9 thoughts on ““Shall Carry” In California”

  1. The problem I have with so much of this type behavior is that there are few to no consequences for the officials involved. Far far beyond just first and second amendment issues.

  2. While I am happy about the SCOTUS decisions reaffirming the right to keep and bear arms as far as the people of California are concerned elections matter. There is only so much SCOTUS even if it rules correctly can do for you. If the people of California keep returning these gun rights denying (& other Constitutional rights denying) folks to office ultimately they deserve what they get.

    1. california elections have been at best dubious for many years. They haven’t had voter ID. Then between the jungle primary and universal fraud by mail, we must presume the elections are crooked. But california, especially the big cities, people just expect the democrats to win so the elections don’t get the scrutiny they need.

  3. Have you ever read the Constitution of the Soviet Union(1936) Fundamental Rights and Duties of Citizens? All sorts of wonderful things that are all dependent on the will of an all-powerful Communist Party that thought they were a joke.

    TL/DR: Authoritarians gotta authoritarian and laws mean nothing to them — only power.

  4. “Authoritarians gotta authoritarian and laws mean nothing to them — only power.”

    A Constitution (in Russia) is meaningless if one side has all the guns; like I said if they keep returning this lot (like Maxine Waters) to office the people of California are getting what they deserve.

    “Waters said from the steps of the court. “Women are going to control their bodies no matter how they try and stop us. The hell with the Supreme Court. We will defy them. Women will be in control of their bodies.”

    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/maxine-waters-reacts-dobbs-ruling-hell-supreme-court-we-will-defy-them

    Maybe she doesn’t get that all the court did by vacating Roe v Wade is return the issue to the States; they can expand or ban the right to abortion as they see fit. So defy in what sense?

    1. Just more Jim Crow from the party that invented Jim Crow.

      Southern state voter registration applications from before the 1960’s included the same “personal references” garbage that the AG is suggesting for CCW permits. They were not only used to qualify or disqualify people from voting based on who they used as references, they were also likely used the same way Facebook and others use your personal relationships now to more easily identify “pre-crime” in like-minded individuals.

      You’re so completely spot on.

  6. “Just more Jim Crow from the party that invented Jim Crow.”

    One of them (Pelosi) made a speech where she suggested that vacating Roe v Wade was just the first step. That if the Republicans take over the House/Senate they will attempt pass legislation outlawing Abortion. Likely it would be vetoed of course. In any case while I am not a lawyer I but wonder if that would pass SCOTUS’s interpretation of the Constitution. Article 10 says that unless it is spelled in said document that the federal government has the authority, if doesn’t; it is reserved for the States or the People.

    “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

    So by the courts rationale based on the 10th Amendment Congress doesn’t have the authority to either ban abortion (Republicans) or pass the equivalent of Roe V Wade legalizing all abortions (Democrats); both would be unconstitutional. Alito seem to indicate that was the view he saw; reserved for the States (or the people by referendum) to decide period.

Comments are closed.