Southern California -- this just in

« Previous Post | L.A. NOW Home | Next Post »

Should California lawmakers get special status to carry concealed weapons?

Talk back LASome California lawmakers are saying their jobs have become dangerous -- so much so that they want to be able to carry  concealed weapons.

They are citing the shooting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.) in Tuscon and threats from constituents in California as grounds for them to have easier access to permits to carry weapons, the Times' Patrick McGreevy reports.

"I've had guys physically come up to me ready to punch me out," said state Sen. Lou Correa (D-Santa Ana), co-author of a new permit proposal.

Under current law Californians who want to carry concealed firearms must apply to their county sheriff or police chief and show "good cause" for permission. That can include threats of violence or a dangerous job. Under the new bill, being an elected state official or a member of Congress would constitute good cause. The officials would, like others, be subject to a background check, and a sheriff or police chief could still turn down the application.

Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca objects to the idea, noting that elected officials should have to go through the same process that requires them to show good cause for the permit. And, in an unusual show of agreement, both gun rights and gun control advocates agree that elected officials should not have special status.

Do you agree? Are California lawmakers exposed to so many threats that their position alone should qualify them to acquire a concealed permit? Or should they be treated like every other citizen? Tell us your thoughts below.

Comments () | Archives (52)

From John Longenecker, second amendment author:

I have news for you: you are now experiencing the very same conditions most citizens experience, and the case for officials to carry concealed handguns is identical to our own case ignored by the very same people now seeing it our way: being armed. If you believe in concealed weapons for yourselves, you understand the concept as 90 million gun owners have been saying it.

"There are nuts out there!" was the very same response Dianne Feinstein gave when she was asked about her own concealed carry permit for a high caliber revolver hand cannon.

The fact is that this appeal for concealed carry exhibits most clearly the greatest disconnect in all that is wrong with elites; they expect it to be understandable for them to obtain CCW permits with advance clearance while the rest of us somehow are not able to show cause clearly enough.

Either this special treatment is to be turned down so officials live like the rest of us, or we ALL get CCW permits. You get to carry yours, and we get to carry ours, otherwise you're making the unmistakable statement that we are not equal and that you're special.

The complaint is that citizens are very tired of being so very dependent on officials, but now we caught a break: finally, legislators see it our way and do the natural thing. They want to be armed.

Thank goodness I live in Virginia, where my government understands my right to Open Carry my (loaded) firearm, or I can easily obtain a CHP/CCW to conceal carry my firearm.

Californians need to wake up and realize that they are going to keep losing rights to tyrannical governments that make different rules for them, than for you. Vote anyone out that does not respect your rights as a citizen.

If the gun control these tyrants have imposed on the people of California works, there is no reason for them to go armed. If their restrictions on the liberties of the citizens do not work, they should be repealed and every law-abiding citizen should enjoy the "privilege" the legislators seek to claim for themselves.

This proposal reeks of hypocrisy and false elitism. Support for this measure should be a permanent disqualification from any office of power or trust.

Righteous revolutions have been built on less. Speed the plow.

In good behavior.

First, they need to make Kalifornia a "shall issue" CCW license state, then they need to follow the process everyone else has to follow. No special privilages.

Better yet, let's just go with Constitutional Carry, no license required, just like the framers of the 2nd Amendment meant it!

California laws passed by the California legislature forbidding the carrying of arms by citizens are unconstitutional and have been, at the very least, since the states ratified the 14th amendment.

Now, a legislator expects to be exempted from the very laws he and his co-conspirators have passed over the years. Since when has his life been declared more important than the lives of all those Californians he disarmed and who have died due to the inability to defend themselves and their families?

He helped cook up this stew he should be required eat it just like he expects others to do, or throw it out so nobody has to eat it.


Why should these people be given anything? They don't work for the people they work to maintain their political seats, and by so doing cause nothing but gridlock in this state. Weapons I think not

Yes, California lawmakers should be able to get a permit allowing discreet carry of a personal sidearm, just like all the rest of the legal California residents.

They should not be allowed to carry a gun at all. They have demonstrated their poor judgment and lack of trustworthiness. If they had guns, they would likely shoot someone, and then claim that it was while they were on official business, so the taxpayers would be on the hook for the damages.

That is a no brainer. They should be checked out just like everyone else. Just because you are politician doesn't mean you have the correct mindset to be armed with a deadly weapon.

I guess it all comes down to what would be easier to investigate: A citizen shooting a politician or a politician shooting a citizen.

Hey libs/Dems, I thought gun control in CA works? Whats happening down there that all of the libs/Dems need guns all of a sudden.

Whatever it takes to make California a Right To Carry state, works for me.

