General Discussion has a thread claiming the Supreme Court has declined to hear the case, so the San Diego Sherriff's restrictive policy on issuing CCW licenses remains intact.

In a place and at a time when violent crime is ever-increasing and increasing in its severity; in a time when Police refuse to enforce the laws; in a time when courts have ruled the Police have no responsibility to prevent crime and protect you; in this time of terrorist attacks; in this time of releasing felons from prisons before their term is finished; in this time of releasing potentially dangerous people from the mental hospitals,...

NOW is the time when the good people of California and the USA need to be armed to defend themselves.  

If the government will not do it, they should at least not prevent The People from doing it for themselves.

I agree wholeheartedly! There are still plenty of free counties in California, remember which ones are so you have a safe place to fall back to if needed.

Didn't the Peruta case say that the State can be restrictive on concealed carry if unrestricted  Open Carry was available.  (or vice versa if Open was restricted then concealed should be unrestricted) that the State has to allow carry of some kind outside the residence.

This ruling was based on the situation and laws as of the time of the case.  Open Carry was nominally available so the State/Sheriff could be restrictive on concealed carry.  Open Carry was banned while the case was working it's way up, but for whatever reason, the Court decided to not take that in to account and narrowly ruled on the case before it and disregarding the changes in the laws.    I guess I'm in favor of the courts looking at the cases in front of them and not allowing things happening outside the court influence their decisions, in general.  They decide to let in misellaneous stuff on a regular basis everybody is screwed.

So I'm wondering if (and I may be way off base here.) if SCOTUS has ruled defensive carry outside the home is allowed, states must permit it with strict scrutiny on restrictions.  Since CA has banned Open Carry, then Sheriffs must permit Concealed Carry with minimal interference.

?????

You've got fingers just like a Kansas City whore.


Makes for a few decisions, if I think I should carry when I go someplace, should I really be going there?  (Just in general, situational awareness kind of things, driving to LAX in the middle of the night on surface streets)  or,

This is bullshit, I'm carrying (of course I really don't that would be illegal, ahem.)   like when walking the dog, in the evenings, crime is almost non-existent in my neighborhood, otoh we got coyotes.  I know from experience my knucklehead thinks they are dogs and wants to play with them.    Plus there are some occasions when I need to pick up a family member at work in the middle of the night, or when I go to my Model RR Club and get out really late or early, depending on your point of view.  The area around the club ain't all that great, on the other hand as empty as it is, somebody isn't going to go there and hope that somebody shows up.  They will go someplace where they can expect a paying customer.  But we have been seeing and hearing indications of some poor guys who have slipped their trolleys.  You know standing outside a bank back window at 2 am shouting Scripture.  Or maybe I might want to take visitors or family members to some interesting places in downtown LA, old family residences, one of the Mural Districts.  there's no valid reason that I should avoid going there.

I think my decision is going to be prepared when I go places I want to go.

Now we are getting more of Jerry's kids getting released, gang activity is increasing in the neighboring cities