California militia men (courtesy wramsite.com)

California’s contracostatimes.com has taken a tally of civilian disarmament bills at the federal and Golden State level. According to their count Uncle Sam’s contemplating 13 gun ban bills in the Senate and 40 (yes 40) pieces of firearms-related legislation in the House. Golden State gun owners are staring down the barrel of 12 gun control bills in the Senate and 14 in the General Assembly. Make the jump for the list–which does not include New York’s SAFE Act or the dozens of bills being mooted in Connecticut, Colorado, Illinois, Maryland, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Washington and elsewhere. Fasten your metaphorical seat belts; this is going to get rough . . .

U.S. SENATE

S. 2, the Sandy Hook Elementary School Violence Reduction Act, by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev. — S.2 would express the Senate’s support for the president’s gun-violence reduction efforts and other common-sense proposals; for aid to law enforcement officers; for safe learning conditions for school students; for developing tools to identify people who pose a threat to themselves or others; for keeping weapons out of the hands of criminals and others not legally allowed to have them; and so on. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:s.2:

S. 22, the Gun Show Background Check Act of 2013, by U.S. Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J. –S.22 would require background checks for all firearms sales at gun shows, with “gun show” defined to include any place where more than 50 guns are on sale/display. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:s.22:

S.33, the Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device of 2013, by U.S. Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J. — S.33 would prohibit the sale, transfer, importation or possession of any magazine, belt, drum, feed strip, or similar device that can hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition, unless it was made before the law’s effective date. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:s.00033:

S.34, the Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2013, by U.S. Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J. — S. 34 would prohibit those on the government’s terrorism watch list from buying a firearm or obtaining an explosives license. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:s.00034:

S.35, the Stop Online Ammunition Sales Act of 2013, by U.S. Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J. — S.35 would require face to face purchases of ammunition, require licensing of ammunition dealers, and require reporting regarding bulk purchases of ammunition. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:s.00035:

S.54, the Stop Illegal Trafficking in Firearms Act of 2013, by U.S. Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt. — S.54 would specifically prohibit the straw purchase of firearms and beef up the law prohibiting material false statements when purchasing a firearm, establishing penalties for anyone who buys a firearm or ammunition with the intent to transfer it to someone else, particularly in cases involving crimes of violence or drug trafficking. The bill also expands existing trafficking law to make it a crime for an individual to smuggle firearms out of the United States. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:s.54:

S. 82, the Separation of Powers Restoration and Second Amendment Protection Act of 2013, by U.S. Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky. — S. 82, the companion bill to HR 410, would invalidate any past, present or future executive actions on gun control, like those President Obama took Jan. 16, rendering them as advisory only unless Congress enacts them.http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:s.82:

S. 147, the Common Sense Concealed Firearms Permit Act of 2013, by U.S. Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif. — S. 147 would require that each state that allows residents to carry concealed firearms create a permit process involving local law enforcement and requiring that those receiving permits be legal U.S. residents, at least 21 years old, have good cause for requesting the permit, and demonstrate that he/she is worthy of public trust. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:s.00147:

S. 150, the Assault Weapons Ban of 2013, by U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif. — S.150 would ban semi-automatic weapons that can accept a detachable ammunition magazine and also have one or more specific military-style characteristics, including pistol grips, flash suppressors and a folding or telescoping stock. It also would ban large-capacity magazines and other ammunition-feeding devices holding more than 10 rounds. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:s.00150:

S.174, the Ammunition Background Check Act of 2013, by U.S. Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn. — S.174 would require an instant background check for the purchase of ammunition, and would restore pre-1986 requirements that sellers track their inventory and keep records of their customers; purchases of 1,000 rounds or more, or thefts of large amounts of ammunition, would have to be reported to law enforcement. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:s.00174:

S.179, the Gun Trafficking Prevention Act of 2013, by U.S. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y. — S.179, like companion bill H.R.452, would make a federal crime of buying or transferring a firearm with the intent to deliver it to someone else who’s barred by state or federal law from having it; impose prison terms of up to 20 years for such “straw purchasers”; and provide stiffer penalties for organizers or managers of firearms trafficking networks. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:s.00179:

S.261, the No Firearms for Foreign Felons Act of 2013, by U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif. — S. 261 would prohibit anyone convicted of a felony or crime of domestic violence in a foreign court from possessing a firearm in the United States. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:s.00261:

S.374, the Protecting Responsible Gun Sellers Act of 2013, by U.S. Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. — S.374 would make congressional findings that Congress supports and respects Second Amendment rights and the existing prohibition on a national firearms registry, but also that the Justice Department should make a priority of closing holes in its firearm background check system and that citizens should be more vigilant about keeping firearms from dangerously mentally ill people. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:s.00374:

U.S. HOUSE

HR 21, the NRA Members’ Gun Safety Act of 2013, by Rep. Jim Moran, D-Va. — HR 21 would require a background check for every firearm sale or transfer, with the only exceptions being gifts between immediate family members; probate or executor transfers after the owner’s death; a loan to someone who believes they need the firearm in their home to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm; and certain loans while target shooting, hunting, fishing or trapping. It also would require owners to report a firearm’s theft or loss within 48 hours, and would require any state that allows concealed carry to establish a permit process if it doesn’t already have one. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:h.r.00021:

HR 34, Blair Holt’s Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2013, by Rep. Bobby Rush, D-Ill. — HR 34 would bar anyone from buying or owning a firearm without a background check and government-issued license; the U.S. Attorney General would establish a federal record-of-sale system, and any firearm thefts or losses would have to be reported to the government within three days. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:h.r.00034:

HR 35, the Safe Schools Act of 2013, by Rep. Steve Stockman, R-Texas — HR 35 would repeal federal laws mandating “gun free zones” around schools. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:h.r.35:

HR 65, the Child Gun Safety and Gun Access Prevention Act of 2013, by Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, D-Texas — HR 65 would raise the minimum age for handgun ownership from 18 to 21; prohibit people under 21 from possessing “semiautomatic assault weapons or large capacity ammunition feeding devices”; stiffen federal criminal penalties for gun ownership violations by minors and for selling or giving handguns, assault weapons or large-capacity magazines to minors knowing they intended to use it for crime; requires all firearm sales to include a gun storage or locking device; prohibits keeping a loaded firearm or unloaded firearm and ammunition within a child’s reach; and lets the attorney general provide federal grants for gun-safety classes for parents and children. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:h.r.65:

HR 93, the Fire Sale Loophole Closing Act, by Rep. David Cicilline, D-R.I. — HR 93 would close the “fire sale loophole,” which lets gun dealers with revoked licenses transfer their weapons to their private collections, then sell the firearms in inventory clearance sales without federal background checks. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:h.r.93:

HR 117, the Handgun Licensing and Registration Act of 2013, by Rep. Rush Holt, D-N.J. — HR 117 would require that each state provide for the mandatory licensing and registration of every handgun sold in the future. The bill is based upon New Jersey’s mandatory handgun registration law. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:h.r.00117:

HR 133, the Citizens Protection Act of 2013 by Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky. — HR 133 would repeal federal laws mandating “gun free zones” around schools. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:h.r.133:

HR 137, the Fix Gun Checks Act of 2013, by Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, D-N.Y. — HR 137 would require a background check for every firearm sale and “ensure that all individuals who should be prohibited from buying a firearm are listed in the national instant criminal background check system,” in part by widening the range of mental-health situations reportable to the FBI’s background check database. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:h.r.137:

HR 138, the Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device Act, by Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, D-N.Y. — HR138 is the House companion bill to Lautenberg’s S.33. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:h.r.138:

HR 141, the Gun Show Loophole Closing Act of 2013, by Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, D-N.Y. — HR 141 would require criminal background checks on all firearms transactions occurring at gun shows. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:h.r.141:

HR 142, the Stop Online Ammunition Sales Act of 2013, by Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, D-N.Y. — HR142 is the House companion bill to Lautenberg’s S.35. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:h.r.142:

HR 226, the Support Assault Firearms Elimination and Reduction (SAFER) for our Streets Act, by Rep. Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn. — HR 226 would create a $2,000 refundable tax credit ($1,000 for two consecutive years) for an assault weapon owner who turns in his or her firearm to state police. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:h.r.226:

HR 227, the Buyback our Safety Act, by Rep. Ted Deutch, D-Fla. — HR 227 authorizes $15 million over 5 years for the Justice Department to provide matching grants to local law enforcement agencies for firearms buyback programs. The bill also directs the National Academy of Sciences to identify guns most often used in violent crimes and create a pricing scale for buying such weapons. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:h.r.227:

HR 236, the Crackdown on Deadbeat Gun Dealers Act of 2013, by Rep. James Langevin, D-RI — HR 236 would increase the ability of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to inspect federal firearms licensees for compliance with recordkeeping requirements by increasing the allowable inspections per year from one to three; increase the penalties for knowingly misrepresenting any facts about a firearms sale; and authorize the attorney general to suspend a dealer’s license and assess civil penalties for firearms violations, including failure to have secure gun storage or safety devices. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:h.r.236:

HR 238, the Fire Sale Loophole Closing Act, by Rep. Grace Meng, D-N.Y. — HR 238 would close the “fire sale loophole,” which lets gun dealers with revoked licenses transfer their weapons to their private collections, then sell the firearms in inventory clearance sales without federal background checks. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:h.r.238:

HR 321, the Firearm Safety and Public Health Research Act of 2013, by Rep. Carolyn Maloney, D-N.Y. — HR 321 would release the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Institutes of Health from restrictions placed on them in 1996 that have prohibited them from conducting peer-reviewed research into gun violence prevention.http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:h.r.321:

HR 322, the Hunting, Fishing and Recreational Shooting Protection Act, by Rep. Jeff Miller, R-Fla. — HR 322 would exclude all firearm and ammunition components from the definition of “chemical substance” under federal environmental laws, so that the lead and other substances in ammunition couldn’t be regulated or restricted. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:h.r.322:

HR 329, the Strengthening Background Checks Act of 2013, by Rep. Mike Fitzpatrick, R-Pa. — H.R. 329 would require states to share mental-health information with the FBI’s system or else lose 10 percent of their federal Justice Assistance Grants for local police. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:h.r.00329:

HR 332, the Equal Access to Justice for Victims of Gun Violence Act, by Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Burbank — HR 332 lets civil cases proceed against irresponsible bad actors in the gun industry who turn blind eyes to straw purchases and trafficking, overriding a 2005 law that providing immunity from civil liability in state and federal court for gun makers, distributors and dealers. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:H.R.332:

HR 339, the Fairness in Firearm Testing Act, by Rep. Phil Gingrey, R-Ga. — HR 339 amends the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to direct the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) to make a video recording of the entire process of its examination and testing of an item for the purpose of determining if it’s a firearm (and if so, the firearm’s type) or ammunition; the bill also bars ATF from editing or erasing any such recording. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:H.R.339:

HR 404, the Straw Purchaser Penalty Enhancement Act, by Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Burbank — HR 404 adds more prison time for those convicted of making straw purchases of firearms, and forbids courts from putting such convicts on probation or reducing their prison term to compensate for multiple convictions. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:H.R.404:

HR 410, the Restore the Constitution Act of 2013, by Rep. Steve Stockman, R-Texas — HR 410, the companion bill to S. 82, would invalidate any past, present or future executive actions on gun control, like those President Obama took Jan. 16, rendering them as advisory only unless Congress enacts them. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:H.R.410:

HR 427, the Trafficking Reduction and Criminal Enforcement (TRACE) Act, by Rep. Mike Quigley, D-Ill. — HR 427 would require that federal background check records be maintained for at least 180 days, rather than the current 24-hour limit; that gun dealers do inventory checks to report lost or stolen guns; and that new firearms include a second, hidden serial number printed inside the receiver which could only be removed by dismantling the entire weapon.http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:H.R.427:

HR 431, the Gun Transparency and Accountability Act of 2013, by Rep. Jackie Speier, D-San Mateo — HR 431 would abolish a series of 2004 amendments that weakened gun safety rules: the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives could once again use information on guns traced to crimes; background check information wouldn’t have to be destroyed within 24 hours; and the ban on federally required inventory audits of gun dealerships would be lifted.http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:h.r.431:

HR 437, the Assault Weapons Ban of 2013, by Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, D-N.Y. — HR 437 is the House companion bill to Feinstein’s S.150. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:h.r.00437:

HR 449, by Rep. Jeff Miller, R-Fla. — HR 449 would provide a 90-day amnesty period during which veterans and their family members can register in the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record any firearm acquired before October 31, 1968, by a veteran while a member of the Armed Forces stationed outside the continental United States.http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:H.R.449:

HR 452, the Gun Trafficking Prevention Act of 2013, by Rep. Carolyn Maloney, D-N.Y. — HR 452 would make a federal crime of buying or transferring a firearm with the intent to deliver it to someone else who’s barred by state or federal law from having it; impose prison terms of up to 20 years for such “straw purchasers;” and provide stiffer penalties for organizers or managers of firearms trafficking networks. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:H.R.452:

HR 538, the Protect Law Enforcement Armor Act (PLEA) Act, by Rep. Eliot Engel, D-N.Y. — HR 538 would expand federal law’s definition of “armor piercing ammunition” to include certain handgun ammunition that can pierce body armor, and would ban the making, sale and possession of any handgun that uses such ammunition.http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:h.r.538:

HR 575, the Second Amendment Protection Act of 2013, by Rep. Steve Stockman, R-Texas — HR 575 would express the sense of Congress that the United States should not adopt any treaty that threatens national sovereignty or abridges rights guaranteed by the Constitution, such as the right to bear arms, and should stop providing financial support to any entity that does so. It would bar the United States from providing any funding to the United Nations for a fiscal year unless the president certifies to Congress that the U.N. has not acted to infringe on individuals’ rights in the United States to have a firearm or ammunition, or abridge any other constitutionally protected rights of U.S. citizens.http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:h.r.575:

HR 577, the Veterans Second Amendment Protection Act, by Rep. Steve Stockman, R-Texas — HR 577 would make sure any veteran deemed mentally incapacitated, mentally incompetent or experiencing an extended loss of consciousness in a Department of Veterans Affairs case is not considered mentally defective for purposes of prohibition from firearm ownership without a separate court order or finding that the person is a danger to self or others.http://thomas.loc.gov/cgibin/bdquery/z?d113:h.r.577:

HR 578, the Respecting States’ Rights and Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2013, by Rep. Marlin Stutzman, R-Ind. — HR 578 would guarantee that individuals who legally carry a concealed weapon in their home state may also carry in any other state that allows concealed carry. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:h.r.578:

HR 602, the Veterans Second Amendment Protection Act, by Rep. Jeff Miller, R-Fla. — HR 602 is the same as HR 577.http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:HR00602:

HR 619, the Keep Kids Safe Act of 2013, by Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y. — HR 619 would prohibit possession of a firearm by, or the sale or transfer of a firearm to, anyone who has been convicted in any court of a misdemeanor sex offense against a minor. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:HR00619:

HR 661, the Tiahrt Restrictions Repeal Act, by Rep. Barbara Lee, D-Oakland — Like HR 427 and HR 431, HR 661 would repeal current provisions that require federal firearm background check records to be destroyed within 24 hours; prohibit ATF from requiring licensed dealers to conduct annual inventory checks to detect lost and stolen guns; and restrict state and local authorities from using trace data to fully investigate corrupt gun dealers and traffickers.http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:HR00661:

HR 720, the Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2013, by Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y. — HR 720 would let the attorney general deny the right to buy firearms or to get a firearms and explosive license to anyone engaged in, or who has providing material support to, terrorism and might use a firearm or explosive to terroristic ends; those denied firearms or licenses could challenge it in court. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:HR00720:

HR 722, the Detectives Nemorin and Andrews Anti-Gun Trafficking Act of 2013, by Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y. — HR 722 would impose stiffer penalties for gun-trafficking crimes; expand the Justice Department’s “Project Safe Neighborhoods” program; require the attorney general to make a report to Congress every two years on gun traces and trafficking prosecutions; require the FBI to share its National Crime Information Center Stolen Gun File with ATF; impose a 5-year prison term for having a stolen firearm or a firearm with an obliterated serial number while committing any felony; and impose a 7-, 9- or 12-year penalty for using such a firearm during a violent or drug-trafficking crime.http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:HR00722:

HR 793, the Firearm Safety and Buyback Grant Act of 2013, by Rep. Linda Sanchez, D-Cerritos — HR 793 would establish a grant program within the Department of Justice in which grants would be eligible to state, tribal and local units of government and law enforcement agencies to carry out anti-violence campaigns, gun safety campaigns and firearms buyback programs. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:HR00793:

HR 848, the Armed Prohibited Persons Act of 2013, by Rep. Mike Thompson, D-Napa — H.R. 848 would make federal grants available to states that develop programs with the goal of removing firearms from people no longer allowed to own guns due to criminal convictions, mental illness incidents or other causes. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:H.R.848:

H.Res. 40 by Rep. Phil Gingrey, R-Ga. — H.Res.40 would expresses the House’s sense that active-duty military personnel stationed or living in the District of Columbia should be allowed to fully exercise their Second Amendment rights and be exempt from the district’s gun control laws. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D?d113:40:./list/bss/d113HE.lst::

H.Res. 55 by Rep. Frederica Wilson, D-Fla. — H.Res.55 would condemn “unfounded reliance on Stand Your Ground laws to protect actions that extend far beyond historical use of self-defense;” urge any state legislature to reject or repeal such bills and laws; calls for creating incentives for states to find alternatives to such laws, such as community-policing grants; encourages states to create penalties for those found to have caused “substantive harm” through racial profiling;” and urges the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights to seek to study black males’ higher rates of school expulsions and suspensions, homicides, incarceration, poverty, violence, drug abuse and other disparities. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D?d113:55:./list/bss/d113HE.lst::

CALIFORNIA STATE SENATE

SB 47 by state Sen. Leland Yee, D-San Francisco — SB 47 would prohibit the use of the “bullet button” and other devices that allow for easily changeable magazines on assault weapons. Such weapons would only be allowed to have ammunition magazines holding 10 or fewer rounds, which could not be changed without taking the weapon apart; essentially, bullets could only be loaded one-by-one from the top of the gun. http://leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquery?bill_number=sb_47&sess=CUR&house=B&author=yee

SB 53 by state Sen. Kevin de Leon, D-Los Angeles — SB 53 would require anyone buying ammunition to first pass a background check and receive a one-year permit — for an estimated $50 fee — from the state Justice Department.http://leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquery?bill_number=sb_53&sess=CUR&house=B&author=de_le%F3n

SB 108 by state Sen. Leland Yee, D-San Francisco — SB 108 would require that all guns be properly stored with a trigger lock or in a lock box at a residence when the owner is not present; current law requires only that gun owners also own a trigger lock or lock box, but doesn’t require such devices be used on idle firearms. The bill also would make it illegal to loan a handgun to anyone not registered as its owner. http://leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquery?bill_number=sb_108&sess=CUR&house=B&author=yee

SB 127 by state Sen. Ted Gaines, R-El Dorado Hills — SB 127 would permanently prohibit gun ownership for anyone who has been judged by a court to be a danger to others due to mental illness or has been judged a mentally disordered sex offender; courts could no longer issue certificates allowing gun ownership for such people after treatment. http://leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquery?bill_number=sb_127&sess=CUR&house=B&author=gaines

SB 140 by state Sen. Mark Leno, D-San Francisco — SB 140 would let the state Justice Department use money from Dealer Record of Sale background check fees to beef up use of the Armed Prohibited Persons System (APPS) program, which identifies and confiscates handguns and assault weapons from those no longer legally allowed to own them due to criminal convictions, mental illness or protective orders. http://leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquery?bill_number=sb_140&sess=CUR&house=B&author=leno

SB 293 by state Sen. Mark DeSaulnier, D-Concord — SB 293 would require that handguns have an owner authorized safety mechanism, such as biometric readers or other technologies. http://leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquery?bill_number=sb_293&sess=CUR&house=B&author=desaulnier

SB 299 by state Sen. Mark DeSaulnier, D-Concord — SB 299 would require that anyone whose firearm is lost or stolen must notify local law enforcement within 48 hours of the time they knew, or reasonably should have known, it was missing. If the firearm is later recovered, the local law enforcement agency must be notified within 48 hours of the recovery. http://leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquery?bill_number=sb_299&sess=CUR&house=B&author=desaulnier

SB 363 by state Sen. Roderick Wright, D-Inglewood — SB 363 would require gun owners living with someone prohibited from possessing firearms to keep any guns in the house locked up. http://leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquery?bill_number=sb_363&sess=CUR&house=B&author=wright

SB 374 by state Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento — SB 374 would add to the state’s assault weapons law all semi-automatic rifles with detachable magazines, thus banning their manufacture and sale; those already owned would have to be registered. http://leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquery?bill_number=sb_374&sess=CUR&house=B&author=steinberg

SB 396 by state Sen. Loni Hancock, D-Berkeley — SB 396 would revoke the “grandfathering” of large-capacity magazines owned before 2000, making it illegal to even possess any magazine that holds more than 10 rounds.http://leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquery?bill_number=sb_396&sess=CUR&house=B&author=hancock

SB 567 by state Sen. Hannah Beth Jackson, D-Santa Barbara — SB 567 would ban “rifled bore” shotguns with revolving cylinders such as the Circuit Judge .410/.45; it’s already illegal to use or possess to “smooth bore” shotguns with revolving cylinders in California. http://leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquery?bill_number=sb_567&sess=CUR&house=B&author=jackson

SB 755 by state Sen. Lois Wolk, D-Vacaville — SB 755 would expand the list of misdemeanors for which convictions result in a prohibition from firearm ownership; make it a felony to possess a gun after two or more convictions within three years for crimes committed while using alcohol or drugs; prohibits firearms ownership by anyone ordered by a court to undergo assisted outpatient treatment for mental illness; and more. http://leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquery?bill_number=sb_755&sess=CUR&house=B&author=wolk

CALIFORNIA ASSEMBLY

AB 48 by Assemblywoman Nancy Skinner, D-Berkeley — AB 48 would require ammunition sellers to be licensed; ammunition purchasers to show identification; ammunition sellers to report all sales to the state Justice Department; and the Justice Department to create a registry of ammunition purchases, which would be available to all law enforcement agencies, as well as to notify law enforcement of large-quantity purchases. The bill also would ban kits that convert legal ammo feeding devices into high-capacity magazines. http://leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquery?bill_number=ab_48&sess=CUR&house=B&author=skinner

AB 134 by Assemblyman Dan Logue, R-Chico — AB 134 would prohibit law enforcement agencies from publicly disclosing personally identifying information such as phone numbers or addresses of concealed carry weapons permit holders and applicants. http://leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquery?bill_number=ab_134&sess=CUR&house=B&author=logue

AB 169 by Assemblyman Roger Dickinson, D-Sacramento — AB 169 would prohibit people who are allowed to buy handguns designated as unsafe by the state Justice Department from selling or transferring those handguns to others who aren’t allowed to have them. http://leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquery?bill_number=ab_169&sess=CUR&house=B&author=dickinson

AB 170 by Assemblyman Steven Bradford, D-Inglewood — AB 170 would limit the possession and use of registered assault weapons or machine guns to individuals only; current law lets both individuals and organizations apply for permits, even if organization members might not have passed background checks. http://leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquery?bill_number=ab_170&sess=CUR&house=B&author=bradford

AB 174 by Assemblyman Rob Bonta, D-Oakland — AB 174 declares the Legislature’s intent to end all “grandfather clauses” allowing ownership of assault weapons and large-capacity magazines. http://leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquery?bill_number=ab_174&sess=CUR&house=B&author=bonta

AB 187 by Assemblyman Rob Bonta, D-Oakland — AB 187 declares the Legislature’s intent to put a tax on all ammunition sold in the state, with the revenue directed to a fund for crime-prevention efforts in the state’s high-crime areas. http://leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquery?bill_number=ab_187&sess=CUR&house=B&author=bonta

AB 202 by Assemblyman Tim Donnelly, R-Hesperia — AB 202 would let school districts, county education offices and charter schools pay for training for any school employee who’s qualified to be trained and willing to carry a concealed firearm as a “school marshal.” The bill also would protect those employees’ anonymity by exempting their concealed-carry permit information from public release by law enforcement. http://leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquery?bill_number=ab_202&sess=CUR&house=B&author=donnelly

AB 500 by Assemblyman Tom Ammiano, D-San Francisco — AB 500 would require gun owners to keep their firearms under lock and key if someone else in the house is legally prohibited from owning guns due either to criminal convictions or a mental-health problem. The bill also would let the state Justice Department extend the 10-day waiting period for gun purchases by up to a week if a background check can’t be completed within 10 days.http://leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquery?bill_number=ab_500&sess=CUR&house=B&author=ammiano

AB 538 by Assemblyman Richard Pan, D-Sacramento — AB 538 would require the state to make updates in handgun, assault-weapon and other firearm ownership records within five business days; exempt law enforcement officers from the law requiring a license to sell, lease or transfer a firearm to a dealer, wholesaler or manufacturer; require local, state and federal government agencies to report the destruction of its weapons; require firearms sellers to provide purchases with copies of the background-check transaction; and more. http://leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquery?bill_number=ab_538&sess=CUR&house=B&author=pan

AB 539 by Assemblyman Richard Pan, D-Sacramento — AB 539 would require the state to notify anyone who’s temporarily prohibited from owning a firearm, whether due to a restraining order or probation or some other cause, that they can transfer their firearms to a licensed dealer for the duration of the prohibition. http://leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquery?bill_number=ab_539&sess=CUR&house=B&author=pan

AB 740 by Assemblyman Luis Alejo, D-Salinas — AB 740 would lengthen the list of crimes that bar a convict from owning a firearm for 10 years, adding offenses such as illegally buying or selling firearms or ammunition; interfering with public officials or first responders; possessing ammunition when prohibited from possessing firearms; carrying ammunition on school grounds; and others. The bill also would tighten the number of sales, leases or transfers of firearms a person could do in a year without a license. http://leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquery?bill_number=ab_740&sess=CUR&house=B&author=alejo

AB 760 by Assemblyman Roger Dickinson, D-Sacramento — AB 760 would impose a five-cent tax on each bullet sold in California, dedicating the revenue to an existing program to screen young children for mild to moderate mental illness, and intervene with strategies to address their problems. http://leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquery?bill_number=ab_760&sess=CUR&house=B&author=dickinson

AB 761 by Assemblyman Roger Dickinson, D-Sacramento — AB 761 would require CalPERS and CalSTRS to divest any existing pension fund investments from companies that manufacture, sell, distribute or market firearms or ammunition. http://leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquery?bill_number=ab_761&sess=CUR&house=B&author=dickinson

AB 1020 by Assemblyman Rob Bonta, D-Oakland — AB 1020 would require the state attorney general to send a letter to gun purchasers during the 10-day waiting period informing him or her of the state’s laws on gun trafficking and safe storage. http://leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquery?bill_number=ab_1020&sess=CUR&house=B&author=bonta

AB 1084 by Assemblywoman Melissa Melendez, R-Murrieta — AB 1084 would toughen the existing penalties for carrying or firing a firearm in school zones; carrying a firearm on public or private university campuses; carrying a firearm in a playground or a public or private youth center during operating hours; for being a felon in possession of a firearm; providing a firearm to anyone prohibited from having it; and selling a firearm to a “straw purchaser” who’s known not to be the actual buyer. The bill also would require probation supervision for anyone released from prison after doing time for any offense involving deadly weapons. http://leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquery?bill_number=ab_1084&sess=CUR&house=B&author=Melendez

94 Responses to Read ‘Em and Weep: 80 Civilian Disarmament Bills (Not Including All the Other Ones)

  1. As I go through all of these things one thought keeps popping up.
    Where in the hell do they expect to find the money to administrate and enforce this stuff?!?

    • You know, from the taxpayers and the majority of gun owners who support common sense gun laws.

      /sarcasm

      No, really

        • Public safety is always the first to get cut. Ironic considering they do that and want our guns too.

