The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit may have gotten something right yesterday, affirming a District Court decision that California residents do not have the right to carry concealed weapons in public without compelling reason. Lest you think I’ve lost the plot, let me explain: The majority opinion held that California state law does not provide for concealment for all citizens without positively demonstrating “good cause” to carry. Sure enough–considering that the bulk of the California penal code is in Part 6, “Control of Deadly Weapons”–California Penal Code Part 6, Title 4, Division 5, Chapter 4, §26150 (a) (2) does stipulate that the sheriff of a county may issue a license to carry a concealed weapon if “[g]ood cause exists for issuance of the license.”
Of course, to any responsible, thinking firearm owner, living in California is in and of itself good cause.
The Ninth Circuit is an incredible behemoth of a court, set up to hear appeals from District Courts of the western parts of the country before the explosive growth of the west. Today, the Court comprises four courthouses, 29 judges, fifteen District Courts, and the worst record of the Circuit Courts for being overturned at the Supreme Court. Rather than convening all 29 judges for a given case, the Ninth Circuit “randomly” assigns eleven judges to a given matter and entrusts them with handing up a decision on behalf of the entire court. Which means that a slightly different cadre of judges on this panel might–might–have changed this 7-4 verdict against into a 6-5 verdict in favor of preservation of citizens’ rights to self defense.
Again, before you think I’m crazy–and I readily admit that it is a stretch to believe any court based in law-crazed California would defend the rights of the individual–listen to the opinion of one of the dissenting judges, Judge Consuelo Maria Callahan (a moderate appointment of George W. Bush). Judge Callahan made clear that “in the context of present-day California law, the defendant counties’ limited licensing of the right to carry concealed firearms is tantamount to a total ban on the right of an ordinary citizen to carry a firearm in public for self-defense. Thus, plaintiffs’ Second Amendment rights have been violated.”
Judge Callahan, as well as Judges Barry Silverman (a Bill Clinton nominee), Carlos Bea (George W. Bush), and Randy Smith (George W. Bush) all affirmed the landmark Heller ruling of 2008, in which the Supreme Court clarified that the Second Amendment does extend beyond the home. Judges Silverman and Bea went further in their dissents, criticizing the relevant California laws as unconstitutional under the Second Amendment.
All of this means that the Second Amendment may soon come before the Supreme Court once again, and, in a Presidential election year, every responsible firearm owner should find good reason to get deeply concerned about the outcome of this election.
Foolish politicians and cranky activists who fight against personal freedom and self-protection need to remember a few things:
Carry permit holders do not commit gun violence.
Felons commit gun violence.
Felons do not submit for nor are eligible to receive carry permits
Most attacks against multiple people occur in gun-ban zones.
This ruling converts California into a near-plenary gun-ban zone.
The next President will have an opportunity to bias the Supreme Court.
Anyone with a vested interest in protecting herself, himself, one’s family, one’s friends, one’s coworkers, one’s employees, one’s fellow moviegoers, one’s fellow students, one’s fellow worshipers, one’s fellow shoppers, or anyone else in whose presence one finds oneself must carefully consider this upcoming election and the candidates from all parties (not just the main two).
If you wish to protect your rights, you must take every opportunity to help others understand the gravity of the situation: the effect on the Supreme Court, the effect on individual rights, and the effect on personal defense.
Be afraid, and then be (thoughtfully, intelligently, and carefully) vocal. The risk here is immense. Assert yourself.
What difference, at this point, [will] it make? All the difference in the country.