California’s Drop Test and Handgun Freedom

Used by the Swiss Special Forces but illegal in California!

We Californians have to endure many things including earthquakes, wildfires, a bloated budget, higher taxes, and a gun law that is supposedly for increasing consumer safety but really is a way to limit consumer choice.  I am speaking of the California Department of Justice’s “Drop Test.”  Like most laws that have friendly names, the Drop Test really has an ulterior motive.  On initial reading of the law it sounds like a good thing:

Among the tests used by DOJ-certified labs are a 600-round firing test with six or fewer malfunctions and a drop-safety test from six different positions at a height of 1 meter.

In reality, if a pistol does not “pass” this test it is not legal to be sold in the State of California unless somebody bought one prior to the law having been passed and then decides to sell it to another person or if you are a member of law enforcement (their safety doesn’t matter?).  Why does this law have an ulterior motive?  There are many handguns that are built or imported in small numbers and the manufacturer either cannot afford or does not want to go through the lengthy bureaucracy of having it approved.  One such example is the pistol pictured above, the Sphinx .45 ACP.

The Sphinx is built in Switzerland by Sphinx Systems and is based on a Czechoslovakian design.  In the May 2009 magazine Combat Handguns this pistol managed to put 5 rounds into a circle less than 1.38″ wide from 25 yards.  Not only is the Sphinx used by the Swiss Special Forces but its manufacturer “is the last remaining weapons manufacturer in Switzerland whose products are officially accepted and registered as ‘Swiss Ordinance Pistols.’”  To obtain this level of certification rigorous Swiss government tests are conducted.  Because this pistol sells for around $3,000.00 in the U.S. and is sold in such few numbers it has not been submitted for the Drop Test in California.  As a California resident, I cannot legally own this pistol.

You may ask why anybody would want to own a $3,000.00 pistol to begin with; this is not the point.  Last time I checked, the 2nd Amendment was still in force and somebody in Arizona could own this pistol as could somebody in every other state but Massachusetts and California (they also have a “drop test”).  The law was sold to the public as a way to keep them safe (to keep inexpensive handguns off the market) but in reality it is just another form of trying to ban handguns.

The original 1911 that carried America through two world wars would not pass the Drop Test.

Another issue related to the “Drop Test” is to keep inexpensive handguns off of the market for the “good of public safety.”  Let’s examine that point for a moment.  Firstly, there are about 65 million handguns in the United States which means the secondary market for them is huge and many of them (if not most) are probably very inexpensive.  So how, exactly, is a law banning “inexpensive handguns” really effective if there are plenty of them you can buy legally from a private party?  The entire reason for having passed the “Drop Test” law was to get Saturday Night Specials off of the market:

The Phoenix Arms Company of Ontario, California — known as one of the state’s “Ring of Fire” handgun manufacturers – served as an impetus for the safety standards created by Senate Bill 15, the “Saturday Night Special” law, authored by Richard Polanco in 1999.

Clearly with so many handguns already available legally posing a series of tests for newly manufactured guns is nothing but a political move by so-called “gun grabbers” to limit freedom of choice in consumer self-defense purchases.  A criminal won’t care what’s legal to buy or not buy so clearly this law doesn’t accomplish it’s goal.

A second point is that even if you are not wealthy enough to afford a $3,000.00 Swiss-built handgun you still should be able to purchase something which you can afford in order to defend your life or your family.  Democrats always seem so interested in helping the poor but apparently not when it comes to self defense.

As if the Drop Test law was not restrictive enough it was amended in 2005 to include handguns that either do not have a loaded chamber indicator or a detachable magazine safety (if it has a detachable magazine).  For those unfamiliar with handgun terminology a loaded chamber indicator means an external method of seeing whether there is a bullet in the gun ready to fire and a magazine disconnect safety means if you remove the magazine holding the bullets from the handgun it will not fire.  Clearly this amendment was written and passed by people who know nothing of owning a handgun.

Safe enough for the Wild West but not for Californians.

The first rule of owning a handgun is to always treat it as being loaded.  Following this common sense rule, you should never point a gun at something you do not wish to shoot.  Secondly, if you are trying to defend your life and for some reason the magazine on your handgun falls out your method of self defense will be useless.  These are examples of how the government tries to pass a law to compensate for the lack of common sense by some of its citizens.

So let’s assume you disagree with me on every single point that I have made and you are telling yourself: “But the law is meant to protect people.”  Well, if this is your line of thinking then explain to me why rifles and shotguns are not covered by it?  Is the California government only concerned about people’s lives when it comes to handguns or are they rather simply trying to restrict gun ownership by another name?