The California Senate passes a draconian gun bill, which, according to the Firearms Policy Coalition, will effectively bans all semi-automatic firearms, and requires registration of those remaining. No more bullet buttons, no more anything. No state that’s ever managed to pass a certain number of gun laws has ever done anything except get worse. Once they have broken gun owners as a voting bloc, they’ll do what they please, when they please to us. Colorado is starting to tip, but it is not too late for Colorado. The rest of the states are either going to be saved by the courts, or by federal preemption. For approximately 1/3rd of the US population, they effectively don’t have a Second Amendment right.
22 thoughts on “California Moves to Ban all Semi-Autos with Detachable Magazines”
Comments are closed.
Lets see if Jerry Brown signs it… He has done more controversial things in his past, even recently.
I don’t see why he wouldn’t. He is no friend of the gun community.
He is a better friend than people assume because they assume any D is an anti. He vetoed other bills last year and signed into law a bill that was actually a strategic plus for gun rights advocates. He also owns guns. He may not be a hardcore AR owning gun owner, but just being a gun owner means he knows that most of this is BS. Given his wealth, he may even own a shotgun banned under the new rules.
Hey, he has to protect his stash.
I doubt it matters. The democrats are getting there marching orders from Bloomberg and Biden will be sure to call him to ask him to sign it (by threatening him) and while it does not pass constitutional muster how many years would it take for the courts to hear it?
No, Gov. Moonbeam is not a strict friend of the 2nd Amendment. He vetoes the most innocuous anti-gun measures but signs or allows to pass the most egregious anti-gun measures. There are 55 anti-gun bills that are passing in CA now. How many will he let pass? If he stays true to form, most!
I attended a firearms legal presentation this past weekend. The attorney presenting the info mentioned as an aside that nearly all the bad legislation nationwide is coming out of one law office with in part Bloomberg financing:
The Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence,
268 Bush Street #555
San Francisco, CA 94104.
This is the nexus of all bad gun laws coming our way and enemy of every law-abiding firearms owner in the country.
Their website for a puking good time is http://smartgunlaws.org/about-gun-laws/
The Supreme Court challenge will be fun, if that becomes law.
That will be very difficult to reconcile with Heller…
Heller hangs by a thread. The Democrat-appointed SC Justices vote in lockstep with the Democrat agenda, as predictably as the sun rises in the east. Only Republican-appointed Justices are ever ambiguous about which way they will vote. So all the left needs is for one of the five justices in the Heller majority to leave, and the Second Amendment is a dead letter. The Constitution is no protection against anything.
By my reading it doesn’t ban *all* semi-auto rifles.
Interestingly enough, it wouldn’t ban the M1 Garand because, while semi-auto, it has a fixed magazine capable of holding no more than 10 rounds.
So the actual military rifle is fine.
But my Marlin Model 60 gets banned as an assault weapon.
Isn’t the M1 banned by name?
No, it’s not. Also a standard SKS is still good, but the Ruger 10/22 is “designed to kill the maximum amount of people in the shortest amount of time”.
I think that’s the M1 Carbine, not the M1 rifle (Garand).
Which reminds me – in the Memorial Day parade in my town, not only was there a drill team with M1s shooting blanks off from time to time (and lending them for photo ops after the parade was done), but a couple of the Vietnam Veterans Association folks marching had (what were presumably) AR-15 knockoffs kitted to look like early M-16s slung. I couldn’t see if the magazines were seated.
Read the bill text, your Garand, anyone’s SKS, my Remington 241 take-down .22 that loads through the stock…all will be classified as AW’s next year. Does that sound too bad? Go and look at what it takes to register your Garand or my multiple .22’s as AW’s, the cost, and the restrictions and that you can never sell, will, loan or do anything with it except for a few strictly defined actions or you will be a felon. And that is the point, to make you a felon in California makes you a felon in any other state, losing your right to vote, limited 4th and no 2nd Amendment rights.
Then Steinberg the bills author, will extend this to pistols next year. The bill is already written. Darrell Steinberg senator pro-tem of CA has been quoted that he wants all gun owners to leave California. he thinks only Republicans are gun owners. He of course is wrong but by his actions he may get his way. On the other hand there will be a lot of stalwart Republicans ejected from Kalifornia who will fight harder in their new state to stop creeping incremental authoritarianism masked as Progressive Rights.
Peruta could help upset the anti’s apple cart in Cali. If the folks in LA/San Fran/etc, the real population centers, can actually get permits and begin to, they are less likely to be apathetic about having their choice of pistols restricted.
Having practical “Bear” recognized as part of the RKBA will backstop IL’s ruling as well.
I would think this goes against the ‘common use’ clause in Heller since it would ban an entire firearm action and make entire classes of weapons illegal.
But then again if these people had the chance to kill 90 million of us gun owners they hate us that much and would do it. So this is par for the course but they would of liked total confiscation and the killing of those who refuse publicly without trial.
What do you think happens after mandatory registration?
New York already has the stasi-style snitch line up. In a few years (or less) we’ll start seeing paramilitary SWAT raids. They won’t give a shit if there’s “collateral damage,” just so long as the officers go home safely. :-\
Exactly. Except in the world they want there wouldn’t be trials, due process and for people owning guns the right to live.
“I would think this goes against the ‘common use’ clause in Heller…”
My thoughts exactly; Personally, I can’t see most “assault weapon” bans passing that test, nor magazine capacity bans.
“In a few years (or less) we’ll start seeing paramilitary SWAT raids.”
We of course have them already, just for other “crimes.” But here in PA, it must have been more than a decade ago that we had a paramilitary SWAT raid on a mere gun owner, because he had overslept and his coworkers had been worried about his mental health, following a divorce. When they unwisely called authorities to report their concerns, and said he owned guns, the cops launched a full-blown SWAT raid on his home. Fortunately he was sacked out in bed, so they had no reason to start shooting, but they did confiscate his guns. The story had a happy ending, he got his guns back after a big court case, plus an undisclosed cash settlement, but the point of the story is, the first SWAT raid on the first innocent gun owner, for being a gun owner, is already yesterday’s news.
It is also worth noting that they are working bans from both ends. This bill bans detachable magazines while Yee’s “bullet button” bill redefines the definition of fixed magazine and bans guns formerly defined as not being detachable.
Here is a partial list:
•$50 fee PER YEAR for a new Photo I.D. Ammunition Permit (SB 53)
•TOTAL BAN on mail order and internet sales of ammunition (SB 53)
•A new, additional 10% additional “tax” on ammunition (AB 187 –
•A NEW fee of 5-cent per loaded round or individual component (AB 760
•A new Ammunition registration scheme with bound books (AB 48 –
•A new, additional fee-based “permit’ requirement on all previously registered Assault weapons and .50 BMG rifles (AB 170)
•MANDATORY “Gun Liability” Insurance required on all new & existing firearms, even if no insurance company offers such coverage, which could prohibit ALL OWNERSHIP! (AB 231)
•The outright banning and confiscation of all existing 10+ round magazines ( No grandfathering if assembled or in parts; parts are a crime too.)
•NEW, mandatory registration of all semi-automatic rifles with 10 round or less magazines including tube magazines in both rimfire and centerfire calibers, bans future sales and transfer; yes, you will be CRIMINALIZED FOR gifting these firearms to relatives. (SB 374)
•A complete ban on all “private party” transfers of non-roster handguns; even to relatives. (AB 169)
•Allows specific cities (read that as anti-gun cities) to circumvent state preemption of firearms laws, intentionally creating a confusing matrix of conflicting laws to entrap law abiding gun owners (AB 180) & SB 475)
•Greater restrictions on loaded firearms IN YOUR HOME with criminal penalties (AB 231)
•Extend waiting period for 10 days to 15 days (AB 500)
•Creates additional notification requirements to State DOJ when firearm is picked up
•Completely bans all lead ammunition used in hunting or anywhere that Condors may fly (AB 711)
•Completely bans public retirement systems from investments in firearms and ammunition companies (AB 761)
•A new 10-day “warning letter†with threats of prosecution by State DOJ (AB 1020)
•Creates new hunting and trapping restrictions (AB 1213)
•Bans all centerfire semi-auto firearms equipped with bullet buttons (AB 47)
•A new mandatory firearms storage requirements in their residence with extensive criminal penalties (SB 108) & (SB 363)
•Requires the diversion of background check fees (DROS) for other non-firearm related uses, which sets the stage for big DROS fee increases. (SB 140) & (AB 1020 – still in Committee)
•Mandatory owner recognition technology equipped to all new handguns that could cost $20,000. per gun. All older guns without the technology will be banned. (SB 293)
•Mandatory 48-hour notice to police if your firearm is stolen or lost regardless of when you actually know of the loss with stiff criminal penalties. (SB 299)
•A new ban all magazines all existing10+ rounds magazines (no grandfathering) (SB 396)
•Redefine the current definition of a shotgun (SB 567)
•Greatly expands the requirement for a mandatory “firearms safety certificate†(SB 683)
•Expands the list of misdemeanor convictions prohibiting firearms possession (SB 755)