PDA

View Full Version : CA Assembly OKs concealed guns in capitol for four legislators


pbchief2
04-08-2011, 4:05 PM
The ruling class continues to distance themselves from "The People." I understand their desire for personal protection, yet in light of new laws brought forth why should they worry.

http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2011/04/assembly-gives-four-legislator.html

chaseface
04-08-2011, 4:17 PM
I am pissed that I dont get to excersize a right that these people get to. The ligislators as a whole pass all sorts of gun-restricting laws while we have to sit back and watch. The only recourse we have as voters is to make calls, write letters, vote for alternative candidates, etc.

On the other side of the coin, there is obviously a shift taking place, as subtle as it may be. The fact that people (although not the average citizens) are allowed to carry guns where they were not before, and that those people are in fact legislators, does say something about a change in attitude towards guns in our state capitol. Perhaps it could be a signal of greater changes to come. Im being very optimistic here, but the more legislators that are becomming comfortable around guns the better as far as I'm concerned. Im not pissed that they get to excersize their rights, just pissed that I can't.

Edit: "Im not pissed that they get to excersize their rights, just pissed that I can't." ... what I should have said is that I wouldnt be pissed that they get to excersize their rights IF I got to excersize mine

Connor P Price
04-08-2011, 4:21 PM
I remember reading in my history books about this cool idea called equal protection. I wonder what happened to that.

Sent from my SGH-T959 using Tapatalk

ddestruel
04-08-2011, 4:23 PM
I remember reading in my history books about this cool idea called equal protection. I wonder what happened to that.

Sent from my SGH-T959 using Tapatalk



just wait........the equal protections clause is alive and well just awaiting a court challenge to apply it ;)

goober
04-08-2011, 4:25 PM
to be clear, this is not about awarding full-time CCWs to legislators. it is about allowing those that already have them to carry inside the capitol building.
still a special exception for them, but not what might be inferred from the post title.

Connor P Price
04-08-2011, 4:31 PM
just wait........the equal protections clause is alive and well just awaiting a court challenge to apply it ;)

Its going to be coming back in a big way sometime soon. At least that's what I'm expecting.

Sent from my SGH-T959 using Tapatalk

cmichini
04-08-2011, 4:31 PM
I remember reading in my history books about this cool idea called equal protection. I wonder what happened to that.

Sent from my SGH-T959 using Tapatalk

That was in the United States of America. We're now just Amerika, very different concepts.

gunsmith
04-08-2011, 4:32 PM
I saw a post on Drudge but didn't click it, the drudge headline also makes it seem as if its CCW for them but not us

N6ATF
04-08-2011, 4:48 PM
What are the odds that any of them are civil rights-violating legislators that claim to be in fear of their lives of law-abiding gun owners, who, by definition would never assassinate them, unlike the other way around?

RP1911
04-08-2011, 5:54 PM
doesn't PC171b already exempt CCW holders and allows them to enter the state capitol?

edwardm
04-08-2011, 5:56 PM
Two things stick out.

First, an elevated class. Perfect. I'm glad to see this. It's going to make things much easier in the long run.

Second, further proof that the multitude of California's gun control laws obviously Do Not Work.

paul0660
04-08-2011, 5:58 PM
doesn't PC171b already exempt CCW holders and allows them to enter the state capitol?

True. The article refers to a bill this year that I am not aware of. It might in the works maybe, and this is preemptive?

RP1911
04-08-2011, 6:08 PM
I am wondering if this is to specifically allow them to CCW on the Assembly floor.


ETA: Looks like the article has been updated and actually says that unless you have permission from Assembly sgt-at -arms, one cannot CCW at the State Capitol. Hummm, apparently they passed a low a while ago to circumvent PC 171b.

voiceofreason
04-08-2011, 6:10 PM
Texas seems to have no problems with armed legislators.

Skidmark
04-08-2011, 6:11 PM
What the... now they can't? Crazy.

The speaker of the California Assembly has blocked permission given to four lawmakers to carry concealed weapons inside the state Capitol, a spokesman said Friday.

Speaker John Perez "does not believe that members should bring weapons into the Capitol because the job of protecting the men and women who visit and work in the Capitol is best left to the well-trained professionals in the sergeant's office and the California Highway Patrol," spokesman John Vigna said.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2011/04/08/state/n173650D12.DTL&tsp=1

chaseface
04-08-2011, 6:11 PM
Its going to be coming back in a big way sometime soon. At least that's what I'm expecting.

Sent from my SGH-T959 using Tapatalk

yep, in :twoweeks:

Shotgun Man
04-08-2011, 6:13 PM
Gotta love the comments-- Communism is never meant for the communist himself, of course.

Drivedabizness
04-08-2011, 7:18 PM
Why do our "betters" need to be armed? They are surrounded by armed guards to protect them and are in a "gun free zone"?

Oh - that's right! Bad guys don't respect limits like that. And they want to be able to defend themselves. DOH! Its so simple!

N6ATF
04-08-2011, 7:26 PM
It is possible that some or all of the 4 are not criminals, i.e. they stand up for our civil rights whether it is politically convenient or not. In that case, I support them being able to carry. After all, they are surrounded by criminals at work every day! :43:

blakdawg
04-08-2011, 7:46 PM
I think this is a favorable development - not that it's fair, but as more and more people get used to the idea of carrying, it gets tougher to deny it to everyone.

Once these guys get used to it, it'll be even tougher to take it away from them - so if we can create legal or political pressure to go "all or nothing" on CCW, here's 4 people who will go for "all" instead of "nothing."

Connor P Price
04-08-2011, 7:55 PM
It is possible that some or all of the 4 are not criminals, i.e. they stand up for our civil rights whether it is politically convenient or not. In that case, I support them being able to carry. After all, they are surrounded by criminals at work every day! :43:

So long as they aren't prohibited, I feel they should be able to carry as well. Simply by virtue of my believe that all non prohibited persons should be able to carry.

N6ATF
04-08-2011, 7:59 PM
Since they are guilty of capital felonies (treason, civil rights violations resulting in countless deaths of law-abiders), but go unprosecuted because the wolves are guarding the sheep pen, they should be on death row, not carrying weapons to keep them alive during their ongoing genocidal criminal enterprise.

Connor P Price
04-08-2011, 8:07 PM
Since they are guilty of capital felonies (treason, civil rights violations resulting in countless deaths of law-abiders), but go unprosecuted because the wolves are guarding the sheep pen, they should be on death row, not carrying weapons to keep them alive during their ongoing genocidal criminal enterprise.

If they are tried before a jury of their peers I will join you in your conviction. Until then, equal protection for all.

N6ATF
04-08-2011, 8:18 PM
You'll be waiting an eternity. The wolves will never completely eat their own; justice will never truly be done to these accomplices to mass murder on this plane of existence. Which sucks if you don't believe in heaven and hell, as I don't. Even the death penalty would be too good for them; proportionally they would need to serve life sentences in remote, harsh climate hard labor camps where they really find out what it is to be human, and all the suffering they've caused.

Connor P Price
04-08-2011, 9:14 PM
I"ll continue waiting for that eternity. Its the way our justice system works, a few will always get away. We can surmise that there is blood on their hands but there isn't a direct causal link that can be proven indefinitely. I'd rather have a few guilties go free than a few innocents go convicted.

N6ATF
04-08-2011, 9:51 PM
I"ll continue waiting for that eternity. Its the way our justice system works, a few will always get away.

This is the government we're talking about. A few will not get away, the vast majority will. If the wolves were to eat more than a few of their own, government would collapse under the weight of its collective prosecution of itself.

jimh
04-08-2011, 10:01 PM
I want to see the bill they passed in 2010 restricting CCW in the state capital.

Connor P Price
04-08-2011, 10:14 PM
This is the government we're talking about. A few will not get away, the vast majority will. If the wolves were to eat more than a few of their own, government would collapse under the weight of its collective prosecution of itself.

I'm not saying its the best way. I'm just saying I don't have a better idea right now.

I find it best to look at these instances as a categorical imperative. If we don't want to the be exceptions to the right, then the legislators shouldn't be exceptions either. So how should we do it?

Dave A
04-08-2011, 10:54 PM
As soon as the speaker of the Legislature heard about it, he moved to change it back to what it was before. Needless to say the speaker is about as far Left a politician from LA as is possible. How the Dems elected a freshman legislator to the speaker post is still beyond me.

CessnaDriver
04-09-2011, 12:22 PM
Guns for me but not for thee.

The elite you know, their lives are more important then ours.

Had enough government yet?

Don29palms
04-09-2011, 2:53 PM
And Shepherds we shall be

For thee, my Lord, for thee.

Power hath descended forth from Thy hand

Our feet may swiftly carry out Thy commands.

So we shall flow a river forth to Thee

And teeming with souls shall it ever be.

In Nomeni Patri Et Fili Spiritus Sancti."

Don29palms
04-09-2011, 2:55 PM
"And when I vest my flashing sword And my hand takes hold in judgement I will take vengeance upon mine enemies And I will repay those who hase me O Lord, raise me to Thy right hand And count me amoung Thy saints ."

"Whosoever shed last blood. By man shall his blood be shed. For immunity of god make he the man. Destroy all that which is evil. So that which is good may flourish. And I shall count thee amoung my favoured sheep. And you shall have the protection of all the angels in heaven."

"Never shall innocent blood be shed. Yet the blood of the wicked shall flow like a river. The three shall spread their blackened wings and be the vengeaful striking hammer of god. "

Skidmark
04-09-2011, 3:48 PM
"All who curse their father or mother must be put to death. They are guilty of a capital offense."

"If a man commits adultery with another man's wife, both the man and the woman must be put to death."

"If a man lies with a male as with a women, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives."

"Do not think that I have come to bring peace upon earth. I have come to bring not peace but the sword. For I have come to set a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and one's enemies will be those of his household'."

oni.dori
04-09-2011, 3:53 PM
In all honesty, part of me is hopeful at the apparent possibility of the attitudes of CA residents and legislators possibly opening up to the idea of a 2A friendly CA with laws like this passing (along with the other pro-2A laws being presented, and anti-2A laws being defeated as of late), coupled with the potential for grounds of progressive legal advancement of our Constitutional rights.
However, another part of me is infuriated at the blatant "ruling/aristocratic class" privilages being flaunted, grossly infringing on EVERYTHING the Constitution (and this country) was founded upon. Our cherished Founding Fathers would be INFURIATED at this, it is EVERYTHING they revolted against Britain for.