AB 1263: Economic Warfare Disguised as Compliance

[gorgothmog]

I don't think you will need to worry about that here

When I look side to side I see my neighbors of all political stripes. When I look up all I see are the likes of Newsom, Gipsom, and Everytown stepping on our collective necks. Left, Right, Center, we need to start organizing as a political bloc. I know we can do better than we are doing right now if we organize together. Gun violence and Bloomberg are symptoms of a sick society because there is so much wealth inequality. We just need to elect people that want to stick it to the political donors. Switzerland has tons of guns, they're rich as hell, but the wealth disparity isn't nearly the same. Sure, their culture and enforcement is different, but if we need to organize around providing for society, which would in turn lower violent crime rates. We can have our cake and eat it, but we need to understand where the problems come from. What is the first step, where can we starve them of oxygen? Electing an AG that isn't a puppet of Everytown or breaking the supermajority would be an excellent start. We also need to be clear eyed about who the average California voter is. It's a needle to thread, for sure. I'm not a political analyst, but I'm saying we have enough of a voice if we want to show up as a bloc.

 

[Warpspeed]

When I look side to side I see my neighbors of all political stripes. When I look up all I see are the likes of Newsom, Gipsom, and Everytown stepping on our collective necks. Left, Right, Center, we need to start organizing as a political bloc. I know we can do better than we are doing right now if we organize together. Gun violence and Bloomberg are symptoms of a sick society because there is so much wealth inequality. We just need to elect people that want to stick it to the political donors. Switzerland has tons of guns, they're rich as hell, but the wealth disparity isn't nearly the same. Sure, their culture and enforcement is different, but if we need to organize around providing for society, which would in turn lower violent crime rates. We can have our cake and eat it, but we need to understand where the problems come from. What is the first step, where can we starve them of oxygen? Electing an AG that isn't a puppet of Everytown or breaking the supermajority would be an excellent start. We also need to be clear eyed about who the average California voter is. It's a needle to thread, for sure. I'm not a political analyst, but I'm saying we have enough of a voice if we want to show up as a bloc.

You make some good points.

From my perspective, we need to get money out of politics. Citizens United v. FEC has caused more harm than anything else but I get it, 1A and all that jazz.

The flip side is only those with money can afford to run so how do we balance that? I don't know. Like gun violence, if the solutions were easy they would be done already.

 

[gorgothmog]

You make some good points.

From my perspective, we need to get money out of politics. Citizens United v. FEC has caused more harm than anything else but I get it, 1A and all that jazz.

The flip side is only those with money can afford to run so how do we balance that? I don't know. Like gun violence, if the solutions were easy they would be done already.

I'm 100% behind ending Citizen's United, and there are ways of doing that by redefining what rights a corporation has. There is over 100 years of case law to back up state-level controls over corporate status and governance to allow for that. Montana is in the thick of it again!

Then, onto my main point in exposing Everytown:

If California gun owners showed up as a bloc that openly backed wealth redistribution and cracking down on donor corruption as real ways to reduce violence, it would change the whole conversation. It reframes gun owners as people who care about public safety and social stability, not just hardware. Guns stop being the only issue and become part of a bigger picture about how people actually end up desperate, angry, or violent. That kind of platform doesn’t attack anyone, it just shifts the frame.

The move isn’t calling groups like Everytown hypocrites, it’s forcing a reveal. If they truly care about saving lives, then housing, wages, healthcare, and inequality should matter just as much as gun laws. If they refuse to engage on those issues and only push restrictions, people can draw their own conclusions about donor influence, and it's just exposing rich lawyers who don't want working class people to have arms. A disciplined, cross-political gun-owner bloc that supports civil liberties and economic fairness becomes unavoidable, and once that exists, others either adapt or expose themselves.

 

[GoldensRule]

You make some good points.

From my perspective, we need to get money out of politics. Citizens United v. FEC has caused more harm than anything else but I get it, 1A and all that jazz.

The flip side is only those with money can afford to run so how do we balance that? I don't know. Like gun violence, if the solutions were easy they would be done already.

