California Can’t Enforce the Laws They Already Have [VIDEO]

 

This is TTAG’s weekly roundup of legal and legislative news affecting guns, the gun business and gun owners’ rights. For a deeper dive into the topics discussed here, check out this week in gun rights at FPC

Teacher gun Training Shootings

Cindy Bullock, Timpanogos Academy secretary, participates in shooting drills at the Utah County Sheriff’s Office shooting range during the teacher’s academy training, in Spanish Fork Canyon, Utah. About 30 teachers in Utah are spending their summer learning how to stuff wounds and shoot guns as part of a training held by police to prepare educators for an active shooter scenario in their schools. (AP Photo/ Rick Bowmer)

Teachers Lose Right to Self-Defense Courtesy of Bloomberg Gun Control Group

In an unfortunate turn of events this week, an appeals court in Ohio determined that in order to qualify for the right to carry on school grounds, teachers must train a minimum of 728 hours.

Why such a large number? Because that is the level of training defined as “police levels.” You know, trained to the same level that guys like Mike Bloomberg’s NYPD were in 2012 when they shot 9 bystanders.

For the mathematically challenged, 728 hours is 18.2 work weeks. That means that in order to train to the level the Ohio court demanded, teachers would effectively lose their entire summer vacation AND their sick days to meet the hour requirement. I guess the judges didn’t have a calculator on hand when they were considering this opinion.

Not only is this number asinine, it’s completely arbitrary – according to the DOJ, police academies across the country average a mere 110 hours on firearms training and only 8 on conflict management and mediation. I think the technical term for this is “yikes!”

So why such a high number of training hours? It’s clearly not to ensure the skill and safety of the firearm operator, and it’s clearly not for efficiency. It’s to ensure that teachers are either entirely dissuaded from pursuing training or are physically (and financially) incapable of completing the training. Any firearms instructor or will tell you that perfect practice makes perfect, but this is just obscene. Hopefully when the schools appeal (and they should), we’ll see the Ohio Supreme Court apply some actual common sense and overturn this ridiculous decision.

california gavin newsom

California’s Governor Gavin Newsom. BigStock.

California Can’t Keep Criminals from Keeping Guns

Governor Newsom and his lackeys were so focused on implementing anti-2A legislation last year that they seem to have overlooked enforcing. This is, of course, at the same time the legislature seeks to impose a slew of new laws.

According to numbers from California’s Armed Prohibited Person System, as of January 1 of this year, 22,424 criminals and individuals considered mentally unfit to own a firearm are, in fact, in possession of firearms. This number is only 798 less than it was at the same time last year, which begs the question…why are Gavin Newsom and the California Legislature focusing so much energy on criminalizing otherwise lawful possession of arms, when there is an identifiable and overwhelming number of allegedly dangerous people on the streets at this very moment?

It’s about control. When California cops came for the gun stores this spring, it wasn’t for public safety. It was to minimize the number of firearms that end up in the hands of decent, innocent people. Just like with Bloomberg, Murphy, and President Trump, Newsom believes your civil rights are secondary to “safety and security.”

If it really was about safety, wouldn’t we see a sweeping (read: effective) effort from the California DOJ to take arms from this parade of horribles? I guess that wouldn’t leave them much for grandstanding come next election season.

45 Automatic Hand Gun Isolated On White With Texas Sta

Bigstock

Brady PAC Targeting 2020 Texas Elections

Following the Democratic victories in Virginia’s most recent state election, it should come as no surprise to anyone that the National Council to Control Handguns is trying to flip seats in Texas. Sure, it didn’t work when Beto ran for Senate, but they’re giving it another go. But they’re not the only ones.

Other gun grabbers like Everytown for Gun Safety have also committed to spending millions in campaign funding to try to expand their tentacular reach into the suburbs. Though Brady PAC claims it is vetting candidates prior to lending them support, they have historically donated exclusively to Democrats, offering advertising support to 27 candidates in 2018.

Surely not all of these candidates supported the Brady credo, so why are they donating so indiscriminately?

Maybe it’s because they’re just a veiled fundraising wing of the DNC. Who knows. What I do know is that they’re going to have a tough time flipping seats down south, and they’re certainly going to have to dig deep into their donors’ pockets if they plan to win.

Mirror Police side rear view rearview mirror

Bigstock

SCOTUS Strikes Blow to Fourth Amendment. Again.

On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its opinion in Kansas v. Glover, holding that it’s okay for the police to pull over vehicles owned by people who have suspended drivers’ licenses, even if they can’t confirm that the driver is the person with the suspended license. The decision was an overwhelming 8 to 1, but it’s just another in a long list of cases which have slowly eroded your Fourth Amendment rights over the years.

The basis for the Justices’ decision was that officers must be able to make “commonsense judgments and inferences about human behavior,” pulling from a case in 2000, Illinois v. Wardlow, where the Court decided, quite contrarily, that sudden flight in a high crime neighborhood isn’t the kind of conduct that permits the police to briefly detain someone. Let’s take a moment here.

The Supreme Court says that you don’t have to do anything at all except drive your friend, spouse, or family member’s vehicle, and the police can stop it, but if you’re running adjacent to a suspected crime scene, it’s not enough for the cops to stop you.

Don’t get me wrong – the police should always have to show that they had reasonable cause to detain people regardless, but it’s patently ironic that engaging in behavior that’s significantly more suspicious is totally fine whereas merely existing on a highway is enough to get you detained.

Not only is the status of a drivers’ license an unreasonable basis for detaining someone,  but it gives the police the power to conduct repeat stops, which means they can decide to routinely target particular individuals. No way that could be abused, right? In a state like Ohio, that means that if the police stop you, they can use the old “I detect the odor of marijuana” trick and bam! They’re searching your vehicle and you haven’t even failed to signal a turn.

How does this relate to firearms? Well, it pertains to the Bearing Arms part. The Fourth Amendment protects your right to be secure in your person, house, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures.

If you live in a state where the police are notorious for hating civilian gun ownership or for  improperly classifying weapons or ammunition as illegal, that unwarranted traffic stop could result in your arrest and the seizure of your firearms.

If the vast majority of police had common sense to exercise, they wouldn’t need things like qualified immunity to protect them from the kind of abuses that they would engage in when nobody is looking. And if their attitude is something along the lines of “nobody but a cop should have a gun,” it’s only a matter of time before these new tactics are used against law-abiding gun owners.

(AP Photo/Ringo H.W. Chiu)

San Francisco board of supervisors panicked over “panic buying.”

Could you believe that, during a situation where people have a rational fear of civil unrest, and that the government will not be able to help them, the people would purchase products that could give them security?

This concept absolutely freaked out the San Francisco board of supervisors. So they’ve responded with a resolution to study (read: generate propaganda) to warn us peasants of the dangers of not strictly bending to the whims of the ruling class. You’ll be hearing more from me on this one, but be sure to check out the take action page.

comments

  1. avatar Debbie W. says:

    Most law abiding gun owners have their driver’s license, insurance, vehicle inspection up to date. And have no DUIs or pot oders in their vehicle, etc. If you want to be an irresponsible nitwit stay home, lock the doors and be an irresponsible nitwit.
    On the other hand this “I need a gun for protection” and “if they take my gun only criminals will have guns” goes nowhere with anti gun zealots. What sinks their ship is the fact that the Roots of Gun Control are in racism and genocide. When they go Gun Control hang the racism and genocide banner around their necks so all can see exactly where those ratbassturds are coming from.

    1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      Debbie,

      Most law abiding gun owners have … no … pot oders in their vehicle …

      That does not hinder police. A family at my church has a daughter who is literally the epitome of “Polly Puritan”. She was driving herself home from a movie one night when a county Sheriff deputy fabricated a reason to pull her over. When she opened her window to talk to the deputy, he additionally fabricated the claim that he smelled marijuana to justify putting her in the back seat of his cruiser while he ransacked her car. No one has ever possessed nor used marijuana in any way, shape, or form in her car. And the deputy of course never found any marijuana nor associated paraphernalia and ultimately had to let her go. Nevertheless, that did not stop the deputy from jacking her up anyway.

      The sad reality: I was reluctant to believe her story until almost the same thing happened to me and my family. My family and I were returning from church on a Sunday morning. My spouse was driving about 50 m.p.h. in a 50 m.p.h. zone when we passed a Sheriff deputy on the side of the road. He nearly crashed into oncoming traffic in order to pull out fast and pull us over. He claimed that he clocked us at over 70 m.p.h. which is why he stopped us. His claim was so patently ridiculous that I immediately blurted out, “What?!?!?! That’s ridiculous!” without even thinking about it. After running my spouse’s driver’s license, he came back and made up some lame story that his training and experience led him to believe that we were not actually going 70 m.p.h. but rather were going close to 50 m.p.h. so we could go on our way. Meanwhile, my very young child was deeply disturbed thinking that the deputy was going to take my spouse and/or myself to jail. (It was so frightening that my young child cried while telling us about it later that afternoon.)

      That kind of chicanery happens all the time. Perhaps it will decrease significantly in the future due to police body cameras and people recording video in their vehicles (either on dedicated video recording devices in their vehicles or on their smart phone). Sadly, I have this nagging suspicion that police will find some other workaround which enables them to stop people without probable cause and without facing any personal penalties.

      1. avatar I Haz A Question says:

        The “suspected substance” claim is the very reason why you should never allow for more than a single window to be open at any given time. The “point” officer will remain at your driver side window, while his partner goes to your passenger side and asks you to roll down the glass so he/she can ask you a question. The proper response is to maintain the conversation with the point officer and state that you feel unsafe with two people displaying deadly weapons and attempting to split your focus into two separate directions. If they insist that they remain at opposite sides of your vehicle and that you answer the second LEO, respond by saying you will follow their commands out of fear for your life, but will roll up one window before rolling down the other as you prepare to interact with the second LEO. Then roll down the passenger window only enough so that you and the LEO can clearly hear each other.

        Without the benefit of a cross breeze running through the vehicle, it will be very difficult for them to prove in court that they smelled anything that could be used as a reason to search your car.

        1. avatar GS650G says:

          Sorry officer, the passenger window doesn’t roll down, it’s broke.

      2. avatar Debbie W. says:

        There is a difference between Most and All.
        If an officer/deputy does something like profiling, uses poor judgement, etc. file a complaint with the Chief of Police or Sheriff and/or file a lawsuit. A complaint could require the officer to take a poly.
        The officer was probably playing her hoping he would have pot luck. When she gave consent the door opened for anything. She should have requested an addiitional officer preferably female and a dope dog for a dope search. Mary Poppins needs to know how to build a case against an officer who by your account should not be in LE. She should also have submitted a hair sample to verify she uses no drugs. Police officers can and do lose their jobs over such matters.
        The important part of my post was the part that began with, On the other hand. You musta missed it.

        1. avatar Well Armed says:

          Quite a few years ago a black man driving a Cadillac pulled into a predominantly white neighborhood near Indianapolis. Following all the trafic laws he was pulled over anyway. After being searched and detained for more than an hour, he informed the officers that they should look closer at his background. Turns out the Jack booted officers pulled over the head of the Indiana state police. If I remember correctly neither officer is still working on any police force.

        2. avatar Kyle in Upstate NY says:

          The problem is without extensive knowledge and training, most people don’t know any of that stuff. They just know not to answer questions at most, and some don’t even know that, and cops can be intimidating.

        3. avatar Chris T in KY says:

          To well armed
          As a black man I’m glad the white police tailed this black stranger into a white neighborhood. As I would be glad if the police followed anyone who was suspicious in a neighborhood. Who they knew did not live there.
          And yes good neighborhood cops. Really do know who lives in the neighborhood and who does not.

          I’ve called the cops in my neighborhood and open openly carry my sidearm when they arrived. The (white) cops in town know I have guns. And I’m glad they do.

          Now go back and try harder next time. You’re not doing too well At this.

          Besides racist liberals like you have worked to disarm blacks for decades.

  2. avatar Debbie W. says:

    TRUMP/PENCE 2020.

  3. avatar uncommon_sense says:

    What I do know is that [civilian disarmament organizations are] going to have a tough time flipping seats down south …

    I’ll bet countless people said the same thing about Virginia.

    As the core family and faith disintegrate in our nation, Progressives will gradually take over everything, even the South, even the Deep South.

    1. avatar M1Lou says:

      Yeah, I roll my eyes every time I read this. People said the same thing in Virginia and look at us now. They will look at flipping the easiest seats first. They will pour money into at risk seats for Republicans for their Democrat challengers. As it is Texas, the Republican party there is probably complacent like they were here in Virginia. Money in a race is a large predictor in who will win. The person with the most wins in the mid 80% range in an election. This is because a lot of people vote based on likability, not principles. People need to stop with the South is safe rhetoric. Start to shore up your state now, not after a bad election like we are doing here in VA. Everything we do now is just a delaying action, or an attempt to blunt the worst legislation and only get partially screwed, rather than fully screwed.

      1. avatar GS650G says:

        Austin, Houston and Dallas are the beach heads of the left. Texas is their big prize, along with Florida. The PR invasion and flight of New Yorkers south will turn Florida soon enough.
        Texas is being invaded by Mexico and California and both armies like progressive ideas.

  4. avatar Paladin says:

    The We the people group, will not vote for any politician that oppose guns!!!

    1. avatar Eric Swalwell says:

      “If it really was about safety, wouldn’t we see a sweeping (read: effective) effort from the California DOJ to take arms from this parade of horribles?”

      What you call “horribles”, we call Democrat voters. Why upset the base?

      Eric Swalwell 2020

  5. avatar Frank Zappa says:

    I was pulled over a few weeks ago by the local sheriff.
    Told me I was going 10mph over the 25mph limit.

    I looked at him and said, funny my cruise control was set for 25.
    I also said that if you would like we can verify your accusation of my speeding by reviewing my dash cam.

    He did not like that.
    Tells me to have a nice day.

  6. avatar Prndll says:

    I will never vote for anyone with a D.

    1. avatar Eric Swalwell says:

      I don’t have a D.

      Eric Swalwell 2020

      1. avatar Prndll says:

        I don’t vote for people that threaten Americans with nuclear weapons either.

    2. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

      One has to be careful of the R’s that are nothing more than D’s in drag.

  7. avatar LifeSavor says:

    Just a gut feeling: the Dem govs who are behaving tyrannically right now (“Shut down isle 7, but half of isle 4 can remain open!”, “I am going to criminally charge any doctor who prescribes that medicine!”, “I will decide which business can open, I will decide whether you can pray together”.) will have a difficult time at the polls this next go-round. Their allies in the state houses will suffer, also.

    Just a hunch.

    Good opportunity to begin reversing the damage done in Virginia.

  8. avatar Huntmaster says:

    Teachers Lose Right to Self-Defense Courtesy of Bloomberg Gun Control Group. 728 Hours! That is about 100 time as many hours of weapons training they used to require to stand a security watch in the missile compartment of a nuclear submarine at the height of the cold war.

    1. avatar Sebra says:

      I believe this got overturned.

  9. avatar Shadow says:

    For anyone who lives in Texas (or lived there?), what are the chances that Bloomberg could flip that state the way he did Virginia?

    1. avatar Ed Schrade says:

      Not good.

      1. avatar GomeznSA says:

        Ed ‘likely’ true but not out of the realm of possibility. Couple of three examples: the seat being vacated by will Hurd (squishy republican that he was) will likely go to the dems, 2) my district – currently misrepresented by the other Castro twin ‘might’ have a chance to turn red but the ‘r’ candidate has some personal baggage that could sink him. At least the state party is running someone against him this time. 3) Chip Roy is in a dog fight with abortion barbie (look her up if you don’t know who she is) who is getting a ton of $$$$$ from bloomie and gyorgi – it could go either way. And of course we (the state) are likely to be still stuck with the likes of sheila with the two Confederate last names as well as al green (not the singer).

    2. avatar Kyle in Upstate NY says:

      We need some kind of law IMO to restrict super-rich people from being able to spend so much money in elections that they can essentially flip a state. I am not talking about wealth confiscation or anything like that, just more laws that limit how much money people can throw at campaigns. It shouldn’t be where one person, just because they have tens of billions of dollars and the ability to at a whim throw hundreds of millions into a campaign or for a voter referendum to pass a law.

      1. avatar GomeznSA says:

        Kyle – those laws limiting individual contributions already exist. The mega donors get around it by funneling money in small amounts from ‘anonymous’ donors. IIRC amounts less than $25 aren’t tracked by the FEC. That was what happened in Virginia last fall, of course the state republican party not even bothering to run anyone in several districts just opened the barn doors even wider. bloomie admitted that in essence he bought the state house and senate races. Both now have just enough in each chamber that they can (and have) pass any law that ralphie wants them to. As the old saying goes – all politics is local – and VA has now proven that.

  10. avatar Wheel gun guy says:

    Californians are not bright enough to enforce their laws , as proof I offer this — THEY KEEP ELECTING THE SAME MORONS INTO OFFICE!!!

  11. avatar Not Larry from Texas says:

    Darn Othais and Mae from C&Rsonel have really changed

  12. avatar Hannibal says:

    “Why such a large number? Because that is the level of training defined as “police levels…”

    hahaha what? Maybe secret service or tactical team levels.

    Personally, I think 27 is too low. But the sweet spot is probably 40 with a day refresher every year.

    1. avatar GomeznSA says:

      Hannible Yep – I’d like to know what department allegedly requires that many hours. Back in the dark ages (we still carried wheel guns back then) the state requirement was 40 hrs, up to individual departments how often re-quals were conducted. One major department in that state did minimum of quarterly at least 800 rounds – most were semi annually. Don’t recall too many (if any) bad shootings where Citizens were shot by the local constabulary.
      I think the Ohio folks just pulled a number out of thin air – with the intent as the author stated to simply discourage the teachers with an unreasonable ‘standard’.

      1. avatar Hannibal says:

        I, too, qualified on a wheelgun at one point and while I don’t remember how many hours training it was I wouldn’t be surprised if it was around 40 of actual trigger time (not cleaning, waiting, etc).

        Pistols are harder to shoot than rifles, maybe if they care about safety they should arm the teachers with ARs instead? Oh… you say they aren’t actually concerned with safety?

      2. avatar Not Larry from Texas says:

        GomeznSA,

        As of 2008 when I did my academy we did 40 hours of basic pistol qualification/ familiarization. We did additional hours to keep our skill set up. Once back on station during our field training program, we did a shotgun course as well 40 hour course on the UMP 40. After that for about 10 years the only training we had twice yearly Pistol, Shotgun, Subgun and AR-15 qualification. What I think was to streamline or reduce the abused amount of weapons we had to use and rarely ever did , we only use the pistol and a LWRC M6 now. Additionally they reduced qualification to once a year and introduced a weapons training block that encourages uncomfortable shooting positions, movement ( as much as you can on a indoor range) , low light shooting etc ect….

        1. avatar Not Larry from Texas says:

          Forgot to add so we have 16 hours a year now of weapons time in addition to our yearly 44 hours in-service.

  13. avatar Hannibal says:

    re: SCOTUS decision.

    Stupid decision. First of all, modern technology has made it easy to pull up someone’s license photo and check to see if it’s them behind the wheel IF the agency has sprung for a working computer in the car. Second, any cop who has been on the department shitter for more than a couple hours can follow a car and typically find a violation that the driver has committed. And if not, then the person gets away with driving suspended (oh, the humanity) and gets caught tomorrow. Big F’in deal.

    On the other hand, now anyone being driven around by their spouse in a vehicle because they are suspended gets pulled over every time someone runs their plate? Bullshit.

    1. avatar Darkman says:

      Said it many times. When you rely on 9 people who answer to no one. Are placed upon the court that determines not only what Rights you have and don’t have. Cannot be removed by the will of the people through vote or impeachment. The people have ceded their Rights to a system that is closer to serfdom and citizen. Is Freedom decided by decree. Truly Freedom? Or permission based on the authority of those in control? Keep Your Powder Dry.

      1. avatar M says:

        Very well said, both of you.

