Posted on 03/13/2011 8:50:28 PM PDT by Nachum
The right to carry a concealed weapon in California is mostly reserved for those at risk of violence — jewelers, bail bondsmen and criminal prosecutors among them. But some legislators say their job has become dangerous too. Despite objections from some law enforcement officials and even gun rights advocates, they want a law that would make it easier for them to tote firearms for protection. The lawmakers cite the shooting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.) in Tucson and threats from constituents in California as cause for permits to carry weapons. "I've had guys physically come up to me
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
"We do look at that as inconsistent," said Sam Paredes, executive director of the nonprofit Gun Owners of California. He questioned whether lawmakers are in any more danger than anyone else."All law-abiding citizens have the same good cause," he said. "They are law-abiding citizens in troubled times."
That.
After what happened in Tucson, EVERYONE should be allowed to carry a concealed weapon. Hell, you never know when you’re going to cross paths with a lunatic in this country. They’re everywhere. Everyone should be armed.
Second Amendment only for Second-a-Motioners
Liberals want concealed carry for them in Californistan but not for the Little People!
They can do without it.
They are sick and tired of the GOP (such as it is in California) and want to make an end of things very quickly. Lure the GOP lawmakers into a large room and do them in. Then the budget can finally pass with the needed tax increases and no benefits cuts.
That’s right! The lunatics crying for CCW are D’s, as in demented.
If any ever supported and voted for any anti-gun legislation, including registering ammo, unique firing pins and all that stuff, too bad. They now must live with the outcome of their decision.
If they supported the 2nd amendment of citizens, no problem. Give them a permit or encourage open carry.
So, what about non-lawmakers at the same risk?
This is all about furthering the advance of an elite ruling class. This already exists with aldermen in the City of Chicago. It certainly has not translated to Second Amendment Rights for Citizens.
“members of the public who come into the office and scream at them because they don’t like the way the state is run.”
So, if I’m reading this correctly, they would like to pull a gun and shoot someone who screams at them?
I sure hope they take the legal part of the carry permit training seriously. I’m pretty sure that being spat upon, or screamed at may not be a good defense for murder.
you are correct. In my cynical way, I’d let them have it. then sue the living [expletive] out of them to get the same treatment. same thing happened when they passed an excemption to the AWB in CA for former LEOs. screwed the LEOs. screw the pols. (figuratively speaking that is)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.