The NRA’s “Anti-Endorsement” in Sheriff’s Race

Guest Column Guest Column 6 Comments

Share

Guest Commentary
by Michael Schwartz

You can’t find an intersection in San Diego that isn’t plastered with the name of at least one of the three candidates for the office of Sheriff. The attention given to this race is not surprising since there is no elected incumbent for the highest law enforcement position in the county.

We’ve seen some unusual twists and turns with some interesting endorsements over the last two years. The latest twist is an anti-endorsement, for lack of a better term. A notice has been issued from the lobbying arm of the National Rifle Association, the Institute for Legislative Action (ILA) authored by Executive Director Chris Cox. The alert does not endorse one candidate over another; rather it implores San Diego voters to “Vote Against Appointed Sheriff Gore!”

Mr. Cox goes on to say that Appointed Sheriff Gore’s anti-gun views “have no boundaries” for denying Carry Concealed Weapon permits (CCWs) to military veterans and CCWs have only been issued to “campaign contributors, personal friends, and select few others who fit his arbitrary definition of ‘good cause.’”

One candidate has the alert proudly displayed on his campaign blog:

http://sheriffjay.org/blog/archives/516

Appointed Sheriff Gore is currently named in a lawsuit based on his policies for issuing CCWs. “Peruta et al vs. San Diego County Sheriff William Gore et al” asserts that Appointed Sheriff Gore’s policies to determine CCW eligibility are unconstitutionally infringing on the fundamental right to keep and bear arms codified in the Second Amendment. An attorney for the plaintiffs told me that they are working with a group of plaintiffs from San Diego County and should have a decision by November.

This case is moving forward ahead of the Supreme Court’s issuance of its decision on another case the NRA is involved with, “McDonald vs. Chicago”, which is expected to incorporate the Second Amendment against the states. The decisions from the Supreme Court are expected sometime in June.

Share

Comments 6

  1. Anti-gun is all the NRA has against GORE?

    Post-Ruby Ridge and Waco, the NRA famously spoke out against federal jack-booted thugs (and rightly so)

    NOW, we have a certified jack-booted thug running the Sheriff’s Dept, and all the NRA can say is he’s anti-gun??

    GORE is unqualified to fill any responsible position, as proved by Ruby Ridge, where his illegal and unConstitutional order (per the US Supreme Ct, 9th Circuit Court, US Dept of Justice, US Senate) to “shoot any armed male on sight” caused the MURDERS of a 14-yo BOY (shot in the back) and his MOTHER (shot in the head while holding her 10-month old infant).

    “A Justice Department task force has concluded that those rules of engagement were unconstitutional because the U.S. Supreme Court has determined police can use deadly force only to save lives or prevent grievous injury to officers or innocent parties.”

    http://www.seattlepi.com/archives/1995/9509200047.asp

    Don’t believe me? Google “Gore Ruby Ridge” and learn about the Idaho Attorney General’s valiant attempt to try the FBI agents for MURDER, GORE’s invoking of the 5th Amendment when testifying before the Senate, etc.

    The only folks supporting GORE are either ignorant of the facts, or want a hatchet man / trigger man to carry out their orders…

    Vote for Jay LaSuer, a law enforcement professional without women and kids on his resume….

  2. BTW – NRA should be endorsing Jay LaSuer for Sheriff right NOW.

    He was NRA A-rated for 6 years in the Assembly.

  3. http://www.signonsandiego.com/weblogs/all-in-favor-politics/2010/may/21/gore-resonds-to-nra/

    In this response appointed Sheriff Gore claims that his policies are restrictive due to the requirements of state law. A year ago I asked Sheriff Gore if any sheriff in California had been threatened with legal action or successfully stopped from issuing CCWs for using “personal protection” to fulfill the California’s requirement of “good cause”. His response at the time was “no”.

    My research confirms that no ruling has ever denied the ability of a California sheriff to accept “personal protection” for the state’s requirement of “good cause”. Currently at least 23 counties in California will issue CCWs for personal protection to law-abiding citizens.

  4. Yeah – Gore is lying bout the “CA law won’t let him issue CCWs” topic. But he’s counting on receiving the votes from the congenitally-stupid demographic….
    .

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *