Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: NCTimes LTE - Saldana bill is another step to taking away our defenses

  1. #1
    Moderator / Administrator
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    8,711

    Post imported post

    If you have the ability to compose short focussed letters to the editor, now would be the time.

    --

    http://www.nctimes.com/news/opinion/...90ed73c54.html

    SNIP

    Another step to taking away our defenses

    Assemblywoman Lori Saldana submitted a bill that would delete the provision to allow open carry of guns in California. All in the fear that law-abiding citizens "might" be shot or were not properly trained to carry a gun, even though California requires a gun safety class before purchasing a gun.

    Are we really concerned that those who open-carry a gun are a real threat? It seems to be we would be more concerned with those who are carrying the guns illegally, the ones we can't see. Has anyone ever heard of an issue with someone open-carrying a gun? I think the bad guys would be concerned, since they know that they would be less likely to commit a crime when someone is around who has a gun in the fear that they could be shot.

    So once again, we take another right penalizing those who can carry legally and take the defense away from us.

    . . .

  2. #2
    State Pioneer ConditionThree's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Shasta County, California, USA
    Posts
    2,231

    Post imported post

    I think its interesting to point out that open carry of an unloaded firearm as never been illegal in California... That open carry of a loaded firearm has only been regulated for the past 40 years... and its only now, that its suddenly a threat to public safety.
    New to OPEN CARRY in California? Click and read this first...

    NA MALE SUBJ ON FOOT, LS NB 3 AGO HAD A HOLSTERED HANDGUN ON HIS RIGHT HIP. WAS NOT BRANDISHING THE WEAPON, BUT RP FOUND SUSPICIOUS.
    CL SUBJ IN COMPLIANCE WITH LAW


    Support the 2A in California - Shop Amazon for any item and up to 15% of all purchases go back to the Calguns Foundation. Enter through either of the following links
    www.calgunsfoundation.org/amazon
    www.shop42a.com

  3. #3
    Moderator / Administrator
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    8,711

    Post imported post

    ConditionThree wrote:
    I think its interesting to point out that open carry of an unloaded firearm as never been illegal in California... That open carry of a loaded firearm has only been regulated for the past 40 years... and its only now, that its suddenly a threat to public safety.
    That's a good point.

  4. #4
    Regular Member Gundude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Sandy Eggo County
    Posts
    1,691

    Post imported post

    I'm wondering if we should ask/tell the politicians to wait on passing this bill till after the McDonald v. Chicago decision is handed down. It could be held in committe till after the decision. It will obviously be ruled unconstitutional if McDonald prevails.
    A citizen may not be required to offer a ―good and substantial reason-- why he should be permitted to exercise his rights. The right‘s existence is all the reason he needs.

  5. #5
    Regular Member coolusername2007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Temecula, California, USA
    Posts
    1,660

    Post imported post

    Gundude wrote:
    I'm wondering if we should ask/tell the politicians to wait on passing this bill till after the McDonald v. Chicago decision is handed down. It could be held in committe till after the decision. It will obviously be ruled unconstitutional if McDonald prevails.
    Not a bad idea if your representative is in favor of this bill. Approach it from a cost savings basis since the State is already bankrupt, there's no need to waste money on lawsuits this legislationwill surely bring ofwhich the State will surely lose.
    "Why should judicial precedent bind the nation if the Constitution itself does not?" -- Mark Levin

  6. #6
    Regular Member Gundude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Sandy Eggo County
    Posts
    1,691

    Post imported post

    coolusername2007 wrote:
    Gundude wrote:
    I'm wondering if we should ask/tell the politicians to wait on passing this bill till after the McDonald v. Chicago decision is handed down. It could be held in committe till after the decision. It will obviously be ruled unconstitutional if McDonald prevails.
    Not a bad idea if your representative is in favor of this bill. Approach it from a cost savings basis since the State is already bankrupt, there's no need to waste money on lawsuits this legislationwill surely bring ofwhich the State will surely lose.
    The appropiations committe chairman's email is... senator.kehoe@sen.ca.gov

    I just sent an email asking them to wait.
    A citizen may not be required to offer a ―good and substantial reason-- why he should be permitted to exercise his rights. The right‘s existence is all the reason he needs.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    329

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •