CCRKBA Has Harsh Words for Newsom and his Anti-Gun Whining

California Gov. Gavin Newsom may have tried to trick the public into thinking he wasn’t really anti-gun by accepting a firearm from podcaster Shawn Ryan, but I don’t think anyone was fooled. The elites have never been against gun ownership for themselves, after all, just for the rest of us.

This was made pretty clear when Newsom lost it after the Ninth Circuit found that California’s law requiring background checks for all ammo purchases, which also included banning people from ordering ammo by mail, was tossed.

He really wasn’t a fan.

And the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms isn’t really a fan of Newsom, which they made pretty clear in a recent press release.

Anti-gun Democrat Gov. Gavin Newsom is having a hissy fit over Thursday’s 2-1 ruling by a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that the Golden State’s requirement for background checks on ammunition purchases are unconstitutional, quite a change from his pro-gun remarks a week ago.

But the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms (CCRKBA) is reminding the Golden State governor that when rights are on the table, his opinion doesn’t really count, especially when he seems to change it from week to week. Last week, Newsom appeared on Shawn Ryan’s podcast, where he accepted a Sig Sauer pistol and professed his support for the Second Amendment. This week, he’s reverted back to being an anti-gunner.

Newsom called Thursday’s ruling a “slap in the face to the progress California has made in recent years to keep its communities safer from gun violence.” He referred to the voter-approved ballot measure, passed in 2016, noting Californians “voted to require background checks on ammunition and their voices should matter.”

“Newsom’s so-called newly found support for the Second Amendment vanished overnight,” said CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb. “He is a lying politician who can’t be trusted. We warned at the time that his pro-gun pronouncement needed affirmation, and he has failed to deliver, just as we expected.

“We’ve got some bad news for Gavin Newsom,” Gottlieb continued. “Constitutional rights are not up to a public vote, which the 9th Circuit panel recognizes, even if he doesn’t. Neither are rights subject to essentially getting permission from the state, via a background check, in order for citizens to exercise them.”

The ruling came in a case known as Rhode v. Bonta, a case dating back to 2018. It was authored by Circuit Judge Sandra S. Ikuta, a George W. Bush appointee. Concurring was Judge Bridget S. Bade, a Donald Trump appointee. Judge Jay S. Bybee, also a George W. Bush appointee, dissented. The appeals court ruling upheld an earlier district court decision to grant a permanent injunction against the law.

Writing for the court, Judge Ikuta stated, “Given the fees and delays associated with California’s ammunition background check regime, and the wide range of transactions to which it applies, we conclude that, in all applications, the regime meaningfully constrains California residents’ right to keep and bear arms.”

“Gov. Newsom is widely considered to be running for the 2028 Democratic presidential nomination,” Gottlieb observed. “Ranting that a constitutional right should be decided essentially by a popularity contest among California voters is not the way to win the hearts and minds of voters across the country.”

Perhaps more accurately, ranting that a constitutional right should be decided by a popularity contest should be a disqualification for anyone who wants to be president.

After all, if one constitutionally protected right is up for deletion because of the mob, which others will be later on? It never stops at the right to keep and bear arms. Look to Europe to see ample evidence of that.

Germany has a tight rein on who owns guns. They also kick in people’s doors over memes.

The UK has very strict gun control. They also arrest and imprison people for offering commentary on a crime that they soon delete–longer than the criminal in question, even.

People in the UK can be arrested for praying in their home if someone sees it and thinks they’re praying for the wrong thing, but they can’t have a gun.

Yes, this involved ammo, but let’s also be real here. The background checks for ammo had no impact on California’s violent crime rate, but did stop people like Olympic gold medalist Kim Rhode from being able to practice as she needed to for her sport. It made it a pain for law-abiding people to get ammo when they needed it for training, but criminals just drove across state lines, purchased ammo, and drove back.

Or they just got someone else to do it for them, because as ammunition isn’t serialized, it’s virtually impossible to be caught straw-buying ammo.

But even if it worked flawlessly, it was still an unconstitutional infringement on the right to keep and bear arms.

Newsom can complain all he wants, but we don’t give up rights simply because the voters don’t want others to have them. That’s mob rule, and such a mob can disenfranchise minorities, legalize any manner of tyranny, and a host of other terrible things that have no place in a constitutional republic such as ours.

There are ways in which the judgment of the people can and should be paramount, but not when it comes to civil liberties.

Editor’s Note: Gavin Newsom is pretending to support the Second Amendment and has a real chance to become the Democratic presidential candidate in 2028. 

Help us continue to report on his radical views and expose the anti-gun extremists who support him. Join Bearing Arms VIP and use promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your VIP membership.