Little-Acorn
02-13-2014, 05:37 PM
Even a blind squirrel finds an occasional acorn.
The 9th Circuit Court (the most overturned court in the country) actually got one right. They ruled that California can't require people demonstrate a "good cause" for carrying a handgun, but must be allowed to carry as long as they are law-abiding, etc.
Another small step in the right direction.
Link to a PDF of the decision: http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2014/02/12/1056971.pdf
------------------------------------------------
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014/02/13/ninth-circuit-strikes-californias-restrictive-rule-against-licensed-carry-of-handguns/
Ninth Circuit strikes California’s restrictive rule against licensed carry of handguns
By David Kopel
February 13 at 1:17 pm
The Ninth Circuit’s decision in Peruta v. San Diego, released minutes ago, affirms the right of law-abiding citizens to carry handguns for lawful protection in public.
California law has a process for applying for a permit to carry a handgun for protection in public, with requirements for safety training, a background check, and so on. These requirements were not challenged. The statute also requires that the applicant have “good cause,” which was interpreted by San Diego County to mean that the applicant is faced with current specific threats. (Not all California counties have this narrow interpretation.) The Ninth Circuit, in a 2-1 opinion written by Judge O’Scannlain, ruled that Peruta was entitled to Summary Judgement, because the “good cause” provision violates the Second Amendment.
The Court ruled that a government may specify what mode of carrying to allow (open or concealed), but a government may not make it impossible for the vast majority of Californians to exercise their Second Amendment right to bear arms.
(Full text of the article can be read at the above URL)
The 9th Circuit Court (the most overturned court in the country) actually got one right. They ruled that California can't require people demonstrate a "good cause" for carrying a handgun, but must be allowed to carry as long as they are law-abiding, etc.
Another small step in the right direction.
Link to a PDF of the decision: http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2014/02/12/1056971.pdf
------------------------------------------------
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014/02/13/ninth-circuit-strikes-californias-restrictive-rule-against-licensed-carry-of-handguns/
Ninth Circuit strikes California’s restrictive rule against licensed carry of handguns
By David Kopel
February 13 at 1:17 pm
The Ninth Circuit’s decision in Peruta v. San Diego, released minutes ago, affirms the right of law-abiding citizens to carry handguns for lawful protection in public.
California law has a process for applying for a permit to carry a handgun for protection in public, with requirements for safety training, a background check, and so on. These requirements were not challenged. The statute also requires that the applicant have “good cause,” which was interpreted by San Diego County to mean that the applicant is faced with current specific threats. (Not all California counties have this narrow interpretation.) The Ninth Circuit, in a 2-1 opinion written by Judge O’Scannlain, ruled that Peruta was entitled to Summary Judgement, because the “good cause” provision violates the Second Amendment.
The Court ruled that a government may specify what mode of carrying to allow (open or concealed), but a government may not make it impossible for the vast majority of Californians to exercise their Second Amendment right to bear arms.
(Full text of the article can be read at the above URL)