California Democrats are once again proving that when it comes to firearms policy, there is no such thing as “enough.” The latest push comes in the form of SB 948, a newly introduced bill that would dramatically raise the bar for ordinary Californians who wish to exercise their Second Amendment rights.
Under this proposal, purchasing a firearm would no longer hinge solely on passing a written safety test. Instead, residents would be required to complete a state-approved, eight-hour training course that includes live-fire shooting exercises before they could even obtain the certificate needed to buy a gun.
Under current law, California already mandates that prospective gun owners secure a Firearm Safety Certificate by passing a test developed by the Department of Justice. That test covers firearm handling, legal responsibilities, and other required subjects. SB 948 would layer an entirely new requirement on top of that system.
Beginning July 1, 2028, applicants would need to complete a minimum eight-hour course, approved by the state, with both classroom instruction and time on a firing range. The bill also gives the Department of Justice broad authority to issue regulations and additional requirements for implementation, leaving the full scope of the burden largely undefined.
Supporters will predictably frame this as “common-sense” safety legislation. But critics see it for what it is: another deliberate obstacle placed between law-abiding citizens and lawful gun ownership. Live-fire training sounds reasonable in the abstract, until one considers the practical implications.
State-approved courses will cost money. They will require access to ranges that, in many parts of California, are already scarce or heavily regulated. They will demand time off work, transportation, and compliance with whatever evolving rules the DOJ decides to impose. Each of those factors disproportionately affects working-class residents, rural Californians, and minorities—the very groups Democrats often claim to champion.
Gun Owners of California did not mince words in its response, noting on X that the bill would require a state-approved class and live-fire training just to purchase a firearm, courtesy of the same legislator who previously supported background checks for gun barrels.
That reference is not accidental. California’s legislative history on firearms is filled with examples of regulations so granular and excessive that they border on parody, yet SB 948 fits neatly into that pattern.
