California
A controversial handgun crackdown is coming in California
A new law in California targets Glocks, which critics say can be easy to convert into a machine gun. Other states have also struggled with the issue.
ATF regulating 3D-printed machine gun conversion devices
The ATF is concerned by the rise in 3D-printed “machinegun
conversion devices” and has announced plans to limit them.
A newly passed law in California restricts sales of a popular type of handgun that critics have long said is too easy to convert into a machine gun.
The law, signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom on Oct. 10, will outlaw retail sales of semiautomatic handguns that can be easily modified using a category of tools commonly known as “Glock switches” – machine gun-conversion devices that interfere with the gun’s trigger device to allow shots to continually fire while the trigger is pressed.
The law comes after years of criticism and litigation aimed at Glock for continuing to manufacture guns compatible with the switches. The devices can enable pistols to fire at rates of up to 1,200 rounds per minute, according to gun control advocacy group Everytown for Gun Safety.
In one example last year, a mass shooting in Birmingham, Alabama, that killed four and injured over a dozen involved what officials believed to be Glock switch-modified guns.
The move in California comes as a number of Democratic-led states are looking for their own solutions to the problem of illegal machine gun conversion devices, turning to lawsuits and pondering their own anti-Glock measures in the absence of the company taking steps to thwart the switch devices, said Jennifer Dineen, a professor at the University of Connecticut and member of the Rockefeller Institute of Government’s Regional Gun Violence Research Consortium.
“California is the first to be successful here,” Dineen said. “It’s a state taking action when a manufacturer does not take action.”
While the law marks a notable escalation in the crackdown on modified semiautomatic handguns, California is focused on making Glocks harder to access – not banning them from the state entirely.
“Nobody is taking away anybody’s Glocks. Nobody is removing guns that already exist,” Dineen added.
What does the new law say?
The law, Assembly Bill 1127, covers handguns manufactured by Glock and similar pistols that use a “cruciform trigger bar.” It notes that the sale of machine guns is already prohibited, and it expands the definition of a machine gun under state law to include handguns that can be easily modified to fire automatically.
Firearms dealers will be banned from selling the guns starting in 2026. Dealers will still be allowed to sell the guns they had before the law goes into effect, and there are exceptions for law enforcement and private party sales.
The possession of the handguns isn’t affected, only the sale of them.
Why ban the sale of Glock handguns?
The small converter parts aren’t affiliated with or sold by Glock itself, but are a “do-it-yourself” hack posing a rising issue in the U.S. Illegal “auto sears” can be easily and cheaply made using 3D printers, and instantly turn a handgun into an illegal machine gun.
Federal authorities say they have become the most commonly seized weapon in firearm trafficking cases and are commonly used by young people. Between 2017 and 2021, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives seized 5,454 machine gun conversion devices that include Glock switches. That was a 570% increase from the previous five years when the agency recovered 814 of the parts.
The bill says that the guns “can bereadily converted by hand or with common household tools into a machinegun by the installation or attachment of a pistol converter… as any device or instrument that, when installed in or attached to the rear of the slide of a semiautomatic pistol, replaces the backplate and interferes with the trigger mechanism and thereby enables the pistol to shoot automatically more than one shot by a single function of the trigger.”
“Now people can (3D) print or get things from the internet,” Dineen said. “The ability to DIY a modification is greater than it was even 10 years ago.”
A gun that may have been purchased completely legally and is compliant with the law can be instantly turned into a weapon that is outlawed, she said.
NRA immediately challenges new law in court
The National Rifle Association announced on Oct. 13 it was joining the Firearms Policy Coalition, Second Amendment Foundation, Poway Weapons and Gear and two members of the NRA to file a lawsuit to challenge the new law. The suit claims the law is a violation of the Second Amendment of the Constitution because of previous Supreme Court rulings striking down bans on handguns.
“California’s ban on many of the most popular handguns in America blatantly defies the Court’s precedent,” the NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action said in a statement.
But Dineen said it may be tough to prove that argument, because the new law doesn’t ban all firearms, or even all handguns; it only bans the sale of handguns with a certain type of design, not the ownership of them.
Coalition of states also sue Glock
Mounting calls to modify the design of Glock handguns to make them harder to “switch” into machine guns have gone ignored by the manufacturer, Dineen said. As a result, states have begun taking matters into their own hands.
“Gun violence is an epidemic, and we cannot allow manufacturers to look the other way while their firearms are turned into illegal machine guns,” said California Assemblymember Catherine Stefani, a Democrat.
By banning the sale of Glock and similar handguns, California – which ranked third in states with the most gun sales in 2023 behind only Texas and Florida – might exert some significant financial pressure on Glock to pursue those changes, Dineen said.
Pressure has also come in the form of lawsuits against Glock. States including New Jersey, Minnesota and Maryland, and cities including Baltimore, Chicago and Portland, have all filed lawsuits against the company in recent years claiming it has allowed for the proliferation of machine guns by facilitating the sale of guns that are easily converted, according to news reports.
Some of the suits argue that Glock has known for years that its weapons are easy to turn into machine guns and done nothing.
Glock didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment on the California law or claims in the lawsuits against it.
Other states including New York and Illinois have also considered legislation that would ban the sale of Glock and similar handguns.
Glock switches are already prohibited by specific laws in at least 28 states including California, according to a count by Everytown for Gun Safety.
California
California bill to block registered sex offenders from local office rejected by Senate committee
FRESNO, Calif. (KFSN) — California bill aimed at preventing registered sex offenders from holding local elected office was halted Tuesday after a Senate committee declined to advance the measure without changes opposed by its author.
Assembly Bill 2753, introduced by Assemblywoman Esmeralda Soria in February, would have prohibited anyone who is or has been required to register as a sex offender from running for local elective office.
“This issue is critical. We have heard loud and clear from the community that we must do something,” Soria said.
The proposal came to a stop in the Senate Elections Committee, where lawmakers argued the bill’s restrictions were too broad.
California’s sex offender registration system is divided into three tiers. Tier 1 offenders are generally required to register for 10 years, Tier 2 offenders for 20 years and Tier 3 offenders for life.
According to Soria, committee members proposed limiting the bill to Tier 3 offenders. She rejected those amendments, arguing that the legislation should apply more broadly.
“For this not to be the law today, where we’re banning people that have committed some of the most horrific crimes against children, against other people, you know, and we have survivors out there, I think it’s a disservice,” Soria said.
The bill had attracted significant support before reaching the Senate. It was backed by the Fresno City Council and passed the Assembly floor in April.
Fresno City Council President Nelson Esparza traveled to Sacramento to testify in favor of the measure and said he was disappointed by the outcome.
“I call it really a gut punch for our community, and what we had experienced here, and sort of the upheaval… I don’t think we want that to happen again here at Fresno,” Esparza said.
Esparza referenced controversy earlier this year involving registered sex offender Rene Campos, who sought a seat on the Fresno City Council but ultimately did not qualify for the ballot.
Opponents of the bill argued that candidacies should be decided by voters rather than restricted by law.
“It should be a decision made by the voters, so a person should not be barred from running for office and let the voters make the decision that makes the most sense for them,” said civil rights attorney Janice Bellucci.
With the committee declining to move the bill forward under its current language, efforts to enact the proposed restrictions have stalled for now.
Copyright © 2026 KFSN-TV. All Rights Reserved.
BAKERSFIELD, Calif. (KBAK/KBFX) California voters will face a high-profile “billionaire tax” measure on the November ballot, a proposal supporters say would raise new revenue, but critics warn could push some of the state’s wealthiest residents to leave.
If passed, the measure would impose a one-time 5% tax on California billionaires living in the state as of Jan. 1, 2026.
Tal Eslick, owner of Vista Consulting, said, “I think there is this effort, especially on the part of progressive state leaders, to somehow, you know, go after billionaires or maybe even the trillionaires that may exist in the future.”
Billionaire tax measure heads to California’s November ballot, with Kern County watching (AP Photo/Jeff Chiu, File)
Political analysts say a proposal like this could encourage some of California’s wealthiest residents to relocate, potentially taking investment and business activity with them.
Eslick said, “And for that matter, they can come back occasionally to visit and do a little bit of business, but live in a state that is a little more accommodating for them from a tax standpoint.”
Questions have also been raised about what the impact could be for Kern County if billionaires leave the state.
Sherod Waite, CEO of Moneywise Guys, said, “It’s questionable how much revenue would actually be generated from the tax and how much revenue would be lost from those people exiting the state. It’s questionable. It’s a gamble.”
Waite said billionaires leaving could reduce state revenue that could be used in Kern County.
Billionaire tax measure heads to California’s November ballot, with Kern County watching (AP Photo/Jeff Chiu, File)
“Think of all the support services that the state offers to the entire state, including us here in Kern County, that are paid for by tax dollars,” he said.
Gov. Gavin Newsom has been outspokenly against a state wealth tax and is instead proposing a national tax policy that would tax anyone with a net worth of $100 million.
Newsom said, “It’s time for a national billionaire’s tax and a new social contract. Just think of this, just ten percent of people own 2/3’s of the nation’s wealth.”
Eslick said Newsom’s position can be difficult to square.
“It’s a naturally confusing sort of position to be opposed to the tax in California but be supportive of it at a national level. But I think that’s him walking a treacherous political road,” he said.
Billionaire tax measure heads to California’s November ballot, with Kern County watching (AP Photo/Jae C. Hong, File)
In a statement regarding the measure, Assemblyman Stan Ellis said in part, “This would hurt Kern’s energy, Agriculture, manufacturing, and working families through lost investment, fewer jobs and unstable state funding.”
WASHINGTON (TNND) — Residents in a neighborhood in Southern California said that their homeowners association has threatened to fine them if they don’t take down the American flags displayed outside their homes.
Amy and Chris Cooke and their neighbor Terri Collins live in San Marcos, which is located in San Diego County.
They said that they could potentially face a $100 fine if they keep the flags displayed outside their homes, according to the Daily Wire.
“I’m not taking my flag down,” Collins said. “They can fine me, $100, $200, $1,000, I’m not paying it.”
Collins said that the neighborhood is very patriotic because it is located close to the former Miramar Navy Air Station.
She said that “all the Top Gun pilots lived here.”
The neighbors said that ever since President Donald Trump won the 2024 election, the HOA has enforced the rule about flags.
“Once the members allow use of a common property by an owner to express what is essentially a political or affiliative view in a flag, other owners will want to do the same and the common area will degrade,” a letter from the HOA reads.
Homeowners were told that flags displayed in “exclusive use” areas like backyards.
An HOA attorney told the Daily Wire HOAs “count on the fact that homeowners don’t know better and might be scared.”
BE THE FIRST TO COMMENT
“I would tell these people to stand firm and under no circumstances should they remove that flag,” he told the outlet.
-
Wyoming7 minutes agoYoung bull moose captured wandering Laramie, relocated by Game and Fish
-
Crypto10 minutes agoWebinar: Crypto and public pensions—risks, rewards, and fiduciary duties
-
Finance15 minutes agoWednesday’s Campaign Round-Up, 7.1.26: Justices help GOP with campaign finance ruling
-
Fitness22 minutes agoI’ve been doing the bird dog exercise instead of planks to improve my core strength – it’s even better for beginners
-
Movie Reviews30 minutes agoNeil’s Movie Reviews
-
World40 minutes agoRussia Approved Secret China Military Training At Top Level: Reuters
-
Science1 hour agoThis Cell Feeds, Grows and Reproduces. And It’s Manmade.
-
Lifestyle1 hour agoGreetings from London, where Banksy’s flag man is a warning cry
