PDA

View Full Version : California Open/Concealed Carry Unconstitutional.


boglbus
04-29-2012, 11:25 AM
The second amendment reads as follows:
"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

There is no clause that says "... if you own or rent property."

California has banned open carry, and says it is a "privilege" to carry concealed, and you can be denied (Especially Merced County).

So if you cannot open carry of handguns, and you cannot carry concealed, the only place to have it is in your house. But what if you do not own a house? Does the bill of rights only apply to citizens with property? Do the homeless have no bill of rights? Do people who travel often and far from home give up their rights?

Last time I checked, the definitions of bear were:
verb (used with object)
1.
to hold up; support: to bear the weight of the roof.
2.
to hold or remain firm under (a load): The roof will not bear the strain of his weight.
3.
to bring forth (young); give birth to: to bear a child.
4.
to produce by natural growth: a tree that bears fruit.
5.
to hold up under; be capable of: His claim doesn't bear close examination.

This is clearly unconstitutional, and I would love to sue the crap out of California for infringing on my second amendment rights. I have never seen this argument used, but it sure makes sense to me.

Something I have been looking for was any law pertaining to the open carry of LONG GUNS or SHOTGUNS, or the concealed carry of such. I have not seen such law, and would like to demonstrate and protest peacefully the rights we still have pertaining to such. If we do not exercise our rights, they will be taken!

The Original Godfather
04-29-2012, 11:35 AM
Your sentiment is one that is shared among many, if not most or all, on these forums for a long, long time.

Lives_In_Fresno
04-29-2012, 11:38 AM
So, what are you going to do about it?

AragornElessar86
04-29-2012, 11:39 AM
Spend a few weeks reading through the 2A forum here. There is a treasure trove of information about the current work being done by CGF, CRPA, NRA and others to bring California's firearms policies in line with Constitutional protections.

Heretodaygonetomorrow
04-29-2012, 11:59 AM
The problem is that politicians don't care about what the Constitution says and means, because they have their own interpretation. Just like the religious fanatics who twist the meaning of the texts of many religions out of shape, to justify acts of terror.

boglbus
04-29-2012, 12:01 PM
I'm not sure what I can do about it. I've been all bark and no bite, just trying to wake people up about the different challenges and infringements of liberty that surround us on a daily basis. Not just the 2nd amendment, but the 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th etc. We need to stand up and do something now, but we need more to be educated. I have seen an awakening in this country like nothing before. The generations who came before grew complacent with prosperity.
I don't know what I need to do besides spread the word, and that is part of the reason I have decided to post here, on a forum I am relatively quiet on.

Don'tBlink
04-29-2012, 12:22 PM
The problem is that politicians don't care about what the Constitution says and means, because they have their own interpretation.

This applies to California "in spades". Our day WILL come though :D .

CBruce
04-29-2012, 12:24 PM
Just like the religious fanatics who twist the meaning of the texts of many religions out of shape, to justify acts of terror.

Or deny women coverage for birth control. Not all religious zealotry has to result in blowing something up.

To the OP, I don't understand it either. I'm a liberal-leaning indy, but even I can't think of any other way to interpret "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed".

littlejake
04-29-2012, 12:42 PM
The problem is that politicians don't care about what the Constitution says and means, because they have their own interpretation. Just like the religious fanatics who twist the meaning of the texts of many religions out of shape, to justify acts of terror.

^^ BINGO. Not only do they not care, they are immune from the harm done by their actions. We can tear down bad laws and they will just write more --- because there are no consequences. we cannot hold their feet to fire (so to speak.) Even if we sue the State; we are suing, We the people. Any monetary recovery for a denied right comes out of the treasury -- from money put there with our taxes. They use our tax dollars to beat us over the head; and we must use private funds to fight them in the courts.

No one with half a brain feels that's fair -- but that's what we have.

Smokeybehr
04-29-2012, 12:44 PM
Or deny women coverage for birth control. Not all religious zealotry has to result in blowing something up.

To the OP, I don't understand it either. I'm a liberal-leaning indy, but even I can't think of any other way to interpret "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed".

Let's leave the birth control comments out of this forum. I could give you SO many reasons why you're wrong on the issue, but I don't want to get off topic.

NoJoke
04-29-2012, 12:50 PM
What about a class action suit?

Something along the lines of "the undersigned vs CA"

Sunday
04-29-2012, 12:58 PM
I know what it would take to fix the problem and it wouldn't cost much but the cost would be great .

monk
04-29-2012, 1:08 PM
I'm sure the open carry ban will eventually be fought. In the mean time people are trying to get concealed carry opened up to the point that it becomes shall issue. The basis for this argument is that, I believe, either SCOTUS or the 9th have said that because open carry is an available option, a state is not required to issue LTCs.

jdberger
04-29-2012, 1:37 PM
The problem is that politicians don't care about what the Constitution says and means, because they have their own interpretation. ....

]^^ BINGO. Not only do they not care, they are immune from the harm done by their actions.[/B] We can tear down bad laws and they will just write more --- because there are no consequences. we cannot hold their feet to fire (so to speak.) Even if we sue the State; we are suing, We the people. Any monetary recovery for a denied right comes out of the treasury -- from money put there with our taxes. They use our tax dollars to beat us over the head; and we must use private funds to fight them in the courts.

No one with half a brain feels that's fair -- but that's what we have.

I'm not sure what I can do about it. I've been all bark and no bite, just trying to wake people up about the different challenges and infringements of liberty that surround us on a daily basis. Not just the 2nd amendment, but the 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th etc. We need to stand up and do something now, but we need more to be educated. I have seen an awakening in this country like nothing before. The generations who came before grew complacent with prosperity.
I don't know what I need to do besides spread the word, and that is part of the reason I have decided to post here, on a forum I am relatively quiet on.

Why not get involved in the political process?
Volunteer for a candidate.
Walk a precinct.
Man a phone booth.
Send a monetary donation with a note.
Call a candidate and express your views.

I realize that all the suggestions above are a bit more involved than simply sitting at the computer, and might even require a modicum of effort - but continually rehashing the "true meaning of the Second Amendment" without actually getting off one's @$$ and doing something isn't going to get you anywhere.

Do y'all understand that this forum has 100,000 members - yet it's a flippin' miracle if more than 50 show up to a City Council meeting to oppose an anti-gun law?

Do y'all understand that in District 52, we have an opportunity to forclose the political aspirations of a GENUINE BRADY CAMPAIGN ENDORSED CANDIDATE (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=565790)and not a single member of CGN has bothered to step up and volunteer for any of her opponents?

Don't like the laws? Elect new lawmakers.
Don't like the politicians? Work for their opponents.
Don't like the stances on issues? Call and tell them.

alfred1222
04-29-2012, 1:46 PM
I think people are forgetting that the open carry ban, while it sucks, is also a blessing of sorts for us. For a LONG time, the anti's used the ability for regular people to UOC as a means to deny us the right to CCW. In the long run, this could help us.

Left Coast Conservative
04-29-2012, 2:39 PM
The problem is that politicians don't care about what the Constitution says and means, because they have their own interpretation. Just like the religious fanatics who twist the meaning of the texts of many religions out of shape, to justify acts of terror.

Then they need to be compelled to follow the accepted interpretation as determined by the Supreme Court. Progress on that is being made by the efforts of the CGF, SAF, the NRA, and others.

OleCuss
04-29-2012, 2:46 PM
To the OP. In the case of the 2A, bearing arms means having a weapon immediately available in case of confrontation.

The legal and political systems have spent many years bending the meaning of the Constitution to their will - or just ignoring it entirely. It's been the route to election and re-election.

At this time it is clear that the route to restoring our rights is primarily through litigation although the politics should not be ignored.

Here in California this means first establishing a clear right to concealed carry. It is my contention (never confirmed by the "right people") that after concealed carry is established in this state it will be a matter of years before that will be leveraged into loaded open carry - we'll just need the right plaintiff.

littlejake
04-29-2012, 2:52 PM
Why not get involved in the political process?
Volunteer for a candidate.
Walk a precinct.
Man a phone booth.
Send a monetary donation with a note.
Call a candidate and express your views.

I realize that all the suggestions above are a bit more involved than simply sitting at the computer, and might even require a modicum of effort - but continually rehashing the "true meaning of the Second Amendment" without actually getting off one's @$$ and doing something isn't going to get you anywhere.

Do y'all understand that this forum has 100,000 members - yet it's a flippin' miracle if more than 50 show up to a City Council meeting to oppose an anti-gun law?

Do y'all understand that in District 52, we have an opportunity to forclose the political aspirations of a GENUINE BRADY CAMPAIGN ENDORSED CANDIDATE (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=565790)and not a single member of CGN has bothered to step up and volunteer for any of her opponents?

Don't like the laws? Elect new lawmakers.
Don't like the politicians? Work for their opponents.
Don't like the stances on issues? Call and tell them.

Agreed -- my post from 2/25/2012 -- "It isn't enough"
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=540237

scarville
04-29-2012, 4:03 PM
Spend a few weeks reading through the 2A forum here. There is a treasure trove of information about the current work being done by CGF, CRPA, NRA and others to bring California's firearms policies in line with Constitutional protections.

The work of the CGF, etal is to be applauded and supported (hint: click on the donation button) but it will still be a long time before carrying in California is a matter of right instead of permission.

From the Atlanta Declaration (http://www.lneilsmith.org/atlanta.html) by L Neil Smith:

Every man, woman, and responsible child has an unalienable individual, civil, Constitutional, and human right to obtain, own, and carry, openly or concealed, any weapon -- rifle, shotgun, handgun, machinegun, anything -- any time, any place, without asking anyone's permission.

Someday to demonstrate that principle -- before I'm lying on my deathbed in a hospital with green plastic tubes up my nose, before arthritis sets in and I have to do it on crutches -- I intend to walk the length of Manhattan Island with a handgun openly on my hip, unmolested by any freelance or official parasite.


I hope to someday to do the same in Los Angeles but in the interim I will settle for a goddamn hall pass.

DVSmith
04-29-2012, 4:16 PM
preachin to the choir...

HogKiller
04-29-2012, 4:29 PM
This applies to California "in spades". Our day WILL come though :D .
NOT UNTIL we get rid of the Loons, starting with that moron, yes I SAID MORON Jerry MOONBEAM Brown. So many here voted for him because he owned a gun, BFD, how's that working out for you? He's bought and paid for by the left and just in case you haven't noticed, THEY DON'T LIKE GUNS or the Constitution for that matter.

SilverTauron
04-29-2012, 4:35 PM
Unfortunately, we as a nation are not united on this perspective on Civil Rights.

Some people feel any form of government regulation is in violation of the 2nd Amendment. I must confess that this is the camp I reside in.

Others believe that the 2nd Amendment does guarantee the right to keep and bear arms, but that some level of limited regulation is needed in the same philosophical vein as regulation on commerce and free speech.


Certain voters believe that because firearms can be used to commit grievous evil they need to be regulated as a matter of civil public security , in the same fashion nuclear weapons are controlled by treaty on the international stage for global security. For this set of the population, the 2nd Amendment does not even come into the discussion:protection of the public takes precedence over civil rights to bear arms on utilitarian principle.

For the more radical sort, these people believe firearms represent a social problem worse than drug use or teenage pregnancy. These are the most rabid and committed of the disarmament lobby, these people who believe any and all means should be undertaken to rid America of firearms in every way possible.


Much as I would love to see the day where I can drive from Jersey to San Fransisco armed and unmolested ,the reality of things is that our nation is much too divided on the subject currently for that to happen. So long as the voters in Camden, San Fransisco, Chicago, and New York live under the myth that gun ownership is a social ill equitable to heroin use, law abiding gun owners will be hassled and jailed for no reason for many decades to come. Like turning around an aircraft carrier, some people on board will be closer to the true line of bearing than others until the ship rights course.

kcstott
04-29-2012, 5:21 PM
The problem is that politicians don't care about what the Constitution says and means, because they have their own interpretation. Just like the religious fanatics who twist the meaning of the texts of many religions out of shape, to justify acts of terror.
Yeah like the Catholics, and Christens.

fighterpilot562
04-29-2012, 5:50 PM
Most people if not ALL people on here will agree with you, most view all gun laws as Unconstitutional, but our leaders don't care.

Kid Stanislaus
04-29-2012, 6:22 PM
NOT UNTIL we get rid of the Loons, starting with that moron, yes I SAID MORON Jerry MOONBEAM Brown. So many here voted for him because he owned a gun, BFD, how's that working out for you? He's bought and paid for by the left and just in case you haven't noticed, THEY DON'T LIKE GUNS or the Constitution for that matter.


Its a wash. The person he was running against was just as anti-gun if not more so.;)

Kid Stanislaus
04-29-2012, 6:24 PM
Yeah like the Catholics, and Christens.

Last time I checked Catholics were, in fact, Christians. Maybe you meant Christians and Muslims?;)

HogKiller
04-29-2012, 6:50 PM
Its a wash. The person he was running against was just as anti-gun if not more so.;)

THAT was NEVER proven, just the typical assumptions. She never did say one way or the other. Still voting for a lefty because he owns a weapon and filed one brief when the rest of his policies and thoughts were well know was not the brightest of moves. Oh I'm sorry, he did say he was older and wiser now....uh huh right.

HogKiller
04-29-2012, 6:59 PM
Yeah like the Catholics, and Christens.

