Tuesday, April 16, in both houses as expected, gun control bills passed out on a party line vote and common sense measures to protect the Second Amendment were defeated; but the Super Majority, who expected to shove their unconstitutional measures through without serious opposition, got WAY MORE than they bargained for.

A pack of bills (15 to be exact) passed the first of several committee hearings but it was no easy day for Democrats. The Senate Public Safety Committee hearing of 11 bills began at 9AM and ended around 8:30 PM. So many citizens showed up in support and opposition for Senator Steinberg’s (Dem) Assault Weapons bill, SB374 that a lunch break had to be called after hours of citizen testimony.

The Senate Public Safety Committee was clearly caught off guard as Del Norte County Sheriff Wilson and El Dorado County Sheriff D’Agostini, gave very compelling testimony to the cheers of many, that they would not enforce unconstitutional measures that infringe upon a citizen’s right to bear arms. They made it clear that as Sheriffs sworn to protect the citizens they serve, that citizens must retain their Second Amendment Rights to defend themselves with lawfully obtained firearms they choose, as a citizens’ best and most sure defense is himself, in life threatening situations.

Sam Paredes, Executive Director of Gun Owners of California, had more surprises in store, bringing Rob Young to testify. Rob was just a first-grader, when he and numerous classmates were gunned down on the school playground by Patrick Purdy in the infamous Cleveland Elementary School mass shooting in Stockton on January 15, 1989. That tragic incident rocked the entire state and subsequently lead to legislation that banned assault weapons in California.

Upon discovering that an old video interview of himself as a shooting victim was used without his knowledge in the Joint Public Safety Committee hearing earlier this year, Rob Young wanted to make sure that his pro-Second Amendment views were not miss-characterized by the anti-gun agenda that followed. Rob Young testified Tuesday in opposition to SB 374. He testified that although he still has a bullet lodged in his chest, the events of that horrific day made him realize that an unarmed citizenry is no match for the criminally insane who do not obey gun laws. He grew up to become a well-respected police officer and is passionate about allowing armed, trained citizens to be able to defend themselves.“Gun control would not have saved me or any of my classmates that dreadful day. Five kids were killed, 27 were injured, and an entire Nation lost the sense of security of being able to send their children to school,” Young said. “What happened to us on that schoolyard is horrific, however, what the psychopath wanted that day, the need to hurt and kill, could and probably would have happened whether he was armed or not.”  

 Young added,  “Do not take my right as a husband and as a father to protect my family against sick individuals who may choose to cause us harm. Do not place unfair limits on my ability to protect me and my loved ones.

Equally compelling testimony came from retired Sergeant United States Marine Corps, John Michael Garcia, a contractor in the field of anti-terrorism force protection. He told the Assembly Public Safety committee that he supports AB 871 (Jones / Concealed Weapons Permits) that would make California a “shall issue” state for applicants with good cause and good moral character. He testified that although he is a military trained sharp shooter and a deadly weapons trainer for many law enforcement personnel, he has been repeatedly denied a CCW. He told GOC that while his country counted upon him to defend it over-seas against every kind of threat imaginable, he is still being denied the ability to defend himself and his family here at home. Assemblyman Brian Jones (Rep), author of AB 871, made with the following statement before the Assembly Public Safety Committee: “A recent national survey of over 15,000 police professionals conducted by PoliceOne.com found that the overall attitude of law enforcement is strongly anti-gun legislation and pro-gun rights,” as shown by these results:


 “There is indisputable evidence by the FBI that shows states with ‘right to carry’ laws have lower rates of violent crime,”  said Jones. “The best way to combat gun crime is through harsher punishment, not through stricter gun control.”  Despite expert testimony, Assemblyman Jones’ measure, which he has introduced before, was quickly defeated again by a party line vote. Throughout the day witnesses on both sides made their views known. Back in the Senate Public Safety Committee hearing, some moms tearfully explained they supported all gun control bills on that committee’s agenda after the loss of their child to gun violence. Of the opposite opinion, were moms who pleaded they were desperate to be able to acquire a concealed weapons permit to protect themselves and their kids, as they live in crime-ridden neighborhoods. Throughout the day, gun-rights advocates made it clear that while tragic events make us all want to stop violent crime – all of the bills introduced would only hurt law-abiding citizens – because criminals do not obey gun laws when they commit violent crimes. As predicted, the facts presented fell on deaf ears.


With committees stacked 5 Democrats to every 2 Republicans there is little chance for a fair hearing.  Numerous citizens who had never been to a committee hearing before, said they were aghast at the ease in which false statements were made by anti-gun enthusiasts in order to present their case. It was painfully clear to everyone present that gun-rights advocates were the experts on firearms, bullets, firearms manufacturing. Despite being greatly outnumbered on the dais, the two lone Republican Senators on the Senate Public Safety Committee, Vice Chair Joel Anderson and Senator Steve Knight, were tenacious in their expert questioning of bill authors and witnesses who often stretched the truth and distorted facts. During part of the hard lined questioning on Senator Darrell Steinberg’s SB 374, regarding the difference he sees between a semiautomatic and an automatic firearm, the Senator fumbled that it is a “distinction without difference.” Steinberg later admitted that he wished he could rewrite the Second Amendment that would only guarantee the right to certain firearms.

It was often said by supporters of anti-gun and anti-ammunition bills that it is their desire to take as many guns out of the market that they can as a matter of public safety. They also made it clear that they want to know WHO owns every assault weapon – that I might add – fits their definition.

Gun–rights advocates poked holes in the “need to fix a current loophole”excuse – continuously touted by Democrats on numerous bills.  Ed Worley of the NRA demonstrated that the Department of Justice was part of the negotiations on the original assault weapons ban in 1989 and therefore there were no loopholes in the original legislation. Furthermore, Worley pointed out that the bullet button conversion was encouraged by a CHP memo sent to officers to retrofit their personal firearms ensuring they do not fall into the new Assault Weapon category.

GOC Executive Director, Sam Paredes explained to Senator Leland Yee (Dem) that there is no such thing as a fixed magazine rifle or handgun and therefore, his bill, SB 47 was banning something that didn’t exist.  He further explained that the unconstitutional policies drafted by this legislature are driving up gun and ammunition sales to record levels, as citizens fear their Second Amendment freedoms will soon no longer exist. Sam continued to explain to Senator Yee that his bill requiring more firearms registration would require the impossible building of a governmental infrastructure bigger than the DMV in order to manage the millions of new gun registrations!

Several alarmed citizens told the committee that they were shocked that compelling testimony made no difference in the outcome of each vote cast for another unconstitutional measure and begged them to reconsider. You people scare the hell out of me!complained one gentleman, clearly unnerved by the whole experience. “It’s like you will stop at nothing to take away our rights to defend ourselves and our property in our own homes!” And THAT pretty much wraps up the entire day’s proceedings. Sam Paredes made it very clear, “For every unconstitutional measure that you put forth, we will see you in court and win! We’ve done it before and we will do it again. The Constitution and the will of the law-abiding is on our side.”

Crossposted on Gun Owners of California