The Second Amendment Foundation: SAF FILES AMICUS BRIEF IN SAN DIEGO COUNTY GUN PERMIT CASE
From the Second Amendment Foundation:
The brief, submitted by attorney Alan Gura, is also on behalf of the Calguns Foundation and two Yolo County residents, Adam Richards and Brett Stewart, who are parties to a separate, but fundamentally related lawsuit. The case at hand, Peruta v. San Diego County, is now on appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco.
At issue in both cases is the broad discretionary authority exercised by California authorities under existing statute in the issuance of carry permits. Edward Peruta’s lawsuit against San Diego County challenges the constitutionality of “good cause” criteria used as a basis for issuing or, more typically, denying a permit to carry. SAF has filed an appeal in its own case, Richards v. Prieto, in the Ninth Circuit. Read more
CalGunLaws.com: Opening Brief Filed in NRA / CRPA Foundation Supported Lawsuit Challenging San Diego County’s CCW Policies
CalGunLaws.com:
On May 23, 2011, the CRPA Foundation and a number of San Diego residents filed their opening brief in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in their appeal seeking to overturn a Southern District Court ruling from December 10, 2010 that upheld San Diego Sheriff William Gore’s restrictive and unfair policies in issuing permits to carry concealed firearms.
California law allows a permit to carry a concealed firearm (CCW) to be issued if an applicant has “good cause.” The lawsuit asserts that under the Second Amendment, a desire for self-defense must constitute “good cause” for the issuance of a CCW, and that Gore’s requirement that an applicant demonstrate some special need or a specific threat in order to get a CCW is an unconstitutional restriction on the right to keep and bear arms; specifically, the right to carry a loaded firearm in public for self-defense.
In a nutshell, the District Court held that rather than needing a CCW to defend oneself, since California law allows unloaded open carry of handguns one can carry unloaded and openly, and then act pursuant to a California law that requires you to wait until you are about to be attacked, then load your firearm (see Cal. Pen. Code section 12031(j)). Obviously, that is not an effective way to exercise your fundamental, individual constitutional right to defend yourself, nor to bear a firearm under the Second Amendment.
The brief points out that under any potentially applicable constitutional standard, banning people from carrying a loaded firearm in public unless they can show a special need does not pass Second Amendment muster. Accordingly, Plaintiffs are asking the Ninth Circuit to overrule the district court’s decision. (See opening appellate brief here).
The plaintiffs include several individuals who were either denied CCWs or do not qualify under the Sheriff’s strict issuance standards, as well as the CRPA Foundation. Copies of the court filings in the lawsuit can be viewed at http://michellawyers.com/perutavsandiego.
The lawsuit and appeal are being funded by the NRA-CRPA Foundation Legal Action Project (LAP). To fight for the self-defense civil rights of all Californians, the NRA and CRPA Foundation have joined forces. Through LAP, NRA/CRPAF attorneys fight against ill-conceived gun control laws and ordinances, educate state and local officials about available programs that are effective in reducing accidents and violence without infringing on the rights of law-abiding gun owners, and produce valid science about game and wildlife resource management. To contribute to the NRA/CRPAF Legal Action Project (LAP) and support this and similar efforts and Second Amendment litigation in California, visit www.crpafoundation.org or www.nraila.org
About:
CalGunLaws.com is an online research resource designed primarily for use by attorneys and interested firearm owners. CalGunLaws.com strives to provide easy access to and facilitate understanding of the multitude of complex federal, state, and local firearm laws and ordinances, administrative and executive regulations, case law, and past and current litigation that defines the California firearms regulatory scheme in theory and practice. CalGunLaws.com is designed and organized to make it easy to research the law and to locate source materials and related information. All of the articles are cross referenced. Note the two sections on the right: Related Items and Related Law. Related Items will take you to any article related to the one you are currently viewing. Related law takes you to the related law and statutes for the item you are looking at.
LA Times: “U.S. effort to slow flow of guns into Mexico failing”
Here we go again. Once again the United States is being blamed for the violence in Mexico. A story this week from The Los Angeles Times noted “an inspector general’s review finds that a once-praised federal program is too narrowly focused, fails to share information with law enforcement agencies and does not adequately trace U.S. guns in Mexico.”
The paper further noted, as has been noted time and time again that there are a lot of gun dealers near the Mexican border. But could it be there are numerous major cities not all that far from the Mexican border, including San Diego and El Paso, which are right on the border? The paper offered this thought:
“About 7,000 licensed U.S. gun dealers operate near the 2,000-mile border, and cartel leaders often hire straw buyers to purchase firearms and pay others to transport the weapons into Mexico. Just as the drugs flow steadily north, the guns reach Mexico secreted under truck beds or stashed in car trunks, sometimes even hidden in clothing.
So what is the solution? Telling the gun shops to close shop? Or how about making gun laws tougher in the United States so that law-abiding citizens can’t own guns. That will show those Mexicans we mean business. Seriously, why doesn’t this story die?
Automatic Weapons Heading to Mexico
Numerous sources are reporting that a 19-year-old U.S. citizen has been arrested at the border to Mexico, and according to 760AM KFMB, the man was caught with a cache of weapons. The news radio reports the items as including:
“…five automatic guns, two pistols, numerous rounds of ammunition, 23 loaded magazines, 10 rifle slings and other gun accessories.” Read more
Guns for Groceries
Things have actually gotten so bad that some residents in the San Diego area would trade guns for groceries. The concern we have in these cases remains that history could be lost. As collectors, we see that these are items that can’t easily be replaced. But in nearly all these cases it is – at least according to the media and the police anyway – about getting “guns off the streets.” So it is nice to see that SignOn San Diego reported this interesting turn of events:
“Not everyone was so enthusiastic. About a half-dozen men who said they are advocates of ‘open carry’, the practice of openly and legally wear an unloaded gun, stood at the corner of Market Street. They held signs and handed out fliers that told participants in the exchange they may be getting a bad deal, but none of the men were armed.”
It would be great if other law abiding citizens also let those handing in guns know that these items are worth more than a few bucks or a bag of groceries!
San Diego Union-Tribune Reports Facts on Straw Purchases
Did you know it was a crime to make a so-called straw purchase for a criminal? Of course anyone who thinks about it would know this is a criminal offense. Knowingly supplying a gun to a criminal is a felony. But the way that the media makes it sound as if this is yet another loophole, as if somehow criminals can get guns “legally.” But kudos to The San Diego Union-Tribune for setting this record straight. The paper is reporting about a new ad campaign that points out that buying a gun for a criminal is crime.
“The message targets “straw buyers” — people who can pass a federal background check and use their good name to buy a gun for someone prohibited by law from possessing one. People not allowed to have guns include convicted felons, illegal immigrants, people dishonorably discharged from the armed forces, minors and those convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence.”
Now if the rest of the mainstream media could report on this as well, maybe it would put to bed this “straw purchase” story already.
