A new law which has already partially taken effect in California with the other half set to take effect in 2025 will implement new "merchant category codes". These codes can be used for various purposes by the state including "detection scenarios"

Hey everybody, how's it going? Welcome back to Copper Jacket TV! Believe it or not, there's yet another new firearm law in California that we need to talk about, which is going to take effect fairly soon. If you thought California couldn't possibly track you any further, you're going to want to pay attention to this one.

Now, real quick before we get started, a great way to support this channel is to subscribe. It's free, only takes a second, and it really helps us out. Another way to support us is by checking out our main sponsor. Especially if you’re someone who carries for self-defense, having a lawyer in your back pocket is essential. That’s what you get with Attorneys on Retainer.

So, let's dive into what's going on here. In California, things are already tough enough as it is. There are background checks for almost everything, waiting periods, purchase limits, and outright bans. Just about every restriction that can be thought up has been put into law to limit your Second Amendment rights. But this new law takes things a step further.

What we're talking about is the introduction of new Merchant Category Codes. Starting next year, there will be specific codes that categorize purchases related to firearms separately from general sporting goods. So, instead of simply categorizing a purchase as sporting goods, these new codes will identify if you bought firearm-related products.

Now, you might think this isn’t a big deal since California already tracks so much. But you’d be wrong. California can always find ways to use this information against you. Listen to this: A representative from a gun control advocacy group in California mentioned that these Merchant Category Codes can be used to create "detection scenarios." Essentially, they’ll be able to flag patterns in purchasing that could be deemed suspicious, potentially reporting these to law enforcement.

The goal here is not just about separating these category codes. It’s about enabling preventive action — California loves the whole pre-crime concept, which is why they're big on red flag laws. It almost feels like they’re inspired by science fiction movies, constantly coming up with new ways to track and restrict.

For instance, let’s say you go to a store often, maybe three or four times a week. With the new codes, this could appear on a radar as suspicious if your purchases are logged multiple times a month under firearm-related products. This could make you a suspect under their detection scenarios. Who knows how California might use that information? While there are background checks and registration for many things, there are also items that don’t require registration, like buying paper or other miscellaneous items that these stores might sell.

This new law is being rolled out in two stages. The first stage has already happened with the creation of the new category code. Next year, stores will be required to adopt this new code, and if they don’t, there are penalties. Fines could go up to $10,000 per incident for failing to use the code, potentially shutting down businesses that can’t comply. Imagine missing ten transactions — the fine could quickly become astronomical.

California is the starting point, but we’re already seeing other states implement similar measures. Recently, Kathy Hochul in New York signed a bill introducing this in her state, so we’re likely to see this creep into other states soon. However, some states are making it illegal to use Merchant Category Codes specifically for tracking firearm purchases, which shows how divisive and concerning this issue is.

I wanted to make you all aware of this because not many people are talking about it yet. Information is the best tool we have to fight back. Thank you all so much for watching; I really appreciate it. Please like, subscribe, and have a great day!

The stagnant California "Roster" has seen some new life recently due to a decision in a case called Boland v. Bonta. This case got the microstamping requirement overturned. Which is what allows for todays news.

Hey everybody, how's it going? Welcome back to Copper Jacket TV! Today, I've got some exciting California roster news for you. We're going to be talking about something that is about to be added to the roster—it’s not there quite yet, but it could be any day now. This is a game changer for California; it’s something Californians have been waiting for decades. So, we're going to talk about what it is and why it's so exciting. Stay tuned!

Hey, real quick before we get started—if you believe that rosters are unconstitutional like I do, and you don't believe the government should be able to tell you what you're allowed to have, go ahead and smash that subscribe button! It's free, it only takes a second, but it helps us out here quite a bit. It helps us spread our Second Amendment message, and it lets the powers-that-be know that you guys enjoy watching content like this. I always appreciate the support—thank you! With that being said, let’s get to it.

Okay, so let’s go and talk about what's going on here. Now, just in case you're not aware of what the roster is—simply put, it’s an unconstitutional government-approved list of handguns available to the state of California. To get on that roster, handguns have to have certain features like magazine disconnects and loaded chamber indicators. They also have to go through a series of tests before they can be approved for the roster. Up until recently, they also had to have microstamping. Microstamping basically does not exist, and it certainly doesn’t exist in mass production, so for a long time, nothing new was being added to the roster.

Currently, there’s an injunction barring enforcement of that microstamping provision, which means that as long as they have the other features, pass the tests, go through the steps, and pay the fees, they can now get on the roster. We've seen a lot of new things start to show up on the roster, but the one thing missing has been any later-generation Glock frames. While the rest of the country has moved on to Gen 4 and Gen 5, California has been stuck at Gen 3. This has been a problem because certain cosmetic features in Gen 3 weren’t popular, and people wanted to get away from them. To do that, you had to do a lot of work to make it similar to what the rest of the country could have.

That’s where this new addition comes in to fix that problem, because Shadow Systems is now going to be on the roster! We’re talking about three new models of Shadow Systems that are about to be added to the roster, and they’re built on Gen 4 frames. This is exciting for me because I remember when the microstamping provision went into effect, and we saw everything fall off the roster. We lost a vast majority of what we could get just a year prior, and it was tough. Going off-roster would eventually catch up with you.

So, seeing something like this being added is fantastic! There are three different models being added: the MR920 (Multi-Role 920), similar to the Glock 19; the DR920 (Duty Role 920), similar to a Glock 17; and the DR920P, which is the compensated version. After testing nearly every Shadow Systems product on this channel over the last seven years, I can say these are well-made, rugged, reliable, durable, and accurate. They come with almost every feature you could ask for if you were getting something custom done. The fluting, the angles of the cuts, and the textures are all there—these models come out of the box as nice as you can get them.

Now, a couple of things to note. If you check the "recently added" section on the roster, you’ll see new items pop up every now and then. Recently, I saw the 365 XL RO pop up, which I think is a cool option, especially for the ladies. New things are being added frequently. However, there’s a new law that’s been passed in California aiming to reimplement microstamping by 2028. If microstamping is added back to the roster, it could cause a freeze or lead to another major drop-off, just like before. So, keep an eye on new laws, even if they don’t seem like they’ll affect you now—they might in the future.

In the meantime, there’s an ongoing lawsuit to overturn the roster completely, which is what I’d like to see. I believe all rosters are unconstitutional. The government shouldn’t have a list of items they allow you to have—it’s our Second Amendment right, not a privilege granted by them. Hopefully, this lawsuit will progress and lead to a positive outcome, possibly reaching the Supreme Court and overturning rosters nationwide.

Anyway, I wanted to share this update. I think it’s a big deal, and I’m looking forward to seeing the reaction of people in California about getting something new like this. Thank you all very much for watching. I really appreciate it. Please like, subscribe, and have a great day!

The Supreme Court is back in session as of Monday October 7th and they have a case before them in Snope v. Brown that could end all bans nationwide. This comes from a 4th circuit decision upholding the Maryland ban.

During a recent interview with Scripps News, the Director of the OGVP admitted that at some time within the next couple weeks we will get new executive actions. Some of which will address the BPSCA and some will be "wholly new".

In this video I break down important developments in rifle and mag ban cases moving forward towards Supreme Court review!

In this video I break down an important "assault weapon" ban case seeking Supreme Court review!

There are dozens of big cases working their way through the court system in California right now, like Duncan v Bonta and Miller. However there is one that isn't talked about enough that is challenging the 10 day waiting period and that case is Richards v. Bonta

Darrell Issa (Ca) and Elise Stefanik (NY) with several other co-sponsors have introduced a bill in congress to overturn California's "roster". This Federal legislation would also overturn any other state "roster" and prevent states from implementing new ones.

This video from Copper Jacket TV discusses the worsening state of gun control in California, highlighting that the state has over 100 gun laws, making it one of the most restrictive for Second Amendment rights. There's a new bill introduced by California Congressman Darl Issa and New York Congresswoman Elise Stefanik aimed at overturning handgun rosters, which limit the types of handguns available for sale based on stringent safety features. These rosters are unconstitutional and a way to undermine gun rights. The bill seeks to prevent any state from enforcing such restrictions and to overturn existing ones. Support this initiative by contacting your representatives.

A recent decision by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court on switchblades is poised to have significant ramifications within the Second Amendment community. The court's ruling is particularly impactful because Massachusetts broadly defines "switchblade" to include not only traditional switchblades and out-the-front knives but also any spring-assisted folding knife—a category encompassing many common knives.

The case in question began on July 3, 2020, when a person was arrested, and during a post-arrest search, a spring-assisted knife was found on his person. The individual was subsequently charged with possessing a dangerous weapon, as switchblades are deemed dangerous per se under Massachusetts law. He appealed, arguing that the Second Amendment covers all bearable arms, and the case eventually reached the Supreme Judicial Court.

The court's ruling has surprised many residents of Massachusetts and could potentially dismantle aspects of the state's strict gun control laws. This development is particularly concerning for those aligned with the state's liberal policies. The court's decision suggests a new legal avenue for Second Amendment groups to pursue lawsuits at the state level, which could mirror the success of recent federal cases.

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court concluded that folding pocket knives, including those commonly known as switchblades, are protected under the Second Amendment. The court referenced the Bruen decision, which has begun to influence state-level rulings, including in Massachusetts. The court determined that the Massachusetts law prohibiting the carrying of switchblade knives could not stand because it did not align with the nation's historical tradition of arms regulation.

This decision could have broader implications, particularly for cases like the Donal case in Lowell, Massachusetts, where a New Hampshire resident was charged for carrying a firearm without a Massachusetts permit. Given New Hampshire's constitutional carry laws, the individual argued that his Second Amendment rights should not be infringed simply because he crossed state lines. The initial ruling favored the defendant, and Massachusetts is currently appealing, but the state is expected to lose due to the broader implications of the Supreme Judicial Court's decision.

Massachusetts has become one of the most anti-gun states in the U.S., even surpassing California in some respects. The state's new laws have imposed stringent restrictions, turning previously legal firearms into contraband and raising the stakes for legal challenges. Federal lawsuits have been filed, and more are expected, as the state's gun control measures face increasing scrutiny.

For residents of Massachusetts, this is a critical moment to support legal efforts to overturn these laws. Local groups, like the Gun Owners Action League, are at the forefront of this fight and need help gathering signatures for petitions and mobilizing voters. With the deadline for voter registration approaching in October, it is crucial for citizens to take action to protect their rights.

In conclusion, this ruling marks a significant victory for the Second Amendment in Massachusetts, and the impact is likely to resonate across the country. It's a reminder of the importance of staying informed and involved in the ongoing fight to protect constitutional rights.

In a decision by the District Court in CRPA v. LASD the judge has ruled that California must begin issuing Non Resident carry permits and has approximately one month to come up with a plan to do so. This does not force reciprocity with other permits but is a huge step in the right direction.

The video from Copper Jacket TV discusses recent developments in a legal case involving California's restrictive gun laws. There are both positive and negative outcomes from the case CRPA vs. LASD (Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department). The positive outcome is that California has been ordered to create a system allowing non-residents to apply for a permit to carry firearms within the state. However, the court did not grant full reciprocity, meaning that out-of-state permits will not automatically be recognized in California. Additionally, the ruling only partially addresses issues like excessive wait times and high fees associated with obtaining permits and applying relief to only two named plaintiffs rather than all affected individuals. While this ruling is a step forward, California may still impose onerous requirements on non-residents seeking permits.