The Recession, TBJ lawsuits, and "Fair Issue" of CCWs

[Paladin]

I read the below in the recent thread re Ron Paul's thoughts on the Mumbai terrorists attacks.

In our own country, we should be ever vigilant against any attempts to disarm the people, especially in this economic downturn. I expect violent crime to rise sharply in the coming days, and as states and municipalities are even more financially strained, the police will be even less able or willing to respond to crime. In many areas, local police could become more and more absorbed with revenue generating activities, like minor traffic violations and the asset forfeiture opportunities of non-violent drug offenses.(emphasis added)

To me, the recession might make municipalities less willing to face the chance of losing a TBJ federal lawsuit and might make them more willing to loosen up (i.e., be fair) in their issuance of CCWs. Not all cities/counties have major corporate headquarters that can readily absorb ever increasing tax rates just to say they're based in, for example, S.F.

If anyone might be interested in some extra $$$ during these tough economic times, be sure to ck out www.californiaconcealedcarry.com (and throughly review their FAQs page before contacting TBJ). BJ is currently preparing to go after Laurie Smith, Sheriff of Santa Clara County.

From BJ's most recent blog:

Gearing up now for the Santa Clara County case. May have some interesting news about the direction of that case real soon. We would like to hear from those with GC who have been denied by Sheriff Laurie Smith within the past 2 years.

It is your county, let's make it CCW legal.

Billy Jack

[tyrist]

My deptartment is already dealing with a surge in bank robberys.

[Theseus]

I think that during these times, although we would like to see action we might try to work with them on change before trying to increase their need or desire to raise funds by increasing their traffic enforcement and money grabbing.

[jacques]

Because we are in California we all know the politicians in office are bent on feel good legislation and think pretty much exactly the opposite of what we all do.

Would you not come to the conclusion that as violent and/or armed crime increases, they will just pass more of the same idiotic laws that they have passed in the past?

They do not think of gun control as taking the guns out of the criminals hands. They consistently violate the rights of law abiding citizens.

I could realistically see things getting much worse as far as gun rights, unless the Heller, Nordyke etc. all goes our way. And even then, it will be an uphill battle.

A very bad downturn in the economy however could result in this regime being ousted and replaced by more middle of the road politicians.

[yellowfin]

^ I hope so, but at the same time the Depression got us the NFA and nobody fought against it.

[nick]

Because we are in California we all know the politicians in office are bent on feel good legislation and think pretty much exactly the opposite of what we all do.

Would you not come to the conclusion that as violent and/or armed crime increases, they will just pass more of the same idiotic laws that they have passed in the past?

They do not think of gun control as taking the guns out of the criminals hands. They consistently violate the rights of law abiding citizens.

I could realistically see things getting much worse as far as gun rights, unless the Heller, Nordyke etc. all goes our way. And even then, it will be an uphill battle.

A very bad downturn in the economy however could result in this regime being ousted and replaced by more middle of the road politicians.


Here's to illustrate what you said:

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=136969