BREAKING: California Gun Ban Bills Pass Committee

California gun confiscation (courtesy bizpacreview.com)

B-53 Ammunition/PermitsPASSED“This bill would require the Attorney General to also maintain copies of ammunition purchase permits, information about ammunition transactions, as specified, and ammunition vendor licenses, as specified, for those purposes.”

SB-38 Firearms: prohibited persons - HOLD – “This bill would, no later than January 1, 2015, require the Department of Justice to establish a 30-day amnesty period during which a person prohibited from possessing a firearm may surrender his or her firearms to a local law enforcement agency without being charged with illegal possession of a firearm, except as specified.”

SB-293 Firearms: owner-authorized handguns – HOLD – “This bill would define an owner-authorized handgun as a handgun that has a permanent feature that renders the handgun incapable of being fired except when activated by the lawful owner or owners of the handgun.”

Four more after the jump . . .

SB-374 Firearms: assault weapons – PASSED – “This bill would, instead, classify a semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that does not have a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept no more than 10 rounds as an assault weapon.”

SB-567 Firearms: shotguns – PASSED – “This bill would revise the definition of a shotgun to delete the requirement that it be intended to be fired from the shoulder, and would clarify that the projectile may be fired through either a rifled bore or a smooth bore.”

SB-683 Firearms: firearm safety certificate – PASSED - “This bill would instead, commencing January 1, 2015, and subject to exceptions, prohibit a person from purchasing or receiving any firearm without a valid firearm safety certificate, and would, subject to exceptions, prohibit any person from selling, delivering, loaning, or transferring any firearm to any person who does not have a valid firearm safety certificate.”

SB-755 Firearms: prohibited persons – PASSED - “This bill would add to the list of misdemeanors, the conviction for which is subject to those prohibitions, misdemeanor offenses of violating the above provisions as well as threatening a peace officer, removing a weapon from the person of a peace officer, hazing, transferring a firearm without completing the transaction through a licensed firearms dealer, furnishing ammunition to a minor, possession of ammunition by a person prohibited from having a firearm, furnishing ammunition to a person prohibited from possessing ammunition, carrying ammunition onto school grounds, carrying a loaded or concealed weapon if the person has been previously convicted of a crime against a person or property, or of a narcotics or dangerous drug violation, or if the firearm is not registered, participation in any criminal street gang, and a public offense committed for the benefit of a criminal street gang.”

avatar

About Robert Farago

Robert Farago is the Publisher of The Truth About Guns (TTAG). He started the site to explore the ethics, morality, business, politics, culture, technology, practice, strategy, dangers and fun of guns.

176 Responses to BREAKING: California Gun Ban Bills Pass Committee

  1. avatarAlphaGeek says:

    I’m getting seriously sick of this crap.

    • avatarRad Man says:

      If it’s any consolation California will likely be bankrupt by 2015. Speaking of which, how are they going to pay for the implementation of this crap again?

      • avatarAlphaGeek says:

        I don’t know why people keep repeating that. The CA budget is fine. It would actually be better if we still had budget woes as that would kill some of these bills which have costs associated with the programs they create or expand.

        • avatarRC says:

          The California budget is Fine? Hahahahahaha! What politician do you work for again? GTFO!

        • avatarWilliam Burke says:

          Search the term “comprehensive annual financial reports” (CAFRs, “coffers, get it?”) and you will discover governments from town level, through states, to the federal government keep two sets of books. One is public, and shows them all broke, or nearly so.

          The other set of books is a totally different story.

      • avatarJus Bill says:

        Pot taxes.

      • avatarSteve says:

        As much as I want liberal states to be hell-holes to demonstrate that their policies suck and just make things worse….

        The worse they become, the more they move to states that do thing the right way like Texas. It’s hard enough keeping these people in Austin and Dallas.

        • avatarDon't_Give_Up_the_Ship says:

          Personally I do not want anyone from CA or NY moving to my state.
          Pro-gun or not they let their elected officials get out of control so why would
          I want them here?

        • avatarRich Grise says:

          Even escapees? It wasn’t me that voted for any of this crap. I and others like us just get this crap crammed down our throat – would you leave us nowhere to escape to? Did the Free States around Civil War time turn away escaped slaves?

        • avatarneiowa says:

          Exactly, Clean up the mess you made, don’t come defecate in the yard of your neighbor. You, or your ancestors, decided the future lay in the lazy life of sunny Ca. You got what you wanted. Fix it if it’s broken.

        • avatarSivartius says:

          Dear Sir;

          My parents came to California to go to Christian College, and then to start a church. My father died here. We have always voted in favor of limited government and greater freedom. We have also been active in encouraging others to do the same. Our district is one of the “safe” Republican districts, and has been so for a long time. We have never had the “easy life of sunny California”. Your remarks are divisive, uninformed, and unhelpful. It is your attitude, and people like you, that has led to creeping tyranny in instances throughout history. There were many people here in America who did not welcome the Jews fleeing Nazi Germany. They sent them back to die. Congratulations.

  2. avatarMatt in FL says:

    Well, sorry guys.

    Maybe they can still be defeated in the legislature. Hold on, gotta get my shotgun, a pig just flew past my balcony.

    • avatarAlphaGeek says:

      Governor veto and court injunction are the last two lines of defense.

    • avatarWilliam Burke says:

      Ya know all this talk in certain states about secession? I’m fine with that. But can we also sever present states from the union? Is that in any way possible?

      • avatarJake says:

        Technically breaching the provisions of the Constitution and the various amendments puts a state government in a state of armed sedition, which severs their connection to the Union. They just like to dress up and pretend we’re all still under the same system, and it’s unfair, but not in the way we think. No it’s unfair because even after all the breaches and all the treason the government still isn’t allowed to do enough, so really we are being unfair to them by trying to get them to play by the rules.

  3. avatarDaniel Raidt says:

    Was there any doubt that the worst scenario would not happen in the peoples republic of Kalifornia ?

    • avatarTomy Ironmane says:

      I’m kinda surprised that “removing a weapon from the person of a peace officer” is a misdemeanor. Depending on the circumstances, I’d expect that to be either a felony or a lethal mistake.

      • avatarWilliam Burke says:

        Even by an arresting officer? How is the rest of the thing written? Can’t arresting cops “remove” the gun from an officer under arrest?

  4. avatarmediocrates says:

    Just in time to let that serial rapist ouf the mental facility. Not to mention the the 25,000 prisoners the courts ordered released from Kalifornia jails.

    Off to get popcorn and beer. This should be good.

    • avatarMark N. says:

      They have already released 25,000, most of them drug offenders who committed burglaries. So now the burglary rate is up as these guys return to their former habits, but the violent crime rate is pretty much unchanged. The problem is that the Ninth Circuit has order the Governor to release another 10,000, and Brown says they’ve pretty much run out of non-violent offenders. This should get interesting.

      • avatarAlphaGeek says:

        That certainly explains some of the apparent uptick in property crimes in the Fremont police blotter recently. And not all of those apprehended have been amateurs — some of them have been pros with serious equipment and skills.

      • avatarJake says:

        Mass deportations of non-citizens in US prisons along with proper border security would do the trick.financially, I should think.

      • avatarRich Grise says:

        Burglary has a victim. Simple possession doesn’t. Those are the people who need to be released forthwith.

  5. avatarMatt in FL says:

    I wonder if we’ll hear from Daniel Silverman in this thread, or if he’s already three fingers deep into his first drink of the weekend.

    • avatarjwm says:

      I don’t drink, but I think I’ll join him. I went to sleep in America and woke up in the twighlight zone.

    • avatarDaniel Silverman says:

      After I cash my paycheck I will be getting a bottle.
      I am just at a point now where I ask what will it take to gain back our rights in CA.
      Gun owners across the state are frustrated, and upset. Rightfully so.

    • avatarWilliam Burke says:

      I have every faith that Daniel can text and drink without harming anyone.

      • avatarRich Grise says:

        I knew a guy who said he’d drink two fingers of booze – “These two,” he’d say with his index and little finger extended.

  6. avatarGreg says:

    This may be my tipping point. Would love to stay and fight but were not getting anywhere here, Texas is looking better all the time!

    • avatarBDub says:

      We’ll leave the light on fer ya.

      • avatarGreg says:

        Appreciate that. Have family here, lots of them, just can’t think I have to comply or I will be a felon soon for something I bought legally. Least with my job being remote they won’t be replacing my income so I can hurt them a bit where it counts. A mass exodus would hurt this state and I know others already leaving or thinking about it.

        • avatarAlphaGeek says:

          Anything you own will be grandfathered. They’re killing gun rights with a slow death, not a quick one. By the time my kids are all adults CA will look more like the UK.

        • avatarSivartius says:

          Well, it may be grandfathered… if you register it in time, and if you can afford to pay the special taxes every year that will be levied against it. Also, you have to have a permit to buy ammo. And I don’t know that ammo will be grandfathered. What’s more, if you have ammo, and no card, that becomes an offence that get’s your right to own firearms revoked.

  7. avatarAlphaGeek says:

    SB374, if passed, is going to result in me buying a bunch of stripped receivers and registering them as assault weapons before the ban goes into effect.

    • avatarjwm says:

      If it passes I’ll have to arrange for a good home for my assualt rifle, my Ruger 10/22 outside of the state. Maybe I can donate it to an appleseed type group that trains new shooters.

      • avatarBen says:

        Your 22lr is fine. Rimfire are exempted from sb374

        • avatarMark N. says:

          Yeah, the language including rimfires was amended out. And you get to keep your AWs, you just can’t transfer them (by gift, bequeath or devise) to anyone in the state of California after the effective date of the law. But if you have any previously legal 20 or 30 rounders, whose will have to go, even if purchased when legal, and even if converted to 10 rounds only.

        • avatarTomy Ironmane says:

          Hey, if you believe that, I can get you a really good deal buying the golden gate bridge.

      • avatarAlphaGeek says:

        Why? Refuse to register them as AWs so you can keep them?

      • avatarS.CROCK says:

        jwm, isn’t the cali life outside of family and weather just the suckiest thing ever?!?!

        we have to bend over backwards to legally own a gun, then break our back to keep owning it legally.

      • avatarAdam says:

        .22 (and other rimfires) are exempted, because everyone knows a .22 isn’t a real bullet. It’s just a spit wad shooter and no one has ever died from them, so the pols aren’t worried about banning them. After all the only reason for all these bills is the safety of the children and children are not at threat from .22LR.

        • avatarRich Grise says:

          Ahh, anybody remember the “good ol’ days” when carneys had shooting galleries with real .22′s?
          (actually, maybe that’s why the grabbers aren’t so eager to grab them – they have fond memories of winning the Kewpie doll for their girl. (or their guy winning the Kewpie doll for them.)

        • avatarWilliam Burke says:

          Nope, Rich. Don’t remember that at ALL.

        • avatarRich Grise says:

          Yeah, the magazine was a tube, that they’d load from a tubular “clip.” Something like this:
          http://www.jdbedwell.com/Guns/OldGunStories/Henry_leveraction_22.jpg
          The tube under the barrel was loaded with .22 shorts.
          But I’m 64½ years young; this was back in the days when we had to walk 5 miles uphill both ways through 10 feet of snow with nothing for out feet but tree bark.

        • avatarWilliam Burke says:

          Shorts, and not CB or BB caps?

        • avatarRich Grise says:

          I don’t know that; to me they looked like what I thought .22 shorts looked like (from the Sears catalog); just now is the first time I’ve ever even heard of CB or BB caps.

    • avatarDaniel Silverman says:

      It will pass.

      • avatarAlphaGeek says:

        Yeah, I know it’ll pass. That was more a statement about the timing. At least AR receivers are back to being plentiful and reasonably priced.

        What completely sucks in the short term, though, is that my upper-receiver, ammo and upgrade budget is going to get totally wrecked by this.

        Long term, it’s going to suck because, well, the process of selling the house and moving to a free state is not exactly my idea of fun either. If this new gun-control regime is signed into law and is permitted to stand by the courts, I’m not going to finish raising my kids here. That would be the wrong example to set.

  8. avatardlj95118 says:

    …we are soooooooo screwed. *8(
    I’ve mailed the Governor and pleaded with him to be the adult in the room and veto these ridiculous bills.

  9. avatarDanny C-W says:

    Do yourselves in CA all a favor and register as Democrats and vote out these numbskulls in the primaries. 2014 will be an interesting year here in MD.

    • avatarJus Bill says:

      I’m planning to attend a get-together in late Sept. Eat their food, drink their drinks, and give them an earful in return. And then vote them ALL out. At least we’ll be rid of O’Malley (lil’ Bloomberg).

    • avatarRich Grise says:

      How would that work? Are you expecting there to be any even moderate dems in the primary? Or would the registration just be to impart a false sense of security?

  10. avatarm11_9 says:

    From 374: “(b) The Legislature finds a significant public purpose in exempting from the definition of “assault weapon” pistols that are designed expressly for use in Olympic target shooting events. Therefore, those pistols that are sanctioned by the International Olympic Committee and by USA Shooting, the national governing body for international shooting competition in the United States, and that were used for Olympic target shooting purposes as of January 1, 2001, and that would otherwise fall within the definition of “assault weapon” pursuant to this section are exempt, as provided in subdivision (c).”

    Maybe we are all olympians now. Are there any mag fed olympics guns out there or are they all single shot?

    I guess I could get used to the funny looking grips.

    It looked like they struck-out the word rimfire in several places too, so they apparently wanted to AWB many .22s but changed their mind.

    Look for a ban of that ‘loophole’ in 5 years, along with olympics guns.

  11. avatarDaniel Silverman says:

    Anyone know of any IT jobs out side CA??
    I am breaking out the boxes!!!

    • Austin Texas has all the Silicon Valley companies of any size offices there.

      • avatarWilliam Burke says:

        There are some high-tech jobs on VA Route 7, near Dulles International. AOL, to name but one.

      • avatarAlphaGeek says:

        I’ve already started discussing the idea of a move to Austin with the spousal unit. Not this year, but in the next few years.

    • avatarCarlosT says:

      Look north, to Washington. Gun laws are good and we need more people to help in the fight to keep them that way.

    • avatarJeremy says:

      Cisco has a large office complex in Richardson (northern suburb of Dallas)

    • avatarSkyMan77 says:

      Howdy Dan… I sure hope you’re looking on Dice.com. I’m also in IT and like you; I’m still behind enemy… I mean >> not-so-friendly lines here in Kali… Good luck to you Sir, I’ve got my eye on northern AZ… Lot of IT jobs out there for skilled, seasoned Geeks…

    • avatarRuss Bixby says:

      There’s quite a bit of IT in the “united states” of Kansas City and surrounds. If you move into this area, go Kansas as we’re less expensive and have better laws, but most of the IT work is just over the line in Missouri.

      There are some notable exceptions, however, with some large shops on the Kansas side.

      Welcome.

  12. avatarMaltwit says:

    Gee whiz, people! What’s the big deal?

    After all, it’s not like there are bad guys shooting in the streets or nuttin’, right?

    You’ve got the PO-lice there to protect you, dontcha know?

    /sarc

    • avatar(Formerly) MN Matt says:

      Nah. It’s just the police who are shooting up people in the streets. Nothing to see here.

  13. avatarMatt in FL says:

    Regarding the “prohibited persons” item: I don’t think hazing is a good thing, but they actually put it on the list through which you can be prohibited firearms ownership? That’s kinda… wow.

  14. avatarPaul says:

    *** PUFF *** and all that was left was a whisper of smoke in the air.

  15. avatarDave says:

    So f’ing glad I no longer live in the People’s Socialist Republic of California. I miss living in the desert, but they can keep their liberals and mis-guided gun laws.

    • avatarWilliam Burke says:

      America has other deserts, if that’s it. I very much loved living in one. Everything struggles to survive, putting everything on pretty much an even footing.

      Plus, it’s real purty.

  16. avatarJusgart says:

    It looks like the only alternative action for anyone in CA is to keep your powder dry, 25,000 convicts running loose at the same time, I can see nothing good coming of that.

    There will soon be a great influx of armed crimes being perpetrated and lawmakers in CA wondering WTH is going on.

    Just my $.02

  17. avatarBruce says:

    “participation in any criminal street gang”. Everyone in California can sleep well, street gangs have been outlawed, so I would expect them to all disband tomorrow.

  18. avatardisthunder says:

    It took them long enough, but its official- the NRA is full of shit….we’re losing this fight, especially in places we can’t argue against it.

  19. avatarAvid Reader says:

    Unfortunately I’m sure some of our worthless politicians here in Colorado are looking at this as inspiration.

    • avatarsagebrushracer says:

      if these brain surgeons got tarred, feathered and rode out on a rail more often, we would not be here today.

  20. avatarJDub says:

    So, by redefining “assault weapon” and “shotgun”, I’m assuming that this applies to previous bills? ie no “post-ban” no “pre-ban” just all semi-auto mag fed centerfire rifles under one umbrella?

    Glad to see that at least the ridiculous ‘magical handgun’ bill didn’t pass.

  21. avatarAccur81 says:

    The FLAME DELETED statists and low information voters have spoken. I’m almost out of scotch and need to get more. I took an oath to defend the US Constitution as a Marine and as a police officer. So did those who took office, although they clearly don’t have much in the way of integrity. This isn’t going to go well.

    • avatarDaniel Silverman says:

      I will register nothing.
      They can stick there list…

      • avatarjwm says:

        If they excempt rimfires I have nothing to register. I don’t own an EBR. As for ammo, if they ban mail order I will just have to roadtrip to Reno a couple of times a year. I’m sure Neveda will appreciate my money.

        • avatarsagebrushracer says:

          Holler when you do, lunch and a beer are on me! Cabela’s even has a nice little restaurant inside it.

        • avatarMark N. says:

          I have to wonder how long it will be before someone challenges the ban on internet sales provision as a violation of the Commerce Clause. I haven’t looked at it in a while, but as I recall, the ammo bill not only requires an ID (which itself requires a background check), but requires FTF transactions only.

        • avatarjwm says:

          I will Sage. Roadtrip needs a good lunch.

        • avatarRuss Bixby says:

          “Your papersss pleasss? Thank you.

          “Haff you any plants, seedsss or ozer akricultural products to declare? Gut. Haff you any ammunition to declare…?”

        • avatarRich Grise says:

          Don’t you have to go through Checkpoint Charlie to come back?

        • avatarWilliam Burke says:

          I think it’s Checkpoint Fruitfly, but that’s going the other way, Rich!

        • avatarRich Grise says:

          Huh? Are we talking about the same thing? From CA to NV, they check for fruit flies? I’m confused again.
          Every time I’ve entered CA, they’ve checked for plants.

        • avatarWilliam Burke says:

          No, the other direction. When they check plants, they’re primarily checking for fruit flies.

          Remember Malathion? Spraying for the Mediterranean Fruit Fly?

          A joke. Forget it.

        • avatarRich Grise says:

          Maybe I’m slow, but I’m still confused. Which “other direction?”
          Do they stop me on the way from California to Nevada to check for fruit flies?

        • avatarWilliam Burke says:

          You said, “Nevada to California”. When I said, “the other way around, I meant Nevada to California. I guess they still do the plant checks. They’re mainly looking for stuff that may bear unwanted fruit flies.

