New Gun Control Bill to be Introduced

Jackson Will Introduce Bill to Add Certain Guns to Assault Weapons Ban

Tuesday, February 12, 2013
Article Tools
Print friendly
E-mail story
Tip Us Off
iPod friendly
Share Article

The bill, which will be introduced in upcoming weeks, would ensure shotguns with revolving cylinders, known for their killing power, continue to be banned under California’s assault weapons ban. The bill was unveiled today at the State Capitol in Sacramento as part of a multi-bill package by Senate Democrats designed to address gun violence in the wake of the Newtown tragedy and other mass shootings.

“As gun technology evolves, our laws need to keep pace with them,” Jackson said. “Shotguns with a rifled barrel and revolving cylinder are relatively new, and can fire a large number of cartridges in a short period of time. The danger of these guns far outweighs any recreational use they may have.”

It is already illegal to use or possess to “smooth bore” shotguns with revolving cylinders in California. This bill would ban “rifled bore” shotguns with revolving cylinders such as the Circuit Judge .410/.45. It is unknown how many such guns are sold in California.

“No bill will singlehandedly solve the problem of gun violence,” Jackson said. “But a bill like this keeps our assault weapons ban up-to-date and relevant, so we can keep exceptionally deadly weapons out of the hands of the wrong people.”

According to a recent poll by the Public Policy Institute of California, two in three Californians support a nationwide ban on assault weapons.

Jackson added, “I hope that President Obama and Congress, as they work to renew the federal assault weapons ban, will follow our lead in banning these types of guns as well.”


Independent Discussion Guidelines

There is no such thing as a rifled shotgun. It is a slug gun or a large bore rifle designed for non rifled slugs. You fire shot through a rifled slug gun and you destroy the rifling. Crist i wish the dam media would get things right for once.........

Mojavegreen (anonymous profile)
February 13, 2013 at 10:42 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Nice job Ms Jackson: we need this!

DrDan (anonymous profile)
February 13, 2013 at 2:08 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I dunno man, the entire California Legislature often just seems like a nightmare episode of The Gong Show.

Ken_Volok (anonymous profile)
February 13, 2013 at 2:17 p.m. (Suggest removal)

yes, I get the gong show ref. I can add my critique but it's off-thread: where is the big cap on public pensions, ms Jackson? Cap at $90,000@ year. THIS is a much bigger issue than the gun thing. That is happening.

DrDan (anonymous profile)
February 13, 2013 at 2:23 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I don't think that's off topic at all. people cite there've been so many shootings since Newtown but in OTHER states, the LAPD is the one shooting people. CA already has a ban an automatic / assault weapons.* It's all just smoke and mirrors and grandstanding across the board, not just one person or party.

* If you forgive my lack of knowledge of gun types, I won't grill you on World Cinema.

Ken_Volok (anonymous profile)
February 13, 2013 at 2:35 p.m. (Suggest removal)

If they take away your Judge, they will take away every 22 cal. revolver ( which includes that massive assult weapon the Ruger Bear cat ) through the Dirty Harry .44 mag and Rugers Rapid fire SINGLE ACTION Heart Stopping ,,,38s,.357,.41 cals. I have been shooting shot loads in these for 50 years. My Taurus circuit judge is carried as a .45 long Colt when I am in the mountains for cougar protection while teaching my grand children the art of camping and survival if lost. Then I carry it with .410 snake loads in the deserts and hay fields etc. I have not EVER heard of anyone using any of these to kill anyone,not even a gangsta would use revolvers with shot shells to kill any thing.THE ONLY REASON TO BAN ANY GUN IS TO DISSARM AMERICA . WHO VOTES THESE COMMUNISTS INTO OFFICE? Is California a total communist state ?

donholmes (anonymous profile)
February 13, 2013 at 8:45 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Based on history and human nature, I'd say we are on our way Don.

billclausen (anonymous profile)
February 13, 2013 at 8:49 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"The danger of these guns far outweighs any recreational use they may have.”

... you really don't get it, do you MIss Jackson?? Guns are not toys - they are meant to be dangerous and to defend law abiding citizens from otherwise more-powerful attackers.

They are not for recreation - that is just an added bonus. They are for defense.

But I guess you may agree with that other bozo Democrat who thinks women are too irrational to use guns in self defense?

Promulgator (anonymous profile)
February 19, 2013 at 3:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)

event calendar sponsored by: