XPost: talk.politics.guns, alt.privacy, ca.politics
XPost: sac.politics, alt.politics.republicans

On 7/5/2022 4:08 PM, Leroy N. Soetoro wrote:

https://news.yahoo.com/california-takes-aim-supreme-courts-234510896.html

Does that mean anyone under 21 cannot be considered an adult? That would certainly kill drafting any of these under 21 juveniles and would
certainly curb the Democrats war pandering and profiteering. Also you
would certainly have to attain age 21 before being tried in an adult
court while being considered a juvenile. What happens to age 18 voting
rights? How about low point drinking that is allowed in some states?
Are the babysitting laws going to change to under 21 year old children? Chicago, Ferguson and other crime ridden cities will certain save a lot
of money with having mostly juvenile detention facilities rather then a
bunch of hard core adult prisons. It will certainly benefit us all by
being being mugged/robbed/assaulted by 21 and older, legal gun packing
thugs. Much nicer then by drugged up 14 year olds.

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — Days after the U.S. Supreme Court allowed more people to carry concealed weapons, California lawmakers on Tuesday moved
to limit where firearms may be carried and who can have them, while struggling to stay within the high court’s ruling.

They aim to restrict concealed carry to those 21 and older; require applicants to disclose all prior arrests, criminal convictions and restraining or protective orders; require in-person interviews with the applicant and at least three character references; and allow sheriffs and police chiefs to consider applicants' public statements as they weigh if
the individual is dangerous.

The California legislation was advanced Tuesday by the Assembly Public
Safety Committee on a 5-2 vote over the objections of gun owners rights advocates who said it goes too far and predicted that it, too, would be
ruled unconstitutional.

“This amendment is not improving California’s concealed carry laws — it’s
in defiance of this court opinion,” said Daniel Reid, the National Rifle Association's Western regional director. “We're seeing a complete redrafting of places where law-abiding citizens can carry in the state of California. It's an incredibly confusing patchwork.”

He said lawmakers are using a “shell game” to substitute new rules for the
one outlawed by the Supreme Court.

The proposed legislation would bar concealed weapons from schools and universities, government and judicial buildings, medical facilities,
public transportation, any place where alcohol is sold and consumed,
public parks and playgrounds, and special events that require a permit.

No other state uses those kind of restrictions, said Sam Paredes,
executive director of Gun Owners of California.

“This bill will never become law," he said.

The proposal would allow anyone whose application is denied to receive a hearing before a Superior Court judge.

Applicants would be required to provide fingerprints each time they apply
for a permit, regardless of whether they have previously submitted their fingerprints to the state Department of Justice, which opponents called redundant and designed to drive up the cost and bureaucracy of obtaining a license.

It also would require the applicant to be the licensed owner of the
specific firearm for which they seek a license, which opponents said would make it more difficult for spouses to be licensed for weapons they jointly own, potentially putting them in legal jeopardy.

Bonta said the Supreme Court ruling doesn't undermine other requirements
of California's law, including that those seeking to carry concealed
weapons demonstrate “good moral character.”

Sheriffs and police chiefs are required to perform background checks
before issuing permits. The applicant must have training in carrying a concealed weapon, must live or work in the city or county where they are seeking the permit, and the sheriff or police chief may require
psychological testing.

California officials issued about 40,000 permits last year, down from more than 100,000 during the peak year of 2016, according to information newly posted on the state Department of Justice's website.

Orange County had by far the most, at more than 65,000, followed by Fresno and Sacramento counties with more than 45,000 permits. By contrast, Los Angeles County, with about a quarter of the state's population, issued
about 3,600 permits, and San Francisco just 11.

But the database for some period also publicly disclosed the names and
other identifying information on the state's permit holders, in what the California Rifle and Pistol Association called an “unconscionable breach” of confidential information.

Bonta's office said it was investigating the exposure of personal information, adding that "any unauthorized release of personal information
is unacceptable.”

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)