On January 10, the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) and the Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers’ Institute (SAAMI) filed a lawsuit on behalf of their members against the State of California in Fresno Superior Court challenging the state’s microstamping law. NSSF and SAAMI seek to invalidate and enjoin enforcement of provisions of California state law enacted in 2007, but not made effective until May 2013. These newly “activated” provisions of California law will effectively require that ALL future models of semi-auto pistols be microstamp-capable. Note — semi-auto handguns that are currently on California’s “approved” handgun roster will not be banned from sale. But guns introduced in the future cannot be sold in California unless they have microstamping technology. If gun makers cannot include such features in their future designs, the next generation of handguns will effectively be banned from sale in California.
Under California law, firearms manufacturers would have to micro laser-engrave a gun’s make, model and serial number on two distinct parts of each gun, including the firing pin so that, in theory, this information would be imprinted on the cartridge casing when the pistol is fired. “There is no existing microstamping technology that will reliably, consistently and legibly imprint the required identifying information by a semiautomatic handgun on the ammunition it fires. The holder of the patent for this technology himself has written that there are problems with it and that further study is warranted before it is mandated. A National Academy of Science review, forensic firearms examiners and a University of California at Davis study reached the same conclusion and the technical experts in the firearms industry agree,” said Lawrence G. Keane, NSSF senior vice president and general counsel. “Manufacturers can not comply with a law the provisions of which are invalid, that cannot be enforced and that will not contribute to improving public safety. As a result, we are seeking both declaratory and injunctive relief against this back-door attempt to prevent the sale of new semiautomatic handguns to law-abiding citizens in California.”
In 2007, California Assembly Bill 1471 was passed and signed into law requiring microstamping on internal parts of new semiautomatic pistols. The legislation provided that this requirement would only became effective if the California Department of Justice certified that the microstamping technology is available to more than one manufacturer unencumbered by patent restrictions. On May 17, 2013, Attorney General Kamala D. Harris provided such certification. The DOJ’s certification notice has been attacked on the grounds that it is scientifically unsound, founded on little more than “wishful thinking”.
Share the post "NSSF and SAAMI Sue to Block California Microstamping Policies"
We have good news and bad news for California gun owners and hunters. The good news is that California Governor Jerry Brown vetoed SB 374. The bad news is that Gov. Brown also signed AB 711 which bans the use of lead-containing ammunition for hunting. Gov. Brown surprised many people with his veto of SB 374, a sweeping ban on virtually all semi-automatic centerfire rifles with any kind of detachable magazine. Had it become law, SB 374 would have banned the sale and transfer of hundreds of rifle types, including many classic hunting rifles with 3- or 4-round flush-mount detachable magazines. In addition, SB 374 would have banned historic military rifles such as the M1 Garand, and M1 Carbine, which are prized by collectors and widely used in vintage rifle events and CMP shooting matches.
I am returning Senate Bill 374 without my signature.
The State of California already has some of the strictest gun laws in the country, including bans on military-style assault rifles and high-capacity ammunition magazines.
While the author’s intent is to strengthen these restrictions, this bill goes much farther by banning any semi-automatic rifle with a detachable magazine. This ban covers low-capacity rifles that are commonly used for hunting, firearms training, and marksmanship practice, as well as some historical and collectible firearms. Moreover, hundreds of thousands of current gun owners would have to register their rifles as assault weapons and would be banned from selling or transferring them in the future.
I don’t believe that this bill’s blanket ban on semi-automatic rifles would reduce criminal activity or enhance public safety enough to warrant this infringement on gun owners’ rights.
Governor Brown Signs Eleven Bills Targeting Gun Owners
In addition to vetoing the expanded “assault weapons” ban, Brown vetoed six other bills relating to firearms: SB299, SB475, SB567, SB755, AB169, and AB180. Again, that sounds good. However, at the same time, Gov. Brown signed eleven other bills that will affect California gun owners:
SB 171 – Patient threats must be reported by psychotherapists to police within one day.
