Why AB144 may be the best thing we could ask for to restore our right to keep and bear arms:
9-17-2011 updated 10-31-2011

I find it most timely that I write this on the anniversary of our Constitution. AB144 could be a great gift to us. Allow me to explain.
Our opponents, the enemies of liberty seek to oppress us. They have done so incrementally. Why have they not done so in a sweeping action? Because they wish to lull the people into passivity as no one action is sufficient enough to provoke them to action. Contesting against them all is viewed as to difficult, there are too many targets, and “we can live with them”, or if we choose not to live with them, we leave CA, and that is actually their preference, for every pro-liberty citizen/voter who leaves CA is one less political opponent for them to contend with. Those who leave are their most intractable opponents!
Our American Revolution occurred because the British backed us into a corner. The British overreached, they should have (for them to succeed) been more incremental! We could yield our rights, flee, or fight. They gave us no other option. Their acts were so oppressive that the people (the10% that actually make things happen, not the greater body) had to make a choice. We chose to resist, as must we again. The resistance was not armed, that only came about much later as the British refused to yield. The resistors forced their neighbors to realize the gravity of the situation and that they too must make a choice.
A preface to my friends to explain the impact of open carry. Open carry is what the opponents of liberty fear the most. If there are 10,000 concealed carry owners in So Cal, who would know? Those 10,000, and a few friends. Now consider 10,000 open carry people in So Cal, many of whom (I would prefer all) are women! Who will know? Everyone! Those 10,000 OCs and their highly visible holstered firearm will each be seen by an average of 100 people, every day! At the supermarket, in the bank, Starbucks, at the kids games, church, everywhere. Those 10,000 OCs will impact ONE MILLION people every day! What will the people see? That gun owners are regular folks, Susie in line at Vons, Bob picking up his dry cleaning and Bruce at church. They will see that gun owners are good people, regular people, their neighbors. The public would be quickly acclimated to seeing firearms on the hips of regular people, not cops, just their neighbors. How will the politicians demonize them? “Who ya gonna believe, me? Or your own eyes?” Will there be the ninnies who are upset? Yes. But when everyone they cry to laughs at them because they see Erika at Baskin- Robbins with her gun, she not dangerous, she’s cute! OC will change the non-gun owning public perception of gun owners, powerfully, completely and swiftly. It will proselytize more effectively than anything anyone can say. The public will see that if Erika can carry a gun to defend herself when she strolls over to Baskin-Robbins, so can they, and their daughter.
This swift change is why we have AB144. The enemies of liberty know full well what I laid out to be is on target. If they allow the OC movement to grow up and have 10,000 OCs in So Cal, it’s game over, they lose. Therefore they have chosen to “strange the infant in the cradle”. AB 144.
With the passage and signing of AB144 they have over-reached. They have forced us into a position where we must commit to our course of action. We lovers of liberty will be faced with a choice. We may either
1. Give up our guns. They win.
2. Sneak around (so we avoid jail). They win, and you will likely go to jail at some point.
3. Leave the State, again they win.
4. Resist.
5. Legal action. This strategy will be pursued by the NRA and CRPA. AB 144 is a gift to the litigation. Let me explain. In the Peruta v. County of San Diego case California, like the handful of “may issue” states, allows sheriffs and police chiefs to arbitrarily reject carry permit applications from people who are fully eligible for permits under state law.
In the NRA-ILA supported case of Peruta v. County of San Diego, several individual plaintiffs (along with the California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation) are challenging San Diego County Sheriff William Gore’s refusal to issue carry permits to qualified applicants. Briefs are currently being filed before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. NRA-ILA is represented as an amicus curiae (“friend of the court”) by former U.S. Solicitor General Paul Clement, who is making the strong argument that restrictions on our Right to Keep and Bear Arms must be reviewed under the highest possible level of judicial scrutiny.
The case is on appeal from a ruling by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California. That court came up with the notion that discriminatory permitting isn’t a burden on the Second Amendment because California law allows a person to carry a loaded firearm when in “immediate, grave danger,” and also allows a person to carry an unloaded firearm openly. Therefore, claimed the court, “Should the need for self-defense arise, nothing in [state law] restricts the open carry of unloaded firearms and ammunition ready for instant loading.”
It appears that the State has destroyed the very basis of the court’s argument that there is no need to carry concealed, one can carry open! Not any more. This is an excellent example of over-reaching.
#6 We all get issued security guard cards and gun permits. It’s complicated by doable. Probably cost folks $500 a year to do it. Yes, I know how to do this.
#7 A 2nd Amendment loving Sheriff is found who will gladly and openly issue permits for any law abiding Californian. He/She will issue to any and all applicants on a shall issue basis irrespective of their County of Residence. This could work beautifully, who is this Sheriff? I will be sending out the 58 letters to ask. If people can go to their local chief of police, lets find one.
#8 OC will be OC rifle! This is already occuring.The law only refers to 'handguns', excludes rifles.This willmakeOC more difficult but also more really obvious,and that may yield massive political awareness as women have to carry a rifle on their back to be protected! {roblem is it eliminates many peoples practical day to day ability to OC, but many OC will step up and shoulder it.

Well I know the readers are not going to yield their guns, sneak’in around trying to avoid jail is not going to work; We refuse to run away, so we must resist, but how to resist and succeed is the question?
This is where I believe that AB144 is our opportunity and the answer!
The Governor has now signed the bill and it will become law at the stroke of midnight New Year’s Day 2012.
The challenge is how to effectively resist. Yes pursuit of the legal option is excellent and will be done. How can we assist it and what do we do for the next ten years? #’s 1,2,and 3 are not very appealing.
I will present options for number four.
Bruce Boyer , [email protected],com