2023 SB 2 Portantino Carry Restrictions: It's back!

[Dvrjon]

Originally Posted by Chewy65

Speaking of maps makes me think of technology, wtf is this little section all about?

Would big brother be thinking about mapping out all forbidden zones and locations and then inserting a chip into all CCW licenses. The sysem will allow the holder to be tracked passing through verbotten places and zones. The next step is a chip to be attached to firearms so as to alert the eye in the sky when you enter a zone with a firearm. That doesn't tell Big Brother that the firearm isn't in a lock box, but I bet it is good enough to do a traffic like stop and check.

No.

They have to upgrade their systems to meet the demands of review and reporting. This was detailed as an implementation delay in the analyses.

Senate Appropriations Apr 2023:

The DOJ anticipates that it would require a delayed implementation in order to properly plan and implement. Department of Technology (CDT) Oversight and Approval requires a 4-stage Project Approval Lifecycle (PAL). As part of the PAL oversight, all planning documents must be submitted for review and approval. This requirement adds approximately 6 months to the project timeline.

Assembly Appropriations, Aug 2023:

DOJ reports it needs delayed implementation of July 1, 2027, to complete the required IT enhancements.

They've side-stepped all of the state contracting rules to cut procurement time (often 14+ months to get a contract in place). Existing contracts can be extended without discussion; they can sole-source new contracts without competition or formal source selection or even confirmed pricing. All of the contracting safe guards and competition standards are down.

The clowns that built the CCW Portal (remember that?) amd others will have free run to boost profits.

[Dvrjon]

Originally Posted by Rickybillegas

(e) Except in the places specified in paragraph (14) of subdivision (a), a licensee shall not be in violation of this section while they are traveling along a public right-of-way that touches or crosses any of the premises identified in subdivision (a) if the concealed firearm is carried on their person in accordance with the provisions of this act or is being transported in a vehicle by the licensee in accordance with all other applicable provisions of law. Nothing in this section allows a person to loiter or remain in a place longer than necessary to complete their travel.

Thanks for digging this up, Ricky. I earlier posted there was an exemption but didn't have time to dig it out, so deleted the post.

Since the initial prohibition on school grounds is contained in 626.9, it needs to be noted that this exemption is stated in CA PEN 23260 (SB 2, Section 27)

But it is important to note that the exception of paragraph (14) of subdivision (a) retains prohibitions on:

(14) Any area under the control of a public or private community college, college, or university, including, but not limited to, buildings, classrooms, laboratories, medical clinics, hospitals, artistic venues, athletic fields or venues, entertainment venues, officially recognized university-related organization properties, whether owned or leased, and any real property, including parking areas, sidewalks, and common areas.

[Rickybillegas]

Originally Posted by norcalplinker1

Thanks. The section about being on an adjacent street confused me.

Not just you. A lot of the SB2 is confusing as hell.
Just think how LEO is going to be confused too.

[Superben104]

It's written to be ambiguous so it may be enforced whenever they deem necessary.

[Rickybillegas]

Originally Posted by Superben104

It's written to be ambiguous so it may be enforced whenever they deem necessary.

I thinks you may be exactly right.

Some officers, if you, for any reason are discovered carrying, will be in doubt because the law is so confusing. So, some not friendly or 'Dudley do right' will say "better cite this guy/gal just to be sure" or "better take them in and book them and let the station Captain decide or let the Judge decide".

Just hope if it ever happens, you run into an officer who doesn't give a crap or gives you the benefit of the doubt. I think they do exist?

[AlmostHeaven]

Originally Posted by Superben104

It's written to be ambiguous so it may be enforced whenever they deem necessary.

^^^^^^^^

Law enforcement in liberal-leaning areas of California will zealously enforce the carry law using maximally restrictive readings. Police in conservative-leaning areas will apply the law more lightly.

[Dvrjon]

In case it was missed. Mass gun law bill signing event tomorrow.

TOMORROW: In Sacramento County, Governor Newsom to Sign Legislation to Further Strengthen California’s Gun Safety Laws
Published: Sep 25, 2023
SACRAMENTO – Tomorrow in Sacramento County, Governor Gavin Newsom, alongside Attorney General Rob Bonta, lawmakers, and gun safety advocates and survivors will announce new efforts to protect Californians from gun violence.

WHEN: Tuesday, September 26, 2023 at approximately 10:30 a.m.

LIVESTREAM: @CAgovernor Twitter page, California Governor Facebook page and the Governor’s YouTube page. This event will also be available to TV stations on the LiveU Matrix under “California Governor.”

**NOTE: This in-person press event will be open to credentialed media only. Media interested in attending must RSVP to govpressoffice@gov.ca.gov by no later than Tuesday, September 26 at 8:30 a.m.

[Dvrjon]

Bills potentially available for highlighting at the Newsom News Conference and signing party:

Senate Bill 241: Signed. The bill requires California firearm retailers and their employees to undergo annual training courses which are implemented by the California Department of Justice (CalDOJ).

Assembly Bill 1406: would expand the existing 10-day waiting period on the sale or transfer of a firearm to include a possible 30-day state waiting period.

Senate Bill 368: adds additional requirements and red tape for firearm retailers to navigate should a person experiencing temporary mental health challenges decide to give their firearm to the dealer for storage.

Assembly Bill 1089: prohibits anyone, including a gunsmith or hobbyist, from manufacturing a home-built firearm and requires those individuals to register as a state-licensed firearm manufacturer.

Assembly Bill 28. would impose an 11 percent excise tax on firearm retailers and manufacturers for all sales of guns or ammunition.

Senate Bill 2 ?nuff said.

Assembly Bill 1587: California state Merchant Category Code (MCC) bill to track individuals who make firearm purchases using a credit card.

Senate Bill 452 which would require the state to study the unworkable and flawed technology on new firearms in the state.

Expect many ?usual suspects? to be gathered and speechs about common sense gun laws. Then, expect a diatribe on the reckless ideologues in the courts and the need to press for a 28th Amendment.

[bigdaddyz1776]

Meanwhile the GOP nominee for the election 2024 went to a gun store.

When I think about it, has any previous GOP nominee for president ever been to a gun store during election time?

[superhondaz50]

AB28, SB2, and SB452 signed during the press conference.

[TrappedinCalifornia]

Newsom signed it...

Newsom signs gun laws that add new taxes and limit where owners can carry firearms

California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed several gun-control measures on Tuesday, including a bill that tightens the state?s concealed-carry rules and another that imposes a new tax on firearm and ammunition sales.

During a signing ceremony in Sacramento alongside lawmakers and gun-control advocates, Newsom said California would push back on legal efforts to dismantle its firearms laws and maintain its position as a national gun-control leader, but called for greater federal action...

Of the more than 20 bills Newsom signed, two stand out as especially significant...

Senate Bill 2 is California?s response to the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn. vs. Bruen last year, when the 6-3 conservative majority justices struck down restrictive concealed-carry laws as unconstitutional...

Speaking at the signing event in Sacramento, Bonta shrugged off those arguments and said that SB 2 is "Bruen compliant" and "follows the blueprint" of the decision.

Portantino also said California could make a "compelling argument" in defense of every banned place on the list...

The second major proposal Newsom signed is Assembly Bill 28, landmark legislation by Assemblymember Jesse Gabriel (D-Encino) that will impose an 11% tax on dealers and manufacturers for sales of guns and ammunition. The new law is expected to raise more than $160 million annually for violence prevention, school safety programs and victim support services...

Newsom said he saw the new gun tax through a different lens than a general income tax, and that the money would be used for important services and programs.

"I think this is a pretty modest investment in prevention," he said...

The new tax law will take effect on July 1, 2024.

Other bills Newsom signed will:

• Restrict firearms dealers from holding certain game-style promotional events such as lotteries and raffles and create an opportunity for gun owners in a mental health crisis to store their weapons with dealers.
• Prohibit licensed firearm dealers from selling semiautomatic pistols without microstamping verification, beginning in 2028.
• Prohibit certain people in pretrial mental health diversion from owning a firearm until they complete the program.
• Reduce how much time someone convicted of a crime has to hand in their firearms.
• Bar someone from buying or owning body armor, often used by mass shooters, if they're also banned from owning guns.
• Crack down on unserialized firearms, or so-called ghost guns, and the 3-D printers used to make them.

[CitaDeL]

Where is the announcement of the lawsuits?

[Strafer]

Originally Posted by CitaDeL

Where is the announcement of the lawsuits?

https://www.firearmspolicy.org/fpc-f...e-restrictions


Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

[Superben104]

Originally Posted by CitaDeL

Where is the announcement of the lawsuits?

https://web.archive.org/web/20230926...n-safety-laws/

This link lists all of them, and provides a summary of most of them.

[SamsDX]

I checked out the complaint for Carralero v. Bonta - is there any particular reason why financial institutions and parking lots controlled by financial institutions were not challenged as "sensitive places"?

Going to a bank ATM at inopportune times seems, to me at least, one of the key reasons to CCW.

[Steemax]

Can someone ELI5... finally getting to a point I can have a CCW license in LA and now governor Newscum goes and does this.

Do the lawsuits at least stop these bills from becoming law until they are challenged in court? Or do we need to abide by these unconstitutional laws until they are addressed?

Thank you!

[SamsDX]

Originally Posted by Steemax

Can someone ELI5...

Do the lawsuits at least stop these bills from becoming law until they are challenged in court? Or do we need to abide by these unconstitutional laws until they are addressed?

Typical legal answer: yes and no.

SB-2 has already been signed into law by Newsom today. Its provisions don't go into effect until January 1, 2024, but it's still a law on the books. In that sense, it still needs to be followed until a court rules on its unconstitutionality.

That said, the lawsuit has already been filed. Plaintiffs will likely be seeking a preliminary injunction that at least halts enforcement of the law on January 1, 2024, and hopefully until the court rules on its unconstitutionality. There have been other plaintiffs in other states that have filed similar lawsuits against similar laws, and their enforcement has been enjoined. Chances are good that there will be similar results here, but then again, the court could come up with different rationale that might support an opposite conclusion. We just don't know at this point.

Regardless of the restrictions, I still think it's worthwhile to apply. Also, SB-2 adds a whole bunch of additional hoops to jump through as a new applicant (character references being one such hoop), that I think it's worthwhile to apply now, while we're still under the old laws.

[AlmostHeaven]

General Secretary Gavin Newsom proclaims the entire State of California a gun-free zone, 2023

[Superben104]

Newsom should be recalled. All of these are unconstitutional.

Need Benitez and SCOTUS to strike all these down, and remove him from office asap.

[9Cal_OC]

Originally Posted by Superben104

Newsom should be recalled. All of these are unconstitutional.

Need Benitez and SCOTUS to strike all these down, and remove him from office asap.

Dejavu eh

[Dvrjon]

Originally Posted by Superben104

Newsom should be recalled. All of these are unconstitutional.

Need Benitez and SCOTUS to strike all these down, and remove him from office.

Newsom beat a recall by almost 3M votes in 2021. He is stronger in this state now.

And Benitez does not get all of these cases. If they are set in his district, they will be apportioned to various judges. The system has already taken crap for Benitez getting a bunch if these, and he is in his mid 70s now.

SCOTUS may overturn these, but it will be a decade before that happens.

[wingnut0525]

Just wondering how the signing today will affect renewals through LASD?

[ProfChaos]

Originally Posted by Dvrjon

Newsom beat a recall by almost 3M votes in 2021. He is stronger in this state now.

And Benitez does not get all of these cases. If they are set in his district, they will be apportioned to various judges. The system has already taken crap for Benitez getting a bunch if these, and he is in his mid 70s now.

SCOTUS may overturn these, but it will be a decade before that happens.

He did not beat that recall, it was just solidifying the demonrats cheating system. If he survived by like 55/45 split, that would have been believable.

