Shotgun Forum banner

Youth shooting in California takes a hit.

5.3K views 33 replies 22 participants last post by  Huntinandhotrods  
#1 ·
California recently passed ab2571 and was signed by the Governor, this has put all youth shooting programs in the state out of business. The California Rifle and Pistol Association is leading the fight against the new law which had emergency clause attached. With the present climate to "do something" about mass shootings it may be a difficult task to overturn this legistation.
Both the bill ab2571 and CRPA can be read online.
Don
 
#2 ·
They just postponed/moved the Junior World Skeet Championships that was supposed to be held at LA Clays, not sure who thought they would have good participation there anyway. "The Junior World Skeet Championships scheduled for later this month at LA Clays has been canceled due to inadequate pre-registration numbers. The Junior World has been rescheduled to take place concurrently with the Mini World on September 30 - October 2 at the National Shooting Complex in San Antonio."
 
#25 ·
I was in the Trap and Skeet and Hunting club at UCLA in the late 1970's and actually borrowed a full choke barrel for my Remington 1100 that they kept in the athletic equipment room. Someone would have a brain aneurism if they found that out nowadays. Glad I'm out of that state. Gavin Newsom is the salesman of the decade for U-Haul. Last year I checked the renal rates for a particular moving truck between Dallas and Sacramento. It changes according to the market but at that time it was $1300 from Dallas to Sacramento, $7000 from Sacramento to Dallas. (Now it's only $1400/$4600)
 
#4 ·
They will be running to Congress, ASAP, to try to make this a Federal Law before November. This impacts hunter education, 4-H, and Boy Scouts in CA.

I posted this in "Not in Kali"

Does this mean all movies, games, and TV shows containing guns or similar weapons, with ratings under adult only, will be illegal? Retroactively? Sounds like CA gov and advisors didn't think this through because that would shut down Hollywood and part of Silicon Valley (if the rampant crime doesn't do it first).

JB
JB
 
This post has been deleted
#5 ·
We don't advertise firearms or "firearm related products" at all in our youth shooting program, much less in a way designed to appeal to minors. Also not sure we are in the "firearms industry." Doubt we are.

Sounds like an inane and useless law, but I don't see how it would affect what we are doing, if we were in CA.
 
#7 ·
Coach,
The way it reads, if you had something like an announcement, sign-up, or flyer for "the 4-H Youth Skeet shoot on Sat", you would be technically in violation. And by conducting, or providing the area and equipment to conduct this "shoot", you would be in violation.

JB
 
#24 ·
While I certainly understand the concern, I do not see how any prosecutor would have much chance of convicting us due to the definition of "advertising" in the law:

(6) “Marketing or advertising” means, in exchange for monetary
compensation
, to make a communication to one or more individuals, or to arrange for the dissemination to the public of a communication, about a product or service the primary purpose of which is to encourage recipients of the communication to purchase or use the product or service.

But then who wants to spend a year fighing a spurious criminal charge in court!

The fundamental problem here is not what the bill said, it is that a majority of the CA legislature, being virulently anti-gun, couldn't care less if all youth shooting activities were outlawed, even organized trap, skeet, etc. They are terrified of an armed population because they saw what happened on January 6 and today in Sri Lanka and they envision millions of fed-up citizens storming their elite chambers with guns.

The amusing aspect, of course, is the dolts who claim to support the 2nd Amendment, youth shooting, etc., but then vote for Dimocrats.
 
#9 · (Edited)
Would somebody please post a link to the law?

All I can find online is why they passed the law.

I didn’t believe this at first, but it’s true.

A company has developed and marketing to little kids, a two pound .22 AR type rifle.

This is their logo.
Image
II liked the Joe Camel ads, but times change and the do gooders are a sour bunch of old Nannie’s about such matters.

Image
 
#10 ·
Many of the comments here are as big an over-reach as the comments on guns by the left. As long as both sides play an "all or nothing game", sportsmen &sportswomen will be caught in the middle. Pretty whackie in CA, but about as bad here in NJ. Would be nice to see reasonable folks on both sides of the issue reach some reasonable accommodations.
 
#32 ·
Thanks Randy, for posting that link.

The evil the legislature wants to actress is marketing military styled firearms to children.

It’s going to be difficult for the makers of Wee 1 Jr 15 to convince a court they aren’t doing just that.

Using children’s skulls with one of their eyes blanked out as a logo is something the legislature likely could forbid.

Image
I think the statue is over broad because it has a chilling effect on youth shogun sports programs and youth rifle clubs, which the legislature does not have to fund, but I cannot see they would have the power to outlaw.


This is why extremism is poisoning our society.

The extremes of far right and far left collide over issues like this, and moderation and common sense fly away.
 
#14 ·
Here is a link to wording:


Sad for the good folks in Cali, seems it disregards the 1st as well as treads on the 2nd.
So NSSA?NSCA will have to reconsider sending magazine with pics of any Jr. or sub Jr to cali, not to mention not be allowed to advertise competitions that have Jr. and Sub-Jr. classes.
This is a real mess..........
 
#20 ·
Here is a link to wording:


So NSSA?NSCA will have to reconsider sending magazine with pics of any Jr. or sub Jr to cali, not to mention not be allowed to advertise competitions that have Jr. and Sub-Jr. classes.
This is a real mess..........
They already have. I got an email from NSSA-NSCA yesterday stating they would no longer send their publications to CA, effective immediately.
 
#28 ·
Newsom put this in place in direct response to the company which SuperXone linked to above.

The problem CA is trying to solve are those companies that are trying to market guns to kids using the same marketing techniques that are used to sell toys. I don't blame the state for making the effort, even as I think the law as written is a huge overreach.

In typical California fashion, the law is so broad that someone could fart in front of a minor, and if that fart sounded like the word "Benelli", that person could face charges. I doubt the order will hold up, and will eventually struck down by SCOTUS as an infringement. I suspect the legal reasoning will be that the state is trying to override a parent's decision making.

In that time frame before it's struck down the smartest thing ad vehicles can do is place an "adults only" banner on the cover of their mags sold in CA, or in the case of websites put a "you must be 18 or older" page on the front.

Yeah, that means Field and Stream is going to be next some pretty skeevy magazines in California. But at least we'll still be able to find the mag on the shelves.
 
#30 ·
Coach,
I understand your point, but the underlying verbiage tangentially touches upon conducting and providing resources. I have degrees in Chemistry and Biology, but I took a few business courses including Business Law. Think of a Venn Diagram and the over-lapping of criminal and civil law. If you are not convicted for evidence "beyond the shadow of Doubt" for a criminal charge, there lurks a lawyer with a civil case where the difference is "the prevalence or predominance of evidence" and the degree of culpability. They cast the net as widely as possible and see what they catch. Think of liability, Tort, and non-absolute determination (majority). Terms such as "attractive nuisance", "contributory negligence", and the idea of relative degree of participation and liability come into play.

The idea of the county 4-H club, a private, or a local, non-private skeet/trap/sporting clays range versus a national group with deep pockets.

Once there is a law, no matter how strange and it stays on the books, there is a practical precedence for execution of action in either the criminal or civil sphere even if you eventually win it can bankrupt you or cause you to have to challenge injunctions individually. Can they sustain the fight to the State Supreme Court or Federal.

The black and white print is one thing, but the gray area gets you.

JB