This was written by staff at the nonprofit newsroom CalMatters. It was republished by The Mendocino Voice in partnership with CalMatters to bring relevant nonpartisan news to Mendocino County readers. Learn more about CalMatters here.
SACRAMENTO, CA., 7/15/26 — California Democrats are used to defending gun control measures against lawsuits by Second Amendment advocates like the California Rifle and Pistol Association.
Now, the state is facing a lawsuit from the Trump administration targeting a new law restricting sales of Glock semi-automatic handguns.
Since July 1, the state has prohibited the sale of Glock handguns and various off-brand imitators that can be converted to fully automatic guns — which are already illegal under state and federal laws, with some exceptions — after inserting a converter into the gun.
The U.S. Department of Justice is challenging the law, saying it bans the sale “of the most popular handgun in America” and that it “obviously violates the Second Amendment.” California can enforce its law while the lawsuit proceeds, a judge ruled Thursday.
It’s another example of the state playing defense to protect the gun control laws it adopted in the decade after the 2012 Sandy Hook school shooting.
Take, for instance:
- The state is awaiting a decision in another case at the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals that gutted a 2016 ballot initiative requiring background checks before ammunition purchases.
- A new U.S. Supreme Court decision struck down state laws that prohibit people from carrying concealed firearms in private places, such as stores, including California’s. Writing for the majority, Justice Samuel Alito said a similar law in Hawaii “hobbles … the right of Americans to carry arms for self-defense as they go about their daily lives.”
- And, the high court agreed to hear an Illinois case that could overturn California’s assault weapons ban, which limits the sale of AR-15-style rifles.
State officials are preparing to protect the new handgun law by arguing it is not a categorical ban on Glocks. Rather, they say, it directs gun makers to redesign firearms so they can no longer be easily modified into machine guns.
Proponents of gun safety also criticized the lawsuit.
- Adam Skaggs, chief counsel and vice president at the Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence: “This law addresses the alarming rise in black market conversion devices and home-made machine guns, like the one used in the 2022 Sacramento shooting, and aims to keep them off the streets.”
The number of semi-automatic pistols recovered in crimes that were modified into machine guns soared 784% nationwide between 2019 and 2023, according to the federal Justice Department.
This article first appeared in CalMatters here.
Please give me my time back after reading this useless article
Mendocino Voice is obviously in bed with liberal anti-American ideals. What a waste of oxygen.
“The number of semi-automatic pistols recovered in crimes that were modified into machine guns soared 784% nationwide between 2019 and 2023, according to the federal Justice Department.”
And during that time the Glock switches were heavily advertised for sale on Facebook among other places yet the ATF did very little to stop the proliferation.
JC and TP. this article is only “useless” because people like TP use the 2nd Amendment to justify horrific murders (even mass shootings of school children like at Sandy Hook), and they excuse the absolute lunacy of the violence as merely unfortunate collateral damage. “Our thoughts and prayers, etc. . . .” is their only response.
The 2nd Amendment was written in the context of a newly-formed, fragile nation right after the Revolutionary War, when traitors and Royalist enemies were still a big threat, long before automatic assault weapons were even imagined. But pro-gun rights zealots like TP say the Amendment gives every individual person living in the U.S. the unalienable right to conceal and carry automatic assault weapons anywhere they want, supposedly for “self-defense.” According to them, even strung-out psychopaths, ex-cons or just hot-heads with a grudge have this same right. Are these people going to use the guns for self-defense, do you think?
Should the people walking down the street yelling their heads off at no one be allowed to carry an assault rifle? How about the person who loses his temper on the freeway and runs another car off the road? What about angry, hormonal teens? Does the 2nd Amendment draw a line between them and the people you think deserve the right to carry such a weapon? No.
All the 2nd Amendment says is that the right to “keep and bear arms” should be granted to a “WELL-REGULATED Militia” to protect the “security of a free State.” So, TP, please explain how it keeps our society secure to let every Tom, Dick and their crazy uncle Harry carry a completely UNregulated AR-15 or a concealed, fully-automated Glock everywhere they go, including into stores. What if that store doesn’t carry the beer they want?
Can guns die? That’s why they can’t vote.
The Constitution was written for all “People of the United States.” I look forward to the day when poor people, minorities, and naturalized citizens have more rights than guns do.
You: “All the 2nd Amendment says is that the right to ‘keep and bear arms’ should be granted to a ‘WELL-REGULATED Militia'”
NO, it does NOT.
It says “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
Not the right of the government or the National Guard. THE PEOPLE, all of us, collectively and individually.
“Shall not be infringed,” not “shall be infringed when some kook in a black dress says so.”
Tell you what: if you want to force your control freakdom upon us you can simply (LOL) pass an amendment to the Constitution, repealing the Second Amendment. Until then, stick your “gun control” up your orifice.
I bet you think there is a “right to abortion” in the Constitution (there isn’t).
You: “I look forward to the day when poor people, minorities, and naturalized citizens have more rights than guns do.”
