-
Tips for becoming a good boxer - November 6, 2020
-
7 expert tips for making your hens night a memorable one - November 6, 2020
-
5 reasons to host your Christmas party on a cruise boat - November 6, 2020
-
What to do when you’re charged with a crime - November 6, 2020
-
Should you get one or multiple dogs? Here’s all you need to know - November 3, 2020
-
A Guide: How to Build Your Very Own Magic Mirror - February 14, 2019
-
Our Top Inspirational Baseball Stars - November 24, 2018
-
Five Tech Tools That Will Help You Turn Your Blog into a Business - November 24, 2018
-
How to Indulge on Vacation without Expanding Your Waist - November 9, 2018
-
5 Strategies for Businesses to Appeal to Today’s Increasingly Mobile-Crazed Customers - November 9, 2018
Appeals courts agree on concealed weapons ban restrictions
The case involved challenges to such “good cause” policies in Yolo and San Diego counties, and Yolo County Sheriff Ed Prieto said Thursday that he has required such a policy since he became sheriff 18 years ago.
Advertisement
The Washington Post reports (http://wapo.st/1ZBK58m ) that a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit said this week that they would move quickly to review the law that requires residents to show “good reason” to obtain a license to carry a firearm in public.
He said Hawaii makes it most hard to obtain a permit to carry a concealed weapon while New Jersey, Maryland and Washington D.C., are close behind with strict laws.
Gun permit applicants in California must submit a specific reason to be granted authorization to carry a concealed weapon.
The 7-4 ruling from a federal appeals court in San Francisco overturned a prior decision, much to the dismay of gun advocates. “We hold that the Second Amendment does not preserve or protect a right of a member of the general public to carry concealed firearms in public”.
That ruling undid a previous 2014 ruling of the same court that tossed out the restrictions and prompted thousands of Californians to flood sheriff’s departments with concealed weapons applications seeking the permits for personal safety. No judge on the full 9th Circuit wanted to grant a rehearing. “Chuck” Michel said in a statement.
“This flawed ruling underscores the importance of the 2016 election”.
The Supreme Court has never addressed directly whether an individual has the right to bear arms outside the home for the objective of self-defense.
California Attorney General Kamala Harris, a Democratic candidate for the U.S. Senate, had a different reaction, praising the decision as one that will enhance public safety.
“This is a significant victory for public safety and for local jurisdictions that apply sensible policies to protect the public”, said California Sen.
Advertisement
Eidsmoe added, “The decision runs contrary to the plain wording of the Second Amendment, which guarantees the right, not just to “keep” arms, but also to “bear” arms”. Typically, people who are being stalked or threatened, celebrities who fear for their safety, and those who routinely carry large amounts of cash or other valuables are granted permits.