View Full Version : Possible to do a budget-based attack on CFLC program?

02-18-2009, 11:53 PM
Apologies if I am missing something:

Political attacks on the CFLC seem pretty hard given the legislative makeup. And non-gun owners won't get why it sucks. However, given the downturn, money talks louder than it used to.

Since it appears the ATFs FFL EZ check website (https://www.atfonline.gov/fflezcheck/) provides identical functionality to what the CFLC purports to accomplish how plausible would it be to get CFLC eliminated as a duplicate expense given that CA is bankrupt?

I.e., instead of shippers to CA doing all the DOJ stuff, they could just enter the FFL number on EZ check, print out the page showing the license is current (and the shipping address) and include that with the firearm.

It seems possible that spinning this issue as financially irresponsible waste could potentially give much broader leverage against it as compared to merely painting the proponents as gungrabbers.

My apologies if this has already been talked to death or I've misunderstood something (please delete if so).

02-19-2009, 1:33 AM
great idea but that term is not understood in Sacramento.

I don't have much hope that sac-nuts will understand that they shouldn't spend so much money that isn't theirs. However, they do seem to be desperately cutting pennies to get that one last vote for the budget to pass. So perhaps members that wouldn't naturally be sympathetic to The Cause would go along with this elimination as part of the budget process.

But, who knows. I'm partly posting to see if I misunderstood that ezcheck gives you the same purported explicit functionality as the cflc program. (Of course ezcheck would not cut down on the guns coming into CA so of course does not at all do what cflc is implicitly supposed to accomplish.)

02-19-2009, 7:11 AM
It's all about control.

They have no problem spending money to control the people...

02-19-2009, 5:14 PM
It isnt CFLC that out of state dealers hate, it is the process, the extra step. Replacing that extra step with a federal website vs. a state one I dont think would do any good. I would save the energy for a different fight. This one just seems to not get a positive result for the energy put into it, because you know once they .gov has the smell of control they dont want to let it go.