Peruta V. San Diego County Case Study

2427 Words10 Pages
The Second Amendment provides: “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” (US Const. amend II). The right of the people to keep and bear Arms should not be contravened, if militia is well regulated. However, how can someone tell what is a well regulated Militia? There are many countries in the world where forbid people from using or wield arm, and those countries national security is ensured just as well as it is in the United States or even more ensured than it is in here. “The average number of people being killed by gun either as suicide or as homicide is 31,695” (EVERYTOWN For Gun Safety). According to statistics, the United States is…show more content…
San Diego County case, the plaintiff, Peruta is a United States citizen and a California resident with a permanent mailing address in San Diego. Peruta is a traveler with a motorhome and maintains several residences across the United States, including but not limited to a residence in San Diego County. He attempted to obtain a concealed weapon’s permit in San Diego County to protect himself. However, he was denied a concealed carry permit because the County said that he did not have a good and enough cause, self defense, and he was not a resident. Even though his permanent mailing address and a room in which he kept wardrobe and other personal items were in San Diego, he was not considered as a resident because he traveled a lot and he did not reside long enough. He alleged that he obtained and provided to the San Diego County Sheriff the required 8 Hour Firearms Safety and Proficiency Certificate in accordance with California Penal Code 12050. Peruta argued that Section 12050’s requirements of good cause beyond the interests of self-defense and durational residency violate the Second and the Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. He also alleged that Defendants’ subjective application of the good cause and residency requirements result in an unequal treatment of similarly situated individuals, and therefore violates the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. He also argued that Peruta has right to travel freely under the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution but the requirement that individuals reside full time in San Diego County before they can apply for a concealed weapon’s permit violate it. Peruta also alleged that the Firearms Licensing and Permits Unit of the State of California Department of Justice found him eligible to possess firearms. Peruta argued the Second Amendment requires that a person be allowed to carry a weapon “that is immediately capable of being used for its intended purpose” (Peruta v. County of San
Open Document