Brady Campaign: CA’s Pro-Concealed Carry Ruling ‘Legal Error’

By AWR Hawkins

Concealed Carry
Brady Campaign: CA's Pro-Concealed Carry Ruling ‘Legal Error'
AmmoLand Gun News
AmmoLand Gun News

Washington DC – -(  On February 13th 2014, a three-judge panel of the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals struck down California's requirement that citizens applying for concealed carry show “good cause” for keeping a handgun on their persons.

Later in the day, the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence responded by labeling the ruling a “legal error” and expressing hope that “the entire Court” will correct the “mistake.”

According to the Brady Campaign ( ) , “Neither history nor precedent supports this aberrant, split-decision that concocts a dangerous right of people to carry hidden handguns in public places to people whom law enforcement has determined that they have no good cause or qualifications to do so.”

Far from being without precedent, the Ninth Circuit's ruling was similar in many ways to the Seventh U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals' December 2012 ruling which struck down Illinois' ban on concealed carry. In that ruling, Judge Richard Posner wrote that the “right to bear arms for self-defense … is as important outside the home as inside.”

On February 13th, the Ninth Circuit's Judge Diarmuid O'Scannlain wrote, “The right to bear arms includes the right to carry an operable firearm outside the home for the lawful purpose of self-defense.”

To demonstrate the “dangerous” aspect of the Ninth Circuit's decision, the Brady Campaign cited the death of Trayvon Martin. They did not mention, however, that George Zimmerman –the man who shot Martin– was acquitted of any wrongdoing on grounds of self-defense.

Follow AWR Hawkins on Twitter @AWRHawkins.

AWR Hawkins writes for all the BIG sites, for Pajamas Media, for, for and now AmmoLand Shooting Sports News.

His southern drawl is frequently heard discussing his take on current events on radio shows like America's Morning News, the G. Gordon Liddy Show, the Ken Pittman Show, and the NRA's Cam & Company, among others. He was a Visiting Fellow at the Russell Kirk Center for Cultural Renewal (summer 2010), and he holds a PhD in military history from Texas Tech University.

If you have questions or comments, email him at [email protected] You can find him on facebook at

  • 5
    Leave a Reply

    Please Login to comment
    5 Comment threads
    0 Thread replies
    Most reacted comment
    Hottest comment thread
    5 Comment authors
    jamesPaulJohnPepeCharles Nichols Recent comment authors
    Notify of

    Unfortunate that Brady was shot during the attack on Pres. Reagan but that risk comes with the job, even the Secret Service can not protect POTUS 100% of the time.

    A man who was mentally disturbed was responsible, not law abiding citizens.

    Good thing that he used the wrong ammunition, it was under powered for that handgun, otherwise the President may not have survived.


    just remember that sarah brady has been wanting all private gun ownership thrown under the bus. she has said on too many occasions that the only people that have any kind of a gun are the cops. well as far as I am concerned the cops in too many cases have abused that right as well so the private people SHOULD HAVE GUNS if not for protection but for putting food on the table as well. Remember what Yamamoto Said ” we dare not attack the American mainland everyone there is well armed, and there may well be a gun… Read more »


    Just remember, those in the Brady Campaign Organization make a comfortable living off/by soliciting “donations” from ant-gun dupes. They will say and do anything to keep the “gravy train” on track.


    The Brady Campaign, from what I understand, is a group of people who either have been shot, or family members of people who were shot and killed, because they had no way of defending themselves from bad people using a gun. Their idea to prevent this from happening to other people is to make sure no one is able to defend themselves from bad people using a gun. Somehow, I don’t think their idea would work.

    Charles Nichols

    “[T]he carrying of concealed weapons may be absolutely prohibited without the infringement of any constitutional right, while a statute forbidding the bearing of arms openly would be such an infringement.” Peruta v. San Diego, No. 10-56971 at pg., 26. “To be clear, we are not holding that the Second Amendment requires the states to permit concealed carry. But the Second Amendment does require that the states permit some form of carry for self-defense outside the home.” Peruta v. San Diego, No. 10-56971 at pg., 61. There will be a slew of press releases and news reports by reporters who have… Read more »