PDA

View Full Version : Overturning CA Assault Weapons Ban


Trinket
07-23-2008, 8:31 PM
With the recent decision made by the Supreme Court, how is it looking at bolstering a legal challenge aimed at overturning the CA Assault Weapons Ban?

bwiese
07-23-2008, 8:35 PM
The CA AWB has sufficient elements it could be taken down on multiple fronts even before Heller.

Some DOJ BoF conduct relating to certain areas of AW-related paperwork is also challengeable in court or OAL level.

Given CA politics and a near-irrelevant Calif Republican party, if we took it down now we could well just have another dropped into its place one year later, screwed up in different ways.

[However, I do believe we could arrange to have a half a billion dollars of AWs shipped into & sold in CA during that interregnum - enough to make enforcement of a replacement law even more confusing, and again further challengeable, especially since the replacement law would likely be written in a panic by nongunnies.]

But first and foremost, we need to get incorporation of RKBA into CA law first.

A couple of cases are already up & running that may get to that goal sooner than we'd expected.

leitung
07-23-2008, 8:52 PM
Sweet.. is there any links to track current cases.. I will be more than happy to own a few of those AW's..

Blue
07-23-2008, 8:54 PM
Sweet.. is there any links to track current cases.. I will be more than happy to own a few of those AW's..

You can start helping by buying yourself an OLL rifle and getting familiar with the law. The more there are in the state the better.

leitung
07-23-2008, 8:58 PM
I am working on an OLL AK right now, but money is tight.

I really want to go after the high cap mag ban too.. Hopefully some good things are in store..

hoffmang
07-23-2008, 9:54 PM
One place to look is here: http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=108030

-Gene

nhanson
07-23-2008, 10:53 PM
You can start helping by buying yourself an OLL rifle and getting familiar with the law. The more there are in the state the better.

Is 5 enough?
I'm not sure there is a cure and most probably they are a very addictive habit.

Enjoy

Frijolito1988
07-23-2008, 10:59 PM
If you guys where to predict when the ban MIGHT be lifted, when do youthink that would be ?

so no AWB means

no more bullet buttons, more options of AW and high cap mags!! :)

CHS
07-23-2008, 11:07 PM
no more bullet buttons, more options of AW and high cap mags!! :)

It would help our cause if they were referred to by what they REALLY are, standard capacity magazines. Standard capacity magazines holding more than 10 rounds of ammunition have been around for a hundred years. Only recently has the concept of "high capacity" been thrown around.

Now we're forced to use neutered "reduced capacity" magazines.

The more you call them "high capacity" the sooner 10 rounds starts to sound like normal.

ShadowDeviant
07-23-2008, 11:20 PM
If you guys where to predict when the ban MIGHT be lifted, when do youthink that would be ?

Two Weeks! :D


I just couldn't resist...

domokun
07-23-2008, 11:32 PM
Is 5 enough?
I'm not sure there is a cure and most probably they are a very addictive habit.

Enjoy

I'm sorry to inform you that there is no cure for BRD, RRD, nor 1911 disease. :cool2:

domokun
07-23-2008, 11:34 PM
It would help our cause if they were referred to by what they REALLY are, standard capacity magazines. Standard capacity magazines holding more than 10 rounds of ammunition have been around for a hundred years. Only recently has the concept of "high capacity" been thrown around.

Now we're forced to use neutered "reduced capacity" magazines.

The more you call them "high capacity" the sooner 10 rounds starts to sound like normal.

Well in comparison with other states with similar laws, we do have "high capacity magazines" in that we have more than 5 rounds allowed in our magazines up to 10. :eek:

randy
07-24-2008, 1:38 AM
bdsmchs

There are "large" capacity magazines and there are 10 round magazines.

That is the legal term I believe. Anything else is just you trying to make you feel good.

Moonclip
07-24-2008, 1:48 AM
I'm sorry to inform you that there is no cure for BRD, RRD, nor 1911 disease. :cool2:

What is RRD? I don't have 1911 disease, I only have about 5 of them and none of them high end stuff like Wilsons or Les Baer. Do Llama 1911 sorta clones count as 1911's, have a couple of more of them:)

I can't wait to see a CA Assault weapons challenge post Heller.

rbgaynor
07-24-2008, 9:31 AM
It would help our cause if they were referred to by what they REALLY are, standard capacity magazines. Standard capacity magazines holding more than 10 rounds of ammunition have been around for a hundred years. Only recently has the concept of "high capacity" been thrown around.

Now we're forced to use neutered "reduced capacity" magazines.

The more you call them "high capacity" the sooner 10 rounds starts to sound like normal.

I agree 100% with this. When I talk to non-gunnies and mention the fact that you can't buy standard capacity magazines, only reduced capacity magazines I get a much more favorable response than I would by saying I want to purchase high capacity magazines. Language matters - careful choices allow us to frame the argument in a much more positive way.

mdouglas1980
07-24-2008, 9:48 AM
yeah I think now is the time to "strike while the iron is hot" especially since the ban in DC was an overturn of a 30 year ban. I bet if you made if lucrative for the State of CA, like making a test you had to take and get a safety card like the stupid handgun safety certificate. I'm sure the state would be all for it, anything they can make money on. wish I had bought an AK, AR, or so so many more back in 2000. oh well.... wasn't thinking about it.

mdouglas1980
07-24-2008, 9:50 AM
now if we could only get rid of that damn "roster of approved handguns list"! I hate that thing!

FortCourageArmory
07-24-2008, 10:59 AM
now if we could only get rid of that damn "roster of approved handguns list"! I hate that thing!
When the timing is right (post-incorporation unless I'm mistaken), the "Safe Handgun Roster is also challengable and would probably go away as well. But, the wait is going ot be a PITA.

domokun
07-24-2008, 11:26 AM
What is RRD? I don't have 1911 disease, I only have about 5 of them and none of them high end stuff like Wilsons or Les Baer. Do Llama 1911 sorta clones count as 1911's, have a couple of more of them:)

I can't wait to see a CA Assault weapons challenge post Heller.

RRD = Red Rifle Disease (AKs)

aileron
07-24-2008, 12:34 PM
bdsmchs

There are "large" capacity magazines and there are 10 round magazines.

That is the legal term I believe. Anything else is just you trying to make you feel good.

Because in DC any semi-auto that can accept +12 rounds is a machine gun.

So if they say its so, it must be so? I don't think so.

Bdsmchs is right, its political verbiage written into law, put it right back in their face.

Standard capacity magazine is the magazine that was designed with the firearm in question, which was engineered to accept that capacity magazine at initial design. So if you originally designed a 15 round mag for you handgun you just created; thats the standard capacity of the firearm. If you then design a larger capacity mag for the firearm that is a large capacity magazine.

The rest of it is just political bullocks written into the law.

Librarian
07-24-2008, 1:41 PM
Because in DC any semi-auto that can accept +12 rounds is a machine gun.

So if they say its so, it must be so? I don't think so.

Bdsmchs is right, its political verbiage written into law, put it right back in their face.

Standard capacity magazine is the magazine that was designed with the firearm in question, which was engineered to accept that capacity magazine at initial design. So if you originally designed a 15 round mag for you handgun you just created; thats the standard capacity of the firearm. If you then design a larger capacity mag for the firearm that is a large capacity magazine.

The rest of it is just political bullocks written into the law.

Until the law is changed, we're stuck with 'large-capacity' (the hyphen is part of the legal definition). I think leaving the term in 'scare quotes' conveys the appropriate disdain without unnecessarily tilting at windmills.

Otherwise, I feel as you do - magazines as designed for the gun are 'standard', lesser capacity are just odd.

Of course you do run into counter examples - the 33 round mags for Glock-17 fit, but I think they were intended for the G18, select-fire version. It's hard to look at something sticking that far out of the grip and think "That's standard capacity".

Mute
07-24-2008, 1:42 PM
We should just refer to them simply by how many rounds they can hold. A ten round mag is still "standard" if that's what it was designed to be. Of course we should just try to refrain from using the term "high capacity" since "high" is arbitrary. After all, 20 (or even 30) rounds isn't high if we compare it to a Beta C mag.

ShadowDeviant
07-24-2008, 2:23 PM
now if we could only get rid of that damn "roster of approved handguns list"! I hate that thing!

I second that! Sooo many nice ones to choose from... :mad: Kimber Grand Raptor II

CHS
07-24-2008, 2:47 PM
On the AR15/M16 platform, both 20-rd and 30-rd magazines are the "standard" capacity. A 10 or 5rd mag for the AR/M16 platform is a "reduced" capacity mag. To me, the only thing that really qualifies as a "high-capacity" magazine would be the 100rd beta drums.

Then we've got the 5.7 platform. On the P90, 50rds is standard, but there are both 30rd and 10rd "reduced" capacity mags available. On the FiveSeven pistol, 20rds is standard and 10 is reduced.

On the 1911, 7/8 is the "standard" capacity, while on the M9/92FS 15rd's is "standard" and 10 rounds is "reduced".

What has been available and standard up until about 15 years ago, for over 75 years, have been magazines that carry more than 10 rounds. For some reason, the Federal AWB decided to name these standard mags "high capacity", and force reduced-capacity mags on us.

Unfortunately, this verbage has stuck, but that does not make it factually correct.

chris
07-24-2008, 2:57 PM
The CA AWB has sufficient elements it could be taken down on multiple fronts even before Heller.

Some DOJ BoF conduct relating to certain areas of AW-related paperwork is also challengeable in court or OAL level.

Given CA politics and a near-irrelevant Calif Republican party, if we took it down now we could well just have another dropped into its place one year later, screwed up in different ways.

bill you are right another bill would be quickly drafted. but after incorporation of RKBA how well would it stand given it could very well violate the 2nd?

bill would a new AWB be harder to make into law now. than in the previous Sh*t threw a goose law we have?

[However, I do believe we could arrange to have a half a billion dollars of AWs shipped into & sold in CA during that interregnum - enough to make enforcement of a replacement law even more confusing, and again further challengeable, especially since the replacement law would likely be written in a panic by nongunnies.]

now this is what i'm talking about given the AWB getting struck down this would be a paradise given the amount of OLL's in the state allready. i think the goons in Sac would really have their hands full in trying to dump a new law on us. given the post heller climate.

But first and foremost, we need to get incorporation of RKBA into CA law first.

A couple of cases are already up & running that may get to that goal sooner than we'd expected.

i like many here wish to see the laws we have jammed down our throats finally get struck down and in the future have to pass Constitutional muster given after Heller.


bill i apologize for chopping your post up like that. i hope you understand my questions in it.

javalos
07-27-2008, 12:25 PM
Regarding Trinkets inquiry, everyone needs to donate to Calgun Foundation so they will have the legal funds to go after the AWB in California. Time to end the BS with "bullet buttons", "fixed magazines", not having this feature, not have that feature. We have our work cut out for us, we need to go after anti-gun DOJ for coming out with regulations and laws that make it difficult for manufacturers and dealers to sell guns in this state, not to mention the other laws that are designed as a pre-text to a total ban. Currently there are bills in Sacramento that require handguns to have certain features if they are to be sold in this state despite the fact that the technology just doesn't exist. They might as declare a total ban on handguns in this state. Its a known fact that handgun manufacturers are pulling out of this state, with that, they should pull their business from law enforcement as well and refuse to service any guns no matter who they are in this state. But first things first, go after the AWB.

jamesob
07-27-2008, 1:54 PM
if the cal. aw ban goes to court, wich court will hear or decide on this?

badicedog
07-27-2008, 2:36 PM
I was on the phone the other day with Alex at Robinson Arms. He made an interesting point. Why are we not applying for AW permits? Sure, we know that we are going to be denied but the more denials... this would make it easier for the NRA to file a suit.

AngelDecoys
07-27-2008, 2:47 PM
if the cal. aw ban goes to court, wich court will hear or decide on this?

In all likelyhood, it would be contested in Federal Court over the State.

I was on the phone the other day with Alex at Robinson Arms. He made an interesting point. Why are we not applying for AW permits? Sure, we know that we are going to be denied but the more denials... this would make it easier for the NRA to file a suit.

Nope. Not necessary in this case. Lots of permits being denied doesn't help. That would just be a waste of resources. (If I recall Gene mentioned the permit was almost $300 just to be denied). Buy another toy instead ;)

We only need one to challenge. 1 that is funded. Gene recently had a permit denied (just for CGF to later challenge). My guess is CGF is just waiting for incorporation before proceeding with legal *** whoopin'.

bwiese
07-28-2008, 1:03 AM
if the Cal. AW ban goes to court, which court will hear or decide on this?

In all likelyhood, it would be contested in Federal Court over the State.

Given Heller & derivative cases, probably.

But the CA AW ban has internal inconsistencies that can be fought at the state level too.

FlyingPen
07-28-2008, 11:17 AM
I wonder if NYers are getting something together to challenge their oppressive laws as well.

ghettoshecky
07-28-2008, 12:00 PM
The CA AWB has sufficient elements it could be taken down on multiple fronts even before Heller.

Some DOJ BoF conduct relating to certain areas of AW-related paperwork is also challengeable in court or OAL level.

Given CA politics and a near-irrelevant Calif Republican party, if we took it down now we could well just have another dropped into its place one year later, screwed up in different ways.

[However, I do believe we could arrange to have a half a billion dollars of AWs shipped into & sold in CA during that interregnum - enough to make enforcement of a replacement law even more confusing, and again further challengeable, especially since the replacement law would likely be written in a panic by nongunnies.]

But first and foremost, we need to get incorporation of RKBA into CA law first.

A couple of cases are already up & running that may get to that goal sooner than we'd expected.

Hey Bill I don't follow what you mean about having a half a billion dollars of AWs shipped in means to us. Are you just trying to encourage other Californians to own AWs or are you saying the more there are the better?

bwiese
07-28-2008, 1:04 PM
Hey Bill I don't follow what you mean about having a half a billion dollars of AWs shipped in means to us. Are you just trying to encourage other Californians to own AWs or are you saying the more there are the better?

I am saying that - assuming no Heller nor CA RKBA incorporation - if the CA AW ban were to go down for a period of, say, 3-6 months there could easily be arranged $500Mil in AWs imported/sold in CA. This could happen if the California courts killed it for any of several reasons, and the legislature decided to throw up another one.

Not all CA-defined AWs are ARs/AKs or buildups from bare receivers, and some folks simply just wanna buy complete 'name brand' guns w/warranties, etc.

Lines of credit from floorplanning-loan financing firms (hey, Gene Hoffman has a helluva Rolodex!) could readily be arranged for CA gunshops to buy a ton of AWs. These lines of credit would be backed by the actual inventory - an inventory that's well-documented and protected from shenanigans not just by financial laws but because a CA gun dealer's inventory is among the most well-documented in the world, due to both state & Federally- mandated bookkeeping.

Let's say

the credit line resulted in an effective 15% yearly interest rate;
the legal gap lasted 3 months;
the average selling price of an AW is $1000 (hi-end + low-end);



15% / 4 x $1000 = is only $37.50 extra financing cost for the dealer which schleps into the pricing without much trouble and nobody *****es about. Remember a ton of folks paid $300+ for off-list AR receivers at end of 2005.

California is a large, populous state with a fair proportion of folks w/substantial discretionary income. I believe there'd readily be 250+K rifles at least sold in such a 'gold rush' period, with some folks buying multiples.

$1000 x 250,000 = $250Million.

At the end of the gold rush should legislation reemerge the remaining AWs would be sold to free states without much if any loss. The 1989 Roberti-Roos experience showed that the CA AWs still remaining in FFL inventory did not decline in value once banned in CA.

The more we'd get in the more any followup/cleanup legislation would be unmanageable.

OK, I was off a factor of two in my quoted post above, but still...

All the above of course changes with Heller + RKBA incorporation for CA.

tyrist
07-28-2008, 1:19 PM
I was on the phone the other day with Alex at Robinson Arms. He made an interesting point. Why are we not applying for AW permits? Sure, we know that we are going to be denied but the more denials... this would make it easier for the NRA to file a suit.

Just by the way the permit was written it seems to only apply if you are going to manufacter/repair/sell aw's or otherwise engage in the "business" of AW's. The permit really does'nt seem to apply to ownership.

bwiese
07-28-2008, 1:22 PM
Just by the way the permit was written it seems to only apply if you are going to manufacter/repair/sell aw's or otherwise engage in the "business" of AW's. The permit really does'nt seem to apply to ownership.

That's the dealer one.

A regular AW permit should be shall-issue from wording of law. Gene Hoffman applied but was rejected on specious grounds.

tyrist
07-28-2008, 1:23 PM
Where is the regular AW permit?

bwiese
07-28-2008, 3:36 PM
Where is the regular AW permit?

As I recall, it's just a Dangerous Weapons Permit that's used for multiple functions.

hoffmang
07-28-2008, 5:13 PM
Where is the regular AW permit?

DOJ didn't really implement the permit per the Penal Code and as such the CCR has some errors in it... I applied using the regular AW (Sales) Permit.

-Gene

tyrist
07-28-2008, 7:09 PM
Here is a question then....If I applied for an AW permit woud I have to renew it every year? Is that renewal just meant for sales?

hoffmang
07-28-2008, 8:11 PM
Here is a question then....If I applied for an AW permit woud I have to renew it every year? Is that renewal just meant for sales?

We don't really have enough data right now to be able to answer your question...

-Gene