California bans open carry

[since9]

I wonder how soon and how fast crime rates in California will increase?

Ooops... Looks like it's already started.

From the article: "Police were struggling to determine the motive for the killings."

Need a little help? Try this: "Salon employee Lorainne Bruielle, who wasn't working Wednesday, told the Long Beach Press-Telegram the gunman was the husband of another employee."

I wonder how this weighs on the conscious of Governor Brown and all the other Constitutionally illiterate idiots who proposed, supported, and signed the unbelievably ridiculous piece of legislation? Had just ONE of the people in that salon been carrying, their odds would have been improved. If just ONE had been OCing, their odds would have improved significantly.

Our Founding Fathers sought to protect the right to keep and bear arms because any infringement puts people at risk, whether it's mandating the type of carry (OC/CC), unloaded vs loaded, or being picky about who has a "legitimate need" to carry. How many of those in the salon would have been given a CWP under California's massively restricted standards? I doubt any of them would have "qualified."

How many of them had a "legitimate need" to carry, today?

ALL OF THEM. Same as do all of us, each and every day. That need will never die, for we can never predict when some nut case will ballistic like this.

Who killed these folks? Was it the gunman? Yes. But it was also the people's fault for not arming themselves in defense, as well as the California Government's fault for creating such a hostile, anti-gun environment that many people who would have carried chose not to bother.

And that, buggybear, is inexcusable.

 

[buggybear]

Wow, kudos and credit for the passionate responses. Several were very well written, researched and relayed in a respectful manner. I've never understood the personal attacks, however. They accomplish nothing beneficial and clearly reveal much more about the author than the receiver. Frequently, it becomes apparent that the emotion generated by the discussion prohibits thorough reading of all the posts prior to submitting a response. It is this "back and forth" repetition that has me beginning to understand why so many members have thousands of posts....and why I would find myself not visiting regularly.

I appreciate some of the support for differing opinions by several of you. It is not as common as I would hope (or as I see in different discussion forums), but it is welcome nonetheless.

I have been a part of this forum for 3 years, though I haven't posted in well over 1 year. It appears that my other posts, numbered at 20-30, are erased after a period of non-participation. My objective was not a proverbial "hit and run" post yesterday, but, as I had shared the recent Fall 2011 Point of View (Alameda County D.A. publication) article on OC and the results of AB144 with my officers, I thought I would participate in some exchange of opinions. Some of those exchanges went well; some not so much. Questioning my honor, ethics, intelligence and/or effort, after almost 28 years of service to my community, was never going to be received well....especially since I've made no personal attacks on any of you. None of you know me....or none of you know you know me, one might say. And for the two of you who seemingly wanted to pull out your weenie and measure how much you've "done" compared to me....rest assured, by your challenge alone, you've already lost. No truly great man or woman feels the need to compare themselves to anyone; their accomplishments represent their qualities and sacrifices.

I have honored my oath to the laws of my nation, my state and my city to the best of my ability. Yet, the Constitution is not a perfect work. It wasn't when it was completed, it is not now, nor will it be 100 years from now when it is "massaged" though the decades. Anything touched by man is inherently flawed; do not follow so easily without question or reserve that which you believe in.......use caution with unabated faith.

I believe I have my finger on two pulses; law enforcement and the community I live/work in. I do not, in any way, claim to have insight into the pulse of the OC movement or it's members. In my humble opinion, many....most?.....of you need to taper down the rhetoric and the ranting. You are not going to win on this issue using a club as your microphone. Screaming at the top of your lungs to any listener; "I WANT TO CARRY A GUN!!!", probably has most people hoping that you're the last person in possession of a gun. That's just the way it is here in California, I think. If you want to change that, maybe a change in your message might be needed.

 

[rodbender]

buggybear, you really should do some research on OC other than our opinions. Criminals fear an armed citizen more than they do the police. You have no obligation to protect any particular citizen. Why should we not be able to protect ourselves? The police draw the outline and write the report. That's if it was an innocent victim or a BG that picked the wrong target. There is not one instance where a BG took out an open carrier or snatched a gun. The list of advantages is long.

Do the research...REAL research.

 

[Dreamer]

"buggybear", Please provide a SINGLE instance of a criminal who was apprehended because he was spotted by LEOs open carrying a firearm in a holster in CA.

If you can provide such an example, then we will listen to what you have to say.

But if you can't then your entire argument about "not knowing if an OCer is a good guy or not" collapses and is based on nothing more than LE elitism, and a privileged elite attitude that the lives of We The People are somehow less valuable than the lives of LEOs or the few, anointed "WWW" oligarchs in CA that ARE allowed to carry firearms for lawful self-defense.

Just ONE arrest and successfull prosecution of a real criminal who was OCing with a holster in CA--that's all we're asking for.

We'll wait...

 

[rodbender]

"buggybear", Please provide a SINGLE instance of a criminal who was apprehended because he was spotted by LEOs open carrying a firearm in a holster in CA.

If you can provide such an example, then we will listen to what you have to say.

But if you can't then your entire argument about "not knowing if an OCer is a good guy or not" collapses and is based on nothing more than LE elitism, and a privileged elite attitude that the lives of We The People are somehow less valuable than the lives of LEOs or the few, anointed "WWW" oligarchs in CA that ARE allowed to carry firearms for lawful self-defense.

Just ONE arrest and successfull prosecution of a real criminal who was OCing with a holster in CA--that's all we're asking for.

We'll wait...

Not just Kalifornia, check the entire U.S.

In either case, I ain't waitin' that long. He ain't gonna find one.

 

[Daylen]

I've got to tell all of you; personally speaking, I'm happy about this new law. For complete disclosure, I'm a 27 year police Lieutenant here in California. I had the distinct displeasure in having to deal with three OC situations within my city. Each one called for my officers to conduct a tactical contact under difficult circumstances (remember, these simply come out as;"man with a gun" calls) and deal with OCers who were seemingly enjoying the stir their conduct generated. Now, I can't speak for other states and their social environments which might be conducive to open carry....but, here in California, this isn't the wild west anymore. Here, if you show you have a gun....if you pretend you have a gun.....if you imply or even mention that you have a gun....you are going to get rained on with cops and the confrontation WILL TAKE PLACE! And because that is the enviroment of this state, very few Californians were tolerant of, or gave a rats ass to, the Open Carry movement.

Like every state in this nation, there is good and bad unique to that state. And so it is with California on this issue, and there wasn't much doubt as to the outcome.

Isn't creating a stir a Kalifornia pass time? Whats wrong with gun enthusiasts doing it their own way? Or is it only ok out there for liberals to try and cause a stir and get attention?

 

[revjen45]

While I disagree with any type of ban on firearms, these folks elected these asshats and should have seen this coming. I do feel bad for the freeedom loving people in Kalifornikation. They need to get over Kalifornia and realize that if they want true freedom, they need to get the hell out.

We left the DPRK in 1992 to live in Free America. The freedom loving people who still live there should leave before the Reconquista finds them living in La Republica de Nuevo Aztlan.

buggybear - Please stay in the DPRK. Free Americans don't need the Cylons. When the laws are made for the convenience of the police it's called a police state. You seem to get off on the exercise of authority and being an Only One, so you belong in a populace of grass eaters who think you can protect them.

 

[SouthernBoy]

It is my fervent hope that far more, many times more, guns remain in the hands of the citizens than the police and the military combined. James Madison knew from which he spoke when he made similar statements. Keeping the government and all of its agencies in fear of the People is the only way to insure liberty.

 

[paul@paul-fisher.com]

I believe I have my finger on two pulses; law enforcement and the community I live/work in. I do not, in any way, claim to have insight into the pulse of the OC movement or it's members. In my humble opinion, many....most?.....of you need to taper down the rhetoric and the ranting. You are not going to win on this issue using a club as your microphone. Screaming at the top of your lungs to any listener; "I WANT TO CARRY A GUN!!!", probably has most people hoping that you're the last person in possession of a gun. That's just the way it is here in California, I think. If you want to change that, maybe a change in your message might be needed.

So..... not that I really want to derail this thread but here goes, a gay pride parade shouldn't be held because heterosexuals might be offended? Have you seen what they wear? If that doesn't scream 'look at me', I can't imagine what does. However, government officials celebrate the parade and condemn the open carriers. Both are constitutionally protected.

 

[aosailor]

I've got to tell all of you; personally speaking, I'm happy about this new law. For complete disclosure, I'm a 27 year police Lieutenant here in California. I had the distinct displeasure in having to deal with three OC situations within my city. Each one called for my officers to conduct a tactical contact under difficult circumstances (remember, these simply come out as;"man with a gun" calls) and deal with OCers who were seemingly enjoying the stir their conduct generated. Now, I can't speak for other states and their social environments which might be conducive to open carry....but, here in California, this isn't the wild west anymore. Here, if you show you have a gun....if you pretend you have a gun.....if you imply or even mention that you have a gun....you are going to get rained on with cops and the confrontation WILL TAKE PLACE! And because that is the enviroment of this state, very few Californians were tolerant of, or gave a rats ass to, the Open Carry movement.

Like every state in this nation, there is good and bad unique to that state. And so it is with California on this issue, and there wasn't much doubt as to the outcome.

I like how you say "it's not the wild west anymore"... if you were able to pull your head out of your ass and put it in a book once in awhile you would realize that the murder rate back then was MUCH LOWER than just LA today. it wasnt as bad as the movies make it out to be. and the reality of it was because everyone had a gun!

but way to be un-American and be proud that you get your kicks oppressing the same law abiding American citizens you swore to protect..... and you wonder why so many people dont trust your uniform

 

[Kirbinator]

No-one has made any recommendation to arm "everyone". And sorry, but the Constitution trumps what any of us have seen or experienced. It applies to Californians, Arizonans and folks in the northern-most reaches of Maine equally.

No one has to -- it's implied in the documents that founded this nation. In 1789, we didn't have much of an army or much of a militia, and all it took to lose territory was for Britain to invade and claim part of the land and defend it from the native peoples who claim in. I'm sorry if that sets off the "sovereign citizen" flag in your head, but you need to get off your hindparts and study the documents, the law, the acts, and the circumstances surrounding the founding of The United States of America. The Miltia Act of 1792 required every man to keep a gun and about 50 rounds at all times. The simple fact is that, in a society where all are armed, we must agree on words -- or we fight to the death to see who will rule. That's the way it's been since caveman times. The one without the weapon either submits to the dominator, or they both meet, armed, and agree as equals. That's where this novel notion of "equality" comes from.

According to the design of the country, we are all supposed to be armed and ready for battle -- for self-defense, and defense of the state -- from enemies foreign (England) and domestic (spies, Canada, Mexico, and the Spanish in Florida).

In the last 220 years, our values have changed a bit as a whole, and our perception of things have changed. We've seen the firearm demonized for the actions of criminals and the insane. The film and print media, capturing our emotions and imagination, have shown a simple mechanical tool not unlike a wrench in such a negative light as to create fear -- an intense emotional response rooted in the animal part of our brains -- whenever a firearm is simply viewed.

And I know this to be true. I was an anti.

 

[SouthernBoy]

No one has to -- it's implied in the documents that founded this nation. In 1789, we didn't have much of an army or much of a militia, and all it took to lose territory was for Britain to invade and claim part of the land and defend it from the native peoples who claim in. I'm sorry if that sets off the "sovereign citizen" flag in your head, but you need to get off your hindparts and study the documents, the law, the acts, and the circumstances surrounding the founding of The United States of America. The Miltia Act of 1792 required every man to keep a gun and about 50 rounds at all times. The simple fact is that, in a society where all are armed, we must agree on words -- or we fight to the death to see who will rule. That's the way it's been since caveman times. The one without the weapon either submits to the dominator, or they both meet, armed, and agree as equals. That's where this novel notion of "equality" comes from.

According to the design of the country, we are all supposed to be armed and ready for battle -- for self-defense, and defense of the state -- from enemies foreign (England) and domestic (spies, Canada, Mexico, and the Spanish in Florida).

