Appeals court allows California law to go into effect, restricting concealed carry in public places | CNN
www.cnn.com
A US appeals court Saturday paved the way for a California law banning the concealed carry of firearms in “sensitive places” to go into effect January 1, despite a federal judge’s ruling that it is “repugnant to the Second Amendment.”

A US appeals court Saturday paved the way for a California law banning the concealed carry of firearms in “sensitive places” to go into effect January 1, despite a federal judge’s ruling that it is “repugnant to the Second Amendment.”

The law – Senate Bill 2 – had been blocked last week by an injunction from District Judge Cormac Carney, but a three-judge panel filed an order Saturday temporarily blocking that injunction, clearing the path for the law to take effect.

The court issued an administrative stay, meaning the appeals judges did not consider the merits of the case, but delayed the judge’s order to give the court more time to consider the arguments of both sides. “In granting an administrative stay, we do not intend to constrain the merits panel’s consideration of the merits of these appeals in any way,” the judges wrote.

  • teft
    41·
    12 days ago

    deleted by creator

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      15·
      9 months ago

      “Common sense” is the thing that made people think the sun orbited the Earth for thousands of years. Laws should be based on evidence, not “common sense,” which is why it isn’t surprising that most conservatives think “common sense” is behind everything they believe.

      https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/religious-landscape-study/sources-of-guidance-on-right-and-wrong/common-sense/party-affiliation/republican-lean-rep/

      Why do so many of you here think we should make or strike down laws based on gut feelings?

      Also “no one wants to do the research” is nonsense. The ability to do the research has been blocked for a very long time. The government is literally not legally allowed to do the research.

      https://abcnews.go.com/US/federal-government-study-gun-violence/story?id=50300379

      You and the others here simply want to do what feels right to you regardless of evidence, lack of evidence, or consequences. I’m not talking about any one side on gun issues either. I’m talking about people like you who don’t care whether or not there is evidence about the effectiveness or lack thereof when it comes to any law, but especially gun laws when it comes to America.

      This isn’t a religious country, so why do you want your laws to be faith-based?

      (To all of you arguing with me: those links you see above? That’s what is called backing up your claims.)

      • teft
        41·
        12 days ago

        deleted by creator

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
          12·
          9 months ago

          No, I’m not assuming you are a conservative. I am saying these “common sense” arguments are faith-based much like a lot of conservative thinking, which is why I am saying it shouldn’t be done.

          Doesn’t it strike you as even a little odd that, despite multiple people telling me that a shooter will take out the armed civilian first, not a single person has actually given an example of this? I’m not talking about a statistical survey, I’m talking about even one example.

          The only answer I have received so far from anyone that doesn’t rely on “this makes sense to me even though I can’t prove it” is the person who says it isn’t about a deterrent, it’s about feeling safe. And I wish that’s what everyone else had said because at least you don’t need evidence for that sort of claim. On the other hand, it’s a little hard to justify laws based on what makes you feel safe considering that’s a big impetus for the drug war.