PDA

View Full Version : CGF teaser tweet


Pages : [1] 2

yakmon
07-26-2010, 10:09 AM
Good news coming for CA DOJ for all CA firearms owners tomorrow.

Anyone know what this is about, the suspense is killing me?

ripcurlksm
07-26-2010, 10:22 AM
Yea i got it on my phone too... If I had to guess maybe the handgun roster?

thayne
07-26-2010, 10:28 AM
In on first page! Two Weeks!

tiki
07-26-2010, 10:44 AM
Oh no, here goes the speculation thread. :)

ETA: Why didn't we get a Tweet 2 weeks ago?

WokMaster1
07-26-2010, 11:00 AM
Goodbye AW list or Safe handgun roster.:D

ZombieTactics
07-26-2010, 11:03 AM
If the roster dies in the wake of some deep legal or administrative magic ... I'll be pleased as punch to be sure.

It will be bittersweet, as I just DROS'd a PPT for a "California Priced" Ruger LCP :o

gunRfun
07-26-2010, 11:03 AM
Haha I was going to start a thread but I found this. What does it mean!!?

Citizen 14
07-26-2010, 11:04 AM
Yea i got it on my phone too... If I had to guess maybe the handgun roster?

I hope, I hope, I hope.....
It's probably to much to ask, but that would be awesome.

exklusve
07-26-2010, 11:04 AM
anyone have a link to this?

Thanks!


doh...


http://twitter.com/CalgunsFdn

dantodd
07-26-2010, 11:10 AM
I suspect it has to do with..... what do you call those monthly periodicals?

383green
07-26-2010, 11:17 AM
I no longer have a Twitter account. Can somebody post a link to the CGF Twitter feed?

Never mind... found it:

http://twitter.com/CalgunsFDN

383green
07-26-2010, 11:17 AM
I suspect it has to do with..... what do you call those monthly periodicals?

Aunt Flo? :whistling:

Shenaniguns
07-26-2010, 11:30 AM
Rhymes with agazine? :eek:

383green
07-26-2010, 11:34 AM
Rhymes with agazine? :eek:

That seems most likely to me, but I'm still crossing my fingers that it'll rhyme with "orty millimeter Bofors". :D

bballwizard05
07-26-2010, 11:37 AM
the best part about this is, no matter what gets fixed right now. It's gonna be a breath a freedom none of us have breathed in this state for YEARS! Can't wait!!!!!!!

Casual_Shooter
07-26-2010, 11:38 AM
"Good news coming for CA DOJ for all CA firearms owners tomorrow"

Perhaps they meant "from"?

ripcurlksm
07-26-2010, 11:39 AM
That seems most likely to me, but I'm still crossing my fingers that it'll rhyme with "orty millimeter Bofors". :D

as in no more 10rd mags?

ColdDeadHands1
07-26-2010, 11:40 AM
I'll play. Speculation is a wonderful thing! It must be one of the following:
1) Change CA to Shall Issue
2) Eliminate Roster
3) Eliminate magazine restriction

It is one of these, right?:chris:

safewaysecurity
07-26-2010, 11:41 AM
That bothered me when I read it. Imagine all the speculation " 50 cal loophole, CA roster, AW ban dead, CCW shall issue" then all of a sudden it turns out... free hot dogs for all CGF CONTRIBUTORS YAY!!! lol

Shenaniguns
07-26-2010, 11:42 AM
I'll play. Speculation is a wonderful thing! It must be one of the following:
1) Change CA to Shall Issue
2) Eliminate Roster
3) Eliminate magazine restriction

It is one of these, right?:chris:


My guess would be the roster, but I'll take all 3 :D

yakmon
07-26-2010, 11:43 AM
I like hotdogs

tiki
07-26-2010, 11:43 AM
Haha I was going to start a thread but I found this. What does it mean!!?

What??? Someone looked before posting???

hill billy
07-26-2010, 11:44 AM
"Good news coming for CA DOJ for all CA firearms owners tomorrow"

Perhaps they meant "from"?

What I was wondering.

Maybe this will help some of those who think JB is anti gun.

safewaysecurity
07-26-2010, 11:45 AM
JB is anti gun but so is meg...

Liberty1
07-26-2010, 11:46 AM
So is LCAV's CGN monitor having a coronary right about now? :)

eaglemike
07-26-2010, 11:48 AM
Nordyke?

dantodd
07-26-2010, 11:49 AM
So is LCAV's CGN monitor having a coronary right about now? :)

They just don't know whether or not to believe it. Ain't life grand sometimes?

hill billy
07-26-2010, 11:50 AM
JB is anti gun but so is meg...

ok.:rolleyes:

Nordyke?

I thought of that but what would DOJ have to say regarding that?

safewaysecurity
07-26-2010, 11:50 AM
Nordyke?

Don't think so I think the message means to say FROM the CA DOJ so don't think it has to do with any cases except maybe in response to McDonald or something.

pullnshoot25
07-26-2010, 11:50 AM
Based on previous rumors and a small amount of insider info, I am.betting that normal capacity magazines are the topic of the day.

Untamed1972
07-26-2010, 11:51 AM
I'll play. Speculation is a wonderful thing! It must be one of the following:
1) Change CA to Shall Issue
2) Eliminate Roster
3) Eliminate magazine restriction

It is one of these, right?:chris:


not sure where everyone is coming up with that one, since currently there is no litigation pending on the 10rd mag limit and DOJ does not have the power to just override laws currently on the books.

So I'm guessin' either:

1) the announcement of the filing of a new case on AWB challenge or the mag-capacity

OR

2)The judge issued an injuction against implementation of AB962.


But since they said it was good news for ALL CA gun owners I'm leaning towards the 2nd one since ammo availability affects ALL gun owners regardless of the type of weapon they own.

sevensix2x51
07-26-2010, 11:51 AM
ibtc (in b4 the coronary)

the suspense is killin me....

Fyathyrio
07-26-2010, 11:52 AM
Sykes?
Pena?
Nordyke?

All gave up and settled in our favor?

safewaysecurity
07-26-2010, 11:53 AM
Based on previous rumors and a small amount of insider info, I am.betting that normal capacity magazines are the topic of the day.

Insider info!??!?! =0 I hope it's mag limits plus extra somethin somethin.

thayne
07-26-2010, 11:53 AM
"Good news coming for CA DOJ for all CA firearms owners tomorrow"

Perhaps they meant "from"?

I doubt its a typo. Why would we get good news from? I take it as meaning DOJ is going to get a new order :chris:

Citizen 14
07-26-2010, 11:54 AM
That bothered me when I read it. Imagine all the speculation " 50 cal loophole, CA roster, AW ban dead, CCW shall issue" then all of a sudden it turns out... free hot dogs for all CGF CONTRIBUTORS YAY!!! lol

Ok, that made me giggle out loud.

thayne
07-26-2010, 11:54 AM
Based on previous rumors and a small amount of insider info, I am.betting that normal capacity magazines are the topic of the day.

OMFG! That would be awesome.

DVSmith
07-26-2010, 11:55 AM
Oh no, here goes the speculation thread. :)

ETA: Why didn't we get a Tweet 2 weeks ago?

That is what I would have expected... :D

ScottB
07-26-2010, 11:56 AM
Don't think so I think the message means to say FROM the CA DOJ so don't think it has to do with any cases except maybe in response to McDonald or something.

Actually, it doesn't say 'from" DOJ. Here is the quote:

"Good news coming for CA DOJ for all CA firearms owners tomorrow. "

Maybe a typo, but could be Nordyke-related

bulgron
07-26-2010, 11:56 AM
A free peppermint candy for every purchase of a handgun costing $500 or more.

ZombieTactics
07-26-2010, 11:58 AM
OK ... I'll play ...

If it's actually "good news" FOR the CA DOJ ...
Perhaps "good news" is meant sarcastically ...
In which case it could be an order from a higher authority ...
"Good news" for them ... they have some new rules to follow in the wake of McDonald.

... could be.

Fjold
07-26-2010, 12:00 PM
They are going to change the list of prohibited gun colors by adding "pink". No more Kalishna Kitties or AR Kitties.

BlindRacer
07-26-2010, 12:00 PM
Hopefully it's more significant than what I'm thinking, but couldn't it be a little smaller of an issue?

Like maybe dros is going to be 1 dollar cheaper? Or the ten day wait is any time on the tenth day instead of after the exact time?

I'm just thinking that everyone is hoping for more than will actually happen. But it would be wonderful if it were something meaningful and substantial.

safewaysecurity
07-26-2010, 12:00 PM
Actually, it doesn't say 'from" DOJ. Here is the quote:

"Good news coming for CA DOJ for all CA firearms owners tomorrow. "

Maybe a typo, but could be Nordyke-related

I was saying it could mean from because it sounds kind of weird to say good news for both CA DOJ and us because there is never a win win.. unless they mean for CA DOJ is a funny kind of way or something.

mzimmers
07-26-2010, 12:02 PM
Aunt Flo? :whistling:

Oh no, you din't.

Fate
07-26-2010, 12:02 PM
Iggy's desk finally got a lawyer and is pressing charges... :iggy2:

Crom
07-26-2010, 12:03 PM
That bothered me when I read it. Imagine all the speculation " 50 cal loophole, CA roster, AW ban dead, CCW shall issue" then all of a sudden it turns out... free hot dogs for all CGF CONTRIBUTORS YAY!!! lol

:laugh: hot dog!

mzimmers
07-26-2010, 12:04 PM
I'll play. Speculation is a wonderful thing! It must be one of the following:
1) Change CA to Shall Issue
2) Eliminate Roster
3) Eliminate magazine restriction

It is one of these, right?:chris:

I'll bet my eye teeth that it won't be #1.

(If I'm wrong, it'll be worth it.)

liketoshoot
07-26-2010, 12:05 PM
I know I KNOW!!! Librarian or Kestryll have been offered a job with them......

OK Bad joke but would be nice LOL

willm952
07-26-2010, 12:06 PM
Man. At this point, I'd be thrilled with no awb and 10 rounders. Geez!

safewaysecurity
07-26-2010, 12:07 PM
bye bye bullet button and 10 round limit?

liketoshoot
07-26-2010, 12:08 PM
or no more ten day wait, that would be http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb32/quester1000/Sweeeeeeeet.jpg
sweet!

ShootinMedic
07-26-2010, 12:09 PM
Maybe they are declaring all laws dealing with firearms including NFA are unconstitutional and will no longer be enforced in CA. CA will be a firearms sanctuary state! :party:

or...


maybe something a little less exciting.

ETA: I like hot dogs too!

putput
07-26-2010, 12:16 PM
I'm going with AB962...

2009_gunner
07-26-2010, 12:17 PM
My Glock 21 is tired of being subnormal.

Of course, if there are 13+1 rounds in the weapon instead of 10+1, then I'm sure rainbows will cease to exist and unicorns will cry.

ripcurlksm
07-26-2010, 12:17 PM
Good news coming for CA DOJ for all CA firearms owners tomorrow.

re-reading this... could JB's DOJ replacement be appointed tomorrow and he is pro 2A?

EastBayRidge
07-26-2010, 12:17 PM
Downgraded again, from "Bureau" to "Cubicle in the corner by the loud copier, the one that jams constantly and makes that REALLY annoying grinding sound... of Firearms" ??

tango-52
07-26-2010, 12:18 PM
Any law or regulation that currently exists cannot be changed by a simple declaration of the governing agency. It all takes a long process of public notification, input and hearings. So, it has to be something that the Attorney General can issue an opinion on, that changes past practices. Maybe he will say that they will now recognize all other states' CCWs, even if they are held by a CA resident. Or maybe he will say that the BOF is being reduced to a one-person clerical position, in light of budgetary considerations. But it won't be an announcement that the roster is eliminated or the mag capacity is increased, because those are laws and regulations that will have to go through a bunch of gymnastics to get removed.

Time will tell. :cool:

yakmon
07-26-2010, 12:18 PM
Ab962 is my guess, too.

chrisw
07-26-2010, 12:20 PM
Based on previous rumors and a small amount of insider info, I am.betting that normal capacity magazines are the topic of the day.


That would be a breath of fresh air!

Havoc70
07-26-2010, 12:25 PM
7/27 - StarCraft II releases, California gun owners go crazy with massive weapons and tactical nukes. DOJ can't do squat about it....

Just sayin' :).

Untamed1972
07-26-2010, 12:27 PM
Any law or regulation that currently exists cannot be changed by a simple declaration of the governing agency. It all takes a long process of public notification, input and hearings. So, it has to be something that the Attorney General can issue an opinion on, that changes past practices. Maybe he will say that they will now recognize all other states' CCWs, even if they are held by a CA resident. Or maybe he will say that the BOF is being reduced to a one-person clerical position, in light of budgetary considerations. But it won't be an announcement that the roster is eliminated or the mag capacity is increased, because those are laws and regulations that will have to go through a bunch of gymnastics to get removed.

Time will tell. :cool:

The 2 bolded statements contradict. I dont think DOJ has the authority to grant reciprocity since 12050 clearly states a valid CCW in CA must be issued by the sheriff of your county of residence. That will take a judge or the Legislature to change.

oepirate
07-26-2010, 12:32 PM
Thanks Havoc, I thought I was the only one noticing the date on that...

mzimmers
07-26-2010, 12:32 PM
Any law or regulation that currently exists cannot be changed by a simple declaration of the governing agency...But it won't be an announcement that the roster is eliminated or the mag capacity is increased, because those are laws and regulations that will have to go through a bunch of gymnastics to get removed.

Regarding the roster: I wonder if the DOJ has the power to make roster entries permanent, instead of expiring every 18 months (or whatever it is).

Even that would be progress; some gun makers might be willing to roster their guns (or more of their guns) if they didn't feel they were being held up for renewal fees.

CaliforniaCarry
07-26-2010, 12:35 PM
7/27 - StarCraft II releases, California gun owners go crazy with massive weapons and tactical nukes. DOJ can't do squat about it....

Just sayin' :).

This. I don't know what I'm going to do tomorrow... I can't play Starcraft 2, read the forums, and watch my Activision/Blizzard stock all at the same time.

wkd4496
07-26-2010, 12:36 PM
GREAT. Now I'm giddy like a school girl...

Well, If calguns foundation thinks it good news. It should be sweet:]

fd15k
07-26-2010, 12:38 PM
Man, there won't be any sleep for me tonight... :rolleyes:

N6ATF
07-26-2010, 12:38 PM
DOJ adopts the flowchart and stops providing BS to all the DAs, enabling them to persecute law-abiding gun owners.

bulgron
07-26-2010, 12:39 PM
Any law or regulation that currently exists cannot be changed by a simple declaration of the governing agency. It all takes a long process of public notification, input and hearings. So, it has to be something that the Attorney General can issue an opinion on, that changes past practices. Maybe he will say that they will now recognize all other states' CCWs, even if they are held by a CA resident. Or maybe he will say that the BOF is being reduced to a one-person clerical position, in light of budgetary considerations. But it won't be an announcement that the roster is eliminated or the mag capacity is increased, because those are laws and regulations that will have to go through a bunch of gymnastics to get removed.

Time will tell. :cool:

Brown could issue an opinion about how, as a result of Heller and McDonald, he thinks "for self defense" is an acceptable CCW good cause.

Just thinking out-loud here.

sevensix2x51
07-26-2010, 12:40 PM
This. I don't know what I'm going to do tomorrow... I can't play Starcraft 2, read the forums, and watch my Activision/Blizzard stock all at the same time.

no lanplay? not gonna buy it. boo blizzard boo.

unless thats the announcement! DOJ made a lan crack already?

hotdogs would be awesome as well...

lazyworm
07-26-2010, 12:40 PM
Tomorrow is the new TWO WEEKS!

stitchnicklas
07-26-2010, 12:41 PM
2)The judge issued an injuction against implementation of AB962


or

that jerry brown is stepping down and appointing hoffmang attorney general...:eek::D:eek::D

ShootinMedic
07-26-2010, 12:51 PM
Gene for AG! This topic made me join Twitter! I swore I would never join Twitter!

elenius
07-26-2010, 1:00 PM
An AG opinion letter seems likely given the hints. Could be that "self defense" is "good cause" due to McDonald. Or that any FFL can sell normal capacity mags (which is one interpretation of the large cap mag law). The former seems more likely given timing after McDonald.

But the pessimist in me suspects is something much less significant...

bden
07-26-2010, 1:02 PM
As a result of drastic budget cuts police departments and other LE agencies statewide will be holding a "bake sale" tomorrow of all their SWAT gear (including AWs) since 90% of the time it's only used in training anyway. It will all be sold at bargain basement prices & become legal once and for all. We're gonna make Alaska look like Chicago!

safewaysecurity
07-26-2010, 1:09 PM
As a result of drastic budget cuts police departments and other LE agencies statewide will be holding a "bake sale" tomorrow of all their SWAT gear (including AWs) since 90% of the time it's only used in training anyway. It will all be sold at bargain basement prices & become legal once and for all. We're gonna make Alaska look like Chicago!

This

7x57
07-26-2010, 1:12 PM
That bothered me when I read it. Imagine all the speculation " 50 cal loophole, CA roster, AW ban dead, CCW shall issue" then all of a sudden it turns out... free hot dogs for all CGF CONTRIBUTORS YAY!!! lol

But still, I'd eat the hot dog. :D

7x57

Joe
07-26-2010, 1:14 PM
I'm not expecting anything huge. But it'll be nice to see what happens.

tiki
07-26-2010, 1:15 PM
Based on previous rumors and a small amount of insider info, I am.betting that normal capacity magazines are the topic of the day.

I don't see why. There aren't any challenges and it is established law. I don't think the DOJ can just decide to kill an existing law like that. Plus, the Brady's and media would have a field day with it. I doubt that the magazine restrictions will be lifted, especially since that is one of the items that may survive a 2nd Amdend. challenge in SCOTUS.

Any law or regulation that currently exists cannot be changed by a simple declaration of the governing agency. It all takes a long process of public notification, input and hearings. So, it has to be something that the Attorney General can issue an opinion on, that changes past practices.

I agree. I am guessing that it has to do with either the good cause requirements, or, a statement about the bullet button/prince 50 legality. But, I don't know why the bullet button would be good news to all gun owners. But it does seem plausible since we already know its legal, and, declaring it as such wouldn't change much. So, they can issue the statement, but there would't be a rush on new guns because we all have them already.

Brown could issue an opinion about how, as a result of Heller and McDonald, he thinks "for self defense" is an acceptable CCW good cause.

Yeah, I would guess that would be it. I'm trying to think about what could come down from the DOJ based on work in the background and recent events. I wouldn't be surprised if they did issue an opinion on the Bullet Button, but that really wouldn't be good news for all gun owners. I think more likely would be self defense is acceptable for CCW good cause.

I am going with shall issue as my guess because given what the DOJ has the power to change without affecting existing laws, this seems the most likely to me. With Heller and McDonald, I think they may feel that the writing is on the wall and they will need to go shall issue at some point. The recent budget cuts and the fact that there is pending litigation against a sitting sheriff might have them rethinking the requirements. Out of the roster, the bullet button and the ccw policy, the ccw policy is the only one that is applied unfairly across the state. The roster applies to all non-leos and the magazine ban applies to all non-leos. CCW is used as a political favor payback game in certain areas. I think this is the most troublesome for the state when it comes to litigation.

My curiosity was peaked a week or so ago when a thread appeared encouraging people, especially in Sacramento, to go file applications, then, shortly thereafter, the thread went away. That makes me wonder. Also, from what I have been hearing about Sacramento County lately, it seems as if the atmosphere around CCW issuance is changing. So, thats my guess. I hope it is something meaningful like that and nothing silly like LEOs have to follow the roster now too.

Someone mentioned something about once a gun is on the roster it will stay on the roster, but I wouldn't call that good news. The roster is unconstitutional, so making a small change but keeping it around still forces manufacturers to send in guns. Taking the fees out of the process makes it a little better, but still, you are limited to the firearms that manufacturers want to apply for. I say no to the roster in any form. If its safe enough for an LEO, then its safe enough for me. The bullet button would be good news to a point, but it really wouldn't give us anything new, so I wouldn't view that as good news for all gun owners in California.

So, that's my .25 cent analysis. I'm going with shall issue as my guess.

thayne
07-26-2010, 1:23 PM
Any law or regulation that currently exists cannot be changed by a simple declaration of the governing agency. It all takes a long process of public notification, input and hearings. So, it has to be something that the Attorney General can issue an opinion on, that changes past practices. Maybe he will say that they will now recognize all other states' CCWs, even if they are held by a CA resident. Or maybe he will say that the BOF is being reduced to a one-person clerical position, in light of budgetary considerations. But it won't be an announcement that the roster is eliminated or the mag capacity is increased, because those are laws and regulations that will have to go through a bunch of gymnastics to get removed.

Time will tell. :cool:

The 2 bolded statements contradict. I dont think DOJ has the authority to grant reciprocity since 12050 clearly states a valid CCW in CA must be issued by the sheriff of your county of residence. That will take a judge or the Legislature to change.

I don't see why. There aren't any challenges and it is established law. I don't think the DOJ can just decide to kill an existing law like that. Plus, the Brady's and media would have a field day with it. I doubt that the magazine restrictions will be lifted, especially since that is one of the items that may survive a 2nd Amdend. challenge in SCOTUS.



I agree. I am guessing that it has to do with either the good cause requirements, or, a statement about the bullet button/prince 50 legality. But, I don't know why the bullet button would be good news to all gun owners. But it does seem plausible since we already know its legal, and, declaring it as such wouldn't change much. So, they can issue the statement, but there would't be a rush on new guns because we all have them already.



Yeah, I would guess that would be it. I'm trying to think about what could come down from the DOJ based on work in the background and recent events. I wouldn't be surprised if they did issue an opinion on the Bullet Button, but that really wouldn't be good news for all gun owners. I think more likely would be self defense is acceptable for CCW good cause.

I am going with shall issue as my guess because given what the DOJ has the power to change without affecting existing laws, this seems the most likely to me. With Heller and McDonald, I think they may feel that the writing is on the wall and they will need to go shall issue at some point. The recent budget cuts and the fact that there is pending litigation against a sitting sheriff might have them rethinking the requirements. Out of the roster, the bullet button and the ccw policy, the ccw policy is the only one that is applied unfairly across the state. The roster applies to all non-leos and the magazine ban applies to all non-leos. CCW is used as a political favor payback game in certain areas. I think this is the most troublesome for the state when it comes to litigation.

My curiosity was peaked a week or so ago when a thread appeared encouraging people, especially in Sacramento, to go file applications, then, shortly thereafter, the thread went away. That makes me wonder. Also, from what I have been hearing about Sacramento County lately, it seems as if the atmosphere around CCW issuance is changing. So, thats my guess. I hope it is something meaningful like that and nothing silly like LEOs have to follow the roster now too.

Someone mentioned something about once a gun is on the roster it will stay on the roster, but I wouldn't call that good news. The roster is unconstitutional, so making a small change but keeping it around still forces manufacturers to send in guns. Taking the fees out of the process makes it a little better, but still, you are limited to the firearms that manufacturers want to apply for. I say no to the roster in any form. If its safe enough for an LEO, then its safe enough for me. The bullet button would be good news to a point, but it really wouldn't give us anything new, so I wouldn't view that as good news for all gun owners in California.

So, that's my .25 cent analysis. I'm going with shall issue as my guess.
You guys need to re-read the original post. Its not coming "from" DOJ is "For" DOJ

tiki
07-26-2010, 1:23 PM
I'm not expecting anything huge. But it'll be nice to see what happens.

