“Gov. Jerry Brown announced early Monday that he had outlawed the open carrying of handguns in public in California, a controversial practice that top law enforcement officials had denounced as dangerous.” The latimes.com would say that, wouldn’t they? “Clearing his desk of final bills sent to him by the Legislature, Brown signed the ban into law after it was backed by Los Angeles Police Chief Charlie Beck, Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca and other law enforcement officials throughout the state. ‘I listened to the California police chiefs,’ Brown said in a statement.” Well, that’s alright then. And rest assured that the cops’ opposition had noting to do with reserving the right to use lethal force for the State . . .
Beck and other top cops were concerned that the open toting of guns wastes officers’ time responding to calls about armed “suspects” and can lead accidentally to violent confrontation.
Assemblyman Anthony Portantino (D-La Canada Flintridge), author of the ban, and his supporters said California is no longer the wild west, where citizens had to carry six-shooters on their hips for protection.
“The bottom line is the streets will be safer for law enforcement and families,” Portantino said.
We anxiously await the statistical verification of that fact. Now that thousands of open carry advocates will no longer be able to carry their UNLOADED guns, we should see a dip in California’s crime rate and fewer cop shootings. Meanwhile gird yourself for the gloat:
“This finally puts an end to the dangerous and intimidating practice of carrying openly displayed guns in public,” said Brian Malte, director of state legislation for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. “California families will now be able to take their families to the park or out to eat without the worry of getting shot by some untrained, unscreened, self-appointed vigilante.”
California families will now be able to take their families to the park or out to eat without the worry of getting shot by some untrained, unscreened, self-appointed vigilante.”
Can he cite just how many families were shot by untrained, unscreened, self-appointed vigilantes and their unloaded guns before this ban took effect?
How many families have been shot by untrained, unscreened, self-appointed criminals and their loaded guns?
Hey, Californicators — you voted for him.
Let me guess. You live in one of the 44 states that have a 2nd amendment in your state constitution. CA does not. Gun owners are outnumbered 5-1 in California. Those of us behind enemy lines will continue to lift the burden and fight the good fight while many elsewhere sit back in comfy chairs and criticize.
From a fellow gun owner under siege in NJ, good luck with that fight dude. I’m just gonna move out when I get a chance.
Many pro-2A people in California supported Brown. He claims to be a gun-owner and he wrote a favorable amicus brief in the McDonald v. Chicago case. The alternative was Meg Whitman who was viewed as anti-gun rights, too.
“‘I listened to the California police chiefs,’ Brown said in a statement.”
Isn’t that sort of like Hitler listening to the SS regarding what’s best for the people of Europe? Yes, I made a Hitler comparison on the internet. But is it that far off regarding this article?
“Beck and other top cops were concerned that the open toting of guns wastes officers’ time responding to calls about armed “suspects” and can lead accidentally to violent confrontation.”
Yeah, that’s a good reason to deprive citizens – sorry, “subjects,” forgot we’re talking about California – of their Constitutional right. Play around with the words and you can find equal nonsensical justification for depriving them of every other Amendment as well. Guess I shouldn’t give the CA despots any ideas.
“The bottom line is the streets will be safer for law enforcement and families,” Portantino said.”
Aside from the fact that this is simply not true, streets would be safer without cars either. Why not get rid of those? Why not just ban people from the streets altogether? Set up a curfew to round out your perfect little totalitarian state. Or just ban criminals, that would solve all the problems. Oh, right, they make up the bulk of the liberal voter base.
What an idyllic little world they live in. I can’t wait for some idiot gun-grabber to follow suit and take his family to a park in LA, thinking things are so much safer now, and have reality come crashing down hard. I have zero tolerance for idiots and traitors, which pretty much means the entire state of California can shove it.
It was a stupid bully tactic undertaken by stupid bullies. They did you guys more harm than good makin’ you all look like a bunch of fanatics. You should be the happiest.
By the way, carrying an empty gun on the right hip and a magazine on the left makes it misleading for you to say “UNLOADED GUNS” capital letters like that. Don’t you guys train for that very thing? How many seconds does it take the proficient gun owners to arm his weapon and get a shot off?
To me that’s not UNLOADED.
Remember that most gun owners are not terrorists or mass murderers. If you still want to murder people in California, then there is nothing stopping you. I have heard multiple stories where open carriers defended their lives and the lives of others by being responsibly armed.
To me that’s not UNLOADED
The gun is unloaded if there’s nothing in it.
But he said “To me,” which in the gun-grabber/progressive mind makes it fact, reality, and justifiable to be enforced on everyone else despite what law, truth, or the Constitution say.
Why don’t you find out for yourself Mike?
Buy an airsoft pistol and holster and then have someone attempt to attack you while you attempt to grab your magazine, load the pistol, and fire it at your “attacker”.
If the other guy is anywhere close to you he’ll be on top of you while you’re still fumbling with your magazine. It really does slow you down.
Because the only danger that someone can remotely logically be concerned about with people carrying guns is the possibility of a misfire, which is while unlikely under normal circumstances is impossible with an unloaded gun.
If someone wants to murder someone, they aren’t going to worry about whether it’s legal to have a gun in their pocket.
Mike, “all guns are always loaded” is a safety rule, not a rule of self defense. I can’t even imagine the kinds of mental gymnastics you have to do to believe what you’re saying.
You lost me Congresswoman. What I’m saying is these guys can take a magazine with their left hand while drawing the gun with their right, load it, rack the slide and be ready to shoot in a matter of seconds.
That’s different than saying they carry UNLOADED GUNS, as if they’re carrying hair dryers.
There’s practically no difference between unloaded and loaded, just a couple seconds.
Then we can agree that magazine capacity restrictions are pointless, Mike?
*SNORT* Oopsie, MikeBNumerals! That’s inconvenient…
So to you a gun without any bullets in it is loaded? Interesting logic there. I think you just solved hunger in Africa – just tell them that an empty stomach is not really an empty stomach and they’ll magically be full and healthy!
lol & +1
Yes, likely the court will have no choice but to rule that gun owners must be allowed CCW/LTC.
The argument before was that CCW/LTC was not necessary given the existence of Open Carry. Given the school zones issue, it wasn’t practical within most densely populated areas.
Read up on your USSC decisions. In the Heller case, the majority decision stated that states can ban concealed carry, but not open carry. In fact, they had some pretty nasty things to say about concealed carry: “Likewise, in State v. Chandler, 5 La. Ann. 489, 490 (1850), the Louisiana Supreme Court held that citizens had a right to carry arms openly: “This is the right guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States, and which is calculated to incite men to a manly and noble defence of themselves, if necessary, and of their country, without any tendency to secret advantages and unmanly assassinations.” – Heller, pg., 40 (emphasis added)
“Secret advantages and unmanly assassinations.” is hardly a resounding affirmation of concealed carry by the High Court.
I always thought Open Carry was stupid for this very reason.
Having said that, wasn’t there some court case running in CA where the courts there ruled that the sheriffs could not be compelled to issue CHLs because California’s open carry law essentially provided an outlet for the right to keep and bear arms?
IIRC, some of the gun rights plotters in CA were talking about using a ban on open carry to revisit that court case as a way to essentially force the courts into making CA a shall-issue state.
Sean and GA Koenig have it right. I wouldn’t jump on the new Governator so quick. His, “I listened to the Sheriffs” will come back when CA is forced to be a Shall Issue state. CA could have kept coasting along a lot farther with it’s same old denial of rights before this bill was signed. Now when CA liberals are dragged kicking and screaming back to the United States of America they will have to kick and scream at the sheriffs. And the sheriffs are the ones who deserve to be kicked and screamed at. Only time will tell, but I think electing Brown will turn out better for CA gun rights. He is better educated on the issues and more pro gun than most people think. I think it was a very smart play by him.
Why would you want to drag them back into union? I say sell them back to Mexico.
We can’t sell them back, because even Mexico isn’t stupid enough to buy this no good COMMIE wannabe state. Maybe we can pay them a couple of billion dollars to take them back and then the guns will flow through COMMIEFORNIA like a mighty river.
Sad, but I kinda figured this would happen in California. I wondered how long they would tolerate the OCers thumbing their nose at Californias silly gun laws.
Hopefully they can use this to get REAL concealed carry in CA now, as a couple others have noted before me.
I’m waiting for California to pass a law requiring cameras in every home to ensure that the peasants do their morning exercises – for their own good of course.
In California, if Police Chiefs don’t support the State, the State doesn’t give them special grants for overtime, equipment and redevelopment of “low income areas”. It is a shame.
“The law, AB 144, takes effect Jan. 1. Violations will be a misdemeanor, with offenders facing up to one year in jail and a potential fine of $1,000. Gun owners may still apply to their local law enforcement agency for a permit to carry a concealed firearm.”
I expect two things to happen. The police will start enforcing this law early (lawsuits to follow) and crime rates (armed robbery, theft, assault, rape, etc.) will rise 15% in California while surrounding states will go down 15% per 100,000 people.
Any one want to bet? 🙂
Brown did veto ammo registration. 3rd time that law has gone down in flames.
Brown signed long gun registration into law. Something the DC court has just suggested is unconstitutional. Can’t wait to see that one thrown out.
And Brown also signed into law CCW application reform. The form is to be standardized in all counties. While the Open Carry ban will take effect in a year, the law will be added to current CCW litigation which in the end might just force CA shall issue.
California is so dangerously unstable. Of the over 60k forced sterilizations perpetrated during this country’s long history with state sanctioned eugenics, California was responsible for more than half of them, yet people consider their historical track record progressive. Also, they suck as a state at public education, crime, civil liberties, maintaining a budget, etc. A few weeks ago the state police in California arrested some organic ‘go green’ farmers for selling minuscule quantities of raw milk to people who are into that. They are being charged with criminal conspiracy. Meanwhile look at the good job the state does with crime in LA. The place is a nightmare for conservatives and liberals alike. If you are a libertarian it will make your head explode.
The restrictions on law abiding citizens in CA regarding guns is akin to the state holding innocent citizens arms behind their backs as the armed criminal element (which demonstrably exists in droves) goes to work on their faces. The message is “you do not have the right to try to survive criminal violence”. This message also implies “we sanction inequity in size, strength, and stamina between individuals” since weapons restrictions disproportionately affect the weak who have no other means of defense.
I am a social liberal, and I approve this message.
I’m not surprised that the COMMIE “dicktator” of COMMIEFORNIA screwed all the law abiding gun owners, but now we have a better chance of getting shall issue for everyone. I really hope this dumb ass law backfires on these fools.
I think this is another example of the gun grabbers hurting their own cause. Like people have stated above, the court ramifications of this law will probably result in shall issue coming about.
In other news, the People’s Republik of Kalifornia has banned red food dye, the number 12, feelings of uneasiness, Germany, and shoulder-things-that-go-up.
Most gun owners are not criminals, yet this law penalizes the innocent many because of the radical few. Though, I suppose, the media’s excuses would be along the lines of:
“If pro-gun activists really don’t support those who carry guns in public, why aren’t they speaking out against it?”
“Not all gun owners are criminals, but all criminals are gun owners.”
“Guns are meant to kill things. Therefore, they’re inherently evil.”
Hey, wait a minute! That same thing happens when our media talks about Muslims!
The “cops” they are referring to are politicians. Ask any local LEO what they think about law-abiding citizens carrying/owning firearms and you’ll get different answers. Some of the LEO are becoming fearful of carrying and using their own sidearms because of the “top cops.”
As a good friend of mine in CA says, he’s SWAT and a firearms instructor, “the gun laws in California are clear as mud and you’re much more likely to go to jail for defending yourself with a firearm than the assailant, so if you draw your weapon shoot to kill.”
The problem with California (and NYC and Chicago) is that anti-gun folks are not the “radical few.”
I’ll bet that if you took a poll (a real poll, not some internet poll), you’ll find that the *vast majority* of Californians are in favor of gun control. The reason is simple; the vast majority of Californians have no positive connection to firearms. In the metropolitan areas, very few people have any firearms mixed into the standard culture in a positive way. No gun ranges. No firearms training schools. No friendly gunshots (every CA gunshop I’ve ever been in has been staffed by the least friendly, most highly strung group of wannabe and off duty cops I’ve ever seen).
When the only connection you see with firearms is gang violence and movies, is it any surprise that the vast majority of the population wouldn’t be in favor of gun laws? Why people would immediately call the cops when they saw folks open carrying? Why they support politicians when they propose anti-gun legislation?
We in the firearms community want to blame gun control on those wacky, anti-gun liberals. This is to give Democratic politicians too much credit. That they would have some sort of independent thought (however wrong) to actually do something about crime. In reality, they are slaves to whatever the polls tell them their constancy wants and will react positively to.
Change the culture in California to make it firearms positive. Show Californians that CCW is a path to freedom. Give them a reason to believe that owning a firearm would be a *positive* thing in their lives. Do that, and you’ll see firearms laws in California (and other anti-gun bastions) change as rapidly as the attitude changes.
Good riddance to the Open Carry crowd, this was a good bill:
The open carry nutcases get their jollies off walking into starbucks, freaking out people who don’t know they are unloaded. It was never about self defense for that crowd, but basically using a gun as a substitute phallus against people who don’t know that the guns are unloaded, and a lot of needless calls to the police for “man with a gun” calls. They made all gun owners look bad.
And this has legal implications, as part of the “may issue if you are a senator” process that some counties use is affected by “hey, the people can always open carry”. Now that they can’t, some of the legal framing that has allowed the counties to get away with “may issue if we feel like it” is in serious legal jeopardy.
Far more important was signing the reform on the CCW permit process, which eliminates a lot of the games various counties have played in making it difficult and expensive to get a CCW.
We’re not going anywhere. So what, they banned my handgun. Now I will resort to carrying my M-4 for self-defense. Wait til all of the Brady Campaign do gooders get a load of that. And no, I’m not carrying to make a political statement; I’m carrying because cops can’t be everywhere (and they’re a little to heavy from all of those bagels and lattes).
I have mixed feelings about this one. Any impingement on 2nd amendment rights bothers me, but those open carry sorts who parade around always make me embarrassed as a gun owner. They get a kick out of it, and the average Joe and Jane just feel intimidated.
Things do not happen in a vacuum. In a perfect world, no one would bat an eye at an openly carried firearm. But hey, in the real world, open display of a firearm is like the open display of any deadly weapon – people assume that someone displaying it is threatening to use it. Like a dog showing its teeth, a person showing a gun (in a situation where guns are not expected) is, unwittingly or not, threatening others around them. You’re basically a walking genital organ for doing so, to use less than polite terms.
People don’t like being threatened. Gun owners owe it to themselves to be considerate of the environment around themselves – not just for potential threats, but for how they’re perceived by others. If you get your jollies by bothering others, perhaps gun ownership isn’t for you. Being an adult with a firearm on your person puts you in a role with a lot of responsibility. If you’re not the responsible sort, don’t make the rest of us out to be in the same crowd.
Open carry doesn’t do, in my opinion, a darn thing to raise a positive awareness.
“Like a dog showing its teeth, a person showing a gun (in a situation where guns are not expected) is, unwittingly or not, threatening others around them. You’re basically a walking genital organ for doing so, to use less than polite terms.”
So police and other gun-wearing organs of the state are “genital organs”, as well? Or are police “non-intimidating”, and citizens (who would have to train and license — and yes, would be the subject of constant checking and rechecking *in public*) are the dickheads in the equation?
For every yahoo who likes to intimidate with the open display of a gun, there are many, many responsible citizens. Those who want to intimidate have plenty of ways to be jerks — or haven’t you driven on California roads recently?
As far as the “distracting from more important law enforcement issues”, try this for a little enlightenment: Google and review the LAPD’s top most wanted list. I’ll wait.
Back yet? Okay, what did you think? Out of, say, 300+ on the list, only four (4) are definitely citizens. The overwhelming majority on the list are violent illegals, including three Japanese citizens, one German citizen, and a very, very bad Dutch fellow. Want to guess where the rest of them come from?
Licensed, trained, non-violent, non-criminal citizens exercise their right to openly carry legally purchased, registered *unloaded* weapons that are their property, but California allows “Sanctuary Cities”?
What’s California’s priority, here?
You all need to wake up and smell the coffee. This will not force the state of CA to issue CCW permits. The USSC case law will continue to support open carry, while frowning upon concealed carry. In the Heller decision, the majority decision states; “Likewise, in State v. Chandler, 5 La. Ann. 489, 490 (1850), the Louisiana Supreme Court held that citizens had a right to carry arms openly: “This is the right guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States, and which is calculated to incite men to a manly and noble defence of themselves, if necessary, and of their country, without any tendency to secret advantages and unmanly assassinations.” – Heller, pg., 40 (emphasis added)
“Secret advantages and unmanly assassinations.” is hardly a resounding affirmation of concealed carry by the High Court.
So keep having your little pipedreams while you diddle yourselves with images of concealed handguns dancing in your heads. The truth is, the USSC in its current configuration will NEVER hear a case that even mentions a challenge to a state’s permitted concealed carry laws. The case law isn’t there and it won’t be as long as the current justices sit on the bench. We have the best chance of challenging the open carry ban based on this decision, not concealed carry.
The second Amendment is your gun permit, DEMAND CONSTITUTIONAL CARRY, not government issued permission slips. The right of self-defense is a right of man, it is only codified and enumerated by the 2A.
A true open carry advocate is a self-defense and civil rights advocate, not a permission slip advocate. Those of you that only open carried to try and force the state’s hand, thanks for nothing you idiots!
This new law is crap. If you outlaw guns only outlaws will have them. The people practicing GOOD gun control and using holsters are not the ones anybody should be worring about. Its the ones that are getting the guns illeagly, carrying their guns in their waste band or in their pockets, and acting like gangsters.
I lived in Calif for 21 years up until 2004. I moved to Florida where concealed permits are granted to law abiding stable citizens. It works, problems are very few between ccw ‘s or LEO. I would never consider living in Calif again with all its problems. I have a ccw permit and the peace and feeling of safety from carrying Is something I believe every law abiding citizen should experience if thats their wish. There’s alot of other states that have sucessfull ccw programs Calif views and laws favor the criminal element, move to a state that has laws that are more progressive. Peace!!