There ought to be a law
We can’t have people exercising their first and second amendment rights, now can we:
California handgun owners would no longer be able to carry their weapons in public under legislation unveiled Wednesday at the state Capitol.
Meanwhile, California’s government is about to go bankrupt.
April 15th, 2010 at 12:24 pm
If the officers regard guns as a threat then why do they carry them. Hint because nobody respects them if they do not. Of course I do not respect them period for what they advocate. Let the scum kill you and we will take notes while the blood is hosed down into the gutter.
April 15th, 2010 at 1:13 pm
Love how they refer to 2A as a “loophole”. Sure am glad I don’t live in the PR-Kalifornia.
April 15th, 2010 at 1:16 pm
Hotep: Great Pharaoh, the slaves will not respect you unless you respond decisively to these demonstrations of insolence.
Ra’amses: Hmmm… maybe I should double their burdens.
Hotep: Brilliant sir!
Moses: Wow, check out these frogs!
Hotep: Shut up, you!
April 15th, 2010 at 1:42 pm
This could play into our advantage. Since they are may issue concealed, and would become illegal for open carry, it would open them up to lawsuits over Keep and Bear arms. We need to push the bear part more.
April 15th, 2010 at 6:04 pm
“guns are threats”? Sure as Hell are if you happen to be a young man on an Oakland subway stop and there are cops with guns there.
Let’s disarm these cretins first.
April 15th, 2010 at 7:25 pm
Yes Nero fiddled while Rome burned.
And the band played on as the Titanic sank (why they didn’t cut up furniture to make individual rafts is beyond me. Guess that was to much effort.)
And the California legislature passed stupid laws up to the day the state economy collapsed (maybe they were hoping an earthquake would solve their problems…)
That’s liberals. Hid their head in the sand till someone kicks their butt, and even then all they do is complain and demand a law be passed.
Yes, glad I live in Texas.
April 16th, 2010 at 12:00 pm
Mayor Stoner, the lawsuit (Sykes) has already been filed by the Calguns Foundation. We’re just on hold pending the decision by the Supreme Court in McDonald. But yes, that’s exactly the rationale: if we have the right to keep AND BEAR arms, then a state might be able to ban loaded open carry or loaded concealed carry, but not both. Our “may issue” regime for CCW is functionally the same as a ban on concealed carry, as far as Constitutionality is concerned.