California Rifle & Pistol Association Clarifies Law-Abiding Citizens Who Legally Carry to Protect Themselves are Not the Problem

The California Rifle & Pistol Association (CRPA) has long championed the constitutional rights of law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms, including the right to carry in public for self-defense. Our advocacy has helped secure victories ensuring that all states recognize this right, with many now embracing permitless carry. CRPA’s CCW Reckoning Project, multiple lawsuits challenging excessive application processing delays and costs, and our strategic partnerships continue to dismantle unconstitutional barriers to exercising these freedoms. And we will not stop.

Recent statements from federal officials, including warnings about the risks of armed encounters with law enforcement, have sparked concerns within the Second Amendment community and raised questions about the Trump administration’s policy on public carry for self-defense at protests.  Other groups have criticized statements by President Trump and other administration officials as advocating against the Second Amendment right to carry.

CRPA’s training programs stress the importance of self-defense skills, situational awareness, legal knowledge, conflict avoidance, prudent decision-making and good judgment. CRPA rejects any narrative that shifts responsibility onto armed citizens for simply being present in public spaces, especially during exercises of First Amendment rights like protests. Lawful carriers should not be required to avoid lawful activities out of fear of misinterpretation by authorities. While this is true, law enforcement risk their lives daily, and any offensive actions by those legally carrying defensive firearms that illegally threaten or interfere with law enforcement may provoke an avoidable and unfortunate response.

Regardless, CRPA rejects any suggestion that carrying a firearm for self-defense carry by itself provokes conflict. In reality, police encounters with armed citizens across the country are now common and uneventful.

The controversy has perhaps been most inflamed by comments from Bill Essayli, the U.S. Attorney for the Central District of California, in a brief social media post about the dangers of approaching law enforcement during a tense operation while armed.

Essayli has long been a friend to gun owners and to CRPA’s mission. As a member of the California State Assembly, CRPA worked closely with him to oppose legislation that infringed on Second Amendment rights and to support measures that protected and expanded those rights. More recently, U.S. Attorney Essayli played a central role in the U.S. Department of Justice’s civil rights lawsuit against the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department over unconstitutional delays and barriers in its CCW permitting system, a historic legal action aimed at defending law-abiding citizens’ right to carry.

Considering CRPA’s historical relationship with Mr. Essayli, CRPA reached out to him directly for clarification on his statement. He provided CRPA the following clarifications:

Law-abiding citizens who legally carry to protect themselves and their families are not the problem, and law enforcement respects that right. Police contact with lawful gun owners is common and usually uneventful.

 Some people took my earlier comment to mean that simply carrying legally could lead to conflict with police. That’s not what I meant. I was referring to situations where someone appears to pose an immediate threat by acting aggressively toward law enforcement and ignoring commands while armed.

We appreciate Mr. Essayli clarifying his thoughts.

As steadfast 2A advocates, CRPA remains committed to defending the right to possess, own, and carry firearms, and doing so in a way that protects our freedoms and respects the rights of the law-abiding gun owners who rely on those rights to defend themselves and their families. CRPA supports gun owners’ rights to lawfully carry for self-defense and the defense of others, even while exercising other rights, like the First Amendment, at a protest.

CRPA believes that President Trump’s statements, and those of other administration officials, were intended as a comment on the poor judgment and actions of Alex Pretti rather than an expression that the Second Amendment does not protect the right to carry for self-defense at protests. And we will continue to work with administration officials to educate them about this issue. Meanwhile, we continue to enjoy a positive and productive working relationship with the US Department of Justice (DOJ) Civil Rights Division, Second Amendment Law Section, as the DOJ continues its unprecedented (if not perfect) pro-Second Amendment advocacy in court, where it counts.