The Appellees (County) in Peruta v. San Diego have filed their response to the Appellants (Ed Peruta, et al) opening brief in the 9th Circuit. The Bradys along with the International Brotherhood of Police Officers and the Police Foundation have filed an
amicus brief in support of San Diego.
The Bradys are, of course, pounding the table with, "In The Home!"
Both briefs spend some time telling the court how the discretionary laws of CA are quite constitutional, as CA law allows unloaded open carry. They are both silent on how you can not carry openly (unloaded or loaded) anywhere within those GFSZ's! Even under Federal Law, you must have a license/permit to carry (issued by that State) in order to carry within 1000 feet of a school. CA has passed a similar law, so theoretically, you might be charged as violating both laws.
It appears that San Diego has caught on to the fact that this case has a much larger scope/magnitude than just S.D. County alone:
Quote:
|
This case is an indirect effort to change California‘s statutory limitations on the public carry of loaded firearms by attacking the concealed carry licensing policy of a single county sheriff. Appellants‘ argument is, at its a core, a challenge to Penal Code section 12031 rather than this Sheriff‘s administration of concealed carry licensing.
|
Well, Doh!
The County then spends a few pages painting a spectacular picture of their licensing scheme and how fair it is.
They then spend a few more pages explaining how the scope of the right does not include anything outside of the home...
And even if it did, CA has provided for alternative methods of carry that are completely fair and do not substantially burden (Thank you,
Nordyke panel) the right.
Moving on.
They contend that the Sheriffs' practices meet any standard of scrutiny. They then say that (are you sitting comfortably?):
Quote:
|
Intermediate Scrutiny is Applied When Firearm Possession in The Home is Involved.
|
Excuse me! That flat out contradicts
Heller.
followed with
Quote:
|
Rational Basis Review Would Be Appropriate after Nordyke.
|
Same old arguments. We've read them, time after time.
If you feel you must read the arguments, Michel & Associates P.C. (MAPC) has the files:
http://michellawyers.com/guncasetrac...rutavsandiego/