Imbecile, are “poor people, minorities, and naturalized citizens” prohibited in airports, schools, courtrooms, etc?
Thank God for the NRA and the California rifle and pistol Association and the Trump administration because nobody else fights for the rights of law abiding gun owners like myself. California is dead set on banning every single handgun in private ownership. This madness has to stop as a hunter and gun collector this is the thing I hate most about California. It’s gun laws. And I do not even own a Glock.
Bradley, many Democrats own registered guns for hunting and other legitimate reasons. And you know AR15s and automatic handguns are not used (or shouldn’t be) to hunt animals, don’t you? If you really are a “law-abiding citizen,” what’s wrong with following gun laws that are intended to keep us all safe?
Americans from all states and political sides overwhelmingly support gun safety laws. 92% support universal background checks, and well over 70% support other common-sense gun restrictions.
Relax: CA is not set on banning “every single handgun.” We just want to make sure that deadly weapons are bought and sold by people who can prove their identity as nonviolent criminals and their ability to use the gun responsibly. What’s wrong with that?
CA’s gun laws have reduced gun-related deaths to the 6th lowest per capita of all states. The states with even fewer shooting deaths all have strict gun laws and happen to be blue states that you probably also hate. In contrast, Mississippi ranks as the highest in the country in gun deaths and the 7th weakest in gun laws, while Wyoming has the weakest gun laws of all and the fifth highest gun deaths per capita. So easy solution: If you hate gun laws so much, move there. You may find people like you who still believe in the Wild West fantasy that the best shot is the good guy and always wins.
I’m going to make the same argument against gun control I always make. You are trapped in alocation with a 6’4″ 300 lb. guy who says he’s going to kill them rape you. Which would you rather: both unarmed, both armed with knives, or both armed with pistols. Don’t fool yourself the 2nd Amendment is about the right to self-defense, and those who want to limit it want you to be unable to defend yourself.
Move to England if you don’t like the second amendment here. The Heller decision confirms that we all have the right to keep and bare arms. If you are a law abiding citizen. I have self defense guns, I have hunting rifles, and I have a huge collection of vintage firearms. Mostly all I do is hunt deer in the fall and target practice. I don’t like the laws in California when it comes to the second amendment and I’m trying to move. If you don’t like it then you should move to a different country. Also guns are not going away in the United States. I don’t know if you follow Supreme Court rulings on the topic of 2A but lately they have overwhelmingly been ruling in favor of law abiding citizens. There’s nobody I despise worse than some anti-gunner who wants to take everybody’s constitutional rights away. Seriously move to any other country. Iran has extreme gun control laws. Start there.
And I do obey all gun laws that keep us safe. No way I’m jeopardizing my gun rights, I do things by the book when it comes to guns and gun law I just want to move to a more pro gun state I have no idea here yet or when.
-Randall
The, more accurate, 6’3ish” 300lb ignoramus you use in your contrived scenario is the same ignoramus in the WH with his tribe of sycophants pedophiles. You speak as if the rapists are coming after us when nearly half of this country elected a known rapist and pedophile to the highest office of power. Please use all two of your brain cells next time you comment your thoughts.
-Bradley
CA voters prefer gun regulation to their guns like they prefer having health departments to regulate sanitation in restaurants. It’s not a terrible idea, in fact statistically, it likely saves more lives and stomach alike. Maybe you should move to one of the many other cheaper states that allow open carry. Next time you visit your local Walmart you might see folks packing with assault weapons defending their day old donuts on the discount aisle. The fact that you made a second, unnecessary comment tells me you probably have unregistered weapons and need to move to a state that doesn’t care about tracking weapons’ ownership. I don’t know what you are waiting for? You tempt the liberal communists a good time when you threaten to leave the state and yet you stay and babble on Mendovoice. I wish you luck on your journey.
The typical leftist:
Murder of the unborn is a “human right.”
The ability to defend oneself against homicidal regimes is “outrageous.”
Also: men can be pregnant.
There is no rational discussion with the typical leftist. Attempting to do so is debating with moving and even phantom targets, since sanity on the other side is not the norm.
If you remove Blacks from the gun crime statistics, America’s gun deaths drop to a rate similar to Western Europe, such as Belgium. Do you really want to go there?
Urbanist (too chickenshit to use their name) says:
“The, (sic) more accurate, 6’3ish” 300lb ignoramus you use in your contrived scenario is the same ignoramus in the WH with his tribe of sycophants pedophiles.”
I have guns because you never know when a Trump OR an Obama might become homicidal.
The funny thing is: Trump’s lifestyle puts him solidly in the “leftist” camp – pro-adultery, pro-abortion, pro-divorce, etc.
“CA voters prefer gun regulation to their guns like they prefer having health departments to regulate sanitation in restaurants.”
Fortunately, the Republican form of government doesn’t allow the majority to simply vote away other people’s rights. Like the Democrats of the Confederate States of America tried.
“Maybe you should move to one of the many other cheaper states that allow open carry.”
I’m a fifth-generation native California. I’m not going anywhere. Maybe you can GFY?
I’m not leaving AND I’m not surrendering my rights and arms. Want to force the issue? I guarantee the consequences won’t be pleasant. Let 1776 be your guide. Our Founders used deadly force against “the authorities” and “law enforcement” when those tyrants attempted their controlfreakdom.
“doesn’t care about tracking weapons’ ownership”
How about we track abortions and issuance of abortion pills? Oh, that’s right, you pretend that’s a “violation of rights,” to be able to murder the unborn as a “choice.”
Urbanist. Nice imagination you have. You couldn’t be further from the truth. I’ve spent most of my life building my collection. If you think I would jeopardize it you are 100% wrong. Every single piece is registered. Even the ones inherited 30 years ago. As per CA criminal code. I’m a straight shooter in more ways than one. It’s something I actually take pride in.
-Tokalenko
Bradley is a big boy and can fight his own battles. He can find the door just like you can if you don’t respect your local laws and customs. You 49 other states to choose from and they all speak english and accept American dollar currency.
No one is forcing you to stay. No one is forcing you to take birth control because pro choice is a choice. 🙂 It is a decision unique to every person and usually with a medical professional in a controlled environment.
Masquerading as heros and fighting the forces of evil is cute, but you seem prone to injuring yourselves and others around you in the process. Why don’t you play Call of duty like the rest of the teenage boys with additional idle time? You can pew pew pew all day in the virtual world.
Babbling about Belgium, black folk, and crime statistics? Did I unlock a glitch? Go take an edible, it is legal and normal practice in liberal paradise, CA. No need to sound like a butthurt rabid dog.
As for leaving CA it’s not as easy as you think. Caring for elderly parents has me here as long as need be. They’re not willing to go anywhere at this point in their lives. As soon as opportunity presents I will be gone. I won’t miss you and you won’t miss me.
No one is stopping you from leaving. No one cares about your fixation with fire arms. You clearly don’t like the state you’re in and have always had the option to leave. Babble away your anger at your parents for staying in this liberal paradise.
Urbanist. My parents are elderly and feeble and 1 with dementia. Been here since 1968. You can’t pick up and move that easily. Acres of belongings. I don’t blame my parents for me being stuck here. I love them and will continue to take care of them in the same home they have always lived in. Then one day I’m out. Don’t worry about me. It’s all planned out. They know I want to move but moving a multigenerational family is no easy task. So back off. I will leave this God forsaken hell hole as soon as the opportunity presents itself.
But abandoning them would be the most self centered thing. I will never abandon them. Your comment shows what kind of heart you have just to even suggest it shows how much you would care.
Have you considered that your position on these articles may be heavily influenced by where you are in life? Living with and caring for elderly parents that may or may not recognize you as they age? You lose a piece of yourself that you will never get back, but yet your parents don’t insist you move on to live your own life? Who is volunteering for this life? and why?
It appears the main antagonist in your life is the thing you care for and, I presume, love (I.e. your parents). CA and “Liberals” aren’t forcing more on you than your parents have already done to you. The fact that you stick with them in their personal home is quite a privilege to them in their later years. Many elders end up in homes and senior communities when the kids can’t take care of them anymore let alone if they have a good relationship with them or not.
The hell hole is the life you are choosing to live. The anger you carry is the cognitive dissonance and living in a contradiction. Under the guise of feeling guilty for leaving your parents, don’t blame CA and the so-called “liberals.” This is resentment forming into despot dialogue. All of us have to live out our lives with declining health if we are lucky enough to live this long. That’s why we try to plan for retirement so we don’t burden the next generation and create a future generation of despots. That’s the responsible thing to do.
Most kids/young adults today can’t afford to live in the same neighborhoods or even the same regions they are from. At the same time many aging boomers are staying in their 2000 plus sqft houses (with super cheap Prop 13 taxes, and super sized entitlements), while their kids live in high risk areas with exaggerated home prices and overpriced rents because mom and dad want to stay in their homes and don’t want to see their local suburb turn into a urban city. This is a choice and it is a self serving one. This is happening across the country. Aging parents don’t want to retire and aren’t preparing the next generation for life after they move on.
It is a privilege (not a right) to grow up and live nearly your whole life in one town comfortably and to even have a child serve your needs as you age out.
You only get one life to live and I hope you can find your own serenity in it.
Urbanist. A heartfelt reply. I admire that. I chose to be the one. My little brother passed away in 2019 at 41. My older brother lives in Florida and is a mess. I stepped up to keep things on track. But I don’t carry resentment towards them. It’s an honor. They have helped me out more than once in my life years ago when I was down and out. I’m glad I get to repay their kindness. I’ve tried to convince them to move as a group. All of us but it didn’t go over well. Their roots are sunk deep. It’s a physically hard task dealing with firewood all winter and tasks like that. Taking care of a swimming pool, picking up walnuts. Their property is a small walnut orchard, but it’s the same chores I grew up with getting an allowance. lol except now I don’t get an allowance.
John C. Tokalenko Amen to everything you said brother.