Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: AB 144, good or bad?

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

    AB 144, good or bad?

    We heard from CGN that we should wait to UOC till after McDonald. After McDonald prevailed, the anti UOC toned down a bit, but the general idea was that UOC was still a bad idea.
    AB144 has been signed and now it seems that it wasn't such a bad idea after all. They are now saying it's going to speed up getting a carry license.
    The Peruta case in San Diego will probably get a GVR, because UOC is now off the table.
    In the Yolo county case, the plaintiff's requested a time extension to see what happened with AB144. The new brief should be an interesting read.
    So, I ask. Did UOC help or not?
    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.

  2. #2
    Regular Member coolusername2007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Temecula, California, USA
    Posts
    1,660
    AB144 is definitely, without a doubt, extremely bad! There is no sugar coating this, there is no justification for this, there is no rationalization for this. Open carry IS the 2nd Amendment, always ways and always will be. AB144 simply puts the final nail in the Mulford Act's coffin on the true, unfettered right to bear arms in CA. AB144 is a clear example of the insidious incrementalism that pervades our society today (as is AB809).

    Whether or not UOC has helped the 2A community is a different question entirely. From my perspective it has absolutely helped. UOC'ers reached out to many in the community who were unaware of their 2A rights and positively impacted them. UOC'ers did not break any laws nor did they harm anyone, or infringe upon any others' liberties. UOC'ers are not to blame for Lori Saldana's anti-American reaction to American's living as freely as possible. UOC'ers are not to blame for Porkantino's decision to carry socialist Saldana's cud after she failed to achieve her tyranny. The full blame and responsibility lies with those who seek only to control you, rip your liberty from you, and endanger the entire public with their failed utopian ideas. UOC'ers took their guns out from hiding and brought them to the forefront of discussion...and that was and is very positive for the 2nd Amendment.

    ETA: Gov. Brown is not our friend, he is every bit the tyrant as Saldana, Porkantino and company.
    Last edited by coolusername2007; 10-10-2011 at 04:39 PM.
    "Why should judicial precedent bind the nation if the Constitution itself does not?" -- Mark Levin

  3. #3
    Campaign Veteran EXTREMEOPS1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Escondido CA
    Posts
    248
    Quote Originally Posted by coolusername2007 View Post
    UOC'ers did not break any laws nor did they harm anyone, or infringe upon any others' liberties. UOC'ers are not to blame for Lori Saldana's anti-American reaction to American's living as freely as possible. UOC'ers are not to blame for Porkantino's decision to carry socialist Saldana's cud after she failed to achieve her tyranny. The full blame and responsibility lies with those who seek only to control you, rip your liberty from you, and endanger the entire public with their failed utopian ideas. UOC'ers took their guns out from hiding and brought them to the forefront of discussion...and that was and is very positive for the 2nd Amendment.

    ETA: Gov. Brown is not our friend, he is every bit the tyrant as Saldana, Porkantino and company.
    LGOC will become an event that will scare way more than any handgun carry ever did ..recall moonbeam will be another fight to...
    "There is only one tactical principle which is not subject to change. It is to use the means at hand to inflict the maximum amount of wound, death, and destruction on the enemy in the minimum amount of time."

    - General George S. Patton, Jr.

  4. #4
    State Pioneer ConditionThree's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Shasta County, California, USA
    Posts
    2,231
    It is bad, but with a slim, slight silver lining...
    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

  5. #5
    Campaign Veteran smellslikemichigan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Troy, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,321
    hmmm, wonder if OCDO will allow LGOC discussion on its hallowed forums to stand in solidarity with california. especially considering the article by one of the founders of the website that says LGOC will be the only legal form of carry in cali now
    "If it ain't loaded and cocked it don't shoot." - Rooster Cogburn
    http://www.graystatemovie.com/

  6. #6
    Campaign Veteran Glock9mmOldStyle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Taylor, Wayne County, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,047

    Thumbs up +1 to infinity and beyond

    Quote Originally Posted by smellslikemichigan View Post
    hmmm, wonder if OCDO will allow LGOC discussion on its hallowed forums to stand in solidarity with california. especially considering the article by one of the founders of the website that says LGOC will be the only legal form of carry in cali now
    It's time we (when left no other options) embrace LGOC. Just my honest opinion. Hell in my backassward state of MI, a person under 21yrs of age cannot buy a handgun or handgun ammo from a store. Yet, they can carry a squad automatic weapon and a M9 pistol in Afghanistan or Iraq. This kind of idiotic law making leaves these younger Americans defenseless, unless they LGOC!
    “A government that does not trust it’s law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms is itself unworthy of trust.” James Madison.

    “Firearms are second only to the Constitution in importance; they are the peoples' liberty's teeth.” “The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that's good.” George Washington

  7. #7
    Guest
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    958
    Is AB144 good or bad...

    At present California county sheriffs have total discretion with CCW permit approval. In many coastal counties, unless you're well connected, rich or well known - you are SOL when it comes to getting a CCW permit.

    Add to the mix - The California Constitution has no second amendment provision, and brushes aside the US constitution second amendment.

    Sacramento will drag their feet to change "May Issue" in California to "Shall Issue", and until then............AB144 is here to stay.

  8. #8
    Activist Member Joshua Costa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    80
    Good, I am much more comfortable operating an long gun than a pistol. And bad, I hate more restrictions that trample on the constitution and limit my freedom..... limited freedom.... sounds like an oxymoron.
    "I do not love the sword for its gleam, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory; I love only what they protect."
    — J.R.R. Tolkien

  9. #9
    Regular Member Gundude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Sandy Eggo County
    Posts
    1,691
    I heard that the lawyers in the Yolo County case are filing another brief because of AB 144.
    As it stands now, LOC and UOC are illegal leaving a concealed carry license the only legal option available in CA.
    The ruling that UOC satisfied the 2nd amemdmet is now off the table.
    It gets more interesting every day.
    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.

  10. #10
    State Pioneer ConditionThree's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Shasta County, California, USA
    Posts
    2,231
    Quote Originally Posted by Gundude View Post
    I heard that the lawyers in the Yolo County case are filing another brief because of AB 144.
    As it stands now, LOC and UOC are illegal leaving a concealed carry license the only legal option available in CA.
    The ruling that UOC satisfied the 2nd amemdmet is now off the table.
    It gets more interesting every day.
    Perhaps they are rewriting their brief to suggest that since the carry of long guns and LUCC is still an option that the plantiffs are able to exercize their 2A rights.
    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

  11. #11
    Regular Member Gundude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Sandy Eggo County
    Posts
    1,691
    Quote Originally Posted by ConditionThree View Post
    Perhaps they are rewriting their brief to suggest that since the carry of long guns and LUCC is still an option that the plantiffs are able to exercize their 2A rights.
    Long guns were ruled out in Heller for self defense.
    We will see about LUCC.
    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.

Posting Permissions

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