California Law Preventing Advertising Directed At Minors - Consequences

Status
Not open for further replies.
hso

hso

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Jan 3, 2003
Messages
65,985
Location
0 hrs east of TN
Once again California legislation goes full Anti suppressing youth shooting programs.

The California State High School Clay Target League (CASHCTL) folded last week following passage of Assembly Bill 2571, which imposes $25,000 civil fines on “firearm industry members” advertising “any firearms-related product” in a way that could be seen as “appealing to minors.” The statewide league, which operated under the nonprofit USA Clay Target League, has removed everything on the site except a message saying it was “forced by law to suspend all operations.”

“As a school-based activity serving students from 6th-12th grade, these provisions serve to outlaw the very name and existence of the California State High School Clay Target League,” the group’s website states.

The only thing the website has now is a one-page plea for restoring the league, with quotes from John Nelson, president of the league.

“The League is the safest sport in high school,” Nelson said. “Over 1,500 schools across the nation have approved our program. Hundreds of thousands of students have participated, and there has never been an accident or injury.”

A coalition of gun-rights groups has already filed suit against the law, arguing it violates the First and Second Amendments since it restricts speech by “members of the firearm industry.” CASHCTL’s message on the website says the group is watching the court challenge and “is eager to return to providing California’s high schools and their students the safest and fastest-growing sport in America.”
Click to expand...
 
That is chilling in every sense of the word. Classic proof that the over-reaching becomes more egregious despite clear violation of first and second amendments to the Bill of Rights. The sponsors must be made to pay for their violations of the civil rights of these children. If there is no penalty for the deliberate and concerted violation of these rights, they will continue and worsen.
 
Not being a lawyer, what are the laws about explicit sexual imagery and materials that are aimed at or accessed by children? Might that be a precedent. Child porn is banned as it is a crime to produce it, so that is a different matter but making sexual materials available to children - laws against that? Could be a precedent?
 
Without doing any research, my gut says that yes, there are laws against showing pornography to children. I guess someone could try to use it as precedent, but it seems a bit of a stretch.
 
A more tangible example would be the state's effort to ban flavored tobacco and its implied, associated marketing to children.
 
I would think that Hollywood, online advertising, magazines, TV.... would all fall under this bill.

Just by advertising/promoting a video game or movie with guns or gun violence in them, they should fall under this bill.

If they don't enforce it, then they should be subject to lawsuits to get rid of it.
 
Spats McGee said:
Without doing any research, my gut says that yes, there are laws against showing pornography to children. I guess someone could try to use it as precedent, but it seems a bit of a stretch.
Click to expand...

Those restrictions don't seem to apply to school systems when indoctrinating students.

I believe the California law is targeting companies in the gun industry. Since video game and movie producers aren't in the gun industry, they are probably exempt. Wouldn't want to affect Hollyweird's profits.
 
Mk-211 said:
I would think that Hollywood, online advertising, magazines, TV.... would all fall under this bill.

Just by advertising/promoting a video game or movie with guns or gun violence in them, they should fall under this bill.

If they don't enforce it, then they should be subject to lawsuits to get rid of it.
Click to expand...

No, because the same people drafting this bill also control Hollywood, so the rules don't apply to them. Generally, whenever you think a rule targeted at the 2A would/should/could apply to anything else, assume it does not, because the system does not work that way.
 
It is really a shame, there are so many great and fun things to do with a gun past killing anything. Flying orange frizbees are so much fun to bust, to this day I will still wait and watch every bit of it hit the ground, for some reason how they fly after hit is just something I can't take my eyes off of. Same goes for little steel animals shot with a 22 rimfire, I would love to do centerfire silhouette sometime, but think I am a bit old and shaky for that game anymore. My boy loved busting clays. It is part of making an adult in my eye.

Be nervous, this guy in Kali wants to be your next Pres.
 
Yeah, I doubt it will be very long before they start blurring out the images of guns in action flicks advertised on TV along with cable. You'll have to subscribe to a premium channel to see the "real" thing. Mark my words, I would put $100 on that, within 5 years guns will be blurred out in advertisements/trailers/previews at the very least.

ETA: As well as a new "Viewer Discretion" warning. For those who are suffering from mental instability or may be triggered by gun violence and depictions of assault weapons, viewer discretion is advised....

But that really is a tough break for the kids, I'm trying to picture the type of shooting advertisements I might have seen as a kid, can't remember any but I guess all of the stalwart defenders of 2A will just have to file suits and all of us will have to make a stronger effort to teach and expose the next generation to safe shooting.
 
Last edited:
Oh, for the good ol' days when Macy's had a barrel of war surplus rifles in sporting goods, next to the toy section. However, there is good evidence that the rampage killers do focus on past massacres, media, visiting the sites, etc.
 
5118ar said:
Next thing that will happen is Chuck Connors will be sued for introducing guns to his son Mark.
Click to expand...

That would have been “Lucas McCain”.

The Left, these days, would most certainly go after him for this one though.

General_Secretary_Brezhnev_meets_actor_Chuck_Connors%2C_at_San_Clemente_-_NARA_-_194526_-_edited.jpg
General Secretary of the Soviet Communist Party Leonid Brezhnev (left) and interpreter Viktor Sukhodrev meet Chuck Connors, 1973
Leonid Brezhnev, the leader of the Soviet Union, met Connors when Brezhnev arrived on Air Force One at El Toro Marine Corps Air Station with President Richard Nixon in June 1973. Brezhnev noticed Connors in the group on the tarmac waiting to receive him and the President. Brezhnev shook Connors' hand and then wrapped his arms around him, lifting the much taller Connors completely off his feet by at least a foot. The crowd laughed and clapped with approval. Later, at a party given by Nixon at the Western White House in San Clemente, California, Connors presented Brezhnev with a pair of Colt Single Action Army "Six-Shooters" (revolvers) which Brezhnev liked greatly.
Click to expand...
 
The 1994 National Survey on Private Ownership and use of Firearms (NSPOF 1994) surveyed a national sample of "uninstitutionalized adults living on homes with land line phones".
The greatest predictor that an adult would be a gun owner was the fact that most had been introduced to recreational sports shooting (including hunting and plinking) by an adult relative.
The gun banners want to raise the age limits and bar youths from shooting sports; couple of generations as older gun owners die off, there will be a generation raised on the demonization of guns and gun owners, and the goal of progressive thinkers, the imposition of a Hobbesian absolute state with a Weberian state monopoly on arms, will be possible.
Under newthink gun owners are all potential gun criminals: "Every gun criminal was a lawabiding gun owner ... until they committed their first gun crime" is a response I have encountered discussing gun laws on other websites. Growing up under local option prohibition of alcohol 1953-1968, ages 5 to 20, in a low income, working class neighborhood, I knew a few people who had never shown any interest in guns until they decided to turn to crime and decided to acquire a gun. The war on gun owners is not a war on gun criminals or gun violence.
 
My teenage son is no longer allowed to train with me at our local center, despite the fact that there is no live fire and everything is conducted with lasers, C02, and video screens. Hard to see how this makes anyone safer.

I'm not completely convinced that was the intent of the law though. The verbiage is vague enough that it is wide open to interpretation, and so businesses are trying to cover themselves against even the most extreme interpretations. Of course, this being California, the lawmakers may have done that intentionally.
 
Last edited:
Riomouse911 said:
I took my 16-year-old son shooting Friday. The Sacramento zealots can smooch my hams as far as this goes.

View attachment 1095612

I am wondering if this will “woke cancel” his marksmanship team in his high school AFJROTC program. If it does, we will be plaintiffs.

Stay safe.
Click to expand...
Good for you for teaching him and taking him shooting. I hope it doesn't come to you being a plaintiff, but from what I know of you, I think you'd make a fine lead plaintiff for a class action.
 
Funny how history repeats itself.
Hitler said, “Whoever has the youth has the future.”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

SharpDog
  • Locked
High school shooting teams are growing thanks in part to the NRA
Replies
6
Views
603
Bbear
Bbear
H
  • Locked
AP story on scholastic shooting sports
Replies
6
Views
906
xd9fan
X
D
  • Locked
(TX) New School Gun Class Gains in Popularity
Replies
1
Views
440
Hoppy590
H
S
  • Locked
Northern Illinois Gun Owners !!!
Replies
1
Views
441
PCGS65
P
luzyfuerza
  • Locked
Florida's Steps To PREVENT School Shootings
Replies
3
Views
382
Robert
Robert
Back
Top