SB 363 – New penalties for storing loading guns where they may be improperly accessed.
SB 683 – Requires long gun owners to obtain safety certificates.
AB 48 – Bans magazine conversion kits increasing capacity.
AB 170 – Disallows organizational permits for “assault weapons”, and .50 BMG.
AB 231 – Criminalizes leaving a gun where child might use it without permission.
AB 500 – Imposes further rules on gun storage; expands DOJ background check times.
AB 558 – FFLs must provide Record of Sale to gun buyers.
AB 539 – Permits disallowed persons to temporarily transfer guns to FFL.
AB 711 – Bans lead ammunition for all hunting activities.
AB 1131 – 5-year gun prohibition for people who have revealed threat to psychiatrist.
Bill Banning Use of Lead-Containing Ammunition for Hunting AB 711, the lead ammunition ban, will create real problems for California hunters as it is “phased in” over the next few years. There are no lead-free bullets readily available for many cartridge/caliber types. Critics of AB 711 have called this “a ban on hunting disguised as an ammunition ban”.
Summary of Key Provisions of AB 711:
Existing California law requires that nonlead centerfire rifle and pistol ammunition be used when taking big game with a rifle or pistol, as defined by the Department of Fish and Wildlife’s hunting regulations, and when taking coyote, within specified deer hunting zones, but excluding specific counties and areas.
This bill would instead require, as soon as is practicable, but by no later than July 1, 2019, the use of nonlead ammunition for the taking of all wildlife, including game mammals, game birds, nongame birds, and nongame mammals, with any firearm. The bill would require the commission to certify, by regulation, nonlead ammunition for these purposes. The bill would require that these requirements be fully implemented statewide by no later than July 1, 2019.
Share the post "Semi-Auto Ban Vetoed in California, But Lead Ammo Ban Approved"
While the mainstream media (and many politicians) call for new bans on firearms, ammunition, and magazines, not to mention further restrictions of Second Amendment rights, too little attention is being paid to the actual facts in the debate over gun control. Sponsors of new restrictions on firearms claim that gun crime is increasing. A majority of Americans also seem to believe that firearms-related crimes are on the rise. But is this really the case? You may be surprised….
In fact, if you look at the hard facts, firearms homicides and other gun-related crimes have been decreasing for decades. That’s right — gun crimes are down significantly over the past twenty years. Since 1993, in the USA, the number of homicides committed with guns has dropped 39% even while gun ownership rates have increased. The number of “all other” crimes with firearms has dropped 69% in the same period. And the number of fatal gun accidents has declined 58% in the past two decades — that’s a big change.
The numbers don’t lie — over the past twenty years, there has been a significant reduction in actual gun-related crime while gun ownership levels have increased. But despite all this evidence that gun-related crimes have declined precipitously in the past two decades, 56% of Americans have the mistaken notion that gun crime is on the rise. Could that be because mainstream media outlets conveniently ignore the facts?
Actual, verified gun crime trends (based on Federal crime statistics) have been presented in an interesting “infographic” chart prepared by the NSSF. Click on the illustration at right to see the full-size version with data charts.
Share the post "The Truth About Gun Crime Trends in America"
54 county sheriffs in Colorado are leading the fight to overturn anti-gun legislation recently passed in Colorado, filing a federal lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for Colorado. The NSSF, the Colorado Outfitters Association, Magpul Industries, and firearms retailers have joined the Sheriffs in a broad-based legal challenge to Colorado’s recently enacted gun-control laws. Notably, all but 10 of the state’s 64 sheriffs, who are elected officials, have joined the suit as plaintiffs.
“From the perspective of the sheriffs this legislature had an agenda rather than good public policy in mind when they rushed these bills through and in this rush to pass new laws they didn’t bother listening to the people charged with enforcing them,” explained Weld County Sheriff John Cooke.
