With California gun owners under constant siege by Democrats passing more restrictive firearms laws on a regular basis, one organization is actively battling throughout the state to help ensure Californians’ right to keep and bear arms isn’t infringed.

Since the critical 2022 U.S. Supreme Court decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, the California Rifle & Pistol Association has worked in every county in the state to ensure a concealed carry application and issuance process that complies with the standards set out in the Bruen ruling.

“In most cases, our efforts focus on unnecessary delays and outrageous fees, but recently CRPA and our allies filed an amicus brief in Matthews v. City of Los Angeles, supporting  the challenge to the state’sban on out-of-state residents obtaining CCWs,” CRPA said in a recent news item. “The brief argues that there is no historical basis for requiring a CCW from another state when traveling. In fact, historical evidence suggests the opposite: Many laws specifically protected the right to self-defense regardless of one’s location.”

In the recently filed brief, plaintiffs argue that the case isn’t a difficult one, given Bruen’s requirement to prove a historical precedent.

“This case is simple,” the brief stated. “No historical tradition supports California’s modern requirement that peaceable nonresidents—who are already permitted to carry firearms in their home states—submit to a burdensome process to obtain a California license to carry (‘CCW permit’) if they wish to exercise their Second Amendment rights while visiting or passing through the state. On the contrary, laws historically exempted travelers from such local restrictions on their right to defend themselves while traveling. Americans of earlier eras knew that requiring citizens visiting another state to give up the right to bear arms was untenable.”

Concerning plaintiff Garry Matthews, the brief pointed out that Los Angeles County had a long history of issuing very few carry permits, even to residents.

“While Mr. Matthews was barred from receiving a permit de jure, he was also, like the other two Appellants, Messrs. Hunn and Hearns, barred from doing so de facto,” the brief stated. “Even if he had established residency in California, he still would not have gotten a CCW permit from Appellees. Before Bruen, LAPD did not issue CCW permits to almost anyone—whether residents or not. In fact, then-Chief Michel Moore had even moved to cancel the few remaining permits still in civilian hands. Before 2022, there were only four active CCW permits issued by LAPD in Los Angeles, despite the city having a large population of 3.8 million people.”

As the CRPA news release pointed out, the law creates an “impossible” situation for nonresidents wanting to comply with California’s regulations but not able to do so.

“Even if such a requirement were valid, California’s law creates an impossible situation,” CRPA stated. “Out-of-state residents are prohibited from even obtaining a CCW in California, leaving them in a state of legal limbo. This is a deliberate tactic by gun control advocates to undermine the Second Amendment and discourage law-abiding citizens from exercising their rights.