Of Arms and the Law

Navigation
About Me
Contact Me
Archives
XML Feed
Home


Law Review Articles
Firearm Owner's Protection Act
Armed Citizens, Citizen Armies
2nd Amendment & Historiography
The Lecture Notes of St. George Tucker
Original Popular Understanding of the 14th Amendment
Originalism and its Tools


2nd Amendment Discussions

1982 Senate Judiciary Comm. Report
2004 Dept of Justice Report
US v. Emerson (5th Cir. 2001)

Click here to join the NRA (or renew your membership) online! Special discount: annual membership $25 (reg. $35) for a great magazine and benefits.

Recommended Websites
Ammo.com, deals on ammunition
Scopesfield: rifle scope guide
Ohioans for Concealed Carry
Clean Up ATF (heartburn for headquarters)
Concealed Carry Today
Knives Infinity, blades of all types
Buckeye Firearms Association
NFA Owners' Association
Leatherman Multi-tools And Knives
The Nuge Board
Dave Kopel
Steve Halbrook
Gunblog community
Dave Hardy
Bardwell's NFA Page
2nd Amendment Documentary
Clayton Cramer
Constitutional Classics
Law Reviews
NRA news online
Sporting Outdoors blog
Blogroll
Instapundit
Upland Feathers
Instapunk
Volokh Conspiracy
Alphecca
Gun Rights
Gun Trust Lawyer NFA blog
The Big Bore Chronicles
Good for the Country
Knife Rights.org
Geeks with Guns
Hugh Hewitt
How Appealing
Moorewatch
Moorelies
The Price of Liberty
Search
Email Subscription
Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

 

Credits
Powered by Movable Type 6.8.7
Site Design by Sekimori

« Work on designing a super penetrating bullet | Main | Commemoratives for sale »

More carry permits in Sacramento County?

Posted by David Hardy · 26 August 2009 09:49 PM

Story here.

Hat tip to Dan Gifford....

· State legislation

4 Comments | Leave a comment

Left Coast Conservative | August 26, 2009 11:30 PM | Reply

And this liberalized attitude would have nothing at all to do with Sykes, et. al. v McGinness which has been filed by Alan Gura?

Gene Hoffman | August 27, 2009 12:49 AM | Reply

Nope. The Sheriff only filed a motion to conduct discovery so he could find some way to grant permits to the plaintiffs in our case and attempt to moot it. Too bad they're boring people who only have the need for self defense...

http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/index.php/Sykes_v._McGinness

-Gene

brerarnold | August 27, 2009 2:05 AM | Reply

And of course civilian gun carriers will do something stupid like shooting themselves in the leg. Why, look at the data from the thousands of counties all over the United States that have shall-issue laws -- people are shooting themselves in the leg all the time. Not!

Now, I would not have been surprised if it was the Brady idiot saying this. But it was the gun owner (Perry) -- they must have looked pretty hard to find one that had a foot on both sides.

wrangler5 | August 28, 2009 9:54 AM | Reply

I suspect that many (most?) of the political LEOs who resist issuing permits are afraid of being asked by a reporter "what, can't your department protect us?" To which the legally correct answer is, of course, "No, that's not my job," but in general no politician dares say that for the record.

But when budget cuts make it clear that police "protection" will decline no matter what, the perceived risk to these LEOs of issuing more permits declines substantially.

Leave a comment