bullet buttons

Uncategorized

California Sued By Coalition Of Gun Rights Groups Over AWB Registration Disasters

July 12, 2018 by 2 Comments

The Second Amendment Foundation, the Calguns Foundation, the Firearms Policy Coalition, and the Firearms Policy Foundation have come together to sue the California Department of Justice, Attorney General Xavier Becerra, and the head of the California Bureau of Firearms. Their complaint, filed in Shasta County Superior Court, is a constitutional challenge to the bullet button registration system and a writ of mandamus requiring the state to allow people to register as required under state law. That last bit might sound confusing but people had until July 1st to register their bullet buttons. The only problem is that many people were not able to do so because the system crashed. It’s a damned if you do and damned if you don’t situation.

From their joint release:

The lawsuit argues that DOJ’s “bullet-button assault weapon” registration system was defective, often “crashing” completely, and the various failures prevented many gun owners from complying with the laws—potentially turning people into felons overnight.

SACRAMENTO, CA (July 11, 2018) — Today, attorneys for three gun owners and four civil rights organizations filed a new lawsuit and petition for writ of mandate that claims California Attorney General Xavier Becerra and his Department of Justice (DOJ) violated their civil rights protected under the state and federal constitutions. A copy of the complaint can be viewed or downloaded at https://www.firearmspolicy.org/sharp.

The lawsuit, captioned Harry Sharp, et al. v. California Attorney General Xavier Becerra, et al., is supported by The Calguns Foundation (CGF), Second Amendment Foundation (SAF), Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC), and Firearms Policy Foundation (FPF). Named as defendants are California Attorney General Xavier Becerra, Acting Chief of the DOJ Bureau of Firearms, Brent E. Orick, and the California Department of Justice itself. The plaintiffs are represented in the case by attorneys George M. Lee and Douglas Applegate, as well as Raymond M. DiGuiseppe, a former California deputy attorney general and prosecutor.

“Many people, including our clients, did everything they could to comply with the law and avoid criminal liability,” commented Lee. “They used updated web browsers, hardware, different devices, and even did internet speed tests to make sure it wasn’t a problem on their end. The DOJ’s crashed system is a reflection of their cascading failures to build a system and allow people to register their guns before July 1 if that’s what they wanted to do.”

The complaint says the plaintiffs “seek an un-extraordinary result, compelled by the basic tenets of due process: That they simply be allowed to register their eligible firearms and comply with the law, and that the Attorney General, the DOJ, and their officers and agents similarly comply with the law by allowing such registrations and ensuring they are properly and timely processed through a functioning online database as they have been required by statute to do.”

Under California’s voluminous gun control laws, someone merely transporting an unregistered “assault weapon” to the shooting range – even if one believes it was legal and registered under other DOJ systems, like DROS – “is guilty of a felony” and possibly subject to a prison sentence of “four, six, or eight years.” Other crimes can be added on to that, including common separate charges like possession and manufacturing.

“Attorney General Xavier Becerra seems to care about everything but the constitution, the rule of law, and law-abiding California gun owners,” said FPC President Brandon Combs. “If Becerra spent as much time doing his job as he does talking about his pet crusades against the federal government, hundreds of thousands of Californians would not be in legal jeopardy right now.”

“We’re suing because California DOJ’s Firearms Application Reporting System (CFARS) broke down during the deadline week for people to register their firearms in accordance with new state laws,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “For a whole week the system was largely inaccessible, so people who wanted to comply with the law simply couldn’t and now they face becoming criminals because they couldn’t do what the law requires.”

“Predictably the state of California wants to take guns away from the law abiding. In this instance they couldn’t even build a working system to respect gun owners’ rights,” explained CGF Chairman Gene Hoffman. “We simply want to allow those who want to comply with the law to have more time with a working registration system.”

“It’s like a bad version of ‘Catch-22’,” Gottlieb observed. “The government required registration by the deadline, but the online registration failed and people couldn’t register. They’re required to obey the law, but the system broke down, making it impossible to obey the law. Now these people face the possibility of being prosecuted. We simply cannot abide that kind of incompetence.”

“Once again, the DOJ and Attorney General Becerra unlawfully and unconstitutionally moved the goal posts on peaceful, law-abiding gun owners,” observed FPF Vice President Jonathan Jensen. “Their failures should not result in people going to prison and losing their property.”

Combs noted that the case is not an endorsement of firearm registration, which carries its own risks, as many news reports have shown.

“Gun owners had a right to decide how they would approach these serious legal issues,” explained Combs. “Attorney General Becerra and his DOJ denied gun owners the opportunity to exercise their rights and make an informed choice, forcing them into the sights of fascist, hyper-aggressive special agents who kick in doors and put gun owners in jail. That’s completely unacceptable and totally deplorable.”

Californians who tried to register their firearms as “assault weapons” before July 1 but were unable to should contact the Legal Action Hotline immediately at https://www.firearmspolicy.org/hotline or by telephone at 855-252-4510.

Uncategorized

While I Was Away – No. 2

July 24, 2017 by 1 Comment

Continuing on with the things I missed while at the beach are these two announcement from the Firearms Policy Coalition regarding bullet buttons and proposed ammo regulations in California. The FPC is a multi-state coalition of gun rights groups headquartered in California. They have been keeping a close eye on the regulations being developed for the enforcement of recently enacted firearms laws and propositions.

When you are headquartered in a state where the progressives have a monopoly on virtually everything, you have to fight back anyway you can. Showing that they have learned Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals and especially Rule No. 4, the Firearms Policy Coalition is making the California Department of Justice live up to all those progressive laws dealing with public notice and freedom of information.

On bullet buttons:

SACRAMENTO, CA (July 21, 2017) — Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) has obtained a copy of the newest version of the California Department of Justice (DOJ) “assault weapons” regulations. FPC has published the regulations at BulletButtonBan.com, a Web site it established in 2016 for tracking the new California assault weapon laws and regulations.

“FPC’s Regulatory Watch program has once again proved its value in ensuring that the State of California does not advance its gun control agenda behind closed doors,” said FPC President Brandon Combs. “Without this program, countless gun-owning Californians would be in the dark about their future.”

Last December, the DOJ submitted its first attempt at “assault weapons” regulations under the California Office of Administrative Law’s (OAL) “File & Print” process, which means that the DOJ believed the regulations were not subject to public notice or comment. However, thousands of FPC members and Second Amendment supporters sent letters opposing the secret process through FPC’s grassroots tools and, without further comment, the DOJ withdrew the regulations near the end of OAL review period.

In May (a quarter of a year later), the DOJ re-submitted regulations under the same “File & Print” process. It took numerous legal demands to DOJ and OAL to finally get OAL to provide FPC with a copy of the proposed regulations. Following DOJ’s numerous attempts at hiding firearm regulations from the public, Craig DeLuz, FPC’s Legislative Advocate, and FPC filed a legal action against DOJ (DeLuz, et al. v California Department of Justice) in order to ensure that in the future DOJ complies with the California Constitution and Public Records Act.

In the end, these proposed regulations were summarily rejected by OAL a little more than a month later. And now DOJ has submitted almost the same exact regulations, appearing only to have changed the implementation date from January 1, 2018 to July 1, 2018. This new date was established by AB 103, a recently approved budget trailer bill.

“At first glance, the DOJ’s latest package of ‘assault weapons’ regulations are as awful as their first two attempts,” noted DeLuz. “It appears that DOJ keeps submitting the same proposed regulations, over and over again, expecting different results. Isn’t that the definition of insanity?”

The second announcement has to do with California’s proposed ammunition regulations and the hearings seeking feedback.

SACRAMENTO, CA (July 20, 2017) — Adding to the growing list of its legal woes, the California Department of Justice (DOJ) was forced to issue a new regulatory notice and postpone a hearing regarding their recently-submitted regulations concerning new ammunition vendors and licenses. Many new ammunition laws were passed last year in Gavin Newsom’s so-called “Safety for All Act” (Proposition 63) and in Senate President pro Tempore Kevin de León’s Senate Bill 1235 (SB 1235).

As part of its California regulatory watch program, which holds the State accountable for the improper implementation of various gun control laws, Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) recently discovered the new DOJ ammunition sales regulations. That new regulation was officially published in the State’s Friday, July 14 Notice Register, but wasn’t clearly accessible to the public until the morning of Monday, July 17.

“In order for citizens and interested groups to be given an opportunity to advocate for their rights and policy preferences, the DOJ must follow the law,” said Craig DeLuz, a lobbyist and spokesperson for the Firearms Policy Coalition. “We are here to make sure they do.”

On July 17, FPC delivered a letter to DOJ advising them that they had not sent any notification about this proposed rulemaking using the DOJ’s e-mail based notification system it established and solicited participation in for that express purpose. The FPC letter also noted that none of the regulation documents that were discussed in the DOJ’s notice could be found on the Attorney General’s Web page listed in the Notice Register. FPC concluded that the public did not receive proper notice and demanded that DOJ remedy the defects.

Just two days later, on July 19, DOJ e-mailed their entire regulatory notice list — which they had initially failed to do — and said that the hearing for public comment, which was originally scheduled to take place August 28, had been pushed back to September 12 — allowing more time for the public and advocacy organizations like FPC to analyze them and weigh in. Additionally, DOJ updated the public notice to reflect a different Web page that contained a working link to the proposed new regulations and forms.

“When law-abiding citizens and small businesses risk fines and jail time for not following the law, the least the DOJ can do is follow the law themselves,” commented DeLuz. “While their latest move is a step in the right direction, they still have a long way to go. We’ll be keeping an eye on them.”

At www.DOJregwatch.com and its companion page, www.bulletbuttonban.com, FPC tracks DOJ firearm-related rulemakings and provides the public with links to the documents and updates. FPC’s goal is to ensure that the regulations proposed are legal, available to the public, and follow all public notice and comment requirements in the California Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and applicable laws.

So far, FPC has so far been successful in repeatedly thwarting DOJ’s attempts to create law by executive fiat under the guise of the regulatory process. Previously, DOJ was forced to withdraw its proposed “large capacity magazine” and “Bullet Button Assault Weapon” regulations. More recently, the Office of Administrative Law rejected DOJ’s second attempt at issuing “Bullet Button Assault Weapon” regulations.

Uncategorized

One Way To Fight Dead Of Night Gun Regulations

July 3, 2017 by

The California Department of Justice submitted a series of regulations relating to “assault weapon bullet button” laws to the Office of Administrative Law. They wanted these regulations to go into effect with no notice and no public comment. When Craig DeLuz of the Firearms Policy Coalition got wind of this he went to the DOJ’s office and asked to inspect these regulations. While this seems reasonable to most people, he was denied.

As a result of this denial, DeLuz, the Firearms Policy Coalition, and the CalGuns Foundation filed suit in California state court on Friday alleging a violation of both the California state constitution and the Public Records Act. Alinsky’s 4th rule for radicals says to make the opposition live up to its own book of rules and FOIA/Public Records Act laws are (or used to be) a darling of progressives.

From the FPC on the lawsuit:

SACRAMENTO, CA (June 30, 2017) — Today, Sacramento resident Craig DeLuz, Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC), and The Calguns Foundation (CGF) have announced a new legal action intended to ensure that the California Department of Justice (DOJ) cannot hide its proposed regulations from the public. The action was filed after DeLuz and two civil rights advocacy organizations sought access to DOJ regulations on so-called “assault weapon” firearms so that they could review them and inform the public, but were denied.

The petitioners are represented by Paul Nicholas Boylan, an attorney based in Davis specializing in records access and government transparency issues.

In May, the Department of Justice submitted to the Office of Administrative Law (OAL) a set of regulations relating to the “Bullet Button Assault Weapons” laws that were passed and signed into law in 2016. Notably, the DOJ had submitted the regulations under the OAL’s “file & print” process, which means that the DOJ wanted the regulations to be put into law without any public notice or comment as would usually be required under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).

When that action was discovered, DeLuz went to the DOJ’s office and asked to inspect them so that he could let California gun owners know what they contained and pass information back to the groups’ legal counsel for review. But the Department turned him away at the door, claiming that the documents were “draft regulations” and “not available for public inspection” — effectively, keeping the regulations secret from 39 million Californians even though they could have become law.

“My clients recognize that the work the Department of Justice performs directly affects the rights of millions of people,” Boylan said. “The people of California have a constitutional right to examine how and why public agencies make decisions that impact other fundamental rights, and the DOJ is no exception.”

“If a record relates to the public’s business, then the public agency that holds the record must be provided to anyone who wants to see it. That’s the law, and the DOJ must follow it,” Boylan concluded.

“When the Department of Justice denied us access to their submitted regulations and told me that they were not available for public inspection, I was outraged and insulted,” said Craig DeLuz, FPC’s California lobbyist and a spokesperson for the organizations. “Those who claim to enforce the law should be expected to follow it.”

“The California Constitution and Public Records Act make it clear that people have a right to access and inspect information concerning the conduct of the people’s business,” said Brandon Combs, the president of FPC and executive director of CGF. “We know that the Department will have more firearm and ammunition regulations coming out over the coming months, and we will not allow them to use bad faith tactics to deny the people information about these important issues.”

To help inform law-abiding gun owners about the status of the “assault weapons” laws and regulations, Firearms Policy Coalition has established a Web site at BulletButtonBan.com where it posts news and information about the issue.

Uncategorized

So What If They Outlawed The Bullet Button

July 3, 2016 by 5 Comments

The gun prohibitionists in California thought they were sticking it to gun owners when they banned the “bullet button”. The two bills signed on Friday by Gov. Jerry Brown (D-CA) which banned the “bullet button”, AB 1135 and SB 880, have very similar language. The laws said that to be exempt from consideration as an “assault weapon” the firearm must have a fixed magazine.

(b)  For purposes of this section, “fixed magazine” means an ammunition
feeding device contained in, or permanently attached to, a firearm in such
a manner that the device cannot be removed without disassembly of the
firearm action.

Darin Prince, the inventor of the original Bullet Button, responded with something that will drive the gun prohibitionists nuts because it fits within the letter of the law yet allows you to replace a magazine very quickly. It may not be as quick as what I can do in a free state but it seems every bit as quick as a “bullet button”.

Uncategorized

Quote Of The Day

September 27, 2012 by 2 Comments

California Senator Leland Yee’s SB249 has officially died for this session of the California legislature. The finger pointing has begun between Senator Yee and Attorney General Kamala Harris. The so-called investigative journalists at KCBS who did the original story that let Senator Yee think he could ride the issue to fame and glory have more on it here.

The quote of the day comes from Senator Yee bemoaning the fact that people let their voice be heard:

State Senator Leland Yee, who sponsored the bill, said the campaign
became ugly fast. “We got emails, we got phone calls. We even had
billboards along 101,” he said.

Dude, that’s the way it is supposed to happen in America. Citizens can and should make their voices heard. I imagine that is one of the reason’s Sen. Yee’s family (including him) emigrated in 1951or ’52 to America from Red China.

As to the billboards, props to the gun rights activists in California!

Uncategorized

A Politician Worthy Of Parody

July 17, 2012 by 2 Comments

California Democrat State Sen. Leland Yee introduced a bill, SB 249, that would have outlawed the “bullet button”. This is the device that converts a detachable magazine to a fixed magazine so that a semi-automatic firearm remains in compliance with California’s assault weapons (sic) ban. Sen. Yee has since amended his bill to only prohibit conversion kits such as the “Mag Magnet”.

Yee was prompted to introduce the bill after seeing a breathless report on the evil bullet button by a San Francisco TV station. California gun groups such as the CalGuns Foundation are fighting back. They have set up a website, StopSB249.org, as well as starting an ad campaign to defeat the bill.

One of the more amusing push-backs against Sen. Yee and SB 249 by CalGuns is this parody mash-up seen below. They’ve taken a CBS 5 report produced last week and added their own special touch to it.

Sometimes ridicule is the best way to deal with pompous politicians such as Sen. Yee.

Uncategorized

State Senator Leland Yee – The General Gage Of California

May 21, 2012 by 3 Comments

A few weeks ago, CBS 5 in San Francisco had a breathless report about a “loophole” in California gun laws that allowed people to have “assault weapons”. The so-called loophole that was just discovered by the intrepid reporters is something called a bullet button which has been around for five years or so. A bullet button allows the use of a removable magazine on an AR-15. However, one must use a tool or the tip of your bullet to remove that magazine. Essentially, it is device that allows fixed magazines to be removed for either loading or clearing a jam.

As sure as the sun sets in the West, you just knew that some politician was going to jump on this imagined bandwagon and introduce a law to outlaw bullet buttons. That politician is State Senator Leland Yee, Ph.D. who represents parts of San Francisco and San Mateo Counties.

Today, Yee introduced his bill to outlaw bullet buttons. He will be gutting the contents of SB 249 and replacing them with his anti-bullet button language.

Leland Yee – California’s General Gage

From his press release:

“There is absolutely no reason why these military style weapons need to have such easily changeable magazines,” said Yee. “While most gun owners are law abiding, I am deeply concerned with these assault weapons getting into the wrong hands, resulting in mass casualties of civilians or law enforcement officers.”

Magazines, or the storage areas that allow for repeat firing, that can be removed by a normal push button in combination with features such as a pistol grip and telescoping stock are banned in California. The law essentially requires magazines to be fixed, or removed or replaced with the use of a tool, in order to slow down the process of reloading.

To get around the law, gun makers have created a new mechanism, or “tool,” that allows the magazine to be easily removed by the tip of a bullet or in some cases by just putting a small magnet over the “bullet button,” basically recreating a normal push button and allowing magazines to be changed within seconds.

“These conversions are circumventing the spirit of California’s assault weapon statute,” said Yee. “Absent this bill, California’s assault weapon ban is significantly weakened. For the safety of the general public, we must close this loophole.”

Fortunately, the people of California have groups like CalGuns and its president, Gene Hoffman, fighting for them. I just loved the historical lesson Gene gave the reporter from CBS 5 and Senator Yee.  Having seen them in action, it would be good for them to take it to heart.

Yee seems to be the type of politician that thrives on attention from special interest groups such as the Brady Campaign and the Violence Policy Center. In his recent effort to be elected Mayor of San Francisco, he touted how he had landed virtually “every major endorsement in the race for mayor.” Yee finished in 5th place.

As a final aside, I find it amusing that Senator Yee insists on putting Ph.D. after his name on his legislative website. While some may find legislators childish, Yee’s doctorate in child psychology has nothing to do with his job as a State Senator. I am reminded of something my late wife Rosanne said about her own Ph.D. – earned at a much more prestigious institution and in a more rigorous field – when asked why she didn’t put it after her name in general usage. She said, and I quote, “that and 50 cents will buy you a cup of coffee.” I think that puts it into perspective.