AB 711, by Assemblyman Anthony Rendon, D-Lakewood, would make California the first state in the nation to prohibit the use of all lead ammunition for hunting.  According to Sam Paredes with Gun Owners of California, extensive research has shown that traditional lead ammunition does not pose a health hazard for hunters. And a recent study found that, despite 99 percent hunter compliance, a ban on using lead ammunition in certain areas of the state under AB 821 of 2008 failed to reduce lead poisoning in condors.

AB 180, by Assemblyman Rob Bonta, D-Oakland, would repeal state firearms preemption in Oakland by allowing the city to enact ordinances more restrictive than state laws on the registering and licensing of firearms. AB 180 would allow the city of Oakland to create anti-gun policies much more strict than the rest of the state. Criminals still could get guns in other California cities, or in Nevada.

AB 231, by Assemblyman Phil Ting, D-San Francisco, would expand the law pertaining to the storage of firearms.  This bill would make it a crime if a child gets access to an unlocked firearm. According to Gun Owners of California, AB 231 is a misguided proposal that imposes unprecedented liability on legal gun owners.

Senate anti-gun bills

SB 475, by Sen. Mark Leno, D-San Francisco, would allow San Francisco officials to ban gun shows in the Cow Palace at the Fairgrounds, one of the last remaining legal gun venues in the city.

SB 374, by Sen. President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento, would ban the sale of all semiautomatic centerfire rifles with a detachable magazine, even with bullet buttons attached. And it redefines these firearms as “assault weapons.”  This legislation would ban most common hunting rifles, including the Marlin Camp Carbines (.45acp and 9mm), Remington M81 “Woodmaster,”  Winchester M1905, BAR MK II, BAR Short Trac, Ruger Mini 14, Ruger Ranch Rifle, M1 Carbine.  SB 374 would also require registration of currently owned detachable magazine rifles.

SB 396, by Sen. Loni Hancock, D-Berkeley, is one of the most repressive gun control bills. The bill would retroactively confiscate guns lawfully purchased and owned. SB 396 would ban the possession of all standard capacity magazines over 10 rounds, which generally means any detachable ammunition feeding device with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds of ammunition.

However, a 2001 study from the Jerry Lee Center of Criminology, University of Pennsylvania, found “no evidence of reductions in multiple-victim gun homicides or multiple-gunshot wound victimizations” as a result of the federal ban on standard capacity magazines.

SB 567, by Sen. Hannah-Beth Jackson, D-Santa Barbara, would redefine the meaning of a shotgun. SB 567  would remove from the Penal Code the requirement that a shotgun be fired from the shoulder, change the definition to include rifled bores, and make any weapon for which shotshell-type ammunition exists a “shotgun.”

SB 567 would also ban the sale of shotguns that have a revolving cylinder and requires registration of these currently owned shotguns.

SB 683, by Sen. Marty Block, D-Los Angeles, expands California’s handgun safety certificate requirement to apply to all firearms, and would prohibit anyone from purchasing or transferring any firearm without a firearm safety certificate.

SB 755, by Sen. Lois Wolk, D-Davis, would expand the list of persons prohibited from owning a firearm.

The Assembly Appropriations Committee recently sent four anti-gun bills to the suspense file, but those can be heard at any time.

Bullets make guns deadly

One of the bills on the suspense file is Assemblywoman Nancy Skinner’s AB 48, which would ban the sale of magazine parts kits that can hold more than 10 cartridges, and require mandatory reporting of law-abiding citizens who purchase more than 3,000 rounds of ammunition within a five-day period.

AB 48 requires the reporting of ammunition sales, requires the licensing of ammunition dealers, and establishes other controls on ammunition sales similar to current controls on firearms sales.

And AB 48 makes it illegal for gun owners to purchase parts that allow them to convert their guns into assault-style weapons that can fire more than 10 rounds of bullets without reloading.

Skinner, D-Berkeley, says it’s easier to buy bullets than to buy alcohol, cigarettes or certain cold medicines. “Sales of some cold medicines are reported to the Department of Justice but not ammunition sales,” Skinner said at a hearing in April. “We expect to show ID to buy alcohol or tobacco, but there is no such requirement for bullets.”

But Skinner is putting the target on lawful gun owners, who purchase ammunition and gun kits legally from gun stores. Criminals don’t shop for legal gun merchandise at gun stores.

Mounting evidence

If history is right, more gun control laws always means more crime and government control. American cities with the strictest gun ownership laws, such as Chicago, also have the highest crime and murder rates.

Interestingly, according to safety expert Steve Curtis, “criminals are generally in favor of more stringent gun controls because it makes their criminal activities safer.”

“Rather than following the progressive model of gun control, where law-abiding citizens are disarmed and only criminals possess firearms that worked so well in Nazi Germany, Soviet Russia, Australia and Britain, Americans should be looking at the immense success of “universal” gun ownership in places like Switzerland or Kennesaw, GA,” Curtis said. In Kennesaw, all citizens are required to own at least one firearm and keep ammunition, resulting in the lowest crime rate of any city its size in America. ”

Crime statistics show the downward trend is positive, as word of the “armed city” spreads.

By Katy Grimes

A wealthy Sacramento couple has offered to make one of the largest private donations in Sacramento history to create a natural history museum for the city. Naturally, an animal rights activist and city officials are freaking out.

Paul and Renee Snider want to donate their extensive personal collection of mounted polar bears, lions, rhinos, dik-diks, and other animals, some of which are rare, and build a nearly 180,000 square foot museum to house them. The museum would also be the new home of the California Auto Museum, which desperately needs an updated building.

But it appears the Sniders are being thwarted by the Sacramento Planning Commission, along with an animal rights activist who finds the project distasteful, despite the decades of charity work the Sniders have done for the Sacramento area.

And that’s the problem. Radical activists and the government officials who listen to them would rather kill a privately funded project than let thousands of others enjoy it.

The animal rights activist and Planning Commissioner

At a planning commission meeting last week, animal rights activists got the ear of Planning Commissioner Kim Mack, and challenged whether the city of Sacramento should approve the museum with the Sniders’ game animals in the same building as classic cars.

The Sniders have asked the city for permission to buy the land for $1.25 million, and will pay to build the new museum building.

“Some members of the commission confined their comments to discussions about the design of the new museum, while others opined on the necessity of reaching out to the community regarding the content of the new building,” the Sacramento Bee reported. “Mack addressed the issue more directly. ‘I think that bringing stuffed endangered species into the mix is dangerous to the reputation of our community,’ she said.”

Mack, a politically active Democrat, has close ties to Mayor Kevin Johnson, and helped run his first campaign for Sacramento mayor. Mack also managed a grassroots support effort in the region for the first Obama presidential campaign.

Mack has also been involved with Johnson’s Sacramentans for Accountable Government effort to put a Strong Mayor Initiative on the ballot, essentially giving Johnson more power.

When Mack was a City Council candidate, she took heat because emails in support of the Strong Mayor Initiative were sent to people on an email list that originated from an Obama campaign list. Mack came under strong criticism for providing the Obama campaign email list to the Sacramentans for Accountable Government group.

And then, after losing in the city council primary, Mack was appointed to the Sacramento Planning Commission by Johnson.

It pays to have friends in high places, regardless of credentials.

The animal rights activist behind the effort to kill the museum is Jennifer Fearing, a well-known Humane Society radical, and California senior state director for the organization.

“Destroying wild animals for the thrill of the kill, for trophies, and for bragging rights is anything but good for the world,” the letter to the planning commission from Fearing said, as reported by the Bee. “We share Renee Snider’s awe of the ‘beauty of wildlife,’ but feel that awe is best shown through shooting them through lenses, not gun barrels.”

“The two-page letter also says the city would be selling valuable riverfront property too cheap, and suggests the attractions at the museum would be unlikely to draw many visitors,” the Bee said.

“A hybrid auto/dead animal museum seems unlikely to generate enough foot traffic over time to be sustainable. We also question the rationale for the city selling this property for $1.25 million — which seems an exceptionally low price for such valuable property,” Fearing said.

Fearing and the Humane Society are behind many of the anti-gun, anti-hunting bills in the California Legislature. One of their bills, AB711, would have unnecessarily banned lead ammunition for all hunting in California, but was killed in the committee process. Fearing and her cohorts are responsible for the recent ban in California on bear hunting with dogs, hunting using trapping, and the name change of the Department of Fish and Game to the Department of Fish and “Wildlife,” which most people questioned.

The Sniders

Several years ago, Paul and Renee Snider had offered to build a smaller history museum on the campus of California State University Sacramento, but were forced to give up that idea when members of the CSUS faculty became unhinged at the idea, and heavily protested the offer.

However, and quite ironically, it was CSUS officials who had previously facilitated the permission from the government of Tanzania needed for the Sniders to hunt exotic animals in that country.

Oh what a tangled web we weave. When first we practice to deceive.

Paul and Renee Snider are well-known as Sacramento’s first couple in charitable giving. There isn’t a charity in town unfamiliar with their selfless kindness and generosity. Renee Snider has been on the Board of Directors for decades of the River Oak Center for Children, where I first met her. The Sniders have donated millions of dollars to River Oak Center, helping to provide group homes, education facilities and care facilities for children needing behavioral health and mental health services.

I’ve been to the Sniders’ home and have seen the amazing museum wing with the animals on display. I sat on a local charitable board with Mrs. Snider. They are very generous and good people, but are being maligned by people who have no idea who they are, or of the many charities to which they give their considerable money and time.

The auto museum

The California Auto Museum is worth a visit. It has fantastic collections of cars, but could use an updated, climate-controlled building. The last time I visited, I saw Gov. Jerry Brown’s old 1974 Plymouth Satellite, from his first term as Governor of California in 1975, and took the nearby picture of it. These days, Brown has plenty of Capitol police escorts to drive him around.

Despite the kindness and generosity with which the gift of the museum is intended, because some froth at the mouth at hunting and hunters, the enjoyment so many others could be killed. A history museum and a new auto museum would be wonderful for Sacramento, and could be a place of learning as well.

By Katy Grimes

SACRAMENTO — There was no shortage of drama yesterday in a Capitol hearing about California’s gun laws. A show-and-tell, demonstration by the California Department of Justice, of several high-capacity rifles held the rapt attention of lawmakers.

A short documentary was shown of the survivors of the 1989 Cleveland Elementary school killings in Stockton, during which five children were murdered by a deranged shooter.

The prevailing theme for state Democrats during the three-hour hearing was that there are bad  guns and good guns, and the bad guns need to be outlawed.

They did not discuss that home robberies have increased in many cities in California. The typical home invasion consists of three to four perpetrators, armed with semiautomatic pistols or semiautomatic rifles, who force their way through the door of the home. Police report that the perpetrators do not care at all about gun laws, and are willing to kill. And since a felony murder charge already carries a life sentence or the death penalty, the gun crime is a freebie in sentencing.

Sen. Joel Anderson, R-San Diego, told me about a meeting he recently had with another lawmaker about gun bans. “What’s a good gun?” he asked. “The one which a single mother uses against an intruder to save her children.”

In reply, the other lawmaker told Anderson, “We just want to ban the bad guns.”

Opening statements set the bias

Nearly every lawmaker present at the Joint Committee on Public Safety made an opening statement which drew a line in the sand on their position. “Perhaps after the recent shootings, we’ve reached the tipping point,” said Sen. Loni Hancock, D-Berkeley, the committee’s co-chairwoman.

Assemblyman Tom Ammiano, D-San Francisco, said certain laws may need to be tweaked, and asked everyone “to respect those with divergent views.”

“I am looking forward to engagement with regard to ammunition,” said Sen. Kevin de Leon, D-Los Angeles. De Leon has proposed regulating gun ammunition.

Freshman Assemblywoman Melissa Melendez, R-Lake Elsinore, said the Newtown tragedy and the previous shooting in an Aurora, Colo. movie theater has reignited a national debate about how to prevent such senseless crimes. “While this is a highly emotional and political issue, we shouldn’t rush into passing measures that may sound or feel good, but do nothing to save lives,” Melendez said.

Melendez also reminded the committee that even the Brady Campaign To Prevent Gun Violence says California has the toughest gun laws in the country. “California’s laws already match U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s proposed law, and much of what President Obama wants.”

Interestingly, all of the Democratic lawmakers acknowledged during the hearing that California already has the toughest gun control laws in the nation, leaving many to wonder what the problem is.

What is the problem?

It quickly became apparent during the hearing that many legislators pushing for more gun control laws were trying to legislate a problem that does not exist. Or if there is a problem, it is that law enforcement is not following up on criminals who have guns.

Assemblywoman Nancy Skinner, D-Berkeley, referred to Interstate 80 and several other state highways as “leakage” to other states. According to Skinner, Californians drive to nearby states to purchase guns, and then bring them back to California illegally.

The Department of Justice issues an annual report every year on firearms, and includes statistics about crimes committed in California with guns. “In the past 11 years, fewer than 60 crimes have been committed in California with assault rifles,” Sam Paredes with Gun Owners of California told me in an interview after the hearing. “Some years, zero crimes were committed with assault rifles.”

“Of the more than 170,000 legally registered assault rifles in California, not one has ever been involved in the commission of a crime.”

Paredes explained to the committee that much of what they think they know and have been told about guns is not correct. “It is already illegal for anyone to buy a handgun in another state and come back to California,” Paredes said. “Everyone must comply with the laws and procedures of this state.”

Several legislators said the National Rifle Association is trying to recruit members by attracting children. Paredes reminded lawmakers that the Boy Scouts of America has been teaching boys about guns for decades.

As for assault rifles, “The AR 15 and AK 47 are the single most popular guns in America,” Paredes said. “They are used for home defense, recreation, target shooting as well as personal defense. There are 40 million guns owned in California, and 400 million in the U.S. Homeland Security just bought 2,000 AR 15 guns for personal defense.”

No follow up on convicted criminals

While every lawmaker on the committee agreed that all efforts should be made to get and keep guns out of the hands of criminals, Sen. Rod Wright, D-Inglewood, asked some of the best questions of the hearing. Wright grilled Stephen Linley, Bureau of Firearms chief, about why his agency and state law enforcement do not follow up on criminals attempting to purchase guns and falsify the applications.

Linley admitted that California already has laws in place to deal with situations like this, and said they do not follow up in these cases.

Linley also told Wright the guns used in the commission of the majority of crimes in the state are handguns.

“The fact is that the person is the problem, not the gun,” Sen. Steve Knight, R-Antelope Valley, told me. “It is people committing these acts, not the guns.”

Knight said that, of all of the crimes committed in California, not one was committed by a person with a concealed carry permit.

California stiffened its criminal laws in the 1980’s, and made a point of not only identifying criminals, but puting them in prison when they were caught breaking the law. Knight said that, in order to bring down the violent crime rate, when criminals are caught using a weapon during the commission of a crime, they need to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law instead of getting plea deals from district attorneys.

Knight added, “Laws that punish law abiding citizens are not the answer to reducing crime in the United States.”

By Katy Grimes

An interesting tidbit came out of Thursday’s big announcement by Sen. Dianne Feinstein about her newest gun ban legislation. The bill would exempt “weapons used by government officials.”

Feinstein officially proposed banning 157 different makes and models of “military-style” assault rifles, pistols, shotguns and semi-automatic weapons, and also proposes to outlaw firearms with fixed ammunition clips that hold more than 10 rounds. And she wants “military-style” looking guns banned. Those are scary.

“Mrs. Feinstein’s measure would exempt more than 2,200 types of hunting and sporting rifles; guns manually operated by bolt, pump, lever or slide action; and weapons used by government officials, law enforcement and retired law enforcement personnel,” the Washington Times reports.

The Weekly Standard has this story.

Notably, Feinstein’s bill is an expanded version of her 1994 gun ban, because many anti-gun activists believed that the 1994 bill was full of holes.

Feinstein’s new gun ban would cover many more firearm models than the 1994 ban – 157 guns, to be exact.

The Daily Caller captured the list in a screen shot showing the specific firearm models that would be prohibited under the new ban:

“Feinstein staged a dramatic press conference Thursday on Capitol Hill with 10 weapons at her side and unveiled legislation instituting a government ban on more than 150 types of firearms, including rifles, pistols and shotguns,” Alex Papas with the Daily Caller reported.

The bill is co-sponsored by California Sen. Barbara Boxer and 13 other Democrats.

By Katy Grimes

Despite a recent report by the  Federal Bureau of Investigation which found that violent crime decreased in 2011, California Sen. Dianne Feinstein released a summary of her legislation to ban assault weapons.

Yet Feinstein said her goal is to introduce a bill to stop the sale, transfer, importation and manufacturing of military-style assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition feeding devises. “Military style” merely means scary looking guns.

Gun sales up, injuries down

The FBI’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System, which records each time someone buys a gun, showed that background checks hit a record high of 16.5 million in 2011. Gun sales have been steadily on the rise.

A recent report from the California Attorney General found that the more guns that have been sold in California, the fewer gun deaths and injuries there have been.  According to figures compiled by department officials, gun dealers sold nearly 600,000 guns last year, almost double the 350,000 sold in 2002.

And gun-related injuries and deaths have gone down.

According to hospital records collected by the California Department of Public Health, the number of California hospitalizations due to gun injuries fell by nearly 4,000 a year to approximately 2,900, a drop of about 25 percent, the Sacramento Bee reported.

The attorney general’s office reported that the number of deaths from firearms fell from 3,200 a year to about 2,800, an 11 percent decline, according to California health department figures.

“Most of the drop in firearm-related injuries and deaths can be explained by a well-documented, nationwide drop in violent crime,” the Bee reported.

Despite this data, Feinstein still plans to introduce stricter gun ownership legislation.

Here is the Summary from Feinstein’s website. Read it carefully, and notice the much broader definition of “assault weapons”:

Summary of 2013 Feinstein Assault Weapons Legislation

Bans the sale, transfer, importation, or manufacturing of:

• 120 specifically-named firearms
• Certain other semiautomatic rifles, handguns, and shotguns that can accept a detachable magazine and have one military characteristic
• Semiautomatic rifles and handguns with a fixed magazine that can accept more than 10 rounds

Strengthens the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban and various state bans by:

• Moving from a 2-characteristic test to a 1-characteristic test
• Eliminating the easy-to-remove bayonet mounts and flash suppressors from the characteristics test
• Banning firearms with “thumbhole stocks” and “bullet buttons” to address attempts to “work around” prior bans

Bans large-capacity ammunition feeding devices capable of accepting more than 10 rounds.

Protects legitimate hunters and the rights of existing gun owners by:

• Grandfathering weapons legally possessed on the date of enactment
• Exempting over 900 specifically-named weapons used for hunting or sporting purposes
• Exempting antique, manually-operated, and permanently disabled weapons

Requires that grandfathered weapons be registered under the National Firearms Act, to include:

• Background check of owner and any transferee
• Type and serial number of the firearm
• Positive identification, including photograph and fingerprint
• Certification from local law enforcement of identity and that possession would not violate State or local law
• Dedicated funding for ATF to implement registration