Tag: AW ban

(Now there’s the least surprising headline I’ve ever written!)

At the risk of sounding like I’m on #TeamKatie over this whole #GunGate thing, the perky one isn’t alone when it comes to creative editing. HBO Sports recently distorted the words of Jim Sullivan with regard to the lethality of the 5.56NATO family of cartridges and the AR-15 family of modern sporting rifles. Sullivan, who was on Eugene Stoner’s design team at Armalite 57 years ago, wrote about his disappointing encounter with the anti-gun wingnuts at HBO:

The anti-gun HBO sports interview misrepresented much of what I had said. They were apparently trying to make the AR-15 civilian model seem too dangerous for civilian sales. They didn’t lie about what I said, they just omitted key parts, which changed the meaning.

Specifically, HBO deleted Sullivan’s comments that delineated between the fully automatic M-16 and the semiautomatic AR-15. This was done to make the AR-15 seem “just as deadly” as the M-16. It’s not. Fully automatic firearms are always more lethal than their semiautomatic versions. HBO also deleted his comments about the differences between hunting ammunition, which expands on impact, and the 5.56NATO projectile that tumbles on impact. Expanding ammunition is always more lethal; a distinction that HBO decided to omit from Sullivan’s comments.

But 5.56 can’t complete with hunting cartridge bullets, which can legally [per the Hague Convention] be expanding hollow point that are more lethal than tumbling. Their lethality is based entirely on how powerful they are. 5.56 is only half as powerful as the 7.62 NATO (.308) hunting bullet. That doesn’t mean I’m not pleased to see AR-15s sell on the civilian market. It just means I didn’t realize they would 57 years ago. And I’m not on the wrong side of any gun issue unless someone wants to argue that an infantry rifle cartridge should kill a cavalry horse at 1,000 yards (30-06 criteria).

Funny how HBO has no problem with 11-year olds stabbing one another to death so long as they’re in costume, but they do have a problem with you owning a modern rifle.

News

From NRA-ILA:


FRIDAY, APRIL 29, 2016

Hillary Clinton to Attack Gun Owners Her “Very First Day” in Office

In what has become as reliable as clockwork, with the passing of another week comes another Hillary Clinton attack on gun owners. This time, the frontrunner for the Democratic presidential nomination explained to supporters her intent to make an assault on gun rights and NRA one of her top priorities. A video of her comments has been distributed by Breitbart.com and can be viewed by clicking here.

Addressing an April 25 MSNBC “townhall” hosted by left-wing commentator Rachel Maddow, Clinton stated,

I really support everything President Obama said he would do through regulation on guns but we’re going to start the very first day and tackle the gun lobby to try to reduce the outrageous number of people who are dying from gun violence in our country.

Later, the candidate spoke of her party’s chances of taking control of the Senate, stating,

The Democrats have decided they will be led by Chuck Schumer and Chuck Schumer has been one of the most effective legislators in taking on the gun lobby. He and I worked together to get the Brady bill passed way back in my husband’s administration. So I think that it’s the kind of issue you have to start early, you have to work on it every day and we need to make it a voting issue.

A visibly agitated Clinton concluded her remarks on the subject by noting,

I’m going to keep talking about it, and we are going to make it clear that this has to be a voting issue. If you care about this issue, vote against people who give in to the NRA and the gun lobby all the time.

These comments make clear that gun owners and NRA would be in Clinton’s crosshairs from the moment she assumes office. And thanks to Clinton’s recent candor, gun owners don’t have to guess at the types of restrictions Clinton has in mind for them. Clinton has supported a ban on popular semi-automatic firearms and endorsed an Australian-style confiscation scheme for carrying out her vision. Clinton has expressed her vehement opposition to the Right-to-Carry. Most disturbing, under Clinton’s false interpretation of the Constitution, the Second Amendment does not protect and individual right to keep and bear arms and allows gun bans.

Somewhat of a political pragmatist, Barack Obama waited until he secured a second term before launching most of his efforts to restrict firearm ownership. Hillary Clinton is continually making clear that under her reign gun owners would receive no such reprieve.

