Bad laws never suddenly become good, but sometimes they hurt the politicians who created them. That’s happening in California now.
Now that Kamala Harris has left her scorched earth policies on liberty and freedom in California behind, her legacy is coming back to haunt her. The Fresno Bee is reporting on the case of Albert Sheakalee. He is not the only one who has suffered at the hands of the California DOJ’s Armed Prohibited Person’s program better known as APPs.
Under the California APPs system, teams of special agents of the attorney general travel through the state in black SUVs in search of those barred from possessing firearms by state law, including felons and those diagnosed as mentally unstable.
These agents have no warrant. They have not gone before a judge to request seizure of private property. They coerce the occupants of the property to force their way in and seize private property from the occupants. If the occupants feel wronged, they must spend outrageous amounts of money and time to fight the secret agents in court. Even if the ruling is in their favor, the people still face a massive red tape bureaucracy to get back their own property which was seized illegally.
If the information they were working with actually was accurate, they could stand by their record, but this is where it gets even worse. As far back as 2013, the state audited the program to determine its effectiveness. Sam Paredes from Gun Owners of California was at the hearing.
“GOC would also like to state that the audit validates our consistent criticism of this program. If the Armed Prohibited Person’s system is so inaccurate as to miss more than 20,000 people who should be on the list, we raise the question as to how many people – other hand, are on the list incorrectly. This year, a California Sheriff reported that the system has shown to be anywhere from 40-60% inaccurate, regarding persons who have been labeled “prohibited” and have thus had their firearms seized needlessly. The system needs to be reexamined from top to bottom. Right now, the government is incapable of processing reports in a timely manner to allow them to maintain an accurate system. It is irresponsible for a government to rely on a system that is so consistently incorrect, while at the same time, allocating funds to carry out forceful seizures of firearms without the proper evidence at hand.”
Over half of the data these agents are using is flat out wrong. That doesn’t give us all great comfort when they come knocking on our doors. The Democrats in Sacramento have continued to double down on their battle against the Second Amendment, funneling $15 million in fees paid by gun owners to fund APPs confiscation. California Dealer Record of Sale (DROS) fees are some of the highest fees in the nation. The idea was that it would be self-sustaining. They have left the CA DOJ in chaos to the point where they can’t even process an instant background checks, and have raided the funds for other purposes. Somehow after all this, Assembly Member Kevin McCarty has the unmitigated gall to demand we audit the current Concealed Carry Weapon (CCW) license program.
“Taxpayers should not be subsidizing gun owners who want to roam our streets with loaded weapons,”
What McCarty fails to realize is the arduous and draconian laws they passed cause legislative overhead. Yes they did this to themselves, and they should eat those costs. Or perhaps do the right thing and simplify the process, which law abiding gun owners have been fighting to do for years now.
Californian gun owners can have a little hope, though. We now have North Dakota joining freedom and liberty as the 14th constitutional carry state. Furthermore we now have some precedent in regards to firearms and persons property in regard to the 4th amendment. Fox News reported on the Supreme Court case.
“The biggest victory came from the Supreme Court, which decided in favor of a man whose lawyers argued that there had been a violation of his Fourth Amendment rights, which protect citizens from unreasonable search and seizure. His lawyers argued that the Fourth Amendment protected their client not just during an arrest but after an indictment and arraignment. The Supreme Court, in a 6-2 opinion, agreed with the position of the GOA, which had filed amicus brief with the high court.”
Providing precedent to fight the APPs program and its insane processes seems like a legitimate endeavor at this point. At least we can hope for real due process in California.