Editor's Note: Since publication of this piece, Patch has learned that many of the. The post remains on our site for reference and news purposes.
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." — Thomas Jefferson
While acknowledging the average response time to a 911 call is over four minutes, yet the average response time of my 357 magnum is 1,400 Feet Per Second, I was thinking:
Our beloved city is protected by the good Lord; however the ability to protect our community, family and selves with a gun is under constant threat. Most recently our city staff innocently yet ignorantly attempted to regulate firearms in city owned subsidized housing. Despite our city attorney’s argument otherwise, such action would have violated the Constitution. Just ask San Francisco in Doe v. San Francisco Housing Authority. Fortunately our council voted 3 to 1 to put a stop to it. (Kramer was the sole no vote while Taylor recused himself). Other threats to our constitutional rights to defend ourselves unfortunately remain, including the right to open carry.
Open carry refers to holstering a firearm on your person.
Once upon a time in California, one could open carry a loaded firearm. That all changed in 1967 when a group of black panthers marched on the state capital while open carrying loaded firearms. This prompted the Legislature to ban the open carrying of loaded firearms. (Regrettably most gun control laws in America have been motivated by racism.)
Recently, I was surprised to learn that San Juan Capistrano has stricter gun control laws than the very pro gun control state as a whole. Presently state law allows for the open carry of unloaded firearms, yet in San Juan Capistrano where constitutional conservatives out number gun control advocates two to one, such civil liberties are strictly prohibited in city parks.
Thus, on July 19, I will be that if approved, will allow for the open carry of unloaded firearms in city parks as well as fishing in city creeks, all to be consistent with state and federal law.
Suzanna Hupp and her parents were having lunch in Killeen, Texas, when a man began shooting diners with his handgun, even stopping to reload. Suzanna's parents were two of the 23 people killed (20 more were wounded). Suzanna owned a handgun, but because Texas law at the time did not permit her to carry it with her, she left it in her car. She's confident that she could have stopped the shooting spree if she had her gun. (Texas has since changed its law.)
Many assume that more gun control will result in less crime; it seems obvious.
The truth, however, as Ms. Hupp would point out, is counter-intuitive. More guns equal less crime while more restrictions result in higher crime.
Why you ask? Because reasonable, responsible, law-abiding people remain reasonable, responsible, and law-abiding whether they have a gun or not. However, when they do have a gun, they are better able to stop or prevent criminal activity. Criminals will do what criminals do regardless of laws to the contrary and firearms restrictions merely guarantee them a safer working environment.
Stay tuned for two more blog posts this week expressing my thoughts on open carry laws.