One of the jobs of the Department of Justice is to protect the civil rights of Americans. While the anti-gun left and much of the judiciary seems embarrassed to admit it, those civil rights include keeping and bearing arms. It’s right there in the Constitution. You can look it up.
Anyway, since the Bruen decision was handed down by the Supreme Court, lots of jurisdictions have thrown up roadblocks to individuals fully exercising their Second Amendment rights through a series of what have come to be known as Bruen response laws. Cities and states have, in effect, cordoned off large areas of public spaces and deemed them “sensitive areas” where carrying a firearm is prohibited. These laws are being challenged in court and they’re being overturned as unconstitutional.
Other ways that jurisdictions have made legally carrying a firearm as difficult as possible include 1) charging exorbitant fees for applying for a carry permit and/or, 2) dragging their feed and taking months or well over a year to approve carry permit applications.
The previous administration in Washington, which was at least nominally run by a desiccated cadaver who was occasionally propped up behind the Resolute Desk, had no interest at all in doing anything about these clear violations of the law. They were totally down with the resistance put up to the Supreme Court’s rulings on gun rights. But times and administrations change and if you hadn’t noticed, there’s a new administration running things in D.C. these days.
These flagrant abuses of individuals’ civil rights have been noted at Main Justice . . .
Some States and localities, however, have resisted this recent pro-Second Amendment caselaw. And California has been a particularly egregious offender. In response to recent Supreme Court caselaw, California enacted new legislation to further restrict the ability of ordinary, law-abiding Californians to keep and bear arms. And many California localities appear to be imposing additional burdens beyond those required by California state law, including by subjecting ordinary, law-abiding Californians to expensive fees and lengthy weight times associated with applications for concealed handgun licenses.
That state of affairs has prompted the Department of Justice to get involved and open an investigation.
As part of a broader review of restrictive firearms-related laws in California and other States, the Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division today announced an investigation into the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department to determine whether it is engaging in a pattern or practice of depriving ordinary, law-abiding Californians of their Second Amendment rights. A recent federal court decision found that “the law and facts [we]re clearly in … favor” of two private plaintiffs who challenged the lengthy eighteen-month delays that the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department had imposed when processing their concealed handgun license applications. And the Civil Rights Division has reason to believe that those two plaintiffs are not the only residents of Los Angeles County experiencing similarly long delays that are unduly burdening, or effectively denying, the Second Amendment rights of the people of Los Angeles.
In case you hasn’t noticed, as a famous man once said, elections have consequences. This is likely an opening, high-profile move designed as a warning to other cities and states around the country.
“This Department of Justice will not stand idly by while States and localities infringe on the Second Amendment rights of ordinary, law-abiding Americans,” said Attorney General Pamela Bondi. “The Second Amendment is not a second-class right, and under my watch, the Department will actively enforce the Second Amendment just like it actively enforces other fundamental constitutional rights.”
As you might expect, this news was greeted with applause by Chuck Michel, president of the California Rifle & Pistol Association . . .
Almost two years ago, CRPA notified California Attorney General Bonta that numerous cities and counties were violating the right to carry by charging exorbitant amounts for CCW permits, or taking as long as two years to process applications. Bonta did nothing, so we had to launch… pic.twitter.com/go5RPrl5mm
— Chuck Michel (@CRPAPresident) March 27, 2025
The prospect of the DOJ moving to protect individuals’ rights — gun rights in particular — has come a shock to the system of the civilian disarmament industrial complex. That includes academics who should know better and have been reduced to sloppy spluttering while trying to characterize the investigation as some kind of partisan move to satisfy Trump supporters.
Jacob Charles, an associate professor of law at Pepperdine Caruso School of Law who studies the Second Amendment, said he had not seen a similar investigation before. It struck him as “another culture war issue pitting red versus blue” amid a broader flurry of “partisan targeting” by the Trump administration of liberal jurisdictions and groups.
“This has to be seen in the context of Trump attacking law firms, universities, and cities, counties and states who don’t profess fealty to him personally and to his vision,” Charles said. “He’s not even pretending to be a president for all of America.”
Professor Charles is apparently so ideologically compromised that he isn’t willing or able to recognize clear violations of an enumerated civil right when he sees one…let alone acknowledge that the federal government has a duty and responsibility to protect those rights. At least, not when right involved includes owning and carrying firearms.
Nice to finally see a spotlight on LASD/LAPD and our absurd fees & wait times, but time will tell if anything actually improves. Remember…here in L.A. County we have a very interesting situation that evolved over time, in which the Sheriff is not the one with the last say in matters of law enforcement. Our Board of Supervisors holds sway over the Sheriff Dept, and the Board (consisting of five liberal females) didn’t like our previous Sheriff Villanueva’s defiance of their COVID mask mandate (because…ya know…Ant!fa and thugs were burning entire city blocks and he had more important things to worry about to keep us safe, but whatever), so they endorsed former Long Beach Police Chief Robert Luna, who won the next election by a tiny margin to become our current Sheriff. Luna openly stated his disdain for private citizens carrying arms, so here we are…
Four years ago, I applied for my NV permit and got it all in a single long day. Five hours of class instruction, then range time, then the shooting skills and written tests, then the trip to the local Sheriff office for processing the permit. All happened in one single day, and with a total cost to me of $158. It is valid for five years and has not yet come up for renewal.
At the same time, I also applied for my CA permit via LASD. It took a full twelve months and a total cost of about $1600. It was good for only two years, and the renewal took four months and another $650. And get this…even though I submitted my renewal application at the 90-day mark before expiration per LASD’s own instructions, meaning the original had expired and I still had to wait another month before they issued the renewal, LASD specifically states a person may not legally carry under an expired permit during the renewal process. So you’re at their mercy even when you follow their own policy as best as you can…
So within the span of the original NV permit, I’ve had to spend a whopping 14x the money and a lot of waiting just to maintain my CA permit, which will be due for renewal again next year already. Sux.
In Louisiana, I usually just stuck a pistol in my pocket. When I recently moved to Oklahoma, I had same pistol in my pocket. My car broke down in Oklahoma and mentioned to the cops who stopped to help me, that I was armed. They didn’t even blink. They did thank me for mentioning it. Two days ago, I checked my pistol with my luggage on a flight back to Louisiana, no problem. There I bought a switchblade from my cousin’s store. Now I’m back in Oklahoma. No fuss, no muss.
Democrats have such contempt for the average citizen. They hide it with their virtue signalling. Actions speak louder than words.
You said Elon had “whipped twitter/x into shape”.
Purchased for $44b.
Sold for $33b.
Net loss $11b.
Yeah, somebody got whipped alright.
“Elon Musk sells X to his own xAI for $33 billion in all-stock deal
Elon Musk has sold social media site X to his own xAI artificial intelligence company in a $33 billion all-stock deal, the billionaire announced on Friday
ByBARBARA ORTUTAY AP technology writer
March 28, 2025, 6:52 PM
Musk, who serves as CEO of Tesla and SpaceX as well as an advisor to President Donald Trump, bought the site then called Twitter for $44 billion in 2022, gutted its staff and changed its policies on hate speech, misinformation and user verification and renamed it X.“
That’s right. Twitter was valued at $10B right before the value was pumped up due to Elon moving to buy it. He said he was fine with overpaying. They didn’t want Elon to have it (because it functioned as a left wing disinformation bubble), but they had to sell because it was in the best interest of the shareholders. Twitter initially lost revenue from left wing corporations leaving in protest, but they still made TWICE the profit due to Elon whipping it into shape. Those companies eventually came back. Then X was recently valued at $44B.
You do realize that Elon is basically selling the company to himself, right? I already told you this was planned. Elon is very happy with the situation.
“Five hours of class instruction, then range time, then the shooting skills and written tests, then the trip to the local Sheriff office for processing the permit. All happened in one single day, and with a total cost to me of $158“
Exactly, a set of reasonable requirements that ensure those carrying in public areas are adequately educated and prepared to handle the great responsibility of bearing lethal weapons in our society.
I agree, it does seem pretty easy and reasonable.
You’re attempting to refer an “agreement” between us that doesn’t exist, as I never mentioned that I agree with any permit requirements. As you are fully aware, I was making the comparison between NV and CA only, and excoriating Los Angeles.
I was wondering when your shadow would eventually be cast over this way. Was hoping you’d stick with Dan’s old site, but every butt must have its pimple, I suppose.
“every butt must have its pimple, I suppose“
So you are characterizing this forum as a butt?
I understand you may be annoyed by my opinion, but I’m rather surprised you’d be that disrespectful to the owners of this forum.
“I understand you may be annoyed by my opinion,”
That’s funny, you assume you have an opinion instead of the reality of your mental illness trolling on a 4 year old level.
To insure fair and legal elections a set of reasonable requirements, such as ID, seams pretty easy and reasonable.
A waiting period on abortions seems easy and reasonable.
“To insure fair and legal elections a set of reasonable requirements, such as ID, seams pretty easy and reasonable“
Yes, that’s why my state requires presentation of photo ID when you’re registered to vote, that’s fair and reasonable.
“A waiting period on abortions seems easy and reasonable.“
Obviously, you know nothing about the medical necessity of abortions.
“Georgia Police Jailed Woman for Miscarriage and Performed Autopsy on Her Miscarried Fetus
The 24-year-old was found unconscious and bleeding near her apartment building. She was arrested and charged with “concealing the death of another person” and “abandonment of a dead body.”
By Kylie Cheung | March 27, 2025 | 11:57am
Photo: Getty Images
LATESTPOLITICS 26
Georgia Police Jailed Woman for Miscarriage and Performed Autopsy on Her Miscarried Fetus
A 24-year-old Georgia woman was arrested by local police last week after having a miscarriage. The woman was found unconscious and bleeding near her apartment building in Tifton, Georgia, only to be charged with “concealing the death of another person” and “abandonment of a dead body.” Police recovered fetal remains in a nearby dumpster after receiving a tip from a witness who claimed to have seen the woman disposing of the remains. Officers then collected the fetal remains to conduct an autopsy.
On Tuesday, authorities released the findings of the autopsy: According to local news station WALB, the county coroner uncovered “no signs of injury or trauma, and the baby never took a breath,” confirming that a natural miscarriage had occurred at about 19 weeks. Yet the criminal charges against the 24-year-old remain. The “concealing the death of another person” charge comes with up to 10 years in prison in Georgia, while the “abandonment of a dead body” charges comes with up to three.“
What about a woman in nj that was murdered by her ex while still jumping through the hoops to get a gun?
How nice of you to expose your classism. If someone can’t afford the time or fees or can’t pass a test, they are denied their rights. Sounds mighty infringy. What other rights do you want to require permits to be purchased and begged for from the government before they can be exercised?
“If someone can’t afford the time or fees or can’t pass a test, they are denied their rights“
I guess you’ve missed the part where I’ve posted many times that the training and skill proficiency test requirements should be free.
As you missed the point of their never being a required necessity.
myner49er interpretation of the second amendment:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed if the people have government permission and a permit after paying fees and undergoing government approved training myner49er agrees with.
Or in other words, not a right but a privilege controlled by government.
myner49er has the typical radical extremism left-wing mindset – rights don’t exist, its privileges granted and controlled by government, despite the intent clearly laid out by those that wrote down these 10 in the bill of rights and defined what they meant in their own words in their own writings in the federalist writings that they do not belong to government to control in any manner.
Lets see if myner49er agrees that the 1st, 3rd, 4th, 5t, 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th, 10th RIGHTS should require ‘training and skill proficiency test requirements’ and a permission from government via permit to exercise those.
“We claim them from a higher source – from the King of kings, and Lord of all the earth. They are not annexed to us by parchments and seals. They are created in us by the decrees of Providence, which establish the laws of our nature. They are born with us; exist with us; and cannot be taken from us by any human power, without taking our lives.
—- John Dickinson, on the source of our Rights, 1776″
“Among the natural rights of the Colonists are these: First, a right to life; Secondly, to liberty; Thirdly, to property; together with the right to support and defend them in the best manner they can. These are evident branches of, rather than deductions from, the duty of self-preservation, commonly called the first law of nature.
—- Samuel Adams in writings four years before the Declaration of Independence” (In short, you don’t have intellectual rights, or rights of the mind, or property rights, or anything else – like a right to life – unless you also have the right to defend them from being taken from you.)
“The first principle of government is founded on the natural right of individuals, and in perfect equality. Locke, Vattel, Lord Somers, and Dr. Priestley, all confirm this principle.
—- Luther Martin in the Philadelphia Convention of 1787, and to affirm that of Samuel Adams (above)” (an on affirming the role of government is to protect and defend rights, not control them or burden them or infringe them.)
Rights are not gifts to be given us as permissions by governments, as Thomas Paine wrote:
“An enquiry into the origin of rights will demonstrate to us that rights are not gifts from one man to another, nor from one class of men to another.
(and further writings from Paine)
“A declaration of rights is not a creation of them, nor a donation of them. It is a manifest of the principle by which they exist, followed by a detail of what the rights are.” (thus the added detail of what those rights are codified in the first 10 in the Bill of Rights supporting and for the defense of ‘We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”
And to put it best, Thomas Jefferson wrote: “A free people [claim] their rights, as derived from the laws of nature, and not as the gift of their chief magistrate.”
The intent was clearly that government authority was to keep away from the rights of the people, not to infringe or control them and not burden the exercise of them (i.e. levy fees or ‘training and skill proficiency test requirements’ and permission from government via permit requirement and restrictions on where or how or with what they can be exercised). These are natural unalienable Rights, they do not belong to governments to control or permit or be burdened with requirement to be exercised. But at the same time Its also clear that, obviously, criminal conduct in harming others was not intended but just as clear is that its not somehow governments rights to impose upon those not in-such-criminal-conduct to burden their rights with infringe or control them and burden the exercise of them (i.e. levy fees or ‘training and skill proficiency test requirements’ and permission from government via permit requirement and restrictions on where or how or with what they can be exercised) as the excuse or means to ‘control’ such criminal conduct as the founders recognized this as what it is, a thing they called tyranny.
myner49er has the typical radical extremism left-wing mindset – Tyranny.
“Jacob Charles, an associate professor of law at Pepperdine Caruso School of Law who studies the Second Amendment”
I guess Jacob Charles, like ex-President AutoPen and ex-Vice President Cackles, stopped reading the Second Amendment at the first comma.
“Jacob Charles, an associate professor of law at Pepperdine Caruso School of Law who studies the Second Amendment”
“studies the Second Amendment”…….What a joke. What is there to study? The 2A is written in simple English and easily understood by anyone with a brain bigger than a pee!
Perhaps this ass. professor is an example of an “educated idiot”.
Good.
I’m getting what I voted for.
Yep! The Puppet’s DOJ was a disgrace.