I Ran for Governor that if you're a law-abiding citizen, you should have every right to carry and protect yourself and especially You look at like San Francisco and some of the madness that's going on the police ain't doing it, you know. Well, California is trying to californify the entire United States by now Gavin Newsom Institute or promoting a proposal to amend the Constitution with a new amendment that would radically change gun laws in America and you can only imagine which direction these gun laws would be changed in America if Newsom presented The Proposal Now I'll talk about the proposal in a moment, but I want to catch you up first with what's actually happening in California right now. then I'm going to catch you up with a debate that I had with my wife last night. and then I'm going to talk about this amendment and some of the implications of what it could mean.

So first things first: California right now and this is actually pretty incredible. California Right now is having a crisis in that courts are rejecting California's ability to actually enforce concealed carry without a license and this is freaking out California because they are like basically the only way to get a gun permit in California is if you're massively donating to the politicians and somehow somebody at the sheriff's office is like get this guy a license. It is really bad. And even if you get licensed, the places that you're not allowed to carry a gun in California are basically all the places you would need a gun.

If there were ever some kind of disaster shooting or attack or whatever. And so right now you have rulings in California where judges are basically going hey, um, we aren't necessarily worried about like laws or this, that or whatever I mean obviously their job is to worry about laws. My point is, they're going with this elevated argument and now judges are saying hey, and the LA times did a great piece on this. They're actually saying the Constitution matters and now we have judges getting bashed for not pausing the enforcement of laws when the constitutionality of those laws is being challenged and this is a really big game changer because it basically says hey, look, you can't enforce these laws that say somebody can't carry a gun concealed without a license if that violates our constitution.

So we need to address the constitutionality first before you can go arrest people for concealed carrying a gun without a license. This is huge happening in California right now. So obviously Gavinusum is freaking out because keep in mind, the Constitution matters a lot and I want to talk about this debate I had with Lauren yesterday I'm a big fan of the Constitution I think everybody's a big fan of the Constitution down in the heart of it. Uh, and the Second Amendment obviously is a big deal.

All right. It's a right to bear arms. We know this, we we, and we'll talk about why this existed and how that applies in just a moment. But what's really interesting is what Newsome's trying to do is he's trying to pass a Constitutional Amendment which you need a two-thirds majority of Congress to actually pass a Constitutional Amendment which basically means it ain't gonna happen bro, it's just a PR stunt.

But I want you to understand what is part of his Constitutional Amendment Part of Gavin Newsom's Constitutional Amendment is that states would be allowed to Institute Common Sense Gun laws. This is literally a reaction to California basically being told by courts all of your laws on guns could be unconstitutional and you're not allowed to enforce these. So in other words, Newsom's trying to get an amendment passed that says no no states are allowed to install laws that are common sense gun laws around guns. and of course A lot of people are like, well, I'm okay with common sense gun laws, but the problem isn't that you know you and I think the laws would be common sense.

The problem is what do people on the extreme sides think is common sense according to California's version of Common Sense common sense is you can have a gun, you just can't take it to any store that doesn't have a sign that says you're allowed to carry a gun here which is basically going to be no store. Uh, you're not allowed to carry it in restaurants, at churches, at bars, at schools, in public parks, at parades, at public events, at stadiums at any Mass Gatherings You're basically allowed to carry a gun on an empty Street and in your home. That's California's version of Common Sense and Gavin Newsom's trying to apply that to the Constitution. So that way you can now argue in court over what common sense is.

whereas the argument right now is um, we're not arguing about common sense. we're arguing about the Constitution now yesterday and Lauren and I we I I love these debates because we we don't agree on everything and I'm Gonna Keep really my opinion out of it because really I'm just trying to present these these these arguments. but we were arguing about what? what are arguments on on either side of the uh of weapons debates right? And what I thought was so incredible was Lawrence not that big of a gun fan. But what was so incredible was in our discussion.

Uh, we we both actually agreed, hey, look, if if the Second Amendment is the right to bear arms, then you technically shouldn't need a license to be able to carry a concealed firearm. We thought this was really interesting because we're just looking at it from just sort of like an outside point of view going well. I mean technically shouldn't need a license to carry a firearm, especially concealed firearm. You have the right to protect yourself and so at what point does this carry over to you know, like assault rifles, right? This is.

there's the big assault weapons ban and so the question then goes to. well, what if judge has been saying and so I did hours of research onto this and I'm going to give you a quick bottom line on this Quick Bottom line: What the Supreme Court is looking at right now when it comes to assault weapons? I Personally, by the way, my quick opinion: I Personally think that we're probably going to have a lot more handgun freedoms and a lot of these. Licensing Laws Probably won't be around anymore in five years because things are just going to go back to the Constitution which is kind of supposed to be right. Uh, it's gonna take longer for any kind of assault weapons.

whatever you might call those right because I know people are like, oh, you know my AR-15 it's on assault weapon AR doesn't stand for assault, but we know this. Okay, we're not going to go down the basic level I Want to go higher level here? Okay, so what's higher level? Well, what judges are evaluating right now is that the point of the Second Amendment was that at any point, if there was a crisis or a problem, we would be able to call on a citizen to participate in an active militia and defend our land or our property or our lives. And so then the question is okay. Well, in order to be able to defend, uh, as a militia against an imposing government, we need to have a similar weapon as that opposing government.

And then it's of course. this is where on one arm, one side people like well, I mean people can't have nukes or hand grenades or C4 or all the you know, Apache helicopters right? of course. But what people can theoretically have would be the same weapon as a soldier Uh in in terms of like, like a rifle. And if a soldier in the military can carry a rifle which might be in an AR-15 an M4 whatever it is an AK whatever it is, then could theoretically or should theoretically an individual citizen have that in their home to have that essential equality right.

Soldier with AK versus citizen AKA soldier with M4 M16 M50 Whatever you want to call it uh versus an individual right. And this is what courts are deciding right now and the Supreme Court will be evaluating is when the Second Amendment was created. The Second Amendment says sure, you can't walk around with nuclear basically the implication as the Second Amendment doesn't say this, but the courts have restricted that. Obviously, citizens don't have the right to bear every arm like you're not walking around with nukes.

but you do have the right to bear the same arms of the equivalent of what basically a military uh uh, participant would carry. And that would be like let's say a side armor Beretta and a rifle. Back then it was a musket. You know, a single shot revolver or yoka or whatever rust reference, Uh, now, uh, that might be, You know, a Glock and uh, you know, and an AR Uh, And so that's really an interesting debate that is going to be had by a courts in our Supreme Court and something to pay attention to because obviously all of us agree that we shouldn't be walking around with nukes.

We all agree with that. Uh, not Everybody agrees that you should have the right to walk around with a handgun, but the Constitution technically does protect that. Now at what point does the Constitution also protect rifles? That's what the Supreme Court's debating now is do we protect the right to single shot rifles or automatic rifles? Do we go 10 bullet magazine limits? Or can we go 30? Because that's what someone in the military would have, right? And so I find this very interesting and I think one of the ways to think about it because there are a lot of people who are super anti-rifals One of the ways to think about it is imagine if we were Ukraine Russia invades one of the biggest defenses against Russia Uh. progressing is the resolve of individuals fighting in urban combat.

Russians Russians Come in, they're getting shot from every window because people have weapons. Imagine for a moment Mexico invades Southern California and you have to wait for the military to come and they're coming in with ARs Should you not also have an AR right? Obviously, if we get nuked, it's a problem I don't have to really worry about that, hopefully knock on wood. Uh, so I find that debate very very interesting and I'm not here to to cast bias. uh I'm here to say look I personally I'm a big fan of the Second Amendment uh, uh, you know I I think what courts though and I think this is what matters I think courts will have some really big deciding to do when it comes to um, you know, rifles.

but in terms of handguns I think courts are actually moving into uh, an optimistic direction for for Uh for individual people who who want to get licensed or who want to be legal gun owners who want to be trained gun owners and want to do the right thing. That's what I ran for Governor on by the way. I ran for governor that if you're a law-abiding citizen, you should have every right to carry and protect yourself and especially you look at like San Francisco and some of the madness that's going. the police ain't doing it, you know? So uh, you know I'm I'm a fan of that and again, that's just my opinion.

The whole point of this though, was to provide some perspective on what's going on with California Uh, basically and Newsome trying to californianify all of America That's kind of what people think he would do if he ever ran for president as well. so something to keep in mind.