[AlmostHeaven]

Originally Posted by wingnut0525

Just wondering how the signing today will affect renewals through LASD?

The law enters into force on January 1, 2024, so renewals after the new year will have to comply with its provisions.

[user name]

Man, do I hate that man b!+ch

[Mithrandir13]

LEAVE.

CALIFORNIA.

NOW.

[AlmostHeaven]

Originally Posted by Mithrandir13

LEAVE.

CALIFORNIA.

NOW.

I literally did just that, yet I still have to constantly waste my life paying attention to California gun laws because any move the state does spreads to the rest of the country like a malignant cancer.

[ezaircon4jc]

Originally Posted by Mithrandir13

LEAVE.

CALIFORNIA.

NOW.

NOT

ALWAYS

AN OPTION.

[terry4130]

Originally Posted by Superben104

Newsom should be recalled. All of these are unconstitutional.

Need Benitez and SCOTUS to strike all these down, and remove him from office asap.

I have literally heard women say they don?t care what he does, they simply voted for him because they want to sleep with him.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Dvrjon]

Originally Posted by ProfChaos

He did not beat that recall, it was just solidifying the demonrats cheating system. If he survived by like 55/45 split, that would have been believable.

He is still in office, so he beat the recall. Y?all need to give up on this Dems cheating in CA nonsense. The true fact is the Republican Party went to sleep in the 90?s and gave away the State.

[BigPimping]

Seems like after the first of the year don?t even bother bringing your firearm with you.

[PaIadin]

Just got back from a trip to the Midwest and saw this legislation. What angers me is not the legislation but the sheep that support it without introspection.

[Psychbiker]

Originally Posted by BigPimping

Seems like after the first of the year don?t even bother bringing your firearm with you.

BP. Didn?t you just get your ccw? My qual is 11/4. Haven?t read all the restrictions but sounds like I?ll carry for maybe a month. I already can?t carry during work out since I?m in education.

With crime skyrocketing, I don?t see how these laws pass.

[Eat Dirt]

Originally Posted by ezaircon4jc

NOT

ALWAYS

AN OPTION.

Agreed , Not in position to pick up stakes at this time ...


I Hate New-scum .....

[NorCalBusa]

Originally Posted by AlmostHeaven

The law enters into force on January 1, 2024, so renewals after the new year will have to comply with its provisions.

That doesn't sound right. Wouldn't "everyone" have to comply come Jan 1 CCW holder or not (renewal would have nothing to do with it)?

Edit- or are you addressing just the new renewal requirements?

[CenterX]

If you have the patience to do so watch the 47 min. YouTube video - the lies and misdirection are communistic!

[AlmostHeaven]

Originally Posted by NorCalBusa

That doesn't sound right. Wouldn't "everyone" have to comply come Jan 1 CCW holder or not (renewal would have nothing to do with it)?

Edit- or are you addressing just the new renewal requirements?

The new statutory application and renewal requirements, such as increased training, mandatory character references, and higher administrative fees, enter into effect on January 1, 2024, so anyone beginning the process right now still retains the chance to receive a license under the existing regime.

To answer your question, every permit holder will have to obey the upcoming carry restrictions, but the legislation has also massively hiked the complexity and financial burden of applications and renewals.

[Donnovin]

Originally Posted by AlmostHeaven

The new statutory application and renewal requirements, such as increased training, mandatory character references, and higher administrative fees, enter into effect on January 1, 2024, so anyone beginning the process right now still retains the chance to receive a license under the existing regime.

To answer your question, every permit holder will have to obey the upcoming carry restrictions, but the legislation has also massively hiked the complexity and financial burden of applications and renewals.

It will be interesting to see how renewals are handled for those whose CCWs expire in January. Typically one would start renewal ~30 to 60 days prior, do their quals, etc, and could be ?approved? before Jan 1. Even so, their formal expiration/renewal date remains in January. Would they have to re-renew according to new requirements or would the IA?s approval for renewal hold? Hopefully this is left to a rational IA to decide.