California Senator: Expand One-Gun-A-Month Law to Long Guns

A gun-shop owner checks out the merchandise.
(Photo: Reuters/Shannon Stapleton)

A California lawmaker wants to expand the state’s one-gun-a-month rule to include long guns, the Los Angeles Times reports.

Sen. Anthony Portantino (D-La Cañada-Flintridge) wants to prohibit California residents from buying more than one long gun in a 30-day period, a purchase limit that currently exists for handguns.

“This is not the Wild West,” he said. “California’s in the 21st century, and you shouldn’t be able to walk into a gun store and come out with an arsenal.”

Portantino said that there is no reason that one would need to buy more than one long gun in a month’s time.

“[The bill] is basically just saying, ‘People, be reasonable, take a timeout.’ We should not have such a proliferation of weapons out in main street California,” Portantino said.

The democratic lawmaker pointed to straw purchasers as one of the main targets of the legislation.  Citing data from the California Department of Justice, he said that one person bought 177 long guns in two transactions during a one-month period in 2014.

He further noted that approximately half the guns seized by the state DOJ from prohibited persons are long guns.

Yet, Sam Paredes, the executive director of Gun Owners of California, disagreed with the premise that restricting long gun purchasers would stop straw purchasers.

“This does not prevent straw purchasers from breaking the law,” Paredes told the LA Times. “They are only passing laws that affect law-abiding citizens. This doesn’t affect criminals.”

Indeed.  This law really targets California gun shops and the law-abiding hobbyists, collectors, and sportsmen who buy multiple long guns in a month.  It’s a way to further chill their Second Amendment rights and kill what’s left of firearm commerce in the Golden State.  By limiting the number of potential sales, it’s going to be harder and harder for local gun stores to keep the lights on.

Moreover, Portantino’s remark that nobody “needs to buy more than one long gun in a month” illustrates the type of socialistic bootlicker he really is.  In a Constitutional Republic the government doesn’t get to gut fundamental rights on its evaluation of what people “need.”  That’s the socialist or communist way of doing things.  Here, in America, people are free to exercise their basic rights and freedoms in the manner they see fit.    

Can you imagine a bill that would prevent journalists from publishing more than one story each month on the grounds that nobody needs to express themselves that often?  Or a bill that prohibited one from attending church weekly because nobody needs to pray more than once in a 30-day period?  Heck no!

Hopefully, Portantino proposal dies in the Legislature.  Unlikely, because this is California we’re talking about.  We’ll keep you updated.

{ 21 comments… add one }
  • Pete March 22, 2017, 4:58 pm

    Personally, I wish Calif. WOULD secede. They set dangerous precedents for the loss of our constitutional rights. A few tofu-farting liberals want to run the lives of a majority of well meaning people. They want to make criminals out of ordinary law abiding citizens. People with concealed carry permits are among the most law abiding citizens in the country. We have to be in order to keep our permits. Other states see them doing it and think ‘why don’t we do it, Calif. got away with it. If they don’t want to own a gun, then don’t buy one, but don’t tell the rest of the people, THEY can’t do it. Calif. The land of fruits and nuts. I won’t even visit there any more. And don’t get me started on the granola munching tree huggers in ‘Holly-Weird’!

  • Patriot March 14, 2017, 7:30 pm

    Sometimes there is not a specific topic for the comment to be made and the comment just has to be made without an appropriate specific topic. The specific topic for this comment would be “Connived TV Fake News Topic”. Many times today, connived TV fake news was given about the President Trump health care plan that will replace Obamacare. The information given stated that in about 6 years, about 12 million people would not have health care under the President Trump plan. It further stated that by 2026, about 24 million people would not have health care. Believe it or not, the fake TV news never stated any details about WHY this information was supposed to be true. In other words, headline information was given many times that was not supported by detailed information. The main purpose of this tactic by the sniveling fake news morons was to try to make President Trump’s health care plan seem to be worse than Obamacare. Due to the First Amendment, the sniveling news morons and Dems will not be held accountable for the probably false information that was intended to hurt the Republican health care plan and help the screwed up Dem plan. Why do the news morons expect an extremely complicated health care plan to be in effect and working perfectly in less than a month? This is part of the attempt to make President Trump and the Republicans look bad so the Dems can campaign on it and try to regain power in the next election. There is no doubt that Pelosi, Schumer, Soros, Bloomberg and Hillary were involved in this attempt to ridicule and degrade President Trump and the Republicans.

  • Mike Watkins March 10, 2017, 10:35 pm

    What’s worse, a lot of politicians in OUR states look at Kali and think “California is so progressive, we need to be more like them.”

    Our rights will never be completely “safe.” We will always have to be vigilant and ready to fight for them.

    Or lose them, like they are in CA, NY, WA, MA, NJ, CT, etc.

  • Gomer March 10, 2017, 3:32 pm

    Democrats are as screwed up as a football bat.

  • Max Hoyle March 10, 2017, 1:47 pm

    Lets all do what I do, boycott that commie state! I don’t buy anything from that state no fruit, products, of any kind, that includes going to movies, which I miss greatly! Also same for the other commie states, mass, conn, nj, ny, md, and yes that means no Victoey 22 from S and W! This sucks I know but maybe if enough people do the same they will change things!

  • skipNclair March 10, 2017, 11:44 am

    Another law maker a so called representative of the people and protector under oath of the constitution that proves once again that he is not qualified for public service and appears to be brain dead.

  • Ruppert Jenkkins March 10, 2017, 11:19 am

    After adding several HUNDRED new anti-gun laws in the last few years, slowly but surely these a***wipes are running out of new gun law ideas. They are now scraping the bottom of the barrel, looking at every single element of gun buying and ownership, to see if they can squeeze out even one more teensy anti-gun law out of the system.
    Short of writing a law that says “all guns illegal in CA”, they will continue to write ANY law that doesn’t say those words. Soooo, that always leaves these jerks with more to work with. Hoping they all burn in hell.

  • NealS March 10, 2017, 10:32 am

    They should limit those politicians in California from having more than one car, one French Fry, one potato chip, one house. California just needs to be given back to Mexico. It used to be a nice place to live, back in the 50’s and 60’s. I was there when Reagan was governor, then along came Brown, it might as well have been Charlie Brown. I finally had it and had to leave, but unfortunately Washington State is getting the same way. It’s too late for me to move again but the rest of you need to take back your government before it’s too late.

  • Johne March 10, 2017, 9:46 am

    CAExit. It is time for them to go!

  • Michael Keim March 10, 2017, 8:26 am

    The camel’s nose under the tent.

  • Rick March 10, 2017, 7:56 am

    Can someone explain to me why democrats are so messed up. Its like they come from another planet.

    • Alan March 10, 2017, 10:38 am

      Hatred, and fear, plain and simple.
      They fear guns, and they hate that they have that fear.
      They are convinced that somehow the Constitution and life guarantees their ‘right’ to be ‘safe’, and they see guns as taking that away.
      In addition, it is FAR more easy to hate an inanimate object, than to hold others to a higher standard of morals and conduct.
      They even go out of their way to rationalize the actions of those criminals by talking about their “disadvantages” and our “privilege”, in order to justify the immoral actions of their crimes.
      This eases their burden of judging others for their actions.
      That’s it, in a nutshell.

  • Mitch Spence March 10, 2017, 6:30 am

    What is superbly ironic about this is that when you specify an amount, that is what people will buy: one gun a month. Whereas they may well buy less than that if not held to a specific number.

  • Joe Deats March 10, 2017, 5:06 am

    The big one can’t strike soon enough to swallow that state up and drag its rotting communist carcas into the sea.

    • Steve March 10, 2017, 8:19 am

      Thanks for giving up on all of us good and law abiding, second amendment supporters, who still call California home. We do not give up on our home state the same way we all did not give up on our nation, please try to do something constructive and helpful instead of just wishing us all dead. On a lighter note, I fully understand the sarcasm and underlying sentiment of your comment.
      God bless.

  • Luke March 10, 2017, 3:56 am

    Gotta’ be something in the water out there. Highly paid jackass politicians have nothing better to do than to dictate how many guns law abiding citizens can buy and when? This bullshit has turned into a hobby for them. Poor mindless, rotten bastards. Sometimes I wonder if a short, violent west-coast military coup would help this country cleanse itself of these treasonous assholes. The outcome might be worse than now though. This does make me conscious though of just how much of this bullshit people are going to take before something snaps on a large enough scale to scare pampered politicians protected in population centers.

  • Randal Koebler March 9, 2017, 1:24 pm

    Do these fools not realize you can only use one at a time? Simply another 2nd amendment restriction.

  • Christian March 9, 2017, 11:54 am

    I don’t know what you guys are thinking but I really have enough of this California crap! I am so angry to read every month on this website about another stupid request for tightening the gun laws of California, or any other state.

    I think someone should step up to these California politicians and tell them straight what the 2nd amendment means.

    Amendment II: A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

    Yes, the 2nd amendment allows regulations but for whom? Only for the militia. What is a militia? Those are normally civilians that can be called to war at any time, if necessary. This isn’t something new. These part-time soldiers were the standard in the Roman Empire, until the Roman military has received its reformation by Gaius Marius in 107 BC. Before that time the Roman army was consisting not of the legions we always think of, but of units like Hastati, Triarii and Equites, people that even had to afford their own arsenal of armor and weapons, for example allowing only the rich to become Equites, a unit of light cavalry. And those people were only soldiers when they have been called out to war but never during peaceful times.

    This is just an example of course but it shows what a militia is all about. Of course, these guys shall be regulated and this is what the creators of the American constitution wanted. But there is a comma between the well regulated militia and the right of the people to keep and bear arms. I do believe that the 2nd amendment has to be read in two parts: The militia, ergo the part-time soldiers, and the rest of the American people, except for full-time soldiers on duty, the American civilians! And they cannot be regulated in any way. As soon as the smallest law is about guns, it infringes the 2nd amendment and is therefore not constitutional. There shall be no ban on magazine capacity, fully-automatic weapons, open carry and all this other stuff. NO gun laws at all for civilians, NO restrictions and NO limits, regardless of age, gender, religion or anything else, also NO restrictions on how much guns I can buy in a month. This is what I do believe the 2nd amendment is really all about. Anyone trying to infringe it, has to leave his/her office and shall never be able to take it back. Therefore, we would see a lot of American politicians to leave immediately. Only if the constitution is being followed as it has been written down, I do believe just then America can be a strong nation because its constitution will not be interpreted anymore but finally builds a stable base. We had these bad times in history before. We had it during the time of Jesus, 2.000 years ago, when Pharisees interpreted the Thora the way they wanted it to hear and to be followed but not how it was really written and the people had no right but to follow those interpretations. Jesus was going against this mess and therefore they wanted to see him dead. The same happened in Germany, 500 years ago, when Martin Luther rose up against the pope and many other religious leaders that interpreted the Bible the way they wanted it to hear and to be followed but not how it was really written and the people had no right but to follow those interpretations. So, you see, history always repeats itself.

    And I have something to add about California. Instead of infringing the peoples absolute right to keep and bear arms, they shall finally infringe their sick porn industry! According to statistics 90% of American adult productions come from San Fernando Valley and thanks to the time of flatrate internet, children and teenagers have easy access to this mostly disturbing material. There are already studies out there, that have proven that porn has a really bad influence on the young, because they often believe these things they see to be actual reality and actual love. Why the politicians of California never do something against this wicked crap, that sickens the mind of so many people, especially the young, ALL OVER THE WORLD? California has a huge responsibility to the world because this stuff can be watched around the world. So, do something against that and not against the constitutional right of the people to keep and bear arms, a right that separates the United States from the rest of the defenseless world!

    • Bill March 10, 2017, 4:45 am

      I know there are still quite a few good People in California, but I’d say the majority’s more concerned with gay rights and abortion rights, than they are their Second Amendment Right. Hope I’m wrong about this, but they dont seem to be fighting tyranny hard enough. It’s a sad day in America.

      • Steve March 10, 2017, 8:26 am

        Their are many of us that are fighting as hard as we can, both in word and finance. That said, many also fight against us, it is those that are against freedom that are depicted by the media as the right and true modern way of life. Blame the media for not reporting on issues equally, they only want the world to see what they support.

  • SuperG March 9, 2017, 11:35 am

    Just another California cuckold doing what his mistress tells him to do. If he dutifully obeys her, she’ll peg him tonight.

Leave a Comment

Send this to a friend