BREAKING: CA Gov. Brown Signs Gun Violence Restraining Order Into Law

CA restraining order (courtesy dailmail.co.uk)

California Governor Jerry Brown has just signed AB-1014 (Gun Violence Restraining Order) and SB-199 (mandating that all BB Guns must be brightly colored). Brown vetoed SB-808 (Ghost Guns). In a statement to the California legislature on the veto, the Gov wrote “SB-808 would require individuals who build guns to first obtain a serial number and register the weapon with The Department of Justice. I appreciate the author’s concern about gun violence, but I can’t see how adding a serial number to a homemade gun would significantly advance public safety.” But confiscating guns without due process (AB-1014) would. [Click here to read our analysis of “one of the worst assaults on Americans’ natural, civil and Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms in the long, sad history of this country’s civilian disarmament.”] As would making sure that criminals paint their guns in bright colors. Apparently.

comments

  1. avatar Scott says:

    Dammit.

  2. avatar Steve in MD says:

    Coming Soon to The People’s Free Republic of Maryland.

    1. avatar John from Marylandistan says:

      Unfortunately, I think you’re right. Luckily, I go to settlement on a home off of I-83, NORTH of the line, in 7 days.

  3. avatar Desert Ranger says:

    Break out the checkbooks, it’s time to throw some money at NRA, SAF, and GOA again.

  4. avatar Gordon says:

    So much for “due process” in California.

  5. avatar Daniel Silverman says:

    Ok I need more booze to stay in this state… I really do!

    1. avatar Desert Ranger says:

      Are you drinking now?

      1. avatar Daniel Silverman says:

        Other than coffee no..

        1. avatar Anonymoose says:

          Irish coffee?

    2. avatar styrgwillidar says:

      Well, at least you can still build using an 80% lower, which is a lot of fun and gives you a much better understanding of the weapon and it’s components. It’s kind of like building a computer– there are a bunch of choices to make, and you need to learn what the different specs mean to make the choices. Also the tradeoffs between various subcomponents like triggers or graphics cards. What does coughing up a little more buy you in terms of performance and your intended use of the weapon/computer..

      1. avatar Jamie says:

        Gotta say, yeah. 80% is probably more fun than… Well, a huge list of things. Sex would be #2 after building an 80%er, I’m sure. Or so I’m told.

        You can make an AR-15, AR-10 (well, LR308, but who’s counting), 1911s of various types, AK-47 (or 74) of an unlimited amount of types and even an MP5 (YES. AN MP5…) I think there are also MAC-10 and MAC-11 sets, but those might require presses.

        Wooo! 80% MAC-11 with a Lage MK2 upper? Count me in.

        1. avatar Old Ben turning in grave says:

          “…Sex would be #2 after building an 80%er”

          And you don’t have to get explicit consent for every stage of the build

          http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2014/09/29/352482932/california-enacts-yes-means-yes-law-defining-sexual-consent

          I’m so very happy to be a former Californian

    3. avatar Matt Richardson says:

      Don’t stay, evacuate… I left four years ago (for the second time) and I’m not looking back this time around. Best decision I ever made and my kids will be better for it. I now have multiple family members that will be cutting ties and coming to a free state over the next few years as well.

      You can choose which hill you die on sometimes.

      1. avatar BugsInMyTeeth says:

        I left there 25 years ago and haven’t looked back once… to AZ no less. From 2A hell to 2A heaven.

        1. avatar Jamie says:

          Thinking about Oregon, myself. I guess more for the fact I have friends up there, thereby having somewhat of a support-structure. Got nobody in AZ, even though it’s apparently gun-owner heaven.

      2. avatar Toby in KS says:

        I say the same thing over and over in TTAG’s comments… Leave CA. It is lost. Regroup in a state that still celebrates freedom!

        I DID. It was among the best decisions of my life.

    4. avatar Jamie says:

      Just go to BevMo and pick up that huge bottle of Jose Cuervo Gold (with the little bottle attached to it) and a Margarita mix (ALSO Jose Cuervo…) and a huge bag of ice.

      I’m just glad SB-808 is dead. Not for any particular reason. *cough*

      Wooo, that’s some strong tequila…

    5. avatar IdahoPete says:

      And don’t piss off any ex-wives/girlfriends/etc. 5th Amendment? What’s that?

      “… nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law…”

  6. avatar Henry Bowman says:

    This is why we can`t have nice things or be free..this is why you never allow leftist to have any power because they will abuse it.

    1. avatar Toby in KS says:

      Paint all your guns bright orange. Who is gonna know they aren’t squirtguns?

      1. avatar Another Robert says:

        I saw a movie once, a fictionalized account of the Patty Hearst kidnapping, and the terrorist group’s guns actually were painted yellow and purple and such. Hell, I can go to Academy right now and see bright purple and blue and pink revolvers in the showcase. The law of unintended consequences may be about to bite the Californios big time.

  7. avatar ADC USN/Ret says:

    Evil likes to cloak itself as good!

  8. avatar v v ind says:

    Well there goes all of the pro 2A fence-sitter votes come November 4. Neil it is…..bummer California

    1. avatar Matt Richardson says:

      I still want to see one of these “fence sitters” put on display. I think you’re more likely to catch a unicorn. Not sure I’d be able to keep myself from spitting on one if I met it face-to-face though…

  9. avatar Another Robert says:

    Well, hell, another reason to be glad I don’t live in Californy. Still can’t see how it would hold up under a Due Process/ Taking Clause challenge. Maybe one of the still-practicing lawyers out there can help me on that.

    1. avatar RT says:

      It’s a pretty long list too. Too bad the locusts are spreading to out neck of the woods.

    2. avatar Mark N. says:

      Umm, it doesn’t. Just because you hear a lot of ranting and raving doesn’t mean a thing. As I have stated a number of times, California is not the first state to enact such a law, it is the third. Texas and Connecticut have similar laws. If you want to talk about due process, let’s talk about Ca. Welfare & Institutions Code section 5150, under which certain persons (e.g. physicians, mental health workers and police officers) can have someone involuntarily confined in a mental health facility for up to 72 hours if there is “probable cause to believe” that the person is “a danger to himself or others.” The 72-hour hold is for evaluation and treatment to determine if such a person is indeed a danger to himself or others., Well, a 5151 admission for treatment and evaluation, even if you are not found to be dangerous, means you lose your guns and your gun rights for TEN (formerly five, but now extended) YEARS. It takes a court hearing and order to get them back sooner. At the hearing, the State only has to establish that the person is more probably than not a danger. By contrast, this new law requires proof by clear and convincing evidence, a much higher burden of proof.

      1. avatar Another Robert says:

        I think I may have asked this before, but do you have a cite to the “similar” law in Texas ? I know about the 72-hour “emergency commitment” for examination purposes, but that is hardly the same thing as confiscating someone’s property for a year with no medical determination that the person is mentally unbalanced. Is there a Texas law specifically relating to confiscating firearms or weapons or other personal property from someone not deemed dangerous enough to warrant the 72-hour hold?

      2. avatar publius2 says:

        Thanks, Mark N. Even though I live in CA, and I try to understand the details on gun law, I did not appreciate the details of the 5150 process, nor the extended seizure time.

        Why the legislators couldnt have just tweaked this, is beyond me. Why Assywmn Skinner couldnt have gotten money for more LEO training, like for the Santa Barbara County Sheriffs who interviewed Lanza, without checking the NICS system- to have seen two very recent handgun purchases, which would have been easy enough on their patrol car computers/dispatch calls – correct?

        Now we have two confusing, overlapping methods, that do NOTHING for mental health professionals, or for the mentally ill, in the way of more funding for facilities. So, the cops dump them in the emergency rooms, for 72 hours, and then they are back on the street living under a bridge, or in a cardboard box, for want of help and medication that might actually return them to some useful or at least less dangerous state…

      3. avatar Another Robert says:

        Well, I guess I’ll have to file this query with my “can some one show me a no-foolin’ pro-gun Dem in national office”, in the never-to-be-answered box.

  10. avatar Clownpuncher says:

    So, I guess it’s time to test this law. Anyone know the name of the .gov’s body guard? I’ll report him since there are no reprocussions for false reports and they will take his guns until he can get in front of a judge and get it dismissed.

    1. avatar Nick D says:

      Better yet, get out a Sacramento Phone book, and just report everybody. Work the system to death. 4chan regulars may recognize this as an analog DDOS attack.

      1. avatar Morgan Y. says:

        +1 this would make them regret it.

    2. avatar Mark N. says:

      Ummm, NO. Unless you happen to be a close family member, you are not qualified to even apply for a restraining order. The application must be supported by affidavits or testimony under penalty of perjury. Perjury, by the way, is a felony with a possible two year sentence. And if convicted of perjury, YOU will lose your gun rights. And the Governor will also be suing you for malicious prosecution.

      1. avatar publius2 says:

        Mark N. I thought this was a misdemeanor for false report. And how will the Governor sue? I thought its up to local DAs to plea bargain or take to court. What is the likelihood they will take “some scared ex-wife” to court for a false report/perjury without proof of intent? Seems to me the divorce attorneys must be dancing in joy for having another weapon to tangle things up, for more billable time.

        For every Adam Lanza, there are going to be 10,000 family court cases complicated, un-necessarily, as a result, I fear.

        I’m pretty disappointed in the Governor for not sending this back to reconcile the gray areas, or better- fix the 5150 process at same time.

  11. avatar launchpadmech says:

    Beats having to really do something that is worth what he is being pay. Big deal ! Bring it on.

  12. avatar Gordon Wagner says:

    Glad I called and wrote in as many times as I did OPPOSING that legislation.

  13. avatar Ralph says:

    The Gun Violence Restraining Order law is going to be abused massively. Not just by divorce lawyers, but by “activists” of the leftist stripe. It will be used to chill First Amendment rights just as much as those remaining to Californians under the Second.

    Any Second Amendment activist who speaks out in a public meeting can expect to get SLAPPed by one of these atrocities. FYI, SLAPP is an acronym for Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation. Well, guess what? Now, no lawsuit is needed.

    1. avatar benny says:

      The sword cuts both ways. If I was a betting man, I’d say it won’t be long before some leftist gun owners get a taste of this. Even Shannon&co. Won’t be exempt.
      Until they are.

    2. avatar Carlos Deras says:

      o-((_-_))-o I give up on this ass backwards country (Yes California minus well be its own country since its not america at all)

      o-((0.0))-o As much as im not a fan of either the NRA or the Republican Party I will go with a good saying “The Enemy of My Enemy is My Friend” I’m joining both.

      1. avatar JasonMfromSoDakota says:

        Don’t forget that other old saying-the enemy of my enemy is still my enemy. Our current democracy is two wolves and sheep deciding what is for dinner. Liberty is the sheep contesting the wolves vote with a gun. Unfortunately we Americans have good hearts but shit for brains with no intestinal fortitude and settle for representatives that openly don’t represent the will of the constituents. Corrupt as a politician should never be an accepted saying in a nation of Laws, and shame on us for the willful continuance.

        1. avatar Ralph says:

          Let’s get rid of the damn Democrats first. Then we’ll get to work on the RINOs and statists in the GOP.

          One thing at a time. If we take on both at once, we lose, badly.

    3. avatar Mark N. says:

      I’d bet real money you are wrong Ralph. Better read the actual law before you jump into this fray, and be sure to tell us about all the abuses in Connecticut and Texas. First of all, divorce attorneys do not need this law at all–they have DV TROs that do the same thing and that need be supported only by a preponderance of the evidence (as opposed to clear and convincing evidence). In California, a shoving match is a sufficient basis for a misdemeanor conviction and loss of gun rights, and divorce attorneys will be sure to have their clients complain if needed.. And second, only close family members (and the police) have the right to apply for the restraining order, so we will NOT be seeing it used in litigation against unrelated adversaries.

  14. avatar kyle says:

    You know this will be abused to the nth degree by the commie and his lackies.

  15. avatar Excedrine says:

    “Due process? What is this.. ‘Due Process’.. you speak of, and why do you even need it if you have nothing to hide?” — Words spoken to that effect before every violation of civil rights.

    They’re getting down to deciding, against their better judgement and centuries of legal precedent, what “rights” we ‘need’. As has been said before: gun control isn’t even about the guns necessarily, but all about control. Period.

  16. avatar Brooklyn in da house says:

    Can someone clear this up. Is this only for family members or can any random person that knows you own a gun file for a restraining order?

    1. avatar Slick says:

      AFAIK, anyone can file against anyone. That’s what is really scary about this.

      Like ralph said, this will be abused to silence opposition.

    2. avatar Kurt says:

      The amended (passed, signed) version limits GVROs to “immediate family members” and law enforcement. Immediate family members, however, include 2-degree consanguination or affiliation (so, in-laws), or anyone who’s cohabited with you for a given period of time.

      1. avatar Brooklyn in da house says:

        You are right i just looked it up. Obviously bad but no where near as bad as giving a random person power to get one.

        1. avatar Ralph says:

          As far as I’m concerned, a cop is a “random person.”

        2. avatar Mark N. says:

          Still losing , Ralph. Cops can take you into custody under W&I Code 5150 based on probable cause, and the subject loses his guns and gun rights for ten years, not just one. This section requires clear and convincing evidence.

        3. avatar Another Robert says:

          There is no jury trial, right? So “clear and convincing” evidence means whatever the sitting judge decides it means, right? What are the appellate rights if you think the judge mis-applied the standard? I don’t think this is as benign as you think, although I also does not seem to be quite as bad as some others think.

  17. avatar Joe R. says:

    Q: With CA disarming itself for a war on China or ______________________ (if you can’t think of anyone/any group you put here you are both ignorant and in denial)?, and we need to do a civil war to protect CA citizens from that war, how do we get the Chinese (or whomever) to first attack the anti-gun nuts?

    We have a little time, talk amongst yourselves. . .

  18. avatar Grindstone says:

    Challenge in 3… 2…

    1. avatar Soccerchainsaw says:

      Trouble is, until someone (that doesn’t deserve it) is hit with one of these restraining orders, no one will have standing to sue the state.

  19. avatar Barry says:

    California, no right to keep and bear arms. Sorry for the loss brother.

  20. avatar B Bradley says:

    I’m one of the oppressed people in this state. So many of us, in this state spend time and money fighting these laws before being signed and after being signed. We have gotten some overturned but this is getting a bit depressing. I wish there was some kind of judiciary oversight committee that would at least go over the constitutionality of these passed bills before they become law. Now we in the” Golden State” have yet another fight on our hands.

  21. avatar Nelson says:

    no due process? illegal & unconstitutional, period.

    it will be sued. however long that may take…

    then again, govt terrorists aren’t exactly honest about keeping fealty to their Constitutional Oath, that they ALL were and are required to take.

    this only leads to one path…

  22. avatar Accur81 says:

    The ex-wife bill.

    1. avatar Geoff PR says:

      Yup. I can see it now… “You better agree to my divorce settlement offer, or bye-bye bang toys!”

  23. avatar Jwestham2 says:

    Why’d the military have to base me here????? From NY-CA. Couldn’t get much worse. Although, sadly, CA is much better than NY

  24. avatar publius2 says:

    Not surprised, sadly. This will generate fees at Family Court for the State, and Divorce lawyers, a big contributor to Lawyer Jerry Brown. It will slow down local LEAs and compromise individual citizens whose rights are removed, by false claims. But those costs come out of city and county and individual taxpayers pockets.

    In the meantime, no funding for LEO training, or more facilities for the mentally ill, the supposed beneficiaries of ghe bill, before Williams switched to grandstanding, with Skinner and DeLeon. Once again, we see the complete hypocrisy of the Democrats in Sacramento, at the beck and call of wealthy elite and urban progtard voters whodemand they do something, anything…GUNS!

  25. avatar NjGunGuy says:

    Can NorCal just secede and become Jefferson already?

  26. avatar anon says:

    I’ve got nothing to say about AB-1014 except *facepalm.*

    As for the BB gun law, I know CA is very active with airsofters and businesses selling airsoft. Since the major draw of airsoft is their aesthetic similarity to firearms, I can see this decimating that industry.

    1. avatar Roger says:

      In CA, maybe. That’s going to hurt a lot of businesses. And CA wonders why their economy is tanking hard.

  27. avatar TiC says:

    Wow! He signed the worst one. Shit like this just reinforces my decision to move back to Texas. I know there’s a lot I’ll miss about Cali, but forget this place.

    1. avatar S.CROCK says:

      Family/ current job.

      Those are the only real reasons to stay here. Note that I specified current job because if you don’t have a job and you are looking… Your screwed.

  28. avatar Roger says:

    I bet you dollars to doughnuts we’re going to see more of this kind of backdoor gun confiscation, esp when it comes to widely cast nets relating to medication or so-called “mental disorders” like abstract things such as “depression” “anxiety” “work related stress” “domestic stress” etc. etc.

  29. avatar DerryM says:

    As “Mark N.” has repeatedly said, the law does not permit “anyone” to seek a GVRO against “anyone”, but specifies “close Family Members” and “Police with probable cause”, requires a sworn affidavit and subjects the “accuser” to Penalty of Perjury. Not rationalizing, just pointing-out that a lot of disinformation has been generated about this law to whip-up gun owner hysteria and squeeze $$$ out of us for pro-gun groups (a tactic I find completely annoying and disingenuous).
    The real question is whether families of people like Elliot Richards (the Santa Barbara, CA Shooter) – NOT Adam Lanza (the Newtown, CT shooter) will actually make use of the law. Historically, the families have claimed either complete ignorance of the shooter’s intention to commit his heinous act, or maintained an attitude of “denial” until it was too late. Angry, battered or disaffected spouses and children may be the ones who use it most. We will have to wait and see what happens.
    It is a bad law and could be abused by eligible parties, for certain. It may become a model for other States to follow, so pay attention to what your own State Legislators are doing. Fight any attempt to enact similar laws in your State with all the resources you can muster.

  30. avatar The Reluctant Nutmegger says:

    Is there a special consideration for LEOs under AB-1014? If not, I think the logical counter is to write restraining orders en-masse against every law enforcement officer, agency–hell, write them against the military personnel at places like Camp Pendleton.

  31. avatar Adam says:

    This painted gun thing is a lose lose for the cops. Criminals will all paint their guns orange. If the cops don’t shoot they will get shot and if they shoot they might just hit someone with an actual fake gun and get persecuted for shooting at an orange gun.

    This 1014 will certainly end up at the supreme court as it violates several rights.

Write a Comment

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

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email