With the panic over pending Federal anti-gun legislation, state anti-gun legislation is often overlooked until it is too late.
So, here is a heads up on newly submitted CA anti-gun legislation.
AB48. Skinner Redefines the term “large capacity magazine” & prohibits the transfer of ammunition by a non-licensed dealer.
Existing laws, allows people to legally acquire “magazine rebuild kits”. Which, people can legally use to repair/replace legally owned large capacity magazines or keep as parts for use outside of CA or to be used to make a permanent 10 round magazine.
Existing laws, allows an individual to transfer (sell/give) ammunition to another individual.
Proposed legislation would revise the definition of “large-capacity magazine” to mean any ammunition feeding device with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds, including a readily restorable, as defined, disassembled large-capacity magazine, and an oversize magazine body that appears to hold in excess of 10 rounds.
Proposed legislation makes it illegal for anyone not licensed as a dealer to transfer (sell/give) ammunition to anyone and requires dealers to report anyone buying ammo to CA DOJ.
Bottom line:
*Makes the importation/manufacture/selling of “magazine rebuild kits” illegal.
*Only dealers can legally transfer (sell/give) ammo and dealers must report any transfers.
Proposed Penal Code 16740
(a)As used in this part, “large-capacity magazine” means any ammunition feeding device with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds, including, but not limited to, a readily restorable disassembled large-capacity magazine and an oversize magazine body that appears to hold in excess of 10 rounds. A magazine body is not a large-capacity magazine if it is only of sufficient size to accommodate no more than 10 rounds of ammunition and the internal working parts of the magazine, including the follower and spring.
(b) As used in this section, “readily restorable” means magazine parts under the custody and control of an individual or individuals that can be assembled into a complete magazine.
Proposed Penal Code 30301
(a) Anyone in this state, prior to selling, transferring, or otherwise furnishing ammunition to an individual or business entity in this state or any other state, shall do all of the following:
(1) Require proper identification from the purchaser in the form of a driver’s license or other photographic identification issued by a state or the federal government.
(2) Be an authorized firearms dealer, pursuant to Section 26500.
(3) Submit a report to the Department of Justice for all of the transactions, in a manner to be determined by the department.
SB47. Yee. “bullet button” ban
Exisiting law, allows a maglock + 10 round or less magazine installed onto a firearm to make it equate to a firearm that operates using a fixed magazine, that can be removed by using a tool (such as the tip of a bullet).
Proposed legislation would redefine what consitutes a “fixed magazine” to mean an ammunition feeding device contained in, or permanently attached to, a firearm in such a manner that the device cannot be removed without disassembly of the firearm action.
This legislation failed to pass earlier this year and is being “improved” and resubmitted for next year’s session.
Bottom line:
*Bans “bullet button” style magazine locks.
SB53. DeLeon Creates the requirement to obtain a state issued permit in order to purchase ammunition.
Exisiting law, does not require a permit to purchase ammunition.
Proposed legislation would require a non-prohibited person to acquire and maintain a permit to purchase ammunition in order to purchase ammo. The applicant for permit will go through a background check (live scan/fingerprinted + application fee). Once approved the permit is only valid for one year (annual renewal fee). When ammo is acquired via face-to-face from a vendor, need to pay a transfer fee.
Bottom line:
*Need a permit to acquire ammunition from licensed vendors.
*Bans mail order/online ammo sales.
*Creates fee system (application, renewal, transfer)
That is some scary shit right there.
SB108. Yee Redefines the condition of how a firearm can be lent and mandates how a firearm must be stored.
Existing laws, allows non-prohibited persons to loan firearms to other non-prohibited persons infrequently and up to 30 days.
Existing laws, do not require firearms to be stored in any particular manner. Except when there are children present.
Proposed legislation would only allow registered firearms to be legally loaned and establishes minimum age limits on the person being lent the firearm.
Proposed legislation would require that all firearms to be stored in a locked container or in a gun safe or disabled with a firearm safety device (gun lock) when the owner of the firearm is outside of their residence.
Bottom line:
*Only registered firearms can be legally loaned.
*All firearms must be stored in a locked container/safe or disabled with a gun lock whenever the owner of the firearm is not home.
AB187. Bonta. Creates a tax on ammunition sales.
Proposed legislation was create a tax on all ammunition sales by vendors in CA.
Bill was recently introduced and the specifics have yet to be printed.
There is no heads up here, the people of california made sure everything was a rubber stamp process with no dissenting opinion.
This will put people out of work, California is a master of destroying their economy. I’m glad I left but sad to see my home intentionally destroyed, there is no other explanation.
Sent from my Nexus S 4G using Tapatalk 2
I really am at a loss. Take a look at the presidential election map by county and you will see that a good portion of CA, and especially northern CA is solid Red.
I have a great job, and all my family is here. However, I will not be made into a criminal by a bunch of idiots from the bay area and LA.
The only scenario I can see that would fix this state is to split it into two or three pieces. I know it will never happen, but I can dream.
I am starting to plant the seed in my wife’s mind regarding a move to a different state. Even the worst of the federal proposals is not as bad as what we currently have, never mind what is proposed for this year. Quiet only touched on a few of the dozens of new gun laws currently proposed.
Why would you leave California now, in the next 5-6 decades and 37 trillion dollars they will have a high speed train, of course it won’t be allowed to go over 65 because of safety concerns. Plus the tax on your ammunition will allow those who have made the journey to your great state from your southern neighbor to attend college and gain better health care and a big screen TV. If you leave your tax dollars won’t enrich the life of some poor inter city mom and her 7 children. California needs you, the unions need you, Berkeley needs you!
Sent from my Nexus S 4G using Tapatalk 2
Boy, you are totally freaking hilarious! Very original too I might add.
There are a LOT of really good people in this state, but they are overwhelmed by the number of absolute morons who unfortunately breed and vote.
P.S. I left Californistan just over a year ago, I am also fairly new to firearms, coincidence… I would love to have stayed and fought but I couldn’t do it at the expense of my children’s education and future. I continue to pray that the people of California will wake up… I digress… You are one your own, god speed! 
Sent from my Nexus S 4G using Tapatalk 2
Before I was into firearms and polluted by politics, my dream was to live in the bay area or San Diego. The people were friendly, well dressed, lots of history, awesome food, perfect weather and scenery. The economy is booming especially in the tech sector and one of my favorite past times was watching TechTV (still talk to Leo Laporte on a regular basis).
Then I learned about the laws…what a shame…I’m still sad I cannot live in California due to its politics and can only wish one day it will make the journey to more freedom.
Oh well, I settled for TX and can’t be happier :rolleyes:
Agreed.
No. The REAL scary shit is the fact that every one of these will pass by a wide margin.
That is the scary shit.
Thats not a fact. They tried last year and we defeated it.
You got that right. I honestly don’t even know why they bother with an assembly now. They should just walk whatever bills they want over to Moonbeam’s desk so he can sign them. Put it to a vote so the 5 Republicans can vote no and have it pass any way?
California is a laughing stock and my career progression has taken me here once again. Unfortunately I’ve noticed many more californians moving to and ruining other states. Remember the Soviets weren’t content to keep communisim in Russia, they had to export the revolution.
The difference is that last year there was no Sandy Hook or 2/3 Dem majority in both houses.
I think it will all come down to how willing Uncle Jerry is to use his veto pen (not just on gun issues, but taxes and other things too).
Moonbeam vetoed one anti-gun bill last go around and that was because a similar law was going through the courts.