), scarred to death was brought to the main office and questioned by several people and I had to leave Work. So, in the end, this woman is home watching soap operas in her kitchen and my son & I are having our world turned upside down. Mind you when I arrived to the school with my motorcycle fanny pack by my side, I got no apologies and they wouldn’t even let me know who my accuser was (although they mentioned it was one of the mothers). Talk about people and lack of common sense. Ugh.
Joe, that sucks. Imagine the response you’d get if you reported a mother who brought her kid to school as a gun carrier? 1) the school officials would not believe you or be concerned, 2) if somehow the mother was called by the school to inquire about her carrying a gun she would end up getting an apology, and 3) you’d be seen as a high-drama dad. I’ve read on other pro-gun forums that men (especially white middle age men) with black fanny packs are sometimes perceived (by cops and others) as possibly carrying a gun in it. Not logical yet that is how some people emotionally process information. Twenty years ago, in Phoenix, I was walking down a street with a black canvas luggage type briefcase when I cop came up to me politely asking me to open the bag. He informed me that he once caught a guy carrying a full auto gun in one such bag. I guess black messenger/shoulder bags are nowadays ok yet black fanny bags are currently suspect.
Well, I tell you what Kalifornians, buy the smallest pistol legally allowed and mexican carry it in your behind and ‘tween the cheeks, fully unloaded for safety and legal reasons of course. Keep you magazines where the support hand can reach them, yet are out of plain sight, I suggest the front crotch area in the genital region.
Now when faced with a life and death situation all you have to do is check to make sure your shorts are clean in front and back. Tap, Rack, Bang, lives saved. Re-holstering is a bit of a pain in the backside, butt it is worth it.
Bad joke y’all. Here in Arizona we may carry open or concealed without a permit, in Vermont, Alaska and Wyoming? it is much the same. I honestly believe that an armed society is a polite society. There is much work ahead in the defense of the universal right to protect ones self, family, personal property and others in harms way.
Joe Zimmerman, in your last paragraph you stated; “I guess equality and the rights granted to us by our forefathers in the Second Amendment need only apply to law enforcement who seem to make up the rules as they please in California. ” Our forefathers, in the Bill of Rights, didn’t GRANT us a single thing. They were not kings or deities. The Bill of Rights that they put together acknowledges and codifies a specific set of rights that they felt were important enough that they should be written down and used as guiding principles for the rational governance of a free and sovereign people. These rights are inherent to the condition of being human. These rights are fundamental and essential. These rights must be applied equally and universally. At least that was their theory, whether or not the actual practice is still working today.
Understood 😀
It’s illegal for convicted felons to have a gun as it is, so how could they possibly open carry a gun? Oh right, criminals don’t follow the law.
How stupid are people that they believe this shit?
“…because they (the police) can’t “see” the weapon…” “…they’re not comfortable seeing “anyone” with a side weapon at all because they’re unsure if the weapon is loaded or not.”
This has to be what burns me the most. Aside from the pro gun/anti gun argument all together, whether your a certified gun nut or mikeb, whether you’re in favor of may issue or constitutional carry, it is painfully obvious that they’re lying to you. They are flat out making up excuses as they go along.
Concealed carry means that police don’t know who has a gun, (As though it’s people like us they have to worry about but w/e) but open carry (letting the police and everyone else know that you have a gun) means that police don’t know….. whether it’s loaded or not? Huh? It means that they have to do their job and respond to people calling about a guy with a gun?
1: You having to do you’re job isn’t an excuse to tell me I can’t do something that is and otherwise perfectly legal and victimless activity.
2: Someone calling and reporting something that isn’t a crime shouldn’t warrant a police response. If someone calls and reports a crime that turns out to not be true, they should be held accountable for wasting everyones time and money.
3: For the most part, operators aren’t idiots. They have the ability to, roughly, discern what crime is taking place so they can accurately dispatch units. (police, fire, medical) They also have the ability to discern whether or not a crime is actually taking place. If someone calls and reports that “There’s a guy with a gun.” why exactly are they unable to ask “What’s he doing with his gun?” “Is he shooting people? Is he threatening people? Is it holstered? Is he putting it into his trunk?”
Please, everyone, let us get back on track. Who is the redhead?
Sandra Hutchins, Orange County Sheriff.
Very anti-CCW.
“the bill will help assure that felons and gang members cannot openly carry an unloaded gun with impunity.”
umm last time I checked thugs and criminals carried their guns loaded and hidden.
Today, law enforcement has virtually made it impossible for law-abiding citizens to legally acquire a concealed carry permit (CCW) for protection in the state of California…
This is not true everywhere in CA. I live in Sacramento County and have a CCW and legally carry concealed everywhere but work, where it is prohibited. The only criteria for a CCW here is “for self defense” and a background check.
In fact, I can legally carry concealed throughout CA. While California is generally bug-house nuts about CCW and just about everything else, some parts of it do retain some sanity.
Yes, Chuck – you are correct but I was speaking in general terms and noted “virtually” (close to). Thanks.
Well done California. Your law enforcement think they are the only ones responsible enough to carry a gun on their person. Next time the Police show up at a murder scene, ask them where is the sanity in not being able to protect yourself given a life or death situation. Which by the way happens every single day in wonderful california. You all live by the vote in california, well you have just increased the percentages that you will also die by that vote. In california STUPID IS AS STUPID DOES.
There are those of us who are raising money for a Federal lawsuit to restore Loaded Open Carry to California -> http://CaliforniaRightToCarry.org/Press/CRTC10212011.html
For those who think this ban on unloaded open carry improves the chances of either the Prieto or Peruta case prevailing on appeal should go back and read the entire opinions. The Heller decision said that states could ban concealed carry, but not Open Carry. Making it a crime to openly carry a handgun, loaded or unloaded, does not invalidate the Heller decision.
For California to become “shall issue” would require that the US Supreme Court both agree to hear their inevitable loss before the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals AND to say it really didn’t mean what it said about concealed carry in the Heller decision.
Or, the California legislature could make CCWs “shall issue.”
Neither scenario is likely.
I have to say I’m not too excited about the near future. My wife and I are going to be moving soon for her to get a better job, so is a media production person (not sure of the actually term, more of an editor than the producers of movies and stuff) but the three best places for that kind of work are California, Chicago, and New York. My profession is present everywhere so that doesn’t really matter, but I’m really hoping there is some great job that doesn’t involve any of those three places, we will have to see.
Comments are closed.