California Banning: Unloaded guns and teenage tanning sessions

posted at 2:05 pm on October 10, 2011 by Ed Morrissey

Two months ago, I wrote about an effort in California to ban the practice of openly carrying unloaded firearms in public.  This practice had been unregulated until state legislator Anthony Portantino discovered this grave threat to public safety that has produced, er, no violence and no issues, except that it makes some people nervous.  Today, Politico reports that Governor Jerry Brown has signed the ban into law:

California Gov. Jerry Brown announced Monday that he signed into law a measure that bans handgun owners from openly carrying their weapons in public.

Previous regulations had allowed the open carrying of unloaded handguns in public, but police chiefs and sheriffs objected to the rule because people felt frightened when they saw handguns in public places.

“They are tied up dealing with calls from the public about gun-toting men and women in the coffee shop,” California Assemblyman Antony Portantino, who introduced the bill, said last month. “As law enforcement officials tell me, it’s not safe and someone is going to get hurt.”

Gun rights activists had exercised their right to open carry their unloaded firearms by showing up to public places in large numbers with firearms in holsters, which alarmed some members of the public.

As I explained at the time, this is not only an affront to 2nd Amendment rights, it’s entirely absurd:

The state of California wants to ban a practice that presents no immediate threat, conducted by law-abiding citizens with no record, that has produced noshooting incidents.  Anti-gun advocates would rather waste time on this than, say, solving the massive budgetary and debt problems the state faces, as well as solving the problem by allowing law-abiding citizens to get concealed-carry permits with a “must-issue” law.

This reaches the point of absurdity near the end of the video, when the author of a bill to ban open carry of unloaded weapons, Assemblyman Anthony Portantino, tells Reason TV that the purpose of the 2nd Amendment is to protect property — which doesn’t include the person himself.  That’s actually backwards, even under existing lethal-force-in-self-defense laws.  People are not permitted to use lethal force to protect property in California, or Minnesota either, with or without carry permits.  (Neither can the police, by the way.)  They can only use lethal force of any kind when faced with an immediate threat in which a reasonable person fears for their own life or of “great bodily harm,” which roughly means losing a limb or an eye, not just getting beaten up.  All the carry permit allows is the ability to have the lethal force at hand if that situation arises; it doesn’t exempt the permit holder from laws defining lethal force in self-defense.  In most cases, and certainly in Minnesota, those laws require a victim to retreat first if possible rather than using the lethal force, sometimes even in their own homes.

Instead of solving the problem by allowing law-abiding citizens to get licenses to carry effectively, the state of California has taken further steps to keep them disarmed.  But at least people won’t have to look at nasty guns, even those that have no ammunition in them.  What a win for public safety!

Speaking of which, that’s not the only ban California has implemented.  Teenagers who get preyed upon for a procedure that its providers claim is entirely harmless but can lead to serious health complications have been barred from such providers — even with parental consent.  Yes, Brown and the legislature have saved California teens from … tanning beds:

Minors in the state of California will no longer be allowed to use tanning beds after Governor Jerry Brown signed a bill on Sunday prohibiting anyone under the age of 18 from using ultraviolet tanning devices. …

Previously, California had banned minors under the age of 14 from using tanning beds, but allowed those between 14 and 18 years of age to use tanning beds with parental consent.

The bill was part of a cluster of legislation signed on Sunday designed to “improve the health and well-being of Calfornians,” according to a statement from the Governor’s office.

So let’s get this straight.  If you’re 17 years old in California, you can’t get a tanning-bed session even with parental consent — but you can get an abortion on demand as well as RU-486 without parental consent.  Senator Ted Lieu called tanning beds “lethally dangerous” and praised Brown’s “courage” in banning their use by minors, but no one has died on a tanning bed.  That’s not true in California about abortions or RU-486:

In August 2003, Holly Patterson, then 17, discovered she had become pregnant with her boyfriend, seven years her senior. On September 10, shortly after her 18th birthday, the couple went to a Planned Parenthood clinic to inquire about an abortion of her seven-week-old unborn child. There, she received the first of two drugs in the mifepristone abortion protocol.

At the Planned Parenthood facility, Holly received an abortion drug regimen not approved by the FDA consisting of 200-mg mifepristone orally — which blocks the hormone progesteromontene that is required to maintain a pregnancy. At home, 24 hours later, on September 11, she followed the clinics instructions to vaginally insert 800-mcg of misoprostol to induce labor contractions and expel the body of the dead baby.

On September 13, Holly repeatedly called the Planned Parenthood clinic hotline to complain of severe cramping. She was told her symptoms were normal and to take the clinic prescribed Tylenol-Codeine painkiller. Later, Holly called the clinic’s hotline again and was told to go to a local hospital’s emergency room if the pain continued.

The next day, Holly continued to experience extreme cramping and bleeding, and visited the emergency room of Valley Care Medical Center in Pleasanton. She told the doctor about her drug-induced abortion and she was sent home after an injection of narcotics getting a prescription for more painkillers.

The severity of the pain continued. Holly was weak, vomiting, and unable to walk. She was re-admitted to Valley Care Medical Center on September 17 and died later that afternoon with her father, Monty Patterson, who had just learned of the pregnancy, at her side. …

In October, the Alameda, California coroner’s office issued a report concluding that Holly Patterson died from Septic Shock, due to endomyometritis (uterus related blood infection),due to a therapeutic, drug induced abortion. Months later, reports showed Holly tested positive for Clostridium sordellii toxic shock syndrome following medical abortion. Hers was the first case of a Clostridium sordellii toxic shock infection after medical abortion reported in the United States — later shown to be brought on because Planned Parenthood violated FDA protocols by telling Holly and other patients to take the abortion drug vaginally.

Since her death in 2003, there have been 10 reported deaths from sepsis (serious infection involving the blood) and 9 of these were from Clostridium sordellii. Dozens of women worldwide have died from the abortion drug as well, according to FDA reports and the European maker of the drug. The FDA also indicates more than 2,200 women in the United States alone have been injured by the abortion drug — with some requiring hospitalization,emergency surgeries and complete blood transfusions.

Frankly, I’m amused that anyone in sunny California feels the need for tanning beds in the first place.  But they seem a lot less “lethally dangerous” for teens than Planned Parenthood does.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

He also signed a law requiring that long guns be registered.

El_Terrible on October 10, 2011 at 2:08 PM

And a law giving $40 million of financial aid to illegal aliens.

El_Terrible on October 10, 2011 at 2:09 PM

The California Governor fiddles while Rome burns…

We get and deserve the government we elect out here, and that is a shame…

Khun Joe on October 10, 2011 at 2:10 PM

Why would you carry an unloaded gun in the first place?

Stupid.

RedNewEnglander on October 10, 2011 at 2:11 PM

On the bright side, he vetoed a law that would require us to register our ammo.

El_Terrible on October 10, 2011 at 2:12 PM

THIS STATE IS LOST FOR LIFE……

SDarchitect on October 10, 2011 at 2:12 PM

Move.. just move. California is a wasteland of stupidity anymore.

upinak on October 10, 2011 at 2:13 PM

Why would you carry an unloaded gun in the first place?

Stupid.

RedNewEnglander on October 10, 2011 at 2:11 PM

People would carry the gun unloaded, but would keep loaded magazines on them. It takes seconds to load the gun if needed.

El_Terrible on October 10, 2011 at 2:13 PM

Why would you carry an unloaded gun in the first place?

Stupid.

RedNewEnglander on October 10, 2011 at 2:11 PM

I said this about it:

Carrying a unloaded gun via CCL, is like eating 0 calorie, fat free bacon. WTF is the point?

upinak on October 10, 2011 at 2:14 PM

Zero sympathy for California…sorry…

PatriotRider on October 10, 2011 at 2:14 PM

Oh snap, forgot.

He also signed a law allowing girls to get vaccinated without parental consent… it includes the HPV vaccine.

El_Terrible on October 10, 2011 at 2:15 PM

It’s easy to laugh at this until you look across the pond, and note that the EU has banned balloons and party favors for anyone under 14.

MNHawk on October 10, 2011 at 2:15 PM

Previous regulations had allowed the open carrying of unloaded handguns in public, but police chiefs and sheriffs objected to the rule because people felt frightened when they saw handguns in public places.

“They are tied up dealing with calls from the public about gun-toting men and women in the coffee shop,” California Assemblyman Antony Portantino, who introduced the bill, said last month. “As law enforcement officials tell me, it’s not safe and someone is going to get hurt.”

The hippie on the corner with a sign frightens me. We must crack down on hippies on the corner with signs.

I mean, that’s the standard for violating constitutional rights, right? Whether some other people are frightened?

Why would you carry an unloaded gun in the first place?

Stupid.

RedNewEnglander on October 10, 2011 at 2:11 PM

They would carry a magazine separately.

amerpundit on October 10, 2011 at 2:15 PM

Why would you carry an unloaded gun in the first place?

Stupid.

RedNewEnglander on October 10, 2011 at 2:11 PM

They obviously have the rounds ready in a magazine ready to load if need be.

jawkneemusic on October 10, 2011 at 2:16 PM

Can’t this be considered unconstitutional and challenged in court? These tyrants need to be reigned in.

jawkneemusic on October 10, 2011 at 2:16 PM

Senator Ted Lieu called tanning beds “lethally dangerous” and praised Brown’s “courage” in banning their use by minors, but no one has died on a tanning bed.

Maybe Sen. Lieu caught Final Destination 3 on late night cable recently and overreacted.

Doughboy on October 10, 2011 at 2:18 PM

Just for the record, these gun bans are the reason my last visit to California was in 1983. I just don’t go there at all anymore, and probably never will.

MikeA on October 10, 2011 at 2:18 PM

Move.. just move. California is a wasteland of stupidity anymore.

upinak on October 10, 2011 at 2:13 PM

Would the last Sane Californian to leave the state please turn off the CFL’s..

Chip on October 10, 2011 at 2:20 PM

Let’s trade France for California

faraway on October 10, 2011 at 2:21 PM

They would carry a magazine separately.

amerpundit on October 10, 2011 at 2:15 PM

It still isn’t the point. They are using loop holes and ways around you, as an individual, not to have, hold or use your gun in anyway…. nor to protect yourself.

This is about as useless as boobs on a bull.

upinak on October 10, 2011 at 2:21 PM

If tanning beds are illegal perhaps there should be a time limit on how much time people can spend at the beach or otherwise outdoors during daylight hours.

Of course, people can’t be allowed out at night either because they sometimes do nasty things so there needs to be a curfew, too.

FloatingRock on October 10, 2011 at 2:21 PM

I am embarrassed for my state. I am learning to hate California Democrats at such a fundamental level that there is no way I will ever in my life vote for one again at any level of government.

crosspatch on October 10, 2011 at 2:23 PM

Previous regulations had allowed the open carrying of unloaded handguns in public, but police chiefs and sheriffs objected to the rule because people felt frightened when they saw handguns in public places.

“They are tied up dealing with calls from the public about gun-toting men and women in the coffee shop,” California Assemblyman Antony Portantino, who introduced the bill, said last month. “As law enforcement officials tell me, it’s not safe and someone is going to get hurt.”

I mean, that’s the standard for violating constitutional rights, right? Whether some other people are frightened?

amerpundit on October 10, 2011 at 2:15 PM

Would it be too much of a stretch for them to detain those that hold certain political beliefs for the public’s and their ‘safety’?

Chip on October 10, 2011 at 2:24 PM


So let’s get this straight. If you’re 17 years old in California, you can’t get a tanning-bed session even with parental consent — but you can get an abortion on demand as well as RU-486 (the “morning after pill’) without parental consent. Senator Ted Lieu called tanning beds “lethally dangerous” and praised Brown’s “courage” in banning their use by minors, but no one has died on a tanning bed.

Is it really case that “pro-family” conservatives are so delighted to have teenage girls having children? There used to be worries about single teenage girls not being the best mothers. My pro-family stance about unmarried pregnant teenagers is to make abortion mandatory for them. I don’t want anything to do with this “pro-choice” nonsense.

thuja on October 10, 2011 at 2:25 PM

If they are forbidden to go to tanning salons, I suspect we will be helpless and numb-struck witnesses to masses of teenagers flocking to the beaches. The horror! The horror!

ss396 on October 10, 2011 at 2:26 PM

Because criminals looking to rob some joint will advertise their weapon by carrying it openly, standing patiently in line, ordering a coffee and a scone, and then sitting quietly at a table.

Bishop on October 10, 2011 at 2:27 PM

If tanning beds are illegal perhaps there should be a time limit on how much time people can spend at the beach or otherwise outdoors during daylight hours.
FloatingRock on October 10, 2011 at 2:21 PM

California will ban sunlight, and if that won’t work they will simply ban solar radiation.

Bishop on October 10, 2011 at 2:29 PM

when all tanning booths are outlawed…only outlaws (and actors) will have tanning booths.

upinak on October 10, 2011 at 2:29 PM

Brown also signed the CA DREAM act.

One step closer to the joinder with Mexico.

Schadenfreude on October 10, 2011 at 2:31 PM

Openly carrying an unloaded gun in a state which prohibits openly carrying one that is loaded seeems to me to be an excellent way to get it stolen by someone carrying one that is loaded and concealed, albeit illegally. However, to each his own.

a capella on October 10, 2011 at 2:31 PM

The horror! The horror!

ss396 on October 10, 2011 at 2:26 PM

Don’t yu mean the Revenue! The Revenue! Maybe it was the one beach I was on, but don’t they have to pay to park?

upinak on October 10, 2011 at 2:32 PM

when all tanning booths are outlawed…only outlaws (and actors) will have tanning booths.
upinak on October 10, 2011 at 2:29 PM

And Charlie H. Crist. And Boehner.

Bishop on October 10, 2011 at 2:32 PM

All hail the Nanny State!

GarandFan on October 10, 2011 at 2:32 PM

I’m warming to the whole Aztlan concept… at least in regard to part of the western US.

mankai on October 10, 2011 at 2:34 PM

And Charlie H. Crist. And Boehner.

Bishop on October 10, 2011 at 2:32 PM

I think Charlie spray tans.. you can’t get THAT orange in a bed.

So, if you are in the “spray Tan” business in Cali, RAKE IN THAT MONEY! Mark up your “tan” by at least 30-40%.

upinak on October 10, 2011 at 2:34 PM

Brown also signed the CA DREAM act.

One step closer to the joinder with Mexico.

Schadenfreude on October 10, 2011 at 2:31 PM

CA has had 3 laws named the Dream Act.

The first Dream Act provided in state tuition for illegal aliens. That’s been in the books for a long while, not new.

The second Dream Act was passed earlier this year, allowing illegals to apply for scholarships and such from private sources.

The third Dream Act, signed last week, provides illegal aliens with grants and scholarships from public funding — $40 million of it.

El_Terrible on October 10, 2011 at 2:35 PM

Just for the record, these gun bans are the reason my last visit to California was in 1983. I just don’t go there at all anymore, and probably never will.

MikeA on October 10, 2011 at 2:18 PM

Same here. I haven’t been to California since started carrying. The company I work for has a big conference there every year, but I never go because of this issue.

Ars Moriendi on October 10, 2011 at 2:37 PM

It is about control, bread and circus. It has no public safety aspect. The hysterics need be pandered to and the resulting show provides entertainment to one and all.

JIMV on October 10, 2011 at 2:38 PM

He’s right. Give us hell, Brown!

mankai on October 10, 2011 at 2:39 PM

Um, Ed, RU-486 isn’t the morning-after pill. The morning-after pill is emergency contraception, while RU-486 induces an abortion. They are very different things, namely that the morning-after pill prevents fertilization rather than destroying a live fetus.

sobincorporated on October 10, 2011 at 2:39 PM

That story about the girl getting the abortion is horrifying. I hope her family is suing the crap out of Planned Parenthood.

Meric1837 on October 10, 2011 at 2:42 PM

Is it really case that “pro-family” conservatives are so delighted to have teenage girls having children? There used to be worries about single teenage girls not being the best mothers. My pro-family stance about unmarried pregnant teenagers is to make abortion mandatory for them. I don’t want anything to do with this “pro-choice” nonsense.

thuja on October 10, 2011 at 2:25 PM

I a comforted to know that there is a special place in hell for people like you.

MadDogF on October 10, 2011 at 2:42 PM

Good to see the bankrupt California is focusing on real issues…

right2bright on October 10, 2011 at 2:44 PM

“They are tied up dealing with calls from the public about gun-toting men and women in the coffee shop,” California Assemblyman Antony Portantino, who introduced the bill, said last month. “As law enforcement officials tell me, it’s not safe and someone is going to get hurt.”

Talk about a non-sequitur. People are scared of guns…therefore, someone is going to get hurt!

What exactly isn’t safe, “law enforcement officials?” Guns? Yeah, of course they’re not safe. That’s sort of the point. Are you proposing to ban them? No doubt you are, but that’s hardly what’s being expressed here. What you’re saying here is that someone’s going to get hurt because they’re bothered by them.

If liberals are so afraid of guns that they want to force gun owners to conceal them in exchange for getting rid of concealed carry permits, well, that’s an acceptable compromise.

HitNRun on October 10, 2011 at 2:44 PM

I don’t want anything to do with this “pro-choice” nonsense.

thuja on October 10, 2011 at 2:25 PM

If only your mother had taken our advice, I tried to tell her it would be okay…but no, she wouldn’t do the abortion, and so now what do we have? You…the only real argument for abortion.

right2bright on October 10, 2011 at 2:45 PM

when all tanning booths are outlawed…only outlaws (and actors) will have tanning booths.

upinak on October 10, 2011 at 2:29 PM

I bet per capita, that the “sunshine state” the state with some of the most sunny days, has more tanning booths than Alaska…

right2bright on October 10, 2011 at 2:47 PM

Governor Jerry Brown signed a bill on Sunday prohibiting anyone under the age of 18 from using ultraviolet tanning devices

So lemme get this straight. . .

The CA legislature just banned the Sun?

UV blocking Burka’s are now required for anyone under 18 in CA?

Really? This is what California sees as it’s pressing problem?

Jason Coleman on October 10, 2011 at 2:52 PM

A Californian with a tanning bed is like an Eskimo with a freezer!

pilamaye on October 10, 2011 at 2:54 PM

I bet per capita, that the “sunshine state” the state with some of the most sunny days, has more tanning booths than Alaska…

right2bright on October 10, 2011 at 2:47 PM

that is a whole lotta power from the solar/wind mills.

A Californian with a tanning bed is like an Eskimo with a freezer!

pilamaye on October 10, 2011 at 2:54 PM

if the epa had their way, we would be digging cold storage pits and throwing our food in them.

upinak on October 10, 2011 at 2:56 PM

In a few more years it will be Mexico anyway so who cares.

docflash on October 10, 2011 at 2:59 PM

Zero sympathy for California…sorry…

PatriotRider on October 10, 2011 at 2:14 PM

..understand your feelings here. If we could excise Los Angeles and San Francisco, this state would be bright red. You have no idea how much the rest of the state detests the assshole liberals in these wretched hives of scum and villainy.

The War Planner on October 10, 2011 at 3:01 PM

Plus the entire state votes mostly Democrat and are useless to the cause.

docflash on October 10, 2011 at 3:01 PM

It’s all Democrats.

Mason on October 10, 2011 at 3:02 PM

I’ve seen the reasoning for carrying unloaded here and how they get around it.

Pretty piss-poor that carrying in this way is the only option. What about the time(s) you may not have time to “load.” This ain’t the movies where the hero always racks a round before going in. Better than nothing but not much better. :(

Heck, it’s almost as dumb as banning tanning beds in the land where tans are king.

California – count on us to get it wrong.

RedNewEnglander on October 10, 2011 at 3:04 PM

Can I assume the girl in the photo is at least 18….?

You know…just curious…

JohnTant on October 10, 2011 at 3:08 PM

when all tanning booths are outlawed…only outlaws (and actors) will have tanning booths.

upinak on October 10, 2011 at 2:29 PM

My collie says:

Didn’t Sarah Palin have a tanning booth installed in the Governor’s mansion, or somnethin’?

Forget it collie. Sarah Palin is dead to HotAir now.

My collie says:

She’s only “mostly dead” CC.

CyberCipher on October 10, 2011 at 3:08 PM

El_Terrible on October 10, 2011 at 2:35 PM

Thanks for clarification.

Schadenfreude on October 10, 2011 at 3:09 PM

..understand your feelings here. If we could excise Los Angeles and San Francisco, this state would be bright red. You have no idea how much the rest of the state detests the assshole liberals in these wretched hives of scum and villainy.

The War Planner on October 10, 2011 at 3:01 PM

There are 3 problems with the California Republican Party:
1) If you don’t have a walker, you don’t fit in.
2) The “consultants” are all Democrats or at best RINO’s. They want “self funding” candidates so that they can take their money. (As a rough measure figure that 40% of the total campaign goes into the consultant’s pockets.)
3) The Republican apparatchiks are all happy playing second fiddle as long as they get paid. And they get paid.

And the “War Planner” is right, except for a 10 mile wide strip down the coast, it’s a really nice conservative state. But that 10 mile strip is home to 1/2 of Mexico and Central America and machine politics.

Ted Lieu, mentioned in the piece was “selected” by the central committee in his 60/40 Democrat district. He’s an idiot, but since Torrance has a large Asian population, he’s the designated Asian face-man.

CrazyGene on October 10, 2011 at 3:11 PM

He also signed a law allowing girls to get vaccinated without parental consent… it includes the HPV vaccine.

El_Terrible on October 10, 2011 at 2:15 PM

The law applies to children as young as the age of 12 and also includes some kind of HIV vaccine. So let me see if I get this straight. Any medicine or medical procedure must have parental consent UNLESS it is related to sexuality? I am so sick of bureaucrats usurping parental rights. Why don’t we stop the hypocrisy, emancipate anyone over the age of 12 and let them make all their own medical and life decisions? But then that would complicate the health care mandate that our “children” remain on our policies until the age of 26. I guess 12 year-olds are able to make life-changing, adult decisions about their health care, but 26 year-olds aren’t adult enough to pay for their own health insurance.

KaliMom on October 10, 2011 at 3:11 PM

Good to see the bankrupt California is focusing on real issues…

right2bright on October 10, 2011 at 2:44 PM

My collie says:

Ha! Just wait until Governor Moonbeam signs new legislation outlawing drapes that don’t match the upolstery. That’ll show the skeptics.

CyberCipher on October 10, 2011 at 3:12 PM

Is it really case that “pro-family” conservatives are so delighted to have teenage girls having children? There used to be worries about single teenage girls not being the best mothers. My pro-family stance about unmarried pregnant teenagers is to make abortion mandatory for them. I don’t want anything to do with this “pro-choice” nonsense.

thuja on October 10, 2011 at 2:25 PM

That’s mighty fascist of you.

Giving birth doesn’t make you a parent, nor does it force you to be one. “Pro-family” conservatives simply like to give ALL people options.

But your solution would have meant no Obama, so score one for you I guess.

Esthier on October 10, 2011 at 3:16 PM

CyberCipher on October 10, 2011 at 3:08 PM

:) CC pet that collie and remember.. she has the booth in her house.

upinak on October 10, 2011 at 3:21 PM

“As law enforcement officials tell me, it’s not safe and someone is going to get hurt.”

I highly doubt that unless your law enforcement officials are panty waists. We carry openly with loaded weapons in Arizona all the time and no law enforcement or others have gotten hurt.

chemman on October 10, 2011 at 3:22 PM

Seems Gov Moonbeam should have a meeting with all the other Governors to let them know how he did it. Clearly all the real problems have been solved in CA.

RDuke on October 10, 2011 at 3:24 PM

RU-486 (the “morning after pill’)

Factually inaccurate here, Ed. As someone else has pointed out, the morning after pill is appropriately named. It’s best used literally the morning after (or hours after if possible), long before a woman could even know she is pregnant. It’s not even worthwhile to use it weeks after you’ve had unprotected sex, as it’s basically a really strong version of the normal birth control pill.

There’s a huge difference between it an the more appropriately named abortion pill. Some pro-lifers see no distinction as the morning after pill can essentially terminate an early pregnancy, but it primarily works simply to prevent pregnancy just like the pill. And I don’t believe there have been any deaths directly associated with the morning after pill.

Esthier on October 10, 2011 at 3:26 PM

Jerry “Moonbeam” Brown – the CA poster child for “Old and Busted”

We’re DOOMED.

mojo on October 10, 2011 at 3:42 PM

He meant to say “all the big-city police chiefs are GFWs”

mojo on October 10, 2011 at 3:45 PM

In most cases, and certainly in Minnesota, those laws require a victim to retreat first if possible rather than using the lethal force, sometimes even in their own homes.

Not in Floriduh, buddy. We were first in the nation to have the ‘Shoot First and Ask Questions Later’ law. Whether in the home or in public.

The JEBster signed that one.

Lanceman on October 10, 2011 at 3:47 PM

Frankly, I’m amused that anyone in sunny California feels the need for tanning beds in the first place.

Some of us work for a living, sir, and don’t get to go out to play in the noontime sun. And some of us are also into bodybuilding and therefore feel compelled to bronze up a bit.

apostic on October 10, 2011 at 3:53 PM

I understand the only way to get to California now is through the Stargate

deedtrader on October 10, 2011 at 3:53 PM

Addendum to my last: In the contenental SW and HI, there is a gym chain called 24 Hour Fitness. Not all their hundred-some gyms have the same equipment. Say what you will about the redundancy of tanning beds in CA, but so far as I know, only two 24Hr locations have tanning equipment: Honolulu and Las Vegas. Talk about coals to Newcastle.

apostic on October 10, 2011 at 4:02 PM

CyberCipher on October 10, 2011 at 3:12 PM

Well it is the State that makes sure you only use fitted sheets for your beds… give it a few more weeks and then they will be looking to make sure the feng shui of your abode is in perfect balance.

Drapes included.

ajacksonian on October 10, 2011 at 4:13 PM

Bans on open carry; bans on scary-looking flash hiders or pistol grips; bans on gun shows; bans on shooting ranges; bans on gun stores within 1000 feet of a school. It’s not a war on gun violence, it’s a war on an entire culture where gun owners are placed in the same class as pornography addicts. The gun banners want a society where anyone who doesn’t cower in fear before a criminal or a police officer is looked on as a social miscreant and menace.

Socratease on October 10, 2011 at 4:32 PM

2) The “consultants” are all Democrats or at best RINO’s. They want “self funding” candidates so that they can take their money. (As a rough measure figure that 40% of the total campaign goes into the consultant’s pockets.)

CrazyGene on October 10, 2011 at 3:11 PM

..and CrazyGene is double-right on this point. I was working my tail off for Carly Fiorina that past election. I know, I know, but the purpose was to get rid of possibly one of the stupidest women on the face of the Earth and, in that context, Carly was not half-bad. Anyway, I was putting in all sorts of volunteer call-banking time and walking precincts and all that stuff like a lot of other volunteers.

I had a short conversation with her Orange County head towards the end of the campaign and he told me that he was going to see if he could get a job on (L.A. Mayor) Villaraigosa’s campaign next and confided in me that he was just a political operative, a Ronin for hire to the highest bidder.

The War Planner on October 10, 2011 at 5:08 PM

Like the Calibex body armor link. Heh. Ought to rent out suits at the airports to incoming

I feel sorry for the adoable California sea otters, because one day, in the final phase of engineered reverse evolution, Californians will be sharing their sea cucumbers

I have a new name for the state: Jerry’s Utopia Barn
New State Nickname: the Gimme State
New State Bird: titmous
New State Flower: Acapulco Gold

The Current State Motto isn’t bad: Eureka I have Found It
but it could be improved
New State Motto: Eureka I have Found My Car Keys

The Current State Flag is a star, and a bear. The state flag was adopted by settlers rejecting Mexican rule, and the star represented sovereignty.

Could replace the sovereignty bear with a spayed and neutered homeless person, or maybe a piece or chorizo. The star could replaced by car keys. Car keys are universal symbols of sharing

entagor on October 10, 2011 at 5:30 PM

Sorry, typo in last post

Could replace the sovereignty bear with a spayed and neutered homeless person, or maybe a piece of chorizo. The star could replaced by car keys. Car keys are universal symbols of sharing

entagor on October 10, 2011 at 5:30 PM

entagor on October 10, 2011 at 5:32 PM

My collie says:

She’s only “mostly dead” CC.
CyberCipher on October 10, 2011 at 3:08 PM

And the only thing that will bring her back now is Wuv twu wuv…send your post card today to:

The Office of Sarah Palin
P.O. Box 871235
Wasilla AK 99687

And ask her to reconsider?….

RedLizard64 on October 10, 2011 at 6:02 PM

Very nice end cap photo on the home page for this article.

Blacksheep on October 10, 2011 at 6:22 PM

Is it really case that “pro-family” conservatives are so delighted to have teenage girls having children? There used to be worries about single teenage girls not being the best mothers. My pro-family stance about unmarried pregnant teenagers is to make abortion mandatory for them. I don’t want anything to do with this “pro-choice” nonsense.

thuja on October 10, 2011 at 2:25 PM

That’s mighty fascist of you.

Giving birth doesn’t make you a parent, nor does it force you to be one. “Pro-family” conservatives simply like to give ALL people options.

But your solution would have meant no Obama, so score one for you I guess.

Esthier on October 10, 2011 at 3:16 PM

It’s always tough to answer these type of statements, because the obvious things to say would imply I am “pro-choice”–as opposed to outright, flat-out pro-abortion. Let me just say it is ludicrous for “pro-lifers” to call me a fascist because I don’t want to give a set of women a choice on whether to abort or not. And is it really true that most people who call themselves pro-family conservatives simply want to all people options? The teenage girl who has sensibly decided to get an abortion would be quite happy to find that out.

thuja on October 10, 2011 at 6:34 PM

California’s now a crap hole. It really and truly is. It didn’t used to be. I’ve lived here all of my life but for a handful of years and it was once beautiful and sane. I retire soon and once I do the entire family are gone from here. We’re taking our jobs, incomes, pensions, and portfolio’s with us. That will be one more family of contributors to society gone from the State of California and contributing elsewhere. To be honest, I am really excited to see the morning arrive that California fades into the rear-view mirror for good, but it is also the place where I grew up and raised my family too. I will get over the nostalgia quickly though as California has lost nearly all of its sanity along with its morals and its very soul which has definitely been snuffed out.

FlatFoot on October 10, 2011 at 7:05 PM

Maybe we should have sanctuary cities

tomas on October 10, 2011 at 7:15 PM

California will ban sunlight, and if that won’t work they will simply ban solar radiation.

Bishop on October 10, 2011 at 2:29 PM

Banning photons would do the trick.

Badger40 on October 10, 2011 at 7:36 PM

The teenage girl who has sensibly decided to get an abortion would be quite happy to find that out.

thuja on October 10, 2011 at 6:34 PM

Bcs as we know, killing the ‘mistake’ sure gets rid of all those problems.
The only reason it’s viable for teenage mothers to ‘raise’ these kids en masse is bcs of social programs like welfare & stuff.
Not all babies born this way are wastes of skin or time.
Sometimes they turn out to actually be worth something to someone in this world.

Badger40 on October 10, 2011 at 7:39 PM

Open carry ban could backfire. Heh

NRA and others have an active case in San Diego appealing CCW defeat. The defeat was based in large part on open carry being a sufficient remedy for self defense. Don’t have to spell it out for most HA commenters.

Long gun registration? That worked so well for Canada. Sales will drop but rise in AZ, NV and OR. And Sacramento can pass registration laws all they want but it won’t happen. BTW Obama sold me four long guns in the last three years. Ammo, too.

Still doesn’t do a thing for all the other stupidities CA is plagued with.

Caststeel on October 10, 2011 at 7:48 PM

You have no idea how much the rest of the state detests the assshole liberals in these wretched hives of scum and villainy.

It doesn’t matter how you vote in California. A stinking liberal judge from the 9th district or from Bombay will overturn any and all votes that don’t follow the socialist path. Even if it was a majority winning vote! It doesn’t matter to them. So voting in California looks meaningless to me. Yet you keep on trudging to the polls knowing full well it’ll be overturned. Where’s the outrage?

If you’re so damn red as you claim…then take back your state. How long do you plan to live under Moonbat rule by the transgenders, gays, lezzzies and tofu eating nut bags? Welcome to California….one of the least free states in the country. I sure as hell would support your secession from the scum.

Twana on October 10, 2011 at 7:55 PM

Was thinking of hitting Disneyland next year. Will have to seriously rethink that and maybe go elsewhere.

kim roy on October 10, 2011 at 7:58 PM

The really dumb thing about CA banning unloaded open carried handguns is that the previous stance allowing such carry was the major defense against the very restrictive issuing of conceal carry permits in CA. The argument was that the local sheriffs were not keeping people from carrying for self defense because they can always carry unloaded guns.

See http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=427710&highlight=prieto

Fredlike on October 10, 2011 at 8:19 PM

FlatFoot on October 10, 2011 at 7:05 PM

I’m feeling you, FlatFoot. I’m a native San Diegan, lived here most of my life (daddy was a Jarhead, so we moved. A lot.), but as soon as mom and dad are cold and in the ground, I’m selling the house and leaving. I’ve thought about Texas, Wyoming, the Dakotas, and Montana. Maybe even just to the east, in Arizona. This state has gone from merely loopy to bat$hit insane at ludicrous speed with it’s politics, and I don’t foresee anytime in my future where it will improve. I hate to leave my friends, my remaining family, and possibly what little business I’ve been able to scare up in the last few years, but I just cannot face another decade or two of the Insane Clown Posse we call a state legislature. That goes for both sides of the aisle, both houses.

BillH on October 10, 2011 at 8:33 PM

My pro-family stance about unmarried pregnant teenagers is to make abortion mandatory for them. I don’t want anything to do with this “pro-choice” nonsense.

thuja on October 10, 2011 at 2:25 PM

It’s always good to hear your position. Let’s us know the jackass position.

Really, there’s really nothing else to say, that post alone shows you have no soul. Or, to borrow a phrase, “your soul is so dark, it’s smudging mine”

AZfederalist on October 10, 2011 at 10:00 PM

Like the TSA airport screening – this is just more political theater run by the Dems.

Prior to this bill, if you were licensed to own a gun in CA you could carry it in open view as long as the gun was unloaded.
- If it is an automatic, you can carry ammunition as long as it was in a magazine and the magazine is also carried openly.
- If you have a revolver, then the unloaded gun must be carried in the open, but speed loads of ammunition or loose ammo can be carried in your pocket or other concealed location.

Yep, that is what passes for logic among our legislative superiors in CA.

OT – Gov. Moonbeam also signed the state Dream Act Part II which sets aside $42MM/year for scholarship aid to illegal aliens who are given in-state tuition under the CA Dream Act I. And yes, American born students and naturalized citizens will be deprived of $42MM of aid that will go instead to illegals.

BTW – Just 3 months into the new fiscal year, CA tax revenue is $700MM behind what was budgeted. But Jerry Brown keeps on piling on new entitlement programs. Sigh…

in_awe on October 10, 2011 at 10:00 PM