Give an inch, and so they’ll take a mile. A slippery slope. Dying by a thousand cuts. By no matter identify you name it, Democrats in California have mastered the artwork of chipping away at constitutional rights. That’s what’s happening proper now within the Golden State the place final week, Lawyer Common Rob Bonta introduced the state needs to lift the price of an ammunition background test (that’s proper, in California, you need to have a background test simply to purchase ammunition) from $1 to $5.
After all, the payment enhance is to cowl the price of doing the background checks Bonta says, checks that buyers by no means requested for and that the federal government imposed upon them within the guise of security, nevertheless it’s simply one of many the explanation why such laws is so egregious within the first place. It’s additionally a textbook instance of why you may’t belief any politician who masks gun restrictions as “gun security” and acts incredulous when residents argue towards their proposals regardless of them calling their restrictive insurance policies “widespread sense” gun guidelines. However they aren’t widespread sense. They by no means are if you’re really conscious of the problems and the way the legal guidelines will later be utilized.
The legal guidelines actually gained’t cease an individual from shopping for a gun—or ammunition on this case—if they’ve the intent to wreak hurt. Such legal guidelines, will nonetheless, make it dearer for Californians to get pleasure from searching, leisure taking pictures, competitors taking pictures and defending themselves. It is going to make it significantly extra expensive and troublesome for these folks in our society who, as Kamala Harris likes to say, haven’t acquired “equitable therapy.” Assuming this implies “deprived” and in deprived that means “deprived economically,” then they’re among the individuals who want to have the ability to defend themselves essentially the most as by being economically deprived they sometimes by default reside in essentially the most harmful and crime-ridden neighborhoods. (It makes you marvel how severe Harris and Bonta actually are concerning the welfare of these they proclaim to be the champions for?)
Right here is a part of Bonta’s pitch to California gun homeowners since it’s the solely individual it would have an effect on:
Previous to the passage of Proposition 63 of 2016 (The Security for All Act) and Senate Invoice No. 1235 (SB 1235) (Reg. Sess. 2015-2016), the sale or switch of ammunition was not regulated in California. Though Penal Code part 30305 prohibited a person from proudly owning or possessing ammunition in the event that they had been prohibited from proudly owning or possessing a firearm, the Division had no mechanism to control the sale of ammunition. Proposition 63 and SB 1235 licensed the Division to finish an ammunition eligibility test or to confirm that a person’s Certificates of Eligibility (COE) is legitimate when the person purchases or transfers ammunition from or by way of an ammunition vendor.
As licensed by Penal Code part 30370, subdivision (e), the Division’s present rules established a $1.00 payment for a Commonplace Ammunition Eligibility Test (SAEC) and $1.00 payment for a COE Verification test. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 11, §§ 4282, 4285.) This payment has not been ample to cowl the Division’s working prices for the ammunition authorization program.
Efficient January 1, 2024, the Division might increase the payment for a SAEC and COE Verification test to cowl the affordable regulatory and enforcement prices for working the ammunition authorization program. (Pen. Code, § 30370, subd. (e).) The proposed regulation raises the payment for a SAEC and COE Verification test from $1.00 to $5.00.
However that is how anti-gun politicians fulfill their agenda actually at “any price.” They’ll’t cease gun possession legislatively or within the courts as a result of this annoying little authorized factor referred to as the Second Modification, the one our founding fathers believed was necessary sufficient to place proper behind our freedom of speech, faith, the press or to assemble. So, they cross administrative legal guidelines that cost charges. And once they do it, they name it a “nominal” payment, merely to assist offset the prices to implement the restrictive legislation they handed. However then, that payment just about at all times will increase, the purpose being to cost folks out of with the ability to train their rights and tax into oblivion what they will’t legislate.
And that my anti-gun associates (OK, as I give it some thought, I don’t know that I’ve any severe, like “exit and protest” anti-gun “associates.” That is likely to be type of onerous to cope with every day. I did meet this chick in faculty who leaned onerous left on the difficulty, however rattling, she was so sizzling, I may forgive her for one evening…however I digress. The reality is, at present, I do know some whiners, and I positively have some weak-spirited, squeamish on the difficulty associates and family. We are able to’t all be the rare-breed sheep canine. The world has to have its sheep…and sadly, wolves, as effectively.) However anyway, that’s the reason supporting extra gun laws doesn’t work.
What on the face of an argument would possibly seem to be it will be “widespread sense,” in the case of politics, is at all times fraught with misleading traps beneath the floor.
Thus far no less than in California, Bonta’s value enhance isn’t the rule, but. His proposed change should bear a 45-day public remark interval. The general public has till 5 p.m. on Oct. 8, 2024, to submit feedback concerning “the proposed regulatory motion.” Right here’s extra particulars from the Bonta-gram:
This rulemaking is present process a 45-day public remark interval. Any individual or their licensed consultant might submit written feedback concerning the proposed regulatory motion. The written remark interval closes at 5:00 pm on October 8, 2024. All well timed feedback that particularly pertain to the proposed rules will probably be reviewed and responded to by Division workers. Feedback could also be submitted by mail or electronic mail to:
Division of JusticeP.O. Field 160487Sacramento, CA 95816
The data beneath pertains to current rulemaking exercise, together with hyperlinks to the rules textual content and related paperwork. Any one that has submitted a remark concerning a proposed motion has the correct to request a duplicate of the Ultimate Assertion of Causes. The Ultimate Assertion can even be posted to this webpage upon completion of this rulemaking.
Public Discover and Associated Paperwork
Whereas I assume, the intent is to listen to what the “public” in California has to say, since California feels it has the correct to impose its guidelines on different states in a wide range of issues, I really feel like each gun proprietor in America has a proper to submit feedback and their ideas to the addresses above. Let your voice be heard.
We all know it gained’t possible sway the state’s choice to cost extra. That is the chance that has been within the works all alongside, however we are able to nonetheless be as a lot of a ache of their arse within the course of. We are able to’t ever cease the battle.
