PDA

View Full Version : Gun Discrimination in California


Ding126
07-17-2008, 6:37 AM
I wanted to start a thread so we can add facts to how crazy the gun regulations are in Ca. I was also wondering if any of the AR manufacturers are involved with or planning a get together with the NRA to go after the state, since we could use some financial support to support the cause.

Here's my fact:

Why aren't the manufacturers such as Colt, Bushmaster, DPMS, Rock River etc not suing California for not allowing many of their products into the state. When we can all clearly see that the OLL's produced by xyz manufacturing are being brought into this state and are identical to the items that are currently being banned.

Fjold
07-17-2008, 6:43 AM
Why are the manufacturers such as Colt, Bushmaster, DPMS, Rock River etc not suing California for not allowing many of their products into the state. When we can all clearly see that the OLL's produced by xyz manufacturing are being brought into this state and are identical to the items that are currently being banned.

Fixed it.

tenpercentfirearms
07-17-2008, 6:44 AM
Why aren't the manufacturers such as Colt, Bushmaster, DPMS, Rock River etc suing California for not allowing many of their products into the state. When we can all clearly see that the OLL's produced by xyz manufacturing are being brought into this state and are identical to the items that are currently being banned.

I think you meant why aren't they suing them. This is a great question that probably has been brought up before. At least I would think the companies have asked the same question. Now is it worth their time to do anything about it since we can still get everything but their lowers? Maybe and maybe not. The problem with trying to appeal to any of the listed companies on a financial basis is they are financially doing great right now. Everyone is back ordered for days, to weeks, and even months. Tying up their money in a lawsuit to further get back ordered might not be money they want to spend.

Ding126
07-17-2008, 6:55 AM
I like to collect pistols by series. Currently I like the Hk USP models and want to collect one compact, full size and one tactical of each caliber. But I am bot allowed the Tactical model since it has a threaded barrel. Same pistols, just one model has the threaded barrel.

Why are threaded barrels allowed on rifles and not pistols?

truthseeker
07-17-2008, 7:35 AM
If a gun fires more than one projectile per trigger pull "no matter what the cause" it is a machinegun. I have done a lot of shotgun shooting and have seen probably 10 break-open over and under shotguns double fire both barrels at the same time when the trigger is pulled once. So I guess by the logic above they are machine guns. Just goes to show the ignorance of everyone from the Judges that rule this crap all the way down to the district attorneys that prosecute these cases. I think that if things don't change in America we are going to have a revolution within the next 20 years.

AJAX22
07-17-2008, 7:43 AM
if you pull the trigger once and it shoots two cartridges, then that IS a machinegun under federal law.

It is just not something they care as much about as an 'evil' rifle malfunctioning

Just because they aren't busting people for this doesn't mean they won't later on down the line as a way to justify their job/pension

Remember the ATF didn't seriously get into the firearms enforcement game untill they needed jobs for all the fed 'revnoors' who the end of prohibition put out of buisness.



If a gun fires more than one projectile per trigger pull "no matter what the cause" it is a machinegun. I have done a lot of shotgun shooting and have seen probably 10 break-open over and under shotguns double fire both barrels at the same time when the trigger is pulled once. So I guess by the logic above they are machine guns. Just goes to show the ignorance of everyone from the Judges that rule this crap all the way down to the district attorneys that prosecute these cases. I think that if things don't change in America we are going to have a revolution within the next 20 years.

heycorey
07-17-2008, 8:04 AM
Here's my fact:

Why aren't the manufacturers such as Colt, Bushmaster, DPMS, Rock River etc not suing California for not allowing many of their products into the state. When we can all clearly see that the OLL's produced by xyz manufacturing are being brought into this state and are identical to the items that are currently being banned.

Because the bulk of business for Colt/Bushmaster (and probably others) are government contracts. One does not bite the hand that feeds you ... unless one wishes to lose a lot of weight.

hoffmang
07-17-2008, 5:50 PM
:fud:

Wow... Please all go read Kasler v. Lockyer and then come back to this thread. The manufacturers did try to sue and they lost. Why they lost is now very, very interesting and will be one of the Sons of Heller.

Incorporation first, then on to the next fun.

-Gene

grammaton76
07-17-2008, 7:26 PM
Ah, but Kasler v. Lockyer was well before the off-list thing started.

I believe what the guy's getting at is that the listed manufacturers have a very strong standing now, compared with in the past.

Nodda Duma
07-17-2008, 7:42 PM
Because the bulk of business for Colt/Bushmaster (and probably others) are government contracts. One does not bite the hand that feeds you ... unless one wishes to lose a lot of weight.

Lol that's funny. Have you ever worked with defense contracts? The Vaseline flows strong and steady my friend, and it's the government (and subsequently the soldier and the taxpayer) that takes the shaft...even when the government knows it's coming and fights tooth and nail for a fair deal. The defense industry will resort to outright thievery. Not all of them are bad, but they all answer to a higher calling than Patriotism. All Hail The Bottom Line.

-Jason

bwiese
07-17-2008, 8:21 PM
The "Category 2" list is in a very precarious legal status now.

Incorporation first - then we take it down.

Attacks for discrimination by name may be moot for other more far-reaching reasons though.

bohoki
07-17-2008, 8:35 PM
the companys banned are free to rename their rifles to be in compliance with california law but they choose not to

RomanDad
07-17-2008, 8:42 PM
:fud:

Wow... Please all go read Kasler v. Lockyer and then come back to this thread. The manufacturers did try to sue and they lost. Why they lost is now very, very interesting and will be one of the Sons of Heller.

Incorporation first, then on to the next fun.

-Gene

As I recall, H&K Sued under a different case??? (and also lost) Fresno gub club maybe?

hoffmang
07-17-2008, 8:56 PM
As I recall, H&K Sued under a different case??? (and also lost) Fresno gub club maybe?

That was under a Bill of Attainder logic.

-Gene

tenpercentfirearms
07-17-2008, 9:08 PM
the companys banned are free to rename their rifles to be in compliance with california law but they choose not to

That is an interesting defense. I kind of like it.

jamesob
07-17-2008, 9:47 PM
i think a good lawsuit would be the approved list. the reason is many guns are made the same but may have a different finish or grips etc. in my opinion the state is doing it just to make it cost more for the mfg. and for it to be a hassle for them to sell. wich is not free trade.

heycorey
07-18-2008, 6:51 AM
Lol that's funny. Have you ever worked with defense contracts? The Vaseline flows strong and steady my friend, and it's the government (and subsequently the soldier and the taxpayer) that takes the shaft...even when the government knows it's coming and fights tooth and nail for a fair deal. The defense industry will resort to outright thievery. Not all of them are bad, but they all answer to a higher calling than Patriotism. All Hail The Bottom Line.

-Jason

Not relevant to the my comment ...