Yeah, I agree. Shall Issue would be nice, but, they will probably come out with something where we wind up saying "yeah, so what?"

tiki
07-26-2010, 1:29 PM
You guys need to re-read the original post. Its not coming "from" DOJ is "For" DOJ

"Good news coming for CA DOJ for all CA firearms owners tomorrow."
I thought that was a typo.

The tweet doesn't really make sense then. Good news coming for CA DOJ and its for all CA firearms owners? What good news for the DOJ would translate into good news for us? We're on the opposite sides of the fight.

mzimmers
07-26-2010, 1:29 PM
You guys need to re-read the original post. Its not coming "from" DOJ is "For" DOJ

I think that has to be a misprint. It's not even particularly good English the way it's currently written.

tyrist
07-26-2010, 1:29 PM
If I had to make a guess it would have to be something with permits where the DOJ has discretion. I believe CCW is at the discretion of the Chief Law Enforcement Officer of your area and does not reside with the DOJ itself.

orangeusa
07-26-2010, 1:31 PM
If the tweet is wrong, could we get it UPDATED?

I HOPE it's AB962.

But could be DOJ list - in that there is precidence in DC case.
- Hanson v District of Columbia Challenge to CA Roster of Handguns in D.C., March 2009 ( I dunno )

IMO - I think Brown is repealing the new CG Classified rule changes.... :)

CaliforniaCarry
07-26-2010, 1:32 PM
I don't see why. There aren't any challenges and it is established law. I don't think the DOJ can just decide to kill an existing law like that. Plus, the Brady's and media would have a field day with it. I doubt that the magazine restrictions will be lifted, especially since that is one of the items that may survive a 2nd Amdend. challenge in SCOTUS.


Bill and Gene have both said that there's something in the works to subvert the magazine restrictions. I was under the impression that this was still a few months out, however.

Untamed1972
07-26-2010, 1:36 PM
You guys need to re-read the original post. Its not coming "from" DOJ is "For" DOJ

You need to read my post and realize I responding to a subsequent comment someone made.....not the about what was in the OP.

I just thought it was funny the poster I quoted by started off by saying DOJ doesn't have the power to change the law...and then 2 sentences later said....but maybe they're gonna change/make up a law about CCw reciprocity.

Or read this post of mine http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showpost.php?p=4678571&postcount=31 which was directly related to the OP.

Havoc70
07-26-2010, 1:38 PM
Brown could issue an opinion about how, as a result of Heller and McDonald, he thinks "for self defense" is an acceptable CCW good cause.

Just thinking out-loud here.

That would make me deliriously giddy.

vandal
07-26-2010, 1:38 PM
I'm thinking budget cuts.

Joe
07-26-2010, 1:38 PM
"Good news coming for CA DOJ for all CA firearms owners tomorrow."
I thought that was a typo.

The tweet doesn't really make sense then. Good news coming for CA DOJ and its for all CA firearms owners? What good news for the DOJ would translate into good news for us? We're on the opposite sides of the fight.

The only way I can see that making sense is some judge is going to tell the DOJ something tomorrow that will be good news to ca gun owners. I dunno. We'll know tomorrow :p

bwiese
07-26-2010, 1:40 PM
I think it perhaps is more aptly phrased, "Good news coming from DOJ for all CA firearms purchasers."

It's nice, though relatively minor. But it's nice.

thayne
07-26-2010, 1:40 PM
"Good news coming for CA DOJ for all CA firearms owners tomorrow."
I thought that was a typo.

The tweet doesn't really make sense then. Good news coming for CA DOJ and its for all CA firearms owners? What good news for the DOJ would translate into good news for us? We're on the opposite sides of the fight.

I think that has to be a misprint. It's not even particularly good English the way it's currently written.

It may be a typo, but I dont think we should take it as a typo for analysis. Grammar my not be correct, but the meaning would be totally different if it was "from". I guess we'll just have to wait and see.

safewaysecurity
07-26-2010, 1:41 PM
Just tell us Gene. Damnit!

safewaysecurity
07-26-2010, 1:42 PM
Nice, relatively minor. It will reduce the cost of your gun.
Announcement tomorrow w/details.

Test will be required only once and will be on roster permanently....

thedrickel
07-26-2010, 1:45 PM
Microstamping

Fate
07-26-2010, 1:46 PM
Nice, relatively minor. It will reduce the cost of your gun.
Announcement tomorrow w/details.

And I was starting to think it was just "Eff with LCAV Part II" Hahaha.

safewaysecurity
07-26-2010, 1:47 PM
Microstamping

Nah this is kind of already semi-settled because there is a patent on micro stamping and it's been put on hold. I can't see it implemented.

tiki
07-26-2010, 1:48 PM
Test will be required only once and will be on roster permanently....

The only good news concerning the roster would be that there is no roster.

CnCFunFactory
07-26-2010, 1:52 PM
Aunt Flo? :whistling:

Oh, wait, what, my girlfriend's dad is coming to visit? What does that have to do with the DOJ? :43:

gotthelife4u
07-26-2010, 1:52 PM
Wouldn't removal of the Roster mean prices for hand guns would go down?

yakmon
07-26-2010, 1:53 PM
After reading bweise's edited post I'm guessing elimination of dros.

bden
07-26-2010, 1:53 PM
Sounds to me like it could possibly be the HSC?

D-Man
07-26-2010, 1:54 PM
After McDonald I keep seeing swine with wings in the sky, are they going to do acrobatics after tomorrow?

sevensix2x51
07-26-2010, 1:55 PM
hmm, no 30days for handguns? that would help me out immensely right now.....

Wizard99
07-26-2010, 1:55 PM
I think the news is that the DOJ is going to issue a new AW guide and remove the "series" information from the guide, since it has been mooted for several years now. Maybe incorporate something like the flow chart as well.

Alaric
07-26-2010, 1:59 PM
After reading bweise's edited post I'm guessing elimination of dros.

Reduction of DROS and/or PPT fees most likely.

Legasat
07-26-2010, 2:00 PM
:popcorn:

tiki
07-26-2010, 2:02 PM
I suggest Bill sends the Tweets from now on. :)

thayne
07-26-2010, 2:05 PM
I suggest Bill sends the Tweets from now on. :)

^^^^ :D

dantodd
07-26-2010, 2:06 PM
Sounds to me like it could possibly be the HSC?

The temporary HSC which replaced the permanent BFSC making it actually a temporary BFSC will now become a permanent HSC?

freonr22
07-26-2010, 2:08 PM
the DOJ will be disbanded due to budget cuts

mzimmers
07-26-2010, 2:08 PM
Reduction of DROS and/or PPT fees most likely.

Reduction in FEES? Not without an attendant reduction or elimination of a "service" (which almost certainly isn't something we want anyway). I can't see any way it's purely $$, particularly given the shape that the state's in.

Turo
07-26-2010, 2:10 PM
I think it perhaps is more aptly phrased, "Good news coming from DOJ for all CA firearms purchasers."

It's nice, though relatively minor. But it's nice.

Well that doesn't sound as good as the "shall issue" ideas or even "magazine limit changing." Especially since I don't have money to buy a new gun anytime soon.

wash
07-26-2010, 2:10 PM
I'm guessing the HSC is going to go away.

It's the equivalent of taxing a right.

I don't know what the legal maneuver would be to kill it but maybe it could be done?

I hope that still leaves the door open for a BSFC class action lawsuit.

If it does go away, that means we can lend handguns to people without a HSC.

n2k
07-26-2010, 2:17 PM
I think its already posted on the AG site:

Title 11, Division 5, Chapter 1. Firearms Division Fees
4001. DROS Fees.
As authorized pursuant to subdivisions (f) and (i) of section 12076 of the Penal Code, the Firearms Division fees for Dealers' Records of Sale (DROS) are as follows:
(a)(1) DROS fee for a single handgun: $19
(2)
DROS fee for each additional handgun submitted at the same time as first DROS: $15
(b)
DROS fee for one or more rifles or shotguns: $19
Note: Authority cited: Section 12076, Penal Code. Reference: Sections 12072, 12076, 12083, 12084 and 12289, Penal Code.



Mabye not....:popcorn::detective:

Kestryll
07-26-2010, 2:20 PM
Okay, I just can not handle the questions anymore, here it is:

As of August 1st 2010 Mr Bill Wiese will be the new Department Chairman of the newly formed California Department of Justice U.T.I.T. (Unitard and Thong Inspection Team).
His duties will include but not be limited to, inspecting unitards for proper coverage, training new inspectors on the proper wearing of the thong, product testing of the tensile strength of thong and unitard material and investigation of all thong and unitard related crimes.

It's not the BoF people but we have a foot in the door at DoJ now!!























:43:

383green
07-26-2010, 2:21 PM
Assuming that the original tweet contained a typo, and the news is coming from DOJ (which Bill appears to have confirmed), I think that most of the speculated announcements would fall well outside DOJ's statutory authority. The only one which seems plausible to me would be an announcement about large-capacity magazines. While DOJ cannot eliminate the magazine ban, I'm aware of debate about at least two different loopholes in 12020, and have seen hints from CGF that one of them would be tested later this year, and DOJ could hypothetically issue an opinion which would be helpful in this area. However, Bill's posts in this thread lead me to believe that tomorrow's news will be about something else, and not something quite as exciting. I don't have a good guess about what the news will be now.

383green
07-26-2010, 2:23 PM
As of August 1st 2010 Mr Bill Wiese will be the new Department Chairman of the newly formed California Department of Justice U.T.I.T. (Unitard and Thong Inspection Team).


Wow, that's pretty stunning. I mean, nowadays it's considered pretty impolite to publicly ridicule mentally-challenged people with a single eyebrow. :rolleyes:

bden
07-26-2010, 2:23 PM
The temporary HSC which replaced the permanent BFSC making it actually a temporary BFSC will now become a permanent HSC?

Ack! I don't know, but I'll have the tuna salad. :D

I think that's along the lines of what I was thinking, but actually a reduction in the DROS fees seems somewhat more plausible now that I think about it. It is pretty tough to imagine fees lowering in this day in age though. Curious...

ripcurlksm
07-26-2010, 2:23 PM
sounds like a small wave, as long as the tide is moving in the right direction!

tiki
07-26-2010, 2:24 PM
I think its already posted on the AG site:

Title 11, Division 5, Chapter 1. Firearms Division Fees
4001. DROS Fees.
As authorized pursuant to subdivisions (f) and (i) of section 12076 of the Penal Code, the Firearms Division fees for Dealers' Records of Sale (DROS) are as follows:
(a)(1) DROS fee for a single handgun: $19
(2)
DROS fee for each additional handgun submitted at the same time as first DROS: $15
(b)
DROS fee for one or more rifles or shotguns: $19
Note: Authority cited: Section 12076, Penal Code. Reference: Sections 12072, 12076, 12083, 12084 and 12289, Penal Code.
Mabye not....:popcorn::detective:

I think the current "DROS" fee is $19. They pile on other fees that bring that up to $25. I don't think the info is up yet. A $6 savings isn't going to get me all excited.

ripcurlksm
07-26-2010, 2:25 PM
inspecting unitards for proper coverage

all butt-kissing aside, this right here is gold

thedrickel
07-26-2010, 2:26 PM
I think the current "DROS" fee is $19. They pile on other fees that bring that up to $25. I don't think the info is up yet. A $6 savings isn't going to get me all excited.

The savings would be $4 per add'l handgun purchased.

safewaysecurity
07-26-2010, 2:27 PM
Nah fees will not be going down in this economy..guessing it has to do with roster which does raise prices for us here in cali.

Untamed1972
07-26-2010, 2:28 PM
Reduction in FEES? Not without an attendant reduction or elimination of a "service" (which almost certainly isn't something we want anyway). I can't see any way it's purely $$, particularly given the shape that the state's in.


Perhaps DOJ will be handing off the background check to the FBI instant check like most other states use, hence reducing the need for DOJ staff and the fees collected to pay them to sit on your DROS for 9-1/2 days before they just call the FBI instant check number anyway.

stitchnicklas
07-26-2010, 2:29 PM
ccw recognition from other states would be awesome,i would get my arizona ccw next month...

tiki
07-26-2010, 2:30 PM
ccw recognition from other states would be awesome,i would get my arizona ccw next month...

Won't happen. They would get zero revenue and it would give them no control.

zman
07-26-2010, 2:31 PM
My stab in the dark guess is no more 1-in-30 rule for new handguns :)

orangeusa
07-26-2010, 2:32 PM
The roster and AB962 are not "relatively minor".. :popcorn:

383green
07-26-2010, 2:33 PM
Won't happen. They would get zero revenue and it would give them no control.

On top of that, I don't think DOJ has the statutory authority to make such a decision on their own. That would need to come from the legislature or a federal court, neither of which would have snuck up on us like this.

tiki
07-26-2010, 2:33 PM
On top of that, I don't think DOJ has the statutory authority to make such a decision on their own. That would need to come from the legislature or a federal court, neither of which would have snuck up on us like this.

Corrrect.
Plus we now know it has something to do with cost/fees.

dantodd
07-26-2010, 2:35 PM
On top of that, I don't think DOJ has the statutory authority to make such a decision on their own. That would need to come from the legislature or a federal court, neither of which would have snuck up on us like this.

What statute covers reciprocity?

NM found it. 12025 has no exception for reciprocity that I can find.

orangeusa
07-26-2010, 2:36 PM
Can DOJ really change any of their laws without legislative or judicial ruling? I doubt it... but even a "relatively minor" win is still a WIN! :)

Untamed1972
07-26-2010, 2:38 PM
What statute covers reciprocity? There isn't one. That's why you can only CCW in Ca with a CA permit.

frankm
07-26-2010, 2:38 PM
They can't just not enforce a law. It has to be handgun roster or instant check.

tyrist
07-26-2010, 2:38 PM
I think its already posted on the AG site:

Title 11, Division 5, Chapter 1. Firearms Division Fees
4001. DROS Fees.
As authorized pursuant to subdivisions (f) and (i) of section 12076 of the Penal Code, the Firearms Division fees for Dealers' Records of Sale (DROS) are as follows:
(a)(1) DROS fee for a single handgun: $19
(2)
DROS fee for each additional handgun submitted at the same time as first DROS: $15
(b)
DROS fee for one or more rifles or shotguns: $19
Note: Authority cited: Section 12076, Penal Code. Reference: Sections 12072, 12076, 12083, 12084 and 12289, Penal Code.



Mabye not....:popcorn::detective:

Can't be it because that was listed in a notice dated Sept 24 2004

http://www.ag.ca.gov/firearms/forms/pdf/dlrfeeinc.pdf

dantodd
07-26-2010, 2:41 PM
JB is going to request the legislature pass a tax on all unarmed residents and use the proceeds to subsidize firearms purchases for those who choose to protect their neighborhoods?

jb7706
07-26-2010, 2:43 PM
Okay, I just can not handle the questions anymore, here it is:

As of August 1st 2010 Mr Bill Wiese will be the new Department Chairman of the newly formed California Department of Justice U.T.I.T. (Unitard and Thong Inspection Team).
His duties will include but not be limited to, inspecting unitards for proper coverage, training new inspectors on the proper wearing of the thong, product testing of the tensile strength of thong and unitard material and investigation of all thong and unitard related crimes.


This sounds a lot like a not unsafe thong and unitard roster. I thought we were trying to avoid such infringements on our freedom.

383green
07-26-2010, 2:45 PM
What statute covers reciprocity?

I'm not aware that there is such a statute under CA law. A quick scan of 12020 and the following sections didn't turn anything up.

safewaysecurity
07-26-2010, 2:46 PM
JB is going to request the legislature pass a tax on all unarmed residents and use the proceeds to subsidize firearms purchases for those who choose to protect their neighborhoods?