          When I was a firefight in my hometown in Connecticut, we (the town) went an entire fiscal year without a budget. Of course my FD suffered signifigant cuts that delayed purchasing much needed equipment. We the firefighters actually discussed walking out and locking up the station. Of course, we decided that ethicaly it would be a horrible idea.

    • Easy. Look again at the California proposals. One is a .05 per bullet tax, another is an undefined bullet tax, another is a $50 annual fee for a background check to get a license to purchase ammo, and another is a bill that the monies collected by the state for transfer fees (which by law is currently limited to paying for the cost of running background checks and is $35) can be used to pay for programs to seize firearms from persons who have been disqualified by restraining order or criminal conviction. (The law is a direct result of the fact that the funds collected for the transfer exceed the costs of running the program, and rather than refund the millions in excess fees, the legislature has decided to spend them. Which means the cost of the ammo ID exceeds the cost to run that program, freeing up funds for other purposes).

  2. BLITZKRIEG. FULL COURT PRESS. BUM’S RUSH.

    They hope to overwhelm the opposition. They may well succeed. The chances of things NOT getting really ugly diminish day by day.

    • > They hope to overwhelm the opposition.
      > They may well succeed.

      $25 billion buys a lot of influence.

    • > I guess they are forgetting there are 120MM
      > of us with guns. I say, “bring it”!

      Bloomberg’s worth: $25 billion. He’s the 10th richest man in America.

      NRA budget: $250 million — 1% of Bloomberg’s worth.

      • You know Bloomberg may have 25 million but that’s not going to stop some nut with an illegal $50 Saturday Night Special and a $0.25 bullet from shooting his ass on the street. For his sake hope it never happens.
        He just does not know when to keep his mouth shut.
        He’s a useless Traitor and Nazi SOB. He’s going to tell you what you can drink, eat or anything else he feels like doing.
        That’s not a living in freedom, it’s Tyranny on a city wide scale.
        He needs to keep his Yankee ass in NYC if he’s smart.
        I’m just surprised some jerk hasn’t shot him already. I remember the Gestapo tactics he used on the homeless in NYC. Locking them all up and showing no compassion at all for their plight. He’s a total Dickhead.

  3. I don’t get the bills that are just to promote support for something, like the first one on the list. I don’t understand how that does anything besides waste time thinking about it. If you support some other bills, then support or vote in favor of those bills.

    • It is purely a symbolic gesture. Like divesting in firearms companies for their pension plans. It does nothing on the bottom line, but it is making a statement.

    • simple as to why mundane ones are to be voted on
      they hide stuff in bills
      some bills are over 600 pages
      worded so carefully
      referring to other bills that have to be researched
      in the end
      most bills aren’t read as they can’t be in any type of timely fashion
      this is when by voting on a nothing bill
      later it’s trojan horse pops out

  4. S.34 – So you are no longer on the “watch” list, you are now a dangerous terrorist? If the government truley believed that, would they not be guilty of conspiracy to aiding terrorism by only watching these people and not arresting them?

    In other words either they are a terrorist and you need to do your job or you need to back the fv*k off!

    • Nah, they gotta leave you a long rope so they can get the rest of your evil cabal (i.e., identify your friends) also.

  5. What’s up with the name of this one which extends background checks to all sales? How can they tack the NRA’s name onto a bill that they do not endorse? That’s pretty deceitful.

    HR 21, the NRA Members’ Gun Safety Act of 2013, by Rep. Jim Moran, D-Va.

  6. its no longer just one bill in maryland. In addition to that one bill, there are 78 other pieces of legislation wending their way through committee (each is a portion of the larger uber-bill, or its own initiative like ammo taxes). Its almost bizarro world, now that the MD senate has voted on one, they turn to 78 more!!

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/md-politics/maryland-legislature-turns-attention-to-other-78-gun-bills/2013/03/05/aa3de60a-85db-11e2-999e-5f8e0410cb9d_story.html

  7. “As goes California, so goes the nation”
    California ought not be written off for that very reason.
    It is a major front in the battle and requires much resources.
    Waiting around to litigate all these bills is counterproductive and will end up bankrupting resources.

  8. 99% of the infringement bills are Democrat back legislation. All the (too few) pro 2A bills are Republican sponsored. I think I’m getting the over all picture. There is no Democratic party any more, and not much left of the Rs. We must prepare, organize, and raise money for 2014 ASAP. Weep is right. If only a portion of there get passed WAFd.

    Tell me again that barry doesn’t want civilian disarmament.

    • Alot of the brain dead on this very forum voted for a democrat, or Donald Duck, thinking that Mitt would have done the same thing as ‘Kid Kenyan’ (a deadly tactical error, and illogical).
      Elections have consequences. Dont throw your vote away in the GENERAL election.
      Liberalism is a mental disorder.

  9. S. 82/HR.410 are not disarmament bills, they state the limitations of executive actions on firearms- until congress votes they are to only be seen as advisories.

  10. HR 575, the Second Amendment Protection Act

    So we will protect the Second Amendment from everyone but ourselves. Once we destroy it the UN can do as they please but not before

  11. How would any of those bills have stopped Sandy Hook?

    That is the one question you should keep asking those who support your disarmament.

  12. What I believe this is, is rule #8 from Rules for Radicals. It is also something that we must do if we are going to beat back this assault on our freedoms.

    RULE 8: “Keep the pressure on. Never let up.” Keep trying new things to keep the opposition off balance. As the opposition masters one approach, hit them from the flank with something new.

    • Looks to most of anti’s break rule #2

      RULE 2: “Never go outside the expertise of your people.” It results in confusion, fear and retreat. Feeling secure adds to the backbone of anyone.

      I will plagiaize a post I saw on a another subject. A law maker must have LEO or military level training before allowed to draft a bill that deals with guns. Or better yet even vote on them.

      • Yes! But don’t forget, we must have a quorum. So, the dirtballs must be present, but cannot vote! That’ll cause a few heart attacks!

  13. Not to mention the BS they are trying to pull in Florida. Anger management classes before you can buy ammunition.

    Foxnews has the article.

  14. Well… I just found a great reason to join my state militia.

    *eye roll* Assault weapons are only for people in the militia, or the military, and police! *neener neener neener*

    I hate this state.

    • Speaking of state militias, did anyone else notice that on the picture above there’s one guy who doesn’t have the camo uniform and he’s clutching what appears to be a Mauser instead of the required AR 15? There’s always one in every group I guess.

  15. And no matter how many of these get defeated, the same people will step up to re-introduce these (and new ones) next year. And, unless they are voted out, the year after that. And the year after that, and….

    If they don’t pay big in 2014, that is. If they do, they might lay low for a while.

  16. Well, you could have knocked me down with a feather. Aside from that RINO POS Peter King from NY, there isn’t a single anti-2A proposal from any Republican. And there isn’t a single pro-2A proposal from any Democrat. What are the odds of that?

    • I dont have a vagina, I have no right to choose for a woman – life or abortion, and I’m not gay… So, all these issues I’ve been voting for, and the associated politicians who support them, have now lost all my faith.

      I have a great job, a great family, a decent place to live, and live by a comfortable standard/quality of life….

      Looks like I know how I’m voting from now on.

      What’s the saying… A a liberal is a conservative who hasn’t been mugged yet.. Well I’m about to get mugged, demonized, and turned into a criminal FOR LAWFUL POSSESSION OF FIREARMS.

    • Well.. now all they need to do is setup some small group in a few remote places across the country, or false-flag a federal building and post a BS manifesto about how it had something to do with gun laws…. aaaaaaaand say good bye to whatever is left of second amendment after that.

      Best thing to do is wait it out, fight with the pen, train with the sword, organize, and pray for the best.

      When it’s time to burry your guns, it’s time to dig them up.

    • Ironic considering Obama and Holder’s newly released views
      of domestic drone strikes against “domestic theats”.

    • The justification and means are still there. The only thing that’s changed is the willingness of Americans to do it.

  17. And yet still, some will not join the NRA, GAO, SAF or even local grass roots organizations. What will it take to get some people to join the fight?

  18. How about….? A House bill that allows that if any person commits a violent act, including vehicular manslaughter while under the influence of California wine, the wineries in the state can be held liable in civil court…

    • Ahhh yes, to progressive brain at work………why do we elect these people?

      A Florida legislator wants anyone trying to buy ammunition to complete an anger management program first, in what critics say is the latest example of local lawmakers reaching for constitutionally-dubious solutions to the problem of gun violence.

      The bill filed Saturday by state Sen. Audrey Gibson, D-Jacksonville, would require a three-day waiting period for the sale of any firearm and the sale of ammunition to anyone who has not completed anger management courses. The proposal would require ammo buyers to take the anger management courses every 10 years.

      “This is not about guns,” Gibson said. “This is about ammunition and not only for the safety of the general community, but also for the safety of law enforcement.”

      • I could suggest a long list of “programs” for state legislators including math, statistics, science and logic. Since it does not seem to “stick” with them, I recommend them yearly.

        • I would prefer courses requiring 12 hours a day, seven days a week. Isn’t that how these nutbars seek to control us? Meanwhile, that will keep them out of the statehouse and out of trouble.

      • Why do we elect these people? Because we’ve been conditioned to accept that:

        Whatever election we’re about to vote in is the most important election ever

        Although the candidate we favor has a lot of views we disagree with, if we don’t elect that candidate then the other major party candidate will get elected and that’ll be even worse

        and…

        The idea of electing a candidate who isn’t a major party candidate is just a pipe dream, and if you “throw away” your vote on an independent or a third party candidate you’ll be stuck with the guy from the other major party that you don’t like.

        It’s that simple. All the major party candidates have to do is keep this conditioning up and they can take your vote for granted, despite the fact that they don’t do what you want them to do.

        • Yeah, you will be stuck with the guy from the other party REGARDLESS of which party you would have voted for otherwise! IOW, BS!

  19. I can’t even quickly read this list without getting majorly pissed off (save for the few pro-2A bills scattered in…)

    I can’t imagine the restraint necessary for Mr. Farago to research and publish this list without punching a hole in his monitor.

    I just want to wave this in front of people faces who have been arguing “we just want a couple of ‘common sense’ laws put in place”… Really? 80+ bills to turn everyday Americans into criminals is just a couple of common sense laws?

  20. I still find it funny that a lot of us are ACTUALLY more sane than most of these lib tards.

    For example:

    1 – We’ve passed background checks
    2 – We aren’t users (at least not habitually) of drugs
    3 – We pride our selves in our ability to maintain a level of calm, BECAUSE we have the option to escalate a scenario if need be, thus we perform a series of checks and balances when confronted with abnormal behavior
    4 – We are, for the most part, responsible and vigilant citizens
    5 – We choose to take the responsibility of our safety, and the saftey of our loved ones, into our own hands.
    6 – We are extremely political, and very active in our communities, counties, and states.
    7 – We have an expensive hobby, which for the most part means you have some form of disposable income.
    8 – A lot of us are present and former LEO/MIL/SEC

    Should I continue?

    That says a lot more than the other people out there.

