.

Court to Allow San Diego County Journalist Right to Carry a Concealed Weapon

In San Diego County, residents must pass a training course and show valid reasons for needing a concealed weapon.

Patch file photo.
Patch file photo.

A federal appeals court today reversed a lower court ruling that denied a journalist's right to carry a concealed weapon in San Diego County, saying that the county's restriction infringes on Second Amendment rights.

In a 2-1 decision, a three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals overturned San Diego County permit requirements because they denied law- abiding citizens the right to carry a concealed weapon in public for self- defense.

The appeals court said San Diego County's policy was too restrictive because it required applicants to show a specific concern for personal safety.

"Given this requirement, the 'typical' responsible, law-abiding citizen in San Diego County cannot bear arms in public for self-defense," Judge Diarmuid O'Scannlain said in the majority opinion.

California law generally prohibits carrying guns in public, but residents can apply for a license to carry a concealed weapon in the city or county where they live or work.

In San Diego County, residents must pass a training course and show valid reasons for needing a concealed weapon.

In the San Diego case before U.S. District Judge Irma Gonzalez, several people sued the county of San Diego, saying they were denied the right to carry a concealed weapon, and the judge ruled for the county.

The appeals court ordered the case sent back to San Diego for further proceedings.

—City News Service

What do you think of this ruling? Tell us in the comment section below.

Libi Uremovic February 14, 2014 at 12:48 AM
they didn't strike down the entire ruling, they just made an exemption for journalist..... with the reasoning they used they should have struck down the law for everyone...
lisa shoshannah shaw February 14, 2014 at 10:36 AM
Love how the corrupt of society like drug dealers and murders can be ready for action anytime they desire but someone like me who won't win in a confrontation against one of them for myself or my children is rendered defenseless and victimized because common sense is a thing of the past these days and evil allowed to thrive relentlessly.
Dave Wilkins February 14, 2014 at 12:27 PM
This is a great reversal ruling by the court! Like Lisa said above, the criminals don't have to have a permit to carry a gun and you never know when you need to be ready to defend yourself and/or your family. The second amendment was intended just for that, as well as being able to repel a government out of control and forgets that they are "of the people, by the people, and for the people" and not a kingdom of their own.
Pop Quiz February 14, 2014 at 09:53 PM
I like all my constitutional rights. Is their order a random coincidence ?
Jon Hall February 16, 2014 at 11:31 AM
Interesting how different people interpret this --- yes, a journalist was one of the people who brought the action to the courts --- but the ruling clearly applies to all who citizens can meet the standards set forth by the broad definition of the concealed carry law (not by the narrow view of Sheriff Gore or other Demi-Gods) --- I applaud the 9th for finally getting one right ...

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »