New Jersey and California Updates

Help Support Ruger Forum:

Gary Slider

Bearcat
Joined
Nov 23, 2007
Messages
11
Location
West Virgiinia
20-843 New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn., Inc. v. Bruen (06/23/2022)
Both New Jersey and California DOJ have put out Directives/Legal Alerts instructing the Issuing Authorities in their respective states that the Good Cause no longer applies. That will make it less difficult in these two states but not a walk in the park. Handgunlaw.us believes that the May Issue states will change their statutes/rules removing the Just Cause but they will make it as difficult and Expensive as they can. They will most likely drag their feet in doing so. We also believe they will expand their list of places off limits the same as DC did when they were forced to go Shall Issue.

Link to CA Legal Alert - https://oag.ca.gov/system/files/media/legal-alert-oag-2022-02.pdf

Link to NJ Directive - https://www.nj.gov/oag/dcj/agguide/...ements For Carrying Of Firearms In Public.pdf

You should read all the SCOTUS Opinion. There are some really good things in there about your rights and issuing permits etc. One example at the bottom of Page 36 of SCOTUS Ruling are footnotes (Bold mine) that state the following:
_______________________

9To be clear, nothing in our analysis should be interpreted to suggest the unconstitutionality of the 43 States’ “shall-issue” licensing regimes, under which “a general desire for self-defense is sufficient to obtain a [permit].” Drake v. Filko, 724 F. 3d 426, 442 (CA3 2013) (Hardiman, J., dissenting). Because these licensing regimes do not require applicants to show an atypical need for armed self-defense, they do not necessarily prevent “law-abiding, responsible citizens” from exercising their Second Amendment right to public carry. District of Columbia v. Heller, 554

U. S. 570, 635 (2008). Rather, it appears that these shall-issue regimes, which often require applicants to undergo a background check or pass a firearms safety course, are designed to ensure only that those bearing arms in the jurisdiction are, in fact, “law-abiding, responsible citizens.” Ibid. And they likewise appear to contain only “narrow, objective, and definite standards” guiding licensing officials, Shuttlesworth v. Birmingham, 394 U. S. 147, 151 (1969), rather than requiring the “appraisal of facts, the exercise of judgment, and the formation of an opinion,” Cant-well v. Connecticut, 310 U. S. 296, 305 (1940)—features that typify proper-cause standards like New York’s. That said, because any permitting scheme can be put toward abusive ends, we do not rule out constitutional challenges to shall-issue regimes where, for example, lengthy wait times in processing license applications or exorbitant fees deny ordinary citizens their right to public carry.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-843_7j80.pdf


________________________
 

Jeepnik

Hawkeye
Joined
Dec 16, 2005
Messages
5,686
Location
On the beach and in the hills
Rather interestingly the L.A. County Sheriff, a short time back, issued a statement that he was easing the path to obtaining permits. One of his points was that the "Need" provision would no longer apply.

Now our current Sheriff was a dark horse during his election. He was running against an incumbent that had the backing of the Board of Supervisors. Upon his victory the Board and a number of other prominent non county officials went to war with him. He was starting to do good things when the county DA announce he would not prosecute a whole raft of crimes. The result has been as you can imagine.

Now my permit isn't issued in L. A. County I have property in another part of the state, and this is my legal address. It's where I'm registered to vote, etc. I'm not sure if you can have two permits issued in different jurisdictions, but I doubt it. Regardless, because of the shifting political situation in L. A. County I'll hang on to my current permit until Constitutional carry becomes a reality here.
 

GunnyGene

Hawkeye
Joined
Nov 23, 2013
Messages
7,029
Location
Monroe County, MS
  • Like
Reactions: RRM

RRM

Single-Sixer
Joined
Jun 12, 2022
Messages
203
Location
NWFL
There's a good read below about this very thing:


Good article. Many of us just will not live long enough to see all this play out. But, we got to see the virtual "first step" in a thousand mile journey.
 
Joined
Nov 15, 2005
Messages
9,165
Location
Greenville, SC: USA
I've always seen the hypocrisy of California, seemingly a very liberal state that still uses the old 'jim Crowe ' type laws with firearms. You have to have permission of the county sheriff, who we'll call 'Bubba', to be able to carry a firearm.
 

Jeepnik

Hawkeye
Joined
Dec 16, 2005
Messages
5,686
Location
On the beach and in the hills
To understand the origin of California’s permit system you need to go back to before it was part of the US.

The large land grant holders were basically leaders of independent states. Some good, some bad as is always the case. These Patrones used weapons restrictions as a means of keeping their subjects in check.

Had it not, as in Texas, been for the influence of American citizens we’d still be part of Mexico.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RRM

RRM

Single-Sixer
Joined
Jun 12, 2022
Messages
203
Location
NWFL
These Patrones used weapons restrictions as a means of keeping their subjects in check.

Our history of "firearms regulation" is deeply rooted in keeping guns out of one or more groups hands. But those were far from the most discriminatory laws--just real useful when you want to make sure you can keep the rabble in check.
 
Joined
Nov 15, 2005
Messages
9,165
Location
Greenville, SC: USA
that is what the ban on firearms by felons is all about.... if you look at the history.... since that became federal law certain crimes that were predominantly committed by select minorities were once considered a misdemeanor have now become felonies.....
 
  • Like
Reactions: RRM

mexicanjoe

Single-Sixer
Joined
Jun 7, 2010
Messages
371
Location
midland/odessa,texas
gun control law are rooted in Jim Crow laws which prevented blacks from arming themselves. Same with a poll tax- if you didnt have the dough, you dont get to cast your ballot. It is interesting to note which party was pushing this agenda & also railed for segregation and such. Many years ago Hispanics in the southwest were treated as second class citizens. Ive read where many of them followed the law and did no try to upset the status quo... With time however things began to change
 

Latest posts

Top