In the wake of NYSRPA v. Bruen, a number of liberal leaning states enacted prohibitive carry laws in response. In September 2023, Governor Gavin Newsom signed SB 2, the Golden State’s Bruen-response law, and it went into effect on January 1, 2024. Firearms instructor and San Diego County Gun Owners PAC board member Joe Drammissi has been navigating the changes in the law and spoke about it in a recent interview.
Drammissi is a veteran firearms instructor with several years of experience and participates in competitive shooting. He got involved with SDCGO, a group that he says “work[s] within the system,” since inception. While working as a board member, Drammissi started the SDCGO blog about seven years ago, which is how he started writing about the Second Amendment. Since then, Drammissi has also gone on to cover the Second Amendment at his own site, GetAGrip.SubStack.com.
SB 2 did many things to restrict California gun owners. The two big areas that affected carriers were the expansion of so-called “sensitive locations” and a large increase in the training requirements.
“Senate Bill 2 [is] the law that tried to make every place a sensitive area,” Drammissi says. “And it’s been going through the courts for a couple of years. [It] got up to the Ninth Circuit, and a three-judge panel ruled on [it].”
The panel upheld some provisions from a preliminary injunction, while they allowed other provisions to stand in their September 6, 2024 ruling.
Drammissi said that the panel was made up of activist judges who used “goofy” logic in making their ruling. The way they applied a historical analogue was that “they twist the wording and Bruen to support their anti-gun” agenda.
He said that the opinion observed “you can’t ban guns in banks or in hospitals or in places like that, because those places existed back then and they weren’t banned then.” However, he continued by noting that “They turn around [and] they say, ‘Well, you can ban them in parks.’ And do we lose parks?”
One of the provisions of the preliminary injunction that was reversed was the prohibition of carry at: “Any bar or restaurant serving alcohol or intoxicating liquor […] for consumption on the premises, including adjacent parking areas.”
“The biggest thing that’s goofy is the alcohol thing,” Drammissi says of the injunction reversal. “So apparently Ben Franklin could walk into his bank with his firearm and he was okay, but he couldn’t walk into a pub and get a cheeseburger? That was not okay. You know, it’s just goofy. The logic is just twisted here.”
Practically, the sensitive location list creates a safety hazard. Drammissi gave a rundown of what it’d be like if he was out and about with his wife and they decide to pop into a restaurant that serves alcohol before heading home.
“Now, I’m in my truck, so I have to take my gun out while I’m sitting in my confined space, in the truck. I’ve gotta take my loaded firearm out of the holster, and try not to let anybody be able to see it through the windows, put it in the other holster I keep [in the truck] and lock it up in the console vault, and then go in,” Drammissi says. “Then walk through the parking lot to the restaurant, where nobody is ever assaulted or attacked in a parking lot, that just never happens.”
The crux of this operation being done as Drammissi navigates from sensitive location to sensitive location in his travels is safety. “You make me handle a loaded firearm in a confined space for no reason at all,” Drammissi explains. “There’s no reason for me to have to do that. So it endangers people.”
As a trainer, Drammissi said the new requirements have doubled the length of the classes and because of that, doubled the price. “An initial concealed carry [went] from eight hours to 16 hours,” Drammissi noted. “And then the renewals went from four hours to eight hours.”
Drammissi is a huge proponent of training, but he does not think the desired effects are there. Drammissi admits that he almost always has a student in class that tells him the last time they shot at the range was the last time they took their initial or renewal CCW class. So, training is a plus. But, he observes, no matter what, there’ll always be people that will do the bare minimum to get by and then move on.
“I think the bigger effect of that kind of stuff is, I think it has the effect of more pricing people out, because now the cost doubles,” Drammissi says. “The bigger harmful effect is pricing people out. If you think about people that for whatever reason, or maybe at the lower end of the socio-economic scale, where maybe they’re stuck in places that are actually really dangerous, and they really could use a gun to protect themselves, and now they can’t.”
Drammissi estimates that the process can cost up to $1,000.00. He further alleges that the cost hike and added requirements are all part of the politicians purposely trying to chill the exercise of the Second Amendment.
To get his instructor certification, Drammissi says, he has to get fingerprinted. The fingerprinting is already something that CCW holders have to get done, and with the law change, they require it on every renewal. For instructors, Drammissi said he went to get his prints done and the woman taking his prints said it cost $30.00. But, he continued, after she looked at the form, she said, ”Oh, wait, this is firearms. That’s $110.”
“I mean these things hurt, and they just endanger the public, and they hurt students,” Drammissi says.
With all the onerous requirements and changes to California law, Drammissi is optimistic that most of the law will be reversed and tossed out. He does make the observation and warning that litigation takes time.
“You just need to be informed, and you need to be up on what’s happening, and you need to know what these politicians are doing, and you need to get involved and get these people out of office and elect the right people,” Drammissi says. Which is why he’s so active with SDCGO. “The better strategy is to get the right people in office in the first place, so you don’t have those problems.”
What’s the next step for California gun owners, the fate of SB 2, and the attempts to ameliorate all the other restrictions on liberty in the Golden State? That remains to be seen. What’s paramount though, Drammissi says, is to support the local and national advocacy groups, because without them, there’s no fighting chance. We’ll be keeping a watchful eye for any movement on the left coast and be reporting on anything that changes.
Be sure to check out Joe’s work over at GetAGrip.SubStack.com. Also take some time to check out San Diego County Gun Owners.
If you’re interested in catching the full interview with Joe Drammissi, you can click HERE. Or, if you rather, you can watch our conversation in the embed below.
Read the full article here
