Gun Facts & Laws

LA Gun Seizure: LAPD, ATF Seize More Than 1,000 Guns From Home

by Personal Defense World

May 31, 2023

Guns

VIDEO: These Rifle Dynamics ‘California Airlift’ AKs Are CA Compliant

by Tactical Life Staff

May 31, 2023

Guns

SAF Sues CA DOJ Over Faulty Bullet Button Rifle Registration System

by Personal Defense World

May 31, 2023

Guns

REPORT: CA DOJ Had Data Breach During ‘Bullet Button’ Registration

by Personal Defense World

May 31, 2023

Page 2 of 6 Previous 1 2 3 … 6 Next

This bill, effective July 1, 2022, would revise the criteria for unsafe handguns by requiring the microstamp to be imprinted in one place on the interior of the handgun, and would require the department, for every new firearm added to the roster, to remove, as specified, 3 firearms from the roster that are not compliant with current requirements. By expanding the number of firearms the sale or manufacture of which would be a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

If you\u2019re not familiar with the state\u2019s law on purchasing handguns, you likely won\u2019t believe it. In order for a law-abiding Californian to purchase any handgun, it must be included on the state\u2019s approved list<\/a>. If it\u2019s not on the list, it can\u2019t be sold by federal firearms licensees in the state\u2014period.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

No New Semi-Autos!<\/h4>\n\n\n\n

Here's another thing you likely won\u2019t believe: California hasn\u2019t added a semi-auto handgun model to the list in seven years. That means that California residents haven\u2019t even had the opportunity to purchase any of the fantastic new semi-autos that have come onto the scene since 2013!<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Think about how many guns we're talking about. Consider all the handgun reviews you've read on this website and in Personal Defense World<\/em> Magazine. And what about our sister publications Combat Handguns<\/em>, Tactical Life<\/em>, and Ballistic Magazine<\/em>? From the Glock 43<\/a> to the SIG P320<\/a> to the Springfield Hellcat<\/a>, none of them are available to California shooters. That\u2019s right, no FN 509<\/a>, Mossberg MC2c<\/a>, Taurus G3, Ruger-57<\/a>, Walther PPQ, ZEV OZ 9C<\/a>, Kahr PM9 or dozens upon dozens of other great, safe handguns that the rest of us choose between when making a purchase.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But let's get back to the focus of the new provision. For every handgun added to the roster, California would remove three others approved handguns. Yes, you're reading that correctly. Should California add a new handgun to the roster, it will take away three guns from the list. Do the math. As time passes and the state adds new handguns to the list, it removes even more. Eventually the number of models available to law-abiding Californians will become fewer and fewer.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Support California Gun Owners<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n

Why should such shenanigans matter to you since they\u2019re taking place all the way out on the West Coast? For starters, our gun-owning brethren in the Golden State deserve our support in their continued plight to have at least a smidgeon of their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms recognized by their state government.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Additionally, California has long acted as a petri dish in the overall experiment of bad gun laws. Quite often, unconstitutional ideas out there can become proposed legislation in states across the country. And none of us want to be forced to buy our handguns only if they are listed on a government roster of approved firearms.<\/p>\n","post_title":"California Handgun Roster: Bill Would Remove 3 Pistols for Each Approval","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"california-handgun-roster-removal-proposal","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2023-05-31 10:33:21","post_modified_gmt":"2023-05-31 10:33:21","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/www.dev.athlonoutdoors.com\/2020\/07\/29\/california-handgun-roster-removal-proposal\/","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":11578,"post_author":"988","post_date":"2020-05-26 10:06:47","post_date_gmt":"2020-05-26 14:06:47","post_content":"Pro-gun advocates have long argued that gun registration leads to confiscation; that is what's happened in just about every place firearm registration has been tried, including within the United States. And the new California ammo background checks show that registration is evolving.\r\n\r\n[in_content post=\"123794\" alignment=\"align-left\" \/]\r\n

California Ammo Background Checks<\/h2>\r\nConsider that in the past, gun registration lists have led to confiscation in Australia, Bermuda, Cuba, Germany, Great Britain, Greece, Ireland, Jamaica, Soviet Georgia and other countries. The same will soon hold true for Canada with that country\u2019s recently expanded gun ban<\/a> requiring owners to \u201cturn in\u201d many rifles and shotguns, most of which can be found on registration lists.\r\n\r\nOf course, the old saying, \u201cIt could never happen here,\u201d was rendered moot by New York City. In 1967, NYC passed an ordinance requiring citizens to obtain a permit to own a rifle or shotgun, which would then be registered. It took a while, but in 1991, the city passed a ban on some semi-auto rifles and shotguns. The city also ordered residents to surrender, render inoperable or remove from the city any of the guns on the banned list. Of course, they knew who owned those firearms because they were on the registry.\r\n\r\nIn fact, the danger of gun registration has been realized by pro-gun advocates in Congress for decades. In 1975, U.S. Sen. James A. McClure, R-Idaho, said, \u201cGun registration is the first step toward ultimate and total confiscation, the first step in a complete destruction of a cornerstone of our Bill of Rights.\u201d When Sen. McClure later sponsored the Firearms Owners` Protection Act in 1986, he made sure that it included a prohibition against the federal government keeping a national registry of gun owners.\r\n

Malicious Intent<\/h4>\r\nUnfortunately, if politicians hate guns and gun owners enough, they can find ways to skirt such laws. Let's take a look at California\u2019s recently instituted ammunition background check law. The new law proves officials passed it for more purposes than just to screen potential ammo purchasers.\r\n\r\nRecent reports from the Golden State show a startling trend. Ammunition background checks have led to confiscation of dozens of firearms in 12 jurisdictions during April and the first half of May. According to ktla.com<\/a>, confiscations included 51 firearms, 123 magazines and 28,518 rounds of ammunition.\r\n\r\nIt\u2019s impossible to know why the owners of those firearms were turned down by the ammo check system; we can\u2019t tell for sure if the guns were confiscated from criminals or law-abiding citizens. What we can know for sure is how easy it would be for an anti-gun government to create a partial gun registry simply by passing ammo background check laws and keeping tabs on what kinds of ammunition people buy. From having that knowledge, it\u2019s not hard to imagine anti-gun politicians and gun-ban groups using a future catastrophe to decide that a list of ammo owners is also a list of gun owners, and that those gun owners shouldn\u2019t be \u201callowed\u201d to own their firearms anymore.\r\n

District Judge's Decision Overturned<\/h4>\r\nAs most readers are likely aware, last month, U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez blocked the ammo background check law, saying, \u201cCriminals, tyrants, and terrorists don\u2019t do background checks. The background check experiment defies common sense while unduly and severely burdening the Second Amendment rights of every responsible, gun-owning citizen desiring to lawfully buy ammunition.\u201d However, only a day later, the 9^{th<\/sup> Circuit Court of Appeals} stayed the judge\u2019s order<\/a>.\r\n\r\nHopefully, a court will eventually nip the entire ammo background check system at the bud. From there, the court should send it to the trash heap of history where it belongs. Such an action would likely deter other anti-gun state politicians who are, no doubt, watching closely to see if California\u2019s restrictive requirement passes judicial scrutiny so they can inflict similar restrictions on the residents of their states.","post_title":"Why California Ammo Background Checks Are De Facto Gun Registration","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"california-ammo-background-checks-gun-registration","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2023-05-31 10:33:47","post_modified_gmt":"2023-05-31 10:33:47","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/www.dev.athlonoutdoors.com\/2020\/05\/26\/california-ammo-background-checks-gun-registration\/","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":11730,"post_author":"351","post_date":"2020-04-27 10:54:05","post_date_gmt":"2020-04-27 14:54:05","post_content":"When it comes to gun rights, Californians continually suffer from the idiom \"one step forward, two steps back.\" Such was the case recently regarding the California ammunition purchase law. It requires residents to undergo a background check in order to purchase ammunition. After a federal judge blocked the law on Thursday,<\/a> a\u00a09th Circuit Court of Appeals reinstated the law Friday.\r\n\r\n[in_content post=\"123782\" alignment=\"align-left\" \/]\r\n

California Ammunition Purchase Law Reinstated<\/h2>\r\n

\r\n\r\n\u201cCriminals, tyrants, and terrorists don\u2019t do background checks,\u201d U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez told usnews.com<\/a>\u00a0after blocking the law. \u201cThe background check experiment defies common sense while unduly and severely burdening the Second Amendment rights of every responsible, gun-owning citizen desiring to lawfully buy ammunition.\u201d\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\nBut now the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals granted state Attorney General Xavier Becerra's\u00a0request to stay that judge's order. Even though Judge Benitez wrote the background checks violated Constitutional rights, the 9th Circuit Court granted the stay.<\/span>\r\n

\u201cThis means that the same restrictions that have been previously in effect regarding ammunition in California are back for the time being,\u201d the National Rifle Association\u00a0said in a news release<\/a>.<\/p>\r\nThe bogus law took effect in July. Judge Benitez said the law blocked sales to legitimate, law-abiding ammo purchasers approximately 16-percent of the time. He further wrote it adversely impacted and violated interstate commerce laws. However, Becerra claimed the law stopped more than 750 people form illegally buying ammunition.\r\n\r\nFor Californians, the reinstatement of the law proves the latest infringement upon their Second Amendment rights. The original challenge came from a suit filed by the California Rifle & Pistol Association. The lawsuit also included the likes of six-time Olympic medalist Kim Rhode, among others.\r\n\r\nLet's hope the California Rifle & Pistol Association, along with all the other individuals in suit, continue the fight. We need a precedent setting decision at the federal level. We need a decision that ends bogus laws like California's, forever.","post_title":"9th Circuit Court Reinstates California Ammunition Purchase Law","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"9th-circuit-resinstates-california-ammunition-law","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2023-05-31 10:34:00","post_modified_gmt":"2023-05-31 10:34:00","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/www.dev.athlonoutdoors.com\/2020\/04\/27\/9th-circuit-resinstates-california-ammunition-law\/","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":3344,"post_author":"850","post_date":"2019-10-17 04:00:12","post_date_gmt":"2019-10-17 08:00:12","post_content":"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=lzfvetZh8w0[\/embed]\r\n\r\nThe mere mention of the state of California causes most gun owners to cringe. Anyone 2A supporter residing in the state is usually met with the common question of, \"So why don't you just move?\" Well, for some people it's not that easy.\r\n\r\n[in_content post=\"9378\" alignment=\"align-left\" \/]\r\n\r\nAs state lawmakers do their best to limit law-abiding gun owners with over-the-top legislation \u2014 like the latest wave of \"Red Flag\" laws<\/a> \u2014 some manufacturers are still fighting the good fight. Queue Franklin Armory and its new Title 1 firearm.\r\n

The Cali-Compliant Franklin Armory Title 1<\/h2>\r\nFranklin Armory created the new firearm for those behind Cali enemy lines, where lawmakers continue to neuter the modern sporting rifle beyond comprehension. While fixed magazines and featureless platforms will continue to have their place, the Title 1 provides a full-feature option to the consumer in restrictive jurisdictions. Franklin Armory has made it very clear: The Title 1 is not a pistol, rifle, nor shotgun. Above all, it can't be considered an \"assault weapon.\"\r\n\r\nThe Title 1 has a standard push-button magazine release. It also features three points of contact, including a padded cheek weld, for stability. It is usable with any flash hider or compensator on the market\r\n\r\nCompletely American made, the Title 1 also ships with a 10-round magazine. However, civilians can use legally acquired 30 round magazines with Title 1.\r\n\r\nLastly is MSRP, which comes in at $944.99. For more information, please visit FranklinArmory.com<\/a>.\r\n

Franklin Armory Title 1 Specs<\/h4>\r\n

\r\n \t
• Caliber:<\/strong> 5.56mm NATO<\/li>\r\n \t
• Barrel Length + Type:<\/strong> 16 inches LTW Contour<\/li>\r\n \t
• Handguard\/Upper:<\/strong> 15 inches FST M-Lok<\/li>\r\n \t
• Sights:<\/strong>\u00a0Optic Ready<\/li>\r\n \t
• Twist:<\/strong> 1:7\u201d<\/li>\r\n \t
• Charging Handle:<\/strong>\u00a0Standard<\/li>\r\n \t
• Bolt Carrier:<\/strong> Salt Bath Nitride<\/li>\r\n \t
• Lower:<\/strong> FAI<\/li>\r\n \t
• Trigger:<\/strong> Custom Tuned Trigger<\/li>\r\n \t
• Gas System:<\/strong> Mid-length<\/li>\r\n \t
• Magazine: <\/strong>10-Round Magpul<\/li>\r\n \t
• Muzzle Device: <\/strong>A2<\/li>\r\n \t
• Color:<\/strong> Black<\/li>\r\n \t
• Buffer Tube: <\/strong>Pistol<\/li>\r\n \t
• Grip: <\/strong>Magpul SL<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>","post_title":"Franklin Armory Title 1: New Firearm Is Not a Pistol, Rifle, or Shotgun","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"franklin-armory-title-1-first-look","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2023-05-31 10:16:13","post_modified_gmt":"2023-05-31 10:16:13","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/www.dev.athlonoutdoors.com\/2019\/10\/17\/franklin-armory-title-1-first-look\/","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":127738,"post_author":"645","post_date":"2019-08-22 06:00:33","post_date_gmt":"2019-08-22 10:00:33","post_content":"California Governor Gavin Newsom signed AB 392 into law recently. The new law, among other things, requires police use lethal force only when \"necessary.\" The law replaces the former law enforcement guideline of \"reasonable,\" an attempt to tighten standards of when officers deploy lethal force to stop a threat.\n\n[in_content post=\"206157\" alignment=\"align-left\" \/]\n

  California Approves New Use of Force Law<\/h3>\n\"As California goes, so goes the rest of the United States of America,\" Newsom boasted, according to npr.org<\/a>. \"And we are doing something today that stretches the boundaries of possibility and sends a message to people all across this country \u2014 that they can do more.\"\n\nHowever, the new law avoids actually defining a specific definition for \"necessary,\" leaving some supporters of the bill frustrated with the watered down final language. That ambiguity will likely play out in court when the next shootings occur, leaving courts and judges to interpret the new language.\n\n\"The whole debate boils down to two words: 'necessary' and 'reasonable,\" explained Ben Adler of Capital Public Radio. \"Right now, deadly force is justified if a reasonable officer would have acted similarly in that situation. So in other words, what a typical officer would have done based on his or her training. When the law takes effect in January, that standard will change to when the officer reasonably believes deadly force is necessary,\" reported npr.org.\n\nAssemblywoman Shirley Weber, a Democrat from San Diego, who pushed for the bill, saw the signing as a win.\n\n\"Significant change is never easy, but those who voted today looked to their conscience and found the courage to do the right thing for California,\" Weber said, according to npr.org. \"I have to thank the families who have lost loved ones to police violence. They have been the energy and the moral compass for making this possible.\"\n

  Willie McCoy Shooting<\/h3>\nOne family mentioned frequently throughout the debate belonged to the late Willie McCoy<\/a>. Vallejo police found McCoy passed out with a gun in his lap, his car still in drive, in a Taco Bell parking lot. Officers attempted to enter the vehicle but found the doors locked. That's when McCoy woke up, appeared to go for his gun, prompting Vallejo officers to open fire. In all, officers dumped a reported 55 rounds into the car, killing the suspect.\n\n\"The reality is, officers rarely face consequences, and families like mine are left to wonder who is policing the police,\" said Kori McCoy, the suspect's sister, according to npr.org.\n

  Law Enforcement Concessions<\/h3>\nMeanwhile, not everyone celebrated the new California use of force law. Black Lives Matter, an early supporter of the bill, pulled that support due to accessions given to law enforcement as part of the compromise.\n\n\"Unfortunately, in efforts to get law enforcement to lift their opposition, the bill was so significantly amended that it is no longer the kind of meaningful legislation we can support,\" said Black Lives Matter's Melina Abdullah, reported npr.org.\n\nThose amendments called for more money, along with more and better training, for officers throughout the state. That money and training \"will modernize our state's policies on the use of force, implementing the very best practices gathered from across our nation,\" said California Police Chiefs Association President Ron Lawrence, reported npr.org.\n\nWe will likely hear much more regarding California's new use of force law, which goes into effect January 2020. When the next shooting occurs, somewhere along the way officers will find themselves in court. Or maybe an officer fails to pull the trigger for fear of that same outcome. While the law will potentially save civilian lives, will it have the unintended consequence of costing the lives of sworn officers? Only time will tell.","post_title":"California Use of Force Law Changes Lethal Force to 'When Necessary'","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"california-use-of-force-law","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2023-05-31 16:16:39","post_modified_gmt":"2023-05-31 16:16:39","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/www.dev.athlonoutdoors.com\/2019\/08\/22\/california-use-of-force-law\/","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":93730,"post_author":"351","post_date":"2019-06-07 06:43:50","post_date_gmt":"2019-06-07 10:43:50","post_content":"Beyond the rights guaranteed by the Second Amendment, there are lots of reasons to own a gun. These reasons include fun, sport and, of course, self defense, which is what a California mother recently used her's for, after she called police for help.\r\n\r\n[in_content post=\"115543\" alignment=\"align-left\" \/]\r\n\r\nThe incident began a little after 8 a.m. on Montello Street in Bakersfield as a burglary call. However, the call involved more than just burglary. The woman told 23 ABC<\/a> that this wasn't the first time she had called police on account of the man. In fact, she claims that Andrew Oldham had been stalking her. This time, he had a hammer.\r\n\r\nAs Oldham allegedly tried to get inside, the woman claims she warned him that she had and gun and was willing to use it. He didn't listen, though, which forced the mother to fire a single shot.\r\n\r\nPolice arrived and arrested Oldham, before transporting him to the local hospital with minor injuries. They plan on charging him with robbery, burglary, child endangerment and assault with a deadly weapon. They also said that the woman was defending herself, her children and her home will face not face charges.\r\n

  California Mother Proves Guns Stop Crime<\/h3>\r\nSecond Amendment advocates have been saying for years that citizens need guns to stop criminals. This is especially important for women trying to fight off men with bad intentions. On average, men are larger and stronger, but a gun can equalize situations that women would typically lose. This situation, along with thousands just like it, shows the importance of having the means to defend one's home and life.\r\n\r\nThere is no way of knowing what would have happened had this mother not been armed. But we know that the chances of officers arriving in time are slim. Police do the best they can, but can't be everywhere. Get a gun, get some training<\/a> and learn to protect yourself. It worked for this mother.","post_title":"Armed California Mother Defeats Hammer-Wielding Intruder\/Stalker","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"california-mother-defeats-intruder","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2023-05-31 10:37:24","post_modified_gmt":"2023-05-31 10:37:24","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/www.dev.athlonoutdoors.com\/2019\/06\/07\/california-mother-defeats-intruder\/","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":2},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"jnews_block_23"};

TRENDING

No Content Available

Gun Facts & Laws

LA Gun Seizure: LAPD, ATF Seize More Than 1,000 Guns From Home

by Personal Defense World

May 31, 2023

Guns

VIDEO: These Rifle Dynamics ‘California Airlift’ AKs Are CA Compliant

by Tactical Life Staff

May 31, 2023

Guns

SAF Sues CA DOJ Over Faulty Bullet Button Rifle Registration System

by Personal Defense World

May 31, 2023

Guns

REPORT: CA DOJ Had Data Breach During ‘Bullet Button’ Registration

by Personal Defense World

May 31, 2023

Page 2 of 6 Previous 1 2 3 … 6 Next

POPULAR

No Content Available

BROWSE BY BRAND

\n

One proposal to note is AB 2847<\/a>, sponsored by Assembly Member David Chiu. While the measure deals largely with the state\u2019s microstamping requirement, it also has provisions to require removal of three certified handguns<\/a> from the state\u2019s \u201capproved handguns\u201d roster for each new handgun added. Here's the exact language:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This bill, effective July 1, 2022, would revise the criteria for unsafe handguns by requiring the microstamp to be imprinted in one place on the interior of the handgun, and would require the department, for every new firearm added to the roster, to remove, as specified, 3 firearms from the roster that are not compliant with current requirements. By expanding the number of firearms the sale or manufacture of which would be a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

If you\u2019re not familiar with the state\u2019s law on purchasing handguns, you likely won\u2019t believe it. In order for a law-abiding Californian to purchase any handgun, it must be included on the state\u2019s approved list<\/a>. If it\u2019s not on the list, it can\u2019t be sold by federal firearms licensees in the state\u2014period.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

No New Semi-Autos!<\/h4>\n\n\n\n

Here's another thing you likely won\u2019t believe: California hasn\u2019t added a semi-auto handgun model to the list in seven years. That means that California residents haven\u2019t even had the opportunity to purchase any of the fantastic new semi-autos that have come onto the scene since 2013!<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Think about how many guns we're talking about. Consider all the handgun reviews you've read on this website and in Personal Defense World<\/em> Magazine. And what about our sister publications Combat Handguns<\/em>, Tactical Life<\/em>, and Ballistic Magazine<\/em>? From the Glock 43<\/a> to the SIG P320<\/a> to the Springfield Hellcat<\/a>, none of them are available to California shooters. That\u2019s right, no FN 509<\/a>, Mossberg MC2c<\/a>, Taurus G3, Ruger-57<\/a>, Walther PPQ, ZEV OZ 9C<\/a>, Kahr PM9 or dozens upon dozens of other great, safe handguns that the rest of us choose between when making a purchase.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But let's get back to the focus of the new provision. For every handgun added to the roster, California would remove three others approved handguns. Yes, you're reading that correctly. Should California add a new handgun to the roster, it will take away three guns from the list. Do the math. As time passes and the state adds new handguns to the list, it removes even more. Eventually the number of models available to law-abiding Californians will become fewer and fewer.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Support California Gun Owners<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n

Why should such shenanigans matter to you since they\u2019re taking place all the way out on the West Coast? For starters, our gun-owning brethren in the Golden State deserve our support in their continued plight to have at least a smidgeon of their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms recognized by their state government.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Additionally, California has long acted as a petri dish in the overall experiment of bad gun laws. Quite often, unconstitutional ideas out there can become proposed legislation in states across the country. And none of us want to be forced to buy our handguns only if they are listed on a government roster of approved firearms.<\/p>\n","post_title":"California Handgun Roster: Bill Would Remove 3 Pistols for Each Approval","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"california-handgun-roster-removal-proposal","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2023-05-31 10:33:21","post_modified_gmt":"2023-05-31 10:33:21","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/www.dev.athlonoutdoors.com\/2020\/07\/29\/california-handgun-roster-removal-proposal\/","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":11578,"post_author":"988","post_date":"2020-05-26 10:06:47","post_date_gmt":"2020-05-26 14:06:47","post_content":"Pro-gun advocates have long argued that gun registration leads to confiscation; that is what's happened in just about every place firearm registration has been tried, including within the United States. And the new California ammo background checks show that registration is evolving.\r\n\r\n[in_content post=\"123794\" alignment=\"align-left\" \/]\r\n

California Ammo Background Checks<\/h2>\r\nConsider that in the past, gun registration lists have led to confiscation in Australia, Bermuda, Cuba, Germany, Great Britain, Greece, Ireland, Jamaica, Soviet Georgia and other countries. The same will soon hold true for Canada with that country\u2019s recently expanded gun ban<\/a> requiring owners to \u201cturn in\u201d many rifles and shotguns, most of which can be found on registration lists.\r\n\r\nOf course, the old saying, \u201cIt could never happen here,\u201d was rendered moot by New York City. In 1967, NYC passed an ordinance requiring citizens to obtain a permit to own a rifle or shotgun, which would then be registered. It took a while, but in 1991, the city passed a ban on some semi-auto rifles and shotguns. The city also ordered residents to surrender, render inoperable or remove from the city any of the guns on the banned list. Of course, they knew who owned those firearms because they were on the registry.\r\n\r\nIn fact, the danger of gun registration has been realized by pro-gun advocates in Congress for decades. In 1975, U.S. Sen. James A. McClure, R-Idaho, said, \u201cGun registration is the first step toward ultimate and total confiscation, the first step in a complete destruction of a cornerstone of our Bill of Rights.\u201d When Sen. McClure later sponsored the Firearms Owners` Protection Act in 1986, he made sure that it included a prohibition against the federal government keeping a national registry of gun owners.\r\n

Malicious Intent<\/h4>\r\nUnfortunately, if politicians hate guns and gun owners enough, they can find ways to skirt such laws. Let's take a look at California\u2019s recently instituted ammunition background check law. The new law proves officials passed it for more purposes than just to screen potential ammo purchasers.\r\n\r\nRecent reports from the Golden State show a startling trend. Ammunition background checks have led to confiscation of dozens of firearms in 12 jurisdictions during April and the first half of May. According to ktla.com<\/a>, confiscations included 51 firearms, 123 magazines and 28,518 rounds of ammunition.\r\n\r\nIt\u2019s impossible to know why the owners of those firearms were turned down by the ammo check system; we can\u2019t tell for sure if the guns were confiscated from criminals or law-abiding citizens. What we can know for sure is how easy it would be for an anti-gun government to create a partial gun registry simply by passing ammo background check laws and keeping tabs on what kinds of ammunition people buy. From having that knowledge, it\u2019s not hard to imagine anti-gun politicians and gun-ban groups using a future catastrophe to decide that a list of ammo owners is also a list of gun owners, and that those gun owners shouldn\u2019t be \u201callowed\u201d to own their firearms anymore.\r\n

District Judge's Decision Overturned<\/h4>\r\nAs most readers are likely aware, last month, U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez blocked the ammo background check law, saying, \u201cCriminals, tyrants, and terrorists don\u2019t do background checks. The background check experiment defies common sense while unduly and severely burdening the Second Amendment rights of every responsible, gun-owning citizen desiring to lawfully buy ammunition.\u201d However, only a day later, the 9^{th<\/sup> Circuit Court of Appeals} stayed the judge\u2019s order<\/a>.\r\n\r\nHopefully, a court will eventually nip the entire ammo background check system at the bud. From there, the court should send it to the trash heap of history where it belongs. Such an action would likely deter other anti-gun state politicians who are, no doubt, watching closely to see if California\u2019s restrictive requirement passes judicial scrutiny so they can inflict similar restrictions on the residents of their states.","post_title":"Why California Ammo Background Checks Are De Facto Gun Registration","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"california-ammo-background-checks-gun-registration","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2023-05-31 10:33:47","post_modified_gmt":"2023-05-31 10:33:47","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/www.dev.athlonoutdoors.com\/2020\/05\/26\/california-ammo-background-checks-gun-registration\/","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":11730,"post_author":"351","post_date":"2020-04-27 10:54:05","post_date_gmt":"2020-04-27 14:54:05","post_content":"When it comes to gun rights, Californians continually suffer from the idiom \"one step forward, two steps back.\" Such was the case recently regarding the California ammunition purchase law. It requires residents to undergo a background check in order to purchase ammunition. After a federal judge blocked the law on Thursday,<\/a> a\u00a09th Circuit Court of Appeals reinstated the law Friday.\r\n\r\n[in_content post=\"123782\" alignment=\"align-left\" \/]\r\n

California Ammunition Purchase Law Reinstated<\/h2>\r\n

\r\n\r\n\u201cCriminals, tyrants, and terrorists don\u2019t do background checks,\u201d U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez told usnews.com<\/a>\u00a0after blocking the law. \u201cThe background check experiment defies common sense while unduly and severely burdening the Second Amendment rights of every responsible, gun-owning citizen desiring to lawfully buy ammunition.\u201d\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\nBut now the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals granted state Attorney General Xavier Becerra's\u00a0request to stay that judge's order. Even though Judge Benitez wrote the background checks violated Constitutional rights, the 9th Circuit Court granted the stay.<\/span>\r\n

\u201cThis means that the same restrictions that have been previously in effect regarding ammunition in California are back for the time being,\u201d the National Rifle Association\u00a0said in a news release<\/a>.<\/p>\r\nThe bogus law took effect in July. Judge Benitez said the law blocked sales to legitimate, law-abiding ammo purchasers approximately 16-percent of the time. He further wrote it adversely impacted and violated interstate commerce laws. However, Becerra claimed the law stopped more than 750 people form illegally buying ammunition.\r\n\r\nFor Californians, the reinstatement of the law proves the latest infringement upon their Second Amendment rights. The original challenge came from a suit filed by the California Rifle & Pistol Association. The lawsuit also included the likes of six-time Olympic medalist Kim Rhode, among others.\r\n\r\nLet's hope the California Rifle & Pistol Association, along with all the other individuals in suit, continue the fight. We need a precedent setting decision at the federal level. We need a decision that ends bogus laws like California's, forever.","post_title":"9th Circuit Court Reinstates California Ammunition Purchase Law","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"9th-circuit-resinstates-california-ammunition-law","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2023-05-31 10:34:00","post_modified_gmt":"2023-05-31 10:34:00","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/www.dev.athlonoutdoors.com\/2020\/04\/27\/9th-circuit-resinstates-california-ammunition-law\/","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":3344,"post_author":"850","post_date":"2019-10-17 04:00:12","post_date_gmt":"2019-10-17 08:00:12","post_content":"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=lzfvetZh8w0[\/embed]\r\n\r\nThe mere mention of the state of California causes most gun owners to cringe. Anyone 2A supporter residing in the state is usually met with the common question of, \"So why don't you just move?\" Well, for some people it's not that easy.\r\n\r\n[in_content post=\"9378\" alignment=\"align-left\" \/]\r\n\r\nAs state lawmakers do their best to limit law-abiding gun owners with over-the-top legislation \u2014 like the latest wave of \"Red Flag\" laws<\/a> \u2014 some manufacturers are still fighting the good fight. Queue Franklin Armory and its new Title 1 firearm.\r\n

The Cali-Compliant Franklin Armory Title 1<\/h2>\r\nFranklin Armory created the new firearm for those behind Cali enemy lines, where lawmakers continue to neuter the modern sporting rifle beyond comprehension. While fixed magazines and featureless platforms will continue to have their place, the Title 1 provides a full-feature option to the consumer in restrictive jurisdictions. Franklin Armory has made it very clear: The Title 1 is not a pistol, rifle, nor shotgun. Above all, it can't be considered an \"assault weapon.\"\r\n\r\nThe Title 1 has a standard push-button magazine release. It also features three points of contact, including a padded cheek weld, for stability. It is usable with any flash hider or compensator on the market\r\n\r\nCompletely American made, the Title 1 also ships with a 10-round magazine. However, civilians can use legally acquired 30 round magazines with Title 1.\r\n\r\nLastly is MSRP, which comes in at $944.99. For more information, please visit FranklinArmory.com<\/a>.\r\n

Franklin Armory Title 1 Specs<\/h4>\r\n

\r\n \t
• Caliber:<\/strong> 5.56mm NATO<\/li>\r\n \t
• Barrel Length + Type:<\/strong> 16 inches LTW Contour<\/li>\r\n \t
• Handguard\/Upper:<\/strong> 15 inches FST M-Lok<\/li>\r\n \t
• Sights:<\/strong>\u00a0Optic Ready<\/li>\r\n \t
• Twist:<\/strong> 1:7\u201d<\/li>\r\n \t
• Charging Handle:<\/strong>\u00a0Standard<\/li>\r\n \t
• Bolt Carrier:<\/strong> Salt Bath Nitride<\/li>\r\n \t
• Lower:<\/strong> FAI<\/li>\r\n \t
• Trigger:<\/strong> Custom Tuned Trigger<\/li>\r\n \t
• Gas System:<\/strong> Mid-length<\/li>\r\n \t
• Magazine: <\/strong>10-Round Magpul<\/li>\r\n \t
• Muzzle Device: <\/strong>A2<\/li>\r\n \t
• Color:<\/strong> Black<\/li>\r\n \t
• Buffer Tube: <\/strong>Pistol<\/li>\r\n \t
• Grip: <\/strong>Magpul SL<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>","post_title":"Franklin Armory Title 1: New Firearm Is Not a Pistol, Rifle, or Shotgun","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"franklin-armory-title-1-first-look","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2023-05-31 10:16:13","post_modified_gmt":"2023-05-31 10:16:13","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/www.dev.athlonoutdoors.com\/2019\/10\/17\/franklin-armory-title-1-first-look\/","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":127738,"post_author":"645","post_date":"2019-08-22 06:00:33","post_date_gmt":"2019-08-22 10:00:33","post_content":"California Governor Gavin Newsom signed AB 392 into law recently. The new law, among other things, requires police use lethal force only when \"necessary.\" The law replaces the former law enforcement guideline of \"reasonable,\" an attempt to tighten standards of when officers deploy lethal force to stop a threat.\n\n[in_content post=\"206157\" alignment=\"align-left\" \/]\n

  California Approves New Use of Force Law<\/h3>\n\"As California goes, so goes the rest of the United States of America,\" Newsom boasted, according to npr.org<\/a>. \"And we are doing something today that stretches the boundaries of possibility and sends a message to people all across this country \u2014 that they can do more.\"\n\nHowever, the new law avoids actually defining a specific definition for \"necessary,\" leaving some supporters of the bill frustrated with the watered down final language. That ambiguity will likely play out in court when the next shootings occur, leaving courts and judges to interpret the new language.\n\n\"The whole debate boils down to two words: 'necessary' and 'reasonable,\" explained Ben Adler of Capital Public Radio. \"Right now, deadly force is justified if a reasonable officer would have acted similarly in that situation. So in other words, what a typical officer would have done based on his or her training. When the law takes effect in January, that standard will change to when the officer reasonably believes deadly force is necessary,\" reported npr.org.\n\nAssemblywoman Shirley Weber, a Democrat from San Diego, who pushed for the bill, saw the signing as a win.\n\n\"Significant change is never easy, but those who voted today looked to their conscience and found the courage to do the right thing for California,\" Weber said, according to npr.org. \"I have to thank the families who have lost loved ones to police violence. They have been the energy and the moral compass for making this possible.\"\n

  Willie McCoy Shooting<\/h3>\nOne family mentioned frequently throughout the debate belonged to the late Willie McCoy<\/a>. Vallejo police found McCoy passed out with a gun in his lap, his car still in drive, in a Taco Bell parking lot. Officers attempted to enter the vehicle but found the doors locked. That's when McCoy woke up, appeared to go for his gun, prompting Vallejo officers to open fire. In all, officers dumped a reported 55 rounds into the car, killing the suspect.\n\n\"The reality is, officers rarely face consequences, and families like mine are left to wonder who is policing the police,\" said Kori McCoy, the suspect's sister, according to npr.org.\n

  Law Enforcement Concessions<\/h3>\nMeanwhile, not everyone celebrated the new California use of force law. Black Lives Matter, an early supporter of the bill, pulled that support due to accessions given to law enforcement as part of the compromise.\n\n\"Unfortunately, in efforts to get law enforcement to lift their opposition, the bill was so significantly amended that it is no longer the kind of meaningful legislation we can support,\" said Black Lives Matter's Melina Abdullah, reported npr.org.\n\nThose amendments called for more money, along with more and better training, for officers throughout the state. That money and training \"will modernize our state's policies on the use of force, implementing the very best practices gathered from across our nation,\" said California Police Chiefs Association President Ron Lawrence, reported npr.org.\n\nWe will likely hear much more regarding California's new use of force law, which goes into effect January 2020. When the next shooting occurs, somewhere along the way officers will find themselves in court. Or maybe an officer fails to pull the trigger for fear of that same outcome. While the law will potentially save civilian lives, will it have the unintended consequence of costing the lives of sworn officers? Only time will tell.","post_title":"California Use of Force Law Changes Lethal Force to 'When Necessary'","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"california-use-of-force-law","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2023-05-31 16:16:39","post_modified_gmt":"2023-05-31 16:16:39","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/www.dev.athlonoutdoors.com\/2019\/08\/22\/california-use-of-force-law\/","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":93730,"post_author":"351","post_date":"2019-06-07 06:43:50","post_date_gmt":"2019-06-07 10:43:50","post_content":"Beyond the rights guaranteed by the Second Amendment, there are lots of reasons to own a gun. These reasons include fun, sport and, of course, self defense, which is what a California mother recently used her's for, after she called police for help.\r\n\r\n[in_content post=\"115543\" alignment=\"align-left\" \/]\r\n\r\nThe incident began a little after 8 a.m. on Montello Street in Bakersfield as a burglary call. However, the call involved more than just burglary. The woman told 23 ABC<\/a> that this wasn't the first time she had called police on account of the man. In fact, she claims that Andrew Oldham had been stalking her. This time, he had a hammer.\r\n\r\nAs Oldham allegedly tried to get inside, the woman claims she warned him that she had and gun and was willing to use it. He didn't listen, though, which forced the mother to fire a single shot.\r\n\r\nPolice arrived and arrested Oldham, before transporting him to the local hospital with minor injuries. They plan on charging him with robbery, burglary, child endangerment and assault with a deadly weapon. They also said that the woman was defending herself, her children and her home will face not face charges.\r\n

  California Mother Proves Guns Stop Crime<\/h3>\r\nSecond Amendment advocates have been saying for years that citizens need guns to stop criminals. This is especially important for women trying to fight off men with bad intentions. On average, men are larger and stronger, but a gun can equalize situations that women would typically lose. This situation, along with thousands just like it, shows the importance of having the means to defend one's home and life.\r\n\r\nThere is no way of knowing what would have happened had this mother not been armed. But we know that the chances of officers arriving in time are slim. Police do the best they can, but can't be everywhere. Get a gun, get some training<\/a> and learn to protect yourself. It worked for this mother.","post_title":"Armed California Mother Defeats Hammer-Wielding Intruder\/Stalker","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"california-mother-defeats-intruder","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2023-05-31 10:37:24","post_modified_gmt":"2023-05-31 10:37:24","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/www.dev.athlonoutdoors.com\/2019\/06\/07\/california-mother-defeats-intruder\/","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":2},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"jnews_block_23"};

TRENDING

No Content Available

Gun Facts & Laws

LA Gun Seizure: LAPD, ATF Seize More Than 1,000 Guns From Home

by Personal Defense World

May 31, 2023

Guns

VIDEO: These Rifle Dynamics ‘California Airlift’ AKs Are CA Compliant

by Tactical Life Staff

May 31, 2023

Guns

SAF Sues CA DOJ Over Faulty Bullet Button Rifle Registration System

by Personal Defense World

May 31, 2023

Guns

REPORT: CA DOJ Had Data Breach During ‘Bullet Button’ Registration

by Personal Defense World

May 31, 2023

Page 2 of 6 Previous 1 2 3 … 6 Next

POPULAR

No Content Available

BROWSE BY BRAND

\n

New Bill Would Remove Three Pistols From California Handgun Roster<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

One proposal to note is AB 2847<\/a>, sponsored by Assembly Member David Chiu. While the measure deals largely with the state\u2019s microstamping requirement, it also has provisions to require removal of three certified handguns<\/a> from the state\u2019s \u201capproved handguns\u201d roster for each new handgun added. Here's the exact language:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This bill, effective July 1, 2022, would revise the criteria for unsafe handguns by requiring the microstamp to be imprinted in one place on the interior of the handgun, and would require the department, for every new firearm added to the roster, to remove, as specified, 3 firearms from the roster that are not compliant with current requirements. By expanding the number of firearms the sale or manufacture of which would be a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

If you\u2019re not familiar with the state\u2019s law on purchasing handguns, you likely won\u2019t believe it. In order for a law-abiding Californian to purchase any handgun, it must be included on the state\u2019s approved list<\/a>. If it\u2019s not on the list, it can\u2019t be sold by federal firearms licensees in the state\u2014period.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

No New Semi-Autos!<\/h4>\n\n\n\n

Here's another thing you likely won\u2019t believe: California hasn\u2019t added a semi-auto handgun model to the list in seven years. That means that California residents haven\u2019t even had the opportunity to purchase any of the fantastic new semi-autos that have come onto the scene since 2013!<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Think about how many guns we're talking about. Consider all the handgun reviews you've read on this website and in Personal Defense World<\/em> Magazine. And what about our sister publications Combat Handguns<\/em>, Tactical Life<\/em>, and Ballistic Magazine<\/em>? From the Glock 43<\/a> to the SIG P320<\/a> to the Springfield Hellcat<\/a>, none of them are available to California shooters. That\u2019s right, no FN 509<\/a>, Mossberg MC2c<\/a>, Taurus G3, Ruger-57<\/a>, Walther PPQ, ZEV OZ 9C<\/a>, Kahr PM9 or dozens upon dozens of other great, safe handguns that the rest of us choose between when making a purchase.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But let's get back to the focus of the new provision. For every handgun added to the roster, California would remove three others approved handguns. Yes, you're reading that correctly. Should California add a new handgun to the roster, it will take away three guns from the list. Do the math. As time passes and the state adds new handguns to the list, it removes even more. Eventually the number of models available to law-abiding Californians will become fewer and fewer.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Support California Gun Owners<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n

Why should such shenanigans matter to you since they\u2019re taking place all the way out on the West Coast? For starters, our gun-owning brethren in the Golden State deserve our support in their continued plight to have at least a smidgeon of their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms recognized by their state government.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Additionally, California has long acted as a petri dish in the overall experiment of bad gun laws. Quite often, unconstitutional ideas out there can become proposed legislation in states across the country. And none of us want to be forced to buy our handguns only if they are listed on a government roster of approved firearms.<\/p>\n","post_title":"California Handgun Roster: Bill Would Remove 3 Pistols for Each Approval","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"california-handgun-roster-removal-proposal","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2023-05-31 10:33:21","post_modified_gmt":"2023-05-31 10:33:21","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/www.dev.athlonoutdoors.com\/2020\/07\/29\/california-handgun-roster-removal-proposal\/","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":11578,"post_author":"988","post_date":"2020-05-26 10:06:47","post_date_gmt":"2020-05-26 14:06:47","post_content":"Pro-gun advocates have long argued that gun registration leads to confiscation; that is what's happened in just about every place firearm registration has been tried, including within the United States. And the new California ammo background checks show that registration is evolving.\r\n\r\n[in_content post=\"123794\" alignment=\"align-left\" \/]\r\n

California Ammo Background Checks<\/h2>\r\nConsider that in the past, gun registration lists have led to confiscation in Australia, Bermuda, Cuba, Germany, Great Britain, Greece, Ireland, Jamaica, Soviet Georgia and other countries. The same will soon hold true for Canada with that country\u2019s recently expanded gun ban<\/a> requiring owners to \u201cturn in\u201d many rifles and shotguns, most of which can be found on registration lists.\r\n\r\nOf course, the old saying, \u201cIt could never happen here,\u201d was rendered moot by New York City. In 1967, NYC passed an ordinance requiring citizens to obtain a permit to own a rifle or shotgun, which would then be registered. It took a while, but in 1991, the city passed a ban on some semi-auto rifles and shotguns. The city also ordered residents to surrender, render inoperable or remove from the city any of the guns on the banned list. Of course, they knew who owned those firearms because they were on the registry.\r\n\r\nIn fact, the danger of gun registration has been realized by pro-gun advocates in Congress for decades. In 1975, U.S. Sen. James A. McClure, R-Idaho, said, \u201cGun registration is the first step toward ultimate and total confiscation, the first step in a complete destruction of a cornerstone of our Bill of Rights.\u201d When Sen. McClure later sponsored the Firearms Owners` Protection Act in 1986, he made sure that it included a prohibition against the federal government keeping a national registry of gun owners.\r\n

Malicious Intent<\/h4>\r\nUnfortunately, if politicians hate guns and gun owners enough, they can find ways to skirt such laws. Let's take a look at California\u2019s recently instituted ammunition background check law. The new law proves officials passed it for more purposes than just to screen potential ammo purchasers.\r\n\r\nRecent reports from the Golden State show a startling trend. Ammunition background checks have led to confiscation of dozens of firearms in 12 jurisdictions during April and the first half of May. According to ktla.com<\/a>, confiscations included 51 firearms, 123 magazines and 28,518 rounds of ammunition.\r\n\r\nIt\u2019s impossible to know why the owners of those firearms were turned down by the ammo check system; we can\u2019t tell for sure if the guns were confiscated from criminals or law-abiding citizens. What we can know for sure is how easy it would be for an anti-gun government to create a partial gun registry simply by passing ammo background check laws and keeping tabs on what kinds of ammunition people buy. From having that knowledge, it\u2019s not hard to imagine anti-gun politicians and gun-ban groups using a future catastrophe to decide that a list of ammo owners is also a list of gun owners, and that those gun owners shouldn\u2019t be \u201callowed\u201d to own their firearms anymore.\r\n

District Judge's Decision Overturned<\/h4>\r\nAs most readers are likely aware, last month, U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez blocked the ammo background check law, saying, \u201cCriminals, tyrants, and terrorists don\u2019t do background checks. The background check experiment defies common sense while unduly and severely burdening the Second Amendment rights of every responsible, gun-owning citizen desiring to lawfully buy ammunition.\u201d However, only a day later, the 9^{th<\/sup> Circuit Court of Appeals} stayed the judge\u2019s order<\/a>.\r\n\r\nHopefully, a court will eventually nip the entire ammo background check system at the bud. From there, the court should send it to the trash heap of history where it belongs. Such an action would likely deter other anti-gun state politicians who are, no doubt, watching closely to see if California\u2019s restrictive requirement passes judicial scrutiny so they can inflict similar restrictions on the residents of their states.","post_title":"Why California Ammo Background Checks Are De Facto Gun Registration","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"california-ammo-background-checks-gun-registration","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2023-05-31 10:33:47","post_modified_gmt":"2023-05-31 10:33:47","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/www.dev.athlonoutdoors.com\/2020\/05\/26\/california-ammo-background-checks-gun-registration\/","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":11730,"post_author":"351","post_date":"2020-04-27 10:54:05","post_date_gmt":"2020-04-27 14:54:05","post_content":"When it comes to gun rights, Californians continually suffer from the idiom \"one step forward, two steps back.\" Such was the case recently regarding the California ammunition purchase law. It requires residents to undergo a background check in order to purchase ammunition. After a federal judge blocked the law on Thursday,<\/a> a\u00a09th Circuit Court of Appeals reinstated the law Friday.\r\n\r\n[in_content post=\"123782\" alignment=\"align-left\" \/]\r\n

California Ammunition Purchase Law Reinstated<\/h2>\r\n

\r\n\r\n\u201cCriminals, tyrants, and terrorists don\u2019t do background checks,\u201d U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez told usnews.com<\/a>\u00a0after blocking the law. \u201cThe background check experiment defies common sense while unduly and severely burdening the Second Amendment rights of every responsible, gun-owning citizen desiring to lawfully buy ammunition.\u201d\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\nBut now the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals granted state Attorney General Xavier Becerra's\u00a0request to stay that judge's order. Even though Judge Benitez wrote the background checks violated Constitutional rights, the 9th Circuit Court granted the stay.<\/span>\r\n

\u201cThis means that the same restrictions that have been previously in effect regarding ammunition in California are back for the time being,\u201d the National Rifle Association\u00a0said in a news release<\/a>.<\/p>\r\nThe bogus law took effect in July. Judge Benitez said the law blocked sales to legitimate, law-abiding ammo purchasers approximately 16-percent of the time. He further wrote it adversely impacted and violated interstate commerce laws. However, Becerra claimed the law stopped more than 750 people form illegally buying ammunition.\r\n\r\nFor Californians, the reinstatement of the law proves the latest infringement upon their Second Amendment rights. The original challenge came from a suit filed by the California Rifle & Pistol Association. The lawsuit also included the likes of six-time Olympic medalist Kim Rhode, among others.\r\n\r\nLet's hope the California Rifle & Pistol Association, along with all the other individuals in suit, continue the fight. We need a precedent setting decision at the federal level. We need a decision that ends bogus laws like California's, forever.","post_title":"9th Circuit Court Reinstates California Ammunition Purchase Law","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"9th-circuit-resinstates-california-ammunition-law","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2023-05-31 10:34:00","post_modified_gmt":"2023-05-31 10:34:00","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/www.dev.athlonoutdoors.com\/2020\/04\/27\/9th-circuit-resinstates-california-ammunition-law\/","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":3344,"post_author":"850","post_date":"2019-10-17 04:00:12","post_date_gmt":"2019-10-17 08:00:12","post_content":"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=lzfvetZh8w0[\/embed]\r\n\r\nThe mere mention of the state of California causes most gun owners to cringe. Anyone 2A supporter residing in the state is usually met with the common question of, \"So why don't you just move?\" Well, for some people it's not that easy.\r\n\r\n[in_content post=\"9378\" alignment=\"align-left\" \/]\r\n\r\nAs state lawmakers do their best to limit law-abiding gun owners with over-the-top legislation \u2014 like the latest wave of \"Red Flag\" laws<\/a> \u2014 some manufacturers are still fighting the good fight. Queue Franklin Armory and its new Title 1 firearm.\r\n

The Cali-Compliant Franklin Armory Title 1<\/h2>\r\nFranklin Armory created the new firearm for those behind Cali enemy lines, where lawmakers continue to neuter the modern sporting rifle beyond comprehension. While fixed magazines and featureless platforms will continue to have their place, the Title 1 provides a full-feature option to the consumer in restrictive jurisdictions. Franklin Armory has made it very clear: The Title 1 is not a pistol, rifle, nor shotgun. Above all, it can't be considered an \"assault weapon.\"\r\n\r\nThe Title 1 has a standard push-button magazine release. It also features three points of contact, including a padded cheek weld, for stability. It is usable with any flash hider or compensator on the market\r\n\r\nCompletely American made, the Title 1 also ships with a 10-round magazine. However, civilians can use legally acquired 30 round magazines with Title 1.\r\n\r\nLastly is MSRP, which comes in at $944.99. For more information, please visit FranklinArmory.com<\/a>.\r\n

Franklin Armory Title 1 Specs<\/h4>\r\n

\r\n \t
• Caliber:<\/strong> 5.56mm NATO<\/li>\r\n \t
• Barrel Length + Type:<\/strong> 16 inches LTW Contour<\/li>\r\n \t
• Handguard\/Upper:<\/strong> 15 inches FST M-Lok<\/li>\r\n \t
• Sights:<\/strong>\u00a0Optic Ready<\/li>\r\n \t
• Twist:<\/strong> 1:7\u201d<\/li>\r\n \t
• Charging Handle:<\/strong>\u00a0Standard<\/li>\r\n \t
• Bolt Carrier:<\/strong> Salt Bath Nitride<\/li>\r\n \t
• Lower:<\/strong> FAI<\/li>\r\n \t
• Trigger:<\/strong> Custom Tuned Trigger<\/li>\r\n \t
• Gas System:<\/strong> Mid-length<\/li>\r\n \t
• Magazine: <\/strong>10-Round Magpul<\/li>\r\n \t
• Muzzle Device: <\/strong>A2<\/li>\r\n \t
• Color:<\/strong> Black<\/li>\r\n \t
• Buffer Tube: <\/strong>Pistol<\/li>\r\n \t
• Grip: <\/strong>Magpul SL<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>","post_title":"Franklin Armory Title 1: New Firearm Is Not a Pistol, Rifle, or Shotgun","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"franklin-armory-title-1-first-look","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2023-05-31 10:16:13","post_modified_gmt":"2023-05-31 10:16:13","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/www.dev.athlonoutdoors.com\/2019\/10\/17\/franklin-armory-title-1-first-look\/","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":127738,"post_author":"645","post_date":"2019-08-22 06:00:33","post_date_gmt":"2019-08-22 10:00:33","post_content":"California Governor Gavin Newsom signed AB 392 into law recently. The new law, among other things, requires police use lethal force only when \"necessary.\" The law replaces the former law enforcement guideline of \"reasonable,\" an attempt to tighten standards of when officers deploy lethal force to stop a threat.\n\n[in_content post=\"206157\" alignment=\"align-left\" \/]\n

  California Approves New Use of Force Law<\/h3>\n\"As California goes, so goes the rest of the United States of America,\" Newsom boasted, according to npr.org<\/a>. \"And we are doing something today that stretches the boundaries of possibility and sends a message to people all across this country \u2014 that they can do more.\"\n\nHowever, the new law avoids actually defining a specific definition for \"necessary,\" leaving some supporters of the bill frustrated with the watered down final language. That ambiguity will likely play out in court when the next shootings occur, leaving courts and judges to interpret the new language.\n\n\"The whole debate boils down to two words: 'necessary' and 'reasonable,\" explained Ben Adler of Capital Public Radio. \"Right now, deadly force is justified if a reasonable officer would have acted similarly in that situation. So in other words, what a typical officer would have done based on his or her training. When the law takes effect in January, that standard will change to when the officer reasonably believes deadly force is necessary,\" reported npr.org.\n\nAssemblywoman Shirley Weber, a Democrat from San Diego, who pushed for the bill, saw the signing as a win.\n\n\"Significant change is never easy, but those who voted today looked to their conscience and found the courage to do the right thing for California,\" Weber said, according to npr.org. \"I have to thank the families who have lost loved ones to police violence. They have been the energy and the moral compass for making this possible.\"\n

  Willie McCoy Shooting<\/h3>\nOne family mentioned frequently throughout the debate belonged to the late Willie McCoy<\/a>. Vallejo police found McCoy passed out with a gun in his lap, his car still in drive, in a Taco Bell parking lot. Officers attempted to enter the vehicle but found the doors locked. That's when McCoy woke up, appeared to go for his gun, prompting Vallejo officers to open fire. In all, officers dumped a reported 55 rounds into the car, killing the suspect.\n\n\"The reality is, officers rarely face consequences, and families like mine are left to wonder who is policing the police,\" said Kori McCoy, the suspect's sister, according to npr.org.\n

  Law Enforcement Concessions<\/h3>\nMeanwhile, not everyone celebrated the new California use of force law. Black Lives Matter, an early supporter of the bill, pulled that support due to accessions given to law enforcement as part of the compromise.\n\n\"Unfortunately, in efforts to get law enforcement to lift their opposition, the bill was so significantly amended that it is no longer the kind of meaningful legislation we can support,\" said Black Lives Matter's Melina Abdullah, reported npr.org.\n\nThose amendments called for more money, along with more and better training, for officers throughout the state. That money and training \"will modernize our state's policies on the use of force, implementing the very best practices gathered from across our nation,\" said California Police Chiefs Association President Ron Lawrence, reported npr.org.\n\nWe will likely hear much more regarding California's new use of force law, which goes into effect January 2020. When the next shooting occurs, somewhere along the way officers will find themselves in court. Or maybe an officer fails to pull the trigger for fear of that same outcome. While the law will potentially save civilian lives, will it have the unintended consequence of costing the lives of sworn officers? Only time will tell.","post_title":"California Use of Force Law Changes Lethal Force to 'When Necessary'","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"california-use-of-force-law","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2023-05-31 16:16:39","post_modified_gmt":"2023-05-31 16:16:39","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/www.dev.athlonoutdoors.com\/2019\/08\/22\/california-use-of-force-law\/","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":93730,"post_author":"351","post_date":"2019-06-07 06:43:50","post_date_gmt":"2019-06-07 10:43:50","post_content":"Beyond the rights guaranteed by the Second Amendment, there are lots of reasons to own a gun. These reasons include fun, sport and, of course, self defense, which is what a California mother recently used her's for, after she called police for help.\r\n\r\n[in_content post=\"115543\" alignment=\"align-left\" \/]\r\n\r\nThe incident began a little after 8 a.m. on Montello Street in Bakersfield as a burglary call. However, the call involved more than just burglary. The woman told 23 ABC<\/a> that this wasn't the first time she had called police on account of the man. In fact, she claims that Andrew Oldham had been stalking her. This time, he had a hammer.\r\n\r\nAs Oldham allegedly tried to get inside, the woman claims she warned him that she had and gun and was willing to use it. He didn't listen, though, which forced the mother to fire a single shot.\r\n\r\nPolice arrived and arrested Oldham, before transporting him to the local hospital with minor injuries. They plan on charging him with robbery, burglary, child endangerment and assault with a deadly weapon. They also said that the woman was defending herself, her children and her home will face not face charges.\r\n

  California Mother Proves Guns Stop Crime<\/h3>\r\nSecond Amendment advocates have been saying for years that citizens need guns to stop criminals. This is especially important for women trying to fight off men with bad intentions. On average, men are larger and stronger, but a gun can equalize situations that women would typically lose. This situation, along with thousands just like it, shows the importance of having the means to defend one's home and life.\r\n\r\nThere is no way of knowing what would have happened had this mother not been armed. But we know that the chances of officers arriving in time are slim. Police do the best they can, but can't be everywhere. Get a gun, get some training<\/a> and learn to protect yourself. It worked for this mother.","post_title":"Armed California Mother Defeats Hammer-Wielding Intruder\/Stalker","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"california-mother-defeats-intruder","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2023-05-31 10:37:24","post_modified_gmt":"2023-05-31 10:37:24","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/www.dev.athlonoutdoors.com\/2019\/06\/07\/california-mother-defeats-intruder\/","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":2},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"jnews_block_23"};

TRENDING

No Content Available

Gun Facts & Laws

LA Gun Seizure: LAPD, ATF Seize More Than 1,000 Guns From Home

by Personal Defense World

May 31, 2023

Guns

VIDEO: These Rifle Dynamics ‘California Airlift’ AKs Are CA Compliant

by Tactical Life Staff

May 31, 2023

Guns

SAF Sues CA DOJ Over Faulty Bullet Button Rifle Registration System

by Personal Defense World

May 31, 2023

Guns

REPORT: CA DOJ Had Data Breach During ‘Bullet Button’ Registration

by Personal Defense World

May 31, 2023

Page 2 of 6 Previous 1 2 3 … 6 Next

POPULAR

No Content Available

BROWSE BY BRAND

\n

California lawmakers returned from summer recess this week to work on an important public safety budget measure. And true to form, they couldn\u2019t resist turning the new session into another attack on the state's law-abiding gun owners. The newest measure focuses on the California handgun roster.<\/p>\n\n\n

[in_content post=\"124215\" alignment=\"align-left\" \/]<\/p>\n\n\n

New Bill Would Remove Three Pistols From California Handgun Roster<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

One proposal to note is AB 2847<\/a>, sponsored by Assembly Member David Chiu. While the measure deals largely with the state\u2019s microstamping requirement, it also has provisions to require removal of three certified handguns<\/a> from the state\u2019s \u201capproved handguns\u201d roster for each new handgun added. Here's the exact language:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This bill, effective July 1, 2022, would revise the criteria for unsafe handguns by requiring the microstamp to be imprinted in one place on the interior of the handgun, and would require the department, for every new firearm added to the roster, to remove, as specified, 3 firearms from the roster that are not compliant with current requirements. By expanding the number of firearms the sale or manufacture of which would be a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

If you\u2019re not familiar with the state\u2019s law on purchasing handguns, you likely won\u2019t believe it. In order for a law-abiding Californian to purchase any handgun, it must be included on the state\u2019s approved list<\/a>. If it\u2019s not on the list, it can\u2019t be sold by federal firearms licensees in the state\u2014period.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

No New Semi-Autos!<\/h4>\n\n\n\n

Here's another thing you likely won\u2019t believe: California hasn\u2019t added a semi-auto handgun model to the list in seven years. That means that California residents haven\u2019t even had the opportunity to purchase any of the fantastic new semi-autos that have come onto the scene since 2013!<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Think about how many guns we're talking about. Consider all the handgun reviews you've read on this website and in Personal Defense World<\/em> Magazine. And what about our sister publications Combat Handguns<\/em>, Tactical Life<\/em>, and Ballistic Magazine<\/em>? From the Glock 43<\/a> to the SIG P320<\/a> to the Springfield Hellcat<\/a>, none of them are available to California shooters. That\u2019s right, no FN 509<\/a>, Mossberg MC2c<\/a>, Taurus G3, Ruger-57<\/a>, Walther PPQ, ZEV OZ 9C<\/a>, Kahr PM9 or dozens upon dozens of other great, safe handguns that the rest of us choose between when making a purchase.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But let's get back to the focus of the new provision. For every handgun added to the roster, California would remove three others approved handguns. Yes, you're reading that correctly. Should California add a new handgun to the roster, it will take away three guns from the list. Do the math. As time passes and the state adds new handguns to the list, it removes even more. Eventually the number of models available to law-abiding Californians will become fewer and fewer.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Support California Gun Owners<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n

Why should such shenanigans matter to you since they\u2019re taking place all the way out on the West Coast? For starters, our gun-owning brethren in the Golden State deserve our support in their continued plight to have at least a smidgeon of their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms recognized by their state government.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Additionally, California has long acted as a petri dish in the overall experiment of bad gun laws. Quite often, unconstitutional ideas out there can become proposed legislation in states across the country. And none of us want to be forced to buy our handguns only if they are listed on a government roster of approved firearms.<\/p>\n","post_title":"California Handgun Roster: Bill Would Remove 3 Pistols for Each Approval","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"california-handgun-roster-removal-proposal","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2023-05-31 10:33:21","post_modified_gmt":"2023-05-31 10:33:21","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/www.dev.athlonoutdoors.com\/2020\/07\/29\/california-handgun-roster-removal-proposal\/","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":11578,"post_author":"988","post_date":"2020-05-26 10:06:47","post_date_gmt":"2020-05-26 14:06:47","post_content":"Pro-gun advocates have long argued that gun registration leads to confiscation; that is what's happened in just about every place firearm registration has been tried, including within the United States. And the new California ammo background checks show that registration is evolving.\r\n\r\n[in_content post=\"123794\" alignment=\"align-left\" \/]\r\n

California Ammo Background Checks<\/h2>\r\nConsider that in the past, gun registration lists have led to confiscation in Australia, Bermuda, Cuba, Germany, Great Britain, Greece, Ireland, Jamaica, Soviet Georgia and other countries. The same will soon hold true for Canada with that country\u2019s recently expanded gun ban<\/a> requiring owners to \u201cturn in\u201d many rifles and shotguns, most of which can be found on registration lists.\r\n\r\nOf course, the old saying, \u201cIt could never happen here,\u201d was rendered moot by New York City. In 1967, NYC passed an ordinance requiring citizens to obtain a permit to own a rifle or shotgun, which would then be registered. It took a while, but in 1991, the city passed a ban on some semi-auto rifles and shotguns. The city also ordered residents to surrender, render inoperable or remove from the city any of the guns on the banned list. Of course, they knew who owned those firearms because they were on the registry.\r\n\r\nIn fact, the danger of gun registration has been realized by pro-gun advocates in Congress for decades. In 1975, U.S. Sen. James A. McClure, R-Idaho, said, \u201cGun registration is the first step toward ultimate and total confiscation, the first step in a complete destruction of a cornerstone of our Bill of Rights.\u201d When Sen. McClure later sponsored the Firearms Owners` Protection Act in 1986, he made sure that it included a prohibition against the federal government keeping a national registry of gun owners.\r\n

Malicious Intent<\/h4>\r\nUnfortunately, if politicians hate guns and gun owners enough, they can find ways to skirt such laws. Let's take a look at California\u2019s recently instituted ammunition background check law. The new law proves officials passed it for more purposes than just to screen potential ammo purchasers.\r\n\r\nRecent reports from the Golden State show a startling trend. Ammunition background checks have led to confiscation of dozens of firearms in 12 jurisdictions during April and the first half of May. According to ktla.com<\/a>, confiscations included 51 firearms, 123 magazines and 28,518 rounds of ammunition.\r\n\r\nIt\u2019s impossible to know why the owners of those firearms were turned down by the ammo check system; we can\u2019t tell for sure if the guns were confiscated from criminals or law-abiding citizens. What we can know for sure is how easy it would be for an anti-gun government to create a partial gun registry simply by passing ammo background check laws and keeping tabs on what kinds of ammunition people buy. From having that knowledge, it\u2019s not hard to imagine anti-gun politicians and gun-ban groups using a future catastrophe to decide that a list of ammo owners is also a list of gun owners, and that those gun owners shouldn\u2019t be \u201callowed\u201d to own their firearms anymore.\r\n

District Judge's Decision Overturned<\/h4>\r\nAs most readers are likely aware, last month, U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez blocked the ammo background check law, saying, \u201cCriminals, tyrants, and terrorists don\u2019t do background checks. The background check experiment defies common sense while unduly and severely burdening the Second Amendment rights of every responsible, gun-owning citizen desiring to lawfully buy ammunition.\u201d However, only a day later, the 9^{th<\/sup> Circuit Court of Appeals} stayed the judge\u2019s order<\/a>.\r\n\r\nHopefully, a court will eventually nip the entire ammo background check system at the bud. From there, the court should send it to the trash heap of history where it belongs. Such an action would likely deter other anti-gun state politicians who are, no doubt, watching closely to see if California\u2019s restrictive requirement passes judicial scrutiny so they can inflict similar restrictions on the residents of their states.","post_title":"Why California Ammo Background Checks Are De Facto Gun Registration","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"california-ammo-background-checks-gun-registration","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2023-05-31 10:33:47","post_modified_gmt":"2023-05-31 10:33:47","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/www.dev.athlonoutdoors.com\/2020\/05\/26\/california-ammo-background-checks-gun-registration\/","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":11730,"post_author":"351","post_date":"2020-04-27 10:54:05","post_date_gmt":"2020-04-27 14:54:05","post_content":"When it comes to gun rights, Californians continually suffer from the idiom \"one step forward, two steps back.\" Such was the case recently regarding the California ammunition purchase law. It requires residents to undergo a background check in order to purchase ammunition. After a federal judge blocked the law on Thursday,<\/a> a\u00a09th Circuit Court of Appeals reinstated the law Friday.\r\n\r\n[in_content post=\"123782\" alignment=\"align-left\" \/]\r\n

California Ammunition Purchase Law Reinstated<\/h2>\r\n

\r\n\r\n\u201cCriminals, tyrants, and terrorists don\u2019t do background checks,\u201d U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez told usnews.com<\/a>\u00a0after blocking the law. \u201cThe background check experiment defies common sense while unduly and severely burdening the Second Amendment rights of every responsible, gun-owning citizen desiring to lawfully buy ammunition.\u201d\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\nBut now the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals granted state Attorney General Xavier Becerra's\u00a0request to stay that judge's order. Even though Judge Benitez wrote the background checks violated Constitutional rights, the 9th Circuit Court granted the stay.<\/span>\r\n

\u201cThis means that the same restrictions that have been previously in effect regarding ammunition in California are back for the time being,\u201d the National Rifle Association\u00a0said in a news release<\/a>.<\/p>\r\nThe bogus law took effect in July. Judge Benitez said the law blocked sales to legitimate, law-abiding ammo purchasers approximately 16-percent of the time. He further wrote it adversely impacted and violated interstate commerce laws. However, Becerra claimed the law stopped more than 750 people form illegally buying ammunition.\r\n\r\nFor Californians, the reinstatement of the law proves the latest infringement upon their Second Amendment rights. The original challenge came from a suit filed by the California Rifle & Pistol Association. The lawsuit also included the likes of six-time Olympic medalist Kim Rhode, among others.\r\n\r\nLet's hope the California Rifle & Pistol Association, along with all the other individuals in suit, continue the fight. We need a precedent setting decision at the federal level. We need a decision that ends bogus laws like California's, forever.","post_title":"9th Circuit Court Reinstates California Ammunition Purchase Law","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"9th-circuit-resinstates-california-ammunition-law","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2023-05-31 10:34:00","post_modified_gmt":"2023-05-31 10:34:00","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/www.dev.athlonoutdoors.com\/2020\/04\/27\/9th-circuit-resinstates-california-ammunition-law\/","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":3344,"post_author":"850","post_date":"2019-10-17 04:00:12","post_date_gmt":"2019-10-17 08:00:12","post_content":"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=lzfvetZh8w0[\/embed]\r\n\r\nThe mere mention of the state of California causes most gun owners to cringe. Anyone 2A supporter residing in the state is usually met with the common question of, \"So why don't you just move?\" Well, for some people it's not that easy.\r\n\r\n[in_content post=\"9378\" alignment=\"align-left\" \/]\r\n\r\nAs state lawmakers do their best to limit law-abiding gun owners with over-the-top legislation \u2014 like the latest wave of \"Red Flag\" laws<\/a> \u2014 some manufacturers are still fighting the good fight. Queue Franklin Armory and its new Title 1 firearm.\r\n

The Cali-Compliant Franklin Armory Title 1<\/h2>\r\nFranklin Armory created the new firearm for those behind Cali enemy lines, where lawmakers continue to neuter the modern sporting rifle beyond comprehension. While fixed magazines and featureless platforms will continue to have their place, the Title 1 provides a full-feature option to the consumer in restrictive jurisdictions. Franklin Armory has made it very clear: The Title 1 is not a pistol, rifle, nor shotgun. Above all, it can't be considered an \"assault weapon.\"\r\n\r\nThe Title 1 has a standard push-button magazine release. It also features three points of contact, including a padded cheek weld, for stability. It is usable with any flash hider or compensator on the market\r\n\r\nCompletely American made, the Title 1 also ships with a 10-round magazine. However, civilians can use legally acquired 30 round magazines with Title 1.\r\n\r\nLastly is MSRP, which comes in at $944.99. For more information, please visit FranklinArmory.com<\/a>.\r\n

Franklin Armory Title 1 Specs<\/h4>\r\n

\r\n \t
• Caliber:<\/strong> 5.56mm NATO<\/li>\r\n \t
• Barrel Length + Type:<\/strong> 16 inches LTW Contour<\/li>\r\n \t
• Handguard\/Upper:<\/strong> 15 inches FST M-Lok<\/li>\r\n \t
• Sights:<\/strong>\u00a0Optic Ready<\/li>\r\n \t
• Twist:<\/strong> 1:7\u201d<\/li>\r\n \t
• Charging Handle:<\/strong>\u00a0Standard<\/li>\r\n \t
• Bolt Carrier:<\/strong> Salt Bath Nitride<\/li>\r\n \t
• Lower:<\/strong> FAI<\/li>\r\n \t
• Trigger:<\/strong> Custom Tuned Trigger<\/li>\r\n \t
• Gas System:<\/strong> Mid-length<\/li>\r\n \t
• Magazine: <\/strong>10-Round Magpul<\/li>\r\n \t
• Muzzle Device: <\/strong>A2<\/li>\r\n \t
• Color:<\/strong> Black<\/li>\r\n \t
• Buffer Tube: <\/strong>Pistol<\/li>\r\n \t
• Grip: <\/strong>Magpul SL<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>","post_title":"Franklin Armory Title 1: New Firearm Is Not a Pistol, Rifle, or Shotgun","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"franklin-armory-title-1-first-look","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2023-05-31 10:16:13","post_modified_gmt":"2023-05-31 10:16:13","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/www.dev.athlonoutdoors.com\/2019\/10\/17\/franklin-armory-title-1-first-look\/","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":127738,"post_author":"645","post_date":"2019-08-22 06:00:33","post_date_gmt":"2019-08-22 10:00:33","post_content":"California Governor Gavin Newsom signed AB 392 into law recently. The new law, among other things, requires police use lethal force only when \"necessary.\" The law replaces the former law enforcement guideline of \"reasonable,\" an attempt to tighten standards of when officers deploy lethal force to stop a threat.\n\n[in_content post=\"206157\" alignment=\"align-left\" \/]\n

  California Approves New Use of Force Law<\/h3>\n\"As California goes, so goes the rest of the United States of America,\" Newsom boasted, according to npr.org<\/a>. \"And we are doing something today that stretches the boundaries of possibility and sends a message to people all across this country \u2014 that they can do more.\"\n\nHowever, the new law avoids actually defining a specific definition for \"necessary,\" leaving some supporters of the bill frustrated with the watered down final language. That ambiguity will likely play out in court when the next shootings occur, leaving courts and judges to interpret the new language.\n\n\"The whole debate boils down to two words: 'necessary' and 'reasonable,\" explained Ben Adler of Capital Public Radio. \"Right now, deadly force is justified if a reasonable officer would have acted similarly in that situation. So in other words, what a typical officer would have done based on his or her training. When the law takes effect in January, that standard will change to when the officer reasonably believes deadly force is necessary,\" reported npr.org.\n\nAssemblywoman Shirley Weber, a Democrat from San Diego, who pushed for the bill, saw the signing as a win.\n\n\"Significant change is never easy, but those who voted today looked to their conscience and found the courage to do the right thing for California,\" Weber said, according to npr.org. \"I have to thank the families who have lost loved ones to police violence. They have been the energy and the moral compass for making this possible.\"\n

  Willie McCoy Shooting<\/h3>\nOne family mentioned frequently throughout the debate belonged to the late Willie McCoy<\/a>. Vallejo police found McCoy passed out with a gun in his lap, his car still in drive, in a Taco Bell parking lot. Officers attempted to enter the vehicle but found the doors locked. That's when McCoy woke up, appeared to go for his gun, prompting Vallejo officers to open fire. In all, officers dumped a reported 55 rounds into the car, killing the suspect.\n\n\"The reality is, officers rarely face consequences, and families like mine are left to wonder who is policing the police,\" said Kori McCoy, the suspect's sister, according to npr.org.\n

  Law Enforcement Concessions<\/h3>\nMeanwhile, not everyone celebrated the new California use of force law. Black Lives Matter, an early supporter of the bill, pulled that support due to accessions given to law enforcement as part of the compromise.\n\n\"Unfortunately, in efforts to get law enforcement to lift their opposition, the bill was so significantly amended that it is no longer the kind of meaningful legislation we can support,\" said Black Lives Matter's Melina Abdullah, reported npr.org.\n\nThose amendments called for more money, along with more and better training, for officers throughout the state. That money and training \"will modernize our state's policies on the use of force, implementing the very best practices gathered from across our nation,\" said California Police Chiefs Association President Ron Lawrence, reported npr.org.\n\nWe will likely hear much more regarding California's new use of force law, which goes into effect January 2020. When the next shooting occurs, somewhere along the way officers will find themselves in court. Or maybe an officer fails to pull the trigger for fear of that same outcome. While the law will potentially save civilian lives, will it have the unintended consequence of costing the lives of sworn officers? Only time will tell.","post_title":"California Use of Force Law Changes Lethal Force to 'When Necessary'","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"california-use-of-force-law","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2023-05-31 16:16:39","post_modified_gmt":"2023-05-31 16:16:39","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/www.dev.athlonoutdoors.com\/2019\/08\/22\/california-use-of-force-law\/","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":93730,"post_author":"351","post_date":"2019-06-07 06:43:50","post_date_gmt":"2019-06-07 10:43:50","post_content":"Beyond the rights guaranteed by the Second Amendment, there are lots of reasons to own a gun. These reasons include fun, sport and, of course, self defense, which is what a California mother recently used her's for, after she called police for help.\r\n\r\n[in_content post=\"115543\" alignment=\"align-left\" \/]\r\n\r\nThe incident began a little after 8 a.m. on Montello Street in Bakersfield as a burglary call. However, the call involved more than just burglary. The woman told 23 ABC<\/a> that this wasn't the first time she had called police on account of the man. In fact, she claims that Andrew Oldham had been stalking her. This time, he had a hammer.\r\n\r\nAs Oldham allegedly tried to get inside, the woman claims she warned him that she had and gun and was willing to use it. He didn't listen, though, which forced the mother to fire a single shot.\r\n\r\nPolice arrived and arrested Oldham, before transporting him to the local hospital with minor injuries. They plan on charging him with robbery, burglary, child endangerment and assault with a deadly weapon. They also said that the woman was defending herself, her children and her home will face not face charges.\r\n

  California Mother Proves Guns Stop Crime<\/h3>\r\nSecond Amendment advocates have been saying for years that citizens need guns to stop criminals. This is especially important for women trying to fight off men with bad intentions. On average, men are larger and stronger, but a gun can equalize situations that women would typically lose. This situation, along with thousands just like it, shows the importance of having the means to defend one's home and life.\r\n\r\nThere is no way of knowing what would have happened had this mother not been armed. But we know that the chances of officers arriving in time are slim. Police do the best they can, but can't be everywhere. Get a gun, get some training<\/a> and learn to protect yourself. It worked for this mother.","post_title":"Armed California Mother Defeats Hammer-Wielding Intruder\/Stalker","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"california-mother-defeats-intruder","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2023-05-31 10:37:24","post_modified_gmt":"2023-05-31 10:37:24","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/www.dev.athlonoutdoors.com\/2019\/06\/07\/california-mother-defeats-intruder\/","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":2},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"jnews_block_23"};

TRENDING

No Content Available

Gun Facts & Laws

LA Gun Seizure: LAPD, ATF Seize More Than 1,000 Guns From Home

by Personal Defense World

May 31, 2023

Guns

VIDEO: These Rifle Dynamics ‘California Airlift’ AKs Are CA Compliant

by Tactical Life Staff

May 31, 2023

Guns

SAF Sues CA DOJ Over Faulty Bullet Button Rifle Registration System

by Personal Defense World

May 31, 2023

Guns

REPORT: CA DOJ Had Data Breach During ‘Bullet Button’ Registration

by Personal Defense World

May 31, 2023

Page 2 of 6 Previous 1 2 3 … 6 Next

POPULAR

No Content Available

BROWSE BY BRAND

California

Gun Facts & Laws

California Handgun Roster: Bill Would Remove 3 Pistols for Each Approval

by Mark Chesnut

May 31, 2023

Gun Facts & Laws

Why California Ammo Background Checks Are De Facto Gun Registration

by Mark Chesnut

May 31, 2023

Ammo

9th Circuit Court Reinstates California Ammunition Purchase Law

by Personal Defense World

May 31, 2023

Guns

Franklin Armory Title 1: New Firearm Is Not a Pistol, Rifle, or Shotgun

by Ballistic Staff

May 31, 2023

News

California Use of Force Law Changes Lethal Force to ‘When Necessary’

by Tactical Life Staff

May 31, 2023

Custom Guns

Armed California Mother Defeats Hammer-Wielding Intruder/Stalker

by Personal Defense World

May 31, 2023

TRENDING

No Content Available

Gun Facts & Laws

LA Gun Seizure: LAPD, ATF Seize More Than 1,000 Guns From Home

by Personal Defense World

May 31, 2023

Guns

VIDEO: These Rifle Dynamics ‘California Airlift’ AKs Are CA Compliant

by Tactical Life Staff

May 31, 2023

Guns

SAF Sues CA DOJ Over Faulty Bullet Button Rifle Registration System

by Personal Defense World

May 31, 2023

Guns

REPORT: CA DOJ Had Data Breach During ‘Bullet Button’ Registration

by Personal Defense World

May 31, 2023

Page 2 of 6 Previous 1 2 3 … 6 Next

POPULAR

No Content Available

BROWSE BY BRAND

Subscribe to our Email List
Email Address:*

No Result

View All Result

• Guns
  • Semi-Automatic Handguns
  • Revolvers
  • Semi-Automatic Rifles
  • Modern Sporting Rifle
  • Lever Action
  • Bolt Action
  • Shotguns
  • Airguns
• Parts & Accessories
  • Optics & Sights
  • Thermal Vision
  • Lasers & Lights
  • Suppressors
  • Holsters
  • Slings
  • Targets
  • Handgun Parts
  • Rifle Parts
  • Maintenance & Tools
• Ammo
  • Handgun Ammo
  • Rifle Ammo
  • Shotgun Ammo
  • Rimfire Ammo
  • Reloading
• Gear
  • Apparel
  • Ears & Eyes
  • Storage
  • Tactical Gear
  • Knives
  • Less Lethal
  • Flashlights
  • Electronics
• Lifestyle
  • Concealed Carry
  • Personal Defense
  • Home Defense
  • Hunting
  • Competition Shooting
  • Precision Shooting/Long Range Shooting
  • Training
  • Shooting 101
  • Survival
  • Military & LE
  • People
  • Rides
  • History
• News
• Giveaways
  • Enter to Win Walther’s PDP F-Series in February’s FGF!
• VIDEOS

© 2025 JNews - Premium WordPress news & magazine theme by Jegtheme.