This reminds me of George Washington's many prophetic warnings. For example:

In his Farewell Address, George Washington warned against the "baneful effects of the spirit of party," fearing that political factions would distract government, weaken administration, foment divisions (especially geographical ones), and open the door to foreign influence and even despotism, urging Americans to prioritize national unity and the public good over party loyalty to preserve the Republic. He saw parties as engines that could be manipulated by ambitious men to subvert the people's will, leading to instability and undermining liberty.

For anyone who might be interested, the address is available here: https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/resources/pdf/Washingtons_Farewell_Address.pdf

 

[GoldensRule]

3. Adult Signature Required — This Is a Tax, Plain and Simple

Let’s call this what it is from the start. The Adult Signature Required mandate is not a safety measure. It is a tax, imposed indirectly through shipping. One government entity mandates it. Another government-linked carrier collects it. (USPS) Sellers and buyers are forced to pay it to complete a “lawful” transaction. That is the functional definition of a tax — just without the honesty of calling it one.

Sidenote on Sellers “Bailing” on California - I’ll try not to go full Marine on companies that have announced they won’t ship to California, so I’ll say this plainly: You cannot call yourself a 2A company in one breath and, in the next, abandon millions of law-abiding brothers and sisters behind enemy lines. We need fighters, not flighters.

That said, here’s the part many of those sellers don’t understand: By bailing on California, they’ve voluntarily cut 13% of their market. That revenue doesn’t just disappear. It has to be replaced. How do you replace it? You raise prices. It may take a quarter or two for them to feel it, but this tax is coming for them anyway — and when it does, the other 49 states will pay for it. This Tax is getting exported Nationally. California represents roughly 1 out of every 8 Americans and that my friend is 13% of the national commercial market. That scale is large and sellers cannot realistically isolate this tax to California alone. No business can operate permanently at a 13% reduction and not raise prices. Either way: Prices rise nationwide, or California gets cut off from lawful commerce. In both scenarios, the other 87% of Americans end up subsidizing California’s policy choices.

We all, sellers and buyers nationwide, will feel this unnecessary inflation from CA export tax, whether you reside in California or not. When a state forces a hidden tax so large that lawful commerce becomes mathematically impossible, the outcome is no longer accidental. It is economic warfare disguised as compliance and it affects everyone.

The State of California also enacted AB1246 (2025):

AB 1246 (effective 2026), allows licensed distillers (in-state & out-of-state) to ship spirits directly to CA consumers under strict conditions: a special permit, age verification (adult signature), clear "CONTAINS ALCOHOL" labeling, shipment limits (2.25L/day/person), and reporting to the ABC, but consumers can't ship to themselves, and all alcohol shipping must use approved common carriers like FedEx/UPS with proper licensing, not the USPS.

This is a 1-year pilot program, expiring Jan 1, 2027

California AB1246 | 2025-2026 | Regular Session

Bill Text (2025-10-03) Alcoholic beverages: distilled spirits. [Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 295, Statutes of 2025.]

legiscan.com

 

[GoldensRule]

When I look up all I see are the likes of Newsom, Gipsom, and Everytown stepping on our collective necks.

In this context, what or who is "Gipsom" and "Everytown"??

 

[GoldensRule]

Just so everyone here knows - I posted this in r/caguns on reddit and even though within an hour it had had 83 upvotes and a ton of Patriots positively commenting the moderators of the sub removed it. This should tell you all who is controlling the reddit forums

I just re-read the rules for that subreddit and it states: #4. ...."No AI generated content." Looking at what you posted above, it appears to be AI generated (to me) and maybe to the mods as well. If it isn't, did you message them and ask for clarification?

 

[MarineGunBuilder]

It is written personally from my perspective and my personal business. I was on a 3 hour podcast last night spreading this exact message to thousands of Patriots. Last I knew AI cannot generate me in real time. Any moderation team, especially now and responsible for a California dedicated firearm sub, who would read this - see the engagement has completely failed to help and serve their fellow Patriots in CA. They have failed their community through an act of censorship, whether it was done from being influenced to do so or made a poor judgement on content. Either way it's malicious against their community to not keep them informed and it does not matter if it was done with intent or through incompetence. The result is the same - less Patriots informed. If we've learned nothing through history it's that silencing is an automatic win for the other side. So to answer your question Sir, no I have not messaged them as their act of aggression clearly shows their intentions are not about benefiting the community.

 

[ikeo1]

It is written personally from my perspective and my personal business. I was on a 3 hour podcast last night spreading this exact message to thousands of Patriots. Last I knew AI cannot generate me in real time. Any moderation team, especially now and responsible for a California dedicated firearm sub, who would read this - see the engagement has completely failed to help and serve their fellow Patriots in CA. They have failed their community through an act of censorship, whether it was done from being influenced to do so or made a poor judgement on content. Either way it's malicious against their community to not keep them informed and it does not matter if it was done with intent or through incompetence. The result is the same - less Patriots informed. If we've learned nothing through history it's that silencing is an automatic win for the other side. So to answer your question Sir, no I have not messaged them as their act of aggression clearly shows their intentions are not about benefiting the community.

Just so you understand a different perspective. You created your account on Saturday and you call out anyone who might silence you because you feel entitled as a new patriot? You are one of 30k here and one of 100k there. If you own a business, did you post it on your website? You have not verified as an FFL which is something we offer for free.

It may be a surprise to you but we get A LOT of people who come in guns blazing who try to piggy back on our platform for their message.

I would expect this statement is on your website to notify all your customers.

 

[MarineGunBuilder]

We are talking about a reddit sub - not this forum Sir. I think you are misunderstanding the conversation. This forum is excellent and has not censored anyone.

 

[GoldensRule]

It is written personally from my perspective and my personal business. I was on a 3 hour podcast last night spreading this exact message to thousands of Patriots. Last I knew AI cannot generate me in real time. Any moderation team, especially now and responsible for a California dedicated firearm sub, who would read this - see the engagement has completely failed to help and serve their fellow Patriots in CA. They have failed their community through an act of censorship, whether it was done from being influenced to do so or made a poor judgement on content. Either way it's malicious against their community to not keep them informed and it does not matter if it was done with intent or through incompetence. The result is the same - less Patriots informed. If we've learned nothing through history it's that silencing is an automatic win for the other side. So to answer your question Sir, no I have not messaged them as their act of aggression clearly shows their intentions are not about benefiting the community.

Act of aggression? So many conflicts begin because of assumptions and you are assuming one heck of a lot. If it were me, I would communicate with them and ask why it was removed instead of just assuming malice. Seriously, what can it hurt to ask? It's a far more mature approach than just assuming the position of victim.

Of course, you would need to ask the question in a civil and polite fashion and remove your heels which you have apparently dug into the dirt. You know something like this:

"Hi Guys, on (such and such date) I made this post (include the link) and it was subsequently taken down. I was hoping you could explain why it was taken down so I can avoid such issues in the future."

You might find out it was a mistake, a misunderstanding or some other innocent reason. Moderators are people and we all make mistakes, even the mods here make mistakes.

PS. Patriotism is not agreeing or disagreeing with your opinions.

 

[MarineGunBuilder]

Act of aggression? So many conflicts begin because of assumptions and you are assuming one heck of a lot. If it were me, I would communicate with them and ask why it was removed instead of just assuming malice. Seriously, what can it hurt to ask? It's a far more mature approach than just assuming the position of victim.

Of course, you would need to ask the question in a civil and polite fashion and remove your heels which you have apparently dug into the dirt. You know something like this:

"Hi Guys, on (such and such date) I made this post (include the link) and it was subsequently taken down. I was hoping you could explain why it was taken down so I can avoid such issues in the future."

You might find out it was a mistake, a misunderstanding or some other innocent reason. Moderators are people and we all make mistakes, even the mods here make mistakes.

PS. Patriotism is not agreeing or disagreeing with your opinions.

I don’t think anyone here is confused about how to ask a moderator why something was removed. Most of us who’ve been around platforms long enough have done exactly that many many times. The point being raised isn’t about hurt feelings or being a victim. It’s about outcomes, not intent. Whether they removed the post due to a mistake or poor judgement, the result is the same - information never reaches the community they serve. It would be those moderators who lack the maturity to understand that. They are the leaders of the sub and are accountable for their own actions.

"Patriotism isn’t about agreement" I agree with you there Sir. It is, however, about making sure our fellow brothers and sisters have access to information that affects their rights, livelihoods, and ability to exercise their freedoms. Suppressing that information, intentionally or not, doesn’t serve that goal.

 

[couragewolf]

The statute may not spell out a retention period, but it also does not authorize immediate destruction. If the State can audit, investigate, or enforce compliance after the fact, then sellers must retain records long enough to prove compliance. Which basically translates to forever.

You can literally do permanent record retention with entirely obfuscated details, kyc as a service and shielded consumer data with digital ledgers and FHE. I could probably be coerced into helping an online dealer demo such a thing.

 

[couragewolf]

California is going to have a hard time enforcing a lot of AB 1263, and that is baked into the law. It mostly targets sellers, many of them out of state, not buyers. California has limited reach over businesses that do not operate here and can just stop shipping to avoid trouble. The rules are vague on purpose, which makes enforcement slow and messy. When the state cannot clearly explain what compliance looks like, proving violations becomes a guessing game.


Just look at the questions enforcement would have to answer. Was an ID “properly” verified? Was a notice presented “correctly”? Was acknowledgment “sufficient”? Were records “adequately” safeguarded? Those are subjective standards with no clear benchmarks, which makes consistent enforcement nearly impossible and risky for the state. DOJ knows that pushing hard on vague rules invites lawsuits, injunctions, and forced clarification. So the real goal is not clean enforcement, it is to scare vendors, shrink the market, and let access dry up before courts ever step in.

Anyone want to build a drop ship aggregator service.

 

[GoldensRule]

I don’t think anyone here is confused about how to ask a moderator why something was removed. Most of us who’ve been around platforms long enough have done exactly that many many times. The point being raised isn’t about hurt feelings or being a victim. It’s about outcomes, not intent. Whether they removed the post due to a mistake or poor judgement, the result is the same - information never reaches the community they serve. It would be those moderators who lack the maturity to understand that. They are the leaders of the sub and are accountable for their own actions.

"Patriotism isn’t about agreement" I agree with you there Sir. It is, however, about making sure our fellow brothers and sisters have access to information that affects their rights, livelihoods, and ability to exercise their freedoms. Suppressing that information, intentionally or not, doesn’t serve that goal.

With you being a vendor, I suspect you would go suborbital if you made an error with one of your customers and, rather than talking with you about it first, they go ahead and blast you in the court of public opinion.

 

[Ro-bo]

For Supreme Court review, the case has to become ripe first. That means real enforcement, real harm, and a clean plaintiff like a legitimate vendor or FFL, not a criminal case.

That's not true at all. The supreme court can vacate lower court decisions on a whim. This generally requires unanimity among the justices but there is no hard and fast rule for that, nor one for a case being "ripe". Would they squash AB1263 like they did Caetano v Mass.?, Not likely, because it's an apple in a discussion about oranges, and the law is so broad comparatively to one regarding stun guns. But could they? Certainly.

 

[MarineGunBuilder]

With you being a vendor, I suspect you would go suborbital if you made an error with one of your customers and, rather than talking with you about it first, they go ahead and blast you in the court of public opinion.

You're right Sir. I will message them

Edit: I messaged them it was not a mistake. To help with the analogy - If I cancelled an order on a customer without speaking to them first on why I cancelled it, then I would deserve to be put on blast publicly. In this case, I gave them the benefit of the doubt and did as you suggested - but it proved what we knew all along - they are poor leaders of that community.

 

[SierraShooter]

This is why I stopped reading and posting on reddit. We cannot have an open conversation about anything over there.

Technical subjects only. Anything political, or based on opinion, forget it. I don't want to sound prejudice about certain demographic groups, but look at what they are on Reddit.

 

[SierraShooter]

"Economic Warfare"...I thought the OP might be talking about the fact that all of the new taxes on firearm related products and the ammo regulations is tantamount to economic warfare on firearms owners.

Using the left's playbook, I argued against the props that introduced these taxes as being "racist", as they disproportionately affects lower income citizens, and non white citizens fall into the lower income brackets more than whites. But I doubt that argument worked with my liberal friends.

 

[axhoaxho]

And the painful irony is..... No ID is required to vote in California.