Concealed carry applications flooding in after court’s decision to scrap the “good cause” requirement in CA

posted at 9:11 pm on February 27, 2014 by Erika Johnsen

Two weeks ago, the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal ruled that, why no, applicants for county-issued permits to exercise the right to bear arms concealed upon their person should not be required to submit a unique, specific reason as to why they should be allowed to do so — i.e., a reason you are somehow in a heightened state of danger beyond your run-of-the-mill, daily self-defense aspirations (that silly old chestnut, lolz). As you might imagine, in the counties in which they decided to immediately begin implementing the court’s decision, applications have been streaming in:

Gun owners are flooding the sheriff’s offices in two California counties with applications for concealed weapon permits following a bombshell ruling two weeks ago by a federal appeals court that citizens need not justify their requests. …

More than 500 applications have poured in to the Orange County Sheriff’s Department in just two weeks — roughly the total number of applications filed in 2013, a spokesman said. Orange County Sheriff Sandra Hutchens announced on the department’s website that the county will comply with the federal court’s order immediately, sparking the wave of applications.

“We’ve received as many or more in the last week in a half than we did in the whole calendar year [of 2013],” OCSD Lt. Jeff Hallock told FoxNews.com by phone early Thursday.

He said Hutchens didn’t wait for the decision to be further tested in order to “show respect to the court’s opinion while demonstrating her responsiveness.” …

In other counties, including San Diego County and Los Angeles County, officals are waiting for the law to really become final before they start changing their rules — and you know the state of California is appealing that one.

Attorney General Kamala D. Harris today filed a petition in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, on behalf of the State of California, urging the court to review and reverse its decision in Peruta v. County of San Diego.

In its February 13, 2014 Peruta decision, the Ninth Circuit ruled that San Diego County violates the Second Amendment by requiring individuals to show “good cause,” beyond a mere desire to carry a gun, when applying for a concealed-carry weapons permit.

“Local law enforcement must be able to use their discretion to determine who can carry a concealed weapon,” Attorney General Harris said. “I will do everything possible to restore law enforcement’s authority to protect public safety, and so today am calling on the court to review and reverse its decision.”


Related Posts:

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

What the hell has the Ninth Circus been smoking lately? And Kamela Harrith-Perry can stick it.

Lanceman on February 27, 2014 at 9:13 PM

The more responsible citizens carrying, the better…

OmahaConservative on February 27, 2014 at 9:13 PM

Freedom is contagious.

jukin3 on February 27, 2014 at 9:14 PM

Does that mean that CA is now a ‘shall issue’ state?
Hell-even Hellinois is ‘shall issue’.

annoyinglittletwerp on February 27, 2014 at 9:14 PM

Nonpartisan’s diaper just exploded

Chuck Schick on February 27, 2014 at 9:15 PM

Hey, maybe my weapon collection will be expanding soon. Awesome!

Naga_Jolokia on February 27, 2014 at 9:16 PM

With any luck, it’ll become the 21st century’s version of Tombstone Territory. After an initial surge in mortuary stocks, all the wimps, wusses, and loudmouths will flee. Which will leave the state to the strong and well-behaved well-armed populace.

The Golden State will become an oasis once again, enforced by a well-armed people’s militia otherwise known as citizens.

platypus on February 27, 2014 at 9:17 PM

Nonpartisan’s diaper just exploded

Chuck Schick on February 27, 2014 at 9:15 PM

I hope he didn’t get any in his eyes.

NotCoach on February 27, 2014 at 9:17 PM

Nonpartisan’s diaper just exploded

Chuck Schick on February 27, 2014 at 9:15 PM

Probably not wearing a diaper…
What’s that called..?

Oh yeah…

Goin’ Commando..

Electrongod on February 27, 2014 at 9:17 PM

I hope he didn’t get any in his eyes.

NotCoach on February 27, 2014 at 9:17 PM

I do…

OmahaConservative on February 27, 2014 at 9:18 PM

The more responsible citizens carrying, the better…

OmahaConservative on February 27, 2014 at 9:13 PM

Um, you’re talking about California.

Lanceman on February 27, 2014 at 9:19 PM

“Local law enforcement must be able to use their discretion to determine who can carry a concealed weapon,” Attorney General Harris said.

Umm, no. Beyond known violent offenders, you and your law enforcement buddies have absolutely no right to deny an American Citizen the right to keep and bear arms. Or even to ask why they would want a gun. It’s none of your freakin’ business, you control freak.

Doc Holliday on February 27, 2014 at 9:20 PM

More will flood in once people have time to take the rather rigorous concealed carry courses that are required by law.

It’s actually amazing that even this many people have applied considering they must have had their courses already passed (evidently).

Nessuno on February 27, 2014 at 9:20 PM

Um, you’re talking about California.

Lanceman on February 27, 2014 at 9:19 PM

Good point!

Bmore on February 27, 2014 at 9:22 PM

Um, you’re talking about California.

Lanceman on February 27, 2014 at 9:19 PM

Yep, I lived there for thirty years. Key word—RESPONSIBLE. CA once had Reagan as governor…

OmahaConservative on February 27, 2014 at 9:22 PM

Thank god these guns aren’t..
Squirt guns..

No ammo to be found…

Electrongod on February 27, 2014 at 9:24 PM

I’ve heard reliable reports that Orange County is still denying permits. They modified the written policy, not the actual practice. More lawsuits to come, most likely.

peski on February 27, 2014 at 9:24 PM

I’m surprised this was the Ninth ruling, they’re usually pretty gung ho on carrying the liberal’s water.

NativeTexan on February 27, 2014 at 9:25 PM

Um, you’re talking about California.

Lanceman on February 27, 2014 at 9:19 PM

The irresponsible ones won’t go near a gun with a sixty-foot pole… minus the gang-bangers of course. But the rest of them are brainwashed into thinking that simply touching a gun will drive a bullet into their gut or make them a blood-thirsty, gun-toting murderer.

Naga_Jolokia on February 27, 2014 at 9:26 PM

Tie them to drivers’ licenses and call it a day.
 
Take the right away from criminals instead of forcing law-abiding citizens to beg permission.

rogerb on February 27, 2014 at 9:29 PM

The more responsible citizens carrying, the better…

OmahaConservative on February 27, 2014 at 9:13 PM

I’d like to remind you that we are talking about California, lol.

xNavigator on February 27, 2014 at 9:34 PM

You idiots didn’t read the fine print. The law only allows for carry of skeet pistols, and it’s my understanding that skeet guns were not designed for killing.

Bishop on February 27, 2014 at 9:35 PM

You idiots didn’t read the fine print. The law only allows for carry of skeet pistols, and it’s my understanding that skeet guns were not designed for killing.

Bishop on February 27, 2014 at 9:35 PM

It never gets old.

CurtZHP on February 27, 2014 at 9:40 PM

“I will do everything possible to restore law enforcement’s authority to protect public safety, and so today am calling on the court to review and reverse its decision.”

Poor Attorney General Kamala D. Harris has obviously forgotten the court decision that stated that law enforcement DOES NOT have a general ‘duty to protect’.

GarandFan on February 27, 2014 at 9:43 PM

I’ve heard reliable reports that Orange County is still denying permits. They modified the written policy, not the actual practice. More lawsuits to come, most likely.

peski on February 27, 2014 at 9:24 PM

Yep, you have to prove you need the permit because of a life threatening situation or they deny it. Let’s hope lawsuits will come to the O.C., area.

onesheep on February 27, 2014 at 9:53 PM

Nonpartisan’s diaper just exploded

Chuck Schick on February 27, 2014 at 9:15 PM

And 4 new trolls were born.

HumpBot Salvation on February 27, 2014 at 9:55 PM

Attorney General Kamala D. Harris today filed a petition in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, on behalf of the State of California, urging the court to review and reverse its decision in Peruta v. County of San Diego.

Now would be a real good time to exercise Eric Holder’s advice that an AG can decline to defend a law that is obviously unconstitutional.

But, of course, that’s not the kind of unconstitutional law he was thinking of, now, was it?

Socratease on February 27, 2014 at 9:59 PM

“I will do everything possible to restore law enforcement’s authority to protect public safety, and so today am calling on the court to review and reverse its decision.”

But do you KNOW that they’re protecting public safety? The scientific consensus says it does not.

