JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
This is great news however the title appears to be misleading. While the Sheriff has decided not to pursue it the county still can.

Also I think by rules of the 9th circuit En Banc hearing can be held at the request of any of the judges. That's how Nordyke v. King went for rehearing - we never even learned which judge requested it.
 
I'm still trying to figure out how shall not be infringed equates "need one for self-defense or personal safety". The Orange County Sheriff is still violating the law and is simply trying to cover his ***.

"Local applicants seeking a permit to carry a concealed weapon now only have to say that they need one for self-defense or personal safety."

What if I choose to carry to defend my family, or my friends, or simply to exercise my right to do so? While this looks like a move in the right direction we must not be misled as this still establishes that they believe they can infringe on our rights.
 
Where is the punishment for all these city, county, state & federal infringements!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I demand that there be retribution!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I believe that is why he did this. Now it's up in the air and if he continues to deny them then he could find himself in hot water under 42 U.S. Code § 1983 if it's upheld. Another words he is trying to cover his behind.
 
Unfortunately Cali remains a "must retreat" state (even in your own home!) and an absurd burden to prove you were about to die before shooting, remains. In urban venues there, expect upside down crucifixion, as matters now stand
 
Unfortunately Cali remains a "must retreat" state (even in your own home!) and an absurd burden to prove you were about to die before shooting, remains. In urban venues there, expect upside down crucifixion, as matters now stand

Not to forget Californian liberals eat babies of the conservatives for lunch. Otherwise this is what the law states in there :

California § Penal Code 198.5 "Any person using force intended or likely to cause death or great bodily injury within his or her residence shall be presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily injury to self, family, or a member of the household when that force is used against another person, not a member of the family or household, who unlawfully and forcibly enters or has unlawfully and forcibly entered the residence and the person using the force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry occurred."
 
So when can I mail in my application for a CA permit? I'll never believe it's real untill I can carry down there too.

You won't be able to until the residency requirements are challenged and struck down. This case actually dealt with residency requirements
early on, since the plaintiff did not reside in San Diego Co full time. But the county later stopped arguing that point, so residency requirements
did not get specifically addressed. Luckily for us, residency requirements can be challenged anywhere in the 9th Circuit now. I can't wait for
somebody from Alaska , Montana or Arizona to file a lawsuit against Oregon :D
 
Not to forget Californian liberals eat babies of the conservatives for lunch. Otherwise this is what the law states in there :

However that is never used in big liberal urban zones as standard court OP procedure.. go ahead and try to use it in a court of law there..
 
However that is never used in big liberal urban zones as standard court OP procedure.. go ahead and try to use it in a court of law there..

I knew that was coming. "Liberals ignore the law".

Stabbing of fan at Dodgers' home opener was self-defense, jury rules - latimes.com



In the People v. Alvarez case, the jury acquitted Mr. Alvarez in a short amount of time of stabbing a man who had punched him and thrown a bottle at his car. In this case, reasonable force, duty to retreat and defense of property were all at play. California allows some force to be used to defend property. Also, one is not required to retreat. Mr. Alvarez got out of the car because a drunken bully he had been at a Dodger game with threw a beer bottle at his beloved pickup truck. When he got out to confront the bully for this act of throwing the bottle (acceptable under a defense of property standard), the bully punched him in the face, knocking him to the ground in one blow. This bully had not only been known to do this to the defendant, he was much larger and prone to fighting when drunk. The jury found that Mr. Alvarez was justified in using his pocket knife to stab the bully five times while the bully continued to try to fight him, likely not feeling the wounds because of his level of intoxication. While many people are shocked to find out that someone could bring a knife to a fist-fight, this was the classic example of more force being acceptable because of the beliefs of Mr. Alvarez coupled with his relative size and having been dropped with one punch and the bully not showing signs he would back down after that. While some might say they would have stayed in the car, and that is fine, the law does not require this when someone is throwing bottles at your car or acting in such a threatening manner.

A man?s home is his castle? and so is his truck: Self-defense in California (Part I: Non-Lethal Force) | Law Offices Of Kate Hardie

I suppose the next one will be "Liberals ignore the law when a good citizen is in question, but acquit gang bangers".

A man who shot and killed an up-and-coming rapper at the Beverly Center last year was acquitted of murder Friday in a case that focused in part on the victim's violence-laced gangsta rap lyrics.
...
Berry testified last week that he opened fire in self-defense in the parking garage of the upscale mall. He said Burton, 21, threatened to kill him near the valet desk and reached toward his back as though he were drawing a gun. Police found no weapon on Burton, who was shot once in the left biceps and three times in the back.
...
Berry had a concealed handgun on his hip, a weapon he said he routinely carried after being the victim of several violent crimes. He had a permit to carry the firearm in Georgia and other states but said he did not realize the permit did not apply to California.

Man acquitted in rapper's shooting death - Los Angeles Times
 

Upcoming Events

Tillamook Gun & Knife Show
Tillamook, OR
"The Original" Kalispell Gun Show
Kalispell, MT
Kids Firearm Safety 2 Class
Springfield, OR
Teen Rifle 1 Class
Springfield, OR

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top