Theseus
Founder's Club Member
imported post
camsoup wrote:
The problem is like the people coming out of Turners Pasadena. They are protected inside, but in the parking lot, which I am sure is within 1000 feet of a school is not protected. You can not leave Turners Pasadena without a handgun locked in a fully enclosed secure locked container under this new definition if it gets made case law.
camsoup wrote:
No, the judge made pretty clear that "inside a business or residence is too clear" to be overridden. But since private property is not defined he took the initiative and defined it.Theseus wrote:"He, in one breath admitted that 626.9 was not ambiguous or vague and that since it wasn't he was not supposed to look into legislative intent and did it anyway declaring that private property as it pertains to 626.9 is not private if it is open to the public."
So now business owners are not even allowed the right to protect their lives in their place of business unless its closed? If its open to the public it isn't considered private? That is hog wash.
If you own a convenience store within 1000' of a school, I guess you need to keep the handgun locked up under the counter. When the armed robber comes in, you would have to call a time out and ask him nicely to wait while you unlock the pistol case.
:cuss::cuss:
The problem is like the people coming out of Turners Pasadena. They are protected inside, but in the parking lot, which I am sure is within 1000 feet of a school is not protected. You can not leave Turners Pasadena without a handgun locked in a fully enclosed secure locked container under this new definition if it gets made case law.