In its infinite statism wisdom, the California legislature ended the week having approved AB-785. Firearms: possession of firearms by convicted persons is aimed at denying citizens convicted of a felony or misdemeanor hate crime their natural, civil and Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms. Governor Brown is sure to sign it into law. Here’s how the Golden State’s gonna roll:

Existing law makes it a misdemeanor to, by force or threat of force, interfere with another person’s free exercise of any constitutional right or privilege because of the other person’s actual or perceived race, religion, national origin, disability, gender, or sexual orientation. Existing law also makes it a misdemeanor to knowingly deface, damage, or destroy the property of another person, for the purpose of intimidating or interfering with the exercise of any of those constitutional rights because of those specified characteristics.

This bill would also add to the list of misdemeanors, the conviction for which is subject to the prohibition on possessing a firearm within 10 years of the conviction, the above-referenced interference with the exercise of civil rights, as specified. Because a violation of this provision would be a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

So, a Californian convicted of a misdemeanor “hate crime” stands to lose their guns and gun rights for 10 years. What could possibly go wrong?

Hey! Does threatening to deport an illegal immigrant by force (via armed government agents) count as interfering with another person’s free exercise of their Constitutional right? And what, pray tell, is a Constitutional privilege?

One more thing . . .

The gun grabbers on the left want to ban Americans on the FBI’s super-secret Terrorist Watch List from keeping and bearing arms (an honest-to-God Constitutional right). What’s the bet those lists are mostly based on the subjects’ race, religion and national origin? 

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

61 COMMENTS

  1. Be careful, some of what is written on this site could conceivably qualify as a hate crime. Refuse to bake a cake for a gay wedding, have state troopers at your door to take your 10/22.

  2. I never worry about threats to ban ownership of guns by those on terrorist watch lists. Being super secret and all, how are the “powers that be” supposed to get their hands on the list?

    I wonder if this bill can be used to bust Antifa members who protest violently against “white people” and try to intimidate them into ceding their constitutional rights to free speech through threats and acts of violence and intimidation. That’d work for me.

    And it is not like racists aren’t getting what they deserve for violently attacking people: crime is crime. Period. But yeah, it is a slippery slope. Just look at England, where any comment critical of Muslim immigrants is a hate crime, but grooming gangs and gang rapes are not prosecuted, because “Muslims.”Will Brown sign this? Only if the hate crime statute is clear and unambiguous. (this is , after all, just a penalty statute for another crime.) So we will see what we see. Misdemeanor domestic violence earns a similar loss of rights.

    • “I wonder if this bill can be used to bust Antifa members who protest violently against “white people” and try to intimidate them into ceding their constitutional rights to free speech through threats and acts of violence and intimidation.” – No. The crime is already on the books. The bill just adds a penalty by making the criminal a prohibited person for ten years.

      • Yes, yes, I recognized that–it is merely an increased penalty, not a new crime. But since all thise3 misdemeanants will be back on the street in no time after a conviction, it would be nice to know that they cannot have guns without committing a felony.

        • I don’t think any of them have been arrested, let alone charged, prosecuted, and convicted under the “existing law.” I know the five at the Ben Shapiro thing weren’t arrested under that law.

        • Tx lawyer, I think you miss the forest for the trees.

          “Existing law makes it a misdemeanor to, by force or threat of force, interfere with another person’s free exercise of any constitutional right or privilege because of the other person’s actual or perceived race, religion, national origin, disability, gender, or sexual orientation. Existing law also makes it a **misdemeanor to knowingly deface, damage, or destroy the property of another person, for the purpose of intimidating or interfering with the exercise of any of those constitutional rights because of those specified characteristics.”**

          As far as the first sentence, there are known and understood double standards galore, including in the case law and popular views as well. Burning a Mexican flag in front of a group of people including one who maybe a Mexican citizen can be a hate crime but burning an American flag in front of Americans is established unsanctionable protected speech. Saying males need to have their privilege reduced is acceptable but saying women need to have their privileges reduced may not be. saying Americans have to accept open borders is going to be protected, saying Mexicans have to respect boarders is going to be a national origin prejudice.

          In terms of the second sentence, this is occurring ALL the time. Literally hundred of cases of signage being pulled on, torn, grabbed away or defaced by being spit on. That is property.

          Is someone tearing away a swastika or hammer and sickle, or spitting on them, going to mean no second amendment rights? We can all agree swastika and hammer and sickle are symbols of the darkest tyranny and mass murder, they have both been symbols of direct enemies of the USA that we have warred against. But what happens when we ratchet it down? What of the tens of thousands of cases where signage in support of Donald rump is damaged? anyone doing that anywhere is going to have their second amendment rights removed?

          Even signage “property” is problematic on double standards. A sign that says “policy should be illegal dreamers need to get out” is what? protected political speech or a per se hate speech??? or both?? How does it compare to “policy should be dreamers stay’?

          • If they aren’t charged under that law, they will not be punished under that law. If they are not charged, legally it doesn’t matter if they did it.

            My point is that they are not being charged under that law.

    • Antifa hasn’t used guns, at least not thus far. Sooner or later, they’ll bring pepper spray and condoms filled with urine and feces …

      … to a gunfight.

    • I dunno. “Comrade Dragonlord” of antifa may have to hand in his “A-K-4-7.” He did threaten to kill Nazis after loading the clip into the hole.

  4. Existing law makes it a misdemeanor to, by force or threat of force, interfere with another person’s free exercise of any constitutional right or privilege because of the other person’s actual or perceived race, religion, national origin, disability, gender, or sexual orientation.

    But it’s perfectly acceptable to use force and threats to stop someone from speaking at UC Berkeley, because of his/her political beliefs.

    • I’m so glad I rescued my fiancee’ from that God-hating, Mohammedan-loving, fascist, illegal immigrant, Socialist, Third World Shithole.

      Just one example, I-5 and I-10 are infested with car-swallowing potholes that will shake the dental fillings right outta your head. I can only imagine how bad the roads are once you get off the highway.

  6. Well at this point I just want Lil Kim to burn the entire west coast into radioactive ash. There’s nothing there worth saving.

    • If not for fallout drifting inland to the east, I might agree with you. Politically, Seattle, Portland, and most of California are like cancerous growths in need of drastic radiation therapy.

    • Sorry to burst your bubble, but ‘Lil Kim isn’t going to be burning anyone to radioactive anything any time soon.

      In fact, no one is.

        • Ok, let’s put it clearly: North Korea is zero threat to anyone but its own citizens.

          Zero ability to project power.

          The No-Dick missile has the payload equivalent of a 250 lb. MK-80. Not a lot of damage potential. And before someone chimes in with “bu….bu…newks!” I will simply say newks are a joke.

          Worry about things that really matter, like our own country.

        • North Korea and South Korea need to settle their own affairs.

          I frankly don’t give a flying squirrel what NK does on the peninsula. They are not a credible threat to CONUS.

          Last century was one big war. From Wilson onward, it was nothing but disaster. Every single war from that point forward (up to and including the “WOT”) derived from the ill-advised involvement in affairs that did not involve us.

          NK has no means of harming anyone on the mainland US (no real means of harming anyone outside the range of their artillery). And SK is not worth a single American life. Unless you’d like to volunteer.

        • I love it how the The US is the only country on the planet that is always embroiled in other countries’ affairs and we still act like we’re benevolent and kind and demonize North Korea as if they can do anything. We’re the big bully. They are the wimpy kid trying to puff out their chest so we’ll leave them alone.

          Why can we Americans not get through our thick skulls that we are the bad guys? We are the empire!

          But I suppose billions of dollars in “taxpayer funds” that are earmarked for “defense” purposes must be spent somewhere huh?

          Gotta keep professional killers out there “spreading democracy” and keeping us “safe and free”…

          • So we just let evil run rampant in the world? Funny how “the world” (all those countries who were/are not embroiled in the affairs of other countries) came to the US twice last century to save them from really nice, but misunderstood nations.

            It is simply foolish to believe that other nations will be good and benign if only the US would stay politically and economically within its own borders? Evil exists. Evil does not contain itself. Believing that ignoring evil is a pathway to peace and safety defies the knowledge that humans are evil at the core and must be taught and disciplined to reject those base characteristics. One does not need to teach a child to lie; it comes naturally.

        • “So we just let evil run rampant in the world?”

          Yes, screw the rest of the world. How is it in any way or shape our problem what happens overseas? We have enough resources to take care of ourselves. We have the most powerful military in the world several times over backed up by an armed population that if anyone tried to invade us would be suicidal on their end plus the thousands of nukes that we could cover the entire planet with if we wanted to. Seriously, who cares!!

          “Evil does not contain itself.”
          So how is piling up trillions in debt, constant warfare, broken families, mentally damaged soldiers, and a foreign policy of warmongering making everyone hate us working out for anyone but your “feelings”? Last time I checked we haven’t won any meaningful conflict since WWII. Every war since then has only further destabilized and made the situation WORSE!!

          The rest of the world hates us anyway. Why are we dying for them? If the world calls us on to defeat the next Hitler tell them to go screw themselves. We tried being the World Police, they didn’t like how we were handling it. They can go cry to the Chinese or Russians to bail them out for all I care and let them waste their treasury and lives instead of ours.

          There will always be human suffering, conquest, genocidal warlords, etc. that even the mighty, proud U.S. cannot stop. Just like there will always be criminals there will always be a Hitler, Stalin, Pol-Pot in waiting. It’s human nature after-all.

          This cartoon here tells exactly how I feel.
          https://pics.onsizzle.com/la-ficken-off-haettul-bigot-ouer-union-is-fort-et-11715969.png

          • Interesting observations. but a bit simplistic.

            I do have a certain affinity for Geo. Washington’s admonition regarding avoiding foreign entanglements (although he certainly took advantage of the deciding factor of inducing France and Spain to enter our war against England). But a complete cutoff of any commerce of any kind with the rest of the world is impossible. One day, have a look at all the raw material the US imports, things available only in foreign lands.

            As for our impossible debt, that was not caused by military interventions. It was caused by politicians who can never see a “need” that doesn’t require a government solution (and funding). 3.1% of federal “discretionary” spending (and you need to know what “discretionary” means,vs. “mandatory) does not build a 20 trillion dollar debt. Take a look at “mandatory” spending. Where, under the constitution, do you find a mandate to spend any funds on the so-called “mandatory” (entitlement) programs? Where in the constitution do you find a mandate to spend funds on defense of the military? Answer: only defense is mandated.

            As to involvement in the affairs of the world, WW1 and 2 were colossal mistakes. Why should the US have joined in the fight against evils? What difference did it make how many Asians and Europeans were killed or enslaved? What was the point of it all?

            Fighting evil is always required because one day, without fail, it will come for you. Like the man said, “One day they came for me.”

  7. Sooo, since the California Legislature has exempted itself from all these gun laws, does that constitute an infringement of the California citizens’ rights regarding the same gun laws?

    I guess they’ll all be prosecuted under this statute…

  8. “Hey! Does threatening to deport an illegal immigrant by force (via armed government agents) count as interfering with another person’s free exercise of their Constitutional right?”

    Uuuhhhh….no. But statements supporting such action are definitely hate crimes. Even disagreeing with someone is hate speech, which is de facto violence under hate laws.

    “Constitutional privilege” is no mystery. It is precisely those things identified in the constitution that the government (or courts) permits the populace to do, or receive. Why is this so difficult for you, anyway? You some kinda believer in the founding principles of this nation? Some sort of limited government radical? One of those people who believe humans have rights not subject to control by the government? Someone convinced this nation is special, unique and different in history? A beacon on the hill? Yeah? Well, you are bordering on hate speech, right there.

    Somebody call Gavin Newsome. We got a hater here.
    Dontchaknow.

    • Under Tam vs the US Patent Office hate speech was declared to be constitutionally protected. The decision was 8-0. If California wishes to claim otherwise there is a federal judge who will toss the case. Even the 9th Circuit will feel bound by an 8-0 decision since any contrary decision will be overturned without a SCOTUS hearing. California would be wise to back away from this nonsense but California politicians give stupidity a bad name.

  10. I imagine people like Ben Shapiro are going to have trouble with these laws. Seeing as how quickly Universities and a number of their students claim he is committing “hate crimes”.

