• 2nd Amendment Foundation Issues Travel Advisory: Your Gun Rights Are No Good in California



    By AWR Hawkins

    On August 7, the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) issued its first ever travel advisory warning American gun owners not to go to California unless they are willing to enter the state disarmed or risk going to jail.

    The gun rights group is “warning law-abiding armed citizens that their civil rights could be in jeopardy due to that state’s restrictive gun control laws.”

    SAF founder and executive vice president Alan Gottlieb observed:

    "The California Legislature has been out of control for years when it comes to placing restrictions on the Second Amendment rights of honest citizens. Right now, I wouldn’t suggest to any gun owner that they even travel through the state, much less to it as their final destination.

    Lawmakers in Sacramento either ignored or have forgotten that in 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court incorporated the Second Amendment to the states via the 14th Amendment in SAF’s landmark case of McDonald v. City of Chicago. The Second Amendment’s protection of the right to keep and bear arms applies to state and local governments, but they seem rather oblivious to that fact in the halls of California’s Legislature."


    Read full story here:http://www.breitbart.com/california/...ion-ca-travel/
    Comments 24 Comments
    1. milktree's Avatar
      milktree -
      How is this any different from NJ or NY or MA or IL?

      Is this statement from SAF a bit of a political statement?
    1. Horrible's Avatar
      Horrible -
      Good to see that CA cares more about harassing law abiding citizens as opposed to MS-13 gang members. Oh well, just another day for the loony left. Anything to push the political agenda forward and control their citizenry tighter.
    1. cockpitbob's Avatar
      cockpitbob -
      California refuses to recognize any concealed carry permit other the one they issue. This is an expression of Democratic hegemony whereby they have made concealed carry licenses extremely difficult for Californians to acquire — fewer than 100,000 Californians have a license — and they do not want to provide a means for additional law-abiding citizens to be armed via reciprocity.
      I was going to say that you could replace CA with MA in that paragraph, but in a state of 35million, only 100K people have LTCs?!?!?!? That's less than 0.3% of the CA population have their LTC. At least here in MA, about 7% of us have their LTC.
    1. Mesatchornug's Avatar
      Mesatchornug -
      Quote Originally Posted by cockpitbob View Post
      I was going to say that you could replace CA with MA in that paragraph, but in a state of 35million, only 100K people have LTCs?!?!?!? That's less than 0.3% of the CA population have their LTC. At least here in MA, about 7% of us have their LTC.
      Remember, however, that you can own/possess in CA without a license. This skews the math - plenty of folks there may simply have a couple long guns and not be counted whereas everyone here that wants to be legal hast to be in the system, as it were.

      Also, I think their math is off in your linked article. The MA population is ~6.8M. 380K is closer to 17% of the population. Higher if we only count "adults."
    1. Kevin_NH's Avatar
      Kevin_NH -
      CPRC's 2014 report showed 4.8% of the total US population had a license to carry, climbing to 6.06% for 2015, their report found ten states where more than 10% of adults have concealed handgun permits, with the highest being Indiana (15%) and South Dakota (14.7%).

      I'd expect that in a "shall issue" states where the primary benefit of a license to carry is that you can carry concealed (e.g. not MA or a Constitutional Carry state) about 7% of the adult population would be licensed to carry. Some states (Illinois) may technically be shall issue, but make it difficult and expensive to qualify, apply, Illinois is at about 2% today, about what I'd expect to see in California if they removed discretionary denial.
    1. fishgutzy's Avatar
      fishgutzy -
      MA should be on that list too. If I made the mistake of entering Massachusetts with my standard FNS9 with the 3 standard magazine, even in compliance with separating full magazines from the pistol I could get upwards of 30 years in prison if sentenced consecutively. Having cartridges (or even spent brass) is an add on charge of 1 year per. [based on what I have read. I'm not a lawyer nor do I play one on TV]
    1. fishgutzy's Avatar
      fishgutzy -
      Quote Originally Posted by Kevin_NH View Post
      CPRC's 2014 report showed 4.8% of the total US population had a license to carry, climbing to 6.06% for 2015, their report found ten states where more than 10% of adults have concealed handgun permits, with the highest being Indiana (15%( and South Dakota (14.7%).

      I'd expect that in a "shall issue" states where the primary benefit of a license to carry is that you can carry concealed (e.g. not MA or a CC state) about 7% of the adult population would be licensed to carry. Some states (Illinois) may technically be shall issue, but make it difficult and expensive to qualify, apply, Illinois is at about 2% today, about what I'd expect to see in California if they removed discretionary denial.
      CA requires all guns to be registered. I checked to see if I could bring my non-list pistols to CA if I moved there. They said yes but all must be registered within 60 days. I'd never actually move there but I did go out for an interview. Free trip.
    1. rwl1955's Avatar
      rwl1955 -
      same as NY, so could they please include NY in their travel advisory? I think NY is worse than CA. for lack of gun rights.
    1. radioman's Avatar
      radioman -
      Quote Originally Posted by Mesatchornug View Post
      Remember, however, that you can own/possess in CA without a license. This skews the math - plenty of folks there may simply have a couple long guns and not be counted whereas everyone here that wants to be legal hast to be in the system, as it were.

      Also, I think their math is off in your linked article. The MA population is ~6.8M. 380K is closer to 17% of the population. Higher if we only count "adults."
      I think you math is off. 5% of 6,800,000 is 340,000. So 380k would be about 5.2% no where near 17%.
    1. Mesatchornug's Avatar
      Mesatchornug -
      Quote Originally Posted by radioman View Post
      I think you math is off. 5% of 6,800,000 is 340,000. So 380k would be about 5.2% no where near 17%.
      ::facepalm::
      Such an elementary mistake - I flipped the numerator and denominator. I'm an idiot. Thanks for calling me on that.
    1. GlockJock's Avatar
      GlockJock -
      Lawyer (he's Pro2A, but not a "gun lawyer) friend I just chatted with about a different matter, but he's wondering if SAF actually does more harm than good by acknowledging that the CA legislature has shaken gun owners to the core... That MAYBE (?) it might be better off not writing articles like this which validate/empower/enable etc the batshit legislators to "do even more against the big bad gun owners, who are "now so worried about our strong efforts that they'll keep out of our gun free Shangri-La with their evil nasty firearms and..." etc.
    1. rwl1955's Avatar
      rwl1955 -
      Quote Originally Posted by GlockJock View Post
      Lawyer (he's Pro2A, but not a "gun lawyer) friend I just chatted with about a different matter, but he's wondering if SAF actually does more harm than good by acknowledging that the CA legislature has shaken gun owners to the core... That MAYBE (?) it might be better off not writing articles like this which validate/empower/enable etc the batshit legislators to "do even more against the big bad gun owners, who are "now so worried about our strong efforts that they'll keep out of our gun free Shangri-La with their evil nasty firearms and..." etc.
      ********
      Nope, call them out and identify them. When the SHTF they'll know they're next.
    1. lpc's Avatar
      lpc -
      Quote Originally Posted by rwl1955 View Post
      same as NY, so could they please include NY in their travel advisory? I think NY is worse than CA. for lack of gun rights.
      The big difference with New York is that for New England residents there is no driving around. You just need to be careful.
    1. Chevy 2 65's Avatar
      Chevy 2 65 -
      Sell it to Mexico. Along with NY, NJ, Maryland, Mass.
    1. Dadstoys's Avatar
      Dadstoys -
      If you replaced the words gun owner with women or minorities there would already be people getting perp walked into federal court for civil rights violations.
    1. noddaduma's Avatar
      noddaduma -
      Glad I left California when I did. Had to give up working for the Navy blowing stuff up, but I'm better off in a state that still thinks the idea of individual liberty means something.

      California does not just have ****ed up gun laws. That is one entire corrupt hard-core socialist system there, deep and wide. I would post first-hand accounts of how dangerous that state is, but I am trying to watch my blood pressure.
    1. VetteGirlMA's Avatar
      VetteGirlMA -
      So when the hell is anyone going to fight to stop this madness? Jesus I send checks to all these organizations and all I get back is scare letters. Hopefully less talky and more walky? You know drag these sick control freaks into court and restore civil rights in this country?
    1. amm5061's Avatar
      amm5061 -
      Quote Originally Posted by rwl1955 View Post
      ********
      Nope, call them out and identify them. When the SHTF they'll know they're next.

      They tried that before with listing the legislators' home addresses and stuff for the ones who voted in favor of these batshit gun control laws. They responded with lawsuits, even against Derek for the link to it being posted here.

      Honestly, though, I think that's fair game. It's public information, anyway, and none of these jackasses ever give a single **** when the antis publish the home address information of ccw holders in the freaking newspaper. So turnabout is fair play in my view here.
    1. Len-2A Training's Avatar
      Len-2A Training -
      Quote Originally Posted by VetteGirlMA View Post
      So when the hell is anyone going to fight to stop this madness? Jesus I send checks to all these organizations and all I get back is scare letters. Hopefully less talky and more walky? You know drag these sick control freaks into court and restore civil rights in this country?
      They all send scare letters but SAF is the one org actually suing in Federal courts to try to cut back the insanity. NRA just uses the scare tactics to boost their revenue and then takes credit if SAF wins a suit.

      I say this as a Life Member of both orgs.
    1. noddaduma's Avatar
      noddaduma -
      Calguns Foundation works closely with SAF and NRA out in California as well. The reality, however, is that the state government is dominated by a single party which introduces anti-gun legislation by the bucketload. So you can imagine that it's like sticking your finger in the leak while the whole dam collapses around you.
  • Visit our sponsors