PDA

View Full Version : Newer House Bill being looked at


jemaddux
03-14-2006, 8:02 PM
Anyone know anything about this Bill that is being looked at?

Talked to DOJ today and they are saying listing may take a very long time because of other Bills being looked at but curious if anyone knows any more about this

AB 2131, as introduced, Haynes. Assault weapons.
Existing law, subject to exceptions, generally prohibits possession
of assault weapons, unless registration and other criteria have been
met, as specified. Existing law also authorizes permits for assault
weapons, as specified. Possession of an assault weapon in violation of
theses provisions is a crime.
This bill would revise permit and registration procedures for assault
weapons obtained from intestate succession and assault weapons
being brought into the state by person moving into the state, and for
other persons wishing to acquire an assault weapon, as specified. 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. The bill
would make prompt compliance with the permit process by licensed
firearms dealers a condition of licensure. The bill would authorize
additional transfers of assault weapons and .50 BMG rifles by licensed
firearms dealers, in specified circumstances.

RRangel
03-14-2006, 8:09 PM
This is not new. It's an NRA supported bill. It's on the front page under new legislation or on the CAL NRA site.

If you called on the phone they can tell you anything.

jemaddux
03-14-2006, 8:27 PM
This is not new. It's an NRA supported bill. It's on the front page under new legislation or on the CAL NRA site.

If you called on the phone they can tell you anything.


The Bill was introduced on 02/21/2006, so I would consider that to be newer. And may be heard in committee March 24 according to the history of the bill.

Understand that they can tell you anything but as a dealer I talk to a few people and try to get the best information that I can. Sometimes they can just give direction on things to look at also to see what is happening. Just thought I would get a few other views about this Bill.

Charliegone
03-14-2006, 8:31 PM
So wait. This bill would allow us to register our guns (like the sb23 ones) as AW's or would they only allow interstate commerced AW's to be registered?

Ford8N
03-14-2006, 8:36 PM
[QUOTE=jemaddux]

Talked to DOJ today and they are saying listing may take a very long time because of other Bills being looked at but curious if anyone knows any more about this




Who said this and what exactly did they say?

RRangel
03-14-2006, 8:45 PM
It's a good bill and we need to support it. It's new, but since learning about it it doesn't feel so new.

What I don't understand though is why would the DOJ be spending so much time looking at it? Just in case it passes and get's signed?
That doesn't seem like such a good excuse to give for not listing lowers.


ASSAULT WEAPONS (Haynes) Description: Existing law, subject to exceptions, generally prohibits possession of assault weapons, unless registration and other criteria have been met, as specified. Existing law also authorizes permits for assault weapons, as specified. Possession of an assault weapon in violation of these provisions is a crime. This bill would revise permit and registration procedures for assault weapons obtained from interstate succession and assault weapons being brought into the state by person moving into the state, and for other persons wishing to acquire an assault weapon, as specified. 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. The bill would make prompt compliance with the permit process by licensed firearms dealers a condition of licensure. The bill would authorize additional transfers of assault weapons and .50 BMG rifles by licensed firearms dealers, in specified circumstances. This bill amends Sections 12285, 12286, and 12290 of the Penal Code, relating to assault weapons.
Action needed: None at this time 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 (http://nramemberscouncils.com/legs.shtml#contactinfo) link will be posted. Vote: majority.
Appropriation: no.
Fiscal committee: yes.
State-mandated local program: yes.

jemaddux
03-14-2006, 8:45 PM
Spoke with one of the field people today about the fixed ten round clips. Was told that the fixed kits are fine as long as they are a 9 round clip plus the one in the chamber for a total of ten, not ten in the clip plus one in the chamber for a total of eleven. So a few other things came up to check out and how things would go step by step once they have things moving so I was directed to this sight.

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/index.html

Look up AB2131 for the total bill and it will give you all the information

NRAhighpowershooter
03-14-2006, 8:49 PM
Spoke with one of the field people today about the fixed ten round clips. Was told that the fixed kits are fine as long as they are a 9 round clip plus the one in the chamber for a total of ten, not ten in the clip plus one in the chamber for a total of eleven.

I think the field person os full of BS or ignorant (both??). what of ALL those 10rnd mags for handguns as they allow 10+1 here in CA because of mag limit laws????

jemaddux
03-14-2006, 8:51 PM
DOJ isn't working on this at all, she was just saying with all of the newer bills that are being put to committee this all my become void as far as listing anything. Basicly all I am saying is be informed, this may take a very long time to sort all this out.

Jason762
03-14-2006, 8:52 PM
Was told that the fixed kits are fine as long as they are a 9 round clip plus the one in the chamber for a total of ten, not ten in the clip plus one in the chamber for a total of eleven.

Where do you get 9 round magazines? Ran a quick search on google, no joy.

Jason

EDIT: Saw the previous two posts made while I typed this. Nevermind.

jerryg1776
03-14-2006, 9:00 PM
Spoke with one of the field people today about the fixed ten round clips. Was told that the fixed kits are fine as long as they are a 9 round clip plus the one in the chamber for a total of ten, not ten in the clip plus one in the chamber for a total of eleven. So a few other things came up to check out and how things would go step by step once they have things moving so I was directed to this sight.

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/index.html

Look up AB2131 for the total bill and it will give you all the information
Damn if my car has 4 tires I better throw out the damn spare cause now I would have a car with 5 tires. Good thing all the mags I have are pre-ban or I might have to toss them all out and find 9 rounders. or maybe just load 10, jack back the slide and never have 11 to go. HAHAHA... OK I am not a comedian and am not funny, Sorry.

PanzerAce
03-14-2006, 9:03 PM
does anybody have the actual text of the law? cause for some reason, the summary of it doesnt make any sense to me....

biff
03-14-2006, 9:05 PM
Oh boy! Here we go again!

jemaddux
03-14-2006, 9:13 PM
does anybody have the actual text of the law? cause for some reason, the summary of it doesnt make any sense to me....


That seems to be the problem, none of the rules make sense at all.....

Best thing is to not build anything until they put everything in writing. I would hate to see someone get busted for something they thought the law said.

RRangel
03-14-2006, 9:21 PM
It's just a bill at this point and it has no effect on current law. Nothing has changed. If it makes it through the legislature it still has to be signed by you know who?

The grabbers are going to try hard to kill this bill.

shopkeep
03-14-2006, 9:22 PM
The DOJ has said it will list for months now both in correspondance and now in a memo. They're going to list these guns, but just like any other state agency they're going to take their time to do it.

Oh and as far as any bills dealing with repealing the AW Ban or allowing open registration NO WAY. There is a fringe socialist elite in charge of the state government that only takes away gun rights, it NEVER gives them back. If anything, they're working on a bill to give the DOJ full discretion over manipulation AW registration and controlling AW features.

Bill's strategy is correct, we must regain the initiative.

PanzerAce
03-14-2006, 9:24 PM
That seems to be the problem, none of the rules make sense at all.....

Best thing is to not build anything until they put everything in writing. I would hate to see someone get busted for something they thought the law said.

Sorry, I wasnt clear. I meant this new law, not the current laws.

azndmd
03-14-2006, 10:40 PM
[QUOTE=Jason762]Where do you get 9 round magazines? Ran a quick search on google, no joy.

Jason




FYI...
9 round magazine can be purchased at Brownells ://www.brownells.com/aspx/NS/store/productdetail.aspx?p=8741&s=21183

xenophobe
03-15-2006, 12:04 AM
This proposed law only seeks to allow AW Permits to be issued if registered firearms are inherited, and to make the state AW Permit 'shall issue', as it was meant to be instead of 'fat chance'. RR89's legislative intent *was* to issue AWPermits to those who qualified, though the state has pretty much changed that to people who can show a clear need to have one.

EBWhite
03-15-2006, 12:46 AM
sounds like the similar reform that the CA ccw system needs!

shopkeep
03-15-2006, 1:20 AM
This proposed law only seeks to allow AW Permits to be issued if registered firearms are inherited, and to make the state AW Permit 'shall issue', as it was meant to be instead of 'fat chance'. RR89's legislative intent *was* to issue AWPermits to those who qualified, though the state has pretty much changed that to people who can show a clear need to have one.

It's too bad really that they've decided to make that interpretation. There are many, including myself, who would pay $5,000+ for a permit. If I could obtain a permit and said permit would allow open registration of "Assault Weapons" I wouldn't have any trouble parting with $10,000 - $15,000. That's considerably more than the bribes most LEOs accept for CCWs... err wait!!! I meant to say "Campaign Contributions"!

xenophobe
03-15-2006, 1:22 AM
Would you pay $5000 a year? I think that's too much. $400 a year at most, and $200 a transfer would be fine by me.

shopkeep
03-15-2006, 1:28 AM
Would you pay $5000 a year? I think that's too much. $400 a year at most, and $200 a transfer would be fine by me.

$5,000 - $15,000 down payment in "campaign contributions" to the appropriate individuals or agency. Then $400 per year and $200 per transfer. Just think of all the state revenue that could be generated!!! We could END THE DEFICIT!!!

Of course the problem is that due to the absolute frenzy of hysteria the Democraps generated with the "Assault Weapons" and "Handgun Control" issues they've backed themselves into a corner. They no longer have the ability to consider reform or legislation that allows access to guns for residents. The fact that AB 2131 is NRA sponsored/authored guarantees its demise. No Democrap will want to have the Brady Bunch, VPC, or other campaign contributers know that they signed off on any pro-gun legislation no matter how common sense it is.

PanzerAce
03-15-2006, 8:36 AM
$5,000 - $15,000 down payment in "campaign contributions" to the appropriate individuals or agency. Then $400 per year and $200 per transfer. Just think of all the state revenue that could be generated!!! We could END THE DEFICIT!!!

wait....I thought that was the point of the DROS fees and this offlist lower madness?

Alphahookups
03-15-2006, 8:44 AM
So let me get this straight, potentially we would be able to get AW's assuming we met a certain criteria....

That is what I have been saying the whole damn time. I dont mind paying a nominal fee( no more then 200 a year) and they could do the best background check ever.

I just want to have the ability to own AW's.

6172crew
03-15-2006, 9:03 AM
I think they are looking at FFL AW permits, am I wrong?

So let me get this straight, potentially we would be able to get AW's assuming we met a certain criteria....

That is what I have been saying the whole damn time. I dont mind paying a nominal fee( no more then 200 a year) and they could do the best background check ever.

I just want to have the ability to own AW's.

Alphahookups
03-15-2006, 9:10 AM
The way its written makes it seem like its for the everyday joe, not the FFL.

NRAhighpowershooter
03-15-2006, 12:19 PM
Aslo, don't forget.... ANY new laws that allow new AW's in this state will bring out the wrath of the brady bunch!...:mad:

Bacon
03-15-2006, 6:29 PM
This is all you need.

http://www.cargolaw.com/images/flipping-money.gif

Charliegone
03-15-2006, 7:21 PM
If we can get a couple of pro-gun democrats on our side it will be most helpful..there are few in the house you know. Baca(representative not the sheriff)... is rate A by the NRA.