  14. avatar MianiBeach says:

    The title, “California Can’t Enforce the Laws They Already Have,” is misleading. It’s not “can’t” it’s “won’t.”
    California and many other states won’t enforce their gun laws. Take for example the shooting in Florida’s Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida. The shooter was reported multiple times at multiple levels, including to the FBI, yet Cruz was never arrested nor placed on any list that would have prevented him from buying that gun.
    The anti-gunners use that as their excuse, i.e. “The current/existing laws don’t work, so we need more.”
    In closing, I’ll repeat my standard mantra here, the anti-gunners understand the implications of the 2nd Amendment better than most people, i.e. to hold the US Government at risk, which is why they’re so desperate to remove or end-run it, for once they do, there’ll be no stopping them.

  15. avatar Chris T in KY says:

    The proud white homosexuals who boast about their political power destroyed civil rights in that city.
    Unless it’s changed San Francisco has the worst rate for clearing murders. For a city population of its size.

    They forced the last gun store to close five years ago. And years before that they ended 2A education and rifle teams in the high schools.

    Street crime is totally out of control in that city.
    San Francisco is as anti civil rights a city, as Birmingham Alabama was in the 1950s.

    Their priorities are urinating and defecating in public. Shooting up crystal meth to improve their sexual experience in public. Stealing from tourists and having sex in public are number 1 &2 in that city for importance. Their priorities have nothing to do with the Bill of Rights.

    They made sure that the Kate steinle murderer walked away a free man.
    I don’t care what happens in San Francisco. It’s an evil place. And they want to spread their way of thinking across the country.

    The question is what are the so-called Libertarians Liberals and the Left, who claim they support the Second Amendment and the rest of the Bill of Rights going to do about it?

    1. avatar frank speak says:

      well,..I got to ride a cable car for free…so they can’t all be bad…..

  16. avatar M says:

    “In a state like Ohio, that means that if the police stop you, they can use the old “I detect the odor of marijuana” trick and bam! They’re searching your vehicle and you haven’t even failed to signal a turn.”
    Maybe if law abiding citizen in the state of Ohio, did something about that when t happened to them, and there was no marijuana or smell of weed in the car (or anything else illegal in plain sight), cops in Ohio would stop using that trick. The odor of marijuana is strong and distinct, someone with normal senses can smell it from pretty far. There is no “I think I might be smelling it, a little, maybe, or maybe it’s lavender, or fried chicken….”
    If that happens to you just stay calm and document everything. Ask for a supervisor, then contact the agency to open an IA investigation, follow up with your representative….in short do something other than whining about it or posting a useless, poorly made and very uninformative video on youtube. My guess is also that out of all the people allegedly tricked, most are just full of it and there was indeed a clear smell of weed coming from the vehicle. You could catch some people with pounds of dope on them and they would tell you they borrowed their cousin’s pair of jeans, they had no idea it was in there, I am barely exaggerating on that one.

    1. avatar Hannibal says:

      There was only one time I searched a car back in the day for weed and didn’t find it or have the driver tell me he had thrown it out the window or otherwise disposed of it. To this day I am 100% sure that if I had been willing to cut open that back seat (from which the odor was coming) I would have found some interesting things.

      But, in the end, sometimes the juice isn’t worth the squeeze.

  17. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

    “California Can’t Enforce the Laws They Already Have”

    Just one more un Constitutional infringement should fix it.

    The result of Leftarrds run amok,if they even had a clue but No they are proud to be uneducated,anti Constitutionalist and un American.

  18. avatar possum says:

    The Kansas story. I don’t believe it. How’s a cop know I’ve got a suspended license unless he pulls me over. Especially if I’m not driving the car I own. Maybe change license for expired tag and I’d go for it, but license??! Probably best to stay out of that God forsaken hay seed state anyway, bad coos, bad laws, unfriendly gunm hating people..

  19. avatar tania roland says:

    Maay ??Looking for hook up with a stranger! ?? Ready for any experiments… http://2.gp/a71sG

  20. avatar trims. Keith says:

    Same comment. Bloomberg, the hobbit, can kiss my ass my ass.

  21. avatar Parkerized says:

    Bloomberg and Trump in the same sentence? Now THAT is asinine.

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