You do realize that on so many levels that comment is wrong, besides the misspellings and the apparently total lack of knowledge of Christianity. Two thing that never mix, religion and politics, which I'm pretty sure is covered in the 1a and our founding fathers were well aware of the dangers of mixing the two. Not to say that a Politician cannot have religious views and well they should as they do provide, in most cases, a good moral grounding. (which btw seems to be obviously lacking in most cases (Kennedy, Obama, Clinton and others). But back to the Lefties and their desire to control the masses.

bobomb
04-29-2012, 7:03 PM
well with all the other gun laws on the books how is this one any more infringing?

Demonicspire
04-29-2012, 7:21 PM
The rights of the homeless are a pretty strange thing. I think I remember some law about how their little bum hidey hole in an alley can theoretically be considered a home insofar as the fourth amendment goes ( I forget exactly how that case went). Still I'm not sure the homeless argument would be a basis for some kind of case.

Meplat
04-29-2012, 9:10 PM
Why not get involved in the political process?
Volunteer for a candidate.
Walk a precinct.
Man a phone booth.
Send a monetary donation with a note.
Call a candidate and express your views.

I realize that all the suggestions above are a bit more involved than simply sitting at the computer, and might even require a modicum of effort - but continually rehashing the "true meaning of the Second Amendment" without actually getting off one's @$$ and doing something isn't going to get you anywhere.

Do y'all understand that this forum has 100,000 members - yet it's a flippin' miracle if more than 50 show up to a City Council meeting to oppose an anti-gun law?

Do y'all understand that in District 52, we have an opportunity to forclose the political aspirations of a GENUINE BRADY CAMPAIGN ENDORSED CANDIDATE (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=565790)and not a single member of CGN has bothered to step up and volunteer for any of her opponents?

Don't like the laws? Elect new lawmakers.
Don't like the politicians? Work for their opponents.
Don't like the stances on issues? Call and tell them.

The problem is that after 50 years of all of the above you have days when you just feel like Indiana Jones in the sward juggler seen. :43:

arsilva32
04-30-2012, 12:33 AM
the problem is that allot of politicians feel the constitution is antiquated and not relevant in todays society , therefore should not be followed anymore. this after they swear an oath to defend it when they take office. they make no bones about it and have voiced there opinions publicly.

Quiet
04-30-2012, 4:17 AM
CA state constitution does not have a "right to bear arms" provision and the Second Amendment did not apply to CA until the year 2010, when SCOTUS ruled it was incorporated and applied to local governments, not just the Feds.

Each CA gun law needs to be challenged in the Court system for it to be determined to be unconstitutional.
But, the Court system is slow and will take 2-6 years for a single case to work it's way through the system and be decided upon.

cycle61
04-30-2012, 5:30 AM
From the Atlanta Declaration (http://www.lneilsmith.org/atlanta.html) by L Neil Smith:


Thanks for that link. Excellent read.

kcstott
04-30-2012, 12:37 PM
Last time I checked Catholics were, in fact, Christians. Maybe you meant Christians and Muslims?;)

Catholics are not Christians (there I fixed my mis spell)
Based on the same stuff but to many differences to say they are the same.

And no I didn't mean muslim at all. I'll leave it at this. It not god that I have a problem with.. It's his fan club.

kcstott
04-30-2012, 12:43 PM
You do realize that on so many levels that comment is wrong, besides the misspellings and the apparently total lack of knowledge of Christianity. Two thing that never mix, religion and politics, which I'm pretty sure is covered in the 1a and our founding fathers were well aware of the dangers of mixing the two. Not to say that a Politician cannot have religious views and well they should as they do provide, in most cases, a good moral grounding. (which btw seems to be obviously lacking in most cases (Kennedy, Obama, Clinton and others). But back to the Lefties and their desire to control the masses.

How is that wrong. Have you read through history and seen how the Roman Catholic church spreads lies and deceit just like any other religious group.

As far as I'm concerned they can all fall off the earth (the Churches not the people) it would do everyone a bit of good.

Flintlock Tom
04-30-2012, 3:11 PM
CA state constitution does not have a "right to bear arms" provision and the Second Amendment did not apply to CA until the year 2010, when SCOTUS ruled it was incorporated and applied to local governments, not just the Feds.
...

I suspect you have never read the CA State Constitution, or perhaps, you just skipped over Article 3?

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/.const/.article_3

Flintlock Tom
04-30-2012, 3:20 PM
...

As far as I'm concerned they can all fall off the earth (the Churches not the people) it would do everyone a bit of good.

The people are The Church, and "all [of us] 'falling' off the earth" is actually part of the plan.
When we're gone the Spirit of God will be gone, too, and I suspect you're not going to enjoy what's left behind.

Oh, and I also agree with the OP: "Shall not be infringed."

Librarian
04-30-2012, 3:39 PM
Since the thread has now drifted into a discussion about religion, and those never go well at Calguns, closed.