This is why NRA members, along with their families and friends, must get involved in our efforts to secure a victory for gun owners this fall. At the bare minimum, gun owners must ensure that they and their loved ones are registered to vote. For those that can contribute more to our fight for freedom, NRA-ILA’s Grassroots Division can connect you with volunteer opportunities anywhere in the country, and NRA has made it easier than ever to participate in our efforts. To register to vote or explore further opportunities to help, please visit NRA-ILA’s Election Center at https://www.nraila.org/about/election-center/.

News Politics

From NRA-ILA:


THURSDAY, MAY 26, 2016

California: Anti-Gun Bills Sent to Assembly Suspense File Scheduled to be Heard Tomorrow, May 27

Tomorrow, May 27, the state Assembly Committee on Appropriations is scheduled to hear all the bills sent to the suspense file.  There are five anti-gun bills that greatly impact gun owners, sportsmen, and Second Amendment supporters.  Email members of the Appropriations Committee by clicking the TAKE ACTION button below and urge them to OPPOSE AB 1663, AB 1664, AB 1673, AB 1674, and AB 1695.

Assembly Bill 1663 and Assembly Bill 1664 are similar and would reclassify hundreds of thousands of legally owned semi-automatic rifles as “assault weapons.”   These are constitutionally protected firearms that have no association with crime.  The changes would happen quickly at the expense of gun owners and without public notice.  Governor Brown vetoed similar legislation in 2013 and the California State Sheriffs’ Association has opposed both of these egregious bills.

Assembly Bill 1673 would expand the definition of “firearm” to include unfinished frames and/or receivers that can be readily convertible.  Depending on how this vague terminology is interpreted, AB 1673 could essentially treat pieces of metal as firearms, subjecting them to California’s exhaustive regulations and restrictions currently applicable to firearms.

Assembly Bill 1674 would expand the current restriction on the number of firearms an individual can purchase within a 30 day period.  Currently the “one gun a month” rule only applies to dealer sales of handguns. This legislation is a misguided attempt to expand the current one handgun per month limitation to long guns.   Rather than targeting criminals, this legislation will have severe consequences for firearm collectors, competition shooters, museums, and various charitable organizations.   AB 1674 will have no impact on criminal access to firearms and instead significantly hamper law abiding individuals, causing increased costs, time and paperwork to purchase multiple firearms. Californian’s are already required to make two trips to a dealer to purchase a single firearm. For an individual who is purchasing firearms for one of the many popular shooting sports such as Cowboy Action Shooting or Three Gun, this would mean at least six trips to a dealer, three separate sets of paper work, fees and background checks all spanned out over a three month period. Criminals will continue to ignore this law purchasing firearms illegally, ignoring this burdensome and ineffective restriction.

Assembly Bill 1695 would require the Attorney General to send notice to each individual who has applied to purchase a firearm informing him or her of laws relating to firearms, gun trafficking, and safe storage. This legislation also allows the Department of Justice to use funds in the Firearms Safety and Enforcement Special Fund for this purpose.  Requiring the Attorney General to send gun law pamphlets to law-abiding gun owners will do nothing to stop the criminal misuse of firearms, because the individuals who are committing firearm-related crimes are likely not receiving the gun law pamphlets.  This is just another example of government waste and abuse of gun owners. The monies paid into this fund are intended to fund the background check system in California. Because the fees paid to run these checks exceed the cost necessary to execute them, legislators in Sacramento continue to look for ways to justify the expenses by wasting resources on “feel good” programs.

Don’t forget to forward this alert to your family, friends, and fellow gun owners and sportsmen urging them to also contact the committee and urge them to OPPOSE the above anti-gun bills.

AB 1663 AB 1664 AB 1673 AB 1674 AB 1695 Anti-gun Legislation State

There’s two distinct ends to the dining spectrum when it comes to choosing what’s for dinner. There’s cafeteria style, where you pick and choose what you want. And then there’s homestyle. And by homestyle, I mean real homestyle; where Mom puts something on your plate and that’s what’s for dinner. There’s no picking and choosing with Mom.

When it comes to protecting civil rights, deciding which rights to protect is supposed to be a homestyle affair; no picking and choosing. And yet, California politicians seem to think that our rights ought to be served up a la carte, but with them picking and choosing which rights are important and which are not. As Dan Walters points out, this becomes a grave threat to civil liberties…

Those who, by word and deed, are out of sync with California’s deeply blue political ethos risk social ostracism.

Increasingly, however, the state’s dominant politicians want to subject dissenters to discrimination and legal harassment – even infringement of constitutional rights.

Smoke a cigarette, own a gun, cut a tree, pan for gold, question the “inconvenient truth” of human-caused global warming, utter an impolite joke or even drive a gasoline-powered car and you may run afoul of an ever-tightening web of laws and rules that punish your heresy – promulgated by political figures who talk constantly about their respect for civil rights.

What happened Thursday in the state Senate typifies the newfangled intolerance. It passed, largely along party lines, 11 new gun control bills whose sponsors, including Senate President Pro Tem Kevin de León, promised they would reduce “gun violence.

Walters, who’s largely supported California’s gun control laws in the past, could not help but notice that Senate Democrats could not offer up “a scintilla of objective evidence” that their newest gun laws would do anything to make Californians safer. In fact, these laws are little more than attempts by a few puffed up politicians to position themselves for higher political office.

But it isn’t just the civil liberties of gun owners being threatened by the CA Senate. The Judiciary Committee approved SB 1161, the “California Climate Science Truth and Accountability Act of 2016”. This would give California prosecutors the authority to bring heresy charges sue corporations who deny the Gospel of St. Algore question anthropogenic global warming. Whether these corporations are right or wrong to do so is beside the point. A corporation is a collective formed by its shareholders. This collective has as much of a right to free speech as any of the individuals do. Burning them at the stake Suing them for unpopular views is a violation of the 1st Amendment. Prosecutors are supposed to be protectors of civil liberties. The last thing the Legislature should be doing is to remold them into a new Spanish Inquisition to hunt down Jews AGW heretics.

The NRA calls the 2nd Amendment “America’s 1st Freedom” for a reason. Our ability to, if necessary, violently put down tyranny is what protects our other liberties. Without the 2nd Amendment, without the threat of armed resistance, the rest of the Bill of Rights is nothing more than a piece of sheepskin with some words on it. It’s been over 200 years since the American People put this 1st Freedom to its intended use and thus it’s become somewhat abstract to most Americans. The CA Senate’s actions this past week are a reminder to us that Freedom’s enemies never sleep and neither can we.

Anti-gun Legislation News Politics State

From CRPA:


Dear Leader

Today, the California State Senate again decided that protecting criminals is more important than defending your Second Amendment rights. The good news is, they have not yet become law!

Ten out of the eleven bills that were approved today will take us one step closer to losing our ability to protect ourselves and our families. Many of these bills will turn thousands of law-abiding citizens into criminals, through the stroke of a pen, because of the new regulations and restrictions that were passed out of the Senate.

While for the most part, these bills were approved by a party line vote, there were many instances of bi-partisanship opposition to the legislation, with Democrats such as Richard Roth (D-Riverside) and Cathleen Galgiani (D-Manteca) voting to preserve your right to keep and bear arms.

In addition to bi-partisan opposition, several brave representatives spoke out to defend the rights of California’s gun owners. Senators Jeff Stone (R-Temecula), Jim Nielsen (R – Gerber), Ted Gaines (R–Rocklin), Senator Mike Morrell (R- Rancho Cucamonga), Senator Jean Fuller ( R-Bakersfield), Senator Andy Vidak ( R-Bakersfield) and Senator John Moorlach (R-Costa Mesa) spoke to promote the rights of Californians protected by the Second Amendment. We appreciate their vocal opposition to the anti-gun bills that were brought to the floor. CRPA sincerely appreciates their efforts and would like to encourage you to call the aforementioned Senators and thank them for their courage. You can find their information by clicking here.

Below you will find a complete list of who voted for and against each anti-firearm bill:
SB 880 (Hall)

SB 1235 (De Leon)

SB 894 (Jackson)

SB 1006 (Wolk)

SB 1407 (De Leon)

SB 1446 (Hancock)

AB 156 (McCarty & De Leon)

AB 1135 (Levine & Ting)

AB 1511 (Santiago)

AB 857 (Cooper & De Leon)

Here is an additional list of each bill that was brought before the Senate today:

SB 880 (Hall) – SB 880 will serve as a reclassification of various weapons such as semiautomatic center-fire rifles or semiautomatic pistols that can accept a detachable magazine to “assault weapons”, meaning that these weapons would now be illegal. 

SB 1235 (De Leon) – SB 1235 will require the California Department of Justice to keep a data-base on all ammunition transactions and require purchasers of ammo to undergo screening with each ammunition purchase. 

SB 894 (Jackson) – SB 894 will make it a crime if an individual gun owner does not report their gun stolen within 5 days of realizing that their weapon has gone missing. This legislation will also make it a crime to fail to report a recovered gun within 48 hours. 

SB 1006 (Wolk) – SB 1006 would direct the University of California to use taxpayer funds for gun control research. 

SB 1407 (De Leon) – SB 1407 would require as of, July 1, 2018, that all newly manufactured weapons must have a serial number or unique identifier or the manufacturer or assembler will face consequences. This bill would also require as of, January 1, 2019, that all gun owners who own a weapon with out a unique identifier must apply to the California Department of Justice for a identifier for weapons dating back to 1899. 

SB 1446 (Hancock) – SB 1446 would make it, as of, July 1, 2017, a crime to posses any high capacity magazine regardless of when the magazine was acquired. The first offense would be a fine not exceeding 100 dollars and with subsequent offenses, the punishment would rise. 
                                 “GUTTED AND AMENDED BILLS”
AB156 (McCarty & De Leon) – AB 156’s original intent was to combat global warming but has been altered to serve as a restriction on ammunition.

AB 857 (Cooper & De Leon) – AB 857’s original intent was to reduce greenhouse gases, but has been altered to serve as a restriction on curios, relics, and home-built firearms.

AB 1135 (Levine & Ting) – AB 1135’s original intent was to form the Kings River East Groundwater Sustainability Agency but has been amended to serve as a reclassification of certain semi-automatic weapons to assault weapons.

AB 1511 (Santiago) – AB 1511’s original intent was to encourage the State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission to establish a comprehensive plan to save energy throughout California. The new version of this bill would be to limit the loan of a firearm between two law abiding citizens, for example a hunting trip or home protection.

While these bills may have passed through the Senate, they have not yet become law! You can help us stop the legislation from being approved by the Assembly. The next step in the legislative process is to go before the Assembly Public Safety Committee and the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

You can find a list of members for the Public Safety Committee here, and the list of members for the Appropriations Committee, here. By actively calling committee members, you can help us stop the bills before they get to the Assembly floor.

If the bills are approved by these committees, they will then go before the entire Assembly for a vote. Help us get a head start and call your Assembly member to tell them they need to stop this legislation.To find your Assembly member, please click here.

For a list of contact information for the entire State Assembly, please click here.

Several bills that originated in the Assembly, were approved by the Senate, (“Gutted and Amended”) and will now go before Governor Jerry Brown. Our best hope is to encourage the Governor to VETO these bills. To contact the Governor, please click here.

Some of the battles have ended, but the attack on your rights continues. Help CRPA continue to advocate for your freedoms. Please assist in these efforts by getting involved or making a donation. Your donation will empower CRPA to continue the fight for your constitutional rights in Sacramento.

Donate To Help CRPA’s Lobbying Efforts

Thank you!

AB 1135 AB 1511 AB 156 AB 857 Anti-gun Legislation SB 1006 SB 1235 SB 1407 SB 1446 SB 880 SB 894 State

From NRA-ILA:


WEDNESDAY, MAY 18, 2016

Contact your state Senator IMMEDIATELY

Tomorrow, Thursday, May 19, the state Senate is scheduled to vote on NINE anti-gun bills.  These bills are being fast-tracked because of political gamesmanship between anti-gun state Senators and Lt. Governor Gavin Newsom. They are fighting to see who can take credit for removing Second Amendment rights first in California.   Don’t take our word on the political fighting, click here to read a Reuters’ article, California Democrat dueling over gun control plans by Sharon Bernstein.  Constitutional Rights should be treated with the utmost respect as the backbone of this great nation.  It is extremely irresponsible that these anti-gun politicians would place your rights in jeopardy for political gain.

The bills have been clearly fast tracked and could be sent to the Governor within a matter of weeks if not days.  Gun owners, sportsmen, and Second Amendment supporters IMMEDIATELY contact your state Senator and respectfully urge him or her to OPPOSE SB 1235, AB 156, SB 1407, AB 857, SB 880, AB 1135, AB 1511, SB 894, and SB 1006.   Contact information can be found here or by clicking on the TAKE ACTION button below.

 

 

WE MUST send a clear message to the State Senate that regulating and restricting our constitutional freedoms will no longer be tolerated.

It is extremely important that you pass this alert to your family, friends, fellow gun owners and sportsmen asking them to contact their state Senator and then forwarding this message on to their family, friends, and fellow gun owners and sportsmen.

Please click here to read our previous alert on how these bills will affect California’s gun owners, sportsmen, and Second Amendment supporters.

It’s CRUCIAL that EVERY law-abiding gun owner, sportsmen, and Second Amendment supporter contact their state Senator and respectfully urge him or her to OPPOSE SB 1235, AB 156, SB 1407, AB 857, SB 880, AB 1135, AB 1511, SB 894, and SB 1006. 

If you are not registered to vote, now is the time to do so!  Click here to register to vote, so you can support candidates who believe in your right to keep and bear arms.

AB 1135 AB 1511 AB 156 AB 857 Anti-gun Legislation SB 1006 SB 1235 SB 1407 SB 880 SB 894 State

Hillary Clinton: “The Supreme Court is Wrong On The Second Amendment”

There’s just so much here packed into a mere 33 seconds!

First let’s talk about “this pernicious, corrupting influence of the NRA”. She’s talking about silencing the voices of 5,000,000 law abiding Americans. She’s talking about erasing not only the 2nd Amendment rights of millions of Americans, she’s talking about erasing their 1st Amendment rights as well. She wants to disenfranchise you for disagreeing with her 0n gun rights.

And then there’s her praise for her husband when he “took [the NRA] out” to pass the 1994 Clinton Gun Ban. The only thing he took out was the longest lived political majority in American history. Historians and politicians of all stripes credit the “assault weapon” ban with the demise of the Democrats’ House majority.

Hillary again ignores history when she blames George W. Bush for the ban’s sunset in 2004. The ban sunsetted because the not-Democrat House majority that Bill Clinton helped to elect wouldn’t pass the extension. (Gun owners would do well to remember that Bush, a Republican, promised to sign the ban if it ever reached his desk.)

Finally, there’s her contention that the Supreme Court was “wrong on the 2nd Amendment”. Presumably, she’s talking about the Heller decision and not the McDonald decision. (That latter is really about the 14th Amendment and I can’t imagine her pining for the days before “incorporation”.) The heart of Heller is the Court’s recognition that the 2nd Amendment protects an individual liberty, not a State power. Hillary apparently longs for a return to the errant belief that the 2nd Amendment somehow only applies to the National Guard. That’s really the only way that she would be able to ban guns like the AR-15.

News Politics

From NRA-ILA:


MONDAY, MAY 16, 2016

NINE Anti-Gun Bills Heading to the Senate Floor

On Monday, May 16, the Senate Appropriations Committee passed and sent nine anti-gun bills straight to the Senate floor.  This move is of great concern not only for the egregious subject matter of the bills but because of the speed the bills are moving. Generally bills with a fiscal note that exceeds $150,000 are sent to the Suspense file for later consideration.  These bills meet that criteria but were still granted a pass to proceed.  Further, four of the bills covered a completely separate subject matter just two weeks ago and were only given policy consideration in a single chamber having passed the previous chamber under the original subject matter.  With this clearly expedited urgency, the bills could be considered on the floor and sent to the Governor within a matter of weeks if not days.

NOW IS THE TIME!

WE MUST send a clear message to the State Senate that regulating and restricting our constitutional freedoms will no longer be tolerated.

It’s CRUCIAL that EVERY law-abiding gun owner, sportsmen, and Second Amendment supporter contact their state Senator strenuously and respectfully urging him/her to OPPOSE SB 1235, AB 156, SB 1407, AB 857, SB 880, AB 1135, AB 1511, SB 894, and SB 1006.  Contact information can be found here or by clicking on the TAKE ACTION button below.

Senate Bill 1235 and Assembly Bill 156 would place unjustified and burdensome restrictions on the purchase of ammunition and would require the attorney general to keep records of purchases.  This legislation would further require any online ammunition sales to be conducted through a licensed vendor.  First and foremost, the reporting of ammunition sales has already been tried — and failed — at the federal level.  Throughout the 1980s, Congress considered repeal of a federal ammunition regulation package that required, among other things, reporting of ammunition sales.  In 1986, the director of the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms supported eliminating the reporting requirement, stating: “The Bureau and the [Treasury] Department have recognized that current record keeping requirements for ammunition have no substantial law enforcement value.”  As a result, the Firearms Owners Protection Act of 1986 repealed the ammunition restrictions, with little opposition to the removal of that requirement.  SB 1235 and AB 156 will similarly fail to reduce violent crime, as a law requiring honest citizens to register each and every ammunition purchase plainly will not deter criminals.   One last note, Governor Brown has twice vetoed similar legislation.

Senate Bill 1407 and Assembly Bill 857 would require an individual to request a serial number from DOJ for home-built firearms.  Anti-gun advocates are under the impression that criminals will apply for a serial number issued from DOJ prior to use.  This bill would do nothing but entrap law-abiding citizens exercising their Second Amendment rights.  Governor Brown vetoed similar legislation in 2014.

Senate Bill 880 and Assembly Bill 1135 would make changes of monumental scale to California’s firearm laws by reclassifying hundreds of thousands of legally owned semi-automatic rifles as “assault weapons.”    These are constitutionally protected firearms that have no association with crime.  These changes would happen quickly with great individual costs to many gun owners and no public notice.  Governor Brown vetoed similar legislation in 2013.

Assembly Bill 1511 would effectively end the long-standing practice of temporarily loaning a firearm for lawful purposes. Under this legislation the ability to loan a firearm to anyone other than a family member or a person who is in the field hunting would now be prohibited unless conducted through a dealer.  The result of the misguided legislation would turn otherwise law-abiding citizens into criminals simply for borrowing or storing a firearm.

Senate Bill 894 would require a victim of a crime to report to local Law Enforcement the theft of a firearm within an arbitrary time requirement of five days and the recovery of the firearm within 48 hours.  Governor Brown has twice vetoed similar legislation stating, “I was not convinced that criminalizing the failure to report a lost or stolen firearm would improve identification of gun traffickers or help law enforcement disarm people prohibited from possessing guns. I continue to believe that responsible people report the loss or theft of a firearm and irresponsible people do not.”

Senate Bill 1006 would enact a California Firearm Violence Research Act at the University of California and would declare legislative intent regarding the principles by which the university would administer the center and would appropriate taxpayer money to the Firearm Research Center Account.  Anti-gun lawmakers are attempting to fund potentially biased research with tax dollars.  Research that can later be used as a further assault on our Second Amendment rights.  Senator Huff called the bill a “sole source contract” for a constituent in senator Wolk’s district,   a researcher with a record of biased anti-gun research.   It is obvious that the research conducted under SB 1006 will not be favorable to law-abiding gun owners.

************************

Don’t forget to forward this alert to your family, friends, and fellow gun owners urging them to contact their state Senator and asking them OPPOSE the above reprehensible bills.

If you are not registered to vote, now is the time to do so!  Click here to register to vote, so you can support candidates who believe in your right to keep and bear arms.

AB 1135 AB 1511 AB 857 Anti-gun Legislation News Privacy SB 1006 SB 1407 SB 880 SB 894 State

From NRA-ILA:


SUNDAY, MAY 15, 2016

The Senate Appropriations Committee added additional anti-gun bills to the agenda to be heard Monday, May 16, at 10am in the John L. Burton hearing room (Rm 4203).  It’s important to contact the members of the Senate Appropriations committee and urge them to OPPOSE SB 880, SB 894, SB 1006, SB 1407, AB 156, AB 857, AB 1135, and AB 1511.  Contact information can be found here or by clicking on the TAKE ACTION button below.

In addition to the previously scheduled bills, the following bills have been scheduled:

Senate Bill 880 would make changes of monumental scale to California’s firearm laws byreclassifying hundreds of thousands of legally owned semi-automatic rifles asassault weapons.  These areconstitutionally protected firearms that have no association with crime.  These changes would happen quickly with great individual costs to many gun owners and no public notice.  Governor Brown vetoed similar legislation in 2013.

Senate Bill 894 would require a victim of a crime to report to local Law Enforcement the theft of a firearm within an arbitrary time requirement of five days and the recovery of the firearm within 48 hours.  Governor Brown has twice vetoed similar legislation stating, “I was not convinced that criminalizing the failure to report a lost or stolen firearm would improve identification of gun traffickers or help law enforcement disarm people prohibited from possessing guns. I continue to believe that responsible people report the loss or theft of a firearm and irresponsible people do not.”

Senate Bill 1006 would enact a California Firearm Violence Research Act and would declare legislative intent regarding the principles by which the university would administer the center and award research funds with taxpayer money.  SB 1006 is research that will do nothing but attempt to convince Californians that lawfully owned firearms are a public menace.

Senate Bill 1407 would make it a crime under California law for an individual to manufacture a firearm without first obtaining California Department of Justice (DOJ) approval to do so and subsequently engraving a DOJ-provided serial number on the firearm.  This legislation should be opposed because it will effectively nullify the long-standing and constitutionally protected activity of building one’s own firearms.   Governor Brown vetoed similar legislation in 2014.

************************

Anti-gun bill, AB 2607, is still awaiting third reading and could be voted on any day.  If you have already not done so, please contact your state Assembly Member and urge him/her to OPPOSE AB 2607.  Contact information can be found here or by clicking on the TAKE ACTION button below.

OPPOSE – Assembly Bill 2607 would amend the “Gun Violence Restraining Order (GVRO)” procedures that were created by AB 1014 (2014).  GVRO’s were opposed by NRA during the 2014 session because of the lack of due process when depriving an individual of their right to keep and bear arms.  AB 2607 would compound the existing problems by significantly expanding the class of individuals who could seek a GVRO.

************************

On Thursday, May 12, pro-gun bill, Assembly Bill 2510, unanimously passed the Assembly and will be sent to the Senate.  We will send out an update when its next committee hearing has been scheduled.

AB 2510 would allow local law enforcement authorities to issue concealed carry weapons (CCW) identification cards approved by the State of California Department of Justice (DOJ) as proof that individuals are licensed in the state. The permits can be used in lieu of the obsolete typed paper form provided by DOJ.

Don’t forget to forward this alert to your family, friends, and fellow gun owners and urge them to contact the Senate Appropriations Committee and their state Assembly Member about these important firearm-related issues.

AB 2510 AB 2607 Anti-gun Legislation News Pro-gun SB 1006 SB 1407 SB 880 SB 894 State

From NRA-ILA:

WEDNESDAY, APRIL 27, 2016

After a busy week of hearings, Friday April 22nd marked the deadline for bills with a fiscal note to be passed out of their respective policy committees. Bills not meeting this deadline are considered defeated for the 2016 legislative session.  The good news is that a couple anti-gun bills are dead for the session.  The bad news is, many of the most egregious bills are still moving. Additionally, several bills have been placed in the suspense file and will not be considered until the end of May.  For an update of where we stand please see below:

Anti-Gun Assembly Bills still alive:

Assembly Bill 2607 would amend the “Gun Violence Restraining Order (GVRO)” procedures that were created by AB 1014 (2014).  GVRO’s were opposed by NRA during the 2014 session because of the lack of due process when depriving an individual of their right to keep and bear arms.  AB 2607 would compound the existing problems by significantly expanding the class of individuals who could seek a GVRO.

AB 2607 has moved to the Assembly floor and could be heard at any time.  Please contact your state Assembly Member and urge him or her to OPPOSE AB 2607.  Contact information can be found here or by clicking on the TAKE ACTION button below.

Anti-Gun Senate Bills still alive:

SB 880, SB 894, SB 1006, SB 1407, and SB 1446 all passed through the respective policy committees and could be heard as early as Monday, May 2 by the Senate Committee on Appropriation.  Please take a moment to contact the members of the committee and urge them to OPPOSE SB 880, SB 894, SB 1006, SB 1407, and SB 1446.  Contact information can be found here or by clicking on the TAKE ACTION button below.

Senate Bill 880  would massively expand the current definition of “assault weapon” to include ALL semi-automatic centerfire rifles with a detachable magazine.  The California State Sheriffs’ Association has already testified in opposition to this egregious bill.

Senate Bill 894 would require a victim of a crime to report to local Law Enforcement the theft of a firearm within an arbitrary time requirement of five days and the recovery of the firearm within 48 hours.  Governor Brown has twice vetoed similar legislation.

Senate Bill 1006 would enact a California Firearm Violence Research Act and would declare legislative intent regarding the principles by which the university would administer the center and award research fund at tax payer expense in an effort to continue to erode your constitutional rights.  Let’s be clear, the NRA is not opposed to research that would encourage the safe and responsible use of firearms and reduce the numbers of firearm-related deaths.  Safety has been at the core of the NRA’s mission since its inception.  But that is not the goal of the gun control advocates who are behind Senate Bill 1006.

Senate Bill 1407 would make it a crime under California law for an individual to manufacture a firearm without first obtaining California Department of Justice (DOJ) approval to do so and subsequently engraving a DOJ-provided serial number on the firearm.  This legislation should be opposed because it will effectively nullify the long-standing and constitutionally protected activity of building one’s own firearms.   Governor Brown vetoed similar legislation in 2014.

Senate Bill 1446 would ban the simple possession of ammunition feeding devices/magazines that are capable of holding more than 10 cartridges.  The federal “large-ammunition feeding device” ban of 1994-2004 was allowed to sunset due in part to its ineffectiveness.  Yet, California anti-gun legislators still are persisting with this ban knowing that the congressionally-mandated study concluded that “the banned guns were never used in more than a modest fraction of all gun murders” before the ban and the bans 10-round limit on new magazines was not a factor in multiple-victim or multiple-wound crimes.

*********************

Assembly Suspense File:

The following bills have been placed in the Assembly suspense file and will not be heard until the end of May.  Your NRA-ILA will continue to keep you posted on potential hearings as the time nears.

Assembly Bill 1663 and Assembly Bill 1664 are similar and would massively expand the current definition of “assault weapon” to include ALL semi-automatic centerfire rifles with a detachable magazine.  The California State Sheriffs’ Association has even testified in opposition to both of these egregious bills.

Assembly Bill 1673 would expand the definition of “firearm” to include unfinished frames and/or receivers that can be readily convertible. This expanded definition continues to push the limits on when a hunk of metal or polymer can be classified as a “firearm” regardless of the significant machining and fabrication necessary.

Assembly Bill 1674 would expand the current restriction on the number of firearms an individual can purchase within a 30 day period. Currently the “one gun a month” rule only applies to dealer sales of handguns. This legislation would make it applicable to all firearm transfers, including long guns. If this ridiculous proposal becomes law the average competitive shooter might be required to wait months to purchase all the necessary firearms for their competition.

Assembly Bill 1695 would make it a misdemeanor to report to a local law enforcement agency that a firearm has been lost or stolen, knowing that report to be false and create a 10 year firearm prohibition for someone convicted of this offense.  This bill would also require the Attorney General to send a letter notice to each individual who has applied to purchase a firearm informing him or her of laws relating to firearms, gun trafficking, and safe storage and would allow the Department of Justice to use funds in the Firearms Safety and Enforcement Special Fund.

Anti-Gun Legislation Defeated for the 2016 Session:

Assembly Bill 2459 would have meant the end of almost every gun store across the state.  As previously reported this legislation would have placed four crippling burdens, in which the cost of compiling these unnecessary and ineffective changes would have driven FFL’s out of business.

Senate Bill 1037 would have effectively removed the SOL from many firearm crimes including many common missteps because of the existing draconian measures that are often confusing and buried throughout CA statute.  This means a gun which an owner may have believed to be in compliance for the past 10 years could continue to be a crime and lend an owner to becoming criminally culpable.  Further it would have created a presumption in state law that would presume the person in possession of the firearm is the owner.  Meaning that a person who is borrowing a gun within the current transfer exemptions would need to prove their possession was legal as opposed to how our system of justice works in almost every other situation, “innocent until proven guilty”. A continuing trend for CA gun owners, the anti-gunners believe you are guilty until proven innocent for exercising your constitutional rights.

Please stay tuned to NRA-ILA for updates.  Please take a moment to forward this alert to your family, friends and fellow gun owners and sportsmen.  The Second Amendment in California is going to need all of its supporters to survive.

AB 1663 AB 1664 AB 1673 AB 1674 AB 1695 AB 2459 AB 2607 Anti-gun Legislation News Privacy SB 1006 SB 1037 SB 1407 SB 1446 SB 880 SB 894 State