Skip to comments.Concealed-weapons ruling challenged (CA)
Posted on 02/27/2014 9:11:10 PM PST by South40
SAN DIEGO Attorney General Kamala Harris announced Thursday she has challenged a federal court ruling in a San Diego County case that made it easier for Californians to carry concealed weapons.
A divided panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 2-1 this month that a law-abiding citizens right to bear arms for self-defense should be enough good cause to grant a concealed-carry weapon permit.
The Feb. 13 ruling overturned San Diego Countys policy of requiring a gun owner to show a specific reason for carrying a firearm, such as working in a dangerous occupation. The decision, which affected the issuing of concealed-weapon permits throughout the state, said the countys policy violated the Second Amendment.
State law requires citizens to show good cause to carry a concealed weapon but gives local law enforcement control over the permit process.
Sheriff Bill Gore, who issues the permits in the county, said last week he would not fight the ruling.
(Excerpt) Read more at utsandiego.com ...
What court is he going to challenge it in?
She’s effectively supporting the death penalty for innocent citizens and their rights to protect themselves when confronting dangerous situations.. and she wants to be Gubinor.. and then who knows.
Her record not prosecuting gangbangers for the death penalty after killing police is 100%.
It goes before the entire 9th Circuit. That was just the panel.
As I said in another post THAT is what worries me.
Kamala Harris is a douchy she-bitch.
not surprised. Kamala the Kommie would of course appeal this decision
I am certain she cannot appeal the ruling as the state was not part of the lawsuit, only the SD Sheriff department and declined to do so.
No. She can. She has standing.
At that point, it's decided. Our side says "we can't take that up again, it's been decided."
She does not have standing since she was not part of the original suit and the ruling does not alter existing law, only how the SDSO was applying the law.
No. It invalidated it statewide. AG has standing.
“Attorney General Kamala Harris announced Thursday she...”
She. There you go.
Who is “he” you are referring to?
No. It did not alter the PC. It merely requires that lawful self defense be accepted as good cause statewide.
If it altered the PC she would automatically have standing.
I’ve litigated a good number of these standing issues. Here is the decision.
The Sheriff is only granted power through the State. It invalidated the State law. She has standing.
Now I hate her decision to appeal. I agree with the panel. But she has standing without question. This was NOT a decision isolated to SD. It applies state-wide and invalidate State law.
Harris really didn’t have a choice, she has to appeal this to keep the rest of the scheme going over there. Her follow traveler’s are going to hate it because Kennedy at SCOTUS may agree with the ruling and use it as the new template for 2nd amendment cases.
Yep and I believe she has a brother who is working for JUST US Holder Department.
Harris finally came out of her red closet. People always said she was a smart one and won’t tip her hand immediately.
Now we know that she can’t be trusted to protect the good people of California from her criminal supporters.
Its ironic that the attorney general is trying to get involved at this late date, Michel said. Its ideologically driven. She just didnt like the outcome.
Michel said he will oppose the move because Harris had not originally asked to be involved in the litigation.
The attorney general is trying to bigfoot her way into the case at the last minute, he said.
It’s a “she”...
Thanks for the correction.
In CA it could be hard to tell
They wait until the second to last paragraph to tell us the “what” of the news story:
“Reached late Thursday, a spokesman in Harris office said the motion to reverse the three-judge panels initial ruling includes a petition to intervene on behalf of the state.”
This might be good news for us who live in “May Issue” states outside of California. By appealing the decision, it could push this issue up to the Supreme Court, where a decision on what bear means in keep and bear. Heller and McDonald set the definition for keep, we just need one for bear. Just hope it gets there before one of our five keels over. If one of our five ends up under the sod, and we get creamed on this, we can all thank the “All or Nothing” crowd.
The way I understand this, the only people left that can bring this case up is the judges of the 9th. She is merely trying to persuade the judges to bring the case back up.
It is also of note that the Brady people and a sherriffs group are also trying to do the same thing.
March 7th cannot get here quick enough!
I didn’t realize what you were talking about.
Yeah, Kamilla is a she and hot too.
Unfortunately, she’s also a very scary woman.
She never once prosecuted a death penalty case against anyone who killed a cop and specifically went out of her way contriving all kinds of reasons as to why she wasn’t pursuing the death penalty.
She is morbidly obsessed with the suppression of gun right and absolutely committed to undermining the 2A.
Shes effectively supporting the death penalty for innocent citizens and their rights to protect themselves when confronting dangerous situations.. [snip]
It is an interesting exercise to read your comment in light of the recent release of convicts from California prisons and the resulting spike in crime.
Seems leftists WANT the populace defenseless & preyed upon...
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.