In recent years, the California Legislature has passed a series of laws restricting the rights of California gun owners. The latest example of anti-gun legislation will hit gun owners in their pocketbooks….
If you want to practice your marksmanship in California from now on, get ready to open your wallet and pay the taxman. With the passage of AB 211, signed into law by Gov. Gavin Newsom, California shooters who use paper targets at indoor ranges will have to pay a fee for every hole they put in paper — literally. This new law, codified in the California Penal Code, states that commercial gun ranges must collect a charge of $0.38 per shot, as established by holes made in approved paper targets. This fee, the “Target Tax”, can be raised in the future at the discretion of the California Dept. of Justice.
Here’s how it will work, starting June 1, 2023, when the new Target Tax law goes into effect at California indoor ranges. First, all shooters must purchase California DOJ-approved paper targets (you may no longer bring your own). When you purchase a certified target at an indoor range, your name and the number of targets you have purchased will be recorded in a state database. Then, after your shooting session, the targets must be scanned, with the number of shot holes recorded. A charge of $0.38 per scanned hole will be added as a line item for your range session, along with the DOJ target-processing fee of $5.00 per target.
With 30 holes, the new California target tax on this left target would be 30 x $0.38 or $11.40. Conversely, the tax on the target on the right would be just 38 cents, because there is only one hole, though five shots went through the same hole. Obviously, exceptional marksmanship skills can help reduce your target tax liabilities.
California Targets Must Be Culturally Tolerant and Non-Discriminatory
AB 211 also includes a series of provisions which specify the types of targets which may be purchased. First, as you might expect, all targets must be printed on recycled paper. Second, no target may contain any “hate speech” or “micro-aggressions”. Third, while targets may still show human silhouette-style outlines, any targets which depict a protected minority type or non-binary gender type are forbidden. Likewise, any target that shows discernable culture, religion, or national origin are forbidden. So, a target showing a bearded male wearing a turban would be forbidden. If you had such a target, the range owner would be required, under AB 211, to confiscate it. Shown below are two types of targets that would be illegal in California under AB 211. NOTE: It is unclear whether a zombie target would be allowed, if the Zombie is unknown gender, ethnicity, or culture.
In some areas of the country (California in particular), hunters are now forbidden to use bullets that contain lead. The Biden administration is currently pursuing a wide-scale ban on lead ammo on Federal lands. If you need a lead-free projectile for your deer rifle, consider Nosler’s E-Tip projectile. This has plenty of penetrating power and retained energy while complying with laws requiring “unleaded” ammunition. An “expansion chamber” behind the green polymer tip helps ensure reliable expansion with 95% weight retention. The video below shows a .30 caliber, 180gr lead-free E-Tip impressively power through TWO 12-inch blocks of Ballistics Gel at 100 yards. This was fired from a .308 Winchester.
Watch 180gr eTip Penetration and Expansion in Ballistic Gelatin:
Nosler claims the E-Tip (“Expansion Tip”) bullet has advantages over other solid copper hunting bullets: “Unlike the competitor’s one-piece designs, Nosler E-Tip bullets will not blow the petals off at extreme velocities nor will the low end expansion ever be questioned, as the minimum impact velocity is set at 1800 fps for standard calibers.” One hunter, posting on Facebook, gave the E-Tip high marks: “I have had the opportunity to take a pig with a 130 gr E-Tip from my .270 and they work flawlessly. My son took two pigs with his .300 Win Mag and 165gr E-Tips and they worked flawlessly as well.”
This video illustrates the design and construction of the Nosler eTip Bullet:
California young adults (18 to 20 years) can now own a semi-auto rifle such as this Browning for hunting, self defense, and target shooting. The 9th Circuit struck down a California law as unconstitutional.
Report from Second Amendment Foundation (SAF)
On May 11, 2022, A three-judge panel for the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals struck down a California prohibition on sales of semi-automatic rifles to 18- to 20-year-old young adults. The 9th Circuit then remanded the case, Jones v. Bonta, back to the District Court for further proceedings. This ruling is a major victory for firearms rights. The fight against California’s unconstitutional restriction was led by a coalition of Second Amendment advocate groups.
In this legal action, the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF), was joined by the Firearms Policy Coalition, Inc., Firearms Policy Foundation, Calguns Foundation, Poway Weapons and Gear and PWG Range, North County Shooting Center, Inc, Beebe Family Arms and Munitions, and three private citizens, including Matthew Jones for whom the case is named. Download Jones v. Bonta PDF.
The majority opinion was written by Judge Ryan Nelson and joined by Judge Kenneth Lee, both Donald Trump appointees, and in part by Judge Sidney Stein from the Southern District of New York, a Bill Clinton appointee. Judge Stein also dissented in part.
Writing for the majority, Judge Nelson observed, “(T)he Second Amendment protects the right of young adults to keep and bear arms, which includes the right to purchase them. The district court reasoned otherwise and held that the laws did not burden Second Amendment rights at all: that was legal error…(T)he district court erred by applying intermediate scrutiny, rather than strict scrutiny, to the semiautomatic centerfire rifle ban. And even under intermediate scrutiny, this ban likely violates the Second Amendment because it fails the ‘reasonable fit’ test.”
“We are delighted with the opinion,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “The court majority rightly recognized that delaying the exercise of a right until age 21 does irreparable harm. It also applied strict scrutiny to the semi-auto ban.”
Gottlieb noted this ruling could have an impact on another case challenging a similar prohibition in Washington State, which is also part of the Ninth Circuit. There, the prohibition was adopted via a citizen initiative in 2018, and was challenged by SAF and the National Rifle Association. ABA Journal related article.
“America would not exist without the heroism of the young adults who fought and died in our revolutionary army,” wrote Judge Ryan Nelson in his majority opinion.
“Today, we reaffirm that our Constitution still protects the right that enabled their sacrifice: the right of young adults to keep and bear arms,” Nelson wrote.
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 22408, 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 22408 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 22408 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 22408 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 Oregon Next?
Meanwhile, in neighboring Oregon, anti-gun groups have called for the passage of similar legislation banning the use of firearms-related terminology. And there have been protests in Arizona also.
Permitted Word Equivalencies for Banned Firearm Terms
When enacted into law, AB 22408 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 22308 provides for substitute words or phrases. AB 22408 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”
Ammo = “Venmo”
Cartridge = “Partridge”
How to Use CA-Approved Substitute Words:
Under AB 22408, 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.
Today, November 25th, is Thanksgiving. That means a large percentage of Americans will be on the road to visit relatives. We know many of our readers have concealed carry permits or will otherwise be traveling with firearms. When crossing into different states with guns in a vehicle, you need to be mindful of all state and local laws and restrictions.
Five Worst States for Traveling with Firearms
This article appears in the Cheaper Than Dirt Shooter’s Log.
The U.S. is a patchwork of confusing and cumbersome laws that change the rules of what you can carry, where you can carry, and whether you can possess the firearm, ammunition of magazine at without running afoul of the local laws. Now, if every state was like Vermont, law abiding gun owners could freely travel with their firearms with no worries. Unfortunately, many states have a history of being hostile to traveling gun owners.
The federal “Firearms Owner Protection Act” allows travel through any state as long as the firearm is unloaded, in a locked case, and not easily accessible to the passengers. However, that is not to say that certain states that are less friendly to firearms have not created their own laws that would snare unsuspecting otherwise law-abiding firearm owners. This led us to name the Top 5 States to Avoid while traveling with a firearm this holiday season.
CONNECTICUT
Connecticut does not have any gun reciprocity agreements with other states. This means nonresidents are not allowed to carry handguns in Connecticut under a permit issued by another state.
HAWAII
Every person arriving into the state who brings a firearm of any description, usable or not, shall register the firearm within three days of the arrival of the person or the firearm, whichever arrives later, with the chief of police of the county where the person will reside, where their business is, or the person’s place of sojourn. GET Hawaii Firearms INFO HERE.
MASSACHUSETTS
Massachusetts imposes harsh penalties on the mere possession and transport of firearms without a license to carry. Prospective travelers are urged to contact the Massachusetts Firearms Records Bureau at (617) 660-4780 or contact the State Police. GET Massachusetts Firearms INFO HERE.
NEW JERSEY
New Jersey has some of the most restrictive firearms laws in the country. Your firearm must be unloaded, in a locked container, and not accessible in the passenger compartment of the vehicle. The New Jersey Supreme Court ruled that anyone traveling within the state is deemed to be aware of these regulations and will be held strictly accountable for violations. If you’re traveling through New Jersey, the N.J. State Police website provides information regarding transporting firearms within state lines. GET New Jersey Firearms INFO HERE.
NEW YORK
Use extreme caution when traveling through New York state with firearms. New York’s general approach is to make the possession of handguns and so-called “assault weapons” illegal. A number of localities, including Albany, Buffalo, New York City, Rochester, Suffolk County, and Yonkers, impose their own requirements on the possession, registration, and transport of firearms. Possession of a handgun within New York City requires a New York City handgun license or a special permit from the city Police Commissioner. This license validates a state license within the city. Even New York state licenses are generally not valid within New York City unless a specific exemption applies. Possession of a shotgun or rifle within New York City requires a permit, which is available to non-residents, and a certificate of registration.
More Scary States for Gun Owners
Here are six other jurisdictions (five states and DC) where you need to be wary when traveling. California, for example, treats all handguns in vehicles as “loaded” if there is ammunition loaded into an attached magazine. It’s wise, when in California, to have handguns unloaded in a LOCKED case, with all ammunition or magazines in a separate section of the vehicle. These states (and DC) all have laws that can trap unsuspecting gun-owners. Be wary.
California
Delaware
Dist. of Columbia
Illinois
Maryland
Rhode Island
In some areas of the country (California in particular), hunters are now forbidden to use bullets that contain lead. If you need a lead-free projectile for your deer rifle, consider Nosler’s E-Tip projectile. This has plenty of penetrating power and retained energy while complying with laws requiring “unleaded” ammunition. An “expansion chamber” behind the green polymer tip helps ensure reliable expansion with 95% weight retention. The video below shows a .30 Caliber 180gr lead-free E-Tip impressively power through TWO 12-inch blocks of Ballistics Gel at 100 yards. This was fired from a .308 Winchester.
Watch 180gr eTip Penetration and Expansion in Ballistic Gelatin:
Nosler claims the E-Tip bullet has advantages over other solid copper hunting bullets: “Unlike the competitor’s one-piece designs, Nosler E-Tip bullets will not blow the petals off at extreme velocities nor will the low end expansion ever be questioned, as the minimum impact velocity is set at 1800 fps for standard calibers.” One hunter, posting on Facebook, gave the E-Tip high marks: “I have had the opportunity to take a pig with a 130 gr E-Tip from my .270 and they work flawlessly. My son took two pigs with his .300 Win Mag and 165gr E-Tips and they worked flawlessly as well.”
This video illustrates the design and construction of the Nosler eTip Bullet:
Breaking News April 25, 2020: There is a report that CA’s Attorney General has applied to the Federal 9th Circuit Court of Appeals for an Emergency STAY of the injunction issued by Judge Benitez blocking application of California’s ammunition background check system. We are working now to determine the status of the case.
Currently in California, citizens must go through a state background check to purchase ammunition — any ammunition. And for quite some time, California residents have not been able to purchase ammunition from out of state, unless the ammunition is first shipped to an approved California ammo dealer. All ammo sales must take place in-person through licensed ammunition vendors. This has all resulted in significantly increased ammo costs in California, and failure of the state’s computerized ammo check system has resulted in over 16% of legitimate purchasers being denied the right to obtain ammunition.
Now all that may change. In Rhode v. Becerra, Federal District Court Judge Roger Benitez has determined that the California ammo check system is fatally flawed and unconstitutional. On April 23, 2020, the Judge granted a temporary injunction which halts California’s ammo background check system and lifts California’s blockade of ammo imports from other states. Californians may now again purchase ammo directly from out-of-state vendors. READ Injunction Decision HERE.
Judge Benitez called California’s ammunition background check law “onerous and convoluted” and “constitutionally defective”. The Judge stated that: “The background check experiment defies common sense while unduly and severely burdening the Second Amendment rights of every responsible, gun-owning citizen desiring to lawfully buy ammunition”. Notably, the lead plaintiff in the case, Kim Rhode, is an Olympic Gold Medalist trap shooter, whose ability to obtain competition-grade shotshells was impaired by California’s “onerous” ammo purchase restrictions.
California’s ammo laws blocked sales to legitimate, law-abiding buyers about 16% of the time, the Judge noted. Moreover, in his 120-page Opinion, the Judge held that the state’s ban on importing ammunition from outside California violates federal interstate commerce laws.
As reported by the NRA-ILA: “The [court’s] Thursday’s injunction means the law cannot be enforced while the case is active unless the decision is stayed.”
Judge Benitez slammed California’s Ammo Check law: “The experiment has been tried. The casualties have been counted. California’s new ammunition background check law misfires and the Second Amendment rights of California citizens have been gravely injured.
These new laws are constitutionally defective for several reasons. First, criminals, tyrants, and terrorists don’t do background checks. The background check experiment defies common sense while unduly and severely burdening the Second Amendment rights of every responsible, gun-owning citizen desiring to lawfully buy ammunition. Second, the implementing regulations systematically prohibit or deter an untold number of law-abiding California citizen-residents from undergoing the required background checks. Third, in the seven months since implementation, the standard background check rejected citizen-residents who are NOT prohibited persons approximately 16.4% of the time. Fourth, the ammunition anti-importation laws directly violate the federal dormant Commerce Clause.”
This Video analyzes the decision in Rhode v. Becerra
Constitutional Rights Must Be Preserved Even in Times of Crisis
The Judge stressed that Constitutional rights should not be sacrificed, especially in these challenging times: “Law-abiding citizens are imbued with the unalienable right to keep and bear firearms along with the ammunition to make their firearms work….. Presently, California and many other states sit in isolation under pandemic-inspired stay-at-home orders…. Maintaining Second Amendment rights are especially important in times like these. Keeping vigilant is necessary in both bad times and good, for if we let these rights lapse in the good times, they might never be recovered in time to resist the next appearance of criminals, terrorists, or tyrants.”
How did California politicians react to their defeat in Court? Read comments from CA Attorney General Xavier Becerra and other state officials in Associated Press Report reprinted by NBC Los Angeles.
This article is written from California where gun stores are shuttered due to the ordered closure of “non-essential businesses”, as part of the effort to slow spread of the Coronavirus. While there is no outright ban on purchasing a gun in California, from a practical standpoint, the gunshops are all closed now. It’s very difficult to purchase ammo as well. But you CAN buy cannabis (marijuana). Yes, that’s right, California Governor Newsom declared Cannabis Dispensaries (Pot Shops) to be essential businesses. Oh well…
Currently 14 U.S. states have issued Stay-at-Home executive orders. In most locations these orders mandate business shutdowns as part of the “Stay at Home/Shelter in Place” strategies. Some states are closing gun stores, others are not. We think gun stores do provide “essential services” that help Americans defend themselves, their families, their homes, and their property. We applaud Illinois which stated that gun and ammo dealers are “essential businesses” that would NOT be closed as part of the Illinois Stay at Home program.
The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) is working to ensure that firearms-related businesses are allowed to keep their doors open during these difficult times. The NSSF stated:
[T]he National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) is hard at work for you during this challenging time as the nation faces the COVID-19 pandemic. NSSF is in contact with the White House, Capitol Hill, and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) advocating that our industry — from manufacturers to distributors to retailers to ranges — be declared by DHS as a “national critical infrastructure industry”. The DHS list is only guidance to states and local governments and does not carry the force of law. Therefore, NSSF is proactively working at the state and local level to advocate that our industry be exempted from any emergency ordinances or orders as “essential businesses”.
For example, through NSSF’s efforts, a proposed city ordnance in Albuquerque, NM, to shutter firearm retailers was defeated. Most recently, in response to NSSF’s efforts, the Governor of Illinois, in his emergency “shelter in place” executive order, declared that firearm and ammunition suppliers and retailers are “essential” and may remain open for business. Please see official statement below:
Supplies for Essential Businesses and Operations (Illinois): Businesses that sell, manufacture, or supply other Essential Businesses and Operations with the support or materials necessary to operate, including computers, audio and video electronics, household appliances; IT and telecommunication equipment; hardware, paint, flat glass; electrical, plumbing and heating material; sanitary equipment; personal hygiene products; food, food additives, ingredients and components; medical and orthopedic equipment; optics and photography equipment; diagnostics, food and beverages, chemicals, soaps and detergent; and firearm and ammunition suppliers and retailers for purposes of safety and security;
The NSSF is also providing guidance for gunshop owners and FFLs. If you operate a sporting goods store or gunshop that sells firearms, you may want to visit the NSSF website, NSSF.org, for guidance on securing your inventory and dealing with increased demand and panic buying.
Today a friend, who has never owned a gun before, called this Editor to ask for firearms recommendations after California officials announced a lock-down of six California counties, home to 6.7 million people. He wanted a gun for defense of his home and family (he has a wife and two young boys).
This story is being repeated around the country as many Americans seek to acquire guns for home defense, many for the first time. There are also concerns that governmental emergency powers, put into place to deal with the Coronovirus pandemic, will be used to throttle the sales of guns and/or ammunition.
In some cities in California, people are lining up around the block to buy guns and ammo. Many do not realize ID is required and there are background checks and waiting periods. Apparently they believed false media reports that firearms are easy to acquire. Our friend Vu Pham posted on Facebook: “Had several calls today [from acquaintances] asking me about buying their first firearm. They were shocked that they had to wait 10 days to actually take possession.”
Ammoland.com reports: “Gun and ammunition sales are surging around the country, including the Pacific Northwest, thanks apparently to concerns over the coronavirus (COVID-19) and the potential for, as noted by the Daily Wire, ‘a breakdown in civil order or even a suspension of weapons sales’.”
As reported by KTVU News, in Vallejo, Calif., “More panic buying has erupted due to the coronavirus. And in addition to disinfectants and other household goods, guns and survival gear are in demand.”
Dan Mitchell, owner of Sporting Systems in Vancouver, told Ammoland News via email, “400,000 rounds (of ammunition) sold last week. Line around the block.”
The Sacramento Bee interviewed Gabriel Vaughn, owner of Sportsman’s Arms in Petaluma, CA. Seeing many first-time buyers, Vaughn stated that people’s attitudes about guns have changed now that they feel threatened: “People … tell me that they don’t like guns, but they’re here to begrudgingly buy one.”
What if a neighbor asks to borrow a weapon for defense? You should follow all federal, state, and local laws. You need to be aware of the laws concerning firearms transfers, if the gun leaves your immediate control. This is not just like sharing a gun at the range. Dennis Santiago notes: “It is a illegal in California to transfer a firearm without a background check and waiting period. Tell that to your non-gun friends when they ask to borrow a gun. They will ask. The answer is NO.”
Thanksgiving is right around the corner. That means a large percentage of Americans will be on the road to visit relatives. We know many of our readers have concealed carry permits or will otherwise be traveling with firearms. When crossing into different states with guns in a vehicle, you need to be mindful of all state and local laws and restrictions.
Five Worst States for Traveling with Firearms
This article appears in the Cheaper Than Dirt Shooter’s Log.
The U.S. is a patchwork of confusing and cumbersome laws that change the rules of what you can carry, where you can carry, and whether you can possess the firearm, ammunition of magazine at without running afoul of the local laws. Now, if every state was like Vermont, law abiding gun owners could freely travel with their firearms with no worries. Unfortunately, many states have a history of being hostile to traveling gun owners.
The federal “Firearms Owner Protection Act” allows travel through any state as long as the firearm is unloaded, in a locked case, and not easily accessible to the passengers. However, that is not to say that certain states that are less friendly to firearms have not created their own laws that would snare unsuspecting otherwise law-abiding firearm owners. This led us to name the Top 5 States to Avoid while traveling with a firearm this holiday season.
CONNECTICUT
Connecticut does not have any gun reciprocity agreements with other states. This means nonresidents are not allowed to carry handguns in Connecticut under a permit issued by another state.
HAWAII
Every person arriving into the state who brings a firearm of any description, usable or not, shall register the firearm within three days of the arrival of the person or the firearm, whichever arrives later, with the chief of police of the county where the person will reside, where their business is, or the person’s place of sojourn. GET Hawaii Firearms INFO HERE.
MASSACHUSETTS
Massachusetts imposes harsh penalties on the mere possession and transport of firearms without a license to carry. Prospective travelers are urged to contact the Massachusetts Firearms Records Bureau at (617) 660-4780 or contact the State Police. GET Massachusetts Firearms INFO HERE.
NEW JERSEY
New Jersey has some of the most restrictive firearms laws in the country. Your firearm must be unloaded, in a locked container, and not accessible in the passenger compartment of the vehicle. The New Jersey Supreme Court ruled that anyone traveling within the state is deemed to be aware of these regulations and will be held strictly accountable for violations. If you’re traveling through New Jersey, the N.J. State Police website provides information regarding transporting firearms within state lines. GET New Jersey Firearms INFO HERE.
NEW YORK
Use extreme caution when traveling through New York state with firearms. New York’s general approach is to make the possession of handguns and so-called “assault weapons” illegal. A number of localities, including Albany, Buffalo, New York City, Rochester, Suffolk County, and Yonkers, impose their own requirements on the possession, registration, and transport of firearms. Possession of a handgun within New York City requires a New York City handgun license or a special permit from the city Police Commissioner. This license validates a state license within the city. Even New York state licenses are generally not valid within New York City unless a specific exemption applies. Possession of a shotgun or rifle within New York City requires a permit, which is available to non-residents, and a certificate of registration.
More Scary States for Gun Owners
Here are six other jurisdictions (five states and DC) where you need to be wary when traveling. California, for example, treats all handguns in vehicles as “loaded” if there is ammunition loaded into an attached magazine. It’s wise, when in California, to have handguns unloaded in a LOCKED case, with all ammunition or magazines in a separate section of the vehicle. These states (and DC) all have laws that can trap unsuspecting gun-owners. Be wary.
California
Delaware
Dist. of Columbia
Illinois
Maryland
Rhode Island
Fulenzo said AB 22408 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”.
Judge Benitez called California’s ammunition background check law “onerous and convoluted” and “constitutionally defective”. The Judge stated that: “The background check experiment defies common sense while unduly and severely burdening the Second Amendment rights of every responsible, gun-owning citizen desiring to lawfully buy ammunition”. Notably, the lead plaintiff in the case, Kim Rhode, is an Olympic Gold Medalist trap shooter, whose ability to obtain competition-grade shotshells was impaired by California’s “onerous” ammo purchase restrictions.
