1. **ATTENTION ALL DEVILS** If you are still having trouble logging in, (Resetting your password should do "the trick") Optimum Online is blocking JD emails for some reason*, OR if you are not technically capable of doing this; use the "Contact Us" form utilizing your current, valid email address. If your email address is 'lost' to you, simply providing some account details will get us on the correct path together. THERE IS NO NEED TO CREATE SECONDARY ACCOUNTS, STOP BEING SO LAZY! YOU WILL BE BANNED! (Yelling/impolite voice implied there for *maximum effect*)
    Dismiss Notice

New (BAD NEWS) gun law just handed down 6-09-16

waterdogs Jun 9, 2016

  1. waterdogs

    waterdogs Brigade Member Brigade Member

    6,683
    2,733
    123
    The 9th Circuit Court of California has passed a new ruling, stating that even those citizens who have a Concealed Carry License DO NOT have a right to carry concealed in public.

    What the FUCK is going on in this country ?
     
  2. Komitadjie

    Komitadjie Jay to the Dee, Y'All!

    1,846
    383
    83
    You expected otherwise from the 9th circus?
     
  3. SlightChance

    SlightChance Miller's Maddness JDBA Official Member

    1,815
    158
    0
    Never mind all the other crazy shit they are trying to get in CA.

    Background checks for ammo purchases, ban on bullet button guns, FELONY for possessing a mag that holds more than 10 rounds (even if it was grandfathered in,) serialized 80% lowers, and much more. Just search for Gun-pocolypse. I most likely spelled it wrong.
     
    crogers likes this.
  4. Mike Grasso

    Mike Grasso "to protect and to serve" Super Moderator Brigade Member

    6,629
    1,918
    113


    Not exactly what happened...

    What is the case that prompted this?


    Gun owners in California tried to get concealed-carry licenses and were denied them by San Diego County in 2009. The reason for denial is that they didn't meet California's requirements to have a “good cause” to carry a concealed firearm.

    What is 'good cause'?

    Anyone applying for a concealed-carry permit in California must prove they have a "good cause." Some examples include having a restraining order against someone and believing they are a threat to your life; working in the firearms industry; being a jeweler who transports merchandise; or being an attorney.

    The application for a license to carry a concealed weapon on the San Diego County Sheriff’s Department website asks the following:

    “If the CCW license is desired for self-protection, the protection of others, or for the protection of large sums of money or valuable property, you are required to explain and provide good cause for issuance of the license. For example, has your life or property been threatened or jeopardized?”

    Who made the decision?

    The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit made the ruling. The court is headquartered in San Francisco and is the largest of the 13 courts of appeals.

    The 9th Circuit has jurisdiction over (and its decisions affect) Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon and Washington as well as Guam and Northern Mariana Islands.

    What did the court say?

    "The right of a member of the general public to carry a concealed firearm in public is not, and never has been, protected by the Second Amendment," the court said in its summary.

    "Therefore, because the Second Amendment does not protect in any degree the right to carry concealed firearms in public, any prohibition or restriction a state may choose to impose on concealed carry — including a requirement of 'good cause,' however defined — is necessarily allowed by the Amendment," it continued.

    "There may or may not be a Second Amendment right for a member of the general public to carry a firearm openly in public, but the Supreme Court has not answered that question."

    The gist: The 2nd Amendment doesn't give you the right to carry a hidden weapon, but states do

    Instead, the court ruled, it is up to states to restrict or allow individuals to carry concealed weapons.

    The court did not say that it is unconstitutional to carry a concealed weapon, and did not comment on open carry.

    In short, the court ruled that "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms" does not apply to hiding them.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 10, 2016
  5. Cold One

    Cold One Little member

    10
    1
    3
    Hmmm, the court is saying that you need to have good cause to carry concealed in public, like being threatened, I guess just being a free person who wants the ability to provide my own protection outside the home is not good enough. I don't wear a seatbelt only when I'm driving fast or going off-road but every boring day for unforseen circumstances.

    So if the second amendment doesn't apply to protection of self in public then what? Protection from government in your home.
     
  6. waterdogs

    waterdogs Brigade Member Brigade Member

    6,683
    2,733
    123


    New Jersey has long embraced this type of "logic", and has made it virtually impossible for a normal, law-abiding citizen to obtain a CCW....they are only issued to the politically-connected, and those who are required by their job to go armed (but only while on the job).

    And, as we all know, the Supreme Court has traditionally chosen to avoid 2A cases....
     
  7. Mike Grasso

    Mike Grasso "to protect and to serve" Super Moderator Brigade Member

    6,629
    1,918
    113
    Exactly, and it's not going to get better with Hilary...
     
  8. gpd215

    gpd215 Brigade Member Brigade Member

    901
    204
    43
    Negative. The state of California is saying that.

    The 9th circuit court of appeals is saying that the second amendment doesn't have anything to do with concealed carry. Its a state issue.
     
  9. Komitadjie

    Komitadjie Jay to the Dee, Y'All!

    1,846
    383
    83
    Could be interesting, I'm wondering exactly how long it's going to take for someone to realize that they basically just said that open carry is legal everywhere, because by omission it's protected? Would make an interesting shit-show. :bwah:
     
  10. IWantThatKnife

    IWantThatKnife I want that knife Knife Maker or Craftsman

    4,739
    573
    123
    The 9th Circuit Appellate Court

    in San Francisco has always been a very liberal decision based court. I worked in the Federal Building in SF in 74-75 and the 9th was considered a liberal circus even then.

    The decision isn't something new - it is consistent with Federal Court Rulings in other Districts in New York, Maryland, and New Jersey (I think New Jersey).

    On the flip side:

    The battle rages on!

    Vote for Members of Congress and at the state level for people who support the Second Amendment.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 13, 2016
  11. SlightChance

    SlightChance Miller's Maddness JDBA Official Member

    1,815
    158
    0
  12. Hawaiian

    Hawaiian Huge member

    442
    40
    28
    So does this mean that all constitutional rights end when you leave your home? Free speech is not allowed in public? Our Judicial system has thrown out the constitution and all logic when interpreting the law. The Judges are nothing more than political hacks.
     
  13. Teamadcahb

    Teamadcahb Huge member

    163
    12
    18
  14. SlightChance

    SlightChance Miller's Maddness JDBA Official Member

    1,815
    158
    0
    I wonder what is going to happen here. They can either allow open carry or concealed carry. To deny both denies their citizens the right to bare arms.

    But with the Supreme Court split right now...
     
  15. HotrodKelley

    HotrodKelley Brigade Member Brigade Member

    2,933
    273
    93
    Blah blah blah


    I guess Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness don't apply either.
     
  16. IWantThatKnife

    IWantThatKnife I want that knife Knife Maker or Craftsman

    4,739
    573
    123
    Bare Arms?

    When I wear a tank top SlightChance I have bare arms...

    When I carry concealed or open carry, I am bearing arms!

    :ross::devilzeek:ross:
     
  17. SlightChance

    SlightChance Miller's Maddness JDBA Official Member

    1,815
    158
    0
    [​IMG]
    You got me:unintroduced:
     
  18. IamMatt

    IamMatt Little member

    36
    3
    8
    I think that is the issue the lawyers were addressing.

    I read a comment from one of them that they were not asking the court to rule that the Constitution guaranteed a right to carry concealed, but that because a) SCOTUS had ruled that citizens have a right to carry ("bear") arms in some way, and because b) CA had outlawed open carry, that c) to comply with the SCOTUS ruling, they had to allow concealed carry.

    You can't say that you are allowed to carry, as long as it is not openly or concealed.
     
  19. perado

    perado Shoot to thrill

    1,364
    257
    83
    Mr. Grasso, I think the point is better made by including the next phrase:

    In short, the court ruled that "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED." does not apply to hiding them.
     
    Mike Grasso likes this.
  20. Bango Skank

    Bango Skank Level: True Devil

    686
    97
    28
    Perado very good point and I am proud you made it.

    I have decided to really just say fuck it when it comes to gun laws. If some shit head judge in some shithead court wants to throw me in jail for doing what I have to do, well fuck him and fuck all like him.

    Frankly it is a slightly frightening line of thought for me because I am resolved to simply not acknowledge laws that I see as unjust. I am sick of these stupid games everywhere.

    The people that sit in offices and write these "legislations" have nothing to do with me and I will keep it that way.

    I am not just talking and I don't need anyone to spell out possible consequences or anything like that. I am a citizen and I am fully aware of what that means.

    California is a disgrace.
     
    HotrodKelley likes this.

Share This Page