Guest Commentary
by Michael Schwartz
A development yesterday in a local federal court case will have far reaching implications when it comes to your gun rights.
Peruta v. San Diego County Sheriff Bill Gore is a federal Ninth Circuit court case that was brought against the Sheriff for his policies regarding issuing a concealed weapon permit.
The law requires that in addition to passing a background check, taking a two day class (including a range proficiency test), paying a fee, and completing a thorough application, applicants for a concealed weapon permit must show “good cause”.
Yet, acccording to a 2010 statement by NRA-ILA’s Executive Director Chris Cox, “campaign contributors, personal friends, and select few others who fit his arbitrary definition of ‘good cause’” are the only ones who fit into Gore’s extremist criteria for issuing a permit. The few San Diegans who have been able to obtain a carry permit under Gore are Deputy Sheriff Association members, business owners who carry a lot of cash, or someone who has already been the victim of a crime and can prove a direct threat still exists.
So, if you help raise money for his department, if you’re protecting cash (not your life), or if it’s too late and a crime has already been committed…then Gore will allow law-abiding citizens to practice their right to bear arms.
Three San Diego County residents had a problem with Gore’s policies and decided to sue. The primary plaintiff, Ed Peruta, is a retired, part-time resident of San Diego who sought a permit from every state he travels to via motorhome between Connecticut and California twice a year. He wanted to make sure that he could protect himself and his wife while enjoying their golden years. California is the only state where he was unable to obtain a license to carry a concealed firearm due to Sheriff Gore’s policies.
Jim Dodd is a Santee resident and Navy veteran and Michelle Laxson is a Lakeside resident and hairdresser. Both Dodd and Laxson are long-time San Diego residents, law-abiding gun owners, and wanted to be able to defend themselves. Like so many before them, they too were denied their right to carry by Sheriff Gore. So in 2009, all three sued.
Earlier this year a panel of three Ninth Circuit judges ruled that Gore’s policies are unconstitutional and infringe on the rights of San Diegan’s. It is important to point out that the state’s law was not ruled unconstitutional. Sheriff Gore’s policies were ruled unconstitutional.
California Attorney General Kamala Harris was not involved in the case until after Sheriff Gore decided not to pursue appealing the decision earlier this year. Harris then petitioned the Ninth Circuit Court to continue on with the case in Gore’s place.
Yesterday the Court ruled that the state of California has no “imperative reasons in favor of intervention on appeal,” because this was a case against Sheriff Gore, not California. This is the Court following the law and being consistent in its decision making.
Look for the law firm that won the case yesterday, Michel & Associates, to rightfully sue San Diego County for the hundreds of thousands of dollars it cost to bring it to a conclusion. Because Attorney General Harris was not eligible to take over the case, San Diego County is on the hook for Gore’s legal costs.
Also look for clarification from the San Diego County Sheriff’s department on the process moving forward for issuing a concealed weapon permit.
Despite the fiscal costs to the tax payer, this is a major victory for your right to bear arms.
Schwartz is the volunteer Regional Coordinator for Gun Owners of California