Bills Firearm bills awaiting Governor's signature (2025)

[bbp00]

Are you suggesting it's ok for Trump to remain in power for the next 5 to 10 years and that the nation MIGHT be released from fascism (phascism) after he dies? This is somewhat reminiscent of what happened with Francisco Franco in Spain who established a (Natsi) aligned (phascist) government in 1939 and oppressed the entire nation until 1975 when he died.

I serious hope you aren't advocating for or condoning this possibility. Do you have any idea just how much damage can be done to the entire world by having an authoritarian / (phascist) world's only super power? This isn't just some political game, this has absolutely dire implications. This also is not akin to having a brush fire in your backyard or having a house burn down.

Speculating that no one could really take Trump's place as the American Fuhrer is somewhat short sighted. Once fascism (phascism) is able to destroy our free elections and is able to militarily and through secret police forces like ICE, suppress the populace, then like the parasite it is, fascism (phascism) will reign over the nation indefinitely and the only way out will be through bloodshed. Just look at Putin's Russia for a real time example of the dangers of authoritarianism.

So, are you advocating for overthrowing current president? Wouldn't surprise me if so, because your post reads like something out of Antifa pamphlet.
Before you continue with your extremist rhetoric, try to remember that more than half the voters voted for him.

 

[ikeo1]

After reading this, all I can say is that if you’re voting for democrats you’re part of the problem. And yes, you are kidding yourself if you think the democrats in charge of this state will ever change their views. They’ve been after the second amendment for as long as I’ve been in the gun culture, and that’s at least 50 years.

So what is your solution? Tell people they’re the problem? How does that fix anything?

 

[shroom]

Need to vote red, no way around that. Dems will be emboldened to do whatever they want if they continue to hold a supermajority like this. Wish they'd do something useful like dismantle PG&E, but nah thats too hard.

 

[p--and--p]

I have to sit back and laugh.. My parents came from m and they know what its like. When people throw around that Trump is a dictator and fas-cist, they actually have zero idea how that works. If he was, you wouldn't have any rights to come here and say that- believe you me.

Again, CA has a super majority (because its already almost gerrymandered) and they just dont care about the will of the people, those who vote Dem without ever changing let them get away with anything they want. This is why direct democracy is retarded here in CA and why they want to get rid of the electoral college for the nation.. when its the republic side that is actually what saved us the last several elections (although trump won the popular vote this time)

The bills will all go through like they always do and lets pray the supreme court actually does their job for once and takes the roster case.. stop with the banning of guns, its already illegal to modify a glock- why ban the glock.

We need to rally around gun rights... especially if you are on the left because IF trump is a horrible dictator as you say, dont you want guns to be able to stop gov overreach should it happen? Overthrowing trump will take alot of firepower lol

Glad we changed things for the most part and I dont see these posts much, I can't take it. I seriously do not understand the two worlds we live in

 

[Serbianguy]

So what is your solution? Tell people they’re the problem? How does that fix anything?

My solution is to vote Republican. In fact, I’ll go as far as saying that anyone in the gun culture who votes for anyone in the Democratic Party is a traitor to the cause. Really, you’re nothing but collaborators.

 

[Serbianguy]

Are you suggesting it's ok for Trump to remain in power for the next 5 to 10 years and that the nation MIGHT be released from fascism (phascism) after he dies? This is somewhat reminiscent of what happened with Francisco Franco in Spain who established a (Natsi) aligned (phascist) government in 1939 and oppressed the entire nation until 1975 when he died.

I serious hope you aren't advocating for or condoning this possibility. Do you have any idea just how much damage can be done to the entire world by having an authoritarian / (phascist) world's only super power? This isn't just some political game, this has absolutely dire implications. This also is not akin to having a brush fire in your backyard or having a house burn down.

Speculating that no one could really take Trump's place as the American Fuhrer is somewhat short sighted. Once fascism (phascism) is able to destroy our free elections and is able to militarily and through secret police forces like ICE, suppress the populace, then like the parasite it is, fascism (phascism) will reign over the nation indefinitely and the only way out will be through bloodshed. Just look at Putin's Russia for a real time example of the dangers of authoritarianism.

This is a bunch of nonsense and you should be embarrassed for having written it.

That said, with your obviously dim view of Republicans, perhaps, since this is a forum that presumably promotes firearms and the second amendment, you could site just one example of something positive the democrats have done for gun rights.

Just one example. That’s all I ask.

 

[ikeo1]

My solution is to vote Republican. In fact, I’ll go as far as saying that anyone in the gun culture who votes for anyone in the Democratic Party is a traitor to the cause. Really, you’re nothing but collaborators.

So how many people have you convinced with this method of persuasion? Are you saying you don’t care what their position or history is unless it says Republican?

A traitor to who? It’s California, it’s a Blue State with a super majority.

Do you think there’s enough people that will follow you?
Which candidate do you back in CA or do you even know of any or are you only a party line voter and none of that matters?

I mean you realize that there aren’t enough Republicans in this state right? So what are you gonna do?

 

[star.3d]

something positive the democrats have done for gun rights.

I'll chime in. Governor Ronald Reagan ended open carry in California with the help of the NRA.

 

[ZeroFoxGiven]

After reading this, all I can say is that if you’re voting for democrats you’re part of the problem. And yes, you are kidding yourself if you think the democrats in charge of this state will ever change their views. They’ve been after the second amendment for as long as I’ve been in the gun culture, and that’s at least 50 years.

You’re not wrong, but a lot of Republicans are no better now, just a different kind of crazy.

I hate Democrats for trying to destroy the 2nd Amendment, but lately Trump has been attacking the 1st Amendment pretty hard because he does not like to be made fun of.

I really cannot stomach either side anymore as they are really just polar opposites of each other.

 

[bbp00]

I'll chime in. Governor Ronald Reagan ended open carry in California with the help of the NRA.

Open carry was banned in 2012. Reagan did sign a bill that banned open carry of loaded firearms.
But yeah, that was one of the Reagan's biggest sins.

 

[Serbianguy]

I'll chime in. Governor Ronald Reagan ended open carry in California with the help of the NRA.

You’re not answering the question.

 

[USMC06RET]

So, are you advocating for overthrowing current president? Wouldn't surprise me if so, because your post reads like something out of Antifa pamphlet.
Before you continue with your extremist rhetoric, try to remember that more than half the voters voted for him.

Read to me as if GR was replying to a post by Ikeo1 who introduced a discussion of political parties and national politics. Seems like he was disagreeing with Ikeo1 and explaining why he felt the parties are not even remotely the same and why. It also seemed like he was speculating as to what could end up happening if things don't change. Didn't read any kind of advocation violence.

I don't get the Antifa pamphlet thing. AntiFa = Anti right? Are you pro fascism? I've never seen one of their pamphlets, could you upload a copy of one of yours?

 

[USMC06RET]

I just do not understand how something this unconstitutional can come to pass. It blows my mind how some here are even trying to rationalize it. After everything here in California we have lost already, how can you possibly be ok with more of our rights being stripped away. I do not understand Americans who are ok with any of their rights being stripped away, regardless on how one labels it.

"The land of the free" use to mean something.

Not sure which bill you are referring too with "this". If any of the bills are unconstitutional, they will be challenged and overturned. This has happened before with so many different types of legislation both related to the 2nd and not. Legislators from all parties make mistakes about constitutionality and that is one of the reasons we have courts.

 

[star.3d]

Just want to say, these are the types of discussions we hoped to see here. Thank you to everyone participating in really thoughtful discussion.

I've got got some bad news, I'm afraid...

 

[ikeo1]

I've got got some bad news, I'm afraid...

It's not that bad.. We're talking about how we can make CA better, some things get pulled in but we try to bring it back. The way i see it, people can see that just saying to vote Red is a losing strategy in CA. It identifies party politics vs the reality that, there's no real good candidates, he's only looking at tribes.

Even then, if you vote for your tribe. His methodology for convincing people is flawed. There's no way he's going to convince anyone with that kind of attitude to help the 2A cause in California. It works from an idealistic POV, but from a practical standpoint in a state where you're the minority, it's never going to work. I never understood why people think that being condescending and aggressive will change the mind of someone else to vote with them. If anything it does the opposite & reinforces their stance that the people in 2A are overly aggressive vs. the approach I'm trying to do. Maybe it works in red states, but this isn't a red state, hopefully people can read the interaction and see that.

In hyper partisan politics, it's harder to convince people than it is to pick a side and be judged. I can see there's a lot more rational people here than not, so I think what we're doing is on the right track. Only every so often some people self identify and we can that see pretty clearly, that's ok. The discourse helps refine our approach and might even help people understand our goals more clearly.

