The California Glock ban fight just got interesting. On July 1st, the Department of Justice formally challenged California’s new ban on various Glock handguns under Assembly Bill 1127. California has now filed its response, and the reasoning is something to behold. I’ve read a lot of legal filings covering gun cases on this blog, and this one is a masterclass in a state bending logic to defend a restrictive law. The video above goes through it point by point.
The “you waited too long” argument
California’s first move is a legal doctrine called laches. In plain English: the DOJ waited too long to sue after the bill was signed, so the lawsuit shouldn’t count, and the delay supposedly proves there’s no urgent problem.
Here’s the trick. The DOJ is suing under 34 U.S.C. Section 12601, which addresses patterns of conduct, and you can’t sue over a pattern of enforcement before the law is actually in effect. AB 1127 took effect July 1st. Sue early and they’d say you have no standing; wait until the law is live and they say you waited too long. That’s not an argument, that’s a catch-22 dressed up in Latin.
Shrinking the statute to fit
Next, California argues the DOJ is misusing Section 12601 entirely, claiming it was only ever meant for extreme police misconduct, not state gun laws. Read the plain language of the statute and you won’t find that limitation anywhere; the state is asking a court to write it in.
Follow the logic to its end and it gets worse. If California’s theory held, the federal government would lose a major tool for stepping in when states trample constitutional rights of any kind, not just the Second Amendment. Be careful what legal theories you invent to win one case, because they don’t stay in one case.
The California Glock ban and the “common use” problem
The boldest claim in the response: banning these handguns doesn’t implicate the Second Amendment at all. We’re talking about some of the most common pistols in America, but California says the numbers don’t matter. Their argument is that because manufacturers haven’t redesigned these guns to prevent illegal machine-gun conversions, the guns aren’t protected. They call it a “modern problem” needing a “nuanced approach.”
Translated: unless the gun is built exactly the way the state prefers, your right to own it doesn’t apply. That turns the Supreme Court’s common-use standard on its head, and I don’t think it survives contact with the current Court’s precedents.
Where this goes
As of this writing, the case is in its early rounds and nothing about the California Glock ban has been decided on the merits. I’ll keep covering it here, because what a state gets away with in California has a way of showing up in other legislatures later. Meanwhile, in Texas, Glocks are as legal as coffee. We keep them and plenty of other pistols in stock, and if you’re choosing between models, my Glock 19 vs Glock 17 comparison is the place to start.
Lance Rankin is the owner and Chief Gunsmith of Western Sport, a family-run Type 07 FFL and Class 3/SOT dealer in Roanoke, Texas, serving shooters since 2007. Born and raised in Texas with over 50 years of experience handling firearms, Lance purchased Western Sport in 2017 and turned his lifelong passion into his profession. He specializes in AR-15 and AR-10 platform rifles, manufactures Western Sport’s own AR-15 line under the Rankin Industries brand, and runs the shop’s in-house Cerakote coating operation. When he’s not behind the counter or the workbench, you’ll find him on his ranch deep into the night, hunting coyotes with an AR-15 and thermal optics. Lance holds an MBA and personally shoots and tests the products Western Sport sells.
