Categories
All About Guns Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends" California

WARNING: Concealed Carry Issuing Authorities: Follow the Courts’ New Orders by F Riehl, Editor in Chief

FPC Statement to Concealed Carry Issuing Authorities: Obstructing the People’s Fundamental Right to an Effective Self-defense is not an Option.

Finger Pointing Blame Shameful Problem

Sacramento, CA –-(AmmoLand.com)- Firearms Policy Coalition issued the following statement in response to reports of multiple carry permit issuing authorities across the country refusing to comply with the Supreme Court’s opinion in NYSRPA v. Bruen, which held that the Second and Fourteenth Amendments protect the right to carry firearms in public:

Quoting the plurality opinion from McDonald v. Chicago, the Supreme Court held in Bruen that “[t]he constitutional right to bear arms in public for self-defense is not ‘a second-class right, subject to an entirely different body of rules than the other Bill of Rights guarantees.’”

To those authorities that process or issue permits to carry concealed weapons that are abrogating the People’s right to carry: Obstructing the People’s fundamental right to effective self-defense is not an option.

It doesn’t matter if you disagree with the recent United States Supreme Court opinion. It doesn’t matter if there are a lot of applicants. It doesn’t matter if you don’t feel like spending time processing them. You are required to objectively process a carry permit application submitted to you without burdensome fees, delays, flaming hoops, and other games. The deluge of applications you’re now experiencing could have been avoided if you simply respected the People’s right to bear arms from the start and not treated it as a second-class right.

FPC refuses to stand idly by while the issuing authorities—who are often law enforcement agencies—delay and deny the People’s right to the peaceable conduct they are entitled to. Your agencies must know that FPC will utilize every available instrument to remedy this ongoing and historical wrong.

Individuals who want to Join the FPC Grassroots Army and support important pro-rights lawsuits and programs can sign up at JoinFPC.org. Individuals and organizations wanting to support charitable efforts to restore the Second Amendment and other natural rights can also make a tax-deductible donation to the FPC Action Foundation. For more on FPC’s lawsuits and other pro-Second Amendment initiatives, visit FPCLegal.org and follow FPC on Instagram, Twitter, Facebook, YouTube.

Categories
All About Guns Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends" California

Newsom Wants Democrats to Fight Fire With Fire, Starting With a Gun Bill

Newsom Wants Democrats to Fight Fire With Fire, Starting With a Gun Bill

SACRAMENTO — On a Saturday night in December, Gov. Gavin Newsom of California was so frustrated by a Supreme Court decision allowing Texas residents to sue abortion providers that he went straight to social media to call for legislation allowing private citizens to enforce his own state’s gun laws.

It sounded so tit-for-tat that many Californians wondered if he was just trying to get a rise out of one of his favorite foils, Gov. Greg Abbott of Texas. Others doubted he was serious because it would have meant embracing a bounty system of enforcement that he considered legally dubious.

Seven months later, Mr. Newsom is not only poised to sign the bill, but he has leaned harder than ever into his rhetoric against Republicans. He ran an ad this month in Florida attacking the state’s Republican governor, Ron DeSantis, a possible 2024 presidential candidate. He has rebuked other states for banning abortion and ripped the Supreme Court for its recent decisions overturning Roe v. Wade and giving Americans a broad right to arm themselves in public.

While he has repeatedly insisted that he has no intention of running for the White House in 2024, Mr. Newsom’s actions sometimes seem to belie his statements. The Florida ad — a $105,000 spot worth more in free publicity — turned heads in national political circles. So did his visit to Washington this month and his declarations this spring that fellow Democrats were too meekly responding to Republican moves.

“I think he realizes that Democrats are hungry for a hero,” said Kim Nalder, a political science professor at California State University, Sacramento. “He’s building a profile as an alternative on the left to this aggressive policymaking we’ve seen by Republicans in recent years.”

No piece of legislation better encapsulates Mr. Newsom’s fight-fire-with-fire attitude than the bill co-opting a Texas anti-abortion tactic to enforce California bans on assault weapons and ghost guns.

