Tuesday, February 21, 2012

Concealed Carry in California


on the newest attempts on the part of gun fanatics to recover from their defeat over open carry. Of course some of the die-hards are now carrying unloaded long guns in some of the most beautiful beach communities of Southern California. A more ridiculous image is hard to picture.

They're trying to use the fact that they can no longer open carry a pistol as reason for loosening the restrictions on concealed carry.

There is also gross inconsistency among authorities in California's 58 counties on what constitutes good cause, which could lead to courts finding equal protection violations, said Stephen Halbrook, a Virginia attorney and frequent litigator for the National Rifle Assn. In remote Plumas County, one in 39 adults has a carry permit, according to state Department of Justice statistics for 2011. In Los Angeles County, one in 33,700 adults is licensed to carry, and in San Francisco the latest records show zero civilian holders among the county's 700,000 adults.

Statewide, the number of civilians with concealed weapons permits is 32,666, or 0.1% of the adult population. That compares with about 5% licensed to carry nationwide, according to Calguns Foundation chief Gene Hoffman.
What seems clear from these incredible numbers is that all the claims about how good concealed carry is for us are bogus. If they were true, California and especially San Francisco would be home to frequent mass shootings because the bad guys know there's a "target rich environment." Isn't that the silly expression they keep using about gun-free places?

What's your opinion? Is California the leader in gun control policies that work. The Brady Campaign thinks so.

Please leave a comment.

7 comments:

  1. "If they were true, California and especially San Francisco would be home to frequent mass shootings because the bad guys know there's a "target rich environment." Isn't that the silly expression they keep using about gun-free places?

    What's your opinion? Is California the leader in gun control policies that work. The Brady Campaign thinks so."


    And yet Doggon posts story after story on here about "mass" shootings in Brady paradise.

    ReplyDelete
  2. There were 164,000 violent crimes (Rape, Robbery, Murder, Aggravated Assault) in the State of California in 2010 because the police couldn't get there in time. What do you tell the 164,000 victims and the victims families -- The Brady Campaign thinks you are safe?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The number is lower than it would have been if you'd had your way.

      Delete
  3. Just so, FatWhiteMan. California has no mass shootings, so there's no justification for carry, but it does have mass shootings, so there's no justification for carry.

    Mikeb, you just showed evidence of what I've told you for a long time now. Few in California can get a license to carry. Those few are celebrities and politicians. Here in Arkansas, open carry is illegal most places, but concealed carry licenses are issued to qualified citizens on demand, and we're not swamped in blood. California should join the majority of other states and become shall issue.

    On the subject of the Brady Bunch, though, have you seen the graphing of Brady scores against rates of violent crime? Have a look:

    http://www.the-minuteman.org/content/2012/February/19/2011-Brady-Scorecard-2010-UCS-Barron-Barnett

    Yup, Brady has nothing useful to tell us, other than the fact that states are moving more and more our way.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Shame on you, Greg for repeating nonsense that you've heard just because it supports you ideas.

      "Those few are celebrities and politicians."

      Delete
    2. I'm not repeating nonsense. I'm repeating evidence that I've seen about who gets carry licenses in California. If you're famous or wealthy or a politician or a campaign supporter (major donor), you get to carry. If you're an ordinary citizen, you get nothing. What do you have that contradicts that?

      Delete
    3. What do you have that supports that, which is objective sources, not gun loon bullshit?

      Delete