Handgun open carry law unconstitutional?

January 4, 2012

A California resident filed a lawsuit arguing that a law prohibiting the open carrying of an unloaded handgun is unconstitutional. [CaliforniaWatch]

Charles Nichols filed the lawsuit in federal court against the state seeking to overturn restrictions on where he can display a loaded or unloaded handgun.

Earlier this week, AB 144 went into effect. It expands California’s firearm regulations that previously prohibited publicly carrying a loaded handgun to also make it illegal to openly carry an unloaded handgun.

In 2008, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down strict gun regulations in Washington, D.C. because they were unconstitutional. Nichols argues in his lawsuit that California’s carry laws should meet with a similar fate.

“By banning fully functional, loaded handguns from being openly carried for the purpose of self-defense, (California’s statute) is a more restrictive ban than the law struck down in (Washington) as unconstitutional,” the lawsuit says.

Proponents of the law contend it allows for gun owners to hunt and protect their homes and that it is not necessary to carry a weapon when shopping or eating out.


After reading this artical and some of these posts,I know why I moved to Arizona after living in California for 56 years. In this state you can carry openly ( loaded or not ) and you can carry concealed with a permit ,or with out, as long as you are a law abiding citizen .

I see people all the time carrying a loaded gun and it is no problem. I carry one my self. In this state when you buy a gun you fill out the B.A.T.F paper work, the gun shop does an instant back ground check on you, if you pass, you pay your money and walk out with it. So do me a favor all you leftist liberals, stay in California !!!


No problem, I love California. You just validated that there is nothing that holds any interest in AZ for me.


Danika: ” The preservation of that very old document is critical to this country’s survival. If you find disfavor with our old Constitution, please move to Cuba or some other such country so you can appreciate what many of us are fighting to preserve…that very old document!”

Did I mention anywhere that we should do away with the constitution?


Cars kill, maim, and injure more people in this state than guns do.

Yet, gun grabbing liberals will jump in a car to drive to a rally to complain about how dangerous guns are.

If you are interested to see just how dangerous a so called “Assault Rifle” is, here is a live video feed of one in action: http://www.assaultweaponwatch.com/camera1.html

They have been providing a live feed for roughly 8 years now.



Happy New Year all you gun-toting bloggers, evangelists, undercover FBI agents seeking tips and terrorists; and San Luis Obispo law enforcement in-laws and ex-wives using your literary skills to transform your hostility into peaceful political change.

One thing I’ve observed about our county’s “native” population: they just LOVE to talk about guns. I guess this explains the CCC’s recent spate of gun-related articles. Just look at the response!

Well, for all you women who feel left out, I ran across an article in the Dec. 15th-22nd, 2011 New Times, written by Shelly Cone, about Range Master of SLO, and Range Master of Santa Maria.

The Santa Maria franchise “offers a Women’s Shoot 101 class that combines a mix of physical self-defense knowledge with gun safety.” According to Cone, Joe Degeus is the owner of the Santa Maria store.

The San Luis store only offers classes on an “as-needed basis”…(what the heck does that mean?!) If you care to ask them, the article lists their number as 545-0322.

I don’t think the CCC would be offended by my mention of their competitve tribal relatives of the New Times branch of Reporter Indians. After all, many of the NT staff have “gone off the reservation” to strenghten tribal bonds with the CCC. The only NT staff I’ve seen wax apoplexic at the mention of her sister tribe was Ashley Schwellenbach.

But Schwellenbach was not around when only the male Reporter Indians were reporting the hard news….Fortunately, they are lightening up, though they have a LONG way to go with respect to their unspoken(?) “policy.”

As for Cone’s article, it borders the line between advertizing and hard news. The potential is there, but only Schwellenbach, the managing (?) editor can say for sure whether she will permit Cone to enter the land of hard news, by writing more than a couple of paragraphs on the two major themes presented in December’s article, “Have a Blast.”

As for me, I’m going to forego the gun thing until they have a class geared towards Responsible Gun Ownership for Italians 101…


Who the hell is CCC ??? would some one please explain what or who CCC is.


Awhile back it was ‘CNN’. I could be wrong (I was once), but I believe she means ‘Cal Coast News’. But that’s just a guess.


THANK YOU, Zaphod! I was scratching my head too.


If you are on your property, you can carry, concealed or not, a firearm. So please don’t talk about home invasions. What this issue is about is carrying a displayed, unloaded firearm.

In my opinion, I think the gun lobby should give this away. No responsible gun owner would carry a displayed unloaded firearm on the hip. Instead, 2 folks should be looking at CA concealed carry laws that restrict the good people but do nothing to stop the bad.

@Typo – If every sane street thug had a tingle in his spine thinking that the next mugging could be his last, do you HONESTLY think it wouldn’t have an effect on street crime?


Carrying an unloaded firearm is better than none at all. It doesn’t take much to slide a magazine into place. Of course I would prefer to carry a loaded handgun, but Charles nichols is challenging just that very thing.

Charles Nichols

The California Courts have held that the property around your house, including your driveway is a “public place” unless it is surrounded by a fence sufficiently tall enough to deter people from entering. How tall does the fence have to be? The court did not say.

Unless your property is enclosed with a really high fence, you can not carry a handgun, or a loaded firearm, on your property.



Supporters of gun rights including myself have been waiting for this law to take effect. When it was signed into law earlier It was obvious that this law violates the 2nd Amendment to more of a degree than any other firearms law in California. When the state passed the law that banned the “Carry of Concealed Weapon”. The majority opinion of the legislators who voted for the ban had the intent that the law was not a violation of the 2nd Amendment because the”People retained the right to open carry a firearm. Now that this new law has taken effect the original intent of the earlier law is now meaningless.

Due to the strict conditions and Zero issue policy of many of the state’s Sheriffs and Police Chiefs placed on the majority of California Citizens to rightfully obtain a CCW permit and the constitutional right of the 2nd Amendment “To bear and posses a firearm”. The combination of these laws & policy’s allows the gun right lobby a very powerful argument to seek the overturn of many of the California’s gun laws.

This new law is the Mother-load argument for gun owners and gun rights advocates to seek to overturn the right to bear a firearm and to significantly change the law and policies of CCW in California. The fight will be long and tedious, but eventually the US supreme Court with its recent decisions will overturn and force the state to change it’s laws and policies regarding the right to bear & posses firearms both openly and concealed.


I don’t think Charles will have to fight all of the way to the Supreme court. In Peruta the federal judge said open carry was an option, which is why peruta lost his suit. Open carry is historicaly the method used to carry guns. To prevent the open carry of handguns is unconstitutional.


Why not ask the 18 year old girl in Oklahoma? 3 month old baby, husband dies xmas eve from lung cancer, home alone and 2 invaders try to break into her house. Takes out one with the shot gun. Second one runs and turns himself in. Worked for her.


We have all been talking gun rights the last two days on a couple articles here at CCN. Well here is a case of what I mentioned yesterday on other article. You are out in the country, the cops aren’t going to get there fast enough, you can’t ask the criminal to kindly wait for the cops so what do you do? How about this……………..



Another story today of a 25 yr old and 26 yr old on killing spree. Kill a 70 yr old retired barber and his wife, and robs their house.. They were captured in Nevada after fleeing Utah. Rather face 12 of my peers than have 6 pall bearers.


Did the barber and his wife have any firearms in their home? Most likely whether they did or didn’t own guns the result would have been the same.


“James Brady was shot by someone licensed and trained in the use of a firearm. Do try and keep up”.

Let me try and help you to keep up Mr. Nichols. Hinkley (that’s the guy that shot Brady) had previously been arrested on a weapons charge and he had received psychiatric care and suffered from depression and had been on antidepressants. If a thorough background check had been done prior to him purchasing his 22 then a few people wouldn’t have been shot and Jodie Foster wouldn’t have live in fear of that nut getting out of prison. Let me know if you need anymore help.


I don’t know about thirty years ago but I thought we now have a seven day waiting period in most if not all states??

Charles Nichols

Hinkly was a security guard licensed to carry a loaded firearm in a state where it is almost impossible to get a license to carry a gun – Hawaii.

You really need to stop relying on the Brady Bunch for your disinformation. You’re just making yourself look ignorant.

Now back to my lawsuit. Did I mention I sent Attorney General Harris a fax asking if she was going to waive service of summons, as the Federal Court rules admonish defendants to do?

She sent the fax back with a letter claiming she had not been properly served.

Let me explain. She hasn’t been served at all, that happens next week but by sending me this letter she no longer gets to ask for more time to answer the lawsuit “because this is the first she has heard of it.”

I wish I had more worthy opponents. But since the defendants don’t have a case, all they can do is to try and get the case kicked on procedural grounds. :-D


So what, who cares if he were a security guard. I remember when the security guards around Diablo used to sit and smoke doobies when they should have been working. Does him being a security guard make him special? He also had known documented psychological issues and had a weapons charge against him. I don’t care if he is head of the FBI. Read my lips, he had a prior weapons charge and suffered from clinical depression. Proper gun control might have prevented that shooting. That has nothing to do with Brady, but don’t let those facts get in your way. The rest of your post is white noise, time for sleep.