Socratease on February 27, 2014 at 10:02 PM

Applications have been “flooding in” ?

I didn’t know there were that many ‘right-wing extremists’ in all of California.

. . . . . huh, imagine that.

listens2glenn on February 27, 2014 at 10:02 PM

Maybe the flood of apps is from Hollywood celebs who can now fire their expensive security details and pack their own security?

slickwillie2001 on February 27, 2014 at 10:17 PM

Nonpartisan’s diaper just exploded

Chuck Schick on February 27, 2014 at 9:15 PM

…no!…that was his brain!…same shit!

KOOLAID2 on February 27, 2014 at 10:20 PM

Good Cause? Jeebus.

CWchangedhisNicagain on February 27, 2014 at 10:20 PM

This is just one example of why most people in California are no different than people anywhere else. California could become a red state if they were actually offered a choice!

Dems never shrink from trying to turn anyone.. but the GOP won’t even consider it an option! The GOP just writes off whole states as a waste of time. That is why we are losing!

It doesn’t happen over night but we could make real gains in California. That state is ripe for a conservative revolution. But one thing is sure.. it will never happen as long as establishment Republicans don’t even want to try.

JellyToast on February 27, 2014 at 11:07 PM

why do these Progressives resisting the Rights guaranteed by the 2nd Amendment remind me of George Wallace, and Orval Faubus, standing in front of the entrance of a school attempting to deny Black students their 13th and 14th Amendment Rights?
That they too are Democrats is strictly a coincidence, right?

Another Drew on February 28, 2014 at 12:50 AM

Wha? CA is supporting the 2nd amendment?

Brock Robamney on February 28, 2014 at 5:54 AM

Nonpartisan’s diaper just exploded

Chuck Schick on February 27, 2014 at 9:15 PM

And 4 new trolls were born.

HumpBot Salvation on February 27, 2014 at 9:55 PM

Hilarious, but true.

HiJack on February 28, 2014 at 6:36 AM

In my state getting a CCW permit is a big yawn and a lot of folks get one just so they will have to go through the instant back-ground check. You still have to fill out form 4473, which the dealer is then required to enter that info into a log or ledger of some kind….and the dealer makes a copy of your DL.

I rarely use it, except to purchase.

HonestLib on February 28, 2014 at 7:47 AM

Heck….I meant……..just so they will NOT have to go through the instant back-ground check….

I need quad-focals as the tri-focals are letting me down. Sigh.

Geez, my first post here makes me sould like ‘ole harmless skeet shooter NP.

HonestLib on February 28, 2014 at 7:52 AM

I have a serious question here.

Since The Federal Despots (something we used to call courts) have been going around from state to state ruling that we have to accept Massachusetts or California gay marriages in my State, why doesn’t the same rule apply to Massachusetts, DC, Illinois, or California being FORCED to recognize a Kentucky or West Virginia concealed carry permit?

ConstantineXI on February 28, 2014 at 7:57 AM

I have a serious question here.

Since The Federal Despots (something we used to call courts) have been going around from state to state ruling that we have to accept Massachusetts or California gay marriages in my State, why doesn’t the same rule apply to Massachusetts, DC, Illinois, or California being FORCED to recognize a Kentucky or West Virginia concealed carry permit?

ConstantineXI on February 28, 2014 at 7:57 AM

If they were intellectually honest that would be happening. But these are Progressives. Honesty, intellectual or otherwise, does not apply.

sumpnz on February 28, 2014 at 9:11 AM

Local law enforcement must be able to use their discretion to determine who can carry a concealed weapon.

No. You do not rule us. (And, what you do cannot really be called ‘governing’, either.) You are our servants.

GWB on February 28, 2014 at 9:24 AM

Wha? CA is supporting the 2nd amendment?

Brock Robamney on February 28, 2014 at 5:54 AM

No. They‘re appealing. It’s even more amazing: the Ninth Circus is supporting the 2d Amendment.

GWB on February 28, 2014 at 9:26 AM

“I will do everything possible to restore law enforcement’s authority to protect public safety, and so today am calling on the court to review and reverse its decision.”

Poor Attorney General Kamala D. Harris has obviously forgotten the court decision that stated that law enforcement DOES NOT have a general ‘duty to protect’.

GarandFan on February 27, 2014 at 9:43 PM

Oh, you missed the nuance there, Garand. She’s not arguing for a duty to protect, she’s arguing for authority. Subtle, but important difference in attitude there.

GWB on February 28, 2014 at 9:31 AM

Attorney General Harris said. “I will do everything possible to restore law enforcement’s authority to protect public safety, and so today am calling on the court to review and reverse its decision.”

Yet, to my knowledge and belief, she has filed no charges against any of the 8 LAPD officers that shot, without any provable reasonable cause, 103 times at 2 unarmed Hispanic women, delivering the morning newspaper.

MTinMN on February 28, 2014 at 10:46 AM

Yeah, but Kamala Harris is the most beautifulest AG of all 57 states according to Obozo. So she can do whatever she wants.

Plus she’s been a little grumpy ever since Barfack started his selfie affair with the Danish Prime Minister.

ZeusGoose on February 28, 2014 at 11:28 AM

BTW Erika – love the cover photo you picked – I’ve got one just like it.

dentarthurdent on February 28, 2014 at 11:58 AM

“Local law enforcement must be able to use their discretion to determine who can carry a concealed weapon,” Attorney General Harris said. “I will do everything possible to restore law enforcement’s authority to protect public safety, and so today am calling on the court to review and reverse its decision.”

Uh, protect the public safety, or protect the gang bangers safety from being shot by law abiding citizens carrying concealed. How does disarming law abiding citizens protect their safety from the two legged predators in society, who have no problem obtaining firearms. And, no, law enforcement doesn’t have the authority to determine who can and cannot carry concealed. The Constitution says “the right of the PEOPLE to KEEP and BEAR arms, shall not be infringed”. So thats a right that we have over and above law enforcement’s authority. The only authority law enforcement has, is removing weapons from the possession of criminals. Seems to me the court decision was pretty clear. Abide by it AG Harris.

kjatexas on February 28, 2014 at 12:17 PM

“Dear Attorney General Harris:

“We have received your request to reconsider.
“**** you.”

Sincerely,
The California Supremes

orangemtl on February 28, 2014 at 12:51 PM

How does disarming law abiding citizens protect their safety from the two legged predators in society, who have no problem obtaining firearms.

kjatexas on February 28, 2014 at 12:17 PM

That’s easy – every human being (excepting the ones in LE and their bosses, of course) is a criminal just waiting to happen, a powderkeg just waiting to go off at the merest spark. They have a natural propensity to assume that citizens are criminals (ATF, DEA, that cop and his dog in NM, etc.). They believe there are no good guys.

Interestingly, those who want to carry have the same rationale (similar, anyway – we assume that anyone on the street might be a criminal, waiting to take us down). The difference is we know they might not be around when the badness happens – they assume that they will be there to handle it (or at least to clean up afterward).

GWB on February 28, 2014 at 2:34 PM

GWB on February 28, 2014 at 2:34 PM

Kinda makes you wonder which scenario requires the cops to do more paperwork:
1) innocent victim gets killed by criminal
2) criminal gets killed by intended victim who is not defenseless.

dentarthurdent on February 28, 2014 at 3:33 PM

dentarthurdent on February 28, 2014 at 3:33 PM

Excellent point!

GWB on February 28, 2014 at 3:36 PM

What would happen if a would-be voter had to show “good cause” for wanting to exercise their right?
Suppose the Government wanted to license printing presses, “for the protection of the public’s right to know”?

I want someone to go into CA with another state’s CCW license, and challenge them to honor another state’s paperwork as the US Constitution requires. What fun!

ReggieA on March 1, 2014 at 2:54 PM

Um, you’re talking about California.

Lanceman on February 27, 2014 at 9:19 PM

Why, you think the liberals are now all going to rush out for permits?

unclesmrgol on March 1, 2014 at 8:25 PM

Plus she’s been a little grumpy ever since Barfack started his selfie affair with the Danish Prime Minister.

ZeusGoose on February 28, 2014 at 11:28 AM

That’s because the Danish Prime Minister punches above her weight.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=erYpXzE9Pxs

unclesmrgol on March 1, 2014 at 8:28 PM