Sheriff begins taking away concealed weapons permits

what the....that is not legal!

because i needed any more reason to dislike cops

I'm a firm believer in "one person's rights end where another person's begin." how that applies to concieled weapons is subjective.

Regardless of who is right or who is wrong, the article points out a strong a) rise in number of permits issued over a short period of time. and b) link between those who were issued permits and those who contributed to the guy's campaign. Regardless of whether or not you agree agree with a person's right to have and bear arms, that right should absolutely never be a tribally dispersed one. If one side is armed, both lose.

PLEASE READ THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES, PLEASE UNDERSTAND THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE INDIVIDUAL TO UPHOLD THE LAWS FOR THE SANCTITY OF EVERYONE AS A WHOLE. There are vague descriptions that speak volumes written in there that can be exercised inappropriately at times but often go unnoticed by individuals, but we are ONE NATION, ONE PEOPLE indivisible, and yet we are being divided by guns because people are looking out for THEIR best interests, and not the interests of their brothers in "arms". Try upholding the safety of everyone once in a while and ignoring what may be best for you alone, "violated" rights or not.

wearebrothers: it would not have been in the best interest to allow denizens of an area to continue having weapons in a time of emergency if they were not militia members_ it that Katrina case, although some of them were Blackwater (I will NOT get into that here), it WAS a regulated militia force that would have taken the weapons away that might have threatened any stability they were trying to enforce. The Constitution isn't concrete in terminology, that is the point, but it provides a root work. At any rate, that is entirely different. The situation in Orange County that the Sheriffs are dealing with was in fact NOT an Emergency situation, but a violation of public trust between the sanctity of the law and preservation of the established protective system in place to keep order and the dealing of a corrupt bureaucrat accepting bribes in exchange for CCW permits.

They are not semantics to the same argument, they are entirely different circumstances!
Katrina incidents were not in violation of the law under Martial Law and thus, certain normally afforded rights were TEMPORARILY suspended - in this case to establish & keep order in a dangerous time of upheaval for the majority of the populace of that district. Removing the threat of extra weapons in a time of danger i.e. looting, general burglary & violence was in the best interests of the MANY RESIDENTS who were not in possession of weapons.

We are so quick as a nation to jump at and protect our self-rights and lookout for our best interests, but when our personal rights are violated we ignore what might be best for the community as a whole! Selfish Americans ruin the system for everyone else.

In the Katrina case, you have facts but no understanding of the sanctity of safety for all.
In the OC issue, everyone is accusing the gov't of overbearing and violating laws but not looking at why they must be revoked, an issue of internal governmental calamity and authority run amok and an order attempting to re-establish the sanctity of community safety. They are separate cases and both appear to violate laws, but in fact, the OC case is rectifying & reinforcing a law put in place and violated by the force keeping it in check and the Katrina issue brought up was a preservation of safety and order for militia members keeping peace in the system.

I urge everyone to pay closer attention to the rights afforded by birth to denizens of the United States of America protecting EVERYONE. They are violated more often than not these days, waived away by individuals who don't know any better, and no one says a thing, but when they are protecting the best interest of everyone and not individuals and things have to change, people throw tiffs.

I'm sorry people, but regulations on concealed weapons is nothing new... I kinda feel like this story is getting blown up more than is justified.

I no I didunt graduwate but im still literut and red the artikl!

I don't think any of these paranoid people who commented actually read the article.

F**KING LIBERALS!!

Why won't they realize they are wrong on this issue?!

Finland has a MANDATORY gun ownership law, and they have the lowest violent crime rate in the world!

Well... this is what its coming down to...

Did anyone actually take the time to appreciate the bill of rights? or did everyone in the Estados Unidos go nuts with rage when their rights were NOT being violated, and yet do nothing when they actually are?

I'd say the latter: There is an established rite to hold arms to: protect your rights & secure your property.

The situation in this instance is not taking away the weapons of anyone, THAT would be unconstitutional; this is taking away the ability to carry a hidden weapon into any public situation not directly forbidding such.
No rights are being violated, they are merely putting in place measures to protect the public and THEIR rights, after all the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few; and although their were more CCWs issued during the reign of one county sheriff they were not entirely lawful (issued by a corrupt bureaucrat) and though they are being revoked ex-post facto they the new officials are merely doing their jobs to protect the greater public interest.

RIGHTS are NOT being VIOLATED!

The issue here is people getting upitty about a right they do not fully understand but preach as a basic fundamental right of being an American.

Come on good citizens, do the right thing! Turn in all your weapons, what harm could THAT bring?

Yet another reason not to live in Kommiefornia.
The idea of a government official issuing a permit for a civil right is odious enough but when it become arbitrary it is even worse. This sheriff has demonstrated zero respect for the Bill of Rights and should be removed.
Mcwally, there is NO problem with the Second Amendment except according to criminals, politicians and statists.

Every single day this government moves closer and closer to it's goal...to be 100% totalitarian, having absolute control over every aspect of all citizens' lives. This is becoming truly scary. See, they've slowly been building up to this, so we're somewhat used to being controlled to a certain degree by the government. Every day they are tightening the reins a little more. They are out of control. They are truly mentally ill individuals and groups, the stuff that nightmares are made of. If we don't do something radical, it will get worse and worse. Maybe this is why they are revoking permits to carry a gun lately. Shit is seriously about to hit the fan, and they want us unarmed and unable to defend ourselves. Alot of people are truly naive as to just how evil this government is. Or they are too afraid to see what is so blatantly obvious. One by one. our rights are being stripped from us, to the point that we can't even raise our own children. The government, I'm sure, is expecting some type of retaliation from we citizen's. It's gonna happen, it's just a matter of when. With a country full of stressed out citizen's, something is gonna give eventually. The government don't give a flying fuck. They'll just keep building more prisons. Oh God, this is soooooo BAD. Armegeddon can't be too far away at this point. God, help us!

Once again those elected to uphold our rights are doing the exact opposite.

Making law abiding citizens into criminals, just for wanting Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.

S.N.A.F.U.

Ride on!

who needs a gun? just use a taser

They're revoking permits they've already issued. Will these people be refunded the money they spent for these permits? My guess is that they probably are not free. The current permit holders can't give a better reason for needing to carry a concealed weapon, in this crime-ridden country? People get shot, assaulted, robbed and car-jacked, etc. every day. Have they shown some reason that they are unworthy of this 'priviledge?' I don't read much about this or that permit holder holding up a bank or otherwise misusing the weapons. It's people who don't have a permit or license, usually. This country has really gone to hell. Completely.

doesn't it say something in the constitution about the right to bear arms?.. It seems like lawmakers are contradicting rules that our fore fathers deemed worthy to build this country on a lot lately..

I think they have it backwards. Instead of citizens showing "good cause" for having a CCW, the state should have to show "good cause" for revoking (or refusing) a CCW.

You can still own and bear arms... concealed weapons permits are for carrying a CONCEALED weapon, like a hand gun in your pants or jacket. Getting the permit revoked just means they were deemed not responsible enough to allow hidden firearms. They can still carry them, but the guns have to be in plain sight.

I can't say that this is a bad thing. I've met a few people with CWW's that probably shouldn't have that right... too unstable mentally. They don't make you take a mental evaluation to get the permit, just weapons safety and law course. It almost seems too easy!

The problem with the 2nd ammendment is that it allows anyone to own guns.Good or bad or ugly..so why is it not A)Scrapped..B)Ammended to recommend locked up house fire-arms only for emergency.C)Gun clubs only usage-except where registered responsible hunters are allowed to use them.
If there were not so many guns being openly sold then most of the Gun related problems would dissappear..but no people still have to quote the'We have a right to defend ourselves with a gun scenario,'when in reality and for the time it was brought into being the Ammendment was saying,'The right to bear arms for the benefit of the country and the individual,in emergency.'
Change the view and get a new perspective on life instead of prolonging your own problems by owning a gun.

If you aren't allowed to defend yourself then you have no rights. There would be far less crimes if responsible people carried guns.