          As if there are wanted fruit flies, right?

        • avatarRich Grise says:

          “You said, “Nevada to California”. When I said, “the other way around, I meant Nevada to California.”

          Now you’re just jerking me around.

        • avatarWilliam Burke says:

          I would NEVER “jerk you around”. I’m hurt!

          http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=105658

        • avatarRich Grise says:

          The point I was making is “Nevada to California” IS “Nevada to California.” I think I was chiding you for what was essentially a typo, if I’m guessing right.

          Lessee if I got this straight:.

          Westbound on I-80, from Nevada to California, towards the Pacific Ocean, there’s no checkpoint.
          Eastbound on I-80, from California to Nevada, towards the Atlantic Ocean, there’s a checkpoint for Mediterranean fruit flies, AKA medflies..

          Am I getting closer?

        • avatarWilliam Burke says:

          Rich, I don’t know where the checkpoints are/were. But I believe you (or someone here) mentioned one. I know they did exist, but I’m not certain they do anymore. I think they do. I have heard and read of them many, many times.

          Yes, I got it backwards. A small point. The California Dept. of Agriculture maintained these checkpoints, but I don’t know what the current state of them might be. I have never even been to California!

          Needless to say, I’m not in any hurry to go there.

        • avatarRich Grise says:

          Yes, it was I. Someone said they were going to go to Nevada to buy ammo, and I said something about getting it through Checkpoint Charlie while returning to California, then they said no, it’s checkpoint fruitfly, and I don’t know which end is up. I guess if it’s a big deal, I could plow through the whole thread, I’m just wondering – are they trying to keep the medflies in California? Or do they just want to know if they’re getting frisky and they might have to spray or something.

        • avatarWilliam Burke says:

          The Mediterranean Fruit Fly somehow got in and infested large agricultural areas. I think this was in 1989. There was massive spraying of the pesticide Malathion (I think I mentioned it), and there were massive protests, because many thought the cure was more dangerous than the disease.

          Some scientists described the infestation as “defying logic” and suggested, improbably, that “biological terrorists” were at work. I suspect it wasn’t something as exotic as that. A never-before, never-since group calling itself “The Breeders” took “credit”, but nothing ever came of it!

          Without explanation, the Malathion spraying ended 3 weeks or so after it began.

        • avatarRich Grise says:

          I’ve looked, and now I get it: http://www.cdfa.ca.gov/plant/pe/ExteriorExclusion/borders.html

          Apparently they’re checking for invasive plants and the fruitflies that live on them, but not for ammo yet.

        • avatarWilliam Burke says:

          Yep.

        • avatarWilliam Burke says:

          Rich: is this helpful, RE: Cali Ag checkpoints?

          http://www.cdfa.ca.gov/plant/pe/ExteriorExclusion/borders_faq.html

        • avatarjwm says:

          Off the top of my head I don’t recall any ag stations on 80 from Reno. The last one I remember was on 5 from Oregon.

        • avatarRich Grise says:

          William: Yes. Now I see They’re trying to keep fruit flies and invasive plants out of California. And it doesn’t say anything about checking for ammunition.

          Yet.

        • avatarRuss Bixby says:

          Yeah, it wouldn’t. The checking for ammo — with the exaggerated faux-German accent — was a prognostication and an accusation.

          As for I-80, really? I’m from California and have been to and through Nevada at numerout points including Reno and don’t remember I-80 coming into the equation. Seems that high a number should be norther than that.

          Still, it does sound vaguely familiar. I guess all roads lead to/from California over here and Rome over there.

          As for medflies, it’s California trying to keep out agricultural pests. Can’t say as I blame ‘em on that score.

          Hmmm…

        • avatar16V says:

          Having ‘climbed the hill’ from SF to Reno and back something over 100 times, the only thing I’ve ever seen is a checkpoint upon entering CA, never when leaving it.

          And sure, you can find another way, but taking 80 is pretty much the only way anyone gets in or out in that quadrant.

  22. avatardlj95118 says:

    …can anyone explain SB567 to me? I guess I’m just stupid – can’t make no sense of it.

    • avatarMark N. says:

      This proposed statute has two purposes, and it is unclear whether they are to be read together so as to include shotguns within the requirements for registration of AWs (section 3 of the proposed bill). If treated as separate laws, then all the shotgun bill does is to provide a single definition in the Penal Code for “shotgun”, and to make sure that simply because a shotty doesn’t have a stock doesn’t mean its not a shotty. If they are intended to be read together, shotguns may be deemed “destructive d4vices” that will have to be retroactively registered under the provisions of section 3.

      • avatardlj95118 says:

        Mark – thanks for the help. I’m still having trouble grasping the fine points though. Guess I need to go read it again.

    • avatarAlphaGeek says:

      Please don’t ask me to explain WHY, but the CA legislature has some kind of vendetta going against the 45LC/.410 revolver pistols & long guns, aka the “Judge” guns. It’s bizarre and confusing and there’s no good reason for the campaign against those particular guns that I’ve been able to discover, just a couple of legislators who are pissed that a .410 shell fired down a rifled barrel isn’t technically a shotgun.

      • avatardlj95118 says:

        …so then, if I understand you correctly…if I had a “Judge” and fired a 410 shot shell with it, then the Judge revolver at that specific time would become a “shotgun”? You can see I’m clearly cornfuzed…

        • avatarAlphaGeek says:

          No, they hate the entire class of 45LC/.410 guns and are moving to ban all of them. It’s not so much a question of what you load into it at any particular time. Again, I don’t know why, it’s one of the more perplexingly petty anti-gun bills in this batch.

          I wish all of these bills were legally required to include a public-safety analysis by a non-partisan agency which explains exactly how many harm has been perpetrated using the item being banned, and projections for how much future harm will be prevented. Stuff like this doesn’t even pass the giggle test if you know ANYTHING about firearms.

        • avatarMark N. says:

          They hate them because they consider them to be short-barreled shotguns, obviously a weapon only a criminal would find attractive. No one else has a “need” for such a firearm.

      • avatarjwm says:

        It’s not just the Taurii. Even the single shot Thompson Contendor barrel on .45/.410 is illegal in California. Beats me why. Only thing that makes since is a nibble here and a nibble there until they’re all gone.

  23. avatargloomhound says:

    I’m sorry for California but they have the type of governance and laws they want.

  24. avatarNate says:

    So the one bill (SB-38) that is common sense – in that it may actually encourage people to turn in their illegally held guns – is one that is on hold.

  25. avatarbeanfield says:

    SB-123 Public lynching of anyone possessing a firearm.

    • avatarWilliam Burke says:

      Gun vs. Rope. Hmmm. I’m betting on Gun.

        • avatarWilliam Burke says:

          Vastly outnumbered by gun owners, even in Cali. The trouble is, they’ve got superior numbers in any given place they put them, while the gun owners are scattered all over the place.

          But remember the lessons of Vietnam and Afghanistan, etc. No modern military can defeat a determined guerrilla army.

        • avatarJus Bill says:

          …especially if they’re fighting on home ground. No army has won one like that since the Romans defeated the Gauls.

        • avatarjwm says:

          So Sitting Bull, Gall, Crazy horse, Geronimo etc. won? The fly in the ointment is that the American military isn’t going to give up and leave America. This isn’t Afghanistan or Viet Nam. Our soldiers are the home team. And where are insurrectionests going to get support or R&R? Canada? Mexico.

          And at least in the case of VietNam the North did have an Army and an Air Force. They had tanks and long range artillery.

    • avatarCraig says:

      All good things take time. Dianne Feinstein and Yee are learning how to tie Hangman’s Nooses.

  26. avatarJoseph B Campbell says:

    From the sounds of it, as usual, everyone in California will just sit back and let the politicians and rich people kick shit on them or just run away!

    • avatarjwm says:

      And what’s your solution to the problem?

      • avatarS.CROCK says:

        for those of us where moving is an option, take it! for those who cant move, own a cali legal collection, waste our time calling representatives, and prepare for 1st, 2nd, and 4th amendment violations.

  27. avatarMatt in SD says:

    Yard Sale…this weekend…my house. Maine here I come.

  28. avatarKCK says:

    Street Gang participation???
    Is there some Due Process for that determination.
    Do the gangs hand out ID Cards?
    Tattoos?
    Legislatures just throw crap out there and the courts refuse to clean it up.

  29. avatarKyle says:

    So I thought that this bill would be in violation of the bullet-button ban and thus would likely not become law. What happened to that?

    An irony is that while the most left-leaning state, California, is running roughshod right over gun rights, in Texas, Governor Perry just signed into law very restrictive abortion legislation. The Right goes after abortion with a vengeance and the Left goes after guns with a vengeance.

    • avatarRadGeek says:

      Defending natural, unalienable rights is what we are fighting for. This conversation is about that. Please do not try to equate abortion with the right to self defense.

      Apples and squirrels.

      Now, back to the conversation about crazy California.

      • avatarKyle says:

        In terms of them both being considered natural, unalienable rights by each side of the political spectrum, they are comparable in that sense IMO.

  30. Wait wait wait!

    So my AR Pistol is fine?!

    BWAAAHAHAHAHAHAH!!

  31. avatarbill says:

    hmm, so I can register my rifle as a AW now, after the last ban? What about grandfathered in magazines? though the supreme court says ya can’t prosecute for legally obtained items before the law. and I have to get printed to buy ammo now? and what’s the point of buying stripped receivers if your still only limited to 10 rounds.

    • avatarAlphaGeek says:

      Yes, you’ll be able to register AWs, which immediately places severe restrictions on sale/transfer.

      You can’t be prosecuted for owning certain magazines in the past, but they can make them illegal going forward as long as there’s a reasonable notice period to let people know to get rid of them.

