TheBakersfieldCalifornian.com

I don't mean to brag, but my boys are awesome with a shotgun. When the twins were old enough, we took an NRA-sponsored women and children shotgun class out at Five Dogs Shooting Range.

Now, if you ask any of the men who taught that class (and they know who they are), they'll tell you that my boys were... rambunctious. Perhaps energetic. Or, if they're honest, they'll tell you those 9-year-olds were just plain boogers. But when it was their turn to shoot clays, they were magnificent. They hit almost every target.

I knew right then and there they were born in the wrong generation. They needed to be kids back in the days when a person could throw their favorite gun on their back and walk down the street on their way to a dove hunt. Unfortunately they were born, and now live, in a "sissified" era where the sight of a gun sends people into a panic.

When Assemblyman Anthony Portantino, D- La Canada Flintridge, introduced a bill in 2011 to make it illegal to openly carry an unloaded gun, I was naive enough to believe it would never pass. After all, an unloaded gun is about as useful a weapon as my coin- and lipstick-loaded 10-lb. purse. It might cause some bruising but no one is gonna die.

I figured logic would prevail, and even the most liberal legislator would see that a gun is an inanimate object. And unloaded it might as well be a toaster!

BOY was I naive! The bill passed, the governor signed it, and now no one in California is allowed to carry a gun out in the open, even if it's unloaded. And now Portantino is back again with a new bill to ban long guns (shotguns and rifles) from the public eye.

Portantino's handgun ban was not the result of any shootings by unloaded guns. It was based in fear and coffee. Let me explain:

A few years ago, a group of gun rights advocates decided to make a public statement about how silly California gun laws were. At the time it was legal to carry a hidden/loaded gun (if you had a license), and also legal to carry a handgun out in the open if it was unloaded.

In an effort to educate the public that it (was) legal to openly carry an unloaded gun, and to bring attention to the fact that it is very difficult to get concealed weapon permits in many California counties, gun advocates decided to target (pun intended) Starbucks.

Where else would a gun toter make a political and policy statement? Where else would someone push the envelope and start a conversation about gun laws and gun rights? Of course! Starbucks! The quintessential, stereotypical, liberal hippie hang out!

But the plan backfired (pun intended) and people went into a panic, calling police and demanding that something be done about these scary guns in their coffee shop. I guess they preferred guns be hidden..because..if you don't see it...it must not exist...?

Enter Portantino, whose law, AB 1527, banned the open display of an unloaded handgun. When it passed, the response from the gun advocates was to begin carrying unloaded long guns in public, which is legal, for now.

The assemblyman fired back (pun intended) with a NEW AB 1527 to extend the current ban to include long guns. This week the assemblyman told the Los Angeles Times: "Unfortunately, the open carry community has decided to once again force our hand by escalating their unnecessary activities and entering our communities with AR-15s and other long guns."

..."I had hoped cooler heads would have prevailed and this law wouldn't be necessary, obviously that hasn't been the case and I must once again take action to ensure the safety of our communities."

What does that even mean? Is the assemblyman suggesting that the First Amendment right to expression has forced his hand? That one's right to make a political statement must be prohibited for the safety of the public?

Since when is using a prop in protest a danger? These unloaded guns are no different than the sign carried by an anti-abortionist outside a clinic. Or the tape that high school students put over their mouths on the annual "Day of Silence" for gay rights activists. Shall we ban posters and signs because punches have been thrown over what they say? Shall we ban tape because it disrupts the academic day once a year? Furthermore, shall we ban "pushing the envelope" because it makes ignorant people uncomfortable?

Laws have been broken and changed for the sake of free speech and political persuasion. Why on earth should the legal act of carrying a gun in public be somehow worse than, say, the illegal act of marrying gay couples on the steps of the San Fransisco City Hall ?

And what happens after the ban on long guns is passed? What's next? Will people openly pack knives? And then hammers? Followed by sticks and slingshots? Will Assemblyman Portantino ban them all?

In the end, considering that an empty gun won't kill anymore than a stick, these gun-packing Americans are not a threat to safety. And a ban on carrying an unloaded gun on ALL Californians as a result of the political expression of a few is unfounded, clearly based in pettiness and revenge on the part of a politician, and should be taken up as a First Amendment case by the ACLU.

But for some reason, I doubt the ACLU will be taking any calls on this.

-- Inga Barks, who hosts a talk show on KMJ AM 580, is one of three community columnists whose work appears here every Saturday. These are Barks' opinions, not necessarily The Californian's. Next week: Ric Llewellyn.