Quantcast

California Bans Sales of Semi-Autos and Forces Registration

Screen Shot 2013-09-10 at 7.34.19 PM

New sales of semi-automatic rifles with removable magazines would be banned in California under a bill passed by the Democratic-led state legislature on Tuesday, and those who already own such weapons would have to register them.

The measure, which passed the state Assembly 44-31 and is expected to go to Governor Jerry Brown for his signature after amendments are approved in the state Senate, is one of a package of gun control bills passed earlier this year by senators in the wake of the massacre last year at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut.

It would classify as an assault weapon as any rifle that accepts a detachable magazine that can hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition, and would ban its sale or purchase. People who already own such weapons would be required to register them.

“How many more innocent men, women and children have to be slaughtered while going about their daily lives before we do something?” asked Assemblyman Reginald B. Jones-Sawyer, Sr., a Democrat from Los Angeles, speaking in favor of the ban.

He ticked off a gruesome list of recent gun massacres: Sandy Hook, killings at a Sikh Temple in Wisconsin, the Colorado movie theater killings and others.

The road to passage has not been easy for several of the weapons measures introduced this year, despite California’s history of strong gun control laws and large legislative majorities for Democrats, who tend to favor them.

New voting laws in the state have made it necessary for many Democrats – particularly in the Assembly – to win over moderates and conservatives, and Republicans were joined by several Democrats in opposing the bill.

“I don’t know what the right word is to express how strongly I oppose this bill,” said Assemblyman Tim Donnelly, a Republican who represents the Southern California community of Twin Peaks, complaining that it amounted to a direct swipe against the constitutional right to bear arms.

California, which has some of the toughest gun control laws in the nation, already bans rifles with large-capacity fixed magazines, which cannot be removed. This bill would expand that ban to add rifles that accept large-capacity removable magazines.

Other bills in the package passed by the Senate would have tightened additional laws, including banning a type of trigger known as a button.

Faced with reluctance by the more conservative, but still Democratic leaning, state Assembly to take up the package, Assembly Speaker John Perez, himself a gun owner, placed the bills in legislative limbo where they remained for months.

Now, with the end of the session looming on Thursday, Perez late last week released three of the bills, including the one passed on Tuesday. Six Democrats joined Assembly Republicans to vote in the minority against the measure.

Two other bills remain active from the original package, and are expected to be heard later this week.

One would ban possession of any ammunition clip that holds more than 10 rounds, and the other bans people with multiple drug and alcohol convictions and convictions for gang-related crimes from owning a firearm for 10 years.

Posting Policy
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse. Read more.
  • Mileaway

    Pure nonsense. California legislation is out of control. We have allowed the extremists to take control of common sense, which they have none of.

  • Aaron

    Unfortunately, I live in California and because of child custody issue cannot leave. I’m getting sick of these self-ritcheous liberals acting like they know better than everyone else. It’s absolutely maddening.

  • Soppy

    Time to rise up against these fascists

  • Vote them out.

    • VOTE??? Really? Think it’s time to turn off the safety and take back their rights by force if necessary.

      • That kind of talk gives them ammunition. They can be voted out. But it will take patience and discipline. People who get scared are not rational. The first step is to get them back on their emotional feet. The 2nd is to get rid of the big donors and PAC corporate money in the entire election process. Taxpayer funding of all aspects with no outside money allowed. That too will take time. Since most of Ca. is urban ways need to be found to address the urban people.

  • Nothing but a bunch of damn lying bigots! Go after the criminals, you morons, not the honest people, and quit your damn lying to justify YOUR criminal and unconstitutional behavior!

  • TREASON. arrest those in office and try them for anti American crimes and constitutional violations. GUN REGISTRY??? Are they kidding…. Everyone in California with a semi auto should not comply.

    • Lukester

      What part of “well regulated” do you misunderstand, you smelly redneck? And it’s “well regulated militia” for that matter. A bunch of unnetworked, gun toting inbreds has never been protected by the 2nd amendment. There is a grand lack of discussion on the meaning of the right to bear arms. For me, people having guns never bothered me, but when they say they have the right to do so is what makes no sense.

      • Adam Bird

        Lukester, you mustn’t have read the Constitution, nor followed any of the SCOTUS decisions regarding this subject.
        District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008)
        “The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm
        unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for
        traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.”
        McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U.S. 3025 (2010)
        “held that the Second Amendment was incorporated.
        This means that the Court ruled that the Second Amendment limits State
        and local governments to the same extent that it limits the federal
        government.”

      • James Seitzinger

        You idiot! You must not know our history! Do you know what a Patriot is? How long have you been in this country. You’re probably an new immigrant! My family fought the revolution, they were Patriots. They took up arms and rebelled against the British, and started their own country, America. That is what a miltia was. They could not have accomplished this, had the British banned them from having arms. Boy are you ignorant!

      • Jim Capobianco

        Well Regulated Militia is not the Military just so your aware, it’s the people, you, me and every citizen of this country.
        You need to realize our founding fathers were not talking about an Army, they just freed themselves from the tyrannical rule of England. They wrote this to ensure the people would never be disarmed, much the same way that England tried to disarm them.
        So yes they were talking about our RIGHT to be armed. You can be one of the masses that isn’t armed and become a victim to our government just like THOUSANDS of people who live in Countries that don’t have the protection of our Second Amendment. Oh and BTW, without the second Amendment. All the other “Rights” / Amendments would be meaningless, as the FEDS would squash them at will. So take your smelly liberal ass and get the hell out.

  • Glenn J. Shapiro

    How many of these weapons are in the hands of criminals?
    And just how will this new law get the criminals to “give up” their weapons?

    Idiots.

  • Robert

    A bill should be introduced banning speech that supports limitation of constitutionally guaranteed rights

  • ARJ190

    Idiots!! I’ll bet they all feel good now though.