    1 – Lemmings – “The police will protect us” or “The government would never do that” types
    2 – Leeches “I want my ‘bama phone!” or “I would rather die than defend myself…” should say it all…
    3 – Pacifist types “I dont believe in violence”
    4- Delusional “Something like that would never happen to me”
    5 – Legal Layman “Why do you need a gun? Just call the police, that’s what they are there for” or “No one is trying to take your guns”
    6 – Retarded sexual and emotional development types – “Guns are just scary, what if it goes off”
    7 – Parrots – “Who needs hi-capacity assault clips”
    8 – Revisionists – “No, the 2nd Amen. says ‘ you need to be in the military or police to own assault weapons, and your right to own is not unlimited” (that one cracked me up when my aunt said that – I pwned her with the actual text and she shut the hell up quickly)
    9 – Time Travelers – “The 2nd Amen. doesn’t apply to today, it was written 2 hundred something years ago” (if you dont know how many years ago, or what year the constitution was written, you should probably shut the hell up – LOL At 4th of July 1776). This class also includes the “Our founding fathers could never have imagined assault clip hip fire weapons” types
    10 – Not sure what to call people who refuse to hear ACTUAL statistics that conflict with their personal opinons and views on the matter? They usually say stuff like “Well CNN said that [insert a statistic]” then followed by “Hey, I just googled the FBI/NSC/DOJ/CDC numbers and I have no idea where they got that, but it is repeated on the Brady Campaign website with no citation, in that year, the following deaths…” “STOP I DONT CARE, CNN knows what they are talking about, dude, you cant just say that they are wrong because the Brady Campaign doesn’t cite their sources, and besides, the NRA has roadblocked all gun studies by the government, so your numbers are probably wrong as well”

    Need to get back to work…

      • Except for the part about the Constitution being written July 4, 1776. That was the Declaration of Independence. The Constitution was adopted by Congress in 1787, and the Bill of Rights (first ten amendments) was adopted during the ratification process, resulting in formal enactment March 4, 1789.

        • if you notice the sentence after the hyphenation says “LOL At 4th of July 1776” i.e The individual in question will almost always reply “Why are you asking me if I even know that, it was on July 4th 1776 duh.”

          I didn’t explain myself properly.

  21. Well folks, the vaunted NSSF just caved on Universal Background Checks. Traitors among us. Slimy quislings. This has to go down as one of the blackest days for the pro 2A folks. How can any in the gun industry justify this? This should get placed on the list of infamy for every gun owner and defender of the 2A. Wonder if this might cause some sort of fissure in the industry lobby? How can LaRue or Barrett or the brave others, support this or be associated with such an organization?

    http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/gun-advocates-part-ways-nra-background-check-issue-170211612–election.html

    • Perhaps they’re trying to prevent a conflict of some sorts. the 4473 DOES NOT constitute registration. Just FYI. Just a NICS check.

    • Gee whiz, let me run out and join the NSSF, they’ll protect my rights! I wonder if this is how some minorities feel when a supposed leader of that minority (Salvador Reza, Jesse Jackson, et al) claims to speak for them. I shouldn’t have to pay a fee to some organization that claims to speak for me, I believe that’s what I pay my elected representatives to do.

  22. Civilian disarmament collaborators have flooded state and federal legislatures with scores of bills to disarm the citizens and infringe on their right to possess the property and firearms of their choosing — citizens who have not committed any crimes and who no courts have found guilty through due process of law.

    I am as horrified as anyone that one mentally ill person murdered 26 people. Nevertheless that is not a legitimate basis for attacking millions of citizens who have certain firearms, certain magazines for certain firearms, or even certain kinds of ammunition. How can we perceive this as anything other than an aggressive attack on millions of U.S. citizens — an act of war?

  23. Some would argue that the blacker the day the better–because these idiots are engaging in such overreach their efforts will be struck down as unconstitutional. A Legislature can keep proposing laws that have been defeated, but they can’t pass a law in violation of SCOTUS decree. Defeating a bill today is a victory for this year only; a defeat in court lasts forever.

    • Yeah, keep taking comfort in a cadre of corrupt black-robed political activists. Once Obama gets his judge picks, the SCOTUS will be the new arm of tyranny.

  24. The blame for all of this falls squarely on the responsible American citizen. Eternal vigilance is the price of the freedom, and we’ve been weak-kneed at our posts.

    It’s impossible to prevent corruption, and the power of politics always attracts the morally bankrupt and fascist-minded. They’re like vicious dogs, unable to control their nature, but a very real threat regardless. And a vicious dog that attacks you needs to be dealt with by the dog owner. The fact that any of the politicians on this list are still breathing is a failure of true Americans to act.

    Very soon, every American will have a choice to make. Live as a slave, die fighting, or move to another country where perhaps the chains are a tad lighter.

  25. Don’t know if anyone noticed, but several of the CA laws are not actually bad. California law already allows CCW holders to carry in a school (and as far as CA law goes, one can carry without a CCW with permission of the superindendant or equivalent…not sure about federal law there). To actually encourage this and training school marshalls, not bad.

    AB 539 seems like it might be good. We have a list of misdemeanors and other conditions that create a temporary prohibition on firearms. Several years ago they required courts to inform people that they are prohibitted, but this often does not happen. So an ex files a restraining order, and ipso facto you are prohibited without a hearing or without being even notified. If you do know, and the cops get the guns, good luck getting them back. Even if the cops follow the law here (which is sadly often not the case…) it costs money and forms and fees. Even if a temp restraining order is lifted as soon as the hearing on it happens and it was baseless. By making it clear that one can transfer the firearms to an FFL for storage, it makes clear another option.

    Now some of the laws are just stupid. SB 567, banning the Judge or similar 410/45lc guns, for instance. Well I cannot legally buy a Judge in CA already, because it is defined by state law as a short barrelled shotgun. The only way to get one without getting the elusive dangerous weapons permit (maybe if you work for movies), is to spending more than the cost of the gun to have it converted to an AOW, and pay the fees on that

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *