TexasCHLforum.com

Examiner.com - Los Angeles

Concealed Carry of handguns imminent?
by Charles Nichols
September 6th, 2010 4:02 am PT

Last May I reported on the Peruta v San Diego case where Chief Federal Judge Irma Gonzalez denied a motion by the Sheriff to dismiss the case.

{snip}

San Diego, like Los Angeles, issues very few licences to carry a concealed weapon. Licenses issued by both jurisdictions are capricious and arbitrary. In the case of Peruta v San Diego, the Sheriff's department favored a private organization called the Honorable Deputy Sheriff's Association. Not a single member in good standing who has applied since 2006 has been denied a license.

On Friday, the attorneys for Peruta filed a motion for a partial summary judgment. If the court grants the motion it would immediately require that all issuing authorities in the Southern District of California issue licences to carry a concealed weapon to everyone who applies and meets the non-discretionary requirements of obtaining a license or, hopefully, everyone who is at least 18 years of age and legally entitled to own a firearm as was found in Heller and McDonald.

The author is a proponent of open carry, and plainly divulges in the last couple of paragraphs of the article; and one can draw one's own conclusions about that. The primary point though is that both California and Hawaii are scant weeks away from being forced to recognize Heller and McDonald and begin issuing permits.

And tangentially, there is a decision expected soon in Nordyke v King, a case which challenges an Alameda County law against possession of a firearm on county property - a law which effectively did away with gun shows in Alameda County. Given current trends, it is not too much to hope for Nordyke to win. Allan Gottlieb of the Second Amendment Foundation said about Nordyke: "This is a very important case, because it could establish the highest standard of scrutiny to which gun laws around the country would be subjected. While gun prohibitionists were upset by the 2008 Heller ruling and demoralized by our victory this year in the McDonald case, they are terrified of a strict scrutiny standard that could be established by the Nordyke case." (Gottlieb quoted in the above linked article.)

Anyway, California's anti-2nd Amendment establishment appears about to be turned on its ear - and in a big way. That is good news for freedom-loving people.

The Annoyed Man wrote:Anyway, California's anti-2nd Amendment establishment appears about to be turned on its ear - and in a big way. That is good news for freedom-loving people.

Next up, I'd like to see a coherent strategy for challenging so-called assault weapons bans. It's disgraceful that those of us who are milsurps collectors can be put in the position of choosing between our collections and accepting a job offer.

Remember, this is the same state that has refused to defend a law banning gay marriage, that the voters passed.

Rex B wrote:Remember, this is the same state that has refused to defend a law banning gay marriage, that the voters passed.

And the same state that refused to enforce an immigration focused ballot initiative passed by an overwhelming majority. That initiative would have denied state taxpayer funded state services to illegal aliens. The liberal court threw it out too. The monkeys are running the zoo in California.

But maybe not for too much longer.

Concealed Carry of handguns imminent?

This is definitely a step in the right direction, and it's going to be a long up-hill battle. When politicians and police chiefs decide that they don't want citizens carrying concealed guns, they can get very creative. It would be nice, but I don't think it's "imminent".

If I lived in California, I wouldn't expect a IWB holster for Christmas.

Yeah, but it's one step closer to me moving somewhere with reasonable summers. I've got family in CA; I like HI better.

Dave2 wrote:Yeah, but it's one step closer to me moving somewhere with reasonable summers. I've got family in CA; I like HI better.

Hawaii has even tougher gun laws than California, including firearm registration, and is only a 'May Issue' state. See http://www.handgunlaw.us/states/hawaii.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Dave2 wrote:Yeah, but it's one step closer to me moving somewhere with reasonable summers. I've got family in CA; I like HI better.

There's an easier way than moving. Just take a little July vacation to Houston.

You'll think our North Texas summers are downright chilly!

Keith B wrote:

Dave2 wrote:Yeah, but it's one step closer to me moving somewhere with reasonable summers. I've got family in CA; I like HI better.

Hawaii has even tougher gun laws than California, including firearm registration, and is only a 'May Issue' state. See http://www.handgunlaw.us/states/hawaii.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Hawaii is under the 9th circuit's jurisdiction and would be affected by any California rulings in that court.

Pawpaw wrote:

Dave2 wrote:Yeah, but it's one step closer to me moving somewhere with reasonable summers. I've got family in CA; I like HI better.

There's an easier way than moving. Just take a little July vacation to Houston.

You'll think our North Texas summers are downright chilly!

No need; I lived there for about a year when I was a kid. The memory still haunts me.