Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Answering the Brady Campaigns 'Fact' Sheet on AB 1934

  1. #1
    State Pioneer ConditionThree's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Shasta County, California, USA
    Posts
    2,231

    Answering the Brady Campaigns 'Fact' Sheet on AB 1934

    http://www.bradycampaign.org/chapters/ca/legaffairs

    The link above takes you to the location where you can download their 'fact' sheet on AB1934. I took a moment to respond to the section on the 'need' for this legislation.

    Current statutes do not presumptively prohibit the exposed carrying of an unloaded handgun in public areas. “Open carry” does not require a permit unlike carrying a concealed firearm, for which the applicant must demonstrate responsibility and a need to their respective county sheriff. As a result, there has been an increase in controversial events where individuals openly carry unloaded handguns in public streets and businesses. For instance, a group of about 100 armed citizens hoping to make it easier to carry loaded guns in California gathered at a restaurant in the San Francisco Bay area suburbs in February 2010.

    The 'need' for this bill has arisen as a response to the renewed interest in Second Amendment liberty. Open carry is not 'new' to California- it has been presumptively legal since before California became a state in 1850. While the scope and focus of the social events has elicited some surprised reactions, each of the events has been conducted within the law and often with the involvement and cooperation of local law enforcement. They have been successful in contributing to the training of law enforcement officers and the education of the bystanding public. These events have spawned numerous training memos that have made the practice of open carry safer not just for those who advocate it, but for the police as well. These larger events have been held almost exclusively in areas where concealed carry licensing is not an option made available through the local police chief or county sherriff- this is not by coincidence... these people want to carry to defend themselves, but the absense of issuance makes no other alternative available. So, in effect, it is the restrictive policies of issuing agencies that has instigated this renewed interest in open carry.


    People who open carry often carry ammunition separately, which is permitted under current law. According to CaliforniaOpenCarry.org, “...with a little practice, one can easily load a handgun in under two seconds.”
    Yes, those who carry guns for self-defense do carry ammunition for the weapon they carry- otherwise the practice would be purely a political demonstration (1st amendment). We advocate training and practice for the purpose of being prepared in the event a violent crime is committed either against or near us. These reload drills are something that police and military train for regularly- but unlike them, California residents are not being allowed to have the same level of readiness that could preserve life and limb by carrying a loaded weapon.

    Open carry creates a potentially dangerous situation.
    Existing law prohibiting possession in certain areas and criminalizing loaded weapons creates dangerous situations. When someone who carries a weapon for self-defense is placed in the position of handling their firearm in public to comply with 626.9 (the gun free school zone law) and 12031 (the criminalization of loaded carry), this creates circumstances where a persons actions could be misconstrued as hostile, whereas a holstered weapon cannot do anything of itself. In jurisdictions where it is impossible to be licensed for concealed carry, carrying exposed is the only option for lawful carry.

    In most cases when a person is openly carrying a firearm, law enforcement is called to the scene. They may have few details other than that one or more people are present at a location and are armed. Should the gun-carrying person move in a way that could be construed as threatening, peace officers may feel compelled to respond in a manner that could be lethal and unsafe not only for the gun-carrying individual, but for others nearby as well.
    This is an assumption that is not supported by facts. The Brady Campaign (or any other group) cannot possibly know what ratio of open carry results in a call to police. Dozens of advocates across the state carry in public without being reported to the police every day. They further cannot tell you how many reports of a man-with-a-gun result in police being dispatched to confront an open carry advocate. There is no statistical data available.

    Additionally, with proper training it is possible for dispatchers to get the necessary details to relay to police- that is not to say they havent already been trained to ask as many questions as required to get a more complete picture for responding officers. In a recent video, a San Diego open carry advocate called the non-emergency line and reported himself to police as an anonymous tipster, wherein the dispatcher asked about important details and advised the caller that this was legal. No police were sent to the scene.


    When responding to calls from concerned citizens, law enforcement agents must determine whether the guns are actually unloaded. In light of the state’s current economic crisis, is the practice of openly carrying a handgun in public areas a drain on public safety resources?
    Peace officers are not required to determine whether the guns are loaded.

    I cite

    12031(e) In order to determine whether or not a firearm is loaded for
    the purpose of enforcing this section, peace officers are authorized to examine any firearm carried by anyone on his or her person or in a vehicle while in any public place or on any public street in an incorporated city or prohibited area of an unincorporated territory.
    Peace officers have been authorized to inspect the loaded condition of a firearm... there is no real or imagined obligation for them to conduct this search. In fact, the obligation of the police is to not conduct this search until they can articulate what crime if any, has been or is about to be committed (4th Amendment) . So when it is put into the correct context, the choice as to whether resources should be expended upon investigating a non-crime lay solely with the CLEO of the department and their subordinates.

    Customers generally worry for their safety when someone carries a firearm into a business. Thus, many businesses, including Buckhorn Grill, California Pizza Kitchen, and Peet’s Coffee & Tea, have recognized this concern and have prohibited customers from openly carrying handguns in their establishments.
    The worry is often placed in their minds by anti-gun groups like LCAV and the Brady Campaign. Private businesses have a bottom line to preserve and are easily swayed by focused campaigns promising boycott if they permit open carry in their establishments. It is not necessarily fear of gun violence that they are reacting to, but the political fallout for crossing a very vocal and organized minority.
    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

  2. #2
    Regular Member Gundude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Sandy Eggo County
    Posts
    1,691

    Facts?

    The Brady bunch don't deal with facts. It's too confusing for them.
    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.

  3. #3
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter bigtoe416's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    1,748
    A quick search in Google shows that the quote "one can easily load a handgun in under two seconds" only exists on anti-gun sites and not on californiaopencarry.org. Why am I not surprised?

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    329

    Leading Causes of Death in the United States

    Last edited by Wc; 08-02-2010 at 07:11 AM.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    542
    Quote Originally Posted by bigtoe416 View Post
    A quick search in Google shows that the quote "one can easily load a handgun in under two seconds" only exists on anti-gun sites and not on californiaopencarry.org. Why am I not surprised?
    Google does not know all.
    Some of our members have demonstrated this skill on video, and can be testified to by anyone who competes in IDPA or practices similar drills.

  6. #6
    Regular Member coolusername2007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Temecula, California, USA
    Posts
    1,660
    Quote Originally Posted by bigtoe416 View Post
    A quick search in Google shows that the quote "one can easily load a handgun in under two seconds" only exists on anti-gun sites and not on californiaopencarry.org. Why am I not surprised?
    If you think about it, this is an area where we agree with the anti-gunners. They see the 2 seconds as dangerous...and what do you know, so do we. Problem is we are coming from two different directions...they want more time, we want less time.

  7. #7
    State Pioneer ConditionThree's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Shasta County, California, USA
    Posts
    2,231
    Quote Originally Posted by coolusername2007 View Post
    If you think about it, this is an area where we agree with the anti-gunners. They see the 2 seconds as dangerous...and what do you know, so do we. Problem is we are coming from two different directions...they want more time, we want less time.
    I disagree. They don't want it to take more time to load your firearm- they don't want it possible to take place at all.
    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

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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