.

Portantino's Rifle Ban Passes State Senate Committee

AB 1527 would make it illegal to carry unloaded "long guns" such as rifles.

From Assembly Member Anthony Portantino's office.

Assembly Member Anthony Portantino’s public safety measure to expand on last year’s ban on openly carried handguns has passed the state Senate Public Safety Committee on a vote of 4 to 2.

AB 1527 would outlaw the “open carry” of unloaded long guns such as rifles or shotguns.

at the urging of law enforcement as a follow up to last year’s successful AB 144, which banned openly carrying an unloaded handgun in public places.

“Last year, we tried to craft a narrow bill to close a loophole in the hopes that gun enthusiasts would support ending this dangerous practice,” explained Portantino. “Unfortunately, the “open carry” folks reacted by carrying rifles and other long guns, alarming the public and creating a potentially dangerous situation. As law enforcement officials tell us, it not only creates a tense situation, but wastes time and money when police have to roll out and respond to these unnecessary calls.”

AB 1527 builds on the law authored by Portantino last year and contains a similar list of exemptions to enable safe transportation, lawful hunting, and use by law enforcement officials. The measure would authorize similar penalties – a misdemeanor punishable by up to one year in county jail and a fine of up to $1000 – for individuals who openly carry unloaded long guns in public.

AB 1527 has the support of California Police Chiefs Association, Peace Officers Research Association of California, California Chapters of the Brady Campaign and Legal Community Against Violence.

 

mamawati June 27, 2012 at 03:46 AM
Hey wait til these clown ban your weapons entirely. Then you can say "what happened?" How long before somone actually reads the Second Amendment and THINKS about the implications fo these laws....Note, no one carrying a long run or a rifle in public or an unloaded handgun killed anyone or hurt anyone. This is your elected officials using whatever excuse they can come up with to disarm you.
Natalie Ragus (Editor) June 27, 2012 at 01:27 PM
Ok, but WHY would anyone need a rifle in public? We're not living in post-apocalyptic times. We don't need to shoot zombies or hungry people trying to kill us to steal our meager food/water supply. This bill is just common sense.
D Settle June 27, 2012 at 02:07 PM
It is unnecessary! Rifles in rifle racks in a pickup truck, why is that creating a "tense situation" call outs of law enforcement? Just another step in disarming the public...since we cannot be trusted to act responsibly, only Assemblypeople, Senators and Congressmen etc. are responsible, yea right!
DR. Truth June 27, 2012 at 04:09 PM
Hello little girl, I'll assume your opinion is based on your need to feel safe and secure. Taking away the right of an otherwise law-abiding citizen to openly carry their rifle in public is the constitutional equivalent to taping your mouth shut. The right to keep and BEAR arms is second only to the freedom of speech. So why don't we pass a law banning public speech in this liberal-facist state? Just because you don't like an article of the constitution, doesn't mean you can or should try and take away or limit those guaranteed rights with such facist legislation in an otherwise broken and corrupt liberal legislature. Just wait for the Supreme Court to strike down the simular liberal-facist legislation known as OBAMACARE or the Affordable Healthcare Act.
Apache June 27, 2012 at 06:16 PM
Where did my comment go?
Sandra June 27, 2012 at 10:34 PM
"DR Truth", as soon as "little girl" came out of your fingers, the rest of what you had to say vanished into the void of meaninglessness. Really.
Sandra June 27, 2012 at 10:35 PM
It's a start! I love California. :o)
Natalie Ragus (Editor) June 27, 2012 at 11:23 PM
Apache, I don't know. I haven't deleted any comments on this thread. And DR. Truth, we might have differing views, but my voice deserves to be heard just as much as yours. Not to mention, I'm a fully-grown woman, not a girl.
DR. Truth June 28, 2012 at 04:37 PM
Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
TKD June 28, 2012 at 06:47 PM
Dr. Truth, Where I agree with EVERYTHING you say except, the HELLO LITTLE GIRL part, when you say that no one listens, therefore your efforts are lost. We are in fact giving up our right to act as responsible people because we live in a world of irresponsible people, this is in fact a very slippery slope. Once something becomes the law of the land the Supreme Court uses those uncontested "bills" "Laws", and "rules" to vet (sp) it's future decisions. Just a note the Second amendment says we have a right to defend hearth and home, so this bill doesn't truly challenge the Constitution, it just chips away at it.
DR. Truth June 28, 2012 at 09:29 PM
The "Little Girl" label does somewhat apply when there is a generational difference between opinions. Her sinister advocacy to this issue, thinly vieled as "common sense" is condiscending at best from my point of view. In fact, this is nothing less that sugar-coated oppressionism in the name of public safety. I'm not suprised at her position however, as she is undoubtedly a devoted deciple of liberalism, having completed a Masters Degree in Online Journalism which is synonomous with liberal acedemic indoctrination.
Natalie Ragus (Editor) June 28, 2012 at 11:30 PM
DR. Truth. I'm well aware of violence and peoples' need to protect themselves. My alma mater is in one of Los Angeles' most dangerous neighborhoods. For safety reasons, I scheduled my classes for morning or early afternoon. When I had to take a class at night or that let out after dark, I NEVER, EVER walked to or from my car alone. I also carried a discreet can of pepper spray in my purse at all times and made sure I was hyper-aware of my surroundings.
Natalie Ragus (Editor) June 28, 2012 at 11:41 PM
Also, I'm a lot more conservative than you think. You'd be surprised at my views on certain issues. I just believe people carrying around rifles on the street will make the streets much less safe.
DR. Truth June 29, 2012 at 02:38 AM
When a belief such as yours becomes legislative action on the cusp of becoming law, the end result is oppression and denial of Constitutional Rights guaranteed by the Second Ammendment. Feel-good legislation such as this proposed bill once passed translates as a pavingstone on the road to tyranny. The law enforcement supporters and special interests you cited in this article believe that only police should have firearms and will continue to support any and all gun-control measures...Would-be Tyrants all! May the below quote answer your question "WHY would anyone need a rifle in public?" "Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the people's liberty teeth keystone... the rifle and the pistol are equally indispensable... more than 99% of them by their silence indicate that they are in safe and sane hands. The very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference. When firearms go, all goes, we need them every hour." -George Washington (Address to 1st session of Congress) I hope
DR. Truth June 29, 2012 at 03:33 AM
I hope his words clearly and completely satisfy the need to keep, display and bear arms, wherever and whenever citizens feel it neccessary. Here's another relevant quote: "I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations." -James Madison I can only imagine he would disapprove of AB 1527
DR. Truth June 30, 2012 at 01:46 PM
Assembly Member Anthony Portantino's personal tryannical vendetta against citizen's practicing their Second Ammendment rights in a non-threatening manner, clearly identifies him as an userper of the U.S. Constitution in deed and ideology. A petty little man who sees those who would "open carry" a weapon as a personal attack on his prevoius legislation (AB 144) and now wants to punish anyone who would try and bend his tyrannical will and anti-gun advocacy. He is undoubtedly a Liberal Facist!
Mary Wright June 30, 2012 at 09:05 PM
You need to understand that there are a bunch of bills in line with ONE purpose- to disarm lawful possession of firearms by law abidiing citizens of the state. Truly, at the end of the Dems almost impenetrable run in the legislature, we will be disarmed except for the hoodlums and gang bangers. Be afraid of well intentioned politicos. They are not on your side or that of the Constitution.
Mary Wright June 30, 2012 at 09:06 PM
Watch out. They will ban pepper spray if they can.
Loretta McKaughan July 01, 2012 at 01:36 AM
@Natalie....let's just hope and pray that you never find yourself in a position where an unloaded gun/rifle is the only thing that stands between you and an assault of any kind. If YOU don't choose to carry a weapon, either loaded or unloaded, then that's just fine but don't stand up against that right for others. I, for one, am SICK TO DEATH of people trying to police the world for others. You live your life and I'll live mine. It's getting to the point where people can't even make decisions any more for fear of being racist or politically incorrect. I say....STAY THE HELL OUT OF MY BUSINESS AND I'LL STAY OUT OF YOURS.

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »