A number of anti-gun bills recently flipped houses in the California State Legislature, and are now a step closer to passing following hearings in their respective committees.
Here is a breakdown of the bills that were heard this week:
What the bill does: AB 2103 would mandate all sorts of extra requirements for CCW applicants, including proscribing a minimum of 8 training hours with the firearm intending to be carried concealed. Further, the bill would also require live-fire shooting exercises on a firing range, as well as a safe handling demonstration with each firearm the applicant intends to carry. FPC, as well as other 2A rights organizations, have argued repeatedly that this bill is redundant, as county sheriffs already require firearms training, and anyone purchasing a firearm must already have demonstrated safe handling of a firearm pursuant to a Firearms Safety Certificate.
However, firearms experts, like those from Everytown and Moms Demand Action, argued CCW instructors, like Sam Parades of Gun Owners of California, don’t know what they’re talking about. They stated that requiring extra CCW training would bring down violent crime, even though there is not a single documented case of a CCW-holder in California causing injury or death in a reckless, illegal manner.
One such firearms expert from Moms Demand Action proudly backed up her claim by stating her qualifications:
“Most importantly, I’m a mom!”
Luckily for her, the bill’s author, Assemblyman Todd Gloria (D-San Diego), was able to provide helpful examples of instances in which a CCW-holder went on a shooting spree: like “violence we see every day in our communities.”
However, when pressed by Republican members of the committee to name a single example of a CCW-holder breaking the law that would justify his bill, he drew a complete blank and suggested doing a Google search.
This is funny considering this ignorant legislator was asked the same question a year ago, and he couldn’t answer it then either.
What happened: The Senate Public Safety Committee voted 5-2 to advance the bill. It will now be heard by the Appropriations Committee.
What the bill does: AB 2526 would allow gun violence restraining orders to be issued verbally. In other words, a police officer could make verbal statements to a judge, and the judge could verbally grant an order to seize a person’s gun without due process. The entire concept of gun violence restraining orders violates the 14th Amendment, which prevents government from depriving a person of property without due process of law. However, AB 2526 would go even further by laxing the procedural requirements for seeking such an order. The government’s aim here is to make gun confiscation easier.
What happened: AB 2526 passed on a unanimous vote of 7-0 in the Senate Public Safety Committee. None of the “pro-gun” Republicans voted against the bill. AB 2526 will now move to be heard in the Appropriations Committee.
What the bill does: It defines bump stocks as “multiburst trigger activators.” The bill is noteworthy because CA Attorney General Xavier Becerra has stated on multiple occasions that bump stocks have been banned in California since 1990 due to being defined as “multiburst trigger activators.” And he has also bragged about confiscating bump stocks because of that supposed prohibition. However, the bill does nothing except define bump stocks as… you guessed it: multiburst trigger activators. This has lead many to conclude the AG has been lying about California’s position on bump stocks, and that SB 1346 is designed to give him political and legal cover.
What happened: SB 1346 passed 6-0 in the Assembly Public Safety Committee. Republican Tom Lackey (R-Palmdale) voted in favor of the bill, making him a literal lackey for Everytown and the gun control lobby.
What the bill does: AB 1903 would prohibit dispensing a gift card through a firearms buy-back program to a gun store. Gun buyback programs already harm public safety by allowing criminals to dispose of evidence used in the commission of a crime. Indeed, these programs even reward such criminals for this disposal of evidence. However, AB 1903 would add insult to injury by discriminately singling out gun dealers and small businesses that sell firearms and ammunition.
What happened: AB 1903 passed 5-2 in the Senate Public Safety Committee and will now be heard by the Committee on Appropriations.
What the bill does: SB 746 would originally have allowed subjects of a protective order to store or transfer their firearms to a licensed gun dealer. However, amendments to the bill have imposed unfortunate and burdensome requirements, such as more frequent inspections of gun dealers.
What happened: SB 746 passed as amended 4-1 in the Assembly Public Safety Committee. It has been referred to the Appropriations Committee.
What the bill does: This is the one good bill of the bunch. SB 1382 would make it easier for gun owners to transport their firearms in their vehicles. Currently, the law only allows gun owners to transport handguns if they are locked and in the trunk of a vehicle. However, vehicles that do not feature a trunk, such as pickup trucks, did not qualify in the past. SB 1382 would rectify this issue, by allowing gun owners to transport a handgun in a locked tool box or lockbox that’s affixed to the bed of a truck or other trunkless vehicle.
What happened: SB 1382 passed on a unanimous vote of 7-0 in the Assembly Public Safety Committee.
Where we go from here
These bills still have not become law… yet. Please visit our Take Action page and help oppose these draconian gun control measures. And please also make sure to support SB 1382, which would actually be a step in the right direction for gun owners for a change.