In the last 220 years, our values have changed a bit as a whole, and our perception of things have changed. We've seen the firearm demonized for the actions of criminals and the insane. The film and print media, capturing our emotions and imagination, have shown a simple mechanical tool not unlike a wrench in such a negative light as to create fear -- an intense emotional response rooted in the animal part of our brains -- whenever a firearm is simply viewed.

And I know this to be true. I was an anti.

Those who have been there are worth listening too for their experience and input. In my youth, I was a liberal. I was never anti-gun as it wasn't an issue back then - that came later and by that time, I had reversed my stance. But I did travel with that crowd and have a bit of an understanding of how they think; about this country, about Americans, and about our economic and governmental system. Suffice it to say, they don't like it. Not all of them, but enough of them to have a voice and make noise.

My transformation was gradual, about four years, and pretty natural for me as I see it. I'm still a liberal but a classic liberal, not what we see today and over the last 100 years. Classic liberals are what most of us here on this website really are. The best example of the classic liberal is the Founding Fathers and what today would be referred to as Constitutionalists.

 

[Brass Magnet]

...My transformation was gradual, about four years, and pretty natural for me as I see it. I'm still a liberal but a classic liberal, not what we see today and over the last 100 years. Classic liberals are what most of us here on this website really are. The best example of the classic liberal is the Founding Fathers and what today would be referred to as Constitutionalists.

Just to pick a nit, there wasn't a constitution so they couldn't have been constitutionalists. I like to think of classic liberals (which not all of the founding fathers were) as fellow libertarians personally.

 

[SouthernBoy]

Just to pick a nit, there wasn't a constitution so they couldn't have been constitutionalists. I like to think of classic liberals (which not all of the founding fathers were) as fellow libertarians personally.

Notice I said, "..and what today would be referred to as Constitutionalists", the key phrase being "what today". And you're right about not all of the Founders being classic liberals. But most were. This is easy to understand since they had just recently thrown off the chains of a king and Great Britain and entered the process of hammering out a constitution in 1787. I am always in awe of the sheer stroke of good fortune that these men were in the same place at the same time in history, and that was here.

 

[Brass Magnet]

Notice I said, "..and what today would be referred to as Constitutionalists", the key phrase being "what today". And you're right about not all of the Founders being classic liberals. But most were. This is easy to understand since they had just recently thrown off the chains of a king and Great Britain and entered the process of hammering out a constitution in 1787. I am always in awe of the sheer stroke of good fortune that these men were in the same place at the same time in history, and that was here.

Yeah, I see it now, my reading comprehension is a bit behind this morning. Mea culpa

 

[Baked on Grease]

Just wanted to hop in and say: awesome thread guys (girls?). Southerboy, since9... I have always had the sense that you two were worth my respect, and your responses in this thread cement that for me. I salute you. Carry on.

Sent using tapatalk

 

[SouthernBoy]

Yeah, I see it now, my reading comprehension is a bit behind this morning. Mea culpa

You're good and the fact that you made mention as you did just shows you know some history, which I applaud.

 

[c45man]

I disagree with the restrictive legislation, but I would expect as much from California. This is a state whose electorate votes in Jerry Brown, Barbara Boxer, Dianne Feinstein, Nancy Blowzi, Henry Waxman, and the list goes on. I am old enough to remember when California was the most popular state in the country. Every other young person in the other states wanted to move there. Truly, the 1965 Mama and Papas hit, California Dramin, was in fact a reality and a mindset. Look at the bankrupt pig pen that state has turned into, cryin shame.

 

[rushcreek2]

The post WWII mindset in California was build, build, build - because of the mass influx from other states. Problem is Californians built too many universities that became store-fronts for Marxist indoctrination. This is why the elections produce such a circus of fools.

Orange County - Seal Beach salon shooting - is also where the Sheriff wanted to revoke all of the CCW permits -remember ?

 

[Morbidph8]

Im sooo glad my parents moved me from SoCal to AZ when I was a child. I can't think of any reason to even go back.