2024 SB 53 Portantino - requires storage in 'approved firearms safety device'

[Rickybillegas]

I suppose we can't fight this bill until Jan. 1 2026 when we have standing? This is one hideous bill that's got to go.

[cz74]

I watched a you tube video by an Australian guy who was teaching people how to comply with the safe storage laws there, It was embarrassing and disgusting to me to see how far those previously robust people had fallen. He explained, almost with pride in his knowledge of how to comply, how guns needed to be locked up, and ammo needed to be locked up separately and all the details one needed to perform carefully to satisfy the police. So sad.

In Australia, the storm troopers can legally shock and awe and storm into people's homes, watch the covid enforcers videos, very very disturbing.

[splithoof]

I watched a you tube video by an Australian guy who was teaching people how to comply with the safe storage laws there, It was embarrassing and disgusting to me to see how far those previously robust people had fallen. He explained, almost with pride in his knowledge of how to comply, how guns needed to be locked up, and ammo needed to be locked up separately and all the details one needed to perform carefully to satisfy the police. So sad.

He is a RCE (Regulatory Compliance Enthusiast), much like some here on Calguns.

[ProfChaos]

I suppose we can't fight this bill until Jan. 1 2026 when we have standing? This is one hideous bill that's got to go.

This idea needs to be challenged to disappear. Any law proposed and waiting to be implemented that deals with a core right should be able to be challenged before anyone gets "harmed".

[Oneaudiopro]

I'm not worried, I have an approved storage device personally approved by me. smh

[flyer898]

If this law goes into effect, it may be that gunowners will forcibly resist law enforcement efforts to enter a residence = dead cops and dead homeowners, and other cops learning from the lesson.
I really, truly hope that does not come to pass.
And maybe it will be time to support the woke efforts to defund the police. When the police are more dangerous to me than criminals, I would rather keep my guns than pay for the police.

[splithoof]

If this law goes into effect, it may be that gunowners will forcibly resist law enforcement efforts to enter a residence = dead cops and dead homeowners, and other cops learning from the lesson.
I really, truly hope that does not come to pass.
And maybe it will be time to support the woke efforts to defund the police. When the police are more dangerous to me than criminals, I would rather keep my guns than pay for the police.

anyone not liked/invited specifically by us does not enter any of our residences, let alone have any reason to stand at the gates that completely surround the properties. Another strategy is to keep things of value decentralized, which means that any given location nobody could access everything of potential value. At least for the time being, the communists and their enforcers do not mandate a declared storage location for most firearms yet (although I do recall that being an element of the AW registration form back in 1990), so combined with poor records and information there is a chance to at least slow them down.

[TrappedinCalifornia]

Interestingly, this piece came out yesterday... 12 Compelling Drawbacks of Using Gun Safes for Firearm Storage

The reasons were labeled...

1. Limited Accessibility
2. Humidity and Corrosion
3. High Cost
4. Space Constraints
5. False Sense of Security
6. Mechanical Failures
7. Legal Implications
8. Weight Issues
9. Over-reliance on Technology
10. Limited Fire Protection
11. Difficulty in Moving
12. Complacency in Security

The conclusion?

So, once again, the Left in California is saying they know better than we do what's best for our own lives/circumstances.

[Rickybillegas]

Interestingly, this piece came out yesterday... 12 Compelling Drawbacks of Using Gun Safes for Firearm Storage

The reasons were labeled...

1. Limited Accessibility
2. Humidity and Corrosion
3. High Cost
4. Space Constraints
5. False Sense of Security
6. Mechanical Failures
7. Legal Implications
8. Weight Issues
9. Over-reliance on Technology
10. Limited Fire Protection
11. Difficulty in Moving
12. Complacency in Security

The conclusion?



So, once again, the Left in California is saying they know better than we do what's best for our own lives/circumstances.

The motivation for Portantino is punitive, not practical or safety. He and his benefactors (anti gun lobby) genuinely enjoy sticking it to gun owners.
Remember rick Travis saying Portantino was laughing and bragging about sticking it to us at the state capitol.
Our last hope before it becomes law is enough assembly members will vote no on final vote. Not likely but a hail Mary.

[Warbonnet]

"I wasn't storing my guns when they were stolen, I was using them" is the correct answer.

[Kyle1886]

...And to think it was not that long ago that a man's 'castle' was a suitable "lock box". Enter uninvited and suffer the consequences. Those days are long gone.

In today's environment your castle is an outlet for a sundry of goods that you might possess, not just arms.

Sad that our politicos would rather punish the innocent with every increasing encumbrances and coddle the bad seeds.

Lack of early firearm training at school and on the home front and is equally at fault

Kyle

[Rickybillegas]

"The bill would additionally prohibit a person convicted under these provisions from owning, purchasing, receiving, or possessing a firearm within one year of the conviction, as specified. The bill would make a violation of this provision punishable as a misdemeanor or felony. By creating a new crime"

Here's a question about this bill. The bill says a first violation is an infraction. Subsequent violations are misdemeanors. So, does the 'infraction' trigger the prohibition of owning firearms or does it require conviction of misdemeanor? Also, the language is unclear. Does the bolded mean the violator is prohibited for one year from conviction? The word 'within' appear to allude to something otherwise.

[Rickybillegas]

Obviously another motivation behind this bill is a gun grab. Convict as many violators as possible and confiscate their firearms.

[Warbonnet]

I'm not worried, I have an approved storage device personally approved by me. smh

I lock my front door. MY CASTLE.is my "storage device"!!

2nd, 4th, and 5th amendments PLUS my natural rights all apply!

Any trigger Locked , unloaded, ammo stored some place else, and all guns in a safe is NOT a weapon ready for self defense.

[splithoof]

I lock my front door. MY CASTLE.is my "storage device"!!

2nd, 4th, and 5th amendments PLUS my natural rights all apply!

Any trigger Locked , unloaded, ammo stored some place else, and all guns in a safe is NOT a weapon ready for self defense.

Agreed. This pecker-sniff legislature can go felate a herd of vagrant donkeys. Not going to comply with any of it.