The Last Resistance – by Philip Hodges
If the government isn’t allowed to institute a gun ban then how can the government give my family that authority?
Under current California law, if a friend or family member claims that someone is a threat to himself or others, a “gun violence protection order” can be issued by the court against that person, and that person would have his firearms confiscated. He wouldn’t be allowed to possess any guns for a year after the protection order was given.
Under a law proposed by state senator Hannah-Beth Jackson (D-Santa Barbara), that one-year ban on gun possession would be extended to ten years. And for good measure, she threw in a provision that bans any transfer of firearms from one person to a family member without a proper background check. A father giving his son his shotgun would require a background check from a licensed dealer. Otherwise, they’d both be in violation. The NRA-ILA reported
SB 347, introduced by anti-gun Senator Hannah-Beth Jackson, would add to the list of misdemeanors convictions that would result in a 10-year prohibition on the possession of firearms. The addition of these misdemeanor offenses to the prohibited category list that include the “transfer” of firearms or ammunition could entrap family members who are giving firearms to relatives and are unaware of the requirements for firearm transfers through licensed dealers.
SB 707, introduced by anti-gun Senator Lois Wolk, would prohibit CCW holders and retired law enforcement officers from possessing firearms on any properties that make up the grounds of a K-12 school or university, including many parking lots, common areas that may not be readily identifiable as school grounds, and student apartment buildings.
SB 707 isn’t a surprise at all, considering this is the left coast we’re talking about, and the left is keen on turning every place into a gun-free zone, particularly places with kids.
Gun confiscation wasn’t going to come about all of a sudden. It’s been happening gradually and incrementally over the course of many years. They’ll keep adding provisions, taxes, and regulations, and taking away exemptions until it’s nearly impossible to own a gun. And they’ll do while paying lip service to the 2nd Amendment.
Read more at http://lastresistance.com/13264/california-proposes-10-year-gun-ban-on-those-deemed-by-family-to-be-a-threat/#guHrCZY3VETGpRTk.99
Screw your gun laws. This one is particularly ludicrous. Now every family squabble in California is going to result in someone losing their guns for a decade.
Nonsense. That decision can’t be left to an angry spouse, and that’s exactly the intent of this proposed law.
What gun laws ❓
“They’ll keep adding provisions, taxes, and regulations, and taking away exemptions until it’s nearly impossible to own a gun.”
They can infringe all they want. It will only weed out the really stupid people, and they’ll be pretty much useless in the coming fight anyway.