Good old boys organization for California concealed carry

I was reading the appellants’ opening brief in EDWARD PERUTA, et. al., v. COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, et. al. and found some interesting material.

It turns out that if you are much more likely to get a concealed carry permit if you are willing and able to join the Honorary Deputy Sheriff’s Association (“HDSA”) – a private, civilian entity, wherein membership is achieved merely by being sponsored by a current member, passing a background check, making a “donation” and paying annual dues (see pages 10 and 11).

Sponsored by a current member, make a “donation, and pay dues? Imagine only getting permission to exercise your right to an abortion, free speech, practice your religion, or a jury trial if you could get “sponsored by a current member” and made a “donation”. If this were anything other than a gun issue you would hear the screams of racism and sexism from the other side of the continent.

The right to keep and bear arms is a specific enumerated right and it’s time these repressive governments get slapped down over it.

For more information on this case see Michel & Associates, P.C. web page on Peruta v. San Diego.


7 thoughts on “Good old boys organization for California concealed carry

  1. I was thinking about this “specific enumerated right” today and wondering how it would work with the mentally ill. Do you have any thoughts on this?

  2. Ubu: There’s this thing called “due process” that can (and must) be followed to suspend certain enumerated rights on an individual basis. It involves things like court hearings, evidence, and establishing proof.

    The mentally ill (and others) can have their freedoms of speech, self-determination, rights to keep and bear arms, and other freedoms and rights suspended or removed, provided due process is followed in doing so. This (theoretically) prevents people – as individuals or groups – from having their rights taken away arbitrarily.

  3. Ouch, Joe. I think it would behoove you to keep your lists of analogous rights to actual rights; unless you were being flippant and simply listing abortion due to its sacred cow status amongst those who also generally detest gun ownership?

  4. +1 to M Gallo

    Additionally, if you look at the origins of gun control both in our country in abroad, much of the time the motivation was not some tyrannical conspiracy to enslave the population. Whether the Sullivan Act, Jim Crow laws – it’s easy enough to flag those as “racist” (which they were). However it’s important to also recognize that at the time, the majority of citizens associated criminal violence with those groups. (Italian immigrants as mafia, and African Americans as “uppity” blacks)

    England had something similar, though perhaps not necessarily as racist, they wanted to protect against arming bolsheviks, anarchists, etc. in their own country.

    I imagine there are enough Californians who’ve witnessed gang wars, immigrant drug crime and all the rest, that they’re tempted to surrender their liberty in exchange for the hope that some government official with “may issue” authority can filter out the scum bags. It’s human nature, and history has shown this consistent attitude for over a century in this country.

  5. @M Gallo, Mostly flippant to make the point with certain people. One could make a case for “my body, my choice” being a natural right but I would just as soon stay away from that topic here. But the indisputable fact is that the Supreme Court has ruled that such a right does exist and until there is a Constitutional Amendment or Supreme Court ruling otherwise (very unlikely in the foreseeable future) the right to an abortion, in this country, is just as legally real as any other right.

Comments are closed.