I say lawmakers should NOT be treated any differently than the average citizen. If you feel unsafe holding office, QUIT! We can replace you fast! If our elected officials were truly representing the people, they'd be loved and re-elected instead of being threatened. But they are bought and paid for by lobbyists and special interest groups, many representing foreign governments. I do not feel sorry for these traitors. If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.

Anyone living in certain part of L.A. sholud be allowed to carry a concealed weapon. The gangs have no problem getting firearms. They have no problem using them. A citizen in these neighborhoods are subjected to deadly threats every day of their lives.

Legislators should be held to the same standard as the citizenry and not be given any special privileges.

One solution to to make CA a shall issue state or even better - constitutional carry. Sadly, that will not happen in my lifetime.

The new America: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, and endowed with certain rights by their creator, unless they are a duly elected member of the legislature, in which case special privileges apply."

You make stupid gun carry laws, you can live with stupid gun carry laws.

Pass Constitutional Carry; decriminalize self defense!

Here we go....politicians are somehow more important than the rest of us. Is their life worth more than mine?

Why is Kalifornia the breeding ground of all ideas that seem to defy logic? (rhetorical question I know)

Make Kali a shall-issue state....same rules for everyone...period. Leave the decision to the individual whether he/she wants to carry a firearm, not the state.

If the law passed allowing special status for elected officials, it would really show how hypocritical people are in that state. What's good for me is not good for thee. Please people...vote these bums out!

I think California lawmakers (you know, the ones who can't balance a budget) are far more of a threat to citizens of California than citizens are to them. They should get no special status.

Lawmakers are not any more special than any other citizen, but I do agree lawmakers should be able to get a concealed carry permit. How do we solve this apparent contradiction? Make California a "shall issue" state, just like over 80% of the country is now. Why should one person, the county sheriff, be able to pick and choose who he or she thinks is worthy enough to be able to defend themselves? Who is truly able to determine what "good cause" is? The number of people who request a concealed carry permit, get the background check and receive the training and then commit a violent crimes is so small it is virtually non-existent. Look at the statistics around the country and you will find that law abiding citizens carrying guns has not increased violent crime one bit anywhere it is legal. Nowhere. Get over the emotional rants, look at the facts, and then allow your citizens to defend themselves. It may be your life they end up saving.

There is no reason why any of these elected officials deserve special privileges on concealed weapons, no one made them run for office, if they are afraid to serve their term....QUIT! It is so true of the many special treatments and privileges they receive, they're not too good at representing the people but are great at reaping the benefits. These people are just regular citizens as any one else and need to have a GOOD reason that is responsible to carry a weapon just as any other citizen!

You've GOT to be kidding me? What happened to the day's where PEOPLE have POWER over their form of Government? So It's ok for an Elected Official to carry a gun under the Constitution, But when it comes to a normal everyday law abiding citizen they cannot?

So much for "equal protection"

yeah i think they should carry guns and all the guns should be banned from citizens or anyone who wants to own their gun only government should have a way to defend them selfs from regular people like starwars and people that way they can shoot us wen ever we stand up against them! i totally agree on giving them guns how about give social workers and spycologist some guns too lol that way they can walk to our home and kidnapp our kids and shoot us at the same timeand maybe us people can purchace our own life savers and become JEDI KNIGHTS

Ithink they should be treated as everyone else. But here's the clincher. Every state with strict gun laws also have the highest crime rates. Why?? Why would there be a higher violent gun crimes commited in states that have stricter gun laws? Liberal gun control advocates need to read and analyze this. If there was no guns in the U.S. the crime rate would soar, like it has in England and other European countries, but you have a country like Sweden where households have guns from their military stints, the crime rate is miniscule. Why?? Criminals know they are going up against an armed household.

Certainly - our lawmakers are SPECIAL. Then we can add our very important assests - the Hollywood superstars. Then teh pro atheletes. Can't forget the local councilpersons. Of course the local rap stars are already armed (and dangerous) but we should include the non-rap singers and B- actors. Soon everyone will have a gun - everyone except the law abiding average citizen who the local sheriffs and police chiefs have deemed aren't trustworthy (or is it just worthy).

« | 1 2 3 | »


Recommended on Facebook


In Case You Missed It...


About L.A. Now
L.A. Now is the Los Angeles Times’ breaking news section for Southern California. It is produced by more than 80 reporters and editors in The Times’ Metro section, reporting from the paper’s downtown Los Angeles headquarters as well as bureaus in Costa Mesa, Long Beach, San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Riverside, Ventura and West Los Angeles.
Have a story tip for L.A. Now?
Please send to newstips@latimes.com
Can I call someone with news?
Yes. The city desk number is (213) 237-7847.


Get Alerts on Your Mobile Phone

Sign me up for the following lists: