PDA

View Full Version : What's the deal with AB 2131?


shopkeep
02-23-2006, 12:35 PM
What's the deal with AB 2131? Is this some type of attempt to create a permit system for aquiring new Assault Weapons or interstate succession of them? How is this any different from the already impossible to obtain Assault Weapons Permits that the DOJ issues to select FFLs?

bwiese
02-23-2006, 12:42 PM
New law proposed (LaSeur), prob doesn't have a chance in hell of even getting out of committee.

Am surmising that it would allow AW inheritance, and import for folks moving into CA and force DOJ to permit/register them in these situations.

xenophobe
02-23-2006, 1:07 PM
Is this the bill that would allow AW Reg'd owners to buy and trade between each other? I heard something like that was being submitted, but figure it wouldn't have a chance....

shopkeep
02-23-2006, 1:27 PM
Is this the bill that would allow AW Reg'd owners to buy and trade between each other? I heard something like that was being submitted, but figure it wouldn't have a chance....

You gotta love LaSuer and Haynes. Until Mark Leno is done with his outrageous fringe socialist reign as chair of the safety committee (and I believe he's also the head of the Gay/Lesbian/Transgender caucus) we can forget any of this legislation being taken even REMOTELY seriously. Hmmm... interesting how the most fringe Democrats from the Bay Area and LA rules the safety committee isn't it? Pretty much zero representation on there for rural areas.

STOP READING HERE IF YOU DON'T WANT TO SEE MY VENTING...


Mr. Leno is the very same man who went against the popular vote and attempted to legalize gay marriage despite a constitutional amendment passing in 52 out of 58 of California's districts by over 65%! I know that homosexual marriage is a controversial topic so I'm not going to promote one side as "correct" but I will note that going against a popular vote that passed by this large of a margin is pretty tyrannical. I also haven't forgotten how Mark Leno promoted the idea of reducing possession of child pornography from a felony to a misdemeanor. What a charming individual!

Besides many Republicans collaborated with the Democraps back in 2000 to secure their districts as well. Sure, why not come up with all the cool pro-gun legislation you'd like? It's not as if you won't get elected by 65%+ again anyhow LOL! I guess for pro-gun Republicans in California politics it's all about introducing new bills rather than RESULTS :rolleyes: !

blkA4alb
02-23-2006, 1:31 PM
so would this allow the AWs to be inherited or passed down? my friend bought 3 lowers and is really disapointed that he wont be able to pass them down to his son who is 16 now. any chance this will pass?

Matt C
02-23-2006, 3:34 PM
I will note that going against a popular vote that passed by this large of a margin is pretty tyrannical
First off let me say I agree with you on the issues. However what you said is not true. The reason we have checks and balances(one of them anyhow) is so the majority does not walk all over the rights of the minoritys. An attempt by one of the branches of government to do what is in their opinion the right thing to do is far from tyranical. He failed because he was dead wrong, and the system worked in that case. Even if it had not, and the wrong thing had happened, it would still not be "tyrannical" by any means.

blacklisted
02-23-2006, 3:51 PM
going against a popular vote that passed by this large of a margin is pretty tyrannical.

But this is exactly what is happening in San Fransisco! Citizens voted away their rights, now the tyrannical NRA is trying to go against that vote and have them reinstated.

stator
02-23-2006, 3:52 PM
First off let me say I agree with you on the issues. However what you said is not true. The reason we have checks and balances(one of them anyhow) is so the majority does not walk all over the rights of the minoritys. An attempt by one of the branches of government to do what is in their opinion the right thing to do is far from tyranical. He failed because he was dead wrong, and the system worked in that case. Even if it had not, and the wrong thing had happened, it would still not be "tyrannical" by any means.


That one sentence does sound tyrannical to me.... government oppressing the will of the people who obviously just voted the opposite. BTW, tyrannical is a word in the English dictionary... no need to quote it.

shopkeep
02-23-2006, 4:07 PM
That one sentence does sound tyrannical to me.... government oppressing the will of the people who obviously just voted the opposite. BTW, tyrannical is a word in the English dictionary... no need to quote it.

EXACTLY. The point I'm trying to make here is that the Legislature is an elected body that represents the people in the state. If a 65%+ majority in 52 out of 58 districts says "NO" to gay marriage and places it in the state constitution, we shouldn't see a 65%+ majority in legislature respond just a few years later by legalizing gay marriage.

Charliegone
02-23-2006, 4:57 PM
You know I have no problems with gay marriage, but if Mr. Leno and others like him continue to do away with our guns little by little I won't support him one bit in his causes. You scratch my back and I'll stratch yours.

saki302
02-23-2006, 6:06 PM
I also haven't forgotten how Mark Leno promoted the idea of reducing possession of child pornography from a felony to a misdemeanor. What a charming individual!

Must be a card-carrying member of NAMBLA :eek:

(a side note- I thought 'South Park' invented NAMBLA- how horrifying to find out it's REAL!)

-Dave

dwtt
02-23-2006, 7:11 PM
OK, so how many of you are going to write in to support it? How many of you are going to consider it DOA like so many did with AB448?

shopkeep
02-23-2006, 7:18 PM
OK, so how many of you are going to write in to support it? How many of you are going to consider it DOA like so many did with AB448?

Short of the state being close to bankruptcy and desperate for money from any source possible, they won't allow people to register new AWs for a fee or get involved in a permit scheme for money.

Fortunately as long as the state continues to grow and regulate every thing under the sun... not to mention pay its employees OUTRAGEOUS salaries, bankruptcy should be in the near future. We've already become the first state to actually dip into the B range of credit worthiness.

Talkin2u2
02-23-2006, 11:19 PM
What's the deal with AB 2131? Is this some type of attempt to create a permit system for aquiring new Assault Weapons or interstate succession of them? How is this any different from the already impossible to obtain Assault Weapons Permits that the DOJ issues to select FFLs?

FWIW, I follow all of the important gun bills at http://www.nramemberscouncils.com/legs.shtml

This bill can be followed at http://www.calnra.com/legs.shtml?summary=ab2131.1

I found this part very interesting -- Details: AB 2131 IS SPONSORED AND INTRODUCED BY NRA. The bill is currently unassigned and unscheduled. When the specific committee is identified, a ONE-CLICK link will be posted.

It looks like the NRA is on the ball with this one. :)

nrandell
02-24-2006, 8:04 AM
Look at this section:

"The procedures would in part require a person who wishes to acquire, or who is bringing into the state, as specified, an assault weapon, to obtain a permit from the Department of Justice and to apply for a Certificate of Eligibility. The bill would require issuance of the permit for an assault weapon if the Certificate of Eligibility is issued."

Sounds like this bill would basically open the AW registry, and anyone that can get a COE would be able to get an AW permit.

shopkeep
02-24-2006, 10:01 AM
Look at this section:

"The procedures would in part require a person who wishes to acquire, or who is bringing into the state, as specified, an assault weapon, to obtain a permit from the Department of Justice and to apply for a Certificate of Eligibility. The bill would require issuance of the permit for an assault weapon if the Certificate of Eligibility is issued."

Sounds like this bill would basically open the AW registry, and anyone that can get a COE would be able to get an AW permit.

It may be a good idea to notify the writters and people behind this bill that anyone who wants an AW can already have a nerfed fixed mag gun lawfully that takes less than 30 seconds to convert into a fully operational AW. Rather than having all kinds of garage gunsmiths fooling around with parts kits why not just issue permits?

dwtt
02-24-2006, 11:08 AM
Short of the state being close to bankruptcy and desperate for money from any source possible, they won't allow people to register new AWs for a fee or get involved in a permit scheme for money.

Fortunately as long as the state continues to grow and regulate every thing under the sun... not to mention pay its employees OUTRAGEOUS salaries, bankruptcy should be in the near future. We've already become the first state to actually dip into the B range of credit worthiness.
That's great, but are you going to write in or call your legislator to support it?
Is anyone else going to support it?
I guess it's clear why pro-gun laws don't have much chance in our state legislature.

MrTuffPaws
02-24-2006, 12:43 PM
EXACTLY. The point I'm trying to make here is that the Legislature is an elected body that represents the people in the state. If a 65%+ majority in 52 out of 58 districts says "NO" to gay marriage and places it in the state constitution, we shouldn't see a 65%+ majority in legislature respond just a few years later by legalizing gay marriage.

IF that is the case, then Arnold is a Tyrant for vetoing the gay marrage bill that the legislature passed.

Simply put, you are wrong to think that majority rules. It was never meant to, and there are peantly of checks put in to insure it does not.

Paladin
03-08-2006, 9:38 PM
IF that is the case, then Arnold is a Tyrant for vetoing the gay marrage bill that the legislature passed.

Simply put, you are wrong to think that majority rules. It was never meant to, and there are peantly of checks put in to insure it does not.

CA Constitution, Art. 2, Sec. 10(c): "The Legislature may amend or repeal referendum statutes. It may amend or repeal an initiative statute by another statute that becomes effective only when approved by the electors unless the initiative statute permits amendment or repeal without their approval."

Arnold exercised his power as chief executive to veto an UNCONSTITUTIONAL bill. Arnold chose not to act unconstitutionally even if the legislature did. He said that if the people wanted to change that initiative statute, they need to pass another initiative to do so. The Kali courts agreed w/him.

Charliegone
03-09-2006, 3:34 PM
Dude, if we could get AW's even with registration and paying this or that I would do it! Its better than nothing.

PanzerAce
03-09-2006, 3:39 PM
the problem that I see with 2131 is that there is not a chance in hell of the DOJ issuing an AW permit. From the summary I read, this would not actually give anyone AW permits if they already have them, but rather would allow people to simply apply for the same AW permit that already exists. The only part about it that I like is that it allows inheritance of AWs. (actually, can this go across state lines in 2132?)

patman
03-10-2006, 8:30 AM
Gun rights for non-criminals were nickel-and-dime away. (i.e. slowly eroded away). This might be a step in getting some of those rights back little by little or at least turn those nickels and dimes into pennies.

[as seen above]

pilotmadrat
03-10-2006, 9:43 AM
Where are the checks and balances on the majority when they trample our gun rights?

PMR