If there is any doubt in anyones mind that Texas is ANYTHING like Kalifornia, here's what our legislature passed this last week and sent to Gov Moonbeam for signature, we can only hope that some of these get Vetoed.
AB-48 (Skinner): Bans magazine rebuild kits (including individual parts)- As a sworn LEO this will increase the costs of buying and repairing my equipment to help ensure the safety of California's citizens. Magazines all have a date of manufacture permanently imprinted on the magazine its self. This date is more than enough to prosecute those who import magazine parts and illegally assemble them into "high capacity magazines."
AB-169 (Dickinson): Bans transfer of handguns not on the "not unsafe handgun" roster.- This bill BANS legally owned and legally purchased firearms. This bill would ban the sale and/or transfer of legally owned guns who's legal owners attempt to sell them through an FFL. This would in effect require the legal owner to surrender the legal firearm to Law Enforcement without proper reimbursement from the State. This is a clear violation of the requirement that the government provide just compensation for confiscation of legally owned items. If this bill is allowed to be come law, it will enact a forced CONFISCATION of these legally owned firearms. This would not have any impact on crime. This would only remove firearms from law abiding citizens. I am afraid this law would force many law abiding citizens to become criminals as they might seek to sell their legally owned firearms on the black market in order to obtain some monetary return.
AB-180 (Bonta): Additional firearms restrictions in Oakland.-This will open a slippery slope to allow unchecked violations of the 2nd Amendment by allowing cities to enact firearm laws within their city. All California citizens deserve to be afforded equal rights regardless of what city they reside in. This law would make citizen's 2nd Amendment rights vary across multiple jurisdictions.
AB-231 (Ting): Criminal liability when child accesses firearm in your home without permission, or a prohibited person accesses firearm in your home.- This bill does not define what "reasonable action is taken by the person to secure the firearm against access by the child" is or what "negligent storage" means. This bill does not provided a clear and concise definition of what constitutes safe storage of a firearm is. This causes confusion to citizens who wish to comply. I for one do not know what safe storage is per this bill. Is a safe? A minor/criminal could find my hidden gun safe key, and obtain a firearm from my safe. Would I be charged with negligent storage of a firearm? Without a clear definition of safe storage local District Attorney's would have to decided how these requirements are met and violated. Again like AB-180 the laws (case law) would vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction depending on the local D.A.'s interpretation of the law. This would violate California citizen's right to equal treatment in the legal system.
AB-500 (Ammianno): Extends time period for background checks, secure storage requirements when living with prohibited person.- This bill does nothing to fix the problem. The System's database is incomplete and not up to date. Instead of improving the database, this bill would only enable the CA DOJ to continue operating with a sub-par information system which violates citizen's 2nd Amendment rights by delaying them from obtaining their legally purchased firearms. Please VETO this bill and refocus the State's efforts on improving and maintaining the prohibited persons system (APPS).
AB-711 (Rendon): Lead ammo ban.- This bill has nothing to do with protection of the environment. The majority of hunters kill their game and take the remains home for consumption. There is more lead in the water streams which pollute the environment than the couple of bullets left in abandoned game which are then "theoretically" consumed by birds feeding on the game. This bill would only increase the cost to hunt, and make good citizens criminals if they unknowingly use lead bullets while legally hunting. Again this bill has no impact on crime or the pollution of the environment (including the condors), and only increases the costs to hunters.
SB-363 (Wright): Criminalizes storage of a handgun where the owner should have known a prohibited person would access it. Exempts Federal Law Enforcement Officers from the "not unsafe handgun" roster restrictions.- See AB-231.
SB-374 (Steinberg): Bans all semiautomatic rifles that does not have a fixed magazine, forced registration of rifles already owned.- This bill is in clear violation of the United States Supreme Court ruling in D.C. VS. Heller. The supreme court in this ruling stated that the right to keep and bear arms is an INDIVIDUAL RIGHT. The Supreme Court further stated that firearms that are in "common use" cannot be banned and are protected under the 2nd Amendment. Make no mistake, This bills bans an ENTIRE CLASS of COMMONLY USED AND OWNED firearms. This bill will ban all semi-auto rifles expect for the M1 Garand (possibly as this is even up for interpretation). This bill would ban many hunting rifles as all semi auto rifles have a detachable magazine. The following is a list of commonly owned rifles for hunting or competitive target shooting, these guns are not used by street gangs in crimes. All of these guns would be banned under this law;
Browning BAR, in various calibers introduced in 1967.
H & R Model 60
HK SL7 in 308 and 223, introduced in 1983
Iver Johnson SC30FS survival rifle in .30, 1988
Marlin Model 9, 9mm, 1985
Marlin Model 45, 45 ACP, 1986
Remington model(s) 742 in various calibers, 1960
Remington model 7400 in various calibers, 1981
Remington models 740A, 740 ADL in 308 and 30-06, 1955
Ruger Mini 14 Ranch Rifle, in 223,
Springfield M1A Match rifle, 308 and .243, 1974
Winchester Model 100 in various calibers, 1961
Remington models 742F, 742 D, 750 in various calibers, 1952 thru 1966
The major flaw of this bill would turn hundreds of thousands of law abiding gun owners into felons over night. Many will not know that their wood stock hunting rifle would ever be classified as an "assault weapon" and therefore never register them. This would in effect cause them to become a felon under this law. Another major flaw is that this bill strictly prohibits the registration of newly classified "assault weapons" under this law that were purchased prior to 1-1-2001. Some of these newly classified "assault weapons" were not classified under California's original Assault weapons ban and therefore were never outlawed or required to be registered. Including these legally owned firearms in this bill, but at the same time prohibiting the registration of these firearms under this bill; Law abiding citizens will be turned into felons. They will be prohibited from complying with the requirements of this bill and therefore be forced to surrender their legally owned firearms to Law Enforcement. IE: Joe buys a M1A target competition rifle in 1998. California's original assault weapon's ban did not include this rifle in it's registration requirements as did not meet the definition of an assault weapon. This new law classifies Joe's M1A target competition rifle as an "assault weapon," however since Joe purchased the rifle prior to 01-01-2001 he is prohibited from registering the firearm as an "assault weapon."
SB-475 (Leno): Eliminates gun shows at Cow Palace.- The Cow Palace gun show has not caused an increase in crime. This event is protected under both the 1s and 2nd Amendments of the constitution.
SB-755 (Wolk) Expands definition of prohibited persons- This bill is the biggest of the slippery slopes. This bill paths a road towards total bans on firearms due to the expansion of "prohibited persons." This bill turns people who make a minor mistake into a prohibited firearm owner for 10 years just because of one mistake. IE: Joe is arrested for DUI with a BAC of .081% Joe, being accountable to his actions, accepts both the charges of 23152(a) VC and 23152(b) VC from this ONE incident. Joe's 2nd Amendment rights are now taken away from one bad judgement call since he was charged with two qualifying misdemeanors. This one mistake does not make Joe a violet person who should have his firearms confiscated. There is no correlation between DUI and criminal acts with a firearm. This bill is only aimed at slowly chipping away at citizens rights to own a firearm under the 2nd Amendment. This bill is dangerous in that the list of offenses could quickly expand. More and more misdemeanor sections will be added to the list as time goes on. Eventually traffic violations will be added to the list, and eventually all citizens will have their rights to own a firearm removed. This bill would also have a detrimental impact on our states Law Enforcement Officers. If an LEO gets arrested for DUI with a BAC of .081% or more, and gets convicted of both 23152(a) and 23152(b) vc he/she would become a prohibited person. A LEO is required to carry a firearm in the performance of his/her duties. This bill would not only removed the LEO's rights to own a firearm, but it would also cause the LEO to loose his/her job.
Dennis
AB-48 (Skinner): Bans magazine rebuild kits (including individual parts)- As a sworn LEO this will increase the costs of buying and repairing my equipment to help ensure the safety of California's citizens. Magazines all have a date of manufacture permanently imprinted on the magazine its self. This date is more than enough to prosecute those who import magazine parts and illegally assemble them into "high capacity magazines."
AB-169 (Dickinson): Bans transfer of handguns not on the "not unsafe handgun" roster.- This bill BANS legally owned and legally purchased firearms. This bill would ban the sale and/or transfer of legally owned guns who's legal owners attempt to sell them through an FFL. This would in effect require the legal owner to surrender the legal firearm to Law Enforcement without proper reimbursement from the State. This is a clear violation of the requirement that the government provide just compensation for confiscation of legally owned items. If this bill is allowed to be come law, it will enact a forced CONFISCATION of these legally owned firearms. This would not have any impact on crime. This would only remove firearms from law abiding citizens. I am afraid this law would force many law abiding citizens to become criminals as they might seek to sell their legally owned firearms on the black market in order to obtain some monetary return.
AB-180 (Bonta): Additional firearms restrictions in Oakland.-This will open a slippery slope to allow unchecked violations of the 2nd Amendment by allowing cities to enact firearm laws within their city. All California citizens deserve to be afforded equal rights regardless of what city they reside in. This law would make citizen's 2nd Amendment rights vary across multiple jurisdictions.
AB-231 (Ting): Criminal liability when child accesses firearm in your home without permission, or a prohibited person accesses firearm in your home.- This bill does not define what "reasonable action is taken by the person to secure the firearm against access by the child" is or what "negligent storage" means. This bill does not provided a clear and concise definition of what constitutes safe storage of a firearm is. This causes confusion to citizens who wish to comply. I for one do not know what safe storage is per this bill. Is a safe? A minor/criminal could find my hidden gun safe key, and obtain a firearm from my safe. Would I be charged with negligent storage of a firearm? Without a clear definition of safe storage local District Attorney's would have to decided how these requirements are met and violated. Again like AB-180 the laws (case law) would vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction depending on the local D.A.'s interpretation of the law. This would violate California citizen's right to equal treatment in the legal system.
AB-500 (Ammianno): Extends time period for background checks, secure storage requirements when living with prohibited person.- This bill does nothing to fix the problem. The System's database is incomplete and not up to date. Instead of improving the database, this bill would only enable the CA DOJ to continue operating with a sub-par information system which violates citizen's 2nd Amendment rights by delaying them from obtaining their legally purchased firearms. Please VETO this bill and refocus the State's efforts on improving and maintaining the prohibited persons system (APPS).
AB-711 (Rendon): Lead ammo ban.- This bill has nothing to do with protection of the environment. The majority of hunters kill their game and take the remains home for consumption. There is more lead in the water streams which pollute the environment than the couple of bullets left in abandoned game which are then "theoretically" consumed by birds feeding on the game. This bill would only increase the cost to hunt, and make good citizens criminals if they unknowingly use lead bullets while legally hunting. Again this bill has no impact on crime or the pollution of the environment (including the condors), and only increases the costs to hunters.
SB-363 (Wright): Criminalizes storage of a handgun where the owner should have known a prohibited person would access it. Exempts Federal Law Enforcement Officers from the "not unsafe handgun" roster restrictions.- See AB-231.
SB-374 (Steinberg): Bans all semiautomatic rifles that does not have a fixed magazine, forced registration of rifles already owned.- This bill is in clear violation of the United States Supreme Court ruling in D.C. VS. Heller. The supreme court in this ruling stated that the right to keep and bear arms is an INDIVIDUAL RIGHT. The Supreme Court further stated that firearms that are in "common use" cannot be banned and are protected under the 2nd Amendment. Make no mistake, This bills bans an ENTIRE CLASS of COMMONLY USED AND OWNED firearms. This bill will ban all semi-auto rifles expect for the M1 Garand (possibly as this is even up for interpretation). This bill would ban many hunting rifles as all semi auto rifles have a detachable magazine. The following is a list of commonly owned rifles for hunting or competitive target shooting, these guns are not used by street gangs in crimes. All of these guns would be banned under this law;
Browning BAR, in various calibers introduced in 1967.
H & R Model 60
HK SL7 in 308 and 223, introduced in 1983
Iver Johnson SC30FS survival rifle in .30, 1988
Marlin Model 9, 9mm, 1985
Marlin Model 45, 45 ACP, 1986
Remington model(s) 742 in various calibers, 1960
Remington model 7400 in various calibers, 1981
Remington models 740A, 740 ADL in 308 and 30-06, 1955
Ruger Mini 14 Ranch Rifle, in 223,
Springfield M1A Match rifle, 308 and .243, 1974
Winchester Model 100 in various calibers, 1961
Remington models 742F, 742 D, 750 in various calibers, 1952 thru 1966
The major flaw of this bill would turn hundreds of thousands of law abiding gun owners into felons over night. Many will not know that their wood stock hunting rifle would ever be classified as an "assault weapon" and therefore never register them. This would in effect cause them to become a felon under this law. Another major flaw is that this bill strictly prohibits the registration of newly classified "assault weapons" under this law that were purchased prior to 1-1-2001. Some of these newly classified "assault weapons" were not classified under California's original Assault weapons ban and therefore were never outlawed or required to be registered. Including these legally owned firearms in this bill, but at the same time prohibiting the registration of these firearms under this bill; Law abiding citizens will be turned into felons. They will be prohibited from complying with the requirements of this bill and therefore be forced to surrender their legally owned firearms to Law Enforcement. IE: Joe buys a M1A target competition rifle in 1998. California's original assault weapon's ban did not include this rifle in it's registration requirements as did not meet the definition of an assault weapon. This new law classifies Joe's M1A target competition rifle as an "assault weapon," however since Joe purchased the rifle prior to 01-01-2001 he is prohibited from registering the firearm as an "assault weapon."
SB-475 (Leno): Eliminates gun shows at Cow Palace.- The Cow Palace gun show has not caused an increase in crime. This event is protected under both the 1s and 2nd Amendments of the constitution.
SB-755 (Wolk) Expands definition of prohibited persons- This bill is the biggest of the slippery slopes. This bill paths a road towards total bans on firearms due to the expansion of "prohibited persons." This bill turns people who make a minor mistake into a prohibited firearm owner for 10 years just because of one mistake. IE: Joe is arrested for DUI with a BAC of .081% Joe, being accountable to his actions, accepts both the charges of 23152(a) VC and 23152(b) VC from this ONE incident. Joe's 2nd Amendment rights are now taken away from one bad judgement call since he was charged with two qualifying misdemeanors. This one mistake does not make Joe a violet person who should have his firearms confiscated. There is no correlation between DUI and criminal acts with a firearm. This bill is only aimed at slowly chipping away at citizens rights to own a firearm under the 2nd Amendment. This bill is dangerous in that the list of offenses could quickly expand. More and more misdemeanor sections will be added to the list as time goes on. Eventually traffic violations will be added to the list, and eventually all citizens will have their rights to own a firearm removed. This bill would also have a detrimental impact on our states Law Enforcement Officers. If an LEO gets arrested for DUI with a BAC of .081% or more, and gets convicted of both 23152(a) and 23152(b) vc he/she would become a prohibited person. A LEO is required to carry a firearm in the performance of his/her duties. This bill would not only removed the LEO's rights to own a firearm, but it would also cause the LEO to loose his/her job.
Dennis
