California: Concealed Carry Weapon Holder Application Scam: False Text Messages

H/T AmmoLand.

These scammers will try any way they can to get their hands on our information.

California – -( California Rifle & Pistol Association is receiving disturbing reports that California gun owners are receiving text messages on their personal phones claiming that today is the “last day” to get a CCW from their respective County Sheriff, along with a link to an application form. Be warned, this is a fraudulent claim!

At CRPA we have just been advised by numerous Sheriff’s offices across the state that there is a nationwide text message scam that has been targeting citizens with CCW permits.


Those targeted by this scam have received text messages alerting them that their permit needs to be renewed or changed and offers a link to provide the user’s information.

These text messages are being sent randomly from phone numbers to people across the entire nation.


It appears this latest attack on California gun owners is nothing more than a ploy to obtain their personal information. To what end is unclear. If you receive this message, California Rifle & Pistol Association advises you to delete it off your phone and block the number from which it was sent.

To stay informed regarding any updates on this issue and more, be sure you are subscribed to California Rifle & Pistol Association email alerts or by visiting the California Rifle & Pistol Association website at

Why I’m Leaving California

H/T Town Hall.

Anyone with the IQ higher than a house plant should be leaving Commiefornia.

My family and my company are leaving California.


It’s heartbreaking.

My parents moved to California four decades ago. I grew up here. For 33 of the 36 years I’ve spent on this planet, I’ve lived here. I was born at St. Joseph’s in Burbank; I attended elementary school at Edison Elementary; I went to college at UCLA. I co-founded a major media company here, with 75 employees in Los Angeles. I met my wife here; all three of my kids are native Californians.

This is the most beautiful state in the country. The climate is incredible. The scenery is amazing. The people are generally warm, and there’s an enormous amount to do.

And we’re leaving.

We’re leaving because all the benefits of California have steadily eroded — and then suddenly collapsed. Meanwhile, all the costs of California have steadily increased — and then suddenly skyrocketed. It can be difficult to spot the incremental encroachment of a terrible disease, but once the final ravages set in, it becomes obvious that the illness is fatal. So, too, with California, where bad governance has turned a would-be paradise into a burgeoning dystopia.

When my family moved to North Hollywood, I was 11. We lived in a safe, clean suburb. Yes, Los Angeles had serious crime and homelessness problems, but those were problems relegated to pockets of the city — problems that, with good governance, we thought could eventually be healed. Instead, the government allowed those problems to metastasize. As of 2011, Los Angeles County counted less than 40,000 homeless; as of 2020, that number had skyrocketed to 66,000. Suburban areas have become the sites of homeless encampments. Nearly every city underpass hosts a tent city; the city, in its kindness, has put out port-a-potties to reduce the possibility of COVID-19 spread.

Police are forbidden in most cases from either moving transients or even moving their garbage. Nearly every public space in Los Angeles has become a repository for open waste, needles and trash. The most beautiful areas of Los Angeles, from Santa Monica beach to my suburb, have become wrecks. My children have personally witnessed drug use, public urination and public nudity. Looters were allowed free reign in the middle of the city during the Black Lives Matter riots; Rodeo Drive was closed at 1 p.m., and citizens were curfewed at 6 p.m.

To combat these trends, local and state governments have gamed the statistics, reclassifying offenses and letting prisoners go free. Meanwhile, the police have become targets for public ire. In July, the city of Los Angeles slashed police funding, cutting the force to its lowest levels in over a decade.

At the same time, taxes have risen. California’s top marginal income tax rate is now 13.3%; legislators want to raise it to 16.8%. California is also home to a 7.25% sales tax, a 50-cent gas tax and a bevy of other taxes that drain the wallet and burden business. California has the worst regulatory climate in America, according to CEO Magazine’s survey of 650 CEOs. The public-sector unions essentially make public policy, running up the debt while providing fewer and fewer actual services. California’s public education system is a massive failure, and even its once-great colleges are now burdened by the stupidities of political correctness, including an unwillingness to use standardized testing.

And still, the state legislature is dominated by Democrats. California is not on a trajectory toward recovery; it is on a trajectory toward oblivion. Taxpayers are moving out — now including my family and my company. In 2019, before the pandemic and the widespread rioting and looting, outmigration jumped 38%, rising for the seventh straight year. That number will increase again this year.

I want my kids to grow up safe. I want them to grow up in a community with a future, with more freedom and safety than I grew up with. California makes that impossible. So, goodbye, Golden State. Thanks for the memories.

California: Anti-Gun and Anti-Hunting Bills Continue to Move!

H/T AmmoLand.

Californians make your voices heard.


U.S.A. -( week, the Legislature passed and the Governor signed SB 118, the budget trailer bill that includes an expansion of California’s “Assault Weapons Control Act” and expedites the effective date on firearm parts checks from 2024 to 2022. Additionally, various policy committees continued to push anti-gun and anti-hunting legislation through the process. Below, are bills scheduled to be considered next week. Use the “Take Action” buttons below to contact members of the committees to oppose these measures. 

Tuesday August 11:

Assembly Appropriations Committee 1:00 p.m.

SB 914, sponsored by Senator Anthony Portantino (D-25), limits when those under 21 can purchase a long gun by requiring their hunting license to be currently valid. This means an individual who has purchased a license for an upcoming season will not satisfy the requirements of the bill. Additionally, SB 914 narrows the exemptions of loans of long-guns to minors and raises the fees the California Department of Justice can charge for eligibility checks on certain ammunition purchases and precursor parts.  SB 914 passed the Assembly Public Safety Committee on August 6.

SB 1175, sponsored by Senator Henry Stern (D-27), prohibits the possession of certain African species of wildlife.  The true goal of the bill is to ensure that individuals are not allowed to bring home lawful hunting trophies—even with the approval of the U.S. Government. SB 1175 passed the Assembly Water, Parks and Wildlife Committee on August 4.   ​​

Click this button to oppose SB 914 and SB 1175. 


Wednesday August 12:

Senate Natural Resources Committee 9:00 a.m.

AB 3030, sponsored by Ash Kalra (D-27), seeks to preserve 30% of California’s land areas, waters within the state and oceans off the coast by 2030. NRA joins a broad coalition of conservation minded groups in opposing this legislation as it fails to clearly protect hunting and angling opportunities. AB 3030 was rescheduled from the August 5 hearing date to August 12, due to committee time constraints.

Click this button to oppose AB 3030.


Thursday August 13:

Senate Appropriations Committee time TBD 

AB 2847, sponsored by Assembly Member David Chiu (D-17), revises the criteria for handguns to be certified for sale by requiring a microstamp in one place on the interior of the handgun (current law requires two imprinting locations). The bill also requires the removal of three certified handguns from the roster for each new handgun added.​ It should be noted that no new semi-automatic handguns have been added to the handgun roster since microstamping was certified in 2013. This legislation is nothing more than a means to reduce the options you have to protect yourself and your family. To read more about California’s microstamping law click here.​ AB 2847 passed the Senate Public Committee on August 1.

Click this button to oppose AB 2847.


Continue to check your inbox and for updates concerning your Second Amendment Rights and hunting heritage. 

California: Felon Shoots Man in Self Defense & Later Set Free

H/T AmmoLand.

Let me get this straight a convicted felon Mark Anthony Nelson Jr.shoots a man with a stolen gun and he gets a get out of jail free card from the state of Commiefornia.

Image from Humbolt County Sheriff’s Department cropped and scaled by Dean Weingarten.

U.S.A. –-( On 2 July, 2020 at about 9:40 a.m., Mark Anthony Nelson Jr. shot an apparently armed robber as he exited the Patriot gas station where Nelson worked as a clerk. It would seem to be a clear justified shooting.

Nelson lied to the police, probably because he is a convicted felon. He was convicted in 2011 of shooting a woman who rammed his vehicle.

He denied shooting the robbery suspect, Jeffrey Allen Kirwan. He denied having a firearm that was found hidden in the store. The firearm had been reported stolen. Nelson had a bullet in his pocket.

He was arrested on 2 July. From

Nelson Jr. was arrested and booked into the Humboldt County Correctional Facility on charges of murder (PC 187(a)), possession of stolen property (PC 496(a)) and convicted felon in possession of a firearm (PC 29800(a)). He is being held without bail pending arraignment.

The community started speaking out in defense of Nelson. He had a great reputation. An attorney agreed to represent Nelson pro-bono. On 7 July 2020, Nelson gave a different statement to investigators. He is reported to have admitted shooting and killing Kirwan but said it was self-defense.

His second statement was consistent with the physical evidence and witness statements. From

Mark Anthony Nelson Jr. — a 39-year-old gas station clerk from Eureka — has had quite a week.

A man came to rob the gas station where he worked.

He shot and killed that man, prompting his arrest on suspicion of murder, possessing stolen property and being a convicted felon in possession of a firearm. He was booked into Humboldt County Correctional facility without bail and quarantined there for five days.

Then yesterday, in a stunning reversal, the Humboldt County District Attorney’s decided no charges would be filed in the case. Nelson walked free and joined his partner Cynthia Shelton and their 14-year-old daughter for a quiet night at home.

Some claimed that “systemic racism” exists such that a white man wouldn’t have gone to jail, in the comments at

I have to ask the question. If this man was white (like me) would he be arrested?

Other commenters contest the conjecture, saying that many white men are arrested in similar circumstances.

The discussion about the case shows the ability of the far left to control the narrative is failing in the face of facts and people’s experience.

One comment claims there are numerous studies that show how poor people and black people are treated differently than other people in the criminal justice system. They do not address the problem of systemic bias in academia in favor of leftist narratives.

A reasonable question, given the facts of the case, and the current climate: Would a white man in the same circumstances have been treated as well as Mark Anthony Young?

Convicted felons still have the right to self-defense. A clear, easily followed mechanism should be in place so they can legitimately regain there Second Amendment rights, as protected by the Constitution.

Mark Anthony Young has gained the trust of the local community.

Perhaps prosecutors are starting to reconsider the common procedure of charging felons with illegal possession of firearms, even when they have been involved in justified self-defense shootings.

It should, at least, be a mitigating factor.

This Week In Gun Rights, Pennsylvania, New York, California, Louisiana, The Second Circuit, the ATF, and More! [VIDEO]

H/T The Truth About Guns.

A look at things that affect the Second Amendment around the nation.

This is TTAG’s weekly roundup of legal and legislative news affecting guns, the gun business and gun owners’ rights. For a deeper dive into the topics discussed here, check out this week in gun rights at FPC

Meltdown after new pro-gun bill in Pennsylvania

man scream horror fear

On Wednesday, Pennsylvania House Republicans passed H.B. 2440. It’s not even three pages long, but the Pennsylvania House Democrats seem to believe that the sky is falling over the Commonwealth. The contents of the bill are pretty straightforward: in a single paragraph, the House voted to establish shooting ranges, sportsman clubs, hunting facilities, firearms and ammunition manufacturers, retailers, importers, and distributors as life-sustaining businesses. The bill protects these entities and their employees from being put out of business or restricted in operation by the state.

What was the response from the Pennsylvania House Dems? Big bad scary ghost guns and 3-D printed guns will be sold to felons! Illegal gun sales are now okay! And it’s going to “make[] the wild, wild west look like Mr. Rogers’ Neighborhood.” How much fun that sounds aside, there’s a few things to talk about.

First of all, you can’t make something that’s illegal “okay” under the law – it’s either illegal or it’s not. Politicians often take this route to make a mountain out of the proverbial molehill of not doing additional banning. Second, if you thought “ghost guns” were going through Cabelas and brick-and-mortar FFLs, what is it you’re so scared of?

Five anti-gun bills pending advance in California

Colorful California Map Collage Of Stars, And Scratched Round Re

The measures included AB2847, a microstamping bill; AB2362, which jacks up fines for gun dealers; AB2617, shoring up gun violence restraining orders; AB2699, setting requirements for handgun storage (because I guess Heller is just a distant memory); and SB914, which imposes still more restrictions on loaning a firearm.

Odd Second Circuit ruling on serial numbers

serial number

In an opinion released by the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, the court determined that the sentencing enhancement for obliterating or altering a serial number on a firearm applies to any serial number on the firearm. Here’s why that’s wrong, and why this determination is bad for gun owners.

