California Gov. Gavin Newsom has been quick to point the finger at Republican politicians when a high-profile shooting takes place in a red state, most recently blaming Louisiana lawmakers (and the gun lobby) for the mass shooting in Shreveport last weekend.
Newsom hasn’t had much to say about the attempted shooting at the White House Correspondents Association dinner in D.C. last night, even though the suspect in the attack is a California resident who apparently was able to lawfully acquire the guns he used despite all of the Golden State’s gun control laws.
Allen — who was seen on surveillance video charging through metal detectors outside the ballroom where the dinner was taking place — had a record of firearm ownership. He purchased the shotgun used in Saturday’s shooting in August 2025, according to two law enforcement sources. He also owned another semiautomatic pistol, purchased in 2023, they said.
The suspect had lived at multiple residences in the Los Angeles area from November 2010 to March 2026, according to the sources. He spent most of those years in Torrance, but also had an address in the city of San Gabriel between early 2018 and late 2019.
According to Newsom the shooting in Shreveport, which was committed by someone unable to legally possess firearms who allegedly obtained his murder weapon through theft, is the fault of pro-2A Republicans. By that same logic, then, why shouldn’t we blame California Democrats for failing to stop Cole Tomas Allen from getting the guns he used to try to assassinate members of the Trump administration, and perhaps President Trump himself?
Newsom’s only reaction to last night’s events was a boilerplate post on X that insinuated Allen’s targets were members of the media in attendance at the WHCA dinner and not administration officials.
Relieved everyone at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner is safe tonight based on initial reports.
A free press is foundational to our country.
Violence is never acceptable.
— Governor Gavin Newsom (@CAgovernor) April 26, 2026
So when will Newsom excoriate his fellow Democrats for not imposing gun laws that would have stopped Allen from legally purchasing firearms, and what laws will he demand in response? The state already allows for licensing regimes to require concealed carry applicants to undergo a psychological screening. Will Newsom ask the legislature to impose that same requirement on anyone seeking to purchase a firearm? Maybe expand the state’s 10-day waiting period to 10 months instead?
I don’t actually blame California’s gun laws for Allen’s ability to acquire a handgun and a shotgun over the course of two years, but then, I don’t hold Louisiana lawmakers responsible for the murderous actions of a convicted felon who was willing to kill his own children with an allegedly stolen firearm either.
The simple truth is that if someone is really committed to carrying out an attack like what we saw in D.C. on Saturday night, or in Shreveport last weekend, they’re not going to be stopped by any gun control laws that are in place. If they can’t get their hands on a gun legally, they’ll turn to the black market or steal a gun themselves.
What stops these individuals is one or more people being able to fight back, and if those folks have a gun of their own, the odds of successfully preventing an attack increases dramatically. The suspect in last night’s shooting lived in one of the most gun-controlled states in the Union and traveled to a place that is almost as unfriendly to the right to keep and bear arms in order to carry out his attack. It was the Secret Service that stopped him, not California or D.C. gun laws.
The WHCA dinner was an actual “sensitive place” because of the president’s attendance; folks were required to pass through a metal detector and a security checkpoint before they could get inside the ballroom, and there was plenty of armed security on hand who could engage any would-be killer who tried to shoot his way inside.
Many mass shootings, though, take place in locations that are sensitive in name only; “gun-free zones” that don’t have any added security measures to truly protect those inside, only a sign on the wall telling people that guns aren’t allowed. Those signs offer the same amount of protection that a waiting period law or “assault weapon” ban does… none at all, despite what Gavin Newsom and other anti-gunners say when they see the chance to exploit a tragedy in order to erode our right to self-protection with a firearm.
Editor’s Note: The radical Left will stop at nothing to enact their radical gun control agenda and strip us of our Second Amendment rights.
Help us continue to report on and expose the Democrats’ gun control policies and schemes. Join Bearing Arms VIP and use promo code FIGHT to receive 60% off your membership.
Read the full article here
