While Newsom recently claimed during a Shawn Ryan podcast appearance that he’s “not anti-gun at all” and believes “people have the right to bear arms,” his record and the legislation advancing in his state tell a vastly different story.

One need look no further than California’s AB 1127—a bill advancing through the legislature that amounts to a de facto ban on Glock handguns, one of the most popular and reliable pistols among law-abiding Americans.

The legislation doesn’t need to say “Glock” by name.

Its language targets semi-automatic pistols that can be “readily converted” into machine guns with illegal aftermarket devices—a reference to the notorious full-auto “switches” already banned under federal law.

But it’s not illegal devices that this bill punishes—it’s the design of the pistol itself.

That’s why it overwhelmingly affects Glocks and Glock-style pistols, and why it’s raising alarm among gun owners and Second Amendment advocates alike.

The Real Purpose of the Second Amendment

What’s most troubling about Newsom’s narrative is that he fails to understand the foundational purpose of the Second Amendment.

It is not about duck hunting.

It’s not about “common sense gun safety.”

It is a fundamental protection against tyranny—a last safeguard against enemies both foreign and domestic.

Newsom’s constant push for radical gun control—more than 70 gun restrictions signed into law since he took office—reflects a deep-seated hostility to this principle.

From his proposed 28th Amendment that would gut the Second Amendment entirely, to supporting “sin taxes” on gun and ammo purchases, to backing unconstitutional advertising bans that even the left-leaning Ninth Circuit couldn’t defend, Newsom’s record reveals a politician working overtime to dismantle the right to self-defense.

The Glock Ban Is Just the Beginning

If Newsom and his allies succeed in banning one of the most common handguns in America—under the guise of stopping illegal machine gun conversions—what firearm is safe?

The answer is none. Because as we’ve seen with bills like the GOSAFE Act and other “assault weapons” bans introduced by Democrats in Washington, the modern anti-gun agenda doesn’t stop at AR-15s. It targets semi-automatic rifles, shotguns, and handguns—the overwhelming majority of firearms in circulation today.

This is why gun rights groups are warning that AB 1127 is not just about “machine gun switches.” It’s about setting the precedent that entire classes of handguns can be banned based on speculative misuse, even when federal law already criminalizes that misuse. And it’s why the Glock ban, if passed, will almost certainly be used as a template for other blue states to follow.

Don’t Trust Newsom’s Words—Trust His Record

Governor Newsom wants to have it both ways—appearing reasonable on guns to moderate voters while quietly supporting legislation that chips away at gun ownership one law at a time.

But the evidence is clear: you can’t claim to support the Second Amendment while simultaneously banning the most popular firearms used for self-defense, law enforcement, and home protection.

No serious supporter of constitutional rights believes in taxing them, regulating them out of existence, or shifting control over them to bureaucratic fiat. Yet Newsom has done all of that—and is positioning himself to do more on a national stage.

The truth is, the Second Amendment is under siege, not by criminals—but by politicians who believe they know better than our Founders and better than the millions of Americans who responsibly own firearms.

If Gavin Newsom is the future of the Democratic Party, then the right to keep and bear arms faces perhaps its greatest threat in decades.

And that’s a truth gun owners can’t afford to ignore.