California gun owners could face a restrictive—and arguably unconstitutional—new firearms storage law if some anti-gun Democrats in the state assembly get their way. A measure requiring guns to be stored where they are inaccessible for self-defense purposes—the very reason many people own them—recently passed one more hurdle in the legislative process.
On Tuesday, Senate Bill 53, introduced by Democrat state Sen. Anthony Portantino was approved by the Assembly Public Safety Committee on a 6-to-2 vote. The measure requires any firearm to be “stored in a locked box or safe that is listed on the Department of Justice’s list of approved firearm safety devices.” Additionally, “The approved firearm safety device is properly engaged so that the firearm cannot be accessed by any person other than the owner or other lawfully authorized user.”
While that might sound reasonable to those who know nothing about armed self-defense, storing a firearm in such a way can make it more difficult to access in times of emergency. All gun owners should be responsible gun owners, and all should be able to decide how to safely store their firearms without being trampled on by excessive government regulations.
Interestingly, the measure would also put a greater burden on firearm manufacturers. Gunmakers already provide trigger locks with new firearms sold at the retail level, but this measure adds additional requirements that will almost certainly increase the cost of guns.
The text of the measure states: “A firearm sold or transferred in this state by a licensed firearms dealer, including a private transfer through a dealer, and any firearm manufactured in this state shall include or be accompanied by a lock box or safe that is listed on the Department of Justice’s roster of approved firearms safety devices and that is identified as appropriate for that firearm by reference to either the manufacturer and model of the firearm, or to the physical characteristics of the firearm that match those listed on the roster for use with the device.”
As we’ve pointed out before, this measure and other storage legislation ignore the Supreme Court’s Heller decision in which the court argued that storage requirements that prevent gun owners from easily accessing their firearms are unconstitutional.
In penning the majority opinion in Heller, Justice Antonin Scalia wrote: “We must also address the District’s requirement (as applied to respondent’s handgun) that firearms in the home be rendered and kept inoperable at all times. This makes it impossible for citizens to use them for the core lawful purpose of self-defense and is hence unconstitutional. The District argues that we should interpret this element of the statute to contain an exception for self-defense. But we think that is precluded by the unequivocal text, and by the presence of certain other enumerated exceptions.”
The measure will next be considered in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.
What I want to know is how are the Feds going to know if my gunms are locked up or not.
I think some of these laws are passed because a brother in law that’s in the business of making 3 lock boxes has his sisters husband making laws.
These types of laws are nothing more than ‘Feelz’ good laws. They are meant to sate the continual screams from liberals “To Do Something”. As is the case with most legislation passed by liberal/progressive democrats. They generally address a made up problem based on emotionally driven agendas.
They’re not intended to know in advance; they’re intended to make sure you have no claim of self defense because you were “committing a crime ” when you had to use it.
These are actually more for zealous D.A.s who use them for bargaining. If someone is arrested on an original charge, a D.A. might dive deep into the case and find several more charges that could be added based upon strict reading of the applicable laws. Then, to successfully secure a plea bargain, the D.A. says “You have 8 charges I have here **points to folder on the desk** against you that could result in a total of 20 years in prison. I’ll offer you a deal of two felonies with the a ‘violent’ circumstance that carry only two years in prison. You could take this to a jury, but they’d have to follow the law and rule that you are indeed in violation of all 8 laws.”
Boom. Defendant takes the deal, is never convicted by a jury of his peers, yet loses his rights to own a gun or vote, and the D.A. claims upon his next re-election campaign that he’s “putting violent criminals behind bars for the community.”
It’s all smoke and mirrors. All lawyers are only in this for money, and all D.A.s are in it for personal political gain.
“What I want to know is how are the Feds going to know if my gunms are locked up or not.”
Your Marsupial burrow gets robbed, the cops come to investigate and photograph the crime scene, and see your gat not locked up…
Typical situation, victim gets victimized by government officials.
BREAKING: Supreme Court Overturns Trump Era Bump Stock Ban > https://www.shootingnewsweekly.com/2024/06/14/breaking-supreme-court-overturns-trump-era-bump-stock-ban/
SCOTUS 6-3 ruling here > https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/22-976_e29g.pdf
Some legal wienie will find a way to outmaneuver this SCOTUS finding with a new, better law.
Well 40calBooger as we have seen with Bruen the Supreme Court and what it says really doesn’t mean much.
I just don’t think they are banging their wooden hammers hard enough.
i guess you cant bring an empty lock box in the store to take it home you have to buy an approved one off the shelf.
its almost as jf they are deterring people from buying guns.
Nah, it’s the brother in law cashing in on his sisters husband passing laws so they both get rich.
Inside bullfckery, its throughout the whole political system.
An original receipt for the purchase of an approved device suffices.
Hmmm…Anyone in the market for a receipt?
California sux! Trying to turn Colorado red but it ain’t working.
So what is the particular issue, it just means you need to keep it in a gun safe, you can’t put it in a shoe box and put a chain lock around the shoe box and it call it secure.
Hey Crappy, did you stop reading after 4 paragraphs? the fifth paragraph says, “The text of the measure states: “A firearm sold or transferred in this state by a licensed firearms dealer, including a private transfer through a dealer, and any firearm manufactured in this state shall include or be accompanied by a lock box or safe that is listed on the Department of Justice’s roster of approved firearms safety devices and that is identified as appropriate for that firearm by reference to either the manufacturer and model of the firearm, or to the physical characteristics of the firearm that match those listed on the roster for use with the device.”
Mike in WI – And? All that says is that when you buy a gun it comes with a lock box or safe.
