Protected By the Good Lord And a Gun

Why I'm introducing a proposal to allow people to carry unloaded guns in San Juan Capistrano's parks.

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.

This post is contributed by a community member. The views expressed in this blog are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Patch Media Corporation. Everyone is welcome to submit a post to Patch. If you'd like to post a blog, go here to get started.

Steve Behmerwohld July 13, 2011 at 12:02 AM
Derek, you reference a 20 year old tragedy in Texas to justify people openly carrying firearms in our parks. Do you have anything more recent or relevant behind this idea? If a Sheriff sees someone openly carrying a firearm, are they to supposed to assume that the gun is registered and that the "carrier" is not a convicted felon or an irate spouse on the way to payback his wife's boyfriend. If your proposal is enacted, it will cause extra work for our already busy Deputies. If our Deputies ARE going to question people walking through a park with a 6 shooter strapped to their hip (and I hope that would be the case), isn't that going to be an added expense? Where do you suggest they cut their existing budget to pay for this extra policing?
Student July 13, 2011 at 04:33 AM
Alcohol and firearms are a great mix. Now maybe SJC will really have that "Old West" feel....
David Jensen July 13, 2011 at 11:10 PM
Derek, you sir are now one more reason I fear for the future of this country. The fact that this article is posted with a picture of Michele Bachmann only confirms the idiocy of your quest. "...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." Where in the world did you come up with that crap? People of conscience on both sides of the aisle find your argument to be insane. For being a "constitutional conservative" you certainly are taking a very wide view of the 2nd amendment, I suppose you think that those who "open carry" in the parks of San Juan Capistrano can serve us as the "well regulated militia". That way they can take care of the gun nuts who might start shooting us and also keep us safe from the tyranny of our government. From what I can see of your voting record as a member of this council, you seem intent on fostering your ideology at every opportunity. I trust the "good Lord" is protecting us from you and your friend Michele. David Jensen San Juan Capistrano
Jenna Chandler July 14, 2011 at 12:23 AM
I posted the picture; it's of Suzanna Hupp, the former Texas House Representative who Derek mentions in his blog
OCPraetorian July 14, 2011 at 06:04 PM
Where do you get the statistic that "constitutional conservatives" have a 2-1 majority in SJC? I don't remember that survey... How many people do you see carrying now, in the streets, where they are allowed? I've not noticed any ... who are you really representing here?
Student July 15, 2011 at 09:31 PM
He's representing an agenda, not the constituents that I know.
Otto July 21, 2011 at 03:54 AM
I am an ex military and law enforcement person,at present I am a business owner. I will not allow any person who are open carry into my business because my normal customers will be bother seeing an odd person brandishing weapons in public.Now if I see an open carry person in my business I will surely pull my own weapon(I have a conceal carry permit) and detain him/her until they can prove that they are normal and harmless and then I will tell them to leave.
Aaron Pluff December 03, 2013 at 02:40 PM
as a business owner I guess you can reserve the right to deny service to anyone BUT ...you have obviously forgot your force continuum...hostile act/hostile intent ring a bell? sounds like you should work on that responsible gun owner issue
Aaron Pluff December 03, 2013 at 02:41 PM
Derek, You have my vote


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »