California Proposal Would Force Gun Owners To Report Weapons

A new Democratic proposal in California would mandate gun owners inform their insurers of how many firearms they own. The insurers, whether for homeowners or renters, would then report that total to the state government.

This is in addition to the push to require all gun owners to purchase liability insurance. Democratic proponents claim this is to offset damages caused by negligent or accidental discharges of firearms.

The latest proposal came Friday from Assemblymember Mike Gipson (D).

This Residential Property Insurance Firearms bill would be added to the California Insurance Code. It would require all homeowners to update their applications for homeowners’ or renters’ insurance to include specific information on their weapons.

They would be forced to report the “presence, storage and number of firearms by Jan. 1, 2026.”

And that would only be the start of the latest state burden regarding the Second Amendment.

California insurers would be required to “annually report the information gathered from the questions regarding the presence, storage and number of firearms to the Department of Insurance and the Legislature beginning on Jan 1, 2027.”

A statewide gun registry.

Sadly, Californians have grown accustomed to having their constitutional rights usurped by Democratic state officials. As for gun rights, the state has been on a quest to strip these away since the U.S. Supreme Court in 2022 affirmed the right to carry outside of the home in self-defense.

But Sacramento is getting pushback from honest judges who follow the Constitution and rule of law.

U.S. District Judge Cormac Carney late last year put the brakes on the state effort to make most public property “sensitive places.” Lawmakers tried to ban concealed carry for even permit holders in a wide variety of locations, including religious buildings and public parks.

And in September, U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez struck down the California prohibition of so-called “high-capacity” magazines. He correctly noted that the targets of this misguided statute were law-abiding citizens who should be protected from such government overreach.

The state is pursuing appeals even as it attempts to pile on more bad law.