SACRAMENTO, Calif.—Citing safety concerns, the California Assembly passed a bill Tuesday that would make it illegal to openly carry a gun in public, even if it is unloaded.The bill would make it a misdemeanor to carry an exposed handgun on any public street or in a public place. The bill passed on a 41-25 party-line vote and now moves to the Senate.
Under current California law, gun owners can carry a rifle or handgun in a holster in public if it is unloaded.
"How is a police officer supposed to know?" asked Sandre Swanson, D-Oakland. "Why would we put our men and women who protect us and provide security for our community in danger to make that split second decision?"
But opponents said bill AB1934 would chip away at the public's right to bear arms and protest peacefully.
"This is a backhanded, even acute way, of implementing gun control," said Assemblyman Jim Nielsen, R-Biggs. "I assure you that criminals don't worry about this. They have the guns, and they know how to conceal them, how to use them."
"You are making it official that gang members can carry weapons," Assemblyman Kevin De Leon, D-Los Angeles said to colleagues who would vote against the measure.
Similar open-carry bans exist in Florida, Illinois, Texas and Washington, D.C., according to the Legal Community Against Violence, a public interest law center based in San Francisco.
The first problem I have with this is that little word "misdemeanor." Either violating this gun law should be a felony, or any gun misdemeanor should result in disqualification to own firearms. How else are we going to weed out the problem gun owners?
Secondly, what's the problem with Assemblyman Jim Nielsen? He says, "I assure you that criminals don't worry about this. They have the guns, and they know how to conceal them, how to use them."
What exactly does that have to do with prohibiting open carry?
What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.
Sounds like someone wanted to pass a meaningless law so they could hype it up before November.
ReplyDeleteOf course, that kind of thing is the only "progress" you people can expect to make these days.
Also, would love to hear your views on the mass shooting in England.
From the BBC:
"Parliament banned all handguns and there is now a mandatory five year jail sentence for possession.
The most recent changes in the law have seen the ban of realistic imitation weapons which can be re-engineered to fire live ammunition. For instance, the Olympic .338 revolver is known as a "blank firer" and was used for starting races. It was banned because police concluded it could be easily converted to fire real bullets."
Perhaps they need stricter gun-control?
The people of California should follow the Chicagoan example and carry anyway, despite the law:
ReplyDeleteSometimes good people have to break bad laws.
>> "I assure you that criminals don't worry about this. They have the guns, and they know how to conceal them, how to use them."
ReplyDelete> What exactly does that have to do with prohibiting open carry?
Nothing. Just like this new law has nothing to do with criminals and gun crime, other than expanding the list of "crimes".
Oh judge, your damn laws. The good people don't need them and the bad people don't follow them. So what good are they?
Also, would love to hear your views on the mass shooting in England.
ReplyDeleteInteresting that the story has been almost completely ignored on this blog.
The people of California should follow the Chicagoan example and carry anyway, despite the law.
ReplyDelete+1000 to this.
I find it sad that CA has so little respect for the Constitution that they'll shit all over not only the 2nd Amendment but the 1st as well.
There is an obvious 1st Amendment component to open carry in California, since it is done as a means of political expression aimed at getting CCW reform.
Of course liberals and not big fans of the 1st Amendment, so this comes as no surprise to me.
No matter, it is blatantly unconstitutional and will be struck down post-McDonald.
So it breaks down like this:
ReplyDelete-Law says you are allowed to bear arms but it has to be unloaded and visible.
-People follow the law.
-Nothing bad happens.
-We need sensible gun laws to stop these people from following the law.
[palm to forehead]
"How is a police officer supposed to know?" asked Sandre Swanson, D-Oakland. "Why would we put our men and women who protect us and provide security for our community in danger to make that split second decision?"
Here is how they know- they are obeying the law. I’ve heard one of the excuses for passing this law as saving police resources from having to check these people. Here is an idea- stop calling the cops on people who are following the law so they don’t waste their time harassing these people.
MikeB: “The first problem I have with this is that little word "misdemeanor." Either violating this gun law should be a felony, or any gun misdemeanor should result in disqualification to own firearms.”
You want to change something that used to be perfectly legal into life altering jail time. Tell me how you are not after law abiding gun owners again.
"-Law says you are allowed to bear arms but it has to be unloaded and visible.
ReplyDelete-People follow the law.
-Nothing bad happens.
-We need sensible gun laws to stop these people from following the law.
[palm to forehead]"
When you say it that way, TS, it's pretty funny.
But let's not forget the ever-increasing number of lawful gun owners who go bad. And let's not forget the point raised in the article about the police having a difficult time in determining that a guy who has a gun is legitimate.
The suggestion that the problem is people should just stop reacting with alarm at this lawful activity. Well, that's not gonna happen, but even if it did, then what? You'd have criminals imitating the legit guys, carrying guns they own illegally as if they were legal. This would make the cops' job even more difficult.
When you say it that way, TS, it's pretty funny.
ReplyDeleteI don't find one damn thing funny about what the bigots in CA are doing to gun owners.
MikeB: “You'd have criminals imitating the legit guys, carrying guns they own illegally as if they were legal. This would make the cops' job even more difficult.”
ReplyDeleteShow me one instance of that. If a criminal is going to carry, they are certainly not going to want to attract attention to themselves. They would always be better off concealing. If a previously law-abiding person decides to suddenly break bad- why bother with open carry? Now if those same people who call the cops on open carriers would also call the cops on everyone who dresses like a gangster, would you have a problem with that? I would.
TS, Of course the criminals don't try that now. I was talking about the wonderful day all you guys keep calling for when all red-blooded patriots can walk around with guns. In that situation which hopefully will never come, you can bet the smarter among the bad guys would do exactly what I said. What better way to go undetected, especially if you guys succeeded in forcing the rest of us to accept such ridiculous behavior as normal.
ReplyDelete