CA “Smart Gun” Bill Stalls Over Funding Issues

Smart gun? (courtesy

Firearms Policy Coalition press release:

Thanks to the efforts of thousands of dedicated gun owners who Took Action at FPC’s and your Firearms Policy Coalition Direct Advocacy Division, California Senate Bill 678 stalled in the Senate Committee on Appropriations earlier this afternoon. SB 678 was referred to the Committee’s “suspense file” due to the bill’s fiscal implications and committee rules . . .

If passed, SB 678 would mandate a new user-authorized “smart gun” exploratory committee headed by anti-gun California Attorney General Kamala Harris and her Department of Justice. It would also mandate that DOJ report back to the Legislature after it identified, among other things, “market conditions and the barriers to the market for user-authorized firearms in the state.”

In FPC’s letter of opposition filed on May 6, President Brandon Combs argued among other things that,

“While SB 678 provides three express mandates….it fails to identify a single funding source. Accordingly, it must be assumed that the mandates in SB 678 would be paid for out of the State’s General Fund….In accordance with Senate Committee on Appropriations Rule 9 (“SUSPENSE FILE”), the Committee should refer SB 678 to the Suspense File.”

The California Department of Finance, which represents the Governor’s fiscal policy interests during the legislative process, agreed with FPC in its letter of opposition, stating that “[SB 678] would have unknown, likely significant costs to conduct research and analysis on the user-authorized firearm industry….Finance is opposed to this bill because it would result in significant General Fund costs not included in the Administration’s current fiscal plan.”

Firearms Policy Coalition believes that SB 678 is one step towards the Legislature creating a new handgun ban through a future amendment to the laws underpinning DOJ’s Roster of Handguns Certified for Sale, as it did with the addition of a “microstamping” requirement in 2008’s AB 1471 (Feuer).

“Today’s action to refer California Senate Bill 678 to the Senate Committee on Appropriations’ suspense file is good for California and good for law-abiding gun owners,” said FPC President Brandon Combs. “However, SB 678 can still be passed out of the committee at a later date, so we urge all gun owners to stay on guard and be ready to respond to future actions on this bill.”

You can read the California Department of Finance opposition to SB 678 here. [h/t DrVino]


  1. avatar JohnF says:

    I’m waiting for the first LE agency to adopt it…not.

    Also, that ugly watch is a crime in and of itself. And why would a right-hander be wearing it on his right hand?

    1. avatar Timmy! says:

      “…why would a right-hander be wearing it on his right hand?”

      I believe the watch is what has the microchip hoozis which tells the gun “I am the person authorized to use you.” therefore, it has to be in close proximity to the gun

      1. avatar JohnF says:

        That’s my point exactly.

      2. avatar GC says:

        I would hope it works in close proximity, if something were to happen with your dominant hand and you were forced to use the other it could be a bad situation. Oh… wait…. they don’t care.

        1. avatar Geoff PR says:

          Feature, not bug…

        2. avatar Bobiojimbo says:

          Actually, there is an easy work around: fix the watch to picatinny rail mount, and then mount the watch to the accessory rail. Done. Now you don’t have worry about forgetting the watch, or switching hands, or whether or not your buddy wants to shoot it.

          Could go even cheaper and quicker, and just tape the watch to the front of the trigger guard. Cut and replace the tape whenever you need to change the battery.

          Actually, as long as the battery lasted, that’d pretty much make this smart gun a dumb gun. Looks like I just broke this concept.

    2. avatar bobmcd says:

      I wonder if wearing the manhole cover, uh, I mean fake watch, on the support hand might make it too far away for the gun to function.

      A “beneficial” side effect: the fake watch is so huge that it makes it obvious who is carrying this paperweight of a “gun.”

      1. avatar Anonymous says:

        If a person ever ran out of ammo they could always “WATCH WHIP” them.

        1. avatar Geoff PR says:

          “When a problem comes along, you must whip it…”

      2. avatar Mark N. says:

        I believe the Armatix has a range of ten inches, after which the gun is disabled. So if you drop your gun, it won’t fire unless you reset the lock. Or change hands and don’t use a two-handed grip..

        1. avatar LarryinTX says:

          I’m thinking the gun has a range of about 20 inches. Is there any chance I might look goofy with my 18K Rolex on one wrist and that stupid thing on the other? Still, I think it is a wonderful idea for the police, once they have used it without problems for 50 years, I’ll try one out.

  2. avatar Removed_californian says:

    Sad to say, but home is a lost cause… I wonder how long until it finally boils over between water, firearms, and the plethora of other shit that we have been subjected to. I just hope I’m around when it does.

    1. avatar Roscoe says:

      Yeah, water, there’s another hot button folly that actually dwarfs the anti-gun BS coming out of Sacra-demento. Tree ring and deep soil core analysis have provided years of information and warning to all players that long term droughts, in the past sometimes decades long, have regularly occurred in this western region going back to the 800’s (that’s ‘eight’ hundreds, not eighteen). This is the single one commodity without which much of this state’s economy, and the public welfare, will be…sunk.

      So, it’s not like western droughts are new or uncommon. For the political gamesmanship in what is now essentially one party rule in this state to ignore such an important asset as our tenuous water resources in favor of a “progressive” feel good DEMOCRAT agenda when a severe drought is bound to come along regularly, and not take the expensive measures to counter water scarcity when resource engineering relief is available through better water management and better infrastructure including desalination, is a tribute to the ignorant narcissistic selfishness of our current and past political leadership who ignore truely difficult dilemmas and waste tax resources on…political theater.

      Water is the single one commodity without which much of CA’s economy will be…sunk.

      But we dammed sure are gonna have a 100 Billion bullet train to race past the evaporating California Aqueduct.

      1. avatar Geoff PR says:

        Look at the bright side.

        When the economy inevitably implodes the price of real estate will go down faster than Paris Hilton in the back of Limp Bizkit’s tour bus…

        (OK, I swiped that from Saturday Night Live…)

        1. avatar Roscoe says:

          😉 Nice!

      2. avatar MIkeP says:

        I’d heard that the longer-term climactic cycle for CA was about 200 years of wet(Ish) weather, then about a thousand years of arid desert, at least as long as the continents have been near-about in their present locations.

  3. avatar ST says:

    Not to discredit Brandon Combs’ hard work, but this is not a major victory. A gun law deferred is not necessarily a gun law denied,especially in California.

    We should pose a philosophical question, because its answer has a lot more at stake then just California’s gun laws.Should the judiciary have the exclusive right to repeal the Legislature’s will ?

    Sure ,youd probably say.California’s legislature has long since driven a bulldozer over the Contitution. Yet , that bulldozer was created freely by the voters of California, who by majority decides they’d rather not have anything to do with firearms .If we offer the idea what the voters decide shouldnt matter if it doesnt accord with the Judiciary, we hand the opposition a sword of Damocles.

    A judiciary with the power to institute the RKBA in California has the power to take it away everywhere else. As Korematsu v US and other rulings prove, the courts are no barometer of perfection. Invalidating gun control in CA…..or invalidating pro-gun laws in Arizona and elsewhere . Guess which is more likely in our PC centric political climate?

    1. avatar Roscoe says:

      “…created freely by the voters of California, who by majority decides they’d rather not have anything to do with firearms.”

      Uh…not exactly.

      These CA voters vote for a style of political leadership. They fancy themselves, particularly the sheeple, as fashionably ‘progressive’ permissive liberals, when often if they were to take a hard look past the Democrat veneer and rhetoric, they would find they are not actually in favor of much of what the CA Democrat politicians want to push on them, especially legal restrictions and hidden taxes that ramp up their cost of living.

      Democrat voters don’t necessarily enthusiastically support the Democrat party’s anti-gun platform and efforts. “Gun Control” is just part of the overall Democrat package that many voters simply accept when voting for the Democrat style of politician but don’t invariably agree with. It simply comes with the vote for the Democrat style of nanny state entitlement political leadership. In CA, Democrat or Republican, I’d say most voters don’t care about guns and 2A issues so much as to move them to base their vote on that subject as a decisive issue, unlike us here, or the anti’s on the other side of the subject.

      As to this Bill going into the Appropriations Committee’s “suspense” file, you’re absolutely correct; it’s only a matter of time before SB 678 or a similar clone will resurface in the State House. My thoughts are that if it ever reaches Gov. Browns desk it will be vetoed. But after Brown, if Newsom or someone like him is in the Governor’s Office, we’re sunk and the fight will go to the courts…again.

      If the CA State Legislature, ostensibly at the behest of the voters, continues to “bulldoze” over the Constitution in ways that infringe on citizens’ constitutional rights and protections, then it’s the courts’ responsibility, both state and federal, to provide guidance and decisions, if necessary striking down the offensive law(s) that violate constitutional principles. In this Constitutional Republic the courts shouldn’t be writing any new law, but rather quashing mob rule that violates constitutional protections.

    2. avatar Mark N. says:

      All anti-gun bills are “delayed” or “deferred.” There is no permanent victory. So every defeat of a bill is a major, if temporary, victory.

  4. avatar almost says:

    I am moving my family to free state of South Carolina this summer. California has become corrupt liberal cesspool. I’m sick of living behind enemy lines . My tax money’s going to state that respects my second rights.

    1. avatar S.CROCK says:

      When you say “has become” are you talking about 30, 40, 50+ years ago?

      But that is awesome that you will have the opportunity to flee to a free state. Some ca subjects have no option but to stay here.

    2. avatar The Original Brad says:

      Welcome – I can name a few 2A friendly realtors who can help you if you’re moving to the Low Country.

  5. avatar Chris T from KY says:

    Check out the 1970s film “West World” to see how “effective ” smart guns are. This sci fi film was way ahead of its time.

    When you vote for an anti gun open homosexual like Tom Ammiano you get what you deserve.

  6. avatar Soccerchainsaw says:

    Looking at that picture I gotta ask….
    How many people will be “lasered” when someone asks what time it is?

  7. avatar Brett says:

    If I were force to live in California, I believe I’d just carry a cap and ball revolver so I didn’t have to worry about all their stupid laws regarding modern firearms.

    1. avatar Vitsaus says:

      Cap and ball are treated the same as regular firearms as far as on body, or in vehicle carry are concerned in the golden state.

      1. avatar Brett says:

        Of course it is. Sigh.

        1. avatar The Original Brad says:

          Now that was funny, LOL!

  8. avatar Mark N. says:

    There is more to this story than as reported. The original bill MANDATED user enabled firearms–until this idiot was told that such guns, other than the Armatix, don’t actually exist and that his bill would not withstand a legal challenge–or Brown’s veto. So he changed it to mandate a study on the feasibility and availability of such guns. But then forgot to provide for financing. I think we can safely assume that his guy is not the sharpest tool in the shed.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      It’s been clear for some time that a lot of politicians NEVER consider how a bill is going to be paid for. Some time, like a hundred years. And pretty evident that no one party is exclusively responsible, as evidenced by our rapidly approaching $18 trillion debt.

  9. avatar Accur81 says:

    Excellent! I donated money to the FPC and sent form letters to my congresscritters to oppose this legislation.

  10. avatar Mikial says:

    California Liberlism has gone from silly to outright sickening. I lived there for a couple of years after getting out of the Army, and it is just another fascist Liberal regime. As with most Liberal states with insane gun laws, crime is rampant and getting worse. The term “law abiding citizen” is becoming synonymous with “unarmed victim,” and anyone with any sense should get out of there and let the place sink, both socially and hopefully physically into the ocean.

    You can depend on it that this law is only delayed and not averted.

  11. avatar Bobiojimbo says:

    Actually, there is an easy work around: fix the watch to picatinny rail mount, and then mount the watch to the accessory rail. Done. Now you don’t have worry about forgetting the watch, or switching hands, or whether or not your buddy wants to shoot it.

    Could go even cheaper and quicker, and just tape the watch to the front of the trigger guard. Cut and replace the tape whenever you need to change the battery.

    Actually, as long as the battery lasted, that’d pretty much make this smart gun a dumb gun. Looks like I just broke this concept.

  12. avatar Beemo says:

    Thank God fiat money has its limits and the taxpayer slaves can only be squeezed so hard, otherwise the oppression of the people would be endless.

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