California Law Allowing Government to Seize Legal Guns Goes into Effect January 1st

December 30, 2015   |   Claire Bernish

Claire Bernish
December 30, 2015

(ANTIMEDIA) Sacramento, CA — Beginning January 1, gun regulations in California will give authorities the right to seize a person’s weapons for 21 days if a judge determines the potential for violence exists.

After a shooting rampage perpetrated by Elliot Rodger in May 2014, the bill was proposed as an “emergency restraining order” option for families concerned their loved ones may act out violent urges — if they persuade a judge that loved one’s possession of a firearm “poses an immediate and present danger of causing a personal injury to himself, herself, or another by having it in his or her custody or control.”

In other words, the “law gives us a vehicle to cause the person to surrender their weapons, to have a time out, if you will,” Los Angeles Police Department Assistant Chief Michael Moore told a local NPR affiliate.

You read that right — a government-imposed time out. Now go sit in the corner, and think about what you did.

“It’s a short duration and it allows for due process,” Moore continued. “It’s an opportunity for mental health professionals to provide an analysis of a person’s mental state.” Because, as everyone knows, mental health professionals — like police — are infallible.

Rodger was 22-years-old when he launched a series of attacks around Isla Vista near the campus of University of California, Santa Barbara that left six people dead and 14 injured before he turned one of his guns on himself. All the weapons he used — three handguns and two knives — had been legally purchased. Mere minutes before carrying out his plan, Rodger uploaded a video to YouTube and circulated a 107,000-word manifesto.

How this law answers that attack on Isla Vista — with the attacker offering nothing in the way of an advance red flag about the carnage that was about to unfold — is anyone’s guess.

Even UC president, Janet Napolitano, said at the time, “This is almost the kind of event that’s impossible to prevent and almost impossible to predict.”

Seeming to ignore this major factor completely, San Diego State University professor and attorney, Dr. Wendy Patrick, told a local CBS affiliate, “[I]t’s the family members, it’s the people closest to the perpetrator who are in the best position to notice red flags.”

Second Amendment and constitutional advocates have been understandably upset by the coming law, saying further rules in a state already rife with restrictive gun laws will only serve to punish law-abiding gun owners.

“We don’t need another law to solve this problem,” asserted Sam Paredes, executive director of Gun Owners of California, to the Associated Press, as reported by the Washington Times. “We think this just misses the mark and may create a situation where law-abiding gun owners are put in jeopardy.”

What could possibly go wrong?

This article (California Law Allowing Government to Seize Legal Guns Goes into Effect January 1st) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Claire Bernish and Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific. Image credit: Augustas Didzgalvis. If you spot a typo, email

Author: Claire Bernish

Claire Bernish joined Anti-Media as an independent journalist in May of 2015. Her topics of interest include thwarting war propaganda through education, the refugee crisis & related issues, 1st Amendment concerns, ending police brutality, and general government & corporate accountability. Born in North Carolina, she now lives in Cincinnati, Ohio.

Share This Post On


  1. Guilt and innocence are legal terms regarding crimes. Those are not involved here. This is not criminal law. This is administrative code. What dont you get about u.s. inc., a wholly owned subsidiary? Courts are equity not common lae. Maybe ClaireBernish needs to wrote a refresher course in law of he sea and other repressed facts on the ground.

    Post a Reply
  2. Setting them up to be targeted by a gov't proven to be both inefficient and corrupt.

    Post a Reply

    Post a Reply
  4. Just an avenue to MORE gun control legislation. Do you think they will use this legally?? Fuck no. This will be jsut like the RICO laws have been used to take American's posessions through Civil Asset Seizure. It's all bullshit and if you cop ass lickers think it's anything else you are a fool.

    Post a Reply
  5. You obviously know nothing about the past or present. Look up the RICO laws and see how they were perverted into Civil Asset Seizure/Forfeiture. Just another liberal boot licking moron.

    Post a Reply
  6. Just 21 days huh? Yeah right, good luck ever getting them back. Check out "The untold story, gun confiscation after Katrina" on YouTube.

    Post a Reply
  7. U.S. genocide will never stop, but at least all you guys are armed to the teeth come your revolution to take your real freedom back,not what your governors properganda tells you it is. 🙂

    Post a Reply

    Post a Reply
  9. Google gives you a great opportunity to earn 98652$ at your home.If you are some intelligent you make many more Dollars.I am also earning many more, my relatives wondered to see how i settle my Life in few days thank GOD to you for this…You can also make cash i never tell alie you should check this I am sure you shocked to see this amazing offer…I'm Loving it!!!! ? ? ? ?>>>>>>>>.


    Post a Reply
  10. A lot of people whining about this. It's a temporary hold on firearms people, take a breath. No different than states who mandate holding the firearms of a person accused of domestic violence (before seeing the judge). Given the stats on gun violence associated with domestic abuse, it's only prudent.

    Post a Reply
  11. This is more than just gun control. This opens a pandora's box. Do you think they will stop at taking your firearms? what happens when they decide you are unfit? what else will they attempt to deprive you of?

    Post a Reply
  12. I am ­­­­­­­­­making ­­­­­­­­­a ­­­­­­­­­good ­­­­­­­­­salary ­­­­­­­­­from ­­­­­­­­­home ­­­­­­­­­$1200­­­­­­­­­-­­­­­­­­­$2500/week , ­­­­­­­­­which ­­­­­­­­­is ­­­­­­­­­amazing, ­­­­­­­­­under ­­­­­­­­­a year ago I ­­­­­­­­­was ­­­­­­­­­jobless ­­­­­­­­­in ­­­­­­­­­a ­­­­­­­­­horrible ­­­­­­­­­economy. ­­­­­­­­­I thank God ­­­­­­­­­every ­­­­­­­­­day ­­­­­­­­­I ­­­­­­­­­was ­­­­­­­­­blessed ­­­­­­­­­with ­­­­­­­­­these ­­­­­­­­­instructions and ­­­­­­­­­now it's ­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­my ­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­duty ­­­­­­­­­to ­­­­­­­­­pay ­­­­­­­­­it ­­­­­­­­­forward ­­­­­­­­­and share ­­­­­­­­­it ­­­­­­­­­with ­­­­­­­­­Everyone, ­­­­­­­­­Here is ­­­­­­­­­I ­­­­­­­­­started,,,,,,­­­­­­­­­


    Post a Reply
  13. Exactly! As an example, Look up the proposed healthy eating disorder called Orthorexia Nervosa. The psychiatric religion has too much power to take away our rights.

    Post a Reply
  14. Go drink some more of that kool-aid Megg. You're just one more of the sheeple killing our Republic.

    Post a Reply
  15. This is more control by the powers that be, 'cause they can use that option anytime anywhere. So Megg, get into that good old Ripple Wine made by DuPont, and just forget about it. Prudent?, is that a toothpaste brand?

    Post a Reply

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *