BREAKING NEWS (6:13 pm, 6/29/17) — Federal Court grants Preliminary Injunction. Attorneys for the California Rifle & Pistol Association (CRPA), supported by the NRA, obtained an injunction in the case of Duncan v. Becerra, a federal lawsuit[.] The injunction prevents California from enforcing new laws prohibiting possession of magazines capable of holding more than ten rounds, while the case is pending. The ban was set to take effect on July 1, 2017. In granting the injunction, Judge Benitez held that Plaintiffs are likely to succeed in this lawsuit because “public safety interest may not eviscerate the Second Amendment”. The Order Granting Preliminary Injunction preserves the “status quo” while the constitutionality of the law is decided by the Court.
Here is a very important notice for our readers in California. As of July 1, 2017 it will be illegal to own ANY firearm magazine that holds more than 10 cartridges or rounds. It does not matter if the “full-capacity” magazines were acquired legally. There is NO Grandfather provision. Mere possession will become illegal. Counting today, June 28th, you have just three (3) more days to destroy your 10+ round magazines, render them permanently inoperable, sell them to a licensed dealer, surrender them to a law enforcement agency, or ship them out of California.
The July 1st magazine ban is the result of a patchwork of new laws passed by the California Legislature as well as Proposition 63, a deceptively-promoted initiative approved by voters last November. There are lawsuits currently challenging the magazine ban. It is possible that a temporary injunction halting the effect of the magazine ban might be ordered by a court in the “eleventh hour”. But don’t count on it — in a related case, a federal judge in Sacramento recently denied an injunction. Bottom line: if you reside in California and own/possess ANY mags that hold more than ten rounds, you need to find a solution… and find it fast.
There are probably hundreds of thousands of Californians who currently own magazines that hold more than ten rounds. The effect of the new laws will turn these law-abiding citizens into criminals. The Sacramento Bee newspaper explains:
Sweeping new gun laws passed last year by California voters and legislators require those with magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds of ammunition to get rid of them by July 1.
The question is: How many of California’s 6 million-plus gun owners are actually going to comply, even though violators face potential jail time if they’re caught?
Talk to gun owners, retailers and pro-gun sheriffs across California and you’ll get something akin to an eye roll when they’re asked if gun owners are going to voluntarily part with their property because Democratic politicians and voters who favor gun control outnumber them and changed the law.
In conservative, pro-gun Redding this week, Shasta County Sheriff Tom Bosenko joked that gun owners were lining the block to hand their magazines in to the sheriff’s office (In reality, no one has turned one in). He said his deputies won’t be aggressively hunting for large-capacity magazines starting next month.
“We’re not going to be knocking on anybody’s door looking for them,” Bosenko said. “We’re essentially making law-abiding citizens into criminals with this new law.”
Incrementalism — How Freedom Is Lost
It has been illegal to purchase magazines with 10+ capacity for quite some time in California. However, it remained completely legal to possess and use such magazines which were lawfully obtained before the magazine-capacity limits were imposed in the year 2000: “California banned the sale of high-capacity detachable magazines in 2000, but it remained legal to possess them, except in cities such as San Francisco, Oakland, Los Angeles and Sunnyvale that enacted local bans. That changed this fall when voters and lawmakers passed overlapping gun laws that require Californians, with limited exceptions, to give up any magazine capable of holding more than 10 rounds.” Source: Sacramento Bee.
Is the Mag Ban an Unconstitutional “Taking”?
Because the new magazine laws provide no compensation to mag owners for what is effectively the confiscation of their property, it can be argued that California’s magazine ban is an unconstitutional “taking” depriving citizens of their property without due process. This is one of the arguments that is being used in court by the NRA and other gun rights organizations challenging the controversial magazine ban which goes into effect July 1, 2017.
Share the post "Warning to Californians — Magazine Ban Takes Effect July 1st"
The Second Amendment Foundation, joined by several other groups and individuals, has filed a lawsuit in Federal District Court in California, challenging that state’s laws prohibiting the possession, use or acquisition of so-called “large capacity magazines,” calling the state’s bans on magazines “hopelessly vague and ambiguous.”
Joining SAF are the Calguns Foundation, Firearms Policy Coalition, Firearms Policy Foundation and six individuals including one retired California peace officer. The lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California.
The lawsuit raises a constitutional challenge to California Penal Code § 32310, as recently amended by Senate Bill 1446 and Proposition 63, and Penal Code § 32390 (the “Large-Capacity Magazine Ban”). Collectively those laws require Californians to relinquish, forfeit, or destroy lawfully-obtained full capacity magazines. The penalties for non-compliance are severe. The lawsuit alleges that if these measures are enforced as applied, they would “individually and collectively prohibit law-abiding citizens from continuing to possess, use, or acquire lawfully-owned firearms, in common use for lawful purposes such as self-defense (inside and outside the home), competition, sport, and hunting.”
“What we see in the enactment of such laws,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb, “is continued erosion by the state of its citizens’ Constitutional rights guaranteed under the Second Amendment. When the U.S. Supreme Court incorporated the Second Amendment to the states via the 14th Amendment under the 2010 McDonald ruling, it automatically should have stopped this kind of prohibition.
“As we state in our lawsuit,” he continued, “this magazine ban fails to provide fair or even adequate notice to law-abiding gun owners of what they may do with their personal property without being subject to criminal sanctions. In effect, this ban amounts to a backdoor form of confiscation, in part, of bearable arms that are protected by the Constitution.”
“Enforcement of this ban,” Gottlieb concluded, “would immediately place thousands of law-abiding California gun owners in jeopardy of criminal liability and subjects their personal property to forfeiture, seizure and permanent confiscation, which is government taking, without due process or compensation. We cannot allow that to go unchallenged.”
The Second Amendment Foundation (www.saf.org) is the nation’s oldest and largest tax-exempt education, research, publishing and legal action group focusing on the Constitutional right and heritage to privately own and possess firearms. Founded in 1974, The Foundation has grown to more than 650,000 members and supporters and conducts many programs designed to better inform the public about the consequences of gun control.
Share the post "Lawsuit Challenges California Magazine Laws in Federal Court"
Californians Buy Bulk Ammo Online While They Still Can
Californians are buying more ammunition, and in bigger, bulk quantities, according to data from online ammo retailer Wideners.com. In the two months since 2016’s General Election, Wideners.com’s online traffic from California is up a full fifty percent (50%). Nationwide traffic to the site has remained relatively static for the same period. And Widener’s sales are up dramatically for the most popular ammo types: 9mm Luger, .223 Rem (5.56×45), and .308 Win (7.62×51).
IMPENDING BAN on Mail-Order Ammo — Starting January 1, 2018, California gun owners will no longer be able to buy ammunition online. Only face-to-face ammo purchases will be allowed inside the state. Per Proposition 63, California will also require a background check for ammunition purchases, and ammo buyers must obtain a four-year purchaser’s license from the CA Department of Justice.
“There’s been a massive influx of California hunters and sport shooters who are stocking up in the wake of California’s new laws”, reports Anne Taylor of Widener’s. “There’s not just increased interest, it’s clear the gun owners who are buying are buying in bulk. We’ve seen our average order weight go up in the past couple months. We expect this sort of rush will continue through the rest of the year.”
“We heard from a lot of customers in late December and early January who were confused about Prop 63,” Taylor said. “Many people seemed to think the background checks would start immediately.”
Percent Increase in Sales by Municipality:
Los Angeles Metro Area – 395%
San Francisco Metro Area – 417%
San Diego Metro Area – 161%
Sacramento Metro Area – 449%
Anaheim Metro Area – 264%
San Jose Metro Area – 233%
Note: Data based on IP Address of computer used to make purchase comparing the two-month period before and after 2016’s General Election. Municipalities such as San Francisco and Los Angeles already restrict online ammo purchases.
The biggest sales increase has been observed with .223 Rem/5.56×45 rifle ammunition, the most common cartridge type used in AR-platform rifles. In fact, .223/5.56 ammo sales in the eight weeks following the 2016 election were TWICE as great as in the preceding eight weeks.
Biggest jump in ammo sales has been for .223/5.56 ammo suitable for ARs.
9mm ammo and .308 rifle ammo are also experiencing large gains from California buyers with increases of 60-80%. That’s notable becauses sales remain static in those calibers in the rest of the country. Overall, Widener’s sales data shows the average quantity purchased by Californians is up 20% in the two months following the 2016 election compared to the same time period before.
Share the post "Oppressive California Gun Laws Spur Ammo Buying Sprees"
Here is the original Sierra manufacturing facility in Whittier, CA.
Sierra Bullets — How It Got Started
Report Based on Story by Carroll Pilant, Sierra Bullets Media Relations Manager
What became Sierra Bullets started in the late 1940s in a Quonset hut in California. In 1947, three aircraft machinists, Frank Snow, Jim Spivey, and Loren Harbor, rented machine space to produce rivets for the aircraft industry along with fishing rod guides and rifle front sight ramps. In the post-WWII years, sport shooting was becoming hugely popular, but quality ammunition was in short supply. For shooting enthusiasts, reloading was the solution to the ammo supply shortage. Snow, Spivey, and Harbor recognized this, creating Sierra Bullets to help fill the void. Before long, they were selling a 53-grain match bullet to the Hollywood Gun Shop. These bullets are still in production today as the Sierra #1400 53-grain MatchKing.
A few years later, an accomplished competitive shooter named Martin Hull joined Sierra. Hull helped develop new bullet types and served as manager of Sierra’s ballistics laboratory for nearly 20 years. With Hull’s help, Sierra’s output grew rapidly. The California company outgrew several locations before it moved to a large facility in Santa Fe Springs, CA, in 1963.
New Owners and New President in the Late Sixties
In 1968, the Leisure Group bought Sierra Bullets. Other Leisure Group companies included Lyman Reloading, High Standard Manufacturing Company, Yard Man, Thompson Sprinkler Systems, Flexible Flyer Sleds, and Dodge Trophies (Which made the Oscar and Rose Bowl Game trophies).
Soon after purchasing Sierra, the Leisure Group hired Robert Hayden as President and General Manager. Hayden was a mechanical engineer who had worked for Remington Arms. Hayden remained the president of Sierra for 42 years, retiring in 2012 when Pat Daly became president.
Sierra Moves to Missouri
In 1990, Sierra relocated to Sedalia, Missouri, where the company remains today. Sierra Bullets now employs over 100 people including five full-time ballistic technicians who answer daily reloading and firearms questions by both phone and e-mail.
The Making of MatchKings — How Sierra Produces SMKs
All Sierra bullets begin life as a strip of gilding metal, an alloy consisting of 95% copper and 5% zinc. To meet Sierra’s strict quality requirements, the gilding metal requires three times more dimensional and quality control standards than is considered standard in the copper manufacturing industry.
A blanking press stamps out a uniform disc and forms the cup that will be drawn into the MatchKing jacket. The cup is then polished and sent to a draw press to be drawn into a jacket that is longer than needed for the future MatchKing, thus allowing for the trim process. Press operators constantly check concentricity to make sure we have only quality jackets. The jackets then go to a trimmer where they are visually inspected again.
After being polished a second time, the jacket travels to the bullet press. In the meantime, 80-pound lead billets are being extruded into lead wire for the cores where great care is taken so that the core wire is not stretched. The core wire is lightly oiled before continuing to the bullet press to be swaged.
The lead core wire and trimmed jacket meet at the bullet press where the first stage forms a boattail on the jacket. The lead core is then formed on top of the bullet press and fed down into the jacket. In one stroke of the press, the MatchKing is formed.
Quality control technicians pull samples from each lot of MatchKings to make sure they meet Sierra’s stringent standards. Samples are then sent to Sierra’s 300-meter underground test range (shown below) to be shot for accuracy on mechanical mounts referred to as “unrestricted return to battery rests” that Sierra designed and built in-house.
After inspection, the bullets are placed in the familiar green box along with reloading labels. They are then shrink-wrapped and shipped all over the world.
Share the post "Sierra Bullets — How It All Started Nearly 70 Years Ago"
Earlier this summer, California Governor Jerry Brown signed six restrictive new gun laws. Less than 24 hours after they arrived on his desk, Brown signed six anti-gun bills railroaded through the Democratic-controlled California Legislature. This legislation imposes many new burdens on California gun-owners and criminalizes conduct that was heretofore legal. With little public debate, these bills were rushed through the legislative process. And now Californians are facing the disturbing consequences.
FREE Online Webinar on California Gun Laws
To help Californians understand their responsibilities under the new gun laws, the Michel & Associates law firm is hosting a free online seminar this week. As space is limited, advanced registration is required for the seminar. CLICK HERE to REGISTER.
The seminar will be held, Wednesday, August 24, 2016 at 12:00 pm (PT). This live webinar will explain how the new gun laws will affect gun owners, when they will go into effect, and what citizens need to do to comply with these laws. The seminar will be hosted by C.D. Michel and Joseph Silvoso, lawyers with Michel & Associates. Important topics will include:
SB 1235 (Ammunition Purchase Bill): This new law requires the California Department of Justice (DOJ) to record ammunition vendor and ammunition purchaser information. This ill-conceived legislation has caused much confusion. It is unclear how AB 1235 will affect mail-order purchases of loaded ammunition from vendors outside the state.
SB 1446 (Magazine Ban): SB 1446 which will require Californians to forfeit, destroy, or ship out of the state ALL firearms magazines that can hold more than ten rounds. Owners of legally-obtained magazines, previously “grandfathered”, will receive no compensation though they must give up their property. Those who fail to comply will be fined and charged with an infraction, a low-level crime. This magazine restriction goes into effect July 1, 2017.
Other California Gun Laws Signed by Gov. Brown:
AB 1135 (Levine) and SB 880 (Hall) Firearms: Assault Weapons – Expands the definition of assault weapons based on whether a semiautomatic firearm has a detachable magazine, banning thousands of popular firearms.
AB 1511 (Santiago) Firearms: Lending – Makes it illegal to loan a firearm to a person who is personally known to you (except for family members with restrictions).
AB 1695 (Bonta) Firearms: False Reports – Creates a 10-year prohibition on owning firearms for someone convicted of falsely reporting a lost or stolen firearm.
California Governor Jerry Brown just departed for a luxurious European vacation. But before he left the state, he savaged the Second Amendment rights of millions of California gun owners. Less than 24 hours after they arrived on his desk, Brown signed six anti-gun bills railroaded through the Democratic-controlled California Legislature. Among the bills signed by Brown was SB 1446 which will require Californians to forfeit, destroy, or ship out of the state ALL firearms magazines that can hold more than ten rounds. Owners of legally-obtained magazines, previously “grandfathered”, will receive no compensation though they must give up their property. Those who fail to comply will be fined and charged with an infraction, a low-level crime. This magazine restriction goes into effect July 1, 2017.
Gov. Brown also signed SB 1235 which will require background checks for the purchase of any and all ammunition. Ammo buyers’ names and personal information will be logged and tracked in a database.
Notice from NSSF RE California Legislation
The NSSF issued this statement: “The National Shooting Sports Foundation is extremely disappointed that Gov. Brown today chose to sign into law these highly restrictive and unneeded gun control measures, all of which will affect law-abiding Californians while doing nothing to stop the criminal misuse of firearms. By acting within 24 hours after being sent these bills, and not allowing the public to voice their opinions in order to depart for his European vacation, the governor compounded the miscarriage of legislative process and procedure while demonstrating disdain for Californians who now face laws that clearly infringe on their Constitutional rights.”
Gov. Brown SIGNED the following bills into law:
AB 1135 (Levine) and SB 880 (Hall) Firearms: Assault Weapons – Expands the definition of assault weapons based on whether a semiautomatic firearm has a detachable magazine, banning thousands of popular firearms.
SB 1235 (de Leon) Ammunition – Requires authorization to purchase ammunition and track what and how much ammunition each person buys, creating a database of ammunition purchasers.
SB 1446 (Hancock) Firearms: Magazine Capacity – Makes it illegal to possess magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds no matter how long a person has owned them.
AB 1511 (Santiago) Firearms: Lending – Makes it illegal to loan a firearm to a person who is personally known to you (except for family members with restrictions).
AB 1695 (Bonta) Firearms: False Reports – Creates a 10-year prohibition on owning firearms for someone convicted of falsely reporting a lost or stolen firearm.
Gov. Brown VETOED the following bills:
SB 894 (Jackson) Firearms: Lost or Stolen: reports – Would have made it a crime not to report lost and stolen firearms to law enforcement within the arbitrary time limit.
AB 1673 (Gipson) Firearms: Unfinished frame or receiver – Would have expanded the definition of a firearm to include partially finished frames and receivers (no definition of what this means) and require their registration.
AB 1674 (Santiago) Firearms: Transfers – Would have made it illegal to buy or receive more than one firearm in any 30-day period.
If you wish to Contact Gov. Brown’s office to voice your concern about his signing of six anti-gun measures, here is the contact information:
Governor Jerry Brown
c/o State Capitol, Suite 1173
Sacramento, CA 95814
By Dennis Santiago
It’s called the “Rattle Battle” or more formally, the National Trophy Infantry Team Match (NTIT) at the U.S. National Matches at Camp Perry, Ohio. It requires practice. It takes teamwork. To optimize one’s Rattle Battle practice in California you need a pre-ban AR-15 properly CA DOJ registered [that’s California law] service rifle — something that civilians in California are now banned from acquiring (along with high-capacity magazines). Glad I have my 1989 Roberti-Roos era registered rifle because I do want to represent my state as well as I can at the Nationals. It’s legal to insert a 30-round magazine into this CA-registered rifle.
This is a practice drill shooting 29 rounds in 50 seconds. Hyperventilate, shoot multiple rounds per breath, put them all into the silhouette target. This was slow. I need to build speed to create time to make one or two sight corrections on command in the middle of the string. Practice makes perfect. As they say: “Improvise, Adapt, and Overcome.”
The CMP’s National Trophy Infantry Team Match (NTIT) has been a staple at the National Matches since 1922. Also known as the “Rattle Battle,” the event is one of the most unique in the competitive rifling world — scoring is based on how many hits six-person teams can score on a bank of targets during a series of 50-second firing periods at four yardages.
Teams begin the NTIT match with 384 rounds of ammunition, which they fire upon eight silhouette targets from 600, 500, 300, and 200 yards during successive 50-second periods. After each rapid-fire string, team members move forward (to the next-closest distance) carrying all equipment from firing line to firing line. The match emphasizes extremely fast, accurate fire and good communication among teammates. The Rattle Battle is always an exciting competition for spectators to watch.
.
Share the post "Dennis Practices for the “Rattle Battle”"
A new statute passed in California will bar state employees (as well as teachers, police personnel, and health care workers) from using a variety of firearms terms in official communications. California Assembly Bill 2243, authored by Assemblyman Tony Fulenzo (D. Los Angeles), defines over 30 gun-related words as “hate speech”. Under existing California law, any words/phrases defined as “hate speech” are proscribed (forbidden) in official publications, school textbooks, and all public-sector communications (including email). By effect of AB 2243 then, dozens of gun-related nouns, verbs, and adjectives will be banned, and “shall no longer be uttered or used in the State of California by any public agent or employee”.
Assemblyman Fulenzo said his intent in sponsoring AB 2243 was to alter public attitudes toward firearms, and in particular, to convince school children that firearms are bad. “We want to prevent young kids from perceiving firearms as ‘cool’ or ‘exciting’. The best way to do that is to bury the subject altogether. We need to dismantle the ‘gun culture’. That begins with banning the words themselves.”
Fulenzo said AB 2243 was inspired by existing bans on racist “hate speech”: “We don’t want children to read about guns or talk about guns. The first step, therefore, is to remove firearms-related words from textbooks, classroom presentations, and state documents. This is not something new. California has done the same thing with hateful words directed at minority groups. In California, by law, we have banned the use of the ‘N’ word (and other racist terms) in official state publications and school textbooks. Now we are just following that practice and banning the ‘G’ word (i.e. ‘gun’) and similar firearms-related hate speech”.
Ban on Gun Words in Arizona Next?
Meanwhile, in neighboring Arizona, anti-gun groups have called for the passage of similar legislation banning the use of firearms-related terminology.
Permitted Word Equivalencies for Banned Firearm Terms
When enacted into law, AB 2243 will ban more than 30 firearm-related words, including “gun”, “pistol”, “rifle”, “bullet” and other commonly-used words. Where it is necessary to reference a firearm, as in a police report, AB 2243 provides for substitute words or phrases. AB 2243 recognizes that, in some instances, it will be necessary to mention firearms-related facts in official documents. By using these officially-designated substitute words, firearms-related facts can be logged without resort to banned “hate speech”.
Gun = “Gunk”
Pistol = “Piddle”
Rifle = “Ripple”
Shoot = “Suit”
Bullet = “Mullet”
Cartridge = “Partridge”
How to Use CA-Approved Substitute Words:
Under AB 2243, if an official report requires description of a hate speech item, then the approved replacement words shall be used instead of the prohibited terms. For example, if a state-funded hospital treats a pistol wound, this shall be listed as a “piddle wound” in the medical report. Likewise the recovery of cartridges at a crime scene by police shall be recorded as a “partridge recovery” in the incident report.
New Law Does Not Restrict Speech by Non-Governmental Entities
This new law only applies to “public sector” entities (schools, police/sheriff agencies, hospitals/health clinics, state and municipal agencies). Private businesses, including newspapers and web sites, will still be allowed to use firearms-related words without the threat of prosecution. Likewise, private citizens will still be allowed to say “gun”, “pistol”, or “rifle” etc. in their own private communications. However internet posting of hate speech involving forbidden firearm words will be monitored by a new California State Agency. This new Agency, the California Office of Firearms Hate Speech (COFHS) will be funded by a new 5% sales tax on firearms ammunition and components.
Share the post "California Bans Use of Firearms Words as “Hate Speech”"
Report by Johnny Fisher
Here’s something you don’t see very often — a fullbore shooter with a .223 Remington topped a field of talented .308 Win shooters. Not only that, he scored more points than any F-Class competitor (however, F-Classers shot a smaller target). Bob Gill’s performance proves that, even in an era of high-BC .308 bullets, the little .223 Rem cartridge can still hold its own in the hands of a great shooter.
At last weekend’s California State Fullbore Championships, Bob Gill bested over 30 competitors for the championship with a .223 Palma rifle, only dropping 7 points over the weekend for a 993-56X. The event was sponsored by the California Rifle & Pistol Association and hosted by the Coalinga Rifle Club.
Bob Gill Talks about the ‘Mental Game’
Conventional wisdom when shooting any match is to just stay focused on each and every shot and let the scores work themselves out after all firing is complete. “Two To The Mound” shooting changes all of that, as each competitor is not only aware of their own standings throughout the course of the match – but also of their closest competitor during these pair-fire strings. With this championship never further out than a 2-point lead throughout the weekend, stress was high and every once of mental focus needed to be tapped.
Bob recalls, “The entire match was neck and neck. After a few mental mistakes and a few wind mistakes, with three shots remaining the thought is three shots and a 1X lead. I need to shoot three 10s. Everything else goes away. Shoot three 10s and he can’t catch me.”
Three 10s later, Bob won the CA State Fullbore Championship by one point and one X. Well done!
Gun Specifications
Bob was shooting a 1970s-era .223 Remington B-40X action inside a Competition Machine R1 chassis. The barrel is a 30.5″ Heavy Palma taper, 1:7″-twist Brux with a Wylde chamber and .220 freebore done up by Randy Gregory at Accuracy Unlimited. The Tubb 7T7 two-stage trigger was set at 1 + 1 pounds.
.223 Remington Accuracy Load — Berger 90gr VLDS, Varget and BR4s
Gill loaded 90gr Berger VLDs in front of 25.0 grains of Hodgdon Varget powder, jumping 15 to 20 thousandths for a 2.708 COL with a BR4 primer inside Lapua brass. Bob uses a Redding Full-Length S-Die to push the shoulders back .004 to match that of new Lapua brass and a bushing chosen to achieve .004 neck tension. He sorts his brass by weight into 0.5 grain lots and each piece is trimmed on a Giraud trimmer after sizing because he says “it grows like crazy”.
Fullbore Course of Fire — Pair Firing on Day 2 at Coalinga
The Fullbore Course-Of-Fire for this match was squadded on the first day by classification for 15-shots string-fire at each yard-line: 300 / 600 / 900 / 1000 yards. These scores were then used to determine “two to the mound” squadding for the second day, when each competitor pair-fired with his closest competitor, and also kept score in between his own shots. In this “pair fire” arrangement, only 45 seconds are allowed between shots after a shooter accepts his shot score. This forces competitors to shoot through condition changes as opposed to waiting for a more favorable pattern.
Don’t drive through the City of Los Angeles (or fly into LAX) if you have a magazine that holds more than ten (10) rounds. The Los Angeles City Council enacted a new law that makes mere possession of a full-capacity magazine illegal EVEN if it was obtained legally. Possession of a magazine that holds more than 10 rounds will now be a misdemeanor throughout the City of Los Angeles. This applies to any person within city limits, including those traveling via Highways or Los Angeles International Airport (LAX). View this Map to see Los Angeles City boundaries, which encompass all major North/South freeways and train routes.
The CTD Shooter’s Log warns travelers: “The law doesn’t just apply to Los Angeles city residents. Non-resident gun owners must avoid traveling through any part of the City of Los Angeles while possessing any banned magazine. Notably, the City intersects every major Southern California freeway. In some cases, the City of Los Angeles completely surrounds other smaller cities, like Beverly Hills, and Santa Monica. So anyone traveling out of Santa Monica or Beverly Hills, and anyone traveling through the city of Los Angeles with a banned magazine can be prosecuted.”
Summary: Under the ordinance, possession of any “large-capacity” magazine within Los Angeles after November 19, 2015 will be a misdemeanor offense. Los Angeles residents must get rid of their banned magazines by November 18, 2015. You can surrender magazines to the LAPD, sell them to a licensed firearm dealer, transport them out of the City limits, or you can “permanently alter” the magazine so it no longer hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition.
Trap for Unsuspecting Travelers
We fear this new law will be a trap for the unsuspecting, including match competitors traveling through the L.A. metropolis on the way to other venues. We suggest that you do not even think about bring large-capacity magazines into the general Los Angeles area (even if you presume you can skirt the city limits). If you can’t avoid transiting Los Angeles, bring only magazines that hold no more than ten rounds — and test them to make sure you can’t shove in an 11th. You can be sure that the friendly LAPD will “assume the worst” when stopping citizens for violation of the magazine law.
SHOT Show Warning: If you are headed to SHOT Show in Las Vegas and have high-cap mags for display or for use on Media Day, it’s best to steer clear of Los Angeles. Be mindful of this when planning your Air Travel.
Elsewhere in California — Older High-Cap Magazines Are Grand-Fathered
Under current California state law it is illegal to buy, sell, manufacture, or import magazines that hold more than ten rounds. However, statewide (except in San Francisco, Sunnyvale ,and Los Angeles) it is still completely legal to possess such magazines if they were acquired legally BEFORE the high-cap magazine ban went into effect. In other words, possession of “pre-ban” high-cap magazines is “grandfathered” in California — you just can’t buy or sell them anymore within California.
Share the post "Traveler’s Warning — Los Angeles Magazine Ban Starts Nov. 18th"
This is a cautionary tale of what can happen when municipal governments are allowed to enact radical, restrictive gun laws…
San Francisco, California has over 850,000 residents*. But thanks to SF’s gun-phobic elected officials, you soon won’t be able to find a single store that sells guns and ammo within city limits. High Bridge Arms, San Francisco’s last remaining gun shop, announced it will be closing its doors in October. The reason is the threat of a new SF law requiring gun retailers to video-tape sales transactions and turn over private customer data to the city. This proposed city ordinance goes way beyond existing state and Federal background check requirements.
“Big Brother” is alive and well in the “city by the Bay”. According to Guns.com, San Francisco Supervisor Ken Farrell introduced a municipal ordinance requiring gun vendors to video-tape gun/ammo sales transactions and deliver buyer/firearms data to police every week. Gun shop owners would be required to “hand over personal information to include names, addresses and birth dates to city officials in conjunction with gun and ammo sales.”
Given the threat of this draconian new city law, High Bridge Arms, San Francisco’s last remaining gun store, announced it would cease operations next month. Posting on Facebook, High Bridge’s owner declared: “We are closing our shop. For many reasons I cannot get into at this moment, it appears our final days will be through to the end of October of 2015.” It is not known whether High Bridge Arms will re-locate to a different location outside San Francisco city limits.
San Francisco-based Top Shot Champion Chris Cheng says the closure of High Bridge Arms will only encourage the anti-gun politicians who run the city: “With High Bridge moving out, it will be interesting to see what will happen to legislation the San Francisco Board of Supervisors is considering which would require video-taping gun and ammunition sales, and sharing ammo sales data with SFPD. My guess is that even with High Bridge closing by the time they vote on this, they will pass it in the hopes to keep any future gun shops from trying to open in the future.”
High Bridge Arms has a long history in San Francisco. Serving sport shooters as well as city law enforcement personnel, High Bridge has operated in the same Mission Street location since the mid-1950s when Olympic shooter and gunsmith Bob Chow opened the shop. In 1988, Andy Takahashi bought the business from Mr. Chow.
*The U.S. Census Bureau estimates San Francisco’s population at 852,469 as of July 1, 2014. San Francisco photo by Creative Commons License, attribution Bernard Gagnon.
Share the post "San Francisco’s Last Gun Store Closes — Thanks to the Politicians"
A few years ago, some folks released a video that showed how gun control laws might operate in a fictional California of the future. The video shows how State Agency pre-authorization would have to be obtained before a handgun could be employed for self-defense in the home. Sound far-fetched? Well, it turns out that this satirical video was not that far from the truth. That disturbing vision of the future is coming to pass… at least in some parts of California.
The City of Los Angeles recently passed an municipal ordinance that would require handguns to be locked up (or otherwise disabled) when kept in the home. Modeled after a similar law in San Francisco, the Los Angeles ordinance makes it a misdemeanor to keep an unsecured handgun in a home. There are some exceptions to the locking rule (such as when the owner has the firearm in “close proxmity”), but this Los Angeles ordinance still imposes onerous burdens on citizens who might need a firearm to defend themselves in their own homes.
Under the new Los Angeles city ordinance, there is no “pre-authorization” requirement — at least not yet. But that could be the next step, as this video shows…
Think about it… how can you respond to an intruder if you have to call and ask for permission to access your own firearm. How that scenario might unfold is depicted in this video, a chilling preview of gun ownership in California. The video is a dramatization, but it shows what could happen in the Golden State in the not-too-distant future.
Share the post "Bleak Vision of Future Gun Control Becomes Reality in California"
Fulenzo said AB 2243 was inspired by existing bans on racist “hate speech”: “We don’t want children to read about guns or talk about guns. The first step, therefore, is to remove firearms-related words from textbooks, classroom presentations, and state documents. This is not something new. California has done the same thing with hateful words directed at minority groups. In California, by law, we have banned the use of the ‘N’ word (and other racist terms) in official state publications and school textbooks. Now we are just following that practice and banning the ‘G’ word (i.e. ‘gun’) and similar firearms-related hate speech”.
