Wow, … amazing!
You do realize how poorly that speaks of the current [police] state of affairs, right?
I am going to have to question your first statement regarding your having "no problem with reading comprehension." I have never said, implied, nor believed that "California is peaches and cream for gunnies." I simply pointed out that NOBODY, to my knowledge, who holds a valid CCWL in California has ever been proned out by California Law Enforcement. If you can post a credible source stating that such has, indeed, happened, I am more than willing to concede the point.No problem with reading comprehension- a poster made a valid observation, albeit with a touch of hyperbole, about the extreme anti-gun attitude that permeates California, then you and some other apologists jumped up with the usual ‘California is peaches and cream for gunnies’ BS.
I disagree. The general population probably tends more toward being pro 2nd amendment. It is the elected leadership that tends to be anti 2nd amendment. But most voters are not activist enough to care as long as their primary issue is supported by their candidate (just like us).The California populace is overwhelmingly anti-gun-owner,
Again, I disagree. Most of the LEOs I know tend toward pro 2nd amendments positions. It is the CLEOs and upper echelon LEOs and DAs who tend to be antis.and the state’s LEOs, prosecutors, and media members are all drawn from that well of gun-haters.
Anyone, anywhere, may run into such a LEO, but that does not support the assertion that it is probable such a thing will happen.Anyone in possession of a firearm in public in California should be very aware of the possibility of running into a LEO who will treat them like a criminal even if they are in compliance with the law.
More hyperbole. Can you post instances where such has happened to a law abiding CCWL holder in California?And should that LEO rob, injure, or kill them, it is quite likely that no action will be taken by the local prosecutor, no interest in the matter will be shown by the local media, and there will be no concern for the matter on the part of the local populace because, after all, in their minds you are a gun-owner and therefore deserve whatever happened to you.
No, California has things arranged improperly. 12031 is, in my opinion, unconstitutional under the 1st, 2nd, and 4th amendments. 12050 is equally, in my opinion, unconstitutional giving too much discretion to local CLEOs inviting favoritism and thus violating the 14th amendment. I won't even address the idiocy of the roster, 10 round limit, etc. However, if you are willing to jump through all the bureaucratic hoops, a CCWL can be had in California, even in the less CCW friendly counties.I’m sure you think that is being unfair though- after all, you got your permit, so California obviously has things arranged correctly.
And should that LEO rob, injure, or kill them, it is quite likely that no action will be taken by the local prosecutor, no interest in the matter will be shown by the local media, and there will be no concern for the matter on the part of the local populace because, after all, in their minds you are a gun-owner and therefore deserve whatever happened to you.
doc: 12031 is, in my opinion, unconstitutional under the 1st, 2nd, and 4th amendments. 12050 is equally, in my opinion, unconstitutional giving too much discretion to local CLEOs inviting favoritism and thus violating the 14th amendment.
The general population probably tends more toward being pro 2nd amendment.
Anyone, anywhere, may run into such a LEO…
However, if you are willing to jump through all the bureaucratic hoops, a CCWL can be had in California, even in the less CCW friendly counties.
Roc: Besides it being one HUGE run-on…
I see cops arrested for bringing their service weapons into court appearances, and others terminated for allegations of minor infraction violations that were unreported...
Yes, that is what I said. Quite clearly. That is not an "admission" as if I were confessing to a crime, that is a fact I stated quite clearly.So you admit California violates its citizens’ 1st, 2nd, 4th, and 14th amendment rights,
Again, I call your reading comprehension abilities into question. I have never defended the violation of any citizen's rights. I called FUD on the assertion that a California CCWL holder could expect to be proned out by Law Enforcement for legally carrying a concealed weapon.yet you eagerly defend it and run down those who disparage it.
What part of "general population" did you confuse with "elected officials?"California’s elected officials have enacted:
Yes, it is, as I clearly stated most voters are single issue voters who vote for the candidate who supports their single issue. The RKBA single issue voters are in the vast minority in California so RKBA is not even on the radar of most California voters in the voting booth. But that is not an indication they are antis, it is only that their single issue is different than ours.That’s quite a disconnect between elected officials and their constituents.