“In addition to Constitutional infringements and unenforceable requirements regarding magazine capacity, as the sheriffs have pointed out, we believe it will be impossible for citizens to comply with mandated firearms ‘transfers’ through federally licensed retailers,” said Lawrence G. Keane, NSSF Senior Vice President and General Counsel. “Colorado’s federally-licensed firearms retailers are being asked to process these transfers as if they were selling from their own inventory and to monitor both seller and buyer through a state-administered check process that can take hours or even days. They will not be able to recoup the actual cost of providing the service, which is capped at $10, but they will be liable for paperwork errors and subject to license revocation. For this reason and the many others detailed in our joint action with our fellow plaintiffs, these laws need to be struck down,” Keane said.
Share the post "Colorado Sheriffs, and Trade Groups Challenge Colorado Gun Laws"
A number of extreme gun control measures are currently being pushed through the California Legislature. In California’s State Senate, the Committee on Public Safety considered some of the most restrictive pieces of gun legislation yet proposed in California.
On April 17, the Public Safety Committee approved Senate Bill 293 that bans the sale of conventional handguns and implements owner-authorized “smart-gun” technology. This would block the sale of ANY handgun that was not “coded” to the gun owner (so that nobody else could shoot it). Of course, no such “smart” handguns are currently offered for sale by any major manufacturer.
As you’d expect, California is also moving forward on legislation to further restrict self-loading rifles. On April 16, the Senate Public Safety Committee, on a 5-2 party-line vote, approved Senate Bill 374. This bill expands the definition of “assault weapons” to ban the future sale of almost all semi-auto rifles that accept a detachable magazine. SB 374 now moves to the Senate Committee on Appropriation.
The California Assembly Revenue and Taxation Committee recently considered Assembly Bill 760 which would impose a new 5% sales tax on all ammunition components (complete cartridge, bullet, or case). That’s a nickel per bullet or cartridge. We’re pleased to report that AB760 has been held in committee pending further study of its financial effects. The bill is “suspended” for the time being, but it could be reconsidered in the near future. According to the L.A. Times, “The state Board of Equalization noted in a review that the proposed tax would be in addition to an existing sales tax on bullets, and it said the new tax could become a burden to businesses.”
In addition to taxing ammunition directly, California legislators have introduced bills that would make it much more difficult to purchase ammunition. SB 53 mandates a background check for ammo purchases. In addition, SB 53 would require gun owners to obtain a permit to purchase ammo. The permit, good for one-year only, would have to be renewed annually with a recurring $50/year cost. “It’s a way to red-tape the right to bear arms to death,” said Chuck Michel, attorney for the California Rifle and Pistol Association. “It’s all part of a campaign of shame, the fight to make it as difficult as possible for law-abiding citizens to make the choice to have a firearm for self-defense.”
State-wide ban on Lead-containing Ammunition
In addition, the Assembly Committee on Water, Parks and Wildlife (WPW) approved AB 711, a bill that if passed and signed into law by Gov. Jerry Brown would extend the now limited condor range ban on traditional lead ammunition to the entire state. By its terms, AB 711 will “require the use of nonlead ammunition for the taking of all wildlife, including game mammals, game birds, nongame birds, and nongame mammals, with any firearm.” This bill passed the WPW Committee and was re-referred to the Committee on Appropriations.
Share the post "California Legislature Considers Tough New Gun-Control Laws"
The state of New York has activated its online registration service for owners of semi-automatic firearms that have been re-classified as “Assault Weapons” under New York’s SAFE Act. We put that term in quotes because the same firearms, such as AR-platform rifles, are legal to own, with few restrictions, in most other U.S. states. New York owners of newly-restricted semi-automatic rifles, pistols, and shotguns have one year from today to register their firearms. Failure to register a newly-defined “assault weapon” by April 15th, 2014 is punishable as a Class A Misdemeanor, with forfeiture of the firearm(s).
If you are a New York gun owner with firearm(s) that may be covered by the SAFE Act, you should read the statute carefully and possibly consult with an attorney if you have questions about your legal obligations. There are many confusing provisions in the new law, but primarily the law requires registration of any auto-loading firearm (pistol, shotgun or rifle) that takes a detachable magazine and has any one or more “evil” features, which are separately enumerated for pistols, rifles, and shotguns. Click these links to read the exact list of banned features.
New York has issued a non-exhaustive list of rifles classified as “assault weapons”. However, even if you don’t see your rifle on this list, it may still be restricted. Under the SAFE Act, ANY semi-automatic rifle “capable of receiving a detachable magazine” is considered an “assault rifle” if it has any ONE or more of these “military characteristics”:
Grenade Launcher
Folding Stock
Thumbhole Stock
Protruding Pistol Grip
Second handgrip or “protruding grip that can be held by the non-shooting hand”.
Bayonet Mount
Flash Suppressor
Muzzle Brake
Muzzle Compensator
Threaded barrel “designed to accommodate” Brake, Suppressor, or Compensator.
In addition to the new registration requirement, the sale and/or transfer of newly-defined “assault weapons” is banned within the state, although sales out of state are permitted. Possession of the newly-defined “assault weapons” is allowed only if they were possessed at the time that the law was passed, and they must be registered with the state within one year (of today) by the owner. The SAFE Act grandfathers the prior ownership of “assault weapons”, but requires that they be registered with the NY State Police by April 15, 2014 — plus they must be recertified every five years. More information can be found at www.Renzullilaw.com.
Share the post "New York State Mandatory Registration Program Starts Today"
Over the objections of legions of Connecticut gun-owners, Connecticut enacted what has been called the “nation’s strictest gun laws” (Huffington Post). Along with new controls on semi-automatic rifles, magazine-capacity limits, and restrictions on ammunition purchases, Connecticut adopted a new system of background checks on all gun transfers. Apparently, the new legislation was so poorly drafted that Connecticut’s new gun laws do not comply with Federal NICS procedures.
The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), the trade association for the firearms and ammunition industry, issued the following statement: “Gov. Dannel Malloy … signed into law a package of gun-control legislation that was assembled in secret by a small group of state legislators and that never received a public hearing. Most legislators had little time to even read the actual bill language. The unfortunate results of this process… [are] that mistakes in [the] enacted law will have to be corrected.
For example, language in the new law specifies a procedure for licensed firearms retailers to perform mandatory ‘universal’ background checks on private party transactions that is not permissible based on federal law and regulations governing the National Instant Criminal Background Checks (NICS) system. As we read it, this mistake in lawmaking means that all private party transactions in the state now cannot be accomplished legally. We will be carefully studying all provisions of the law for possible challenge in the courts.”
The new Connecticut gun-control laws are the main focus of this week’s Gun Talk® Radio show with Tom Gresham. Richard Burgess, President of Connecticut Carry, joins Tom this Sunday to discuss the latest anti-gun legislation passed this week by Connecticut legislators and signed into law by Governor Malloy.
The new legislation, among other things, adds more than 100 firearms to the state’s assault weapons ban and creates what is being called the nation’s first dangerous weapon offender registry, as well as a magazine ban and eligibility rules for buying ammunition. You can learn more about Connecticut’s passage of the new laws in a feature from the Litchfield County Times.
In its 19th year of national syndication, Tom Gresham’s Gun Talk Radio airs live on Sundays from 2:00 pm to 5:00 pm Eastern, and runs on more than 138 stations, plus on XM (Ch. 165) Satellite Radio. All Gun Talk shows can be downloaded as podcasts or accessed via Apple iTunes. To get more information, visit www.guntalk.com.
Share the post "NSSF Attacks Flaws in Connecticut’s New Gun Legislation"
New Jersey legislators have introduced no less than 76 new bills to regulate firearms, control the sale of ammunition, and tightly restrict gun ownership. We’ve summarized some of the most important new NJ gun-control bills below, and you can read the full list here. Legislators in the New Jersey Assembly pushed through 20 of 43 pieces of legislation last month. And New Jersey’s State Senators have been hard at work too, introducing dozens of other bills restricting gun rights. According to the New Jersey Association of Rifle and Pistol Clubs (ANJRPC), “the legislative feeding frenzy of anti-gun bill introductions by Democrats has steadily continued [with] no end in sight. Apparently, they won’t be satisfied until there’s nothing left of the Second Amendment in the Garden State.”
Important New Anti-Gun Legislation in New Jersey (Partial List)
Establishes regulatory/reporting program for ammunition sales and transfers. A3645 Acs.
Defines most centerfire 50-caliber firearms as “destructive devices”. A3659aa.
Bans mail order, telephone, and internet sales of ammunition. A366 and S2465.
Requires, to purchase a gun, mental health screening by licensed professional. A3667.
Requires psychological evaluation and in-home inspection in order to buy a gun. A3676.
Requires handgun ammunition to be encoded with serial number. A3704.
Imposes additional 5% tax on sale of firearms and ammunition. A3727.
Requires firearms to be unloaded and securely locked or stored within home. A3752.
Requires background checks for ammunition sales and transfers. A3800.
Disqualifies persons with three DUIs in 5 years from purchasing firearm. A3973.
Prohibits persons with “disorderly persons” convictions from purchasing firearm. A3974.
Requires firearms endorsement on driver’s license or state ID card. A4001.
Reduces maximum capacity of ammunition magazines to 10 rounds. S2475.
Requires ammunition sales/transfers be done as face-to-face transactions. S3476.
Requires submission of mental health records to NICS. S2492.
Extends reach and coverage of State’s assault weapons ban. S2605.
Creates penalty for failing to report unintentional discharge of firearm in home. S2642.
COMMENT: The above list is a wake-up call, and not just for residents of New Jersey. All readers should take a long, hard look at the above list. This is what happens when anti-gun politicians “pull out all the stops”. These proposed laws are not just about so-called “assault weapons”. Note the tight restrictions (and new taxes) on ammunition purchases. Note the mandating of “gun owner endorsements” on drivers’ licenses. Note the chilling requirements of “mental health screenings” and “in-home inspections”. Law-abiding gun owners across the country need to understand that these kind of regulations are now “on the table” and we can expect “copy-cat” legislation in other states….
Share the post "New Jersey Legislators Introduce 76 Anti-Gun Bills"
Led by the New York State Rifle and Pistol Association (NYSRPA) and the NRA, a group of gun organizations filed suit on March 21, 2013, seeking to overturn the recently-passed New York SAFE Act. The pro-Second Amendment coalition filed suit in Federal court in Buffalo seeking to toss out New York’s new gun control law on a variety of constitutional grounds.
Specifically, the complaint states that the SAFE Act violates the Second Amendment as well the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution. The Buffalo News explains: “The lawsuit says the gun law… violates the U.S. Constitution’s commerce clause, which empowers the federal government to regulate interstate commerce, because the law restricts interstate commerce by requiring private gun owners to go through dealers if they want to sell guns to a private party in another state.” Read Full Article from BuffaloNews.com.
NYSRPA President Thomas King says the SAFE Act infringes New Yorkers’ Second Amendment rights: “The U.S. Supreme Court affirmed an individual right to keep and bear arms in the landmark 2008 case of Heller v. District of Columbia and incorporated that decision to the states in the 2010 case of McDonald v. Chicago. These decisions apply to all New Yorkers”. Chris Cox, Executive Director of the NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action, added: “Governor Andrew Cuomo and the New York State Legislature usurped the legislative and democratic process in passing these extreme anti-gun measures with no committee hearings and no public input“.
Along with the New York State Rifle and Pistol Association, other plaintiffs in this action are the NRA, the Westchester County Firearms Owners Association, Sportsmen’s Association for Firearms Education, New York State Amateur Trapshooting Association, Bedell Custom, Beikirch Ammunition Corporation, Blueline Tactical & Police Supply, and three individual citizens.
Injunction Against SAFE Act Denied in State Action
In another related lawsuit, on March 12, N.Y. State Supreme Court Justice Thomas McNamara refused to enjoin implementation of the SAFE Act. That ruling applied to a lawsuit brought by Robert Schultz and hundreds of other private citizen plaintiffs. A motion had been filed asking the court to temporarily halt the SAFE Act on the grounds that the legislation had been rushed through, without proper consideration or the opportunity for citizen input. The judge denied the motion, holding that the Legislature was authorized by “messages of necessity” to enact the SAFE Act on a “fast track” schedule. Schultz stated that his group would appeal the ruling to the N.Y. State Court of Appeals: “We’re saying the language of the Message of Necessity has to match up with the legislation.”
On March 14, 2013, 550 employees of Colt’s Manufacturing Company traveled to the Legislative Office Building in Hartford, Connecticut. They came in strength to show support for Connecticut-based firearms manufacturing, and their message was direct: “Save our Jobs.”
Last week workers from two Colt operating companies (successors to the famed Colt Armory), boarded buses bound for the Legislative Office Building, in Connecticut’s state Capitol complex. They came to participate in a General Assembly committee hearing on a large number of gun-control measures under consideration in the wake of the Sandy Hook tragedy. Michael Holmes, Colt United Auto Workers Shop Chairman, testified at the hearing, as did NSSF Director Government Relations, State Affairs Jake McGuigan, Joe Bartozzi from O.F. Mossberg, and Mark Malkowski of Stag Arms. Though not all the proposed additional gun-control legislation will move forward for eventual votes, action on some of the measures is expected within days.
Share the post "Colt Employees Attend Connecticut Gun Law Hearing in Hartford"
The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) has produced a video in which management and employees of three Connecticut-based companies, O.F. Mossberg & Sons, Stag Arms, and Ammunition Storage Components, talk about the importance of their jobs and how their companies contribute to the Constitution State’s economy.
This video was produced in response to Connecticut Gov. Dannel Malloy’s recent call for severe new gun control laws. An NSSF statement noted: “We are troubled by the Governor’s apparent change in attitude[.] We do not believe a rush to quick-fix legislation is likely to produce real public safety solutions, while it holds the clear potential to hurt good-paying manufacturing jobs in our state.”
NSSF and member companies based in Connecticut and western Massachusetts have been working for several weeks to help educate legislators, the media and the public not only about the economic impact of the firearms industry in the Constitution State, but also what measures are most effective at keeping firearms out of the hands of criminals and unauthorized individuals. To that end, NSSF President Steve Sanetti authored an op-ed in The Hartford Courant, entitled “Focus on Gun Access, Not Gun Ban”.
Connecticut has a long tradition of arms-making. In 1848, on a site overlooking the Connecticut River in Hartford, Samuel Colt built the Colt’s Patent Firearms Manufacturing Company factory. A larger factory, called the Colt Armory, was added in 1855. The 1850s were a decade of phenomenal success for Colt’s Connecticut-based enterprise.
Colt’s Mfg. was the first to widely commercialize the total use of interchangeable parts throughout a product. A leader in assembly line practice, the company was a major innovator and training ground in manufacturing technology. Colt’s armories in Hartford trained several generations of toolmakers and machinists, who had great influence in American manufacturing. Prominent examples included F. Pratt and A. Whitney, and Henry Leland (who would end up at Cadillac and Lincoln).
Share the post "Connecticut Firearms Manufacturers and Employees Speak Up"
By voice vote yesterday (Friday), the Colorado State House of Representatives* approved tough new gun-control legislation after hours of heated debate. One new law will ban ammunition magazines over 15 rounds (or 8 for shotguns). In addition, companion bills will require exhaustive background checks on all firearm purchases, and impose severe restrictions on lending guns. Yet another new law will prohibit CCW permit-holders from carrying a firearm on college campuses.
The new laws are not final yet. They advanced on Friday’s unrecorded “voice vote”, but there will be a final “recorded vote” in the House next week. Then, before they can become law, these bills must be approved by the Democrat-controlled Colorado Senate and signed by Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper. However, Senate approval is likely and Hickenlooper has stated his support for the new laws.
House Bill 1224 – Bans magazines with a capacity greater than fifteen rounds. House Bill 1228 – Imposes a “gun tax” for a background check when purchasing a firearm. House Bill 1229 – Criminalizes the private transfer of a firearm. House Bill 1226 – Repeals law allowing CCW permit-holders to carry firearms on college campuses.
Colorado resident (and one of our contributing writers) Zak Smith says: “We are facing a tough fight here in Colorado — but don’t give up yet. Now is the time to contact your state representatives.” The official recorded vote will be taken Monday. Accordingly, Zak adds: “Concerned Colorado gun owners need to contact their legislators this weekend before the final recorded vote.” CLICK THIS LINK to get contact information on Colorado State Legislators, in Colorado General Assembly House and Senate.
MagPul Says it May Leave Colorado
Colorado gun parts-maker Magpul has announced that it might leave Colorado if the magazine ban becomes law. This could result in the loss of 600-700 jobs (Magpul employees and subcontractors). Magpul also contributes “nearly $85 million to Colorado’s economy” according to Fox News. “If we’re able to stay in Colorado and manufacture a product, but law-abiding citizens of the state were unable to purchase the product, customers around the state and the nation would boycott us for remaining here,” Doug Smith, Magpul’s chief operating officer, told the Denver Post.
*The Colorado General Assembly is bicameral, composed of the Colorado House of Representatives and the Colorado Senate. The House has 65 members while the Senate has 35 members.
Share the post "Four Gun Control Bills Moving Forward in Colorado"
On January 10, the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) and the Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers’ Institute (SAAMI) filed a lawsuit on behalf of their members against the State of California in Fresno Superior Court challenging the state’s microstamping law. NSSF and SAAMI seek to invalidate and enjoin enforcement of provisions of California state law enacted in 2007, but not made effective until May 2013. These newly “activated” provisions of California law will effectively require that ALL future models of semi-auto pistols be microstamp-capable. Note — semi-auto handguns that are currently on California’s “approved” handgun roster will not be banned from sale. But guns introduced in the future cannot be sold in California unless they have microstamping technology. If gun makers cannot include such features in their future designs, the next generation of handguns will effectively be banned from sale in California.
We have good news and bad news for California gun owners and hunters. The good news is that California Governor Jerry Brown vetoed 
54 county sheriffs in Colorado are leading the fight to overturn anti-gun legislation recently passed in Colorado, filing a federal lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for Colorado. The NSSF, the Colorado Outfitters Association, Magpul Industries, and firearms retailers have joined the Sheriffs in a broad-based legal challenge to Colorado’s recently enacted gun-control laws. Notably, all but 10 of the state’s 64 sheriffs, who are elected officials, have joined the suit as plaintiffs.
A number of extreme gun control measures are currently being pushed through the California Legislature. In California’s State Senate, the Committee on Public Safety considered some of the most restrictive pieces of gun legislation yet proposed in California. 
The new Connecticut gun-control laws are the main focus of this week’s Gun Talk® Radio show with Tom Gresham. Richard Burgess, President of Connecticut Carry, joins Tom this Sunday to discuss the latest anti-gun legislation passed this week by Connecticut legislators and signed into law by Governor Malloy.
New Jersey legislators have introduced no less than 76 new bills to regulate firearms, control the sale of ammunition, and tightly restrict gun ownership. We’ve summarized some of the most important new NJ gun-control bills below, and you can read the 
Led by the 
The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) has produced a video in which management and employees of three Connecticut-based companies, O.F. Mossberg & Sons, Stag Arms, and Ammunition Storage Components, talk about the importance of their jobs and how their companies contribute to the Constitution State’s economy.
