Estimates put the number of gun owners in California at about 4 million out of a population of just under 40 million people. Of course, that’s according to the assiduously anti-gun operation run by Garen Wintemute at UC-Davis. The real number is probably twice that. Maybe more.
Even in the state that takes pride in enacting new restrictions on the right to keep and bear arms almost weekly, there are lots of gun owners. That’s because no matter what the state’s attitude may be toward those who avail themselves of their Second Amendment rights, there’s no shortage of people who choose to have the ability to protect themselves and their families.
People like this Lancaster home owner.
As reported by abc7.com . . .
Los Angeles County Sheriff’s detectives say the man got into the home through one of the downstairs rear windows and walked into an upstairs bedroom.
That’s when the homeowner who feared for the safety of himself and his children grabbed a gun and fired a shot, hitting the suspect, according to authorities.
The family inside the home at the time was not injured.
This was no smash-and-grab job. It was an early morning daylight break-in and as the video above shoes, the home invader had approached at least one other house in the neighborhood before choosing the wrong bedroom to stroll into.
On Tuesday, the county coroner’s office identified the man as 27-year-old Michael Lashomb, and confirmed his cause of death was a gunshot wound to the head.
Residents of the neighborhood are feeling on edge about their own safety after the incident and say they believe their neighbor was justified in the shooting.
“I would do the same thing,” said one neighbor, Darrell Jones.
No one knows what Lashomb was up to. And thanks to the quick action of the unidentified home owner, we probably never will.
I’ve never had an exam administred by a law enforcement agency. And I’ve been legally buying guns in CA for 3+ decades.
Kinda makes me wonder about the accuracy of the other bullet points in the post.
I did. They gave me an old blockbuster card with “ok, can shoot” written on it in marker
I think the reference is to the firearms safety certificate, which must be current to lawfully possess firearms. (Most people think you have to have one only to purchase firearms, because that is the pnly time anyone will actually check it.)
They think that because it’s accurate – no license or permit is required to own or use, the only time the ‘Firearms Safety Certificate’ is noticed is when transferring a gun.
PC 26505 (b)
“(b) No permit or license to purchase, own, possess, keep, or carry, either openly or concealed, shall be required of any citizen of the United States or legal resident over the age of 18 years who resides or is temporarily within this state, and who is not within the excepted classes prescribed by Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 29800) or Chapter 3 (commencing with Section 29900) of Division 9 of this title, or Section 8100 or 8103 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, to purchase, own, possess, keep, or carry, either openly or concealed, a handgun within the citizen’s or legal resident’s place of residence, place of business, or on private property owned or lawfully possessed by the citizen or legal resident.”
So, how did we get a ‘purchase’ permit if it’s supposed to be forbidden?
CA is just so consistent …
See the wiki article, http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/index.php?title=The_Handgun_Safety_Certificate
“Our situation has not improved.”
+1 for the head shot.
Here’s to hoping it was a “Moe Green”.
Sounds like the homeowner is talking too much.
Under “What’s Banned”, this infographic lists “Handguns not listed on the state’s Roster of Handguns Certified for Sale.”
Unsafe handguns aren’t banned, you just can’t buy them at retail unless you’re military, LEO, or Special in one of several other ways. Because the State of California isn’t concerned whether public employees are endangered by unsafe handguns, only ordinary people. I’m surprised the police unions didn’t object to that callous, uncaring attitude.
Exactly I wonder why no one who has been shot by a cops off roster weapon has sued the state for using an “unsafe” weapon on them?!?!?!
The handgun rooster is what has me the most PO’d about CA gun control.
But in California you can buy and smoke Marijuana in public legally. You can have sex in public or just walk around naked on days the government gives you permission. You can defecate or urinate in public and won’t have to worry about any public health concerns.
They say you can put into your body what ever you want to. Except raw milk. Then the california state government will put a gun in your face if you do that.
You just can’t get the gun you want unless it’s on the approved state list.
Your knowledge of California Laws is impeccably moronic. Go back to stump jumpin’.
This is why I move to WILCO, zero tolerance for criminals and stupidity.
The alt rock band, the agricultural supply coop, or abbreviation for the county in Tn, Ga, Tx?
Lots of new homes in our hood for sale. Come be a neighbor.
Had a guy try and strangle me when I was asleep I had a 10 b1/2 inch RSBH. on the bedside table Tried to get the barrul under his chin, wound up clobbering him in the head with it. Fun night.
Possums can’t have dogs, they get chased! 😁
But slowly. Until run over by a car.
A daylight entry into an occupied home?
This criminal had the potential of being very dangerous indeed.
California used to have a section in the penal code known as “homeowner’s presumption.” I seem to recall it was PC 187.50. It basically said that you didn’t need to ascertain the criminal’s intent if he broke into your home, you could presume that it met the threshold of death or great bodily harm by his mere presence in your home, having passed through a previously closed door/window.
That’s pretty much the standard in Florida.
If you’re uninvited, you’re fair game.
And if you’re in Polk County, there’s a good chance sheriff Grady Judd will host a news conference describing in detail the poor choice you made to break in someone’s home…
The presumption is still in effect. The effect is that the prosecutor has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you were NOT in fear for your life, etc. I only know of one prosecution where an intruder was killed in a home (garage, road rage incident). It took three trial for it to go away.
Hey man, nice shot.
“I would do the same thing.” Not unless you have a firearm too.
Good guy with a gun = dead bad guy, with or without a 🔫….👍
You guys hear about that shootout with a 28 year old man who “made” his own guns? The FBI and local law enforcement were trying to raid his home for breaking California’s gun laws, but couldn’t get a judge to sign a search warrant. So they tried other ways to get inside. Ultimately, police said they smelt smoke coming from the apartment for about 20 minutes and feared for his safety. They called the fire department to breech the door so police could enter. Once the police went to enter the man started shooting.
The story isn’t getting much attention because of who that person was and his history. It’s a similar situation to the Houston raid…
This happened almost a year ago. So what happened afterwards?
wow, that is some crazy sh!t. I had to do some looking on that, cause that kinda sounds like a full auto. Not much on the story either from the local outlets. this article had the most info i could really find after the first few fluff articles.
Certainly not an undocumented immigrant. How about actor between roles?
Headline should read homeowner allegedly shoots intruder instead of the other way around. It’s little word games like this which give away their bias
How in the hell is he an “alleged” intruder? If he’s not welcomed in, and forced his way in, there’s no alleged about it. We need a bit of an overall of our legal system.
Imagine if the 1st had the restrictions of the 2nd…
Still under investigation; Innocent until proven guilty, so on.
Sadly you just cant kill someone because they are in your house. There has to be a credible threat of some kind. Could of been a drunk wondering in the wrong home.
It happens a lot. If the bad-guy came in through an unlocked door, homeowner will get a grilling. If bad guy busted his way in then its game on. A threat can be a very small detail but it still has to exist.
Think of all the money saved in prosecution and incarceration! Shoot more save more!
The 4 million California gun owners is probably accurate. The Central Valley has most gun-owners (it is obvious by the number of shooting ranges):
6 million people in the Central Valley – 2 million In Sacramento (basically a Bay Area bedroom) = 4 million.
Gun ownership in Central Valley would have to be over 50 or 60% to break 4 million in the state.
Coastal (including purple San Diego and OC) has gun ownership rates well below 10%.
Guns in coastal are so rare that a Carlsbad School went on lockdown because people are so unaccustomed to hearing gunshots that they mistook a car backfire for an active shooter.
CA does have a lot of military bases and thus former military all over the place. Half of the gun owners i know are veterans. The hunters i know to Central and NorCal to hunt.
Most people would not recognize real gun fire anyway. Also from experience that gunshots in a concrete, urban environment sound completely different than when fired in an open rural area. Then there is differences in caliber and use of suppressors and such.
Unless one lives in a war zone or has reasonable experience with firearms, the average person will never have the exposure to be able to learn how to differentiate. It would also be pathetic to suggest that everyone should be trained in this skill.
What? California has over 850 miles of coastline. Two thirds of the state’s population lives on the coast. You don’t think these communities have the same number of fire arms per capita as the rest of the state? What stereotype do you base this information on?
There is no “test” to get a CCW. There is, however, a training requirement that requires no less than 8 hours (and no more than 16) to include a classroom element on the lawful use of force and a shooting element. The shooting element is administered differently in different counties, some requiring that you have a minimal proficiency (85% score) for each handgun you want listed on your CCW, others requiring no more than a demonstration of safe handling. There is room on the front of the cert for three guns–some counties will limit you to three, others will allow an addendum. Some counties have caliber requirements, e.g. no smaller than .380 and no larger than .45. One can only concealed carry firearms listed on the cert.
I am from this part of CA. There are a lot of pro gun people in this part of LA county.
The most dangerous places on earth are gun free zones! Criminals think they are safe, and in this case, I’m sure very surprised.
Headshot, peeled his cap back. Nice, one less sh!thead running around breaking into homes.
Yeah he was playing damn stupid game. That’s not lifting a Hostess Twinkie from 7-11
When you break into someones home with the full intentions of committing a crime, all bets are off. You take what happens.
He paid the ultimate price for that stupidity.
I’d like to be the claims person at the insurance company and take that call.
“and what was the date of loss sir? And what caused the damage to the carpet?
I wonder if Servepro has a method to get grey “brain” matter out for carpet. I doubt if the popo would let you get it treated before the stuff dried/set. Can you bill the Darwin award winner’s estate for replacing it?
Removed from the gene pool , hopefully he did not reproduce.
There may be a few Floaters left in the ol gene pool
If you make something hard to get, more people will want it.
I’m betting there’s a ton more than 4 million gun owners in California.
Speaking as a California gun owner, I know MANY folks who would not publicly admit to owning firearms. Especially in a place as anti-gun and with a culture so fearful of guns, people will not answer questions truthfully when asked if they have guns. We belong to Kaiser Permanente health care, and my awesome doctor gave me a standard health questionnaire asking among other things if we had guns in the house. The point was to bring up gun storage safety, which I think is a perfectly legitimate healthcare topic, but I told him many folks would NOT answer that question truthfully -and that they should re-word the question to something along the lines of “IF you own guns, here’s the steps you can take to store them safely.”
My doctor was close to retirement, and had been handing out this questionnaire for years, but when I asked him how many people questioned the wording, or told him that they wouldn’t answer the question because they didn’t want their gun ownership ending status up in a Kaiser database he looked confused, and admitted that ALMOST EVERYONE responded that they DON’T own guns! We all know that ain’t true…
The “4 Million” reference is most likely wrong. If gun manufacturers where to compete in a market of only four million potential customers, some of them if not most, probably wouldn’t bother making the “safe” guns to comply with California legislation.