camsoup
Regular Member
imported post
How many panicked beach goers do you see in that photo? :uhoh:
How many panicked beach goers do you see in that photo? :uhoh:
-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
NPR California covers open carry movement in San Diego!
- Thread starter Mike
- Start date
SlackwareRobert
Regular Member
imported post
I see one holding up a baby as a shield, must be an elected official.:what:
I see one holding up a baby as a shield, must be an elected official.:what:
romma
Regular Member
imported post
Absolutely outstanding!!! My hats off toy you folks out there...
We are trying to put together an OC event here in CT, and it isn't illegal to OC at all. But some police in CT will charge you with made up breech of peace.
Absolutely outstanding!!! My hats off toy you folks out there...
We are trying to put together an OC event here in CT, and it isn't illegal to OC at all. But some police in CT will charge you with made up breech of peace.
rpyne
Regular Member
imported post
romma wrote:
romma wrote:
I don't know anything about CT law, but you might try holding an "empty holster" event if there is no legal OC.
romma
Regular Member
imported post
It's not illegal at all as I stated. But some police may harrass you and make up bogus charges. No, when we do it, it will be with loaded firearms...
The DPS here tried to mandate concealed carry through the legislature here, and they got smacked down in committee...For now that is.
But every year, they seem to bring up the same stuff, and every year we fight.
It's not illegal at all as I stated. But some police may harrass you and make up bogus charges. No, when we do it, it will be with loaded firearms...
The DPS here tried to mandate concealed carry through the legislature here, and they got smacked down in committee...For now that is.
But every year, they seem to bring up the same stuff, and every year we fight.
TipsyMcStagger
Banned
imported post
KBCraig wrote:
nice
KBCraig wrote:
nice
rpyne
Regular Member
imported post
romma wrote:
As for them bringing up the same stuff every year, that is the gun grabbers normal mode of operation. Its time to use their own tactics against them. Find a few supportive members of the legislature and get them to bring forward pro-gun bills every year until you either win Vermont Carry or you keep the antis busy fighting the new bills.
It sounds like a good place to start would be changing the laws to specifically state that carrying a firearm is not sufficient to trigger the "disturbing the peace", "public nuisance" or similar laws.
If you don't have any restrictions on open or concealed carry, then work on things like shooting range protection bills, but keep them busy.
Edit: grammatical correction
romma wrote:
My mistake, I misread what you said. Do your research, have copies of the relevant laws on hand, and have fun! Bring your recorders and be prepared to file formal complaints or even civil rights suits against any police that harass you.
As for them bringing up the same stuff every year, that is the gun grabbers normal mode of operation. Its time to use their own tactics against them. Find a few supportive members of the legislature and get them to bring forward pro-gun bills every year until you either win Vermont Carry or you keep the antis busy fighting the new bills.
It sounds like a good place to start would be changing the laws to specifically state that carrying a firearm is not sufficient to trigger the "disturbing the peace", "public nuisance" or similar laws.
If you don't have any restrictions on open or concealed carry, then work on things like shooting range protection bills, but keep them busy.
Edit: grammatical correction
romma
Regular Member
imported post
No Problem rpyne,
We have been waiting for a "declatory ruling" to be issued by the State Supreme Court. In the meantime, the very fact that the DPS tried to get the legislature to mandate concealed carry on our permits is an indicator that they concede that open carry is not,in and of itself,illegal...Their actions are a what is concessionary, though they would never admitto thaton record.
Code:
It sounds like a good place to start would be changing the laws to specifically state that carrying a firearm is not sufficient to trigger the "disturbing the peace", "public nuisance" or similar laws.No Problem rpyne,
We have been waiting for a "declatory ruling" to be issued by the State Supreme Court. In the meantime, the very fact that the DPS tried to get the legislature to mandate concealed carry on our permits is an indicator that they concede that open carry is not,in and of itself,illegal...Their actions are a what is concessionary, though they would never admitto thaton record.
imported post
jarodm20
"Also, I wonder how many "panicked beach goers" called the cops. I'm guessing one or maybe two. The people arounddolook pretty scared in that picture after all."
Actually, the panic was caused by that KILT!! A bunch of hot women were panicked over the idea that JUST PERHAPS that guy was wearing NOTHING under it and some other gal was going to beat her to it!!
jarodm20
"Also, I wonder how many "panicked beach goers" called the cops. I'm guessing one or maybe two. The people arounddolook pretty scared in that picture after all."
Actually, the panic was caused by that KILT!! A bunch of hot women were panicked over the idea that JUST PERHAPS that guy was wearing NOTHING under it and some other gal was going to beat her to it!!
Mykal
Regular Member
imported post
i am seriously amused by this article:banghead:
i am seriously amused by this article:banghead:
TatankaGap
Regular Member
imported post
Outstanding to all involved. Sets a high bar for other communities, esp. in CA - carry on! :celebrate
Outstanding to all involved. Sets a high bar for other communities, esp. in CA - carry on! :celebrate
Edward Peruta
Regular Member
imported post
What everyone seem to forget, and the article does not mention, is the fact that these 40 plus or minuslaw abiding citizens would most likely have carriedconcealed ifSan Diego or county of their residence had followed the provisions of the California Penal Code and issued more permits to carry concealed with less hassles.
Better yet, allapplicatons for permits to carry concealed were processed and issued, (or denied),according to the law, there may never have beena gathering.
To every action their is a reaction, and in this casepeople have chosen to exercise theRIGHT to carry openly because PERMITED rights to carry concealed are being denied.
Ifor onewould chose to carry concealed over open carry, but will open carryas a last resort.
Inow intend to request IN WRITING, permission from the San Diego County Education department permission to carry openly and unloadedwithinall San Diego school zonesWITH THE EXCEPTION OF SCHOOL PROPERTY.
In my planned contact with San Diego School officials, I intend as part of my request, to inform them that I haveNO desire to carry concealed or openly ON school property, but feel that permission to carry while driving, walking or standing nearK-12 schools while onpublic roads and sidewalks should be permitted by individuals who have the right to carry.
I for one would challenge any member of law enforcement or District Attorney to identify the location of every school with is subject to this provision of the law, and if they can't it proves a point.
More on this in the near future, need to talk to several individuals first.
What everyone seem to forget, and the article does not mention, is the fact that these 40 plus or minuslaw abiding citizens would most likely have carriedconcealed ifSan Diego or county of their residence had followed the provisions of the California Penal Code and issued more permits to carry concealed with less hassles.
Better yet, allapplicatons for permits to carry concealed were processed and issued, (or denied),according to the law, there may never have beena gathering.
To every action their is a reaction, and in this casepeople have chosen to exercise theRIGHT to carry openly because PERMITED rights to carry concealed are being denied.
Ifor onewould chose to carry concealed over open carry, but will open carryas a last resort.
Inow intend to request IN WRITING, permission from the San Diego County Education department permission to carry openly and unloadedwithinall San Diego school zonesWITH THE EXCEPTION OF SCHOOL PROPERTY.
In my planned contact with San Diego School officials, I intend as part of my request, to inform them that I haveNO desire to carry concealed or openly ON school property, but feel that permission to carry while driving, walking or standing nearK-12 schools while onpublic roads and sidewalks should be permitted by individuals who have the right to carry.
I for one would challenge any member of law enforcement or District Attorney to identify the location of every school with is subject to this provision of the law, and if they can't it proves a point.
More on this in the near future, need to talk to several individuals first.
mccrevasse
New member
imported post
You know,there are rules,regulations,and parameters to follow,if you are going exercise your second amendment rights,by the book.If you don't,and you just feel like playing cops and robbers out in the street,someone will get in trouble,most likely shot by the cops,namely you.These gentlemen have painstakingly covered every aspect,every scenario, that may arise from an OC outing like this.They even went above,and beyond,by meeting with LE before hand,making LE aware of their intentions.Not to mention,they have an ally,a detective in the local LE Office.Everything was checked,and double checked,insuring they would be operating within the guidelines of the law.It is normally not necessary to inform LE beforehand,about your intent to excercise your 2nd Amendment rights.We all owe these guys plenty,for sticking their necks out,just to demonstrate to the rest of us,that this is America,and it's citizens do have rights,and freedoms,and you are not a criminal,for attempting to exercise them.:banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::cuss::cuss:
You know,there are rules,regulations,and parameters to follow,if you are going exercise your second amendment rights,by the book.If you don't,and you just feel like playing cops and robbers out in the street,someone will get in trouble,most likely shot by the cops,namely you.These gentlemen have painstakingly covered every aspect,every scenario, that may arise from an OC outing like this.They even went above,and beyond,by meeting with LE before hand,making LE aware of their intentions.Not to mention,they have an ally,a detective in the local LE Office.Everything was checked,and double checked,insuring they would be operating within the guidelines of the law.It is normally not necessary to inform LE beforehand,about your intent to excercise your 2nd Amendment rights.We all owe these guys plenty,for sticking their necks out,just to demonstrate to the rest of us,that this is America,and it's citizens do have rights,and freedoms,and you are not a criminal,for attempting to exercise them.:banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::cuss::cuss:
BB62
Accomplished Advocate
imported post
Edward Peruta wrote:
He was working on shall issue for CA a while back - and thinking about litigating it. I don't know what became of it,but he isa very knowledgeable person, IMHO.
http://thehighroad.us/member.php?u=396
Edward Peruta wrote:
Have you contacted Jim March over at The High Road?
He was working on shall issue for CA a while back - and thinking about litigating it. I don't know what became of it,but he isa very knowledgeable person, IMHO.
http://thehighroad.us/member.php?u=396
flintlock tom
Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter
imported post
Assembly Bill 357, to make the state consistent and "shall issue", is working it's way through the legislature now. I wonder if Jim had something to do with it.
Assembly Bill 357, to make the state consistent and "shall issue", is working it's way through the legislature now. I wonder if Jim had something to do with it.
SpringerXDacp
New member
imported post
SlackwareRobert wrote:
SlackwareRobert wrote:
Much like the 1983 movie; The Dead Zone, with Christopher Walken & Martin Sheen.
Decoligny
Regular Member
imported post
Edward Peruta wrote:
Some may have, but I know for a fact, because I was there, MANY of us would still open carry.
One of the reasons a lot of us are doing this is as a political statement, not "Give us Shall Issue!" but rather "Keep your hands off of our right to carry a gun!"
There are those of us who believe that the Government has no business in taxing a fundamental right. How many people would put up with a "Speech Permit" costing $300.00 for the initial one and $150.00 every couple of years after that. NOBODY.
When the California Legislature finally allows it's citizens and visitors to legally carry a firearm any which way they please without government interference, then I might carry concealed.
Edward Peruta wrote:
Some may have, but I know for a fact, because I was there, MANY of us would still open carry.
One of the reasons a lot of us are doing this is as a political statement, not "Give us Shall Issue!" but rather "Keep your hands off of our right to carry a gun!"
There are those of us who believe that the Government has no business in taxing a fundamental right. How many people would put up with a "Speech Permit" costing $300.00 for the initial one and $150.00 every couple of years after that. NOBODY.
When the California Legislature finally allows it's citizens and visitors to legally carry a firearm any which way they please without government interference, then I might carry concealed.
Edward Peruta
Regular Member
imported post
Decoligny wrote:
I couldn't agree with you more, but want my position to be very clear.
I am just short of filing a legal action in San Diego because my rights are being violated by public officials who are operating under the color of law to make up their own laws and rules. The rights being violated in may casejust happen to be rights involving handguns.
There is a difference between those that carry openly becasue they are making a political statement and those that are denied the right to carry because pubic officials are involved in a master scheme to deny people their rights to defend themselves in the real world.
I have jumped through all their hoops, and complied with everyrequirementput in place by the California Legislature.
I even provided more information than is requried by law and paidthe fees they mandated.
It is no secret that some issuing authories are antigun, and believe that the only people who should posses firearms are the police and military.
Under California law, the only difference between a license to carry concealed and carrying openly is inserting my loaded magazine and racking a round into the chamber.
It would serve the State of California better to allow ANYONE who is NOT a federally disqualified person to carry openly or concealed.
I'm not on the other side of the open carry issue in California, and believe that I have just cause to possess and carry a firearm in the states where I reside and travel.
I have spent my entire adult life reading the law and trying to live within its mandates. But I expect public officials to do the same.
When I was young and didn't have the financial resource to seek a court solution, I felt helpless. and fustrated.
I don't qualify financially for a public defender anymore!!!!!
But I'm not the same person I was in my twenties, and now have the ability to use the finances at my disposal to fight in the courts forjustice regardless of the cost.
Stay tuned, it may getvery interesting very soon.
Ed Peruta (edperuta@amcable.tv)
P.S.Because of the initial denial of my permit to carry concealed, I am now forced to carry openly and do not like being in this position.
Decoligny wrote:
I couldn't agree with you more, but want my position to be very clear.
I am just short of filing a legal action in San Diego because my rights are being violated by public officials who are operating under the color of law to make up their own laws and rules. The rights being violated in may casejust happen to be rights involving handguns.
There is a difference between those that carry openly becasue they are making a political statement and those that are denied the right to carry because pubic officials are involved in a master scheme to deny people their rights to defend themselves in the real world.
I have jumped through all their hoops, and complied with everyrequirementput in place by the California Legislature.
I even provided more information than is requried by law and paidthe fees they mandated.
It is no secret that some issuing authories are antigun, and believe that the only people who should posses firearms are the police and military.
Under California law, the only difference between a license to carry concealed and carrying openly is inserting my loaded magazine and racking a round into the chamber.
It would serve the State of California better to allow ANYONE who is NOT a federally disqualified person to carry openly or concealed.
I'm not on the other side of the open carry issue in California, and believe that I have just cause to possess and carry a firearm in the states where I reside and travel.
I have spent my entire adult life reading the law and trying to live within its mandates. But I expect public officials to do the same.
When I was young and didn't have the financial resource to seek a court solution, I felt helpless. and fustrated.
I don't qualify financially for a public defender anymore!!!!!
But I'm not the same person I was in my twenties, and now have the ability to use the finances at my disposal to fight in the courts forjustice regardless of the cost.
Stay tuned, it may getvery interesting very soon.
Ed Peruta (edperuta@amcable.tv)
P.S.Because of the initial denial of my permit to carry concealed, I am now forced to carry openly and do not like being in this position.
shooter_tx
Regular Member
imported post
nakedshoplifter wrote:
e.g. "Photographing the shirtless hippy [or, "shirtless pansy"] trying to turn you in for it: NEAT"
I will thank whomever initially asked the question, because I've seen the pic numerous times but never put two-and-two together that the shirtless character was attempting to get the police to "do something."
From that angle, it wasn't immediately apparent to me that he was *right* next to the police, much less engaging them in conversation. The fact that they don't seem to be paying him ANY attention whatsoever may have added to that a bit.
nakedshoplifter wrote:
I think probably an easy edit of the text might work better than a large, unsightly red arrow.
e.g. "Photographing the shirtless hippy [or, "shirtless pansy"] trying to turn you in for it: NEAT"
I will thank whomever initially asked the question, because I've seen the pic numerous times but never put two-and-two together that the shirtless character was attempting to get the police to "do something."
From that angle, it wasn't immediately apparent to me that he was *right* next to the police, much less engaging them in conversation. The fact that they don't seem to be paying him ANY attention whatsoever may have added to that a bit.