Edward Peruta
Regular Member
imported post
When permitted by law, I should have the right to carry my handgun OPENLY or CONCEALED.
In most states that issue Conceal Carry Permits, individuals who possess the permits have the choice between carrying openly or concealed.
Here are some facts ofwhat I am faced with as a resident ofthe State of California
TO BE ARMED AND READY IS TO POSSESS AND CARRY A LOADED FIREARM
[/b]
I am currently, (under California law), entitled to purchase a handgun
I am, currently, (under California law), entitled to possess a handgun with certain restrictions
I am currently, allowed by California law to carry a handgun UNLOADED OPENLY with certain restrictions as to location and the manner in which I carryammunition for the weapon.
I am currently restricted from OPENLY carrying an UNLOADED handgun in certain areas that would otherwise be permitted if in possession of a Concealed Carry Weapons Permit and a LOADED CONCEALED handgun.
I am therefore currently prevented from being able to bear arms as described by Justice Ginsburg when she defined“bear arms” to mean “wear, bear, or carry…upon the person or in the clothing or in a pocket, for the purpose…of being armed and ready for offensive or defensive action in a case of conflict with another person.”
The requirement for individuals without Conceal Carry Permits to carry handguns OPENLY and UNLOADED exposes the individuals to frequent high risk tactical confrontations with armed members of law enforcement, (as frequently described on this message board), who may during the confrontation, (as authorized by the California Penal Code in section 12031(e)), approach law abiding citizens and their families with loaded drawn weapons while in plain clothes or uniforms.
The purpose of the Second Amendment is to ensure the individual right to self-defense in case of conflict with another person.
In Heller, the Court affirmed Justice Ginsburg’s definition of the meaning of “bear arms.” Justice Ginsburg defined “bear arms” to mean “wear, bear, or carry…upon the person or in the clothing or in a pocket, for the purpose…of being armed and ready for offensive or defensive action in a case of conflict with another person.” (Quoting from Heller).
From this definition, it is clear that the intent of the Second Amendment is to ensure the individual right of being armed and ready[/b] in case of conflict with another person. An individual cannot lawfully be armed and ready if the law prohibits the wearing, bearing or carrying of a loaded[/b] firearm without a permit and the permit is impossible to obtain.
Individuals who carry OPENLY and UNLOADED are NOT required to submit to any positive identification, have "GOOD CAUSE", undergo any form of firearms training or submit to any type of background investigation.
My conclusion and opinionis this:
Individuals who are required to carry their weapons UNLOADED are not “READY” for offensive or defensive action in case of conflict with another person.
As quoted inthe Heller decision:
In Muscarello v. United States, 524 U. S. 125 (1998), in the course of analyzing the meaning of “carries a firearm” in a federal criminal statute, JUSTICE GINSBURG wrote that “urely a most familiar meaning is, as the Constitution’s Second Amendment . . . indicate: ‘wear, bear, or carry . . . upon the person or in the clothing or in a pocket, for the purpose . . . of being armed and ready for offensive or defensive action in a case of conflict with another person.’”
Fortunately I enjoy having more than one 'RESIDENCE", one of which is in the State of Connecticut where individuals obtain a "PERMIT TO CARRY PISTOLS AND REVOLVERS", which entitles the permit holder to carry OPENLY or CONCEALED.
This opinion was formulated after reading the draft response to a motion to dismiss my Federal Suit against the San Diego Sheriff's Department over the denial of my CCW application.
edperuta@amcable.tv
When permitted by law, I should have the right to carry my handgun OPENLY or CONCEALED.
In most states that issue Conceal Carry Permits, individuals who possess the permits have the choice between carrying openly or concealed.
Here are some facts ofwhat I am faced with as a resident ofthe State of California
TO BE ARMED AND READY IS TO POSSESS AND CARRY A LOADED FIREARM
[/b]
I am currently, (under California law), entitled to purchase a handgun
I am, currently, (under California law), entitled to possess a handgun with certain restrictions
I am currently, allowed by California law to carry a handgun UNLOADED OPENLY with certain restrictions as to location and the manner in which I carryammunition for the weapon.
I am currently restricted from OPENLY carrying an UNLOADED handgun in certain areas that would otherwise be permitted if in possession of a Concealed Carry Weapons Permit and a LOADED CONCEALED handgun.
I am therefore currently prevented from being able to bear arms as described by Justice Ginsburg when she defined“bear arms” to mean “wear, bear, or carry…upon the person or in the clothing or in a pocket, for the purpose…of being armed and ready for offensive or defensive action in a case of conflict with another person.”
The requirement for individuals without Conceal Carry Permits to carry handguns OPENLY and UNLOADED exposes the individuals to frequent high risk tactical confrontations with armed members of law enforcement, (as frequently described on this message board), who may during the confrontation, (as authorized by the California Penal Code in section 12031(e)), approach law abiding citizens and their families with loaded drawn weapons while in plain clothes or uniforms.
The purpose of the Second Amendment is to ensure the individual right to self-defense in case of conflict with another person.
In Heller, the Court affirmed Justice Ginsburg’s definition of the meaning of “bear arms.” Justice Ginsburg defined “bear arms” to mean “wear, bear, or carry…upon the person or in the clothing or in a pocket, for the purpose…of being armed and ready for offensive or defensive action in a case of conflict with another person.” (Quoting from Heller).
From this definition, it is clear that the intent of the Second Amendment is to ensure the individual right of being armed and ready[/b] in case of conflict with another person. An individual cannot lawfully be armed and ready if the law prohibits the wearing, bearing or carrying of a loaded[/b] firearm without a permit and the permit is impossible to obtain.
Individuals who carry OPENLY and UNLOADED are NOT required to submit to any positive identification, have "GOOD CAUSE", undergo any form of firearms training or submit to any type of background investigation.
My conclusion and opinionis this:
Individuals who are required to carry their weapons UNLOADED are not “READY” for offensive or defensive action in case of conflict with another person.
As quoted inthe Heller decision:
In Muscarello v. United States, 524 U. S. 125 (1998), in the course of analyzing the meaning of “carries a firearm” in a federal criminal statute, JUSTICE GINSBURG wrote that “
Fortunately I enjoy having more than one 'RESIDENCE", one of which is in the State of Connecticut where individuals obtain a "PERMIT TO CARRY PISTOLS AND REVOLVERS", which entitles the permit holder to carry OPENLY or CONCEALED.
This opinion was formulated after reading the draft response to a motion to dismiss my Federal Suit against the San Diego Sheriff's Department over the denial of my CCW application.
edperuta@amcable.tv