  12. Man the wording of this law going to screw all those kids at Berkeley who destroy property and assault people who don’t agree with their political ideology

    Oh wait California laws only apply to those people they find ‘distasteful’

  14. drag them, kicking and screaming, into the SCotUS;
    if that doesn’t work….do it again!
    and…again….and…again….and….again….. etc

  15. The sign in the above pic says it all. The libtards believe that voting for anyone but dems is a hate crime. Disagreeing with them is a hate crime. Constitutional rights are for them not you. Speech is only protected if they approve.

    Because, GUNS. The evil that is inside them leaks to the hearts of men, they must be destroyed. The elite can have their armed body guards, but you cannot protect you and yours. They don’t like it when you think for yourself, Liberty is only a word to them. The commies always seem to think that when the change finally happens they are good. They are on the inside. Ask all those buried because they helped Stalin, Hitler…etc…

    The libtards are indeed useful idiots. They are often surprised when the laws they push backfire on them. Still funny to watch their little selves eat their own. When some lefty actually says something sane once in a while, their little heads explode. Commie-fornia wants to secede, and one group even pushing for the middle class to just leave if they don’t like their immigration stance, higher taxes, and anti gun laws.

    • That sign is one of the scariest things I’ve seen in some time. The attitude it encompasses is very troubling.

      And just think, some of these people are going to be running the country some day.

      • Yes, I would agree that anyone who voted (in order) for Felon Hillary Clinton, Kenyan-born Filthy Mohammedan Savage B Hussein Obama, John “Lurch The Cowardly ‘War Hero’ ” Kerry, alGore Incorporated, Rapist Clinton, Dukakis, Mondale, Marielito Carter, Socialist McGovern, Hapless Hubert Humphrey, Racist Johnson, Drug-Abusing Kennedy….has committed a Hate Crime and should be locked up.

  16. How is this any different from the current law making California lose right to keep guns when only arrested for domestic violence (which includes cruelty to a pet such as leaving it in a hot car)? If you have a DV arrest, you have to ask the judge to say “full RKBA restored”.

  17. Oh, so now you also loose your second amendment rights if you dare to use your first?
    I’m sorry, but either the supreme court strikes this down really fast or somebody has to defend the constitutional rights by other means. Preferrably some army guy who has sworn an oath to protect said rights and does training flights over commiefornia in his bomber.

  18. The Constitution as a document grants NOTHING, it recognizes and reaffirms those rights already inherent in every one for being human.

  20. So happy I left the Socialist Peoples Republic of Kalifornia!
    Should have done it many, many more years ago, I ended up staying longer than I should have because of work, and family, finally I just couldn’t take it any longer.
    Now I live in a pro gun, red state, and can actually practice my second amendment right to self-defense legally, and collect any damn fire arm I so choose!

  21. sounds like a law that can be interpreted in any way the government decides. They have already said that expressing any view they disagree with is a hate crime.

  22. That means since only white people can commit hate crimes the California government will only take guns from white people it doesn’t like.
    Then person’s other than whites will have it easier to kill white people.
    Dang a democrats liberal wet dream!

  23. How is the fake drought doing in Commiefornia these days? You know, after the commies in Sacramento decided to drain all the reservoirs to save a sardine?

  24. If my vote was a hate crime, their very existence is a crime against humanity. I am not a Christian, I do not turn the other cheek, you are testing my patience, I am not a tolerant individual. Fair warning.

  25. I think this all points right back to the Morons who sit on the Supreme Court. They have ignored the problem of hate speech and threats for years while other civilized Industrial Countries have taken the moral high ground and completely outlawed it. Now California instead of passing an anti-hate speech law only decided they could kill two birds with one stone and outlaw both gun ownership and hate speech at the same time. To the them it is a dream come true. Meanwhile since their new law which will confiscated all semi-auto rifles within two years has been ruled by the courts to be constitutional the lower courts in California will only two willingly support this new law but not because it bans hate speech so much but rather that it is tied to taking away the right to own a firearm. Once this law is sanctioned by the courts it will of course be extended to say spitting on the side walk or playing music at a private party to loudly or having a burned out tail light bulb assuming the person stopped is not executed by some made dog cop on the spot for such a heinous crime.

  26. “…for the purpose of intimidating or interfering with the exercise of any of those constitutional rights…”

    So…how many antifa will this affect when they are suppressing speech every time a conservative speaker tries to appear in CA?

    Answer: Zero. It will only be used again the ‘evil right’.

Comments are closed.