So every time you buy a $200 rifle or shotgun (yes, some are still that cheap), you have to add the cost of a huge $500 floor safe to store that $200 rifle or shotgun, plus you need to rent a truck to haul that safe to your house because long gun safes are HUGE. Buy five guns, have five gun safes taking up all the room in your house! That’s as stupid as saying that every time you buy a car, you have to buy a house with a garage, so if you buy two cars, you have to buy two houses.
And each gun already came with a trigger lock. and you already have a safe at home that can hold six guns, but that’s not good enough.
99.95 for a box that anyone can likely opened with a paper clip or screwdriver, followed by clown recalls that fix nothing. Sounds great. Not. 10 dollar tool defeated several locals large gun vaults, even the gun shops aren’t safe with all their measures.
When are we going to make people lock up their car keys or place in device to slow down car thieves as they get more brazen, which must be the automobile owners responsibility and fault rather than 1500 strikes in and you might be out.
People should be able to leave their gun out and car keys in the ignition if they choose. The government should put away criminals and more people would learn to avoid being thieves. We are in such a different world than when I was a kid. Farmers would leave long guns in the rack of their window down pick-ups while going in the store downtown! No one dared steal them, because they’d either get a cracked head and/or several years to think about it.
Brad – “People should be able to leave their gun out”
You give us gun owners a bad name.
My gun is on the table right next to me as I type this.
You can call me all the names you want. No doucebag libtard politician gets to tell me where my gun can be in my own home.
The ho.mos.exuals and ath.eists who control california, just can’t stay out of your bedroom. They have always wanted to tell you, what you can have, and can’t have, or do in your own bedroom.
this has nothing to do with being an atheist. I don’t have to believe in a god to be a safe gun owner and I don’t have to keep my gun(s) locked up to be a safe gun owner. this is a liberal problem, not an atheist problem.
It’s not about God. It’s about the 1st amendment. And ath.eists don’t support the 1st amendment.
They support pornography. Now you can certainly have your pornography. But your pornography has nothing to do with the 1st amendment. Just as hunting has nothing to do with the 2nd amendment.
Ath.eists are so.ciali.st prog.ressi.ve in their p0litic@l 0rien.tati0n. They worship the state. And because the worship the state and not God. They will do what the state demands.
.
An ath.eist hom. osex.ual wrote the law making rape and stalking victims, wait an extra 10 days to get a gun in california.
You vote for people like that. You are not voting for the christians who have been passing permitless carry, in over half the country now.
Am I the only one who bothers to actually read the SCOTUS decisions? Scalia already declared all mandatory firearm security measures UNCONSTITUTIONAL in principle if not by name.
From Scalia’s opinion for the majority in Heller, verbatim:
He’s speaking only to trigger locks because only trigger locks were at issue in the Heller filing. But in this sentence he CLEARLY has established the Constitutional precedent that any requirement that would make it “impossible for citizens to use arms for the core lawful purpose of self-defense” is “unconstitutional”.
So until they can invent a safety device that costs NOTHING and will allow instantaneous access to the weapon, first time, every time, they’re just pissing in the wind.
And Kommiefornia might pretend they’ve made it law that you have to have to keep all your firearms in an underground safe on an island surrounded by a lake full of crocodiles, but it won’t pass Constitutional muster. It’s just another of the thousand papercuts they hope to inflict on the 2nd Amendment and their own citizens.
The article is inaccurate on several important details. First, a firearm owner can keep a loaded firearm on his person or within range of his immediate control and still comply with this proposed law. Second, you do not have to buy a new safe every time you buy a gun, you only have to show that you have one by producing the original receipt. Third, the police do not have to come into your house to “enforce” the law; the FFL cannot deliver the firearm to the purchaser absent proof of compliance with the safe or lock box requirement.
A couple of other provisions should be noted. First, the proposed statute eliminates the exception for persons who do not have nor reasonably expect to have any minors in their house. (I suspect there will be a multitude of people who will never know that they NOW have to comply with the new statute.) Second, the firearm has to be secured, but it does not have to be unloaded and the ammunition does not have to be stored in a separate locked container.
On a related note, California’s new punitive 11% additional tax on firearms, accessories and ammunition goes into effect July 1, 2025. Unless I am feeling particularly wealthy, I suspect the SP101 I picked up from the “cooling off” period jail today will be my last purchase in this state. Although there are more I would like to acquire, I have enough for my foreseeable needs.
Bobbed-hammer SP101? 🙂
I thought ILLannoy sucked. And the leftards mess with us the heavily armed. MILLIONS of US. Imagine if you were defenseless?!?🙄
Leftist Cox Ukkerz just can’t get enough of reaming, penalizing, accusing, cancelling or fining to death anybody they dislike. Talk about psychopathically triggered!!!
Being Conservative in Shallowpornia MUST have deep parallels to being African American in a KKK state, or being Jewish in Germany in the 30’s.
I’m at our (NEW, to me) broken up old house in NE Texas. Trying to vacate my life and possessions in West New Jersey (CA).
We have been basically impoverished by the corrupt gummint of Calimolestakidafornia, and are heap big tired of it. We be broke!
I can’t even afford to buy a five-shot Taurus for a gat. Time to sell the house, or sell a kidney. We will take a year to clear outa there, but it can’t come soon enough.
Yeesh!
To all of you guys who think any of us voted for this: POP OPEN YOUR EYES! THEY’LL BE DOING THE SAME THING TO YOU NEXT!
Lived in California for a couple of years, late 1960’s, early 1970. It was interesting. Looking at the way cookies have crumbled, going back there was never even a remote possibility.
California is as anti-civil rights, as any former Confederate States of America, state government.
But because of the “bread and circuses” provided by the government. Those distractions are keeping the citizen slave population, of the state very content.
Comments are closed.