      Every stripped AR receiver you own before 1 Jan 2014 would be eligible for registration as an AW. On one hand, you could only feed it with 10-round magazines since it wouldn’t be legal to own anything larger; on the other, it seems like all of the bullet-button nonsense would go away for such AWs.

      • avatarMark N. says:

        That’s one of the stranger aspects of these new proposals. SB47 wants to ban bullet buttons, but SB347 makes them all (registerable) AWs whether they have bullet buttons or not. Which really means, by inference, that everyone who has a bullet button equipped rifle will be able to go to a standard configuration–which is funny because this standard configuration is exactly what they want to eliminate going forward (all rifles sold after the effective date of the law will have to have fixed internal magazines of no greater than ten round capacity).

        • avatarAlphaGeek says:

          Frankly, SB374 isn’t completely terrible for current owners of semi-auto rifles. It pretty much kills the AR market in CA post 1 Jan 2014, but existing owners get to go full retard with any “assault weapons” they already own.

          It’s AB48 that has me growing hair and fangs every time I think about it. That one is going to suuuuck if it gets signed into law, but it’s so ridiculously stupid that I’m holding out hope that it’ll die.

          Edit to add: For anyone who is new to this, AB48 is the bill attempting to ban any magazine which holds >10 rounds, or even LOOKS like it could hold >10 rounds. Which includes every capacity-limited pistol magazine ever made, because you can’t make one shorter than the magazine well. FML.

  32. avatarJoshuaS says:

    What worries me is that SB-374 passed, but not SB-47. SB-374 includes the provisions of 47 (Bullet Button ban), but goes way beyond it. The only reason for the Senate to have passed both was to hedge bets with potential cannon fodder. SB-47 died in Assembly Appropriations last year, as SB-274, after pressure from the governor to kill it. By offering a far more radical bill and it, you offer “moderates” and the governor a bill to veto and a bill to sign, and appear [at least by contrast] as the reasonable one.

    Since SB-47 failed only three possibilities exist AFAIK
    1. The governor has given them very strong reason to believe he would sign 374, thus removing the need for it was cannon fodder and making 47 irrelevant
    2. Steinberg and his cronies are too cocky for their own good, by removing the less radical bill, they risk getting just a veto, but Steinberg mentally challenged so a real possibility
    3. (I highly doubt this) some realpolitick, where the Dems (who are at odds with Brown, despite party) offer him only the bill he can veto, knowing it will fail, but looking like champions of “common sense” gun reform, while avoiding ire in the central valley and east because, a bill that doesn’t become law isn’t a strong electoral factor.

    • avatarAlphaGeek says:

      The second one is the most likely. The legislature is very much at odds with the Governor right now, and the CA state-level anti-gun lunatics are just as frothing-at-the-mouth insane, in their own special way, as certain GOP congressmen at the other end of the spectrum.

      I’m not allowing myself to actually hope, but I do objectively believe there’s a real possibility that Gov Brown will kill SB374 (and possibly a few others) because his agenda for the CA budget differs so significantly from that of the legislature.

      • avatarRLC2 says:

        That seems to be his approach, based on past legislation. I think the sea-change nationally, post hype post Newton is also having an effect on those with any common-sense, which includes the Governor, and many of the Democrats, who went along with the mob at first but probably want most of these bills to go away.

        I see the handgun training certificate, the AWB, and prohibited persons measures being considered reasonable by Brown. We’ll see.

  33. avatarsightpicture says:

    I’m really glad I left that hell hole of a state long ago. I remember hearing gunshots nightly, bars on windows and the third world country feel.
    I don’t miss it a bit.
    Now if I could just get the folks to vacate.

  34. avatarOut_Fang_Thief says:

    Wow, from the “if it feels good, do it” peace and love of the Haight-Ashbury 60′s,
    to the “you’ll do as you’re told” liberal statism of Sacramento, in just…50 years!
    Will this ever be properly credited as the one true legacy of the hippy generation?
    And….
    How many people who’ve been living in California since the 60′s, DON’T have a
    couple of misdemeanor drug violations on their record? Would that be…millions?
    I’m betting there’s going to be some rude surprises coming to the mailboxes of
    some former hippies still living in California. That’s what, almost 60 years now?
    We all know the “Man” has a long, long, memory. Pull up a chair and a glass,
    we’re about to get a tour of California’s whine makers.

  35. avatarRalph says:

    Forget it, Jake. It’s Chinatown.

  36. avatarDJStuCrew says:

    I can’t WAIT to find out how they plan on making those “criminal street gangs” comply with THIS mess! They might as well mandate faster-than-light travel, ’cause neither one is gonna happen while they’re AWAKE.

  37. avatarMark N. says:

    UPDATE RE ASSEMPLY BILLS HEARD IN THE SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE

    FoUr assembly bills were heard in the Senate Appropriations Committee this afternoon–AB 48, AB 169, AB 711, AB 1131. All passed.

    AB 48 bans all “large capacity” feeding devices and rebuild kits, as well as requires reporting of large sales of ammo (6000 rounds in one week) to law enforcement.

    AB 169 bans the transfer between nonexempt individuals of off-roster handguns. Under current law, there was something referred to as the Single Shot Exemption, which allowed a semi-auto firearm not on the roster to be converted (temporarily and for the purpose of the transfer) into a single shot firearm. This exception will be eliminated, allowing only LEO to purchase off-roster handguns–and prevent LEOs from selling such handguns to non-LEOs. Along with the recent determination of the California DOJ that microstamping technology for use in semi-auto pistols is now “widely available”(notwithstanding the fact that there is not a single pistol on the market that employs it), California citizens will be limited to buying pistols that are currently on the roster. Our understanding is that nonroster pistols can only be transferred of they are C&R (i.e. at least 50 years old). Uncertain what will happen to guns that fall off the list because they are no longer manufactured, but are newer than 50 years old.

    AB 711 bans lead hunting ammo state-wide

    AB 1131 extends the ban after an involuntary hold for mental health evaluation from five years to ten years.

    All these bills will now go to the Senate floor for likely passage. Several have been amended and will go back to the Assembly for re-passage, but then all will go to Governor Brown’s desk. Same thing with the Senate Bills in the Assembly. What will happen to them there is unknown–Brown has not commented on any of them so far, as is his practice, and he will be out of town while the legislators work out differences between different proposals.

    • avatarTomy Ironmane says:

      Someone out there better put a leash and a muzzle on their politicians. Tell ‘em they can toe the line or start typin up their resume. Because the way stuff is going in California makes sane men and women want to move someplace where they can take their tyranny without hypocrisy. Like communist China.

      Y’all are makin me glad that I live in Ohio… Think about that one. OHIO.

  38. avatarChip says:

    Should build a wall around California? Or dig a moat?

    • avatarjwm says:

      Your choice Chip. Just know that when you do either you’re losing the support of 9 million gun owners.

      • avatarS.CROCK says:

        jwm, I’m a californian so i know how old the old “lets just separate from cali” statements get. however if i was from a neighboring free state, i would be very upset about the cali trash drifting over into my free state.

        • avatarjwm says:

          S. Crock. Our rights are a nationwide struggle. These dummies that think they can stick their heads in the sand in outer podunk county in the great state of deniel are every bit as big a threat to our gun rights as slow joe and barry.

        • avatarErnst Schreiber says:

          For myself, as a denizen of outer podunk county in the great state of denial, I think a decade long residency period before immigrants from the land of fruits and nuts are allowed to vote in our state and local elections would be satisfactory.

        • avatarRuss Bixby says:

          The Constitution is not a salad bar from which to pick and choose.

          That said, if CA, NY and so on can ignore certain provisions, perhaps your state (Republic? Commonwealth?) can ignore others…

          Myself, I’m hoping that my Great State of Denial will continue to stand against Federal B.S. I somehow doubt that the U.S. military will be deployed against Kansas because they told Withholder and the Commandeerer in Chief to pound sand. It’s not like napalm strikes are being callthe carried out on the pot fields outside Pomona, either.

          What I hope we are seeing is death by a thousand cuts to Federal tyrany, one non-compliant speed limit, pot legalization and “you may stamp your homebrew suppressor ‘Made in Kansas’” at a time.

          The “progressives” are akin to the RR cherry-picking Leviticus to get “Gays are evil but Hagar Triwool Slacks are dandy.”

          They just cherry-pick a more recent and better written document.

  39. avatarDerryM says:

    The only hope in California is that Governor Brown will veto these bills or some of them. The Democrat-controlled Legislature is out of control and will probably stay that way for years to come, so even if Brown vetoes them, these nightmares will come back.
    For now Cal Guns is mounting a Campaign to flood Governor Brown’s e-mail, fax and snail mail with messages pretty much begging him to veto all these bills. If you are a California Gun Owner, you owe it to your own self-interest to join this campaign.
    Here’s the URL:

    https://www.firearmspolicy.org/the-issues/california/2013-2014/askbrown/

  40. avatarCubby123 says:

    Ya know,just let these ASSHOLES keep passing these SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED bills and let them pass bills that take away Californians RIGHT to KEEP AND BEAR ARMS and when they get their ASSES SUED OFF and it goes to the Supreme Court,which it will,then they will LOSE big time just like Illinois JUST DID,where all the STUPIDITY that Illinois ,like California ,has been imposing on their citizens,like AR bans and no CCW,just All got REPEALED.To the shegrun of the Governor ,and powers to be in that state.Everything they had been denying their citizens all went down the toilet.Thanks to the Supreme Court.
    California you’re NEXT!

  41. avatarPat says:

    If ya voted libtard (democrat), then ya got what ya got. Don’t vote democrat again, ya bastards.

Leave a Reply

Please use your real name instead of you company name or keyword spam.