SB 707 - Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment

[Sousuke 1,214]

This is a California topic and a gun control topic, but its a good read even if you are pro-gun control as it highlights that retired police are effectively a protected class above the rest of us "little people".

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dennis-santiago/californias-sb-707-gun-co_b_8120376.html

Every now and then a case, a law comes into focus to remind us just how far we remain from the dream of equal protection under the law. Such a case appears this week in the State of California where the betters have moved Senate Bill 707 to Governor Jerry Brown's desk for consideration.

SB 707 is a gun control bill. It is part of a larger strategy of zero tolerance gun control measures with the real aim to trip people up in ways that even the smallest mistake causes them to lose their gun rights. SB 707 adds a new tripwire to the Gun Free Zone laws that surround 1,000 feet around every school in California threatening everyone, even those with a dire need or legal permit, from being within these zones with a gun. Everyone that is, except for the one lobby Sacramento needed to support this law, retired police officers. Even though they are no longer law enforcement officers and do not have any police powers, they will be granted a privilege no other citizen will have in the State of California. Indeed, there are lobbyists that seem to believe that retired police officers are not subject to living among their lowly fellow citizens as equals under the 14th Amendment; that they are better, exempt; that they are not "little people".

[TBoneTX 46,284]

Sometimes, they're retired for good cause.

[elmcitymaven 9,712]

There are many more exceptions, and superintendents (or their designees) may grant permission as they see fit. Whenever I see rhetoric on either side about legislation, I find it useful to look at primary sources.

http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billCompareClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160SB707

[Sousuke 1,214]

There are many more exceptions, and superintendents (or their designees) may grant permission as they see fit. Whenever I see rhetoric on either side about legislation, I find it useful to look at primary sources.

http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billCompareClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160SB707

Most of the other exceptions you see are standard fare as far as gun laws go (active duty police, feds, guns within a locked container etc.)

I don't think Gov. Brown will sign this law because he was actually tied to some of the case law that said retired police can not receive special treatment per the Ninth. Brown affirmed the Ninth's decision related to another gun law back in 2010 when he was Attorney General.

Edited September 11, 2015 by Sousuke

[Sousuke 1,214]

Interestingly Brown signed this.

While we can argue about CCW all day in schools, I wonder how he could have signed it given he stated an opinion that retired officers could not possess assault weapons in 2011.

Edited October 12, 2015 by Sousuke

[TBoneTX 46,284]

Let us know if any editorial analyses or statements from Brown's office shine any light on his reasoning.