NC Bill Seeks To Impose California-Like Gun Control On State

Gun grabbers don’t care where they are or what the attitude in the state may be toward firearms. You see, they’re True Believers. They’re convinced they know better than everyone else, so they seek to impose their will on others through legislation. The problem is, many of them try it in places where they know the legislation isn’t going to happen.

But that doesn’t stop people like North Carolina Representative Verla Insko from trying anyway.

The bill, HB 1060, was filed last Thursday by Orange County Democrat Verla Insko and would require the North Carolina Department of Public Safety to first develop a safe handgun roster, then ban sale or possession of any pistol not included on the list. Insko and the bill’s seven co-sponsors argue there is a lack of federal design and safety standards on pistols and that California’s controversial roster of Handguns Certified for Sale should be a starting point for North Carolina to work with.

Established by California’s Unsafe Handgun Act, that state’s roster of handguns that meet the state’s expansive safety requirements was established in 2001 and is getting gradually smaller. Under state law, new semi-automatic firearms sold in California must have the capability to permanently stamp shell casings fired through the gun with an identifying mark. The concept, known as microstamping, creates a serialized shell casing that could be traced back to the gun that fired it. However, this technology is not in a current production handgun and as a result, California’s roster is contracting and is increasingly limited to legacy models.

Further, while it is legal to buy and sell so-called off-roster pistols to a degree in California, Insko’s proposed legislation ups the ante on gun control as it bans possession of guns not listed on the proposed North Carolina version and has no provision for grandfathering. Those with newly prohibited handguns would have two options as outlined by the proposal: sell or transfer the gun to a licensed dealer or the local sheriff.

Of course, anyone in California knows how frustrating it is to see all these new handgun models come out and know that you just can’t own them because they’re not on a piece of paper somewhere.

Insko’s proposal would take it a step further, though, and essentially lead to confiscation of any firearms not on the approved list. This is a bizarre proposal in and of itself, but especially in North Carolina, a state that tends to hold fast to their guns. She’s deluded if she thinks this will happen.

However, such is life for the gun grabber right now. They see the constant media barrage of anti-gun propaganda and becomes convinced that they’re winning. People like Insko see that and think, “Now is the time. The public is ready for gun control,” and they offer up proposals like this.

Plus, she probably realizes that even if this proposal goes nowhere, she’s signaled that she’s a good anti-gun politician. That means she’ll get campaign funds from people like Michael Bloomberg and may even get some help reaching the next political level.

Either way, that assinine proposal isn’t going to fly in North Carolina or most anywhere else in the country.