skip to main content









Donation Heart Ribbon

California Attorney General Appeals Judge’s Ruling On San Diego County’s Gun Rules

Credit: Office of California Attorney General Kamala Harris

Attorney General Kamala Harris announces on June 16, 2011, a statewide sweep that collected more than 1,200 firearms were seized from individuals legally barred from possessing them.

State Attorney General Kamala Harris Friday filed a petition urging the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to reverse a ruling—rendered in a San Diego-area lawsuit—that loosened restrictions on the ability to carry concealed guns.

In the Feb. 13 decision, the court asserted that San Diego County violated the Second Amendment by requiring people to show "good cause'' beyond a mere desire to carry a hidden firearm when applying for a concealed-carry weapons permit.


Court Opinion For Edward Peruta V. County Of San Diego

Court Opinion For Edward Peruta V. County Of San Diego

Read the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals opinion for Edward Peruta V. County Of San Diego.

Download document

Download Acrobat Reader

"Local law enforcement must be able to use their discretion to determine who can carry a concealed weapon,'' Harris said. "I will do everything possible to restore law enforcement's authority to protect public safety, and so today am calling on the court to review and reverse its decision.''

Currently, state law requires people to demonstrate a valid reason to carry a concealed gun and gives local law enforcement control over the permit process.

If the Ninth Circuit's ruling in Peruta v. County of San Diego is allowed to take effect, officials throughout the state could be required to issue concealed-carry permits based on nothing more than the applicant's assertion that they wish to carry a gun for self-defense, according to Harris.

In the San Diego area, concealed-carry permit applicants previously had been required to demonstrate "a set of circumstances that distinguish the applicant from the mainstream and causes him or her to be placed in harm's way.''

San Diego County Sheriff Bill Gore announced las week that he would not seek further review of the Ninth Circuit ruling.

To view PDF documents, Download Acrobat Reader.


Avatar for user 'thompsonrichard'

thompsonrichard | February 28, 2014 at 10:35 a.m. ― 3 years ago

I disagree with Kamala: mega, ultra-rich golfers who helped to elect Kevin Falconer certainly ought to be allowed to carry guns. I disagree with an earlier KPBS-viewer post on the same matter that said "the Framers had no concept of the future, so I wouldn't declare this a victory for the Constitution. Gun violence will increase as a result of this ruling because people with no training whatsoever and 100-lbs chips on their shoulders will have permits for concealed weapons. This makes society more dangerous, not safer." The judge -- and San Diego County Sheriff Bill Gore -- have it right.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Missionaccomplished'

Missionaccomplished | February 28, 2014 at 10:44 a.m. ― 3 years ago

Her past history shows that she is not an AG, but an ideologue.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'joemamma42'

joemamma42 | February 28, 2014 at 10:46 a.m. ― 3 years ago

Actually you have to take a training course to get a CCW permit. So your comment about more untrained people carrying guns is incorrect. I got my CCW permit in AZ many years ago, and after all of the training and education I received I determined that there was way too much liability to be carrying a gun around. If anything the training swayed me away from wanting to carry a gun. After I took the class I thought to myself " Everyone should take this class just to be a gun owner."

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'JeanMarc'

JeanMarc | February 28, 2014 at 12:34 p.m. ― 3 years ago

Also, before you freak out and panic, take a look at some statistics. Violent crime is lower everywhere that concealed carrying is allowed. Violent crime is higher where gun laws are stricter.

But lets not let facts get in the way of your leftist ideals.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Peking_Duck_SD'

Peking_Duck_SD | February 28, 2014 at 12:56 p.m. ― 3 years ago

San Diego County should have appealed this ruling.

But, since they are inept, the state has stepped in, and I'm glad they have.

Let's not forget that while this ruling originated in San Diego, it has implications in LA, SF and throughout the state.

Harris is doing the right thing here and I hope she is successful.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Peking_Duck_SD'

Peking_Duck_SD | February 28, 2014 at 12:58 p.m. ― 3 years ago

By the way, I'm not a lawyer, but doesn't a 3-judge panel rule initially at the 9th curcuit and then can be appealed to a larger, full judge panel?

It only makes sense that this ruling should be re-evaluated, this time by a full panel of judges.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'KatrinaAnon'

KatrinaAnon | February 28, 2014 at 2:37 p.m. ― 3 years ago

What is interesting to me is that the state is seeking to deny citizens a right to self defense. The long and short of it is just that. This is especially true when you look at Orange County with a population almost 3/5 of the state of Louisiana and having only a few hundred licensed to carry and Louisiana's being measured in the thousands.

The other truth is that despite the huge uptick in gun ownership violent crime is dropping. While gun numbers increase then why are violent crimes going down? The people pointing at Missouri's relaxation on gun laws that ome people have pointed to as contributing to higher gun deaths did not compare those numbers against the rate of increase when the restrictive laws were put in place...those were higher.

You also have people who want to argue the civil right of self defense needs to be removed in the interest of public safety. The question one might ask is whether you might get more bang for your buck by removing your 4th & 5th Amendment protections. If police did not have to get warrants and you had to answer truthfully no matter what it would be a lot easier to criminals off the street.

However, I think it is obvious that CA has a very liberal conceal carry law. Thousands are carrying firearms concealed every day when they go to work...but those are the criminals!

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'muckapoo1'

muckapoo1 | February 28, 2014 at 2:55 p.m. ― 3 years ago

When we go 5 years without a violent crime, I will think about not carrying firearm protection. Until then, go ahead and make my day. Have a nice day.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Peking_Duck_SD'

Peking_Duck_SD | February 28, 2014 at 7:55 p.m. ― 2 years, 12 months ago

I've heard more than one person making an argument that more guns=less crime,

Anyone who has taken a basic statistics course knows that you need more than just "gun ownership went up here and crime went down".

You need a statistical study ruling out other possible confounding factors that could explain the statistics before determining that A caused B.

Has such statistical analysis been done, and if so is there a link to this data?

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'muckapoo1'

muckapoo1 | March 2, 2014 at 10:42 a.m. ― 2 years, 12 months ago

Just look at stats in Chicago.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'boomerop14'

boomerop14 | March 2, 2014 at 12:39 p.m. ― 2 years, 12 months ago

The whole American "gun mentality" defies logic to begin with. Why do so many
Americans want to own and carry guns in the first place? Some entrenched, handed down mentality, that says that the wild west should be continued? Until someone in
authority really has the conviction and "cajones" to take on this issue and the gun lobby, I don't see any progress, as far as tighter restrictions at gun shows, background checks, and the numerous news stories, about gun violence, people accidently shooting themselves and others, including children, because guns are left in the open, in homes. In my opinion, not one child's death is worth all the preaching about "the right to bear arms and the second amendment.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'CaliforniaDefender'

CaliforniaDefender | March 2, 2014 at 6:09 p.m. ― 2 years, 12 months ago


The "gun mentality" does not defy logic. It is very simple:

Criminals are armed and if you are likewise, it serves as a deterrent.

The 2nd Amendment also does not defy logic. It is very simple:

The US government is armed and if you are likewise, it serves as a deterrent.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'CaliforniaDefender'

CaliforniaDefender | March 2, 2014 at 6:28 p.m. ― 2 years, 12 months ago

I should have added that considering how heavily armed the US government, resistance is pointless. Thus the 2nd Amendment is nothing but an empty echo of centuries past.

I would be in favor of a total ban on all guns if it truly meant a total ban. Use of any weapon for hunting, sport, or in a crime would be met with a long prison sentence.

But that is unreasonable and will never happen. So we must make sure every law abiding citizen who wants to be armed can carry anywhere, anytime.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'muckapoo1'

muckapoo1 | March 2, 2014 at 7:56 p.m. ― 2 years, 12 months ago

Hey Boomer. When crime come your way, I will make sure I will not bring my gun to protect you. Call the Sheriff's Department to file a report 2 hours after they rob you. LOL
The police have become report takers and crime scene investigators.
I am not being negative on our fine police force. They are over-worked, out-gunned and have become experts at solving crimes, not stopping crime. Any home without a gun is at the hands of criminals.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'boomerop14'

boomerop14 | March 2, 2014 at 10:08 p.m. ― 2 years, 12 months ago

Hey muchapoo1,
I do not expect or want you or your gun to protect me. Yes, the police are over-worked, but there is a police force for a reason. Many police officers are steadfastly against a vigilante populace, taking care of crime on their own, with no training, and
plenty of trigger happy citizens wanting to be wanna be cops. For generations, my family has lived in this country without having guns in the home, and that includes my father and uncles who served in world war II, and basically wanted nothing to do with them afterwards. They were hardly the cowardly type after serving in war. It is your opinion that any home without a gun is at the hands of criminals. I believe that an increasingly armed populace makes the country much more dangerous, and for the reasons I stated. Plenty of irresponsible and careless citizens, later lamenting that a child or other person was accidently killed with their weapon. Nothing LOL about that.
You are entitled to your opinion, I just totally disagree.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Missionaccomplished'

Missionaccomplished | March 3, 2014 at 11:43 a.m. ― 2 years, 12 months ago

@Boomer, it's our yahoo mcculture.

That said, target practice is fun, but I do favor workable restrictions.

( | suggest removal )