“A surge in gun sales and a reduction in funding for the [California gun confiscation] program has stymied efforts by the state Department of Justice to eliminate a backlog of people in California who have firearms and shouldn’t,” latimes.com reports. “Approximately 10,226 people remain on a list of Californians who legally purchased guns but were later disqualified from possessing them.” Here’s the thing . . .
California cops can’t just show up at a prohibited person’s premises and search for a firearm. As you’d hope in a constitutional republic, DOJ LEOs have to convince a judge that they have probable cause to believe the prohibited person still has a firearm. They have to get a warrant.
As you can imagine, the cops are not going to get 10,226 warrants, if only because they couldn’t. So they show up — in force — and “ask” for permission to search. You can imagine the
threats and coercion persuasive skills involved.
That’s how it was. Now . . .
A change in state law on Jan. 1 is expected to help the state put a big dent in the backlog.
A provision of Proposition 63 requires people convicted of certain crimes to provide proof that they sold or transferred their firearms before the court finalizes their sentence. Failure to comply could affect the case and result in the court sending officers to recover the firearms.
Getting a search warrant will now be a rubber stamp deal. Leading to more aggressive recovery efforts. Leading to . . .
Are you OK with this?
OK with the idea of a prohibited person in general, or specific (e.g., a citizen convicted of a violent felony)? OK with prohibited persons having to prove that they’ve complied with their firearms prohibition? OK with cops showing up to “ask” for their gun(s)?