CA Could Allow Citizens To Sue Over Illegal Guns [SURVEY]

CALIFORNIA — Lawmakers in California were set to weigh the advancement a new bill Tuesday that would allow private citizens to sue anyone who sells or distributes .50 caliber rifles, illegal assault weapons, parts to build them or guns without serial numbers.

Following the deaths of six people in a shooting involving at least one stolen firearm, calls to toughen gun laws resurfaced this week. Although the state has some of the strictest rules around gun ownership, it has not found a way to prevent people from acquiring stolen or homemade firearms.

On Sunday, just blocks away from the state capitol, two gunmen killed six people and injured 12 others in downtown Sacramento. One of the guns used had been stolen and converted to being capable of automatic gunfire, police said. In another recent instance, a homemade and unregistered assault weapon was used by a father to kill his three daughters, their chaperone and then himself.

Gov. Gavin Newsom urged Sen. Robert Hertzberg to move the bill forward following the latest mass shooting — the 12th in California this year, according to the Gun Violence Archive.

“People argue that we’ve got the toughest gun laws in the nation. But they’re clearly not tough enough,” Hertzberg said Monday.

SB 1327 would not ban citizens from possessing or using such weapons and it would not include stolen weapons unless they are otherwise made illegal, for instance by filing off the serial number.

The bill, authored by Hertzberg, is modeled after a Texas law allowing citizens to sue those who provide or assist in providing abortions. But if SB 1327 becomes law, it will be invalidated if the Texas law faces an unconstitutional ruling in the future.

“It's going to have hopefully a chilling effect on folks with ghost guns or assault weapons,” Hertzberg said. "You’ve got to have millions of eyeballs looking for these guns. If someone flashes one, talks about it, all of a sudden there’s an incentive among the public in a way that there’s never been before to try to pull them off the street.”

In February, Newsom said he thought the Texas abortion law was wrong and lambasted the Supreme Court's decision in December to uphold it.

"But they opened up the door. They set the tone, tenor, the rules. And either we can be on the defense complaining about it or we can play by those rules. We are going to play by those rules," Newsom said.

"We'll see how principled the U.S. Supreme Court is."

After the Supreme Court's decision to uphold the Texas abortion law in December, Newsom said that he would set to work on outlining a similar law that would enforce California's ban on assault weapons.

"If the most efficient way to keep these devastating weapons off our streets is to add the threat of private lawsuits, we should do just that," Newsom said in December.

Sam Paredes, executive director of Gun Owners of California, told the Associated Press he believed the bill's true purpose is to ban guns altogether in California.

"There's no question that it would put some of the smaller mom-and-pop gun stores out of business if they were challenged in court. They don't have the resources to defend themselves, even if they are not guilty," he said. "This will have a huge chilling effect, and that's their intent."

Legislative analysts also raised concerns, including that California's bill might be seen as legitimizing Texas' approach.

Much like the Texas law, the analysts said Hertzberg's legislation is written so broadly that it might ensnare, for instance, “a taxi driver that takes a person to a gun shop,” though Hertzberg said that is not the intent.

Chuck Michel, president of the California Rifle and Pistol Association and an attorney who wrote a book about California's complicated gun laws, called the bill "tit for tat political gamesmanship."

"You’re going to deputize a bunch of amateurs — non-lawyers, non-cops — to judge a neighbor’s actions and then give them the right to drag them into court over it."

Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, which generally favors firearms restrictions, hasn't taken a position on the bill.

The center's state policy director, attorney Ari Freilich, said it “would essentially bring more enforcement oversight to some specific criminal laws in California."

“It’s not something that’s really been tried before," Freilich said.

Last year, U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez overturned a decades old law that banned the sale and manufacture of many assault-style guns. Benitez said the law was unconstitutional and compared the AR-15 rifle to a Swiss Army knife.

The ruling enraged Newsom and Hertzberg.

"We need to call this federal judge out. He will continue to do damage, mark my word," Newsom said, calling the judge a "stone-cold ideologue."

California law defines assault weapons as semiautomatic rifles or pistols that have a variety of functions. The bill would let people seek a court order to stop the spread of these weapons and recover a minimum of $10,000 in damages for each weapon, plus attorney's fees.

California began restricting assault weapons in 1989 and has updated the law several times since. To date, there are an estimated 185,569 assault weapons registered within California, despite the ban, Benitez said last year.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.