|
|
|
|
|
|
| Washington, DC – Congressman Lou Correa released the following statement on the passage of H.R. 38 – Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017:
“In California, our law enforcement decides who gets issued a concealed carry permit. We require these permits because guns aren’t toys and carrying one in public without proper training can be deadly. This bill will allow people who don’t meet California’s standards to carry a concealed weapon in our streets. Our police officers oppose this legislation. I voted with our public safety officers and to keep our streets safe.” |
For those who think we have too many guns in this country causing way too much deadly violence, this new measure is awful beyond words.
The LA Times and the OC Register both ran editorials on this yesterday –the Times against and the Register for.
From the Register:
This bill matters to California. Currently, 14 of the state’s 53 representatives have co-sponsored the National Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act and it’s imperative that more of our representatives in Washington, D.C. support this bill. I’d personally like to urge Reps. Ed Royce, Jeff Denham, Ken Calvert, Dana Rohrabacher, and David Valadao to support this legislation.
This is also a fundamental Second Amendment and civil liberties issue. There is no reason a person who is trusted to carry his or her firearm in their home state cannot be trusted to do the same in another state. Crossing a state line does not make an otherwise law-abiding person want to suddenly commit violent crimes.
On the flip side, threats to your safety can happen anywhere, and just as easily as they can five minutes from home. The law should protect a person’s right to defend their own life – or the lives of others in the case of the attack in Sutherland Springs, Texas – and not restrict where and how a person can do that.
I’m happy to point out the shooter in Texas and the shooter in Las Vegas had never violated a single gun law prior to their murderous rampage — but the debate is a little different because we’re talking high-capacity automatic weapons versus a handgun.
From the Times:
While federal law establishes broad gun control policy, states set the rules under which people may carry concealed firearms. Some states, like California, set the bar high — sheriffs or police here may issue concealed carry permits only to legally eligible people who make a strong case for why they need to carry a firearm, such as those whose business involves carrying large amounts of cash. Neighboring Arizona, on the other hand, issues concealed-carry permits to anyone legally allowed to own a gun who has taken a gun-safety course.
Under the proposed reciprocity law, anyone with a valid permit from another state would be able to carry a concealed firearm in California, even if they do not meet California’s more stringent standards. This is a highly objectionable infringement on the responsibilities of state and local law enforcement to maintain public safety, and is clearly aimed at undermining gun control efforts nationally. What’s more, it will put guns into the hands of more people who shouldn’t have them.
Should you find yourself in a store, a restaurant, a place of business and notice someone carrying a weapon — get up and leave quickly. If you have items in the cart, leave them. You placed an order at a restaurant, tell the waiter or waitress you’re leaving because a customer walked in with a gun — and go. If there’s a gun present, the odds of falling victim to it increase. If stores and restaurants want to keep business, banning weapons inside their establishments could go a long way to making customers feel safe. It’s hard to tell a good guy with a gun from a bad guy with a gun. So let’s take guns out of the equation.