(California) Yolo County concealed weapons law overturned

[petronius]

The same panel that issued the San Diego opinion applied that ruling to the CCW policy in Yolo County. The SD ruling has been appealed by the CA Attorney-General, so I assume the Yolo County ruling hangs on that outcome and isn't really an extension of the debate:

--- Snip ---

In an unpublished memorandum issued Wednesday by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, a three-judge panel found Yolo County’s “policy impermissibly infringes on the Second Amendment right to bear arms in lawful self-defense.”

--- Snip ---

Wednesday’s appellate ruling rests on that much broader February opinion in a similar lawsuit challenging San Diego County’s policy, which essentially found that county’s sheriff and other officials throughout the sprawling circuit cannot demand proof that a citizen has “good cause” before a concealed weapon permit can be obtained.

--- Snip ---

but the more interesting surprising piece of the article came at the end, as the article describes how the Yolo suit got its start in Sacramento County, which once had a more restrictive policy but, along with neighboring counties, has now relaxed its policy:

--- Snip ---

Sacramento County’s policy changed dramatically following the 2010 race to succeed McGinness. All the major candidates for sheriff rushed to convince voters they would relax the strict policy. In May of 2010, there were 319 concealed weapon permits in Sacramento County, according to Sacramento Bee stories about the Sacramento County sheriff’s race. There are now about 4,200, a sheriff’s spokesman said Wednesday.

Sheriff Scott Jones now has a policy stating that applicants must be of good moral character and have “good cause” to carry a weapon, but he made it clear during the campaign that “good cause” could mean simply wanting a permit, as long as the applicant did not have a mental illness or criminal background and had passed a firearms safety course.

--- Snip ---

http://www.sacbee.com/2014/03/05/6212877/yolo-county-concealed-weapons.html

[Eleanors38]

1. Pretty clear these counties see the handwriting.

[S_B_Jackson]

2. Considering that in Peruta

the handwritiing took the form of heavy bold words clear enough that everyone except those residing in Castle Bansalot and the offices of the CA Attorney General's office could understand......

"May-Issue" permitting is about to have the plug pulled on it's ventilator.

[Token Republican]

3. Yes but

The Yolo county case is simply following the Peruta decision. If Peruta stands, all cases will be like Yolo. If Peruta falls, so does Yolo.

There's a lot of nuances to this decision, most of which I won't discuss on this group.

Peruta simply brings all of the 9th Circuit into alignment with 46 other states, and eliminates the handful of counties in a small number of states that denied CCW licenses. For the most part, the denial of the right to CCW is now limited to a small number of counties on the east coast in three states that have individual counties that deny CCW.

Believe it or not, the actual direct effects of Peruta is far less than it would appear, since most people in the 9th circuit already have the right to a CCW.

[S_B_Jackson]

4. Peruta's effects - at the moment

only really apply to about half the counties in CA, the whole of Hawaii, and Clark County, NV.

If you've read the decision in Peruta, skip down to page 58........O'Scannlain to get his shots in on those 3 Districts (not states) along the east coast - drawing a map for the USSC to the points at which the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th Circuits decided to simply ignore the USSC's ruling in Heller hoping that by ignoring it, it will simply go away.

[Token Republican]

5. But it is is controlling

to all of the 9th Circuit even if it only affects the areas you mentioned.

Its a well written decision, independent of which side you take. It cites real cases and follows precedent.

Its a far cry from the district court decision that challenged New York's SAFE act. Judge Skretny actually cited mother jones as a legal authority. While the gun control side likes the decision itself, they seem to be oblivious that relying on mother jones to support gun control legislation carries as much weight as relying on the NRA website to oppose it.