this post was submitted on 07 Jan 2024
228 points (97.9% liked)

News

37342 readers
1916 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

LOS ANGELES (AP) — A new California law that bans people from carrying firearms in most public places was once again blocked from taking effect Saturday as a court case challenging it continues.

A 9th Circuit Court of Appeals panel dissolved a temporary hold on a lower court injunction blocking the law. The hold was issued by a different 9th Circuit panel and had allowed the law to go into effect Jan. 1.

Saturday’s decision keeps in place a Dec. 20 ruling by U.S. District Judge Cormac Carney blocking the law. Carney said that it violates the Second Amendment and that gun rights groups would likely prevail in proving it unconstitutional.

The law, signed by Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom, prohibits people from carrying concealed guns in 26 types of places including public parks and playgrounds, churches, banks and zoos. The ban applies regardless of whether a person has a concealed carry permit.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Ikenshini@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago (2 children)

I don't have stats on that particular situation, it's not tracked, but I could find a video within 2 seconds of looking that happened within the last two years: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=cQeM0ilep5U

[–] Ikenshini@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago

And now having watched the video, it's clear to me that a bank will not keep you safe. I think allowing people with ccws to carry into banks is a good idea, given this kind of thing "happens every day".

[–] hperrin@lemmy.world -2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I just figured since you’re telling me it’s a lot more common, you would have some stats to back that up. One example is a good start though. But again, why do you need a gun inside the bank?

[–] Ikenshini@lemmy.world 7 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

When you live in LA you hear about shit happening all the time.

Because going from your vehicle to the bank, and from the bank back to your vehicle is not safe. There's nowhere next to the bank to deposit your weapon before entering, therefore the only way to carry on the way to the bank requires being armed inside it too.

[–] hperrin@lemmy.world -2 points 2 years ago (2 children)

So would you agree then that the state should be able to require you to check your guns at the door of the bank?

[–] Ikenshini@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Sure, if they provide the same level of security we have at airports, and jails, which have the same restrictions, that's fine by me. Disarming legal ccws and providing no security is reprehensible.

[–] hperrin@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

The armed guard isn’t enough?

[–] Ikenshini@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago

Unfortunately not, they're stuck in the building, and have no obligation to help you, they're there to protect the bank, not you. And you can see how well the "armed guard" helped in the YouTube video above: they weren't even armed nor were they there.

[–] FluorideMind@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

The state? No. The Bank as a private business? Well they can certainly try.

[–] hperrin@lemmy.world -3 points 2 years ago

So the state should not be able to regulate its militia?