Gavin Newsom angry pointing
Previous Post
Next Post

California Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom might be pining for a chance at the country’s highest political office, but he needs a refresher on Civics 101. Specifically, he should get a refresher on how the courts decide the constitutionality of laws.

His message to law-abiding Californians and the judge whose recent rulings struck down his previous gun control laws was clear: Shove it.

Gun Restrictions Repeat

Gov. Newsom held a press conference with Democratic Attorney General Rob Bonta and several Democratic antigun state legislators announcing a new round of strict gun control measures.

At the media event, Gov. Newsom announced his support for expanded concealed carry restrictions. There was no mention of cracking down on criminals – just those who obey the law. His new plan includes banning concealed carry in churches, public libraries, zoos, amusement parks, playgrounds, banks and other privately-owned businesses open to the public.

The U.S. Supreme Court warned that overly inclusive “sensitive places” laws would run afoul of the Second Amendment. Justice Clarence Thomas, writing in the majority opinion, stated encompassing broad areas as sensitive places simply because police are present for public protection is casting a net too wide.

“It is true that people sometimes congregate in ‘sensitive places,’ and it is likewise true that law enforcement professionals are usually presumptively available in those locations,” Justice Thomas wrote. “But expanding the category of ‘sensitive places’ simply to all places of public congregation that are not isolated from law enforcement defines the category of ‘sensitive places’ far too “broadly.”

That didn’t matter – the proposal had the governor’s full-throated support. The proposed legislation would also ban any Californian under the age of 21 from having a permit to carry a concealed gun despite 18-year-olds being fully vested in their Constitutional rights as adults.

Bad History Lesson

Gov. Newsom has never seen a gun control law he didn’t love. His disdain for the Second Amendment is so deep that he’s even attacked the First Amendment rights of the firearm industry as an end around to further limit the Second Amendment rights of Californians.

Last year, Gov. Newsom signed a law attacking firearm industry businesses for their protected free speech in advertising because he believes youth recreational and target shooting leagues will lead to “mass shooting and mass destruction” events. As a result, the California State High School Clay Target League – a nationally renowned youth league – shuttered.

At the time, league president John Nelson wrote, “The League is the safest sport in high school. Over 1,500 schools across the nation have approved our program. Hundreds of thousands of students have participated, and there has never been an accident or injury.”

The governor was forced to walk back portions of the hastily passed bill when it became apparent that hunting safety courses – required for state hunting licenses – would be affected.

Also last year Gov. Newsom signed into law AB 1594, a bill that would allow AG Bonta to help public and private parties sue firearm manufacturers and retailers for the criminal misuse of firearms. This law is strikingly similar and modeled on a New Jersey law that a federal judge last week enjoined the state from enforcing because it was a transparent attempt to circumvent the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) and therefore unconstitutional. NSSF will soon file a lawsuit against Attorney General Bonta in federal court to challenge the constitutionally of AB 1594. By the way, AG Bonta is the same attorney general whose office “leaked” the personal and confidential information of California pistol permit holders.

A victory for California’s lawful gun owners also came in 2021, when U.S. District Court Judge Roger Benitez struck down the decades-old ban on semiautomatic rifles, modern sporting rifles (MSRs).

“This case is not about extraordinary weapons lying at the outer limits of Second Amendment protection,” Judge Benitez wrote. “The banned ‘assault weapons’ are not bazookas, howitzers, or machineguns. Instead, the firearms deemed ‘assault weapons’ are fairly ordinary, popular, modern rifles.”

“This is an average case about average guns used in average ways for average purposes,” Judge Benitez continued.

There are currently more than 24.4 million commonly-owned MSRs in circulation today since 1990.

Gov. Newsom called the judge an “idealogue” with a “history-only approach.” It’s the same judge who just two months ago blocked another antigun law that would force those bringing lawsuits against California’s restrictive laws to pay the legal fees, therefore causing attorneys to shy away from taking cases against gun control.

Like a Broken Record

Gov. Newsom’s ire toward gun owners is a sharp contrast to his soft-on-crime approach. In 2021, the police department in California’s largest city had a message to residents:

“If you are being robbed, do not resist the robbery suspects; cooperate and comply with their demands. Be a good witness,” they said in a press release.

By enacting even more unconstitutional gun restrictions on law-abiding Californians, Gov. Newsom told citizens their rights and safety don’t matter. He will flaunt his gun control obsessions no matter the their cost to personal safety and ignore the Constitutional rights of law-abiding Californians, even if it costs the state millions in court.


Larry Keane is SVP for Government and Public Affairs, Assistant Secretary and General Counsel of the National Shooting Sports Foundation.

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. Come and take it. Prove to the people how brave you are, just how committed you are. It should be easy for you to come and take it from a 60 year old man with a new knee. Especially with your superior intellect.

  2. California keeps voting this jerk into office. So , I don’t care what happens in the shit hole called California,,,
    We need a wall , so I say we build it around the boarders of California so the idiots can’t get out & pollute the rest of the country.

    • Some of us are still fighting the good fight in CA to restore our rights and educate people. But I get it, I don’t want the liberals to leave CA and take their bad ideas with them.

  3. Wrong!! California has less homicides and mass murders than most other states because their gun laws work much better than red states that do not have such laws.

    • false dacian

      and also, all 50 states have ‘red flag’ type laws, even the red states. They just don’t all call them ‘red flag’ laws. All 50 states have laws on their books that have the same effect and can be enacted to the same effect as laws called ‘red flag’ in some states.

      • to Booger Brain

        Look up California’s record and then try and lie your way out of this one. You really fell head first into the shit house on this nonsensical reply. See a Shrink its long past due.

        • You’re the one who has a clear and present danger to the public, with your racist, Anti-American, Anti-CONSTITUTION hyperboling!!!

          Makes since you’re butt still hurts from when your Ancestors had their butts handed to them and they were force to flee the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA!!!!

        • @dacian

          If you do some actual research and apply some basic 4th grade math you will find your claim to be false.

          But, obviously you can’t do that especially the fourth grade math. You prefer to take the anti-gun word for it and swallow it like a $2.00 hooker on Saturday night.

          Ya ever wonder why I jump on your stuff as false? I mean, you’ve had to think “why?” for at least a few of your rants I’ve said were false.

          After all it looked so clear to you, especially the study’s you like to crow about. They said it so it must be right because no one would ever try to use a study from a ‘respectable sounding’ institution performed by people with things like PHD and MD and ‘gun violence researcher’ behind their names to tell a lie and surely the governor or president can be believed – why by golly these are so ‘authoritative’ … right?

          I feel a little sorry for you because I know for people like you who cling to such ‘authoritative’ as their validation of self worth were most likely abused and/or neglected as a child or were missing a parent. That’s woke anti-gun and liberal, they are missing something in their childhood that validated their sense of self worth thus their confirmation bias because it gives them something to hold on to that validates their sense of self worth because they never developed that as a child. They end up searching for it by filling up their confirmation bias with an ‘authoritative’ something and they simply can not tell when that ‘authoritative’ is lying to them or duping them. They aren’t ‘woke’, they are blinded by their own confirmation bias.

          But that’s your thought pattern, and you lay it out so very obviously in your posts. That’s what you go on, they must be right so it fits into your confirmation bias and you think “Ha Ha! I got ’em now. Look, a link with my study is fact” and your sense of self-worth is satisfied because now you can sound ‘authoritative’ and when someone comes along and challenges that you launch into argument with the same stupid delusion further validating that you are really ignorant on the subject.

          Your problem is you are ignorant. You take what anti-gun and your bogus study’s say at face value, its ‘authoritative’ to you so its not a lie to you. It appeals to that child level emotional response of ‘confirmation bias’ that is so evident in your rants and ravings trying so desperately to validate your ‘confirmation bias’ to satisfy filling that hole in your sense of self-worth. And its the only thing you know because you don’t know how to do research and don’t know how to apply basic math.

          And that’s why I jump on your stuff as false sometimes, because it is false because you make your rants false by spreading false because you don’t know how to do research and look at the data objectively and apply basic math skills and see the gaping holes they are not telling you about.

          There have been literally a few hundred times in various articles comments where I have very clearly shown you these gaping holes in their data and statements, with basic math and all. Yet despite it being obvious and trying to help you out by prompting you to do further research for yourself which would lead you to the same and only conclusion and having a “Ah Ha! I see it now.” moment which was so obvious a fourth grader could have figured it out by simple logic – despite that you kept arguing stupid and false. Instead of doing that research and math you continue to argue your false stuff thinking you are discrediting anyone else who says otherwise, and you do this because its the only thing you know and it validates your confirmation bias – in reality all you are doing is re-confirming your ignorance. And actually, its funny to watch you do that and I’ve gotten many a laugh reading your posts and reply’s, its so obvious right there in front of you and you dance around oblivious to the hole you are in.

    • CA leads the nation in mass shootings:

      California’s Mass Public Shooting rate is much higher than Texas’ or the rest of the United States

      “From 2010 on, California’s per capita rate of mass public shootings was 43% higher than the rate in Texas and 29% higher than in the rest of the United States. Since 2020, the rate in California is 276% higher than in Texas and 100% higher than in the rest of the U.S.”

      • to Man with no sense

        CA leads the nation in mass shootings:——–quote

        Another bold face lie.

        FACT SHEET: California’s Gun Safety Policies Save Lives, Provide Model for a Nation Seeking Solutions
        Published: Jun 02, 2022

        SACRAMENTO – With the country still reeling from the mass shooting in Uvalde, Texas that left 19 children and two teachers dead last week, California’s nation-leading record on gun safety provides a pathway for states seeking to rein in gun violence.

        California Ranked #1 for Gun Safety, Death Rate 37% Lower than National Average
        In 2021, California was ranked as the #1 state for gun safety by Giffords Law Center, and the state saw a 37% lower gun death rate than the national average. According to the CDC, California’s gun death rate was the 44th lowest in the nation, with 8.5 gun deaths per 100,000 people – compared to 13.7 deaths per 100,000 nationally, 28.6 in Mississippi, 20.7 in Oklahoma, and 14.2 in Texas. California’s gun death rate for children is also lower than other states, and is 58% lower than the national average.

        Since Early 1990s, California Cut Its Gun Death Rate in Half

        From Brady California: “From 1993 to 2017, California’s firearm mortality rate declined by 55 percent—almost four times the decrease in the rest of the nation. Many of California’s most important firearm laws went into effect in the early 1990s. As California continued to enact strong firearm laws, its firearm death rate continued to decline.”

        Californians 25% Less Likely to Die in a Mass Shooting
        From the Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC): “Compared to citizens of other states, Californians are about 25% less likely to die in mass shootings. Between 2019 and 2021, the state’s annual mass shooting homicide rate of 1.4 per one million people was lower than the national average of 1.9.”

        Man with no sense you really fell head first into the shithouse on this one.

        • I’ll keep posting that study just because it pisses you off. And it’s correct, considering the “sources” that produced the dreck that you posted:

          Brady California
          Public Policy Institute of California

          None of which are credible.

        • Man with no sense

          You are a laugh a minute. Every accredited post from professional sources that is pro-gun laws you ignore with the radical wave of the hand and you expect us to believe the garbage you post from radical right wing forums that have no research to back up their bold face lies that claim gun control never works and we should do away with all gun control laws. Now which group is more insane your rants or the history of gun control which proves it works.

        • dacian, your reading comprehension is lacking.

          “Every accredited post from professional sources that is pro-gun laws …”

          There’s the problem, right there. “Pro-gun control” sources jigger the numbers to support their bias. They don’t post any studies unless the results agree with their bias. Giffords, Brady and PPIC are not credible sources — you haven’t posted any “research” from these groups, only their biased conclusions which you present as irrefutable fact.

          Even when any of us post straight information, you’re unable or unwilling to read and understand it. Case in point:

          dacian: “Are you really that dense??? Do you realize you just contradicted yourself. If the cops had taken away all of the boyfriend’s guns then he would not have had his gun to kill her.”

          my response: “… Bowne, 39, was stabbed to death in the driveway of her Patton Avenue home …” I

        • Fake Miner posted a link to an interesting article:

          Newsom’s statement on violent crime being higher in Texas than California is misleading. Here’s why

          “A review of the crime data from both states shows 2020 was the only year in the past five that California’s violent crime rate was slightly lower than Texas’. …

          “When you look at robberies specifically — which is really what the governor was first asked about — you see California’s robbery rate is consistently much higher than Texas’, which is at least 20 more robberies per 100,000 people.”

          Suck on that, dacian.

    • I live in CA. Stick that lie up your ass, dacian. Even the dummies in Berkeley are beginning to see the truth. Everybody, and I mean everybody, is buying a gun.

      I will continue to call you out on your delusions, dacian. But I hope you and miner stay here commenting. I use your ‘naked apes’ comments especially amongst the younger Berkeley set to start them thinking. And once they start thinking it benefits freedom.

      Thank you for your help in making removing gun control a possibility, dacian.

      • Jethro you are a laugh a minute. You left Ohio where gun laws just barely exist and moved to Socialist California that has many gun laws.

        And do not give me the sob story that there were no Jobs in Ohio. Most of my friends during that time period went back to either trade school or college. You also had the benefit of the G.I. Bill that would have paid for your education but you chose to just get a labors job.

        • I never left Ohio. I left WV. As I’ve told you before I just have a ged. But I did use my GI bill. Ever hear of MU?

          How is it that I have a house paid for in CA. Paid cash for my cars. And am debt free? While you still live at home with your mother?

          Maybe you should get a job. Any job. Get off the dole. You might actually find a life.

        • P.S. Thanks to Bruen and morons like you even CA will have good gun laws before too long. Win, win for me. Nice upper class life and good weather and many things to do.

        • jethro — Marshall University?

          This misplaced Mountaineer says hello, and thank you for your service.

    • Hey lil’dtard.
      You may want to change your username to ‘Everything in My Comment is Incorrect’. 🤪

      But keep the Avatar, it fits a moron like you to a tee. 👍

    • The proposed law does not in any way shape or form apply to criminals, only to those lawfully licensed to carry a concealed firearm. IN the last fifteen years under the current law, only 3 licensed individuals have been involved in a potentially criminal homicide–and those three do not even necessarily include the use of a concealed firearm. Why then is is suddenly necessary to allow individuals to obtain CCWs (at a greatly increased expense and with twice the mandated training) but ban them from carrying virtually anywhere in the state other than on one’s own property or in areas where hunting is allowed? I will tell you why: it is California’s (and NY’s and NJ’s) thumbing their collective noses at the U.S. Supreme Court’s Bruen decision. In other words, it is purely political, as there is no data remotely suggesting that licensed individuals present a substantial risk of harm to the public. To rephrase a famous Twain quip, “there are liars, damn liars,and politicians.”

  4. “If you are being robbed, do not resist the robbery suspects; cooperate and comply with their demands. Be a good witness,’ they said in a press release.”

    Dangerous, plain dangerous. Has not been even partially true in close to 50 years. Various studies supporting the concept have all been debunked by independent research and even by the DOJ.

    Kleck’s study on the matter is the only study that has been validated by independent researchers, and its also used by the DOJ. According to Kleck’s “Point Blank: Guns and Violence in America” – the leading authority on the subject of compliance and referenced/used by the DOJ:

    1. Any form of resistance, except with firearm, carries with it an injury rate of 52%.

    2. Resistance with a firearm carried with it the risk of injury of 17%, but use of a firearm early in an encounter carries with it a risk of injury of 6%.

    Overall, in Kleck, you have a minimum of a 25% chance of being injured if you comply, but you are 4 time less likely to be injured if you have your firearm and are prepared to use it.

    Take away here summary: compliance may still result in injury (which includes death), resistance without a firearm carries a 52% chance of injury (which includes death), resistance with a firearm lowers chance of injury (which includes death) to 17%, resistance with a firearm early in the encounter further lowers risk of injury (which includes death) to 6%

    If you are armed are you willing to gamble that you are not in the 25%?
    if you are not armed are you willing to gamble that you are not in the 52%?

    Compliance or not, resistance or not – is not a decision one needs to make. The answer is already provided, non-compliance via firearms resistance offers the best chance of less injury. But if you want, you can roll the dice and take the chance of being a good-n-dead witness.


    compliance is a form of resistance. One criminals frequently exploit to gain adherence to their will without effort, sometimes they even promise they will not hurt you if you comply. But the facts show otherwise, that complying people are harmed or killed while complying. Over the last two years over 80% of unarmed victims that complied were seriously harmed, some killed, by the criminal even though the victim complied fully with demands.

    Here are a few examples of what compliance can get you…

    examples of what compliance gets you

    Compliance is a myth mostly. Sure, there are cases where it works but the decision is not up to you – its 100% up to the criminal and they do not give guarantees. Today’s breed of criminal also uses the motto ‘ya gotta hurt the victim’, they realize that inflicting injury and terror quickly is the best way to subdue a victim and that’s what they do.

    dacin is going to post all his bogus studies from chicago and the sort. Its a lie, don’t believe it.

    Even if a bad guy with a gun does not want to hurt you they are still likely to do so even if you complied and there is a reason for that. The reason is this – its called an ‘sympathetic response’ to a high stress situation.

    Its a response a person does not control thus ‘involuntary’. More correctly, in its physical manifestation, its called ‘inter-limb interaction’ which is the simultaneous movement of the opposite fingers or fingers or hand during and in response to ‘high stress events’ (such as, for example, self defense or being shot, or when tense due to the circumstances and adrenaline).

    Its more likely for every second the bad guy has that gun pointed at the victim they will pull the trigger anyway due to an ‘involuntary trigger squeeze’ (or intentionally) even if there is no defender there pointing a gun at them.

    People think a robber (criminal) just waltzes in and conducts the robbery (crime), the victim complies, and the robber (criminal) doesn’t harm the victim because they complied, and then the robber (criminal) leaves. Well, yeah that does happen sometimes but its not true overall and it never has actually been true that compliance means no harm to the victim. The danger is still there even if a person complies. Aside from the changes in ‘criminal behavior’ of the past to the more modern day ‘gang affiliated’ criminals with an overall motto of ‘ya gotta hurt the victim’, the reason is the criminal is also experiencing the primal ‘fight or flight’ (AKA ‘stress response’) response adrenaline flooding their body that a self-defender has but the difference is the criminal has their gun or weapon pointed at the victim (or has another type of weapon to bring to bear). Its happening to the robber even though they may appear ‘calm’. That adrenaline flooding the body makes them ‘twitchy’ and causes a sort of feeling like their muscles may move on their own and that feeling is for a reason because the body is right on the very edge of moving on its own if they lose track of their body state. So when they start moving around during their crime or focusing on the victim and/or the prize they lose track of their body state because their sympathetic nervous system has taken over automatically and suppressed (somewhat) their parasympathetic nervous system. This results in a higher chance of an ‘involuntary trigger squeeze’ by the bad guy with their gun pointed at the victim (or use of another weapon), and its not just guns either as the criminal is also prone to have a ‘sympathetic response’ with any weapon they may have (e.g. knife, blunt object, hands-feet etc…).

    The body autonomic nervous system has two components, the sympathetic nervous system and the parasympathetic nervous system. The sympathetic nervous system is what triggers the fight-or-flight response and puts the body in overdrive. The parasympathetic nervous system acts like a ‘slow down’ system that invokes a “rest and digest” response that calms the body down. Normally, without a ‘stress event’ these two systems work in unison to balance each other out (in a person in which the systems are working properly) but with the parasympathetic nervous system in more control and basically suppressing the sympathetic nervous system except for the awareness of the need for fight-or-flight response, but the parasympathetic nervous system is also what makes a person aware of their body status. Because the sympathetic nervous system has taken over its also called a ‘sympathetic response’.

    Yes dacian is probably going to come in here with his bogus ‘chicago’ study and this or that other bogus study, ranting about how if one complies they will not be harmed – its a lie. Complying victims are more likely to be harmed simply because of the ‘sympathetic response’ and also within the last 20 years its increased that they are more likely to be harmed intentionally even if you try to comply. What his studies are pointing out is ‘intentional’ not ‘sympathetic response’ which they left out on purpose to keep their numbers artificially lower to substantiate their claims that ‘comply’ will offer the best chance.

  5. Well damn here I thought NY would be most of the defining cases for how stupid laws can get and how they are unconstitutional now. Looks like everyone in the 9th will be entering the race to who gets precedent first on the CCIA analogue derby.

  6. @Nordneg,
    Kalicitizens do not vote in elections.
    To be fair, software algorithms in Chinese-built Berkeley-Engineered voting machines process votes in our stead.
    Mail-In Ballots are designed so that sensitive (Lib vs Conservative) questions peek through intentional gaps in envelope privacy inking to allow computerized rejection of “Non-Conforming” subjects of Queen Gavin. Without so much as opening the envelope. Please consider how WE feel about that! Van loads of “late, we just found them!” ballots are allowed to swamp our choices.
    Citizens don’t write those algorithms and we never vote the way those alleged “votes” come streaming in to the election reporting shows. Never.
    Many thousands of grinning enlightened New Age pot headed Mao worshipping fools vote that way.
    But not us.
    We live here, but have no voice.

    • 05Banana,

      Even if the details which you listed about voting fraud are not true, they could easily–very easily–become true by the next election cycle.

      We need an entirely new voting system which is impossible to defraud to any significant extent. And my quick thought is that such a system cannot use any electronic devices at any stage of the vote collection, tabulation, and counting.

      • Every ballot envelope should have a bar code coinciding to the named addressee. Once that is confirmed the envelope is disposed of and the ballot counted. If the envelope shows that the addressee is deceased or out of state the whole thing is quarantined until verification. I don’t have the answers but I think this may be a good start.

  7. Newsome…who’s he????? You mean…that faux POS, punk ass bitch, who thinks he’s the Governor of CA…demand a complete forensic audit of his so called “Recall Election” results, you just might find out the TRUTH…..Tar and Feather his ass for all his indiscretions he’s committed against the GOOD PEOPLE of CA…..or contact Hillary for ideas, she’s well versed at getting rid of undesirables in her life….LoL….flush that 4 eyed MoFo today!!!!

  8. Gov. Gavin Newsom might be pining for a chance at the country’s highest political office, but he needs a refresher on Civics 101.

    Wrong. Most of the Ruling Class does not care about Civics, Constitutions, nor laws. They simply want what they want and pursue it. Period. Want proof? Look no further than the two bold-font words in the next sentence in this article:

    [Newsom’s] message to law-abiding Californians and the judge whose recent rulings struck down his previous gun control laws was clear: Shove it.

    Scumbags who are more than willing to violate our basic human dignity and rights come in all stripes, from the two-bit neighborhood thug all the way up to highest political office, which of course includes Governors of states such as Newsom.

    When a rapist declares his intent to rape a women, what should that woman do to effectively defend herself? Should she begin a lecture on Common Law and state statutes which define rape to be illegal? Or should she deploy the minimum amount of physical force necessary to physically stop the rapist? The correct answer is obvious.

    Why should we treat government employees who declare their intent to violate our basic human dignity and rights any different than rapists?

Comments are closed.