$0.10 total tips
Comments 1 - 17 of 17
The ruling will have significant impacts in California beyond only concealed carry laws, UCLA law professor Adam Winkler told SFGATE."It's fair to say this ruling will have its biggest effects in states like California with more restrictive gun laws," said Winkler, who is the author of "Gunfight: The Battle Over the Right to Bear Arms in America." "This is the beginning of a period where we’ll see a wide variety of California gun laws called into question, if not struck down entirely."...While the Thursday opinion does not directly wipe out concealed carry restrictions in California, challenges to such laws are now likely to succeed in court. In California, concealed carry permits are granted by local law enforcement agencies (some of which are quite restrictive), so expect a dramatic increase in permits granted in large cities such as San Francisco and Los Angeles.But what's more significant than the ruling on concealed carry laws, Winkler states, is the updated standard the court prescribed for deciding future gun control cases. Up until this point, lower courts have been using interest-balancing tests in which judges weigh the goals of gun control measure against the burdens they may create.On Thursday, however, the court clarified that "to justify [a] regulation, the government may not simply posit that the regulation promotes an important interest. Rather, the government must demonstrate that the regulation is consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation."This new "historical tradition" standard will jeopardize almost all of California's gun control laws, Winkler believes...."California has red flag laws, but under the 'historical tradition' test, red flag laws should be unconstitutional," he said. "There's no history of taking away guns from people in crisis as red flags do. Bans on high capacity magazines and assault weapons are also likely to be struck down, and then there's California’s 10-day waiting period. There's no history of that. The court says only those regulations consistent with historical regulations are permissible. California has innovative laws that restrict guns in ways that are not historically common."When asked which California gun control laws he believes may survive this new test for Second Amendment cases, Winkler said that background checks appear to be the least endangered (the predecessor to Thursday's opinion, District of Columbia v. Heller, notes a historical tradition of keeping firearms out of the hands of people who may be dangerous)....
I expect it will take more lawsuits for California to comply. We have a commie super majority in our house and senate and californians in general are super I’ll informed and mostly retarded so that will be an issue as well.
California has red flag laws, but under the 'historical tradition' test, red flag laws should be unconstitutional," he said
California has red flag laws, but under the 'historical tradition' test, red flag laws should be unconstitutional," he saidThat's good. Because the Senate RINOs just voted for red flag shit.
I'll have to start doing my research on handguns. With the ammo situation, I'll probably have to stick to the most common rounds. I figure one for me and one for the wife. Decisions, decisions . . .
Even once concealed/open carry becomes legal for all in CA again, I'd still be hesitant to shoot someone. From what I've seen, its not intuitive what you must do when defending yourself to avoid getting prosecuted for murder. This seems intentional - a trick to discourage defensive gun ownership.Of course, I'd rather take my chances landing in prison than a casket.