Makes sense /thread

Untamed1972
07-26-2010, 2:49 PM
This sounds a lot like a not unsafe thong and unitard roster. I thought we were trying to avoid such infringements on our freedom.


You Sir do not have a protected right to a unitard or a thong, however the fine young lady standing next you may be issued a permit to wear a thong ,either openly or concealed, at the discretion of the U.T.I.T if she is willing to "show/model" her "good cause" appropriately. :D

Sgt5811
07-26-2010, 2:49 PM
This is rediculous. I bet Gene is sitting at his computer with Bill and the other guys laughing their arses off at the live feed and saying " Ha, I told you I could make them pee their pants with anticipation!" Come to find out tomorrow that it was just a hoax. Now that would be funny. FTW!!!

yakmon
07-26-2010, 2:55 PM
Swell. A 4month late April fools joke!

dantodd
07-26-2010, 2:55 PM
This is the most fun thread since the great LCAV raid thread.

wash
07-26-2010, 3:04 PM
Ok, here it is:

Dianne Feinstein is proposing CCW reciprocity legislation.

Crom
07-26-2010, 3:07 PM
Ok, here it is:

Dianne Feinstein is proposing CCW reciprocity legislation.

Unbelievable! :eek:

Maestro Pistolero
07-26-2010, 3:07 PM
Ok, here it is:

Dianne Feinstein is proposing CCW reciprocity legislation.

http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z179/jsotoodeh/flying_pig.jpg

tiki
07-26-2010, 3:08 PM
Illegal aliens will now be allowed to purchase firearms.

AndrewMendez
07-26-2010, 3:10 PM
Illegal aliens will now be allowed to purchase firearms.

Probably more realistic then Fienstien and CCW's!

Maestro Pistolero
07-26-2010, 3:10 PM
DOJ writes a favorable amicus brief in one of the several pending CGF cases?

wildhawker
07-26-2010, 3:10 PM
If there's this many wet pants over a little ol' tweet, then I suggest a group buy on Depends before we roll out the serious news. ;)

This is rediculous. I bet Gene is sitting at his computer with Bill and the other guys laughing their arses off at the live feed and saying " Ha, I told you I could make them pee their pants with anticipation!" Come to find out tomorrow that it was just a hoax. Now that would be funny. FTW!!!

383green
07-26-2010, 3:11 PM
If there's this many wet pants over a little ol' tweet, then I suggest a group buy on Depends before we roll out the serious news. ;)

I can't wait to start speculating about what you mean by that! :willy_nilly:

Boo_Radley
07-26-2010, 3:13 PM
Haha I was going to start a thread but I found this. What does it mean!!?

This had me laughing way too hard; I couldn't stop thinking about the YouTube double rainbow guy.

Crom
07-26-2010, 3:14 PM
DOJ writes a favorable amicus brief in one of the several pending CGF cases?

Now this makes sense! :D

wash
07-26-2010, 3:14 PM
They want our guns to rust when we CCW in Depends?

7x57
07-26-2010, 3:15 PM
I think it perhaps is more aptly phrased, "Good news coming from DOJ for all CA firearms purchasers."

It's nice, though relatively minor. But it's nice.

OK, so my guess for the pool (we have a pool, right?) is that DoJ is going to clamp down in some way on FFLs refusing to DROS, making it take two hours, and stacking on extra fees. ETA: I meant one of those. Basically, something related to actually enforcing the law.

7x57

gun toting monkeyboy
07-26-2010, 3:20 PM
I say that the DOJ will be issuing a new dress code for their field officers. It will include lederhosen and fishnet stockings. What? It is just as likely as some of the other things on this thread. Y'all are getting worked up over something that those in the know have already said is going to be minor. Take a deep breath and relax. I am sure we will find out tomorrow. It's not like we are waiting on the SCOTUS again.

-Mb

frankm
07-26-2010, 3:21 PM
They're going to stop compiling the posts here and take us all off the "subversive" list?

RaceDay
07-26-2010, 3:22 PM
WooHoo! I guess I'll be ordering that long awaited Glock 18 tomorrow. :) CGF is really on a roll.

stormy_clothing
07-26-2010, 3:22 PM
well since were likely to get flooded by illegals on Thursday I'm gonna say it's the right to use drug cartel grenades against them.

dantodd
07-26-2010, 3:25 PM
OK, so my guess for the pool (we have a pool, right?) is that DoJ is going to clamp down in some way on FFLs refusing to DROS, making it take two hours, and stacking on extra fees.

7x57

Or cap non-ppt transfers at the same price as PPTs.

bden
07-26-2010, 3:27 PM
This had me laughing way too hard; I couldn't stop thinking about the YouTube double rainbow guy.

Hahaha!!! I've gotta post it...

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/OQSNhk5ICTI&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/OQSNhk5ICTI&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

dantodd
07-26-2010, 3:27 PM
Maybe the AG will be putting as many of the OLLs as they can name on the list of AWs. That would be a very nice parting gift. I might have to register but the BB could come off and large capacity magazines could go back on.

wash
07-26-2010, 3:29 PM
The ability for the AG to add to the list was eliminated some time ago.

Joe
07-26-2010, 3:31 PM
The ability for the AG to add to the list was eliminated some time ago.

This

Sgt5811
07-26-2010, 3:35 PM
Maybe there was a closed door meeting where Jerry Brown and Eric Holder got together and decided they were tired of looking stupid in court and made a super secret deal with the devil. They then called Alan Gura and told him that they wanted him to be the new AG in California. Press conference to be held tomorrow morning. "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em."

IrishPirate
07-26-2010, 3:37 PM
hmmm...everything I can think of (in no particular order of importance):
1) eliminate roster
2) elimintae AW abn
3) eliminate need for BB and evil features
4) eliminate magazine restrictions
5) repeal AB 962
6) eliminate 50cal ban
7) eliminate 10day purgatory
8) eliminate 1 gun in 30 day rule
9) Make CA Shall Issue
10) CADOJ joining fight against Open Carry Ban
11) CA CCW reciprocity with other states
12) No more having to buy gun locks with every new gun
13) Any gun that has been on the roster will remain on the roster permanently
14) Full auto ok (w/ or w/o a permit)
15) No more HSC testing
16) Silencers OK w/o NFA stamp/taxes
17) Coupons for free guns!!!!!!

I'm sure i'll think of more later....but for now I'll continue NOT holding my breath. Whatever it is, if CGF says it'll be good, i'm sure it will. whether it's big or small, it'll be a victory. Thanks CGF for making the game a little more suspensful and fun :D

tiki
07-26-2010, 3:40 PM
If there's this many wet pants over a little ol' tweet, then I suggest a group buy on Depends before we roll out the serious news. ;)


Maybe they should outlaw or put a tax on worthless tweets. :)

Sgt5811
07-26-2010, 3:42 PM
Ouch!

mzimmers
07-26-2010, 3:43 PM
How about an undoing (don't know the correct term) of that law that CA put in place a year or two ago? The one that has many private gun dealers in other states boycotting us. I can't remember any of the specifics, but: 1) it is minor, and 2) it would make guns slightly cheaper to buy.

Anyway, this'll be my official guess (since I'm sure nobody else wants it anyway).

shooting4life
07-26-2010, 3:46 PM
Maybe they will open up registration of aw

383green
07-26-2010, 3:48 PM
DOJ cannot open up AW registration on a whim, they cannot repeal existing laws, and they cannot make up new laws out of whole cloth.

GuyW
07-26-2010, 3:49 PM
DOJ is announcing the issuance of warrants for the arrest of the CA Legislature...
.

Scott Connors
07-26-2010, 3:50 PM
Are we sure that Group Picture hasn't hacked the CGN Twiter account?

Untamed1972
07-26-2010, 3:51 PM
DOJ cannot open up AW registration on a whim, they cannot repeal existing laws, and they cannot make up new laws out of whole cloth.