It aims to bury those who deal in banned guns in litigation. Awards of at least $10,000 per weapon, and legal fees, will be offered to plaintiffs who successfully sue anyone who imports, distributes, manufactures or sells assault-style weapons, .50-caliber rifles, guns without serial numbers or parts that can be used to build firearms that are banned in California.

“No one is saying you can’t have a gun,” said State Senator Bob Hertzberg, a veteran San Fernando Valley Democrat who was tapped by the governor to craft and shepherd the complex legislation. “We’re just saying there’s no constitutional right to an AR-15, a .50-caliber machine gun or a ghost gun with the serial number filed off.”

The bill is the capstone of a sweeping package of firearm restrictions that Mr. Newsom is signing this month. The bills include fresh limits on firearm advertising to minors; intensified restrictions on unregistered “ghost guns”; and a 10-year ban on firearm possession for those convicted of child abuse or elder abuse.

“It’s time for us to stand up,” Mr. Newsom said in late June after the court struck down a New York law, similar to California’s, that strictly limited “public carry” permits. He said then that California had anticipated the ruling and that it was revising state law in ways that would offset “this radicalized and politicized Supreme Court.” He had 16 gun bills heading to his desk, he said, and he planned to sign them all.

The California laws come as mass shootings have intensified pressure for action on gun violence, as death tolls have mounted this year from Buffalo to Uvalde, Texas. Last month, President Biden signed the most significant gun violence legislation to clear Congress in nearly three decades, expanding the background check system for gun buyers under 21 and setting aside millions of dollars so states to enact “red flag” laws that allow the authorities to temporarily confiscate guns from people who are deemed dangerous.

But the congressional response, limited by a powerful gun lobby and deep partisan polarization, has been a far cry from the comprehensive solutions that many gun violence researchers feel are needed. And the conservative 6-3 majority on the Supreme Court has signaled an inclination to not only preserve, but also further expand gun rights.

That has left states led by Democrats to seek their own solutions. The search has extended beyond gun violence policies as the court’s rulings have upended reproductive rights and placed L.G.B.T.Q. protections and other civil liberties at risk. Increasingly, the charge from the left has been led by Mr. Newsom, who has had political capital to spare since last year, when he crushed a Republican-led recall.

Dan Schnur, a former Republican strategist who now teaches political science at the University of Southern California and the University of California, Berkeley, said that the governor’s motives were easy to deduce: Mr. Newsom believes his “California way” is a success, and using a national platform to call out Republicans helps rally constituents across the many media markets in his own immense state.

Also, Mr. Schnur said, “He is running for president.”

Mr. Newsom has said that he has “subzero interest” in the White House. “But just being seen as a player on the national stage serves him, even if he never runs,” Mr. Schnur said. “Mario Cuomo played that game for years.”

California’s gun laws are among America’s strictest, helping the state deliver one of the nation’s lowest rates of gun deaths. In 2020, the state’s rate of firearm mortality was about 40 percent lower than the national average, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the Public Policy Institute of California has determined that Californians are about 25 percent less likely to die in mass shootings, compared with residents of other states.

California’s gun policies, however, have been strained as conservative federal judges, many appointed by the Trump administration, have taken an increasingly hard line on Second Amendment rights.

The California gun bounty law is expected to face legal challenges that could ultimately land at the Supreme Court. The measure will not take effect until next year and includes a legal trigger that will automatically invalidate it if courts strike down its Texas underpinnings. The National Rifle Association and other gun advocates have argued that current state law already offers remedies for illegal activities by firearm manufacturers and dealers in California.

The same groups have argued from the start that the measure’s bounty scheme could — and would — restrict the Second Amendment, and the American Civil Liberties Union echoed their concerns.

“The problem with this bill is the same problem as the Texas anti-abortion law it mimics: It creates an end run around the essential function of the courts to ensure that constitutional rights are protected,” the A.C.L.U. said in a letter opposing California’s legislation. The group also charged that the legislation would “escalate an ‘arms race’” in creative legal attacks on politically sensitive issues including contraception, gender-affirming care and voting rights.

A recent N.R.A. legislative update said that on this and several other gun bills, they were “looking at all available options including litigation.”

In the meantime, Mr. Hertzberg said, Democrats will use all available tools.

“I don’t agree with the Supreme Court,” he said, “but if Texas is going to use this legal framework to harm women, then California is going to use it to save lives by taking illegal guns off the streets.”

Categories
All About Guns Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends" California

California blocks gun sales to those at ‘substantial risk’ of breaking law by: Associated Press

Gun makers and dealers in California will be required to block firearms sales to anyone they have “reasonable cause to believe is at substantial risk” of using a gun illegally or of harming themselves or others, under a new law that Gov. Gavin Newsom announced Tuesday that he had signed.

It’s a subjective requirement that goes farther than current background checks or prohibitions on selling guns to people prohibited from owning them.

The regulation is part of the new law creating a good conduct code for gun makers and dealers that also allows anyone who suffers harm from violations to sue.

The bill was one of more than a dozen adding to California’s already strict gun regulations that were sent to Newsom, a Democrat, by state lawmakers before they left for their monthlong summer recess.

The National Rifle Association said the requirements are vague and represent an attempt to hold gun dealers and makers liable for the actions of others. The new law, the group said, “seeks to frustrate law-abiding gun owners” with the goal of driving gun makers and dealers “out of business with frivolous litigation.”

The state’s firearm industry standard of conduct, starting in July 2023, will require those making, importing or selling guns to “take reasonable precautions” to make sure the weapons don’t fall into the wrong hands through sales or thefts.

That includes having “reasonable controls” to prevent sales to arms traffickers, straw buyers, those prohibited from owning guns, and anyone deemed to be at “substantial risk” of using the gun improperly.

The law is patterned after a New York measure that took effect last year to skirt a 2005 federal law blocking most liability lawsuits against gun-makers or dealers.

The New York measure declared such violations a “public nuisance,” taking advantage of a federal exemption that allows lawsuits when gun makers break state or local laws regulating the sale and marketing of firearms.

Delaware and New Jersey just enacted similar laws, and all contain provisions requiring firearms dealers to act responsibly, said Tanya Schardt, senior counsel and director of state and federal policy at the Brady gun control advocacy organization that sought the laws.

“There may be indicators or things that you see beyond just passing the background check that indicate to the dealer that they shouldn’t sell the gun,” she said.

“I would say the California law is more specific,” Schardt said. “But substantively I think it creates the same set of requirements, the same standards with regards to engaging in safe business practices.”

“It’s not asking someone to be psychic,” she added, but to take reasonable precautions in the same way that an automobile dealer could be liable for selling to a customer who is clearly drunk, for instance.

“It’s not creating liability, it’s not expanding liability beyond what’s reasonable … which is really the same standard that every other industry is measured against,” she said.

A federal judge in May rejected a challenge to the New York law by gun manufacturers and sellers.

Sam Paredes, executive director of Gun Owners of California, expects the California law will be challenged on the argument that it violates the federal law.

“The ability to be sued for doing something bad is already there,” he said, noting that gun makers and dealers are liable for any illegal activity. “This is the anti-gun side’s way of looking for a deep pocket.”

The law will allow the California attorney general, city and county attorneys and victims of gun code of conduct violations to sue gun retailers or manufacturers for civil damages.

“Nearly every industry is held liable when their products case harm or injury. All except one — the gun industry,” Newsom said in a video Tuesday announcing that he had signed the bill on Monday.

With the new law, he said, “gun makers will finally be held to account for their role in this crisis.”

California’s law allows gun makers and dealers to also be sued for alleged violations of other laws, including false advertising, unfair competition or deceptive acts or practices.

“Hitting their bottom line may finally compel them to step up to reduce gun violence by preventing illegal sales and theft,” said the bill’s author, Democratic Assemblyman Phil Ting.

The law will also prohibit manufacturers and retailers from making, importing or selling guns or related products that are “abnormally dangerous and likely to create an unreasonable risk of harm.”

That could include kits for building untraceable “ ghost guns,” “ bump stocks ” that increase the rate of fire for semi-automatic weapons, or “ bullet button ” assault weapons that allow for rapid reloading.

Categories
All About Guns California Cops

$100K in stolen guns, tools found in underground homeless encampment Authorities say $100,000 in stolen goods was found in a hidden homeless encampment. (San Jose Police Media Relations)

$100K in stolen guns, tools found in underground homeless encampment photo 1 These shotguns look mighty high end to me! Maybe I should go on Welfare out here! (Oh Hell No!) Grumpy

Categories
Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends" California

California blocks gun sales to those at risk of breaking law By DON THOMPSON

FILE - Homemade rifles are displayed on a table at an ATF field office in Glendale, Calif., on Aug. 29, 2017. Gov Gavin Newsom signed a bill by Assemblyman Phil Ting, D-San Francisco, Tuesday, June 12, 2022, that creates a good conduct code for gun makers and dealers and allows anyone who suffers harm from violations to sue. (AP Photo/Jae C. Hong, File)
FILE – Homemade rifles are displayed on a table at an ATF field office in Glendale, Calif., on Aug. 29, 2017. Gov Gavin Newsom signed a bill by Assemblyman Phil Ting, D-San Francisco, Tuesday, June 12, 2022, that creates a good conduct code for gun makers and dealers and allows anyone who suffers harm from violations to sue. (AP Photo/Jae C. Hong, File)

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — Gun makers and dealers in California will be required to block firearms sales to anyone they have “reasonable cause to believe is at substantial risk” of using a gun illegally or of harming themselves or others, under a new law that Gov. Gavin Newsom announced Tuesday that he had signed.

It’s a subjective requirement that goes farther than current background checks or prohibitions on selling guns to people prohibited from owning them.

The regulation is part of the new law creating a good conduct code for gun makers and dealers that also allows anyone who suffers harm from violations to sue.

The bill was one of more than a dozen adding to California’s already strict gun regulations that were sent to Newsom, a Democrat, by state lawmakers before they left for their monthlong summer recess.

The National Rifle Association said the requirements are vague and represent an attempt to hold gun dealers and makers liable for the actions of others. The new law, the group said, “seeks to frustrate law-abiding gun owners” with the goal of driving gun makers and dealers “out of business with frivolous litigation.”

The state’s firearm industry standard of conduct, starting in July 2023, will require those making, importing or selling guns to “take reasonable precautions” to make sure the weapons don’t fall into the wrong hands through sales or thefts.

That includes having “reasonable controls” to prevent sales to arms traffickers, straw buyers, those prohibited from owning guns, and anyone deemed to be at “substantial risk” of using the gun improperly.

The law is patterned after a New York measure that took effect last year to skirt a 2005 federal law blocking most liability lawsuits against gun-makers or dealers.

The New York measure declared such violations a “public nuisance,” taking advantage of a federal exemption that allows lawsuits when gun makers break state or local laws regulating the sale and marketing of firearms.

Delaware and New Jersey just enacted similar laws, and all contain provisions requiring firearms dealers to act responsibly, said Tanya Schardt, senior counsel and director of state and federal policy at the Brady gun control advocacy organization that sought the laws.

“There may be indicators or things that you see beyond just passing the background check that indicate to the dealer that they shouldn’t sell the gun,” she said.

“I would say the California law is more specific,” Schardt said. “But substantively I think it creates the same set of requirements, the same standards with regards to engaging in safe business practices.”

“It’s not asking someone to be psychic,” she added, but to take reasonable precautions in the same way that an automobile dealer could be liable for selling to a customer who is clearly drunk, for instance.

“It’s not creating liability, it’s not expanding liability beyond what’s reasonable … which is really the same standard that every other industry is measured against,” she said.

A federal judge in May rejected a challenge to the New York law by gun manufacturers and sellers.

Sam Paredes, executive director of Gun Owners of California, expects the California law will be challenged on the argument that it violates the federal law.

“The ability to be sued for doing something bad is already there,” he said, noting that gun makers and dealers are liable for any illegal activity. “This is the anti-gun side’s way of looking for a deep pocket.”

The law will allow the California attorney general, city and county attorneys and victims of gun code of conduct violations to sue gun retailers or manufacturers for civil damages.

“Nearly every industry is held liable when their products case harm or injury. All except one — the gun industry,” Newsom said in a video Tuesday announcing that he had signed the bill on Monday.

With the new law, he said, “gun makers will finally be held to account for their role in this crisis.”

California’s law allows gun makers and dealers to also be sued for alleged violations of other laws, including false advertising, unfair competition or deceptive acts or practices.

“Hitting their bottom line may finally compel them to step up to reduce gun violence by preventing illegal sales and theft,” said the bill’s author, Democratic Assemblyman Phil Ting.

The law will also prohibit manufacturers and retailers from making, importing or selling guns or related products that are “abnormally dangerous and likely to create an unreasonable risk of harm.”

That could include kits for building untraceable “ ghost guns,” “ bump stocks ” that increase the rate of fire for semi-automatic weapons, or “ bullet button ” assault weapons that allow for rapid reloading.

Categories
Born again Cynic! California Some Red Hot Gospel there!

Just another Monday in La La Land

Categories
All About Guns Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends" California

California: Legislature Passes and Newsom Signs Anti-Gun Bills FRIDAY, JULY 1, 2022

California: Legislature Passes and Newsom Signs Anti-Gun Bills

The California Legislature starts their Summer recess today, but not before a busy week full of defiant action against the recent Supreme Court victory in the NRA case of NYSRPA v. BruenThe legislature passed several anti-gun bills out of policy committees and passed eight anti-gun bills onto the Governor’s desk, two of which he signed yesterday immediately after receiving them. With this swift action, the NRA is continuing to fight these proposals and looking at all available options including litigation. Contact Governor Newsom at (916) 445-2841 and urge him to veto AB 311, AB 1594, AB 1769, AB 2156, SB 915, and SB 1327!

Signed by the Governor

Assembly Bill 1621, introduced by Assembly Member Mike Gipson (D-65), expands what is considered a “precursor part” under existing law and requires serial numbers on those parts. Further, it expands the definition of “firearm” for purposes of criminal and regulatory penalties to include “precursor parts.” And finally, it prohibits the possession, transfer, sale, or advertising of milling machines that have the sole or primary purpose of manufacturing firearmsto anyone other than licensed firearm manufacturers or importers. . *AB 1621 was passed with an urgency clause meaning it went into effect immediately.

Assembly Bill 2571, introduced by Assembly Member Rebecca Bauer-Kahan (D-16), bans advertising or marketing firearms or ammunition in a way that is “attractive to minors,” replacing the language in current law banning specifically “advertis[ing] to minors.” This legislation is so broadly worded that it will be devastating to conservation, safety, and education efforts throughout the state. *AB 2571 was passed with an urgency clause meaning it went into effect immediately. ​

Passed by the Legislature and Will Soon Be Eligible for the Governor’s Consideration: 

Assembly Bill 311, introduced by Assembly Member Christopher Ward (D-78), prohibits the display or sale of any “precursor firearm parts” at gun shows on the Del Mar Fairgrounds of the 22nd District Agricultural Association.

Assembly Bill 1594, introduced by Assembly Member Phil Ting (D-19), creates a private right of action against firearm industry members for failure to implement “reasonable” controls. This intentionally vague term can subject the industry to crippling lawsuits regardless of whether there is any actual violation of law.

Assembly Bill 1769, introduced by Assembly Member Steve Bennett (D-37), prohibits officers, employees, operators, lessees, or licensees of the 31st District Agricultural Association from entering into any agreement to allow for the sale of any firearm, firearm parts, or ammunition on property or buildings that comprise the Ventura County Fair and Event Center or properties in Ventura County and the City of Ventura that are owned, leased, operated, or occupied by the District.

Assembly Bill 2156, introduced by Assembly Member Buffy Wicks (D-15), reduces the number of firearms a private citizen can manufacture in a year from 50 to no more than three. In addition, it prohibits private citizens from using 3D printing to make firearms, precursor parts, or magazines.

Senate Bill 915, introduced by Senator Dave Min (D-37), bans state officers or employees, operators, lessees, or licensees from entering into any agreement to allow for the sale of any firearm, firearm precursor parts, or ammunition on property that is owned, leased, occupied, or operated by the state.

Senate Bill 1327, introduced by Senator Robert Hertzberg (D-18), creates a private right of action that allows individuals to file civil suits against anyone who manufactures, distributes, transports, sells, or imports firearms banned in California, as well as precursor firearm parts. Current law already allows for remedies for illegal activities by firearm dealers and manufacturers.

Passed by the Assembly Public Safety Committee

Senate Bill 918, introduced by Senator Anthony Portantino (D-25), was amended to defy the recent Supreme Court ruling placing significant reforms on California’s existing conceal carry laws. Some of the provisions include:  significantly expanding gun-free zones, requiring signage for private businesses where you “can” carry, doubling training requirements, and maintaining the ability to do in-person interviews, psychiatric evaluations, and allowing “time place, and manner” restrictions on permits.  *SB 918 will be heard in the Assembly Appropriations Committee on August 3. 

Passed by the Senate Public Safety Committee

Assembly Bill 1227, introduced by Assembly Member Marc Levine (D-10), was gutted and amended to contain language from Assembly Bill 1223. It places an excise tax of 10% on the sales price of a handgun, and places an 11% excise tax on the sales price of all long guns, rifles, firearm precursor parts and ammunition. These taxes are to be collected from California retailers and placed in a newly created fund for appropriation by the state legislature. *AB 1227 will be heard in the Senate Appropriations Committee on August 1.

Assembly Bill 2870, introduced by Assembly Member Miguel Santiago (D-53), expands California’s gun violence restraining order to allow additional reporters, to now include roommates, dating partners, and additional family members, out to the 4th level of consanguinity and affinity (this could include out to the first cousin in-law or a great-great-grandparent). *AB 2870 has been referred to the Senate Appropriations Committee but has not been scheduled for a hearing at this time.

Passed by the Assembly Judiciary Committee

Senate Bill 505, introduced by Senator Nancy Skinner (D-9), makes a person who owns a firearm strictly civilly liable for each incident of property damage, bodily injury, or death resulting from the use of the firearm. Additionally, the legislation requires a firearm owner to obtain and continuously maintain insurance as well as keep evidence of this coverage with the firearm at all times. *SB 505 will be heard in the Assembly Appropriations Committee on August 3.

Please stay tuned to www.nraila.org and your email inbox for further updates.

Categories
All About Guns Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends" California

California Just Got Stricter Gun Laws by Sarah Arnold

California Just Got Stricter Gun Laws

Source: Carolyn Kaster/AP Photo

When it comes to gun violence, Democrat-run states love to blame the issue on the firearm itself, calling for strict gun control measures.

Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-CA) signed two gun control laws that prohibit the marketing of guns to minors and strengthen restrictions on so-called “ghost guns.”

Bill AB 2571 bans gun manufacturers from marketing guns in a way that “reasonably appears to be attractive to minors,” while bill AB 1621 strengthens requirements for the microstamping of unserialized firearms, or “ghost guns.”

In a video statement, Newsom berated conservatives and the Supreme Court for their stance on guns.

“From members of Supreme Court to right-wing Republicans all across this country, have you no common decency, respect, or even common understanding?” Newsom said.

While holding a gun similar to an AR-15 rifle that is apparently marketed for children, the Democratic governor tried to justify his strict laws by saying it shouldn’t be necessary for him to have to pass them since keeping firearms out of children’s hands is a “common understanding.”

“The kids should not have one of these,” Newsom said, adding, “This is an AR-15. This is a weapon of war, weapon of mass destruction, but you’re out there promoting and allowing marketing of these weapons of war to our kids.”

Newsom continued to call out the Supreme Court for “rolling back gun safety protections” while touting his state for having the strictest gun laws in the country.

Categories
Born again Cynic! California

California Gun Owners’ Data Breached After State Unveils Firearms Portal By Brandon Drey

Gun owners
welcomia via Getty Images

Gun owners with a Concealed Carry Weapon permit in California had their information — including names, addresses, and race — exposed on Monday after Attorney General Rob Bonta launched a 2022 Firearms Dashboard Portal.

Available through the state’s OpenJustice Data Platform — which has since gone offline in response to the data exposure — Bonta said in a statement on Monday that the firearms dashboard would “improve transparency and information sharing” for gun-related data, including public access to data on firearms in California, and information about CCW permits and Gun Violence Restraining Orders.

“We are investigating an exposure of individuals’ personal information connected to the DOJ Firearms Dashboard,” the California Department of Justice told The Reload. “Any unauthorized release of personal information is unacceptable.”

“We are working swiftly to address this situation and will provide additional information as soon as possible.”

President of the California Rifle & Pistol Association Chuck Michel told The Reload, “vindictive sore loser bureaucrats have endangered people’s lives and invited conflict by illegally releasing confidential private information.”

Michel said the association is working with several legislators and sheriffs to determine the extent of the damage caused by the doxing of law-abiding gun owners.

“Litigation is likely,” he said.

The Reload reported a database for Los Angeles County that showed the personal information of 244 judge permits, seven custodial officers, 63 people with a place of employment permit, and 420 reserved officers.

The report revealed the personal data of 2,891 people with standard concealed carry licenses in Los Angeles County.

The Fresno County Sheriff’s office confirmed that the data breach included names, ages, addresses, Criminal Identification Index numbers, and license types. Despite the state disabling access to the portal, there are concerns that bad actors have copied the information and circulated it around social media and other parts of the internet.

Twenty-four hours before the leak, Bonta said of the portal, “transparency is key to increasing public trust between law enforcement and the communities we serve.”

“As news of tragic mass shootings continue to dominate the news cycle, leaving many with feelings of fear and uncertainty, we must do everything we can to prevent gun violence,” he said. “One of my continued priorities is to better provide information needed to help advance efforts that strengthen California’s commonsense gun laws.”

He added the announcement “puts power and information into the hands of our communities by helping them better understand the role and potential dangers of firearms within our state.”

If anyone had their information compromised as a result of the data breach, the Fresno County Sheriff’s Office asks that you make an online report.

Categories
All About Guns Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends" California

NRA-ILA Asks Court to Stop the California DOJ From Releasing Gun Owners’ Personal Information After Massive Data Leak.

Earlier this week, California Attorney General Rob Bonta announced that he would be releasing firearms data via the California DOJ’s Firearms Dashboard Portal. That data contained gun owners’ names, dates of birth, gender, race, driver’s license numbers, addresses, and criminal history. Today, NRA-ILA asked a federal judge to stop the DOJ from violating gun owners’ privacy rights and releasing any more data.

NRA-ILA sued the California DOJ in January to stop it from releasing gun owners’ information to university professors for “research purposes.” Throughout this litigation, the Cal DOJ has maintained that it has “robust policies and procedures in place to ensure that personally identifying information is not disclosed to the public,” and that it had “instituted three steps to ensure that personal identifying information is not publicly disclosed.” And just this week Attorney General Bonta declared that the: “DOJ seeks to balance its duties to provide gun violence and firearms data to support research efforts while protecting the personal identifying information in the data the Department collects and maintains.” The court, understandably, relied on those repeated assurances and declined to issue a temporary restraining order blocking the Cal DOJ from releasing gun owners’ information.

But those promises turned out to be empty, and those safeguards turned out to be nonexistent. That is why NRA-ILA asked the court to reconsider its decision on the temporary restraining order. Whether the leak was the result of malice or extreme negligence, the Cal DOJ must be held accountable for its shortcomings. NRA-ILA will continue to prosecute this case until that happens.

The case is captioned Doe v. Bonta.