By Michael Smolens

The San Diego Union-Tribune

A rare thing happened in the California Legislature the other day. A gun-rights bill passed.

Granted, it was a relatively minor measure carried by a Republican lawmaker to fix what he said was a flaw in the law that unfairly jeopardized law-abiding gun owners.

The bill was passed unanimously by the Democratic-controlled state Senate and sent to the Assembly, which is also dominated by Democrats.

It would be a fool’s errand to suggest this could be a harbinger of potential common ground on one of the most polarizing issues in the nation.

Still, it serves as a launching point to look at other signs that maybe —just maybe —there could be room for agreement on broader gun policies. After all, the state Legislature is known for passing some of the most restrictive gun laws in the nation, not protecting gun-owner rights, no matter how incrementally.

Senate Bill SB 723 was proposed by Sen. Brian Jones, a Santee Republican who is on the volunteer advisory board of the San Diego County Gun Owners Association.

Jones said a policy was inserted into the state budget that could cause an otherwise-legal gun owner to be brought up on felony charges if a warrant was issued against him or her, even if the individual didn’t know about it. His bill clarifies that a person with a pending warrant must be aware of it before he or she can be arrested on a firearms-related charge.

“It’s the intersection of criminal justice reform and the Second Amendment,” said Jones, explaining why his bill gained such broad support.

Jones, who is running for Congress, said the measure restores due process rights. Given the vote, it clearly made sense to a lot of lawmakers who support gun control.

But, on the flip side, a lot of people support further gun regulations, and they’re not just Democrats and people who don’t own firearms. Some gun owners and even members of the National Rifle Association support various enhanced restrictions.

That’s according to a handful of surveys in recent years that suggest more potential for common ground than you’d think listening to the polarized debate between gun-control and gun-rights groups.

Now, don’t hold your breath for a “Kumbaya” moment, but it seems something is there.

A national survey conducted last year by John Hopkins University’s Center for Gun Policy and Research “found that 84% of all respondents believe that first-time gun buyers should be required to pass a safety course on the safe handling and storage of a firearm,” according to the Los Angeles Times. “Close to three-quarters of gun owners surveyed shared this view.”

More than 60% of gun owners supported setting a minimum age of 21 for Americans to be able to own a semi-automatic rifle, according to the research.

An article from Bloomberg News said 69% of NRA members expressed support for comprehensive background checks in a 2018 survey by Giffords Law Center, a gun-control advocacy group.

At the same time, there’s wariness.

“Among members of the (NRA), 79% expressed concern that a regulation such as increased background checks or a firearms purchase registry could be used to track the activities of Americans,” according to the Bloomberg piece, published in 2018.

Gun owners also oppose banning military-style, semi-automatic assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, but not by a large majority, according to research by the American Journal of Public Health. Just over 40% of gun owners support either ban, the journal said.

While legislation to implement expanded background checks and other gun measures nationwide are stalled in Congress, California already has similar regulations on the books.

So, it’s no surprise that gun-rights leaders in the state feel like they’re fighting a rearguard action.

Michael Schwartz, executive director of the San Diego County Gun Owners, said his group is unfairly depicted by gun-control groups.

“We’re not calling for people to get rid of every gun law,” he said.

Schwartz said his members are “run-of-the-mill San Diegans.”

Ron Marcus, spokesman for San Diegans for Gun Violence Prevention, said members of his group are also everyday people.

“We’re like 90% of Americans who want sensible gun laws passed,” Marcus said.

Both men had less charitable views of the other group.

“I do view them as on the extreme end of the spectrum,” Marcus said of San Diego County Gun Owners.

“They’re way out of the mainstream,” Schwartz said of San Diegans for Gun Violence Prevention. “They’re extremists.”

Marcus said his organization has had positive interactions with some gun owners; Schwartz said the same about some people favoring gun control.

Not long ago, an effort was made to bring people on both sides together.

Schwartz said conflict resolution experts reached out to his group to see if they were willing to try training sessions along with some gun-control advocates. Marcus said the latter group was not officially representing San Diegans for Gun Violence Prevention. Separate sessions were held with the facilitators, but things fell apart before combined progress could be made.

The versions of what happened differ, and at this point, that’s not really relevant.

Sen. Jones said the effort was laudable, but thought there was a simpler way.

“I think the better approach is for each side to spend more time with the other side, walking in their shoes, so to speak,” he said.

He said that might entail taking gun-control supporters to a firing range and having gun owners visit with people who want more restrictions —perhaps victims of gun violence.

Understanding why people on the other side think the way they do couldn’t hurt.

Michael Smolens is a columnist for The San Diego Union-Tribune with a long history of political coverage.