California is poised to vote in some of the most restrictive gun control laws in the nation when voters go to the polls in November.
The ballot initiative, Proposition 63, would ban magazines larger than 10 rounds, which critics say would lead to house-to-house confiscation by police statewide.
It also would:
- Require ammunition sales be made through licensed vendors.
- Require lost or stolen guns or ammo be reported to police.
- Require buyers pass a background check prior to purchasing ammunition.
The magazine ban is drawing the most opposition.
“Millions of legal magazines will need to be sold out-of-state, taken out-of-state, or seized by law enforcement,” according to the Coalition for Civil Liberties, which opposes Proposition 63.
Many legal firearms will only operate with “magazines that can hold more than 10 rounds, making them effectively illegal,” the coalition noted.
“This backdoor gun ban is not just on future sales, but forces you to surrender your existing private property to law enforcement,” it added.
The coalition asserted that Proposition 63, if passed, will lead to “house-to-house confiscation” of guns and magazines.
According to the text of the proposed law, anyone who is caught possessing an illegal magazine can be jailed for up to one year. Current owners of such magazines have three choices, according to the text: 1) remove it from the state, 2) sell it to a licensed dealer, or 3) surrender it to police “for destruction.”
Sheriffs from Butte, Shasta and Modoc counties told KHSL-TV that the proposal would turn law-abiding citizens into criminals.
“Proposition 63 is bad for gun owners and bad for California,” Shasta County Sheriff Tom Bosenko told the outlet.
The California State Sheriffs’ Association opposes Proposition 63.
“This measure would do little to prevent the criminal element from acquiring guns and ammunition via the black market or through theft,” a letter from the association reads. “Instead, it would place additional restrictions on law-abiding citizens who wish to purchase ammunition for sporting or hunting use, retain guns and magazines that are currently legal for them to possess, and pass historical or family heirloom guns down to their next generation.
The measure, the letter reads, “will create a new class of criminals out of those that already comply with common sense practices that now exist.”
What is your reaction to the proposed law? Share your thoughts in the section below: