A California law banning the carrying of firearms in most public places is blocked again

theyoyomaster@lemmy.world to News@lemmy.world – 242 points –
A California law banning the carrying of firearms in most public places is blocked again
apnews.com

LOS ANGELES (AP) — A new California law that bans people from carrying firearms in most public places was once again blocked from taking effect Saturday as a court case challenging it continues.

A 9th Circuit Court of Appeals panel dissolved a temporary hold on a lower court injunction blocking the law. The hold was issued by a different 9th Circuit panel and had allowed the law to go into effect Jan. 1.

Saturday’s decision keeps in place a Dec. 20 ruling by U.S. District Judge Cormac Carney blocking the law. Carney said that it violates the Second Amendment and that gun rights groups would likely prevail in proving it unconstitutional.

The law, signed by Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom, prohibits people from carrying concealed guns in 26 types of places including public parks and playgrounds, churches, banks and zoos. The ban applies regardless of whether a person has a concealed carry permit.

98

You are viewing a single comment

You're worried about the people who have never once robbed a bank? Worry about the criminals without legal ccws.

How about no one else with a gun is allowed to bring it in, so that when the guards/cops start aiming at the people with the guns they won’t be aiming at the wrong people? Why do you need your gun in a bank? There are armed guards there. You don’t need to be a cosplay hero in a bank.

It's a concealed carry license, not open carry, and you're imagining a problem that I'm not even sure if it has ever happened in California, and if it has, it's very rare.

What about the far more common event of a criminal targeting a person who is leaving the bank and going back to their car to rob them of their new withdrawal? They should be able to protect themselves against lethal force.

How common is that event?

It is common enough that bank employees are trained to open bank branches in pairs only after driving loops around the parking lot to check for hidden robbers, as standard branch opening procedure. Robbers have figured out that banks have money in them.

Armed robbery or all violent crime? Here's some stats: https://www.ppic.org/wp-content/uploads/JTF_CrimeTrendsJTF.pdf

tl;dr: there's a lot of crime in California, it's tracked. There's not a lot of cops and armed guards shooting people with legal ccws.

I’m talking about the thing you said was a more common event. I’m wondering how often people get robbed at gunpoint in the bank parking lot.

I don't have stats on that particular situation, it's not tracked, but I could find a video within 2 seconds of looking that happened within the last two years: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=cQeM0ilep5U

And now having watched the video, it's clear to me that a bank will not keep you safe. I think allowing people with ccws to carry into banks is a good idea, given this kind of thing "happens every day".

I just figured since you’re telling me it’s a lot more common, you would have some stats to back that up. One example is a good start though. But again, why do you need a gun inside the bank?

When you live in LA you hear about shit happening all the time.

Because going from your vehicle to the bank, and from the bank back to your vehicle is not safe. There's nowhere next to the bank to deposit your weapon before entering, therefore the only way to carry on the way to the bank requires being armed inside it too.

So would you agree then that the state should be able to require you to check your guns at the door of the bank?

Sure, if they provide the same level of security we have at airports, and jails, which have the same restrictions, that's fine by me. Disarming legal ccws and providing no security is reprehensible.

The armed guard isn’t enough?

Unfortunately not, they're stuck in the building, and have no obligation to help you, they're there to protect the bank, not you. And you can see how well the "armed guard" helped in the YouTube video above: they weren't even armed nor were they there.

The state? No. The Bank as a private business? Well they can certainly try.

So the state should not be able to regulate its militia?