The Gun Control Act of 1968 requires that certain firearms have a serial number. Unfortunately the court overlooked the part where the Act specified the number must be on the frame or receiver. You know, the part that’s legally a gun.

The Court chose to take an aggressive, blanket approach. The law’s clear intention surrounds the serial number on the “firearm” component. However, factories choose to place serial numbers on more parts than are required. Slides, barrels, bolts, and other less regulated components often have serial numbers. The Second Circuit’s interpretation, at least with respect to a sentence enhancement, includes those non-essential serials on things like slides, which aren’t in and of themselves firearms.

By misinterpreting this requirement, the Second Circuit has increased the probability of defendants spending more time in prison for something as immaterial as swapping out a barrel or a slide, even when the issue at trial has nothing to do with something related to ballistics. The Court should at least clarify that the Gun Control Act only affects the frame and receiver so as to prevent this decision from reaching conduct far beyond the intent of the legislature.

New Zealand and New York see a surge in gun crimes, homicides

New Zealand Guns

After the Christchurch incident in New Zealand, the country’s prime minister did exactly what any progressive with virtually unchecked power would do—she banned guns. A lot of guns. It’s a classic story—whenever there’s a tragedy involving things that you generally don’t like, ban them while the iron is hot and the people upset. The problem is, none of these policies do anything to prevent the acts they respond to. Well, Kiwis are learning a hard lesson this year, with rates of gun crimes and gun-related killings the highest they’ve been in a decade.

What does any crafty politician do in response? They blame something else, of course. Auckland city councillor Alf Filipaina thinks the cause might be gangs, or drugs, or domestic violence. Maybe ghosts? Alf isn’t really sure, so he’s taking the safe route and leaving the door open to more gun control. If the trend keeps up, I’m sure more laws will be just over the horizon.

In yet another example of how gun control doesn’t stop violent crime, reports indicate that New York City, probably the most difficult jurisdiction in which to legally buy a gun, is experiencing a surge in shootings, with incidences increasing 21 percent over the last year. What’s driving the increase? Well, I’m not a statistician, but according to the comptroller, unemployment could reach 22% in June, a record for the city.

Louisiana is advancing new pro-gun bills

Louisiana politicians are salty this session. Sure, that’s not really news, but this time they’re mad about four bills making their way through the state legislature. The first is House Bill 140, which would prevent local authorities and governments from restricting firearms possession (Pittsburgh, take note). I’m sure they think that passing laws at a local level is practical, but all local restrictions tend to do is inhibit rights, create legal inconsistency within a broader jurisdiction, and cause the prosecution of people who usually don’t deserve it.

The second bill is House Bill 334, which would authorize concealed handgun carry in churches, synagogues, mosques, and other places of worship. The law previously required individuals to get advance permission from the place of worship, and that congregants be notified of the grant of permission, as well as imposing additional training and insurance requirements.

The last two bills address states of emergency and natural disasters. House Bill 746 would permit anyone who lawfully possesses a firearm to carry it during a mandatory evacuation in these situations, and House Bill 781 establishes that firearm and ammo manufacturers, distributors, wholesalers, suppliers, and retailers are essential businesses that can’t be shut down in a crisis. As a bonus, House Bill 781 also limits restrictions on gun possession under emergency curfews.

ATF 4473 Changes

Form 4473 and GLOCK (courtesy

ATF is rolling out a new 4473 this summer and all FFLs must convert over no later than November 1st of this year. Sure, it’s not exactly the sexy content you usually read this column for, but it’s important. First is relocation of the firearm information on the form. On the new version, the manufacturer/import, model, serial number, type, and caliber are the first thing you see. Some in the industry are happy about this change because it reduces the risk of error and if the transaction is stopped midway through filling out the paperwork, the FFL doesn’t have to recall the identifying details of the firearm. The previous form had the firearm’s information on the second page.

The second noticeable change to the 4473 is the inclusion of “borough” and “parish” next to “county.” Apparently people were mistaking “county” for “country” so often that the ATF decided to place the other terms nearby to reduce the likelihood of buyers writing U.S.A.

The third change is the least visible, but the most significant. The new 4473 will include a non-binary option for specifying sex on the form. Up until now, it was legally difficult for non-binary individuals to obtain a firearm from an FFL when neither option was appropriate for them. The ATF previously made a stir when it opined that transfers ought be denied to individuals who did not select “male” or “female.”

Personally, I wonder why the ATF even cares. As long as enough information is given to identify the purchaser, there is no reason to deny someone who isn’t accurately described by any individual factor. While I’d prefer the “sex” box be eliminated altogether (and race—it’s really none of their business). I hope the addition of this third option eases the strain on those affected and will hopefully lead to more people embracing their right to Keep and Bear Arms.

High Tax States Like California and New York Take Action Against Residents Trying to Flee State

H/T Barbwire.

NewYork and California will do whatever it takes to keep soaking former residents for all of the money they can.

New York and California are Democrat controlled states who are seeing a number of residents fleeing for various reasons.

Among those reasons are high taxes as well as the socialist policies stripping the residents of many of their rights and freedoms.

California and New York, as well as several other states are trying make it more difficult for residents who try to move their place of residency to other states.

If a person keeps a property in the old state (California or New York), the state will still go after them for taxes unless the property owner can prove that they live outside the state for a minimum of 183 days.

Dolly Lenz Real Estate CEO Dolly Lenz and Dolly Lenz Real Estate Managing Director Jenny Lenz on high taxes in states such as California and New York driving residents to leave for lower-tax states.

As an increasing number of residents are looking to leave high-taxOpens a New Window. states, such as California and New York, some of these state and local governmentsOpens a New Window. are not making the process easy.

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act introduced a number of reforms, including a $10,000 cap on state and local tax deductions, which have caused Americans to look into establishing legal primary residences in states where they can limit their liabilities.

But some states give taxpayers a hard time when they are trying to change their domicile – thereby establishing their permanent residency elsewhere…

I also know a number of people that have left both California and New York because of the socialists running both states.

One family left California because of their strong anti-gun policies.

Several left New York for the same anti-gun reason.

Now realize that if Democrats ever regain control of the White House and Senate as well as the House, all of America will become just like California and New York.



California Now Wants to Force Every Restaurant Customer to Pay 1% ‘Global Warming Tax’

H/T Godfather Politics.

You know this voluntary tax will not stay voluntary long.

The proponents of this tax say we are not adding it to property taxes so the folks on a fixed income are not paying it.

Even on a fixed income people can eat out now and then so they will be paying this tax. 

Here we go again with California do-gooders stealing money from citizens, and this time they want to charge every restaurant customer a one percent tax to combat global warming.

Activists in Sacramento are pushing a movement to add the one percent tax to your lunch and dinner costs for the Restore California Renewable Restaurants movement.

These first measures would have restaurants automatically putting the one percent tax onto everyone’s bill but will also allow them the option of taking the tax off if customers complain that they don’t want to pay it.

According to Sacramento’s CBS affiliate:

Restaurant owners have the option of charging customers an additional 1% on their bills that would go to help stop climate change. Payments will be gathered by the California Air Resources Board and spent on implementing carbon plans on farms and ranches across California, boosting healthy soil, according to the Perrenial Farming Initiative.

“There’s always going to be the people who say, why is this on the bill? I don’t want to pay it. I don’t care what it’s for. I don’t want to pay it,” Christopher Barnum-Dann, the owner of Localis, said.

“We’re not asking our fixed-income people to pay that on their property tax. We’re asking that of someone who had made a choice to go out and spend money,” resident, John Peters, said.

Of course, what will eventually happen if this bill is passed into law? You know. Eventually the tax will be made mandatory, not voluntary. You know that will happen.

“Organizers say 1% might not sound like a lot, but if enough restaurants sign-up, it would add up quickly,” CBS said.

“There’s 78,000 restaurants in California, so if half of them join on that’s almost 40,000, so that’s a decent chunk of money,” Christopher Barnum-Dann told the news site.

Sure… Democrats with dreams in their eyes of never-ending money pots to dip their hands into.

The truth is, if you make this voluntary, no one will bother. If the bill passes, and when no one participates, the state will eventually just turn around and make it mandatory and that will do nothing but burden the citizens…. who are already moving out in droves.