Sheriffs Oppose California Lt. Gov.’s Measure to Confiscate Magazines, Require Background Checks for Ammo Sales

Send to Kindle
Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsome.  (Photo: SacBee)

Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom. (Photo: SacBee)

If you can’t get in the front door, go around and pry open the back door. At least, that is the approach Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom is taking with his new sweeping ballot initiative to further limit gun ownership in the Golden State.

Newsom is proposing a bevy of new restrictions that, if passed, would make California the envy of gun-grabbers everywhere.  As the NRA-ILA pointed out, Newsom’s measure would institute all of the following, among other things:

  • Ban possession of and confiscate hundreds of thousands of lawfully possessed magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds;
  • Require licensing of all ammunition vendors and drastically limit the places where ammunition could be sold;
  • Require ammunition buyers to undergo a background check before they could purchase any ammunition;
  • Turn law-abiding citizens into criminals should they fail to report lost or stolen firearms to police within a limited amount of time after they “should have known” a firearm was missing.

This proposal would be devastating to law-abiding gun owners.  Those with lawfully owned magazines holding ten or more rounds — currently legal if they were purchased prior to Jan. 1, 2000 — would have to turn them over to police or destroy them.   Moreover, the cost of ammo would skyrocket as ammo dealers would have to take the time to run a background check on each sale.  Ridiculous!

Thankfully, the California Sheriff’s Association is leading the charge to oppose this initiative.  This week, leaders of the organization wrote a letter to Newsom, insinuating that this is just a ploy to target the law-abiding.

“Effectively, this measure will create a new class of criminals out of those that already comply with common sense practices that now exist,” wrote President Martin Ryan, Amador County sheriff and PAC Chair Gregory J. Ahern, Alameda County sheriff, as SacBee reported. “The focus of efforts to reduce gun violence in this state should be on those responsible for that violence, not those that have no intent to do harm.”

In order to secure its spot on the ballot this fall, the lieutenant governor’s proposal must secure 366K signatures. Newsom appears to be supremely confident in his plan and maintains that “after San Bernardino…people are fed up with the NRA.”

In a press conference late last year, Newsom said “California can set the tone for the rest of the nation with these common-sense public safety provisions. We will lead the nation. We’ll be the only state in America that has background checks on point-of-sale purchases of ammunition.”

Although it hasn’t been confirmed, it’s likely that Newsom’s plan originated with the late Democratic Senator from New York, Daniel Patrick Moynihan. A legendary gun-grabber, Moynihan once said, “We don’t need to ban guns; we need to ban ammunition, because in 25 years, if you can buy ammunition, it goes bad.”

At a time in our country when common sense is not so common, one can only hope that Newsom fails to get the needed signatures to put his measure on the ballot. California has its share of issues to be tackled by their politicians, including tax reform, water supply, and educational funding.  Those are all pressing matters, but it appears Newsom has, instead, prioritized gutting one’s Constitutional right to keep and bear arms. Fool.

At least, the sheriffs in California see Newsom’s agenda for what it is. Hopefully, as we move closer to election season, more agencies and organizations step forward to oppose this attack on the 2A.

(Editor’s note: This article was a submission from freelance writer S. Farver)

{ 28 comments… add one }
  • catfish252 April 7, 2017, 7:42 am

    You folks in California need to vote this ass-hat and his boss Gov Moonbeam out of office come next election. Really, a background check to buy .22 or any other caliber ammo? What does he think we will do with that, take over the world? Doesn’t California already take the fun out of owning a gun. It is their intention to eventually take away your Constitutional right to own arms and they intend on doing it by chipping away at your rights one small piece at a time. Time to get together and vote with your fellow gun owners and remove this putz and any other politicians that promote more strict gun control from office.

  • norcalshooter April 17, 2016, 4:47 am

    If the libitards in LA, SF think making it harder to get ammo will stop gun owners from having firearms.What a joke, ever heard of reloading. Are they going to have border guards between Nevada and Oregon to search each vehicle for “illegal” ammo. The peoples republic of California need to spend more resources on illegal border crossings which contribute to the drug and illegal sales of firearms to the “non violent offender” Gov Brown, AKA Moonbeam, loves to let out of prison. I live north of Sacramento, lived here all my life. Since the dumocrates have been running this state it has gone down hill, businesses are pulling out jobs and wages havent grown, except in the govt sector. The middle class flips the bill, while non college educated get raises???. I cant wait until I can get the hell out of here.

  • Andrew N. March 22, 2016, 9:03 pm

    Newsome is I piece of crap politician from San Francisco. He is trying to make a “name” so he can run for Governor. His hero is Diane Feinstein, that ought to say it all.

  • Maynard Anderson March 21, 2016, 9:00 am

    I live in Illinois one of the worst states to live in and be a gun owner. However I do have a license to carry as well as a Illinois F.O.I.D. card. You must have a F.O.I.D. card for all things firearm related except buying a belt and holster. The F.O.I.D. is your proof of a background check. You must carry it with you and present it, to purchase, firearms, ammunition,, related items. Actually to physically hold and examine a gun you must show it. So he is actually behind times with his proposal Californians believe me you don’t want this. How effective is this law? Well consider Chicago (city with toughest gun laws in country) over 500 shooting and 100 people killed since first of year. One thing for sure they keep the ER Rooms busy.

    • catfish252 April 7, 2017, 7:46 am

      and they would like to pin that problem in Chicago on lawful gun owners. The politicians think that when laws they pass don’t have the desired results, then we need more restrictive laws. The problem is that most of these laws will never have the desired effect because they are aimed at the legal law abiding citizens and not the criminals. Doesn’t take a genius to recognize that.

  • plumbob March 20, 2016, 12:30 am

    I settled in California in 1964 after leaving the US Navy. It was beautiful in San Francisco, but because of the changing attitudes I moved to Orange County, then to Antelope Valley and finally, I fled CA in 2010 upon retirement. It was such a beautiful place to live and raise a family; then the Democrats took over. It seems everywhere the Democrats control the government things go downhill. As specific examples: Detroit 50 years of Democrat rule has forced the city into bankruptcy; Chicago, a city controlled by the most corrupt city government in America; Baltimore, MA; Ferguson, MO; San Francisco, Los Angeles, CA; New York City, NY. Do you see a pattern here? I finally moved to America, the west coast of Arizona on the Colorado River. I really enjoy my life now in America instead of Calif. I do go back occasionally to see my grandchildren and to remind myself and my wife exactly why we left.

  • Larry Koehn March 19, 2016, 5:05 pm

    As a state California already has the most onerous gun laws so how did these laws, aimed at law abiding people, affect the Muzloons Morons who did the killing in San Bernadina? Not at all as they found a straw man willing to break federal law to avoid all of California’s restrictions aimed at honest people. There are thousand of laws on the books already concerning guns but duh, criminals don’t obey the laws! Duh, who would have thunk that?
    This chicken necked DemoRAT gun grabber wants your guns because they stand in the way of the DemoRATZ dream, an Adolf Hitler styled political system where they can tell you how to live and can micro manage your life and you can pee up a rope if you don’t like it!

    • steve crawford March 20, 2016, 12:50 am

      There should be a restriction on magazines that hold over 18 rounds, not 10. Many full size semi-automatic pistol clips can hold 17 rounds. I support all sales of ammo be recorded (unless a person have a conceal permit), and that none all non-US citizens should be restricted from buying ammo and gun powder. Any so called Gun Controlled laws should be directed at non-US citizens and any illegal persons who have been charged and convicted of assaults or the menta
      lly ill.

      • Joe McHugh March 20, 2016, 6:59 pm

        Steve Crawford, What??? Why should a competent, law-abiding adult citizen be restricted to magazines that hold less than 18 rounds? What is it that you fear about such large capacity magazines? I’m almost sure that a bad guy with a rifle that is limited to 18 round magazines, will think ahead and carry 4 or 5 more of the fully loaded things.

        Why should ammunition sales be recorded? If a person is competent and law-abiding, why should the government know if he has thousands of cartridges stored at home?

        Do you see a pattern in my questions? The Second Amendment was not inscribed into the Bill of Rights to enable us to shoot squirrels. The intent of the Second Amendment is to give the people a credible means to resist government abuse.
        George Washington said it best. “A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government.” George was warning us about what our government might do in the future.

        Why would anyone accept any restrictions, regulations or infringements on the right to keep and bear arms? Why would any government of a free people want to know about the firearms that it’s law-abiding citizens have in their homes?
        Please don’t try to use obama’s favorite excuse, “crime fighting”. Criminals don’t obey laws, especially gun laws.

        Laws don’t “prevent crime”, they only stipulate the punishment for those that break those guidelines. You know, like after apprehension and being found guilty of breaking a law.

      • norcalshooter April 17, 2016, 5:13 am

        Steve, I believe your heart is in the right place but your logic of large capacity mags has some flaws.
        example
        All semi auto rifles that are clip fed must have the famous “bullet button” now think like a guy who is intent on going on a shooting rampage. Does he care that he is breaking the law by disabling the button?, that he bought 30 round clips in another state? Probably not, the point is why punish law abiding citizens with a media friendly “feel good law” that has done nothing to lessen and prevent gun violence.
        Hollywood is also responsible for the fear non gun owners have. We have seen movies and TV shows that have the unlimited round clips, I saw a John Wayne movie where he fired 15 rounds from his 6 shooter. Before any State passes laws to restrict, forbid or create any obstacle to prevent good citizens from exercising any constitutional right. They need to have all the facts, not the ones created by the media and anti gun lobbyist.
        As far as background check and safety courses, most court and law enforcement agency’s are 30-45 days behind in reporting to NCIS, CLETS and other agency’s. I believe if you already own a firearm, you should not have to go through a background check over and over. In fact ,CA restricts the purchase of 1 handgun every 30 days, Shotguns and rifles are in their sights. Look at Europe, sure they have less gun violence, but more bombings you can’t pass laws to protect people from criminals. Remember criminals are chicken s**ts, that’s why they prey on the weak and love gun control.

  • john dannewitz March 19, 2016, 1:51 pm

    Newsome has been choking on the silver spoon so long he belives he is relevant. Its nice to have the Getty’s (friend is son of Gorden Getty) provides finacial support for his businesses along way. Newsome is still an alcoholic and had an affair with his most important employees wife until he was caught. He has no soul, says stupid things and I was on an airplane behind him where he admitted he was gay and was helping a man from Phoenix who wanted to open a restaurant in San Francisco. He also is a liar as he declared he was just a poor kid running for mayor, not mentioning his judge father and socialite mother, when the other guy was actually from a poor background. He even faked attendence at Delancy Street, a non-profit rehab place that shaves your head like the military to make people even, he used their dry out alcoholic program to cover for his sexual affair while mayor. Whore in an empty suit.
    Now his is lt governor and says he runs two wineries. Seems to have a lot of time for a government

  • Jim K March 19, 2016, 11:24 am

    “Any twosome” Newsome is at it again! Check out the City of San Francisco where he came. I retired from the “largest Sheriff’s Dept in the world”in October, last & within a week moved to Montana! The destruction the Demorats have wrought on CA AKA “Wetback World”is a sight to behold. The State is run by ideologues, “Moonbean”, “Any Twosome” & the Legislature is truly the Mexican Mafia! I like spending my CA earned pension back here in the USA!
    My one & only AR15 style rifle told me after moving that “I don’t feel like I have to hide in the shadows anymore, always looking over my shoulder, for La Migre”…
    *If you want to visit a third world country without leaving the state, try Santa Ana! Any one reading this that is offended? Deal with it! It’s a free Country! Ha Semper Fi!

    • norcalshooter April 17, 2016, 5:21 am

      Yea brother, I’d love to see Newsome, Feinstein and the rest of the gaggle of F-up’s in Sacramento go on a ride along into gang and drug controlled neighborhoods in their district. Get a good look the mess their constituents have to live in. Didn’t NYC make slum lords live in their slum apartments for 30 days. Sounds like a good requirement for any lawmaker.
      Although born and raised here, I’m also bailing from CA, ASAP.

  • Tommy Barrios March 18, 2016, 12:57 pm

    THE MOST IMPORTANT POINT HERE: If ANY governmental agency even thinks they can get away with passing onerous anti-Constitutional laws, restrictions, procedures, whatever, then IT WILL HAPPEN, IF “We the People” LET IT HAPPEN!
    SHALOM!

  • Tripwire March 18, 2016, 11:43 am

    I saw this coming back in the early sixties and left Calipornia as fast as I could and have never nor will I ever go back.
    Gun owners and Conservatives in general need to realize they can never win the state back if indeed they ever had it in the first place.
    Uprooting and moving is hard, rebuilding elsewhere is hard on families but it has to be done if you want them to be safe and have a life free from the liberal agenda, and frankly if you are white it’s time to get the hell out of there and if that’s racist then so be it because it’s also true, if you are a conservative that’s not white you need to get out and you know that better than anybody.
    California is lost to the America I grew up in, it’s a third world country now and will never change except for the worse.

    • Tommy Barrios March 18, 2016, 12:44 pm

      Honestly Tripp I lived in CA back in the mid 90’s till 2005 and I miss the part of CA where I lived and where my youngest daughter lives right now!
      If you get far away from the blighted Communist Progressive Liberal indoctrinated urban areas, you will find a vastly different and beautiful California that has scenery like no where else! You will also find freedom loving gun toting Americans reminiscent of the old west pioneers who were all armed for protection and survival not to go out commit crimes! Those types, criminals, were taken care of quickly and efficiently!
      Do not think for one minute that the RIDICULOUS restrictive “Assault Weapons Ban” in CA, SB23, has in anyway stopped anyone from getting and possessing these so called “Assault Weapons”, if anything the ownership went up in spite of the RIDICULOUS LAW!
      The only reason I left where I was in CA is because I could no longer to afford to live there as I had been and ended up in the true land of freedom The Great State of Texas!
      If wanna see what I miss about CA look here: http://westwindcompanies.com/index.php/listings/villa-creek-ranch

  • Bob R March 18, 2016, 11:33 am

    In a country that was born with the gun and lived by it through countless wars, the gun is a symbol of our freedom and a necessary evil to defend it. With over 300 million guns in the hands of over 80 million citizens, it will never be possible to completely confiscate that many weapons and change the second amendment. Wherever there is a dictatorship, the people are disarmed and left at the mercy of the very few despots that destroy freedom. Our founding fathers knew that, and if it was to be a nation of the people, by the people and for the people, they had to be able to defend themselves from any form of government tyranny. Sadly, we are also the target of many other nations that are jealous of our way of life and wish to destroy it. Add all our own internal pressures and we become the leading country for violent crime, due to a completely open society. We can only hope to control the use of firearms through laws that regulate their use and control their proliferation into criminal hands, without completely removing their intended use as a deterrent. We can regulate them only from the general public, but not from the criminal element that ignores all gun laws. Removing guns entirely is not the answer, but rather finding ways to control their uses, is the only practical solution. The more we pass restrictive gun laws, the more the public will continue to arm themselves, which only adds to the amount of problems they cause.

    • Tommy Barrios March 18, 2016, 12:27 pm

      If you ever think about running for public office you have my VOTE 😉

  • Deadmeat99 March 18, 2016, 11:23 am

    Notice the use of the term “common sense”: one can substitute the word “tyrannical” for each instance in this article and the meaning wouldn’t change.

  • mike owen March 18, 2016, 8:30 am

    This guy really needs defeat in the next election. Well, that’s not what he really needs, but you know …

  • mtman2 March 18, 2016, 8:25 am

    I’d pose the question to any and all:
    “And this stops, drug dealers, hitmen, rapists, gang-bangers, crazies and terrorists exactly how?”

  • Infidel762 March 18, 2016, 7:58 am

    Mahe sure all your AR mags are marked .50 Beowolf, they only hold 10 rounds of that.

  • Steve Holsten March 18, 2016, 5:09 am

    I despise useless Anti-Gun Loons. They smell like Bullshit!

  • Jboyette1984 March 17, 2016, 4:12 pm

    These democrats are idiots trying to brainwash the public into believing that these laws are for the safety of law enforcement officers or the general public. I can give at least a dozen examples of law enforcement officers standing up for civilians rights to keep and bare arms. This is just another example of the true intention of the democratic party, and that is confiscation plain and simple. The american people need to wake up and realize whats going on before is too late.

  • jaque March 16, 2016, 4:14 pm

    California. Run by old homosexual white men, infested with illegal aliens, strategic state for aerospace and technology, highest taxes, and an enemy of freedom and democracy. How did a once strong Republican majority state become the Marxist slum Democratic stronghold it is ?

    • Robert March 18, 2016, 4:41 pm

      I moved to California in 1959 with my family and it was a wonderful place to live for years. In fact you could carry open in Ontario and numerous other cities I knew of. I once knew a state capitol police officer who told me what a bunch of self centered narcissistic politic officials, including Willy Brown, inhabited Sacramento. I at one time in the 1990s worked for a private security firm and had constant contact with police officers of all stripes. Believe me they do not endorse such laws as Lt. Gov. Newsom is proposing. I do have a proposal for him though. When he gives up his personal state paid for body guards or makes them throw their weapons away then I just might listen to him a little. Will never happen. Bad laws make bad people.

  • SuperG March 16, 2016, 11:01 am

    At the same time curtailing the rights of honest citizens to defend themselves, they are releasing more and more criminals into society. If you don’t want to be a victim, flee now!

Leave a Comment

Send this to a friend