 

[star.3d]

I hear you - my comment was half in jest. I wanted to also write comments on AB-1263, which will severely restricting e-commerce because of ID verification and acknowledgement requirements - even for benign accessories like grip modules, flash hiders, and aftermarket triggers. I'm not sure I want to post that here now. Like you said, incubating ideas here helps me talk to others from an informed and intelligent pro-gun position. I appreciate the folks in this thread - many of whom have much more experience than myself - willing to engage that effort without bellyaching.

If anything it reinforces their stance that the people in 2A are overly aggressive

This. I try not to do this.

The discourse helps refine our approach and might even help people understand our goals more clearly.

Yes.

 

[Serbianguy]

Not sure which bill you are referring too with "this". If any of the bills are unconstitutional, they will be challenged and overturned. This has happened before with so many different types of legislation both related to the 2nd and not. Legislators from all parties make mistakes about constitutionality and that is one of the reasons we have courts.

Here’s a guy who pays no attention to how unconstitutional bills move through the courts. Yeah, they do get challenged, but it takes many years of legal wrangling to get anywhere, thus, the state wins regardless of the outcome.

 

[NorCalBusa]

Newscum best deeply consider what he signs, if he has any desire to be POTUS.

 

[Dvrjon]

Re: AB 1127, the Glock machine gun ban.

Haven’t had time to chew on this but, the bill got a major amendment just prior to being approved by the legislature.

It appears that the amendment gives Glock (or manufacturers of crucifix firing system pistols) until July 1, 2026, (six months following its effective date of 1/1/26) to redesign older generation models to prevent illegal modification with machinegun conversion devices. If this is done, the older modified gens (read: Gen 3) would be grandfathered onto the roster without the need for the “Safe Handgun” attributes (CLI, mag disconnect, etc).

Newer generation 4 and 5 Glocks, which are far more common in other states, appear to still be excluded from the roster.

Here’s the final amended version showing the changes in blue.

ETA: The “firearm accessory” language is concerning as well as the concept of “reasonable controls”. The first is far too broad and the second is far too ambiguous.

But this looks like a deal to allow Newsom to ban machine guns while showing his support of the 2A and firearms industry efforts to provide common sense solutions (I hated writing that).

 

[star.3d]

Re: AB 1127, the Glock machine gun ban.

Yes, though a few nuances:

• In-state FFLs can continue to sell/transfer new Glocks through 7/1/2026, provided they took delivery of inventory before 1/1/2026
• Glock has until 1/1/2027 to submit a re-design of the Gen3 Glock pistols that prevents installation of a switch (as defined in the bill), but they would not be required to add a CLI or magazine disconnect. Same goes for Shadow Systems pistols, I believe, except these pistols already have a CLI + magazine disconnect.
• Glock could submit the Gen5 pistols, but would need to add a CLI and magazine disconnect

[my comments in brackets]

32103. (a) A pistol may be submitted for testing described in Section 32010 and added to the roster described in subdivision (a) of Section 32015 [DOJ's published list] without being subject to the requirements of subparagraph (D) [chamber loaded indicator] or (E) [magazine disconnect] of paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 31910, or the requirements of subdivision (d) of Section 32010 [CLI + mag disconnect, again], if all of the following conditions are met:
(1) The pistol was listed on the roster, described in subdivision (a) of Section 32015, on January 1, 2026. [Gen 3 Glocks]
(2) The pistol was not subject to the requirements of subparagraph (D) or (E) of paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 31910 because it was submitted for testing before the dates identified in subdivision (d) of Section 32010.
(3) The pistol was thereafter only modified to change design features which brought the pistol within the definition of machinegun-convertible pistol in Section 16885.
(4) The modified pistol is submitted to an independent certified laboratory for testing pursuant to Article 5 (commencing with Section 32000) of Chapter 4 before January 1, 2027.
(b) Any firearm meeting the requirements of this section shall be removed from the roster according to subdivision (b) of Section 31910 on the same timeline as the pistol that appeared on the roster prior to being modified pursuant to this section. [Glocks won't get a new date on the roster, and are still subjected to removal under the 3-for-1 removal rule which was enjointed under Renna v Bonta but is currently stayed pending appeal. I don't believe the rule has been implemented by CA DOJ.]