AB 7 would further extend California’s ban on the open carry of an unloaded firearm while in or upon a public place or public street within a prohibited area located within the unincorporated area of a county.
This legislation is not about stopping or reducing firearm crime, it is about stereotyping law-abiding gun owners who are openly carrying an UNLOADED firearm as a criminal. California has some of the most stringent laws regarding the ownership and possession of a firearm. A person who is openly carrying a firearm must still comply with all other California laws regarding firearm ownership, possession, and transport of firearms or risk losing their firearms and imprisonment for simple technical violations of the law.
AB 424 would remove the ability of a school district superintendent, his or her designee, or equivalent school authority to provide written permission allowing a person to possess a firearm within a school zone.
This is not the first attack on law-abiding citizens lawfully carrying their firearms in school zones. In 2015, AB 707 was signed into law which prohibited concealed carry permit holders from carrying and possession on K-12 and university grounds without written permission from the school authority. Supporters of the bill left the discretion to the school authorities on who could possess firearms on campus because they felt the school authorities were in the best position to exercise that discretion. The question is – what have school authorities done to deserve to have this important decision-making power taken away from them? To our knowledge, there have been no incidents with persons lawfully carrying on school campuses.
It is obvious that AB 424 is not about making our schools safer, instead this is only about continuing the assault on the Second Amendment and law-abiding gun owners in the Golden State.
SB 464: Firearms Storage and Security - TAKE ACTION NOW
SB 464 would change the storage and security requirements of all firearms in the inventory of a licensed firearms dealer. California already has some of the strictest laws in the country regarding how dealers must store and secure firearms.
This bill simply places more costs and mandates on law-abiding business owners.
SB 497 would expand the existing one handgun a month law to include ALL guns, including those acquired through a private party transfer.
This bill is a misguided attempt to expand the current one handgun per month limitation to long guns and does nothing to address criminal misuse of a firearm. Governor Brown also vetoed similar legislation last year, stating, “Given California’s stringent laws restricting gun ownership, I do not believe this additional restriction is needed.”
Criminals are already ignoring California’s stringent gun control laws and will continue to ignore additional restrictions. This misguided policy will only impact law-abiding citizens who are lawfully acquiring firearms for self-defense, recreation and other lawful purposes.
SB 536: Firearm Violence Research Center: gun violence restraining orders
SB 536 would would require the Department of Justice to make information relating to gun violence restraining orders that is maintained in the California Restraining and Protective Order System or any similar database maintained by the department available to researchers affiliated with the center, or, at the discretion of the department, to any other entity that is concerned with the study and prevention of violence, for academic and policy research purposes, provided that any material identifying individuals is not transferred, revealed, or used for other than research or statistical activities and reports or publications derived therefrom do not identify specific individuals.
AB 757 would define “good cause” to include self-defense, defending the life of another, or preventing crime in which human life is threatened, and would provide procedural guidelines to the issuing authority on determining the presence or absence of “good cause.”
AB 1040 would require the Department of Justice (DOJ), within 30 days of receiving a firearm-related application, to notify the applicant of whether the department deems the application to be complete and the date of that determination and require the department to grant or deny the application within 180 calendar days of that date, except the bill would allow the department to extend this time period by an additional 30 days, as provided. The bill would also require an application for a permit or license for the above activities that has neither been granted nor denied by the department within these time frames to be deemed to have been granted.
AB 1394 would require the sheriff of a county, or the chief or other head of a municipal police department, to issue a license to carry a concealed handgun or to carry a loaded and exposed handgun, as specified, to an applicant who meets the criteria specified in existing law, but would not require the applicant to demonstrate good cause for issuance of the license. This bill would also exempt the holder of a valid license to carry a concealed firearm from prosecution under any state law or regulation that prohibits the possession of a firearm within any specified location.
The National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA) today announced it is supporting, along with the California Rifle and Pistol Association (CRPA), an important Second Amendment lawsuit challenging California’s newly expanded Assault Weapons Control ...
Public education’s long-running “zero tolerance” war against anything that suggests the idea of a firearm (including, for example, clothing, gestures, toys, food, computer images, and favorable opinions of self-defense) has claimed another victim. This time ...
On Tuesday, Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel met with representatives of the UCAN organization to make the case for further gun controls to combat the city’s violent crime. Chicago’s WLS reported that Emanuel used the opportunity ...
Early this month, members of the gun-control group Prosecutors Against Gun Violence met at a “Manhattan Summit” and took the time to express their dismay and alarm over federal bills proposing national concealed carry reciprocity. ...
For the past decade, NRA-ILA has sponsored leadership forums that have allowed our members to hear directly from national leaders. Next Friday, that tradition continues and the line up of speakers is top notch.
Yesterday, on the deadline for policy bills to move out of committee, the Senate Judiciary Committee voted to pass Senate Bill 719 with its -5 amendment. Because a number of bills were effectively dead for ...
Today, April 19, the House Judiciary Committee passed House Bill 671 by a 20-5 vote. HB 671 is scheduled to go before the full House for consideration next week. Anti-gun billionaire Michael Bloomberg and the gun ...
On Tuesday April 18, the Senate Public Safety Committee passed SB 497 by a party-line vote and will be assigned to the Senate Appropriations committee for further consideration. On Monday, April 17, the Senate Appropriations Committee sent ...
Established in 1975, the Institute for Legislative Action (ILA) is the "lobbying" arm of the National Rifle Association of America. ILA is responsible for preserving the right of all law-abiding individuals in the legislative, political, and legal arenas, to purchase, possess and use firearms for legitimate purposes as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.