In these places, even carry permit holders are prohibited from possessing their weapons for self-defense.
It joined Hawaii, Maryland, New Jersey and New York in this dubious lineup.
The intention of the high court in last year’s New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen ruling was clear. “May issue” laws in states such as California are unconstitutional. No other right guaranteed by the Founding Fathers requires a citizen to show cause to exercise that liberty.
By a 6-3 majority, justices made certain that the Second Amendment is on the same level as other fundamental rights.
But California along with four other states felt the need to rewrite their gun control statutes in response to the Supreme Court. Senate Bill 2, written with Bruen explicitly in mind, will head to Gov. Gavin Newsom’s (D) desk where he has pledged to quickly sign it.
Newsom co-sponsored the bill, which was authored by state Sen. Anthony Portantino (D).
The governor, who has obvious aspirations for higher office, boasted in a press release that citizens are “far less likely to die from bullets in California. We’re using every tool we can to make our streets and neighborhoods safer from gun violence.”
For the record, the FBI confirmed that California saw more active shooter incidents over the previous two decades than any state in the Union. And has his honor visited downtown San Francisco lately?
SB 2 increases the minimum age to apply for a carry permit from 18 to 21. An applicant must have undergone at least 16 hours of weapons training before submitting their application. It also rejects a current prohibition on local authorities tacking on additional fees or liability insurance requirements to receive a permit.
Then there’s the matter of where you will be able to carry, even with a permit.
A common element among new laws enacted by states defying the Supreme Court is a massive expansion of so-called “sensitive places.” For California, they will include all school property, college and university campuses, government and judicial facilities, medical buildings, public parks, public transit, playgrounds and any establishment where alcohol is sold — among others.
Additionally, it continued the trend of canceling the previously common status of permission to carry on publicly accessible private property. Upon Newsom’s signature, carry will be prohibited unless it is expressly allowed by the property owner.
But Newsom’s pending signature will add the Golden State to the list of those acting as petulant children who were told they could not have their way. The state’s two-pronged approach is to make it more difficult to acquire a permit while at the same time severely limiting where it may be used.
This is the second such attempt to ram this through the California legislature. In the last session, a midnight hour clause added to the measure ultimately derailed the bill.
Stipulating that it would take effect immediately upon signature raised the threshold of lawmakers needed for approval, and the gun control effort fell short.
California legislators guaranteed the state will be fighting off lawsuits over yet another overreach in the name of gun control.
Sam Paredes is the Executive Director of Gun Owners of California. Speaking to The Reload, he asserted that the law “will never see the light of day.” He noted that courts in other states determined that these egregiously long lists of “sensitive places” do not align with the history and tradition of firearms regulations as required by Bruen.
To add insult to injury, lawmakers passed Assembly Bill 28 last week. It would impose a unique 11% state tax on all gun and ammunition purchases. This bill was sold on the premise that the money collected would fund “gun violence prevention” programs in the state.
There is already an existing 11% excise tax applied by the federal government on guns and ammunition.