Yes, I know. But again, carefully read the statement concerning the single issue voter.It’s also telling that California has repeatedly elected the only Democratic Senator with the honesty to admit she would like to send government agents to confiscate firearms from citizens.
I am sorry but you seem to be having great difficulty understanding the difference between the State of California (as a Political Bureaucracy) and the people of California (as individuals and collectively). Until you come to grasp that very significant difference any further discussion on the matter will be a waste of time.How desperate do you have to be to deny California is anti-gun?
Again, you seem to have failed to discern between LEOs and CLEOs, DAs, Politicians, etc.Of course, the more anti-gun LEOs you have, the more likely you are to run into one. Duh.
Cute map, but remember, "the map is not the territory" (the map is merely an abstraction) (Alfred Korzybski). If you count the number of CCWLs issued in the counties that are posted as antis you will find that, even in the worst counties, some few CCWLs are still issued. It is NOT impossible, as you assert, merely difficult, but it can be done as has been proven over and over again by the fact that some number, albeit low, have been issued.This is entirely inaccurate (although entirely in keeping with the rest of your posts). Anyone who actually follows RKBA in California knows how absurd your assertion is, but for those who don’t, I submit the following link:
http://www.calccw.com/Forums/county-...-issuance.html
Once again you have failed to grasp what I thought was fairly simple grammar and syntax. I have not "blithely dismiss(ed)" anyone. Shame on you for such a dishonest distortion of my statement. What I said was that if you are willing to jump through all the hoops you can get a CCW in most, if not all, California counties. I stand by that statement on the basis of the fact that every California county lists some CCWLs issued. Difficult, yes. Impossible, no.As the map shows, in the most populous areas of California authorities do not issue permits to people who are not politically connected, thus denying tens or even hundreds of thousands of citizens their natural right to self-defense. These wronged citizens you blithely dismiss as ‘ not willing to jump through hoops’…color me unsurprised.
But even those counties have a few CCWLs issued. Not nearly enough, in my opinion, but they still issue.There are 26 counties in CA that are, for all practical purposes, shall issue. But don't even THINK of trying to get one in San Francisco or Los Angeles counties.
No. My CCW is issued due to my "connection" to another Federal department/agency. My DOJ "connection" is Cal DOJ, and that is tenuous, at best, and would not qualify as "good cause" in any county in California, even the "shall issue" counties.I see by reading over some of the earlier posts that you have SOME kind of connection to the DOJ? If that's the case I'm guess'n that's your ticket to a CCW. Yes? No?
Been there several times. Have had many LEO contacts. Never had a problem. Mostly they just shrug their shoulders and say "no problem." Once I was told "keep it holstered." That was the the most negative thing that ever happened to me in Sodom By The Bay.Let us know how it works out when you go to San Franciso and let an LEO know you're pack'n with a CCW.
doc: …any further discussion on the matter will be a waste of time.
I am still waiting for the name of one person who has been proned out by California Law Enforcement for legally carrying a concealed weapon.Agreed. I’ve made my case against your defense of California, I’ll let it stand as is.
And should that LEO rob, injure, or kill them, it is quite likely that no action will be taken by the local prosecutor, no interest in the matter will be shown by the local media, and there will be no concern for the matter on the part of the local populace because, after all, in their minds you are a gun-owner and therefore deserve whatever happened to you.
Who cares? I was talking about anti-gun LEOs, prosecutors, and local media looking the other way when gun-owners’ rights are violated…which has nothing to do with what you mentioned.
roc: I'm still … person.
roc: No offense
doccas: NONE OF THE ABOVE! BOTH ARE UNTRUE!
The general population [of California] probably tends more toward being pro 2nd amendment.
What I said was that if you are willing to jump through all the hoops you can get a CCW in most, if not all, California counties.
Had that been California, permit holder or not, you would have been proned out on the ground and most likely cuffed until they could verify what you said.