Riverside County Sheriff Sued Over Concealed Weapon Policies

Gun Open CarrySheriff Stan Sniff’s policy on who gets to carry concealed weapons in Riverside County is unconstitutional because it excludes legal U.S. residents, according to a lawsuit filed Oct. 19 in federal court. Sniff denounced the lawsuit, filed by a county resident and five gun rights groups, as politically motivated and designed to help his opponent in the Nov. 6 election.

In his lawsuit, Arie van Nieuwenhuyzen, a legal U.S. resident who was born in The Netherlands, argues his rights were violated last year when the Sheriff’s Department told him he could not apply for a permit because he is not a U.S. citizen. The Riverside resident and business owner said he bought a handgun for self-defense purposes, a need that extends beyond his home.

“Courts across the country have long held that legal United States residents are entitled to the same constitutional protections as everyone else,” the plaintiffs’ attorney, George M. Lee, said in a statement. “Sheriff Sniff’s discriminatory and unconstitutional policies and practices are denying people access to the right to keep and bear arms and violating the Fourteenth Amendment’s command that all people shall enjoy equal protection of our laws.” The other plaintiffs are the Calguns Foundation, the Second Amendment Foundation, the Firearms Policy Coalition, the Firearms Policy Foundation, and the Madison Society Foundation. …

Click here to read the full article from the Riverside Press-Telegram

Sheriffs Condemn Gavin Newson’s Gun Control Efforts

Gavin newsomRiverside County Sheriff Stan Sniff and San Bernardino County Sheriff John McMahon are criticizing Gavin Newsom’s current gun control push as a misdirected effort that restricts law-abiding citizens and the Second Amendment, rather than criminals.

Sheriff McMahon, in particular, suggests that Newsom’s push exemplifies the habit of enacting more and more gun controls when there has been no effort to enforce the laws that are already on the books. McMahon said, “We still have people running around with guns that aren’t supposed to have them.”

According to the Press-Enterprise, McMahon sees Newsom’s push as just another way to restrict law-abiding citizens’ rights. And that — in addition to the lack of enforcement — is why he opposes it: “I generally oppose any legislation that puts any more restrictions or control on citizens having an ability to possess firearms,” Sheriff McMahon is reported to have said.

Sheriff Sniff reportedly expressed the same sentiments, but went even further by suggesting the added restrictions on law-abiding citizens harm public safety. According to the Press-Enterprise, he said, “In some cases, these proposed bills actually make our communities less safe, and remove inherent rights of our citizens to self-defense, or worse, allow only the wealthy, elite or the well-off to protect themselves.”

Newsom responded to the sheriffs’ concerns by suggesting Sniff and McMahon hold “a different point of view” than the sheriffs who had been in office before them. And he suggested that Sniff and McMahon are known to oppose “law after law after law.” Newsom added, “I think these things save lives. They can disagree … but the data does not support their point of view.”

If passed, Newsom’s gun control ballot initiative will enact a statewide “high capacity” magazine ban and put ammunition background checks in place.

It is interesting to note that in one of the most high profile attacks in recent memory — the May 2014 Santa Barbara attack, in which three innocents were gunned down, after others were stabbed — the gunman only used 10-round magazines. Newsom argues that limiting citizens to 10-round magazines is a way to reduce crime.

AWR Hawkins is the Second Amendment columnist for Breitbart News and political analyst for Armed American Radio. Follow him on Twitter: @AWRHawkins. Reach him directly at awrhawkins@breitbart.com.

This piece was originally published by Breitbart California