California Governor Signs New Bill Allowing Gun Confiscation

On Tuesday, Democratic Governor Jerry Brown signed into a new law stating that a close relative or law enforcement can petition to have a firearm taken from citizen, also known as the ‘Gun Restraining Order’. There are 2 major problems with the ‘logic’ behind this law:

1. Taking one weapon away from someone who wants to do harm to another individual will not keep them from finding another way. Take a gun away, fine. They’ll find a knife, bat, hammer, whatever. You’re giving the ‘close relative’ false hope that just because you took their gun away, they are no longer in danger.

2. Close relatives and law enforcement: Honestly, who is looking into this? What would happen if a LEO petitioned to have someone’s firearms confiscated- would anyone look into the reasoning or are they going to take their word for it? This gives people power to disarm citizens for any reason.

Below is the article from Guns N Freedom. What do you think?

The state of California has long been the state with some of the strictest gun laws in the country. It just got much worse.

Yahoo reported that people who fear a close relative may commit gun violence will be able to petition a judge to temporarily remove the person’s firearms in California, under a bill signed into law on Tuesday by Democratic Governor Jerry Brown.

The legislation – the first such measure in the United States – was introduced after police in Isla Vista near Santa Barbara said they were unable to confiscate weapons from a man who later went on a rampage and killed six people, despite concern from his family.

“In the case of the Isla Vista shooter, Elliot Rodger, his mother was noticing that he was becoming more agitated and making these threats of violence, but there was little she could do and little the police could do,” said Democratic Assembly member Nancy Skinner of Berkeley, who introduced the bill along with Santa Barbara Democrat Das Williams.

Under the so-called gun violence restraining order in the court system, immediate family members and law enforcement agencies could ask a judge to order guns temporarily removed from certain individuals.

The restraining order would last 21 days, and could be extended up to a year, after a notice and a hearing.

“The new ‘Gun Violence Restraining Order’ law will give families and law enforcement a needed tool to reduce the risk of mass shootings and gun violence both in the home and on our streets,” said Nick and Amanda Wilcox, legislative co-chairs of the California Chapters of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence.

The law has support from law enforcement agencies and is based on an existing measure that temporarily blocks people with domestic violence restraining orders from owning a gun.

“If it can save one life, one family from that agony, it will be worth it,” Democratic state Senator Hannah-Beth Jackson, said during debate on the measure.

Many of us say that the bill infringed on the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.

Brown also signed a bill on Tuesday requiring BB guns and pellet guns to be brightly colored or otherwise marked so that law enforcement officers do not mistake them for deadly firearms.

The bill was introduced after a 13-year-old Northern California boy was shot and killed by a sheriff’s deputy while carrying a pellet gun that looked like an assault weapon.

The law also expanded the definition of a BB gun in California to include firearms that shoot pellets larger than 6 millimeters.

Just one more step for California.

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “California Governor Signs New Bill Allowing Gun Confiscation

  1. Brown is another elitist who is surrounded by 24/7/365 armed security funded by the serfs and peasants that he rules over, but would deny a single mom the ability to protect her children from a dangerous criminal that Brown released early in the first place. He is an idiot and an enemy of freedom.

    • I couldn’t agree more. It is so hypocritical and selfish of these ‘leaders’ to think that their lives are more important than those that they are trying to take guns from. If guns are so bad and if guns kill people, why do they rely on security forces to carry them? It’s because the person behind the gun is ‘trusted’ just like law-abiding citizens should be. It’s our right to carry just as it is his right to have security.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s