Newsom

[John Kloehr]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And many more, the lawsuit printers are on it. I can smell the laser printer toner in the air all the way over here in Tennessee.

[Hardpan Curmudgeon SASS #8967]

Hm.  I'd heard that he did NOT sign it before the time limit expired... but that it becomes law anyway.

 

Link Here

 

Edit:   This is called a "ten-day rule" enactment, based on a provision in the Constitution.  If the ten day period passes and the legislative body is still in session, it's automatically enacted.  If the legislative body goes out of session (recesses) and the executive does not sign it within ten days, it does not become law - this is known as a "pocket veto."     

 

 

 

Edited October 11, 2025 by Hardpan Curmudgeon SASS #8967

[Subdeacon Joe]

Suit will be filed.

 

Judge will hold it unconstitutional. 

 

CADOJ will appeal to 9th.

 

3 Judge panel will uphold ruling. 

 

CADOJ will ask for en banc. 

 

En banc will overturn lower court.

 

Lather,  rinse repeat.

 

Until SCOTUS comes down HARD on places like California with a broad ruling that offers no wiggle room,  the quockerwodgers,  wethers, and capons in the Sacramento Reichstag will keep working to take away all our civil rights. 

 

[Pat Riot]

So, rather than take out the gangs that put Glock Switches in their Glocks he bans the guns from the public…?

 

I guess this means his personal security and all police will be giving up their Glocks as well…

 

The dic*tater can’t control crime so he punishes the people in his Totalitarian Democracy. 
 

So glad I left that (censored) state. 

[John Kloehr]

 

17 minutes ago, Hardpan Curmudgeon SASS #8967 said:

Hm.  I'd heard that he did NOT sign it before the time limit expired... but that it becomes law anyway.

 

Link Here

 

Yes, I heard that too and read the referenced thread. I thought the deadline to sign passed. But here is an official state list of signatures from today:

 

https://www.gov.ca.gov/2025/10/10/governor-newsom-signs-legislation-10-10-25/#:~:text=AB 1037 by Assemblymember Sade,Oakland) – Wards: probation.

 

The laws are in that list. So if he signed them too late, it does not make a difference, they still went into law. Speculation was he was not signing by the deadline due to future aspirations to higher office. Plausible deniability even though he did not veto them.

Edited October 11, 2025 by John Kloehr

[Hardpan Curmudgeon SASS #8967]

1 minute ago, John Kloehr said:

 

 

Yes, I heard that too and read the referenced thread. I thought the deadline to sign passed. But here is an official state list of signatures from today:

 

https://www.gov.ca.gov/2025/10/10/governor-newsom-signs-legislation-10-10-25/#:~:text=AB 1037 by Assemblymember Sade,Oakland) – Wards: probation.

 

The laws are in that list. So if he signed them too late, it does not make a difference, they still went into law. Speculation was he was not signing by the deadline due to future aspirations to higher office.

 

I reckon his ego made him do it.  

[Texas Lizard]

I have not heard that owners of Glocks will have to turn them in....I do not think there was anything about that in the bill...It will be interesting to see how this plays out....My local toy store did sell a lot of Glocks this passed week or two...And did get many phone calls looking such items....Saw 3 of them go while was looking at things..We might not be able to buy them but the bad guy will get theirs...

 

Texas Lizard

Edited October 11, 2025 by Texas Lizard

[John Kloehr]

13 minutes ago, Texas Lizard said:

I have not heard that owners of Glocks will have to turn them in....I do not think there was anything about that in the bill...It will be interesting to see how this plays out....My local toy store did sell a lot of Glocks this passed week or two...And did get many phone calls looking suck items....Saw 3 of them go while was looking at things..We might not be able to buy them but the bad guy will get theirs...

 

Texas Lizard

No turn-in or confiscation. There are no Gen 4 orGen 5 on the roster, so those can not be sold period. In theory there are none in the state (excluding maybe LE I'm  not digging that deep).

 

Does seem dealers can not sell them (as far as Gen 3) in California as used guns, this is not clear on a first read, First read also suggests private sale of a Gen 3 is still legal, but still needs to go through an FFL. IANAL, I read the law as an engineer. I prefer Red Roof Inn to Howard Johnsons.

 

And as to the raining elements, bad guys get any gun they can and also switches or whatever, no state or federal law withstanding.

[Doc Shapiro]

Par for the course, and a huge reason why we fled.  Newsom doesn't give a shit about lawful gun owners.  He wants to remove all the guns to increase control.  

[Crazy Gun Barney, SASS #2428]

I guess we better turn in our cars that can go faster than 55, and probably quit selling alcohol because people may get drunk, drive and kill somebody.   They better start selling steaks already cut into bite size chunks because next they will quit selling knives because somebody might use one to do something bad. 

[Blackwater 53393]

15 minutes ago, Crazy Gun Barney, SASS #2428 said:

I guess we better turn in our cars that can go faster than 55, and probably quit selling alcohol because people may get drunk, drive and kill somebody.   They better start selling steaks already cut into bite size chunks because next they will quit selling knives because somebody might use one to do something bad. 

Certainly a distinct possibility if Goobernor Gagging Nuisance has his way with things!!

 

How’s the pork situation out there??🙄

[Forty Rod SASS 3935]

Sic 'em, NRA.

 

Go for the jugular vein and no holds barred.

[Subdeacon Joe]

2 hours ago, Forty Rod SASS 3935 said:

Sic 'em, NRA.

 

Go for the jugular vein and no holds barred.

 

Sorry, but the NRA is useless in California.  About 20 years ago I asked a district rep/organizer (I don't remember how it's organized) here why the NRA doesn't make California a focus.  His answer was basically, "Why would we waste money in California? For what it costs to fight one bill here, we can fight something in North Dakota, Montana, and Nebraska all at the same time."

Yeah, little, meaningless things that have no chance of passing even without THE NRA!!!! stepping in.  As useful as if in WWII we had committed all our carriers to defending Easter Island from the Japanese.  The NRA lets CRPA, SAF, FPC do all the heavy lifting here, maybe files one short amicus, then crowing about how hard it fought, please send us money.  

[John Kloehr]

1 hour ago, Subdeacon Joe said:

 

Sorry, but the NRA is useless in California.  About 20 years ago I asked a district rep/organizer (I don't remember how it's organized) here why the NRA doesn't make California a focus.  His answer was basically, "Why would we waste money in California? For what it costs to fight one bill here, we can fight something in North Dakota, Montana, and Nebraska all at the same time."

Yeah, little, meaningless things that have no chance of passing even without THE NRA!!!! stepping in.  As useful as if in WWII we had committed all our carriers to defending Easter Island from the Japanese.  The NRA lets CRPA, SAF, FPC do all the heavy lifting here, maybe files one short amicus, then crowing about how hard it fought, please send us money.  

I hear that a lot (and from other states too), usually from otherwise good 2A organizations competing for the same dollars. The NRA is not always the lead plaintiff, sometimes it provides funding ( a lot of funding per the annual reports). This includes Bruen where the NRA provided significant funding.

 

Also amici briefs are important, amici can shore up claims with additional argument and present aspects which can not be covered in the often limited page count allowed for a complaint.

 

Then consider the multi-year lawfare against the NRA conducted by Letitia James in New York, a very long battle resolved only a year ago. I'm not saying La Pierre should not have paid for his own clothes or should not have traveled on private jets, but stuff like that is normally resolved with reimbursement, not shutting down an organization.

 

Another bit of "obfuscation" used is that it is the NRA-ILA which actually does the legal work is legally a separate organization. So when someone says the NRA does nothing for 2A lawsuits, they are factually correct. But only by spitting hairs. Full list of litigation is on the ILA site:

 

https://www.nraila.org/legal-legislation/current-litigation/

 

Many of the suits are at the Federal level, so they affect California but are not focused on any one state. For California, current and recent activities include:

 

Scotus Cert Petitions
Duncan v. Bonta — challenge to California's ban on and confiscation of magazines that hold over 10 rounds.

B&L Productions, Inc. v. Newsom — challenge to California's ban on gun shows held on state property.

 

Ninth Circuit

California
Duncan v. Bonta — challenge to ban on magazines with capacities over 10 rounds.

Rhode v. Bonta — challenge to restrictions—including background check requirement— on ammunition purchases.

SCI v. Bonta — challenge to AB 2571, which bans the promotion of firearm-related products that may be attractive to minors.

DOW v. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service; 
WildEarth Guardians v. U.S. DOI; 
NRDC v. U.S. DOI — consolidated actions supporting the removal of gray wolves from being classified as endangered under the Endangered Species Act.

 

 

Amicus Briefs
Fouts v. Bonta — challenge to California’s billy club ban.

Nguyen v. Bonta — challenge to California’s one-gun-per-month law.

Knife Rights, Inc. v. Bonta — challenge to California's switchblade ban.

 

STATE CASES

California
Jaymes v. Maduros — challenge to excise tax on firearm and ammunition sales.

 

Edited October 11, 2025 by John Kloehr

[WD Farren]

Remember... 71 million people voted for Harris.
No doubt the same (or more) will vote for Newsom as president in 2028.

Newsom can run on his fine record of financial management, fire control, taxation, crime, business friendly and homeless.
And still get 71 million (or more) votes.

Here in CA, Newsom is vigorously pushing his gerrymander Prop 50.
Apparently having 43 out of 52 seats is not enough.
Especially when 40% of the CA voters are GOP.

Edited October 11, 2025 by WD Farren

[Subdeacon Joe]

1 hour ago, John Kloehr said:

2 hours ago, Subdeacon Joe said:

 

Sorry, but the NRA is useless in California.  About 20 years ago I asked a district rep/organizer (I don't remember how it's organized) here why the NRA doesn't make California a focus.  His answer was basically, "Why would we waste money in California? For what it costs to fight one bill here, we can fight something in North Dakota, Montana, and Nebraska all at the same time."

Yeah, little, meaningless things that have no chance of passing even without THE NRA!!!! stepping in.  As useful as if in WWII we had committed all our carriers to defending Easter Island from the Japanese.  The NRA lets CRPA, SAF, FPC do all the heavy lifting here, maybe files one short amicus, then crowing about how hard it fought, please send us money.  

Expand  

I hear that a lot (and from other states too), usually from otherwise good 2A organizations competing for the same dollars. The NRA is not always the lead plaintiff, sometimes it provides funding ( a lot of funding per the annual reports). This includes Bruen where the NRA provided significant funding.

 

That you "hear it a lot" says something about how little the NRA does in California, even taking into account your not so subtle slap in the face and dismissal of "otherwise good 2A organizations." 

 

Possibly in the last decade the NRA has been in the game more in California, and maybe my view of it is tainted by what that guy told me 20 years ago,  but I'm not seeing it.  Or not beyond the ILA listing bills in our Legislature and telling us to contact our State Senator and Assemblyman. 

 

I guess,  from the way the NRA likes to brag like a 3rd string defensive tackle who is brought in on the last play of a game trying to make it sound as if he singlehandedly won the game, I expect to see it more in that front line almost every play.  Not just high profile cases,  but supplying highly experienced experts to testify on every bill for which there are public hearings. 

[Trailrider #896]

I know we fought a Civil War to preserve the Union, but is there anything in the Constitution prohibiting from  the whole Left(ist) coast from being kicked out?  Wonder how much it would cost to extend the border wall up to the Canadian border? 

Edited October 11, 2025 by Trailrider #896

[John Kloehr]

1 hour ago, Subdeacon Joe said:

 

That you "hear it a lot" says something about how little the NRA does in California, even taking into account your not so subtle slap in the face and dismissal of "otherwise good 2A organizations." 

 

Possibly in the last decade the NRA has been in the game more in California, and maybe my view of it is tainted by what that guy told me 20 years ago,  but I'm not seeing it.  Or not beyond the ILA listing bills in our Legislature and telling us to contact our State Senator and Assemblyman. 

 

I guess,  from the way the NRA likes to brag like a 3rd string defensive tackle who is brought in on the last play of a game trying to make it sound as if he singlehandedly won the game, I expect to see it more in that front line almost every play.  Not just high profile cases,  but supplying highly experienced experts to testify on every bill for which there are public hearings. 

Well, they kind of all do that. Those "otherwise good" certainly include GOA. It has also done a lot of NRA bashing. TFA is another NRA basher. And a bragger for seeming to take full credit for modest contributions, in some cases no more than communicating activities of other groups.

 

GOA is a good group and has actually accomplished some things. TFA? Barely seeing signs they have genuinely contributed to the effort but trying to cut them some slack for being new(ish) and small.

 

The NRA and GOA are national-level organizations, TFA is a state-level organization. On that thought, I think a close look at California might be helpful. Let's consider the CRPA. I do see it doing a lot. And even against the 9th, it can get a win or at least a helpful dissent when it loses.

 

CRPA is a non-profit. I note the current chairman is Chuck Michel. Michel is also the driving force behind Michel and Associates, the law firm which actually does the court work for many California cases.

 

https://michellawyers.com/attorney-profile/c-d-michel/

 

CRPA does not bash the NRA, and there is a very good reason. States (and some territories) have NRA associated local organizations, the CRPA is the California NRA organization. When the NRA seems to take some degree of credit for something the CRPA did, well, it is actually an NRA organization.

 

For those not in California, you can find your state-level organization on the NRA site:

 

https://stateassociations.nra.org/find-your-state-association/

 

For Tennessee, the associated organization is the TSSA, not the TFA I mentioned above.

 

Anyway, sometimes you need to lift the hood to see how the engine is put together.

 

[Forty Rod SASS 3935]

People, read what you are saying! 

 

We've already lost if we don't stop sniping at each other.

[John Kloehr]

1 hour ago, Forty Rod SASS 3935 said:

People, read what you are saying! 

 

We've already lost if we don't stop sniping at each other.

I don't see any name calling or personal attacks. I'm actually glad to see solid conversation. The NRA is a target and not perfect. I see things I don't 100% like, but it is the elephant in the room.

 

I had a long conversation about it with someone from the GOA. It was just a quick exchange at first, but that person asked if I would not mind talking a bit longer. We did and we both learned more about the two organizations. I am a member of both organizations and should probably join FPC and SAF.

[Subdeacon Joe]

46 minutes ago, John Kloehr said:

I don't see any name calling or personal attacks. I'm actually glad to see solid conversation. The NRA is a target and not perfect. I see things I don't 100% like, but it is the elephant in the room.

 

I had a long conversation about it with someone from the GOA. It was just a quick exchange at first, but that person asked if I would not mind talking a bit longer. We did and we both learned more about the two organizations. I am a member of both organizations and should probably join FPC and SAF.

 

Exactly.  

I don't see it as "sniping," but more like identifying factional differences and maybe working them out.

 

Br'er John pointed out, quite rightly,  that GOA tends to be somewhat critical of the NRA, mostly because they see the NRA as too willing to compromise,  while GOA tends to take The Great Stalin's Order No. 227 to heart, "Ни шагу назад!"

 

 

I'll freely admit that I'm more and more an absolutist. I think we've given up too much of the field over the last century. Every compromise,  every "meeting half way," cedes more of the political field to the other side. Met half way,  gave them half the field, went back to our goal line and let them stay on the 50.  Did it again,  now they have 3/4 of the field and we're still back on our goal line.   And so on. See also the 'Cake and Compromise' anology.

 

That stance has the danger of it being used to show the pro-civil rights side as unreasonable gun-nuts who want violence. 

 

As I mentioned earlier,  my view of the NRA is likely tainted by that 20 year old comment, and my probably erroneous view of how little they do in California. 

 

[Blackwater 53393]

I’m a lifetime member of NRA and a member of both GOA and SAF!  I’m actually seeing more cooperation amongst those three in particular!  
 

I usually see more effective litigation from SAF than the others. The Democrat congressman from the neighboring district complained that SAF was the biggest pain in his posterior and the most aggressive of them all!  
 

I’ve repeatedly called for them ALL to get into lockstep and present a unified front!  This, in conversation with NRA board members and representatives of several other organizations that are constantly asking for money!

[Blackwater 53393]

3 hours ago, Barrel Rider said:

The funny thing about Newscum is that he sees himself to be Potus in the future. I will love to see him fail.

 

Like I said earlier! He should run for…

 

 

 

 

 

 

the Chinese border!!

[John Kloehr]

On 10/11/2025 at 9:10 PM, Blackwater 53393 said:

... GOA and SAF!  I’m actually seeing more cooperation amongst those three in particular!  
 

I’ve repeatedly called for them ALL to get into lockstep and present a unified front!  This, in conversation with NRA board members and representatives of several other organizations that are constantly asking for money!

Shortened to this key message, we have this challenge to the "Glock ban":

 

https://assets.nationbuilder.com/firearmspolicycoalition/pages/15257/attachments/original/1760397758/1__2025-10-13_AB_1127_Compl_(TO_FILE)_(1).pdf?1760397758

 

"

DANIELLE JAYMES; PWGG, L.P.;

JOHN PHILLIPS;

NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA;

FIREARMS POLICY COALITION, INC.;

and SECOND AMENDMENT FOUNDATION,

 

Plaintiffs,

"

[John Kloehr]

Just learned CRPA will soon be filing suit against the California law requiring a background check to purchase a barrel, and will file an amicus brief in the "Glock ban" case. Look forward to reading well-reasoned arguments in both documents.