Posts Tagged ‘guns in public places’

In a closely watched case, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued a significant decision on March 21, in which it affirmed the ability of state law enforcement to limit the carrying of guns in public places. Reversing the decision of a federal district court in Maryland, the circuit court held that a requirement under Maryland law – that an individual demonstrate a “good and substantial reason” in order to qualify for a permit to carry a handgun in public – does not violate the Second Amendment.

Notably, the Fourth Circuit rebuked the district court for making a “trailblazing pronouncement that the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms for the purpose of self-defense extends outside the home” and it advised courts that they should await direction from the U.S. Supreme Court before determining whether or to what extent the Second Amendment might protect the possession of firearms in public.

The decision confirms that reasonable restrictions on carrying of handguns in public are constitutional, even if they strictly limit the number of individuals who may carry a handgun. As the Fourth Circuit explained, “The State has clearly demonstrated that the good-and-substantial-reason requirement advances the objectives of protecting public safety and preventing crime because it reduces the number of handguns carried in public. That is, limiting the public carry of handguns protects citizens and inhibits crime.”

Want more? Check out the other recent success stories.

As courts across the country hear Second Amendment challenges against important state gun laws, LCPGV is weighing in, turning our legal expertise into a series of amicus curiae (“friend of the court”) briefs filed in several significant cases.

Three of these cases — Moore v. Madigan and Shepard v. Madigan in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, and People v. Aguilar in the Illinois Supreme Court — involve Second Amendment challenges to Illinois statutes that prohibit the carrying of firearms (either openly or concealed) in public places. Illinois is the only state the continues to prohibit both open and concealed carry. In all three cases, the LCPGV briefs argue that: 1) carrying firearms outside the home for self-defense is not within the scope of the Second Amendment; and 2) even if possessing firearms in public is considered within the scope of Second Amendment protection, Illinois’ ban on carrying guns in public is constitutional.

We made similar arguments in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit in Hightower v. City of Boston. The Hightower case involves a Second Amendment challenge to Massachusetts’ firearm licensing law, which enables law enforcement to deny an application to carry a concealed weapon if the applicant fails to demonstrate he or she is a person suitable to own or possess such firearms. Our Hightower brief argues that the Second Amendment does not apply, and that even if it did, the “suitable person” standard easily survives scrutiny.

Photo by Jonathan Gibby/Getty Images

On April 14, 2012, Arizona Governor Janice Brewer vetoed a bill, for the second year in a row, that would have weakened restrictions on carrying a loaded firearm in public buildings and on public property.  Minnesota Governor Mark Dayton vetoed a bill on March 5, 2012 that would have created reciprocity with concealed weapons permits from all other states and expanded current stand your ground provisions outside of the home. In South Dakota on March 19, 2012, South Dakota Governor Dennis Daugaard vetoed a bill that would have allowed the carrying of concealed weapons without a permit.

Want to see more success stories? You can find them here.

Open Carrying: Provocative Conduct, Dangerous Consequences
Lindsay Nichols, Legal Community Against Violence, U.S. News & World Report “Debate Club,” April 25, 2012

LCPGV presents the public safety side of the open carry issue.  Contrary to the gun lobby’s misleading advocacy, the open carrying of firearms wastes law enforcement resources and jeopardizes, rather than aids, public safety.

State laws allowing concealed, loaded handguns in public have proliferated across the country in recent years. Despite the public’s opposition to these laws, more people can carry loaded guns in more places now than at any other time in modern history. LCPGV’s most recent publication, Guns in Public Places: The Increasing Threat of Hidden Guns in America, examines the dramatic shift toward permissive state laws that regulate who can carry guns in public and the surprising places in which they can carry them.

Guns in Public Places also highlights the encouraging recent victories against the gun lobby’s push to expand guns in public. For example, guns on campus bills were defeated in at least 11 states in 2011, and courts across the country have rejected Second Amendment challenges to strong concealed carry laws. These and other victories provide hope that the public’s common sense view that concealed, loaded guns do not belong in public places, will ultimately carry the day.

Read the complete publication here to learn more about gun regulation in your area.

Yesterday, LCPGV-supported bill AB 144 (Portantino) overwhelmingly passed the California Assembly. The bill would prohibit the open carrying of unloaded handguns in public places, and has received support from law enforcement statewide. Open carrying intimidates the public, wastes law enforcement resources, and increases the risk of injury and death due to the accidental or intentional use of firearms.

AB 144 now proceeds to the State Senate. For more on California firearms legislation, read our Summary of 2011 California Firearms Legislation.

Federal Court Rejects Second Amendment Challenge to Concealed Handgun Licensing Law

In another victory yesterday, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California upheld Yolo County’s application of California’s concealed carry licensing law, which requires an applicant for a license to demonstrate “good cause.”

In Richards v. Prieto, the district court soundly rejected the plaintiffs’ interpretation of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in District of Columbia v. Heller, stating that “Heller cannot be read to invalidate Yolo County’s concealed weapon policy, as the Second Amendment does not create a fundamental right to carry a concealed weapon in public.” The court concluded that “regulating concealed firearms is an essential part of Yolo County’s efforts to maintain public safety and prevent both gun-related crime and, most importantly, the death of its citizens.”

LCPGV congratulates Yolo County on this important ruling. LCPGV is proud to have supported the County during this litigation, providing technical expertise and support during the briefing process. Plaintiffs have appealed the Richards decision to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and LCPGV expects to file an amicus brief in support of the County in those proceedings.

We are alarmed to report that legislation has recently been enacted in Mississippi, and is currently pending in 14 more states, which would change current law to allow concealed weapons on college campuses. In addition, one state – Utah – already requires colleges to allow firearms on campus.

The gun violence prevention community opposes state government’s efforts to allow carrying of firearms by students, faculty or staff. We must urge our elected officials to vote against any bill permitting guns on campus. LCPGV supports preserving college campuses for education and believes firearms create an unacceptable risk in the college environment.

Saturday, April 16th is the fourth anniversary of the Virginia Tech shootings. Today, to honor the victims of that tragedy, we are joining with thousands of others in a national call-in day, organized by The Campaign to Keep Guns Off Campus, asking governors across the country to oppose this dangerous legislation. While California has no proposed laws of this type, we still urge you to call Governor Brown to let him know where you stand on the issue, and ask him to oppose any future attempts to bring guns on campus. If you live in a state where this legislation is being advanced, or if you have children or friends attending a school in these states, please call your governor now to ensure that your voice is heard.

Call Your Governor Now!

On April 12, two extremely important firearms bills moved out of the California Assembly Public Safety Committee.

AB 809 (Feuer), co-sponsored by LCPGV, would delete a provision of state law that currently requires sales records for long guns (rifles and shotguns) to be destroyed after five days. Similar to last year’s AB 1810, the bill would direct the Department of Justice to retain these records indefinitely, as it currently does for handgun records. Retention of long gun records would help law enforcement agencies quickly identify the owners of crime guns, and help them get firearms out of the hands of dangerous felons, domestic abusers, and the mentally ill. It would also help law enforcement be forewarned about the presence of long guns at private residences when responding to emergency calls.

AB 144 (Portantino), which would prohibit the open carrying of unloaded handguns in public places, also passed the Assembly Public Safety Committee. Current law does not prohibit the open carrying of unloaded firearms, even if an individual is also carrying ammunition. Open carrying intimidates the public, wastes law enforcement resources, and creates opportunities for injury and death due to the accidental or intentional use of firearms.

Both bills now proceed to the Assembly Appropriations Committee. For more information about all of the firearms bills under consideration in California this year, please visit our Summary of 2011 California Firearms Legislation.