Appeals court allows California law to go into effect, restricting concealed carry in public places | CNN
www.cnn.com
A US appeals court Saturday paved the way for a California law banning the concealed carry of firearms in “sensitive places” to go into effect January 1, despite a federal judge’s ruling that it is “repugnant to the Second Amendment.”

A US appeals court Saturday paved the way for a California law banning the concealed carry of firearms in “sensitive places” to go into effect January 1, despite a federal judge’s ruling that it is “repugnant to the Second Amendment.”

The law – Senate Bill 2 – had been blocked last week by an injunction from District Judge Cormac Carney, but a three-judge panel filed an order Saturday temporarily blocking that injunction, clearing the path for the law to take effect.

The court issued an administrative stay, meaning the appeals judges did not consider the merits of the case, but delayed the judge’s order to give the court more time to consider the arguments of both sides. “In granting an administrative stay, we do not intend to constrain the merits panel’s consideration of the merits of these appeals in any way,” the judges wrote.

  • @[email protected]
    12•1 year ago

    IMO, a lot of people see the open carrying types to just be people cosplaying badasses. The type that has spent basically 0 time training to use it, outside maybe taking it to a range and firing off a hundred rounds. They see it as a gun to be stolen?

    The only time I see open carry that seems to make sense in all of this is shop workers/cashier. I’ve been in stores that have a reputation based on what they sell to get hit by robbers, and the guy working is carrying outside his belt. Like a smoke shop or liquor store for example.

    • Flying Squid
      10•1 year ago

      I’d like to see some actual data to support this. Much like I’d like to see some data that concealed carry actually has a negative effect on crime.

      • @SupraMario
        2•1 year ago

        https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/does-allowing-law-abiding-citizens-carry-concealed-handguns-save

        The most conservative estimates show that the adoption of “shall issue” right-to-carry firearm laws reduced murders by 8 percent, rapes by 5 percent, aggravated assault by 7 percent, and robbery by 3 percent. Although the initial drop in crime was often small, the longer the law was in effect, the larger the drop in crime over time. The benefits of concealed handguns were not limited to those who used a handgun in self- defense. By virtue of the fact that handguns were concealed, criminals were unable to tell whether a potential victim was equipped to strike back, thus making it less attractive for criminals to commit crimes when they came into direct contact with victims. An additional woman carrying a concealed handgun reduced the murder rate for women by approximately three to four times more than an additional man carrying a concealed handgun reduced the murder rate for men. Further, the study found that the increased use of guns in heated traffic disputes and the increased number of accidental handgun deaths was insignificant compared to the lives saved from violent crime that was prevented.

        • Flying Squid
          1•1 year ago

          I cannot read that beyond the abstract, so I have no idea what to take away from that or what the actual evidence is.

          Furthermore, the author of that piece appears to have a lot of issues with his research if his Wikipedia page is of any indication.

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Lott

          • @SupraMario
            1•1 year ago

            That’s on me, I thought the damn .gov site would hold the whole thing lol

      • @[email protected]
        0•1 year ago

        Can’t help you there, again everything I said was my personal feelings on the matter being a Texan having talked to people about it a ton over the years.