Except that DOJ not issuing AW permits is not a statutory mandate. It's much like CCWs....they could issue them if they wanted....they just dont except for LEOs and .Mil folks which will likely bite them in butt on an equal protection suit. They've created favored classes of people simply based on employment.

shooting4life
07-26-2010, 3:53 PM
Dont forget the want to know what an aw registration denial looks like thread a while back

FirstFlight
07-26-2010, 3:55 PM
You Sir do not have a protected right to a unitard or a thong, however the fine young lady standing next you may be issued a permit to wear a thong ,either openly or concealed, at the discretion of the U.T.I.T if she is willing to "show/model" her "good cause" appropriately. :D

heh...heh...heh...

Sgt5811
07-26-2010, 3:56 PM
How about an undoing (don't know the correct term) of that law that CA put in place a year or two ago? The one that has many private gun dealers in other states boycotting us. I can't remember any of the specifics, but: 1) it is minor, and 2) it would make guns slightly cheaper to buy.

Anyway, this'll be my official guess (since I'm sure nobody else wants it anyway).

CFLC? It would be a good way to save a few dollars. Arnold did say this morning that there won't be a balanced budget until after his term is up.

DKlaw
07-26-2010, 3:56 PM
Ad astra per alia porci!

http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z179/jsotoodeh/flying_pig.jpg

wildhawker
07-26-2010, 3:57 PM
Maybe they should outlaw or put a tax on worthless tweets. :)

Please submit all complaints to http://www.lcav.org/content/contactus.asp

Stealth
07-26-2010, 3:57 PM
1 Handgun per 30 days reduced to 1 handgun per 10 days.

Untamed1972
07-26-2010, 3:57 PM
Dont forget the want to know what an aw registration denial looks like thread a while back


Yeah....as I recall the basis of the denial letter was "you dont have good cause to be issued a permit."

Nothing about the "the law prohibits the issuing of permits or registration of new AWs".

tiki
07-26-2010, 4:02 PM
Please submit all complaints to http://www.lcav.org/content/contactus.asp

Ha ha ha.

That tweet was probably part of some social experiment.

383green
07-26-2010, 4:03 PM
Except that DOJ not issuing AW permits is not a statutory mandate. It's much like CCWs....they could issue them if they wanted....they just dont except for LEOs and .Mil folks which will likely bite them in butt on an equal protection suit. They've created favored classes of people simply based on employment.

If I'm not mistaken, AW registration and AW permits are two separate things. I was thinking in terms of the former, which I believe was pretty much ended by AB2728. A change to their discretionary policy for the latter would be interesting.


Please submit all complaints to http://www.lcav.org/content/contactus.asp

:notworthy:

jdberger
07-26-2010, 4:09 PM
I think that "frothy" was an understatement.....

Kodemonkey
07-26-2010, 4:09 PM
Long gun registration?

stitchnicklas
07-26-2010, 4:22 PM
Long gun registration?

order the moving truck then......

7x57
07-26-2010, 4:23 PM
Another psyops effort to drive DoJ's Calguns moles crazy? :43:

7x57

shooting4life
07-26-2010, 4:25 PM
I am ready for whatever they have to throw at us tomorrow!!!
http://i630.photobucket.com/albums/uu30/shooting4life/DSCI0781.jpg

darksands
07-26-2010, 4:27 PM
What can the DOJ do for us?

No more ten day wait?
No more roster?

frankm
07-26-2010, 4:28 PM
Long gun registration?

Doesn't bother me, I don't own any guns. :rolleyes:

orangeusa
07-26-2010, 4:29 PM
I am ready for whatever they have to throw at us tomorrow!!!


The foil hat doesn't work unless your ears are covered!! I know.... :)

dantodd
07-26-2010, 4:30 PM
[QUOTE=Stealth;4679941]1 Handgun per 30 days reduced to 30 handguns per day

FYP

383green
07-26-2010, 4:32 PM
[QUOTE=Stealth;4679941]1 Handgun per 30 days reduced to 30 handguns per day

FYP

With a tax credit for people who are unduly burdened by the requirement to buy thirty handguns per day! :D

Sick Boy
07-26-2010, 4:38 PM
I hope this isn't Gene and Co having a laugh at our expense. :(

vandal
07-26-2010, 4:38 PM
DROS fees now tax-deductible.

Barabas
07-26-2010, 4:39 PM
They aren't a part of the legislative branch so no laws are going to be changed folks. This is Government 101 stuff. What does the DOJ have the power to change that would make us gun owners happy? They can reduce fees, they can issue permits, they can write opinion letters or change their enforcement policies...

darksands
07-26-2010, 4:39 PM
All speculation but...

PROPOSED DROS FEE REGULATIONS

July 23, 2010 On July 9, 2010, a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking regarding the DROS fee was filed with the Office of Administrative Law for publication in the California Regulatory Notice Register on July 23, 2010. To view or download a copy of the text of the proposed regulations:

http://www.ag.ca.gov/firearms/regs/DROSregs.pdf


That would be incredibly quick of the government if this is it...

Legasat
07-26-2010, 4:42 PM
Bill said "little". Could be a free bag of Fritos with every DROS

shooting4life
07-26-2010, 4:45 PM
If they lower dros fees why would the cgf have inside info. I cannot imagine the $25 is going to go down.

gadjeep
07-26-2010, 4:45 PM
Mmmm... Fritos.

shooting4life
07-26-2010, 4:45 PM
I sticking with my opening of aw registration.

thayne
07-26-2010, 4:46 PM
All speculation but...

PROPOSED DROS FEE REGULATIONS

July 23, 2010 On July 9, 2010, a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking regarding the DROS fee was filed with the Office of Administrative Law for publication in the California Regulatory Notice Register on July 23, 2010. To view or download a copy of the text of the proposed regulations:

http://www.ag.ca.gov/firearms/regs/DROSregs.pdf


That would be incredibly quick of the government if this is it...
That's got to be it

slobson
07-26-2010, 4:46 PM
I'm sure i'll think of more later....but for now I'll continue NOT holding my breath.

yep.
I'm sure it will be positive if CGF says so, but no need to celebrate just yet

Hopi
07-26-2010, 4:46 PM
If they lower dros fees why would the cgf have inside info. I cannot imagine the $25 is going to go down.

Because they know where to look and listen.....


And $14 sounds good to me.

Maestro Pistolero
07-26-2010, 4:47 PM
This has got to be in the top three fastest growing threads this year.

fd15k
07-26-2010, 4:47 PM
Because they know where to look and listen.....


And $14 sounds good to me.

Any DROS fee is unconstitutional ;)

thayne
07-26-2010, 4:48 PM
This has got to be in the top three fastest growing threads this year.

Imagine when something big happens in CA! :chris:

G60
07-26-2010, 4:50 PM
gonna be kinda sad if all it is is lowering DROS fees.

still like being slapped in the face just as often, but the 'good news' is it doesn't sting so much any more.

meh.

yakmon
07-26-2010, 4:51 PM
The McDonald threads grew pretty damn fast

darksands
07-26-2010, 4:52 PM
I'm kinda hoping that someone that knows what it is comes in here and says that it is NOT lowering DROS fees but something better.

shooting4life
07-26-2010, 4:53 PM
If they lower the dros fee then does the dealer just ge to keep charging the maximum $35? Well spend the same amount, it will just be going to different pockets.

Window_Seat
07-26-2010, 4:54 PM
My best guess would be that there will be an injunction against AB-962 taking effect.

I would love to see CCW reciprocity, but since that won't be happening, we will continue working on the big picture.

Erik.

Barabas
07-26-2010, 4:56 PM
I doubt the dealers are going to willfully ignore the letters the DOJ is going to send out as a result of the proposed rulemaking and pocket the difference in fees. If they did, the DOJ is MADE for enforcing compliance.

CalNRA
07-26-2010, 4:57 PM
My best guess would be that there will be an injunction against AB-962 taking effect.



since a while back Bill said it will lower the cost of buying a gun, and then people posted the PDF on DROS cost, I'm doubtful that will happen.

darksands
07-26-2010, 4:57 PM
If they lower the dros fee then does the dealer just ge to keep charging the maximum $35? Well spend the same amount, it will just be going to different pockets.

Looks like DROS will be 30 dollars instead?

How much is the Dealer's Record of Sale (DROS) fee?

The State's DROS fee is $19.00 which covers the costs of the background checks and transfer registry. There is also a required $1.00 Firearms Safety Testing fee and a $5.00 Safety and Enforcement fee. If the transaction being processed is a dealer sale, consignment return, or return from pawn, the dealer may impose other charges as long as this amount is clearly shown as a "dealer fee" and not misrepresented as a state fee. In the event of a private party transfer, the firearms dealer may additionally charge a fee of $10 per firearm transferred.

When settling on the purchase price of a firearm and before completing the transaction, you may want to ask the dealer to disclose and identify any and all fees he/she is charging to complete the transaction.

(PC Sections 12076, 12082, and 12806)

ke6guj
07-26-2010, 5:02 PM
If they lower the dros fee then does the dealer just ge to keep charging the maximum $35? Well spend the same amount, it will just be going to different pockets.the state DROS fees would be $20 total, instead of $25. Nothing was mentioned regardign the allowable dealer fee for a PPT. And since that $10 max fee is set by the legislature, I don't see how CADOJ could adjust that in either direction.

12082(a)....The purchaser or transferee or person being loaned the firearm may be required by the dealer to pay a fee not to exceed ten dollars ($10) per firearm, and no other fee may be charged by the dealer for a sale, loan, or transfer of a firearm conducted pursuant to this section, except for the applicable fee that the Department of Justice may charge pursuant to Section 12076


For non-PPT transfers, yes, a dealer could bump up his dealer fee to make it the same total cost, but they have to note that anything over the $20 in state fees would be a dealer fee. For instance, Turners charges $25DROS + $5dealer fee for normal purchases, $30 total. If the state fee went down to $20, it is possible that Turners could bump the dealer fee to $10 to keep it at $30 total, or they would keep it at $5 dealer fee, and now have a $25 total fee.

ke6guj
07-26-2010, 5:03 PM
I doubt the dealers are going to willfully ignore the letters the DOJ is going to send out as a result of the proposed rulemaking and pocket the difference in fees. If they did, the DOJ is MADE for enforcing compliance.all they have to do is not that the state fees are $20 and that they are adding a $5 dealer fee, and it would be legal.

WatchMan
07-26-2010, 5:04 PM
They aren't a part of the legislative branch so no laws are going to be changed folks. This is Government 101 stuff. What does the DOJ have the power to change that would make us gun owners happy? They can reduce fees, they can issue permits, they can write opinion letters or change their enforcement policies...

This is dead-on, isn't it? Plus, even if good cause is within their sphere of influence, there is no way they are just going to hand that over without something BIG going down.

This just can't seem to be much more than a fee reduction or something along that order.

Barabas
07-26-2010, 5:12 PM
all they have to do is note that the state fees are $20 and that they are adding a $5 dealer fee, and it would be legal.


We're on the same page as long as there is disclosure, there will be no issues.

jl123
07-26-2010, 5:13 PM
Opinion letter re: good cause is possible.....after all isn't the dusty old opinion letter what many Sheriffs use as an excuse to deny?

383green
07-26-2010, 5:16 PM
Opinion letter re: good cause is possible.....after all isn't the dusty old opinion letter what many Sheriffs use as an excuse to deny?

Possible, but that doesn't sound to me like the sort of thing that Bill hinted at. I get the feeling that it's something that directly affects the cost of acquisition, not the ability to carry.

p7m8jg
07-26-2010, 5:17 PM
This is rediculous. I bet Gene is sitting at his computer with Bill and the other guys laughing their arses off at the live feed and saying " Ha, I told you I could make them pee their pants with anticipation!" Come to find out tomorrow that it was just a hoax. Now that would be funny. FTW!!!

:punk:

DTOM CA!
07-26-2010, 5:28 PM
So when does the cat get let out of the bag ? 12:01 AM tomorrow ?

Shotgun Man
07-26-2010, 5:35 PM
All speculation but...

PROPOSED DROS FEE REGULATIONS

July 23, 2010 On July 9, 2010, a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking regarding the DROS fee was filed with the Office of Administrative Law for publication in the California Regulatory Notice Register on July 23, 2010. To view or download a copy of the text of the proposed regulations:

http://www.ag.ca.gov/firearms/regs/DROSregs.pdf


That would be incredibly quick of the government if this is it...



How did you determine the date the proposed regs were filed and are to published? I looked at the 7/9/10 register (http://www.oal.ca.gov/July_2010_Notice_Register.htm) but didn't see anything pertaining DROS fees.

With the other proposed regs, there seems to be always a 45-day comment period.

I doubt that this is "the news" however. As you explained in your post, the proposed reduction of DROS fees is already public information.

frankm
07-26-2010, 5:56 PM
I can't sleep now. I guess I'll just have to hold Teddy, my new California legal AK!!!!!

HA HA!

Shotgun Man
07-26-2010, 6:00 PM
I do not think the news will come in the form of an opinion letter.

As the chief law officer of the state, the California Attorney General
provides legal opinions upon request to designated state and local public
officials and government agencies on issues arising in the course of their
duties.

No one has asked for an opinion letter in this regard. Of the pending opinions, some dating back to 2007, two deal with firearms issues.

09-901
Is a peace officer who purchases and registers an assault weapon for law enforcement purposes permitted to continue to possess the assault weapon after retirement? (Silveira v. Lockyer, 312 F. 3d 1052 (2003); Pen. Code 12280 (h)-(i).) (Eisenberg (Diane.Eisenberg@doj.ca.gov))

and

(Stone (Dan.Stone@doj.ca.gov))
10-504
Does the offense specified in Penal Code section 12072(d) and the punishments listed in Penal Code section 12072(g) apply to both the person transferring a firearm and the person receiving it? (Carey (Taylor.Carey@doj.ca.gov))

Neither one these issues would likely provoke excitement. So I don't see an opinion letter being the news.

http://ag.ca.gov/opinions/monthly_report.php

fd15k
07-26-2010, 6:06 PM
I do not think the news will come in the form of an opinion letter.



No one has asked for an opinion letter in this regard. Of the pending opinions, some dating back to 2007, two deal with firearms issues.



and



Neither one these issues would likely provoke excitement. So I don't see an opinion letter being the news.

http://ag.ca.gov/opinions/monthly_report.php

Maybe CGF requested an opinion ? ;)

bwiese
07-26-2010, 6:08 PM
That's got to be it


It is, you got it - proposed DROS fee reduction.

frankm
07-26-2010, 6:09 PM
It is, you got it - proposed DROS fee reduction.

I don't see how Calif can do that. We're broke.

383green
07-26-2010, 6:09 PM
It is, you got it - proposed DROS fee reduction.

Coolness.

N6ATF
07-26-2010, 6:14 PM
DOJ is announcing the issuance of warrants for the arrest of the CA Legislature...
.

You owe me a new pair of underwear.

jyda
07-26-2010, 6:26 PM
Are we sure that Group Picture hasn't hacked the CGN Twiter account?

LCAV hacked the account to do their own psyops :D

darksands
07-26-2010, 6:27 PM
How did you determine the date the proposed regs were filed and are to published? I looked at the 7/9/10 register (http://www.oal.ca.gov/July_2010_Notice_Register.htm) but didn't see anything pertaining DROS fees.

With the other proposed regs, there seems to be always a 45-day comment period.

I doubt that this is "the news" however. As you explained in your post, the proposed reduction of DROS fees is already public information.

I copied and pasted from the DOJ website.

http://www.ag.ca.gov/firearms/

On the right hand side.

Window_Seat
07-26-2010, 6:27 PM
It's nice to know that the DROS fee will be reduced, but that's not much compared to what I'd like to see.

A new opinion letter on the definition (