Redundant “Waiting Period” in California for Acquisition of Second Firearm Makes No Sense

yo, Bill, it ain't about public safety, you know this. It's about incrementally taking your right to arms away. They will be successful.

California began waiting periods for gun purchases and crime went up. So they increased the waiting period and crime went higher.
The simple fact is that criminals don't apply for a permit to rape or rob and they don't wait.

California should adopt the Alaskan laws, any citizen can buy a gun and walk out of the store in 15 minutes. Any citizen can get a permit to carry their gun concealed in Alaska, but they don't require a permit to carry in Alaska, the permit is for the convenience of the Alaskan who travels to the Lower 48, where about 40 Stattes honor the Alakan permit.

California does not honor out of state permits. Florida passed a concealed carry law over a decade ago. When tourists became targets of local criminals who had learned that local citizens could shoot back, Florida began issuing permits to out of state residents and honoring out of state permits. Tourism is safe in Florida and not in California.

If the Supreme Court does the sensible thing this year with due regard for history, it will say this:

If the people of Washington, D.C., want different gun laws, or no gun laws, they can elect different officeholders.

The Heller case should never have been considered a Second Amendment issue in the first place. That case has nothing at all to do with the continuation and effectiveness of a well regulated militia, which is a body of citizens enrolled for military discipline.

The Second Amendment was written in 1789 to guarantee the continued right of the people to keep and bear arms under state laws that provided for well regulated militias. Most men were obliged under such laws –- called by Washington “well regulated Militia Laws” -- to arm themselves for militia service. They were required to be enrolled in a specific militia company and to muster for periodic training.

It would have been odd indeed for Madison to have framed the Second Amendment to protect the “right” of the people as individuals to obey their own state militia laws.

The amendment was an instruction to the federal government not to use the Constitution to replace the state militia system with a peacetime standing army – a prospect that had been vigorously opposed by such anti-federalists as Patrick Henry.

Thomas Jefferson, the most prominent active proponent of a Bill of Rights, recognized the militia purpose of the Second Amendment. He referred to the amendment as “the substitution of militia for a standing army.” (Thomas Jefferson to Dr. Joseph Priestley, June 19, 1802)

The Second Amendment is silent upon the right of individuals to arms for personal purposes, a subject left to state constitutions and state laws except where other provisions of the federal Constitution apply.

Mr Cavala:
I believe that you are mistaken on two points.

1) A COE does exempt you from a brady background check. (Ask DOJ)

2) To my knowledge, the only time a buyer's eligibility is checked is at the time of sale, NOT annually. However, a COE holder is checked annually.

If you have different information, I'd certainly like to see it. (PC citations)

^Leif Rakur,

I tried to start a militia company and then have the militia company own the guns. I couldn't figure out how to do that in any state. I think you know that's impossible. Outside of law enforcement, an individual citizen must the owner of a firearm. Thus, you're basically saying that there is no recognized right in the Constitution to keep and bear arms - pretty slick of you.

That's wrong. The Second Amendment is in fact directed toward an individual right to keep and bear arms.

Regards,
-Jake

It is my understanding that the background check is an automatic process done by computer when the dealer enters the buyers information. No cost to the state.
California has more gun laws than any other state and they are only to make it harder and more expensive for the legitimate gun buyer. They don't reduce crime nor serve any worthwhile purpose. Same with the high capacity magazine ban. A short drive to Arizona, Nevada or Oregon
solves that. Criminals don't care about the law.
The drop test is another farce by putting a burden on manufactures. It doesn't cover used guns, only new. A gunsmith can't build you a custom gun...This list goes on and on

I just bought a new shotgun and had to go through the ten day waiting period. I don't understand what the big deal is. how inpatient are you that you cant wait ten days? if it even helps a little bit in keeping guns out of criminals hands or gives someone time to "cool off" than I'm ok with waiting ten days.

Post a comment

Commenters: You must preview your comment before posting. And please only hit "Post" once; it may take a while, but your comment is being processed. Thanks.