Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: CC in Cali

  1. #1
    Regular Member Sorcice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Madison, WI
    Posts
    382

    CC in Cali

    I just got off the phone with my grandma who said CA just went from "may issue" to "shall issue" with training. Is there any weight to this?

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Oakley, California, United States
    Posts
    637
    NO!
    CA is still only 'may issue'. While some cities, counties may have relaxed their permits, no where in the state is shall issue.

  3. #3
    Regular Member Sorcice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Madison, WI
    Posts
    382
    After talking with her she said it was on the tv a few weeks ago. I wonder if it was some reporter spouting off without fact? I did find this but it's kinda old( November 17, 2010 ).

    California to become a Shall Issue state?
    Three weeks from today, December 6th, we should have a ruling in the case ofEd Peruta v County of San Diego et al. If Ed is successful then California will become a "Shall Issue" state which means that police authorities will no longer be able to decide who can and who cannot obtain a license to carry a loaded firearm in public. For most of us, this means a license for Concealed Carry for a couple of million lucky people it means a non-discretionary license to openly carry a loaded handgun as well.

    We will have to wait for the exact wording of the judge but I am hopeful that her decision will reflectwhat she wrotein her denial of a motion to dismiss the case back on January 14th of this year.

    If the judge adopts the extreme minimalist case then, at a minimum, a CCW license becomes non-discretionary, meaning if one has the money and can pass whatever training requirements the issuing authority decrees then one must be issued a license to carry a weapon concealed, or a license to openly carry a loaded weapon in counties with a population of fewer than 200,000 people.

    It is my hope that Chief Federal Judge Irma Gonzalez will extend her decision to points of law she concluded in her denial of the motion to dismiss by San Diego County Sheriff Gore on January 14th of this year. In her denial, Chief Federal Judge Irma Gonzalez found the residency requirement to be unconstitutional. She concluded that it might be constitutional to deny a CCW to persons who are just passing through the state or merely within the state for a very short duration but anything beyond that is unconstitutional. The Plaintiff, Ed Peruta, is a citizen of Connecticut. Of course her most important conclusion was that we have a right to carry a loaded firearm in public for the purpose of self-defense. She came to this conclusion six months prior to the McDonald decision.

    For those of us who are advocates of Loaded Open Carry we will just have to wait for her ruling. It has not escaped the attorney's for Ed Peruta that the same arguments made thus far on behalf of non-discretionary CCW also apply to the provision of the statute which limits the license for loaded open carry to persons who reside in the county as well as limiting it to the less populated counties.

    Ed's case does not end with the ruling in three weeks. He will have his hands full with the jury trial next year. Once we review the Courts Opinion in three weeks, it may very well be the time for us to step up to the plate and build upon the foundation that Ed Peruta has given us by challenging the constitutionality of Loaded Open Carry being prohibited from those of us who live in the 28 counties with a population of 200,000 or more.

    Posted on Wed, November 17, 2010 by Charles Nichols - LA Anti-Establishment Examiner

  4. #4
    State Pioneer ConditionThree's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Shasta County, California, USA
    Posts
    2,231
    Quote Originally Posted by Sorcice View Post
    After talking with her she said it was on the tv a few weeks ago. I wonder if it was some reporter spouting off without fact? I did find this but it's kinda old( November 17, 2010 ).

    California to become a Shall Issue state?
    Three weeks from today, December 6th, we should have a ruling in the case ofEd Peruta v County of San Diego et al. If Ed is successful then California will become a "Shall Issue" state which means that police authorities will no longer be able to decide who can and who cannot obtain a license to carry a loaded firearm in public. For most of us, this means a license for Concealed Carry for a couple of million lucky people it means a non-discretionary license to openly carry a loaded handgun as well.

    We will have to wait for the exact wording of the judge but I am hopeful that her decision will reflectwhat she wrotein her denial of a motion to dismiss the case back on January 14th of this year.

    If the judge adopts the extreme minimalist case then, at a minimum, a CCW license becomes non-discretionary, meaning if one has the money and can pass whatever training requirements the issuing authority decrees then one must be issued a license to carry a weapon concealed, or a license to openly carry a loaded weapon in counties with a population of fewer than 200,000 people.

    It is my hope that Chief Federal Judge Irma Gonzalez will extend her decision to points of law she concluded in her denial of the motion to dismiss by San Diego County Sheriff Gore on January 14th of this year. In her denial, Chief Federal Judge Irma Gonzalez found the residency requirement to be unconstitutional. She concluded that it might be constitutional to deny a CCW to persons who are just passing through the state or merely within the state for a very short duration but anything beyond that is unconstitutional. The Plaintiff, Ed Peruta, is a citizen of Connecticut. Of course her most important conclusion was that we have a right to carry a loaded firearm in public for the purpose of self-defense. She came to this conclusion six months prior to the McDonald decision.

    For those of us who are advocates of Loaded Open Carry we will just have to wait for her ruling. It has not escaped the attorney's for Ed Peruta that the same arguments made thus far on behalf of non-discretionary CCW also apply to the provision of the statute which limits the license for loaded open carry to persons who reside in the county as well as limiting it to the less populated counties.

    Ed's case does not end with the ruling in three weeks. He will have his hands full with the jury trial next year. Once we review the Courts Opinion in three weeks, it may very well be the time for us to step up to the plate and build upon the foundation that Ed Peruta has given us by challenging the constitutionality of Loaded Open Carry being prohibited from those of us who live in the 28 counties with a population of 200,000 or more.

    Posted on Wed, November 17, 2010 by Charles Nichols - LA Anti-Establishment Examiner
    The greatest error commited, was trusting that this is actually journalism of any repute. I can assure you, that it is not.

    It is editorial- the most ungrounded and optimistic sort.

    http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/in...y_of_San_Diego

    The above link is an exhaustive source of the case- while a ruling may be emminent, by no means does it assure us 'shall issue'. Yet.
    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
    Regular Member Sorcice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Madison, WI
    Posts
    382
    Quote Originally Posted by ConditionThree View Post
    The greatest error commited, was trusting that this is actually journalism of any repute. I can assure you, that it is not.

    It is editorial- the most ungrounded and optimistic sort.

    http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/in...y_of_San_Diego

    The above link is an exhaustive source of the case- while a ruling may be emminent, by no means does it assure us 'shall issue'. Yet.
    thanks!

  6. #6
    Founder's Club Member protias's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    SE, WI
    Posts
    7,322
    Sorcice, you should know that the news isn't the best at getting the news right.
    No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. Thomas Jefferson (1776)

    If you go into a store, with a gun, and rob it, you have forfeited your right to not get shot - Joe Deters, Hamilton County (Cincinnati) Prosecutor

    I ask sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people except for a few politicians. - George Mason (father of the Bill of Rights and The Virginia Declaration of Rights)

  7. #7
    Regular Member Sorcice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Madison, WI
    Posts
    382
    Quote Originally Posted by protias View Post
    Sorcice, you should know that the news isn't the best at getting the news right.
    Hey hey. I'm allowed delusions of grandeur. Haha.

Posting Permissions

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