Gun Show
AP Photo/Lynne Sladky
Previous Post
Next Post

Part of the post-Bruen anti-gun furies that were unleashed in California was a new law that did what the state had been threatening to do for years. Senate Bill 264, signed into law by the state’s Carnival Barker-in-Chief, Gavin Newsom, banned gun shows on all public property.

That means long-standing shows held at venues like the Orange County Fair and Events Center and the Del Mar Fairgrounds north of San Diego will have to find other private venues or die. It’s all part of Sacramento’s never-ending (not to mention unconstitutional) efforts to squeeze lawful gun ownership out of existence in the Golden State.

The Second Amendment Foundation, however, has filed suit to overturn the new law. Here’s their press release . . .

The Second Amendment Foundation has filed a federal lawsuit challenging California’s Senate Bill 264, a ban on gun shows held on public property that was passed and signed into law by Governor Gavin Newsom.

Joining SAF are the California Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. B&L Productions, Inc., d/b/a Crossroads of the West; Gerald Clark; Eric Johnson; Chad Littrell; Jan Steven Merson; Inc; Asian Pacific American Gun Owners Association; and the Second Amendment Law Center, Inc. The case is known as B&L Productions v. Newsom.

SAF is represented by noted civil rights attorney Donald Kilmer, who successfully represented SAF in overturning the ban on gun shows at the Del Mar Fairgrounds in San Diego County, where the defendants were ordered to pay plaintiffs close to half-million dollars in combined damages and attorney fees

Named as defendants in this case are California Gov. Gavin Newsom in his official capacity as Governor of the State of California, Attorney General Robert Bonta in his official capacity as Attorney General of the State of California, Karen Ross, in her official capacity as Secretary of California Department of Food & Agriculture, and Todd Spitzer, in his personal and official capacity as District Attorney of Orange County. The 55-page federal complaint was filed in U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.

“The state has been regulating gun show operations almost out of existence, and more restrictive than brick-and-mortar retail gun shops or even internet sales,” explained SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb, “Now the California Senate Bill 256 ban amounts to a total deprivation of rights under the color of law, including the First Amendment rights of free speech and freedom of assembly, and the 14th Amendment’s equal protection under the law.

“This lawsuit follows our successful action against the Del Mar Fairgrounds,” he added, “but the regulatory ban regime now in place in California applies to any gun show on public property, anywhere in the state. What is alarming to us is that Crossroads of the West has followed the rules, and so have vendors at their gun shows. Yet, the state is prohibiting constitutionally protected activities that are common all over the country, and are already highly regulated.

“Like it or not,” Gottlieb observed, “gun shows are public forums where like-minded people can meet and discuss various issues, engage in firearm sales and purchases, learn about gun safety and enjoy the camaraderie inherent at such events. Obviously, the defendants don’t like that, but they simply cannot violate constitutional rights to satisfy a personal disdain.”

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. Peel back the layers and see the same sleazy tactics Jim Crow Gun Control democRats used to deny Black Americans their 2A Right. By all accounts you Gun Owners out there in America are just another n-word to today’s despicable democRat Party. What Filth.

    • Won’t matter much. Unless they are held -personally- responsible, meaning their wallets take the hit, they will just freely spend their slaves money.

        • “Collor of Law” case. Let’s see how that goes, if indeed it is the core basis for the law suit.

          Californication is the heart and home of the 9th Circuit. Even if successful, the 9th will declare that only the prohibition will be reversed; personal fines and jail time will be dismissed.

  2. No buying and selling of firearms and munitions on public property because the state believes public property is actually the private property of the state. Since public land owned by the state or by a municipality is managed and cared for by that state or municipality that actually makes the land the private property of the government entity. Private property rights trump the 2A, so the government can forbid the legal commerce of gun shows because it is their property and not the people’s property. If that ain’t a bunch of twisted, sick, and spiteful thinking, then ducks hunt elephants and diesel trucks run on bananas.

    • California’s upcoming AB918 (severe restrictions on CCW permit holders) is sponsored by Newsom and has passed out of committee to be sent to the Legislature for procedural vote. if (cough cough) I mean when it passes, it’ll be fast-tracked to Newsom’s desk for signature and will go into effect immediately due to the inclusion of an “emergency” clause (as compared to waiting the customary six months after signing).

      This bill is mimicking NY’s own action of naming nearly all public places as “sensitive” in response to Bruen. A major problem with AB918 is the inclusion of public areas such as parks, playgrounds, etc. These are public lands maintained by taxpayers. In other words, CA is encouraging the taking our money via taxation for a public use, then telling us we may not exercise our constitutional (and yes, Natural) right on that land. And as some here may recall me saying several times before, CA’s State Constitution, Article 3, Section 1 consists of only a single sentence that explicitly declares CA honors the USC as the “Supreme Law of the Land” and is subservient to it. And yet this claptrap is being passed into law by the Dems in their ignorant zeal.

      It will be knocked down in court and declared unconstitutional, as nearly every gunn control law here over the past dozen years has been. But it’ll be yet another ordeal to get it done.

    • Um, where’s my lengthy comment I posted here several hours ago? This is getting ridiculous. Half my comments today were held for moderation, and the most important one is gone. Yesterday was the same.

      As one who has visited TTAG regularly for several years, this site has fallen over the past few months from being the first I visit on my daily list, to the very last, almost entirely for this reason, and I’m thinking it may be a good idea to take a break from the frustration for a short while. This comments section has evolved into something that’s just downright frustrating.

  3. Legal recreational marijuana intoxication, and legal sex liberation, has made many slaves comfortable in California.

  4. Hard to believe that there are no private venues in CA available where gun shows couldn’t be held. Would be poking Newsom in the eye. Notwithstanding that, this lawsuit is certainly appropriate as a challenge to the law. Here in Virginia all gun shows I have seen are held on private property.

  5. Guess the gun manufacturers should stop selling firearms to law enforcement. It’s public property afterall. Good luck with the crime wave Newscum.

    • “Guess the gun manufacturers should stop selling firearms to law enforcement.”


      Already happening with Barrett :

      “A valid department purchase order and tax exempt forms are required for all Law Enforcement rifle and suppressor orders. All Law Enforcement orders must be shipped directly to a department. Barrett will not sell to or service any California, New York or New Jersey government agencies.”

  6. It is a miracle that citizens of CA. have put up with Newscum, even keeping him through a recall vote. Too many RECTAL ORIFICES in that crumby state.

  7. “Obviously, the defendants don’t like that, but they simply cannot violate constitutional rights to satisfy a personal disdain.”

    It’s not simple disdain, it’s outright contempt.

    If that case falls into St. Benitez’s lap, he should have fun slapping it down with prejudice…

    • Should be hilarious watching the 9th Circus, when it gets there, trying to wiggle their way around trying to minimize damage, knowing how the USC is going to bash their skulls in if they kick the can down the road.

      Popcorn, by the truckload.

      But, being held personally accountable for the violation thereof would be a boon, and likely the only thing that would compel a cessation (outside of looming violencia). Barring that, I’m good with giving them a Mussolini, or Pinochet style ending by WtP should the DeeCee nanny fail to act in protecting the interest of the People of whom it is supposed to serve.

      I am through talking with these mealy mouth slimey shtbags.

Comments are closed.