4
WORLD
The Anchor
February 19, 2014
Court strikes down gun restrictions Andrew Gomez-Seoane World Co-Editor
In what has been hailed as a major victory for gun rights advocates in the state of California, a federal appeals court last Thursday struck down a series of rules that permitted counties to restrict as they saw fit the right to carry a concealed weapon in public. In a 2-1 ruling, the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals overturned restrictions on carrying these concealed handguns in many of California’s majors urban centers, including Los Angeles, Orange County, San Diego and San Francisco. The court’s decision was based on the belief that these restrictions violated the Second Amendment’s guarantee of the right to bear arms because they denied any citizen who followed the law the constitutional right to carry weapons in public unless they demonstrated the need for protection under specific reasons. “We are not holding that the Second Amendment requires the states to permit concealed carry,” Judge Diarmuid O’Scannlain, a Reagan appointee, wrote for the panel. “But the Second Amendment does require that states permit some form of weapon for selfdefense outside the home.” Advocates for gun rights hailed the court’s decision, stating that citizens must have the right to protect themselves in public. Meanwhile, proponents of the ruling described it as aberrant and a reckless expansion of law that would inevitably lead to more gun violence. In the meantime, California’s rules will remain in
Today in History 1674— The Netherlands and England signed the Peace of Westminster, by which New Amsterdam passed to the English (and was renamed New York). 1807— Aaron Burr, vice president under Thomas Jefferson, was arrested for treason. He was later acquitted. 1878— Thomas Edison patented the gramophone (phonograph). 1968— The first nationwide broadcast of Mr. Rogers’ Neighborhood aired on PBS. 2008— Fidel Castro resigned as President of Cuba after 49 years in power. Raúl Castro, Fidel’s brother, succeeded him as president. Source: www.infoplease. com/dayinhistory/
effect for the foreseeable future, pending appeals. Some officials in San Diego County said that they may seek a rehearing before a larger panel, and legal experts believe that the issue will be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court. The decision last Thursday stems from a change in state law in 2012 that took away the right of the residents to carry unloaded firearms in public, with ammunition separately. Before such a ban was enacted, courts in the state routinely held that restrictions on carrying concealed weapons were in fact lawful. Immediately after, gun owners began to argue that the ban and restrictions on concealed weapons made it impossible to defend themselves in public. In general, California leaves it to counties to decide on permit requirements for carrying concealed weapons in public. The rules in many of the major cities are even more restrictive than those in other areas. Gun owners who were denied permits by San Diego County officials sued, charging that their federal constitutional rights were being infringed upon with no legal basis or specific reasons regarding the right to defend oneself. “Given this requirement, the typical responsible, lawabiding citizen in San Diego County cannot bear arms in public for self-defense,” wrote O’Scannlain, who was joined with Judge Consuelo Callahan, an appointee of former president George W. Bush. The ruling, by two of the 9th Circuit’s most conservative judges, has conflicted with the
Photo Courtesy of Associated Press
ARMED AND PROUD— Gun rights advocates are pleased with the federal appeals court
ruling that California’s sometimes draconian restrictions on carrying guns in public violate the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. findings of other circuit courts and established rights beyond what the Supreme Court has guaranteed. Experts say that the high court has applied the Second Amendment in the context of possessing guns in the home, not the streets. Judge Sidney Thomas dissented, arguing the decision “upends the entire California firearm regulatory scheme” and “endlessly intrudes and disrupts valid and constitutional legislative choices.” Judge Thomas, a Clinton appointee, said that the Second Amendment was never interpreted to protect concealed carrying of guns in public and also noted that the state of California was not named a defendant. Senior Deputy San
Diego County Consul James Chapin, who represented San Diego in the case, called the lawsuit an “end run” against the state’s new ban on carrying guns in public. “What they really want to do is strike down California’s open carry ban,” Chapin said. “That’s really what this is about.” UCLA professor Adam Winkler, an expert on gun laws, called the ruling “a huge victory for gun owners in California.” “They have been seeking the right to carry concealed weapons for years now,” Winkler said. He said that even though the ban on open carry affected very few individuals (as most gun owners do not want the attention), many more people
might want to apply to carry concealed weapons. Chuck Michel, who represented the gun owners in the case, said that the suit targeted the San Diego sheriff because the county has a large base of Second Amendment supporters. The rules set forth by the county discouraged gun owners from even applying for a permit. In this case the ruling affects only California and Hawaii among the 9th Circuit states, due to other states granting permits for carrying guns in public. According to Eugene Volokh, a professor of constitutional laws at UCLA, “California rules are essentially unconstitutional because the rule is, your right to carry a gun is at the mercy of the sheriff.”