Across most of the rest of America, even the most liberal Democrats have thrown in the towel on harassing gun owners. Part of it is gun-control isn’t popular with voters. And part is the overwhelming evidence of “More Guns, Less Crime,” to cite the title of John Lott’s book. When law-abiding private citizens are armed, criminals are more likely to back off, fearing getting shot.

Fortunately, our Second Amendment “right to keep and bear arms” has been strongly enforced by the federal courts, even the liberal 9th Circuit. The L.A. Times reported:

Relaxed rules for carrying concealed guns in public may not be challenged by California state officials or advocacy groups, a federal appeals panel decided Wednesday.

The decision was another victory for gun rights advocates, but it was not likely to be the last word. The state has the right to appeal Wednesday’s order and legal analysts expect the state to do so. There is another pending gun case involving the right to carry concealed weapons in California and a ruling in that case could resolve the debate.

In its 2-1 ruling Wednesday, the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals denied an attempt by Atty. Gen. Kamala D. Harris, a gun control group and law enforcement associations to intervene in a case that struck down San Diego County’s policy of tightly restricting the carrying of concealed guns.

Why is Harris wasting my tax dollars attacking my rights, when she should be prosecuting killers, robbers and rapists? Is her budget so overflowing with millions and millions of extra dollars from generous taxpayers that she can blow our money on this?

When Hutchens was appointed sheriff in 2008, she succeeded Mike “America’s Sheriff” Carona, who had been convicted in federal court on corruption charges.

Hutchens unfortunately tightened the county’s conceal-carry policy, which Carona had loosened, in part to give permits to his cronies.

Hutchens tightened the policy even though a) Orange County is a conservative county whose populace favors gun rights. And b) the evidence now is overwhelming that allowing conceal-carry by honest citizens actually cuts crime. The reason is that criminals don’t care about such laws, so the laws only are followed by law-abiding citizens. That leaves citizens unarmed when under assault by armed thugs.

The 9th Circuit’s panel’s decision is under appeal. But even if the decision is overturned, Hutchens could continue her policy. That’s because, under California law, it is county sheriffs who hand out conceal-carry permits at their own discretion.

“California must allow law-abiding citizens to carry concealed firearms in public, a federal appeals court ruled Thursday, striking down the core of the state’s permit system for handguns.

“In a 2-1 decision, the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco said San Diego County violates the Constitution’s Second Amendment by requiring residents to show “good cause” — and not merely the desire to protect themselves — to obtain a concealed-weapons permit.”

Studies by John Lott and others gun scholars have shown that, when states adopt conceal-carry laws, crime drops. That’s because criminals don’t care about gun laws. And their criminal connections provide them with plentiful illegal guns.

All disarming citizens does is provide easy marks for criminals, because the chance of the victim defending himself is limited.

But with conceal carry, criminals don’t know who is armed, and who isn’t. Any potential victim, even a grandma with a purse, could be packing heat.

As we used to say in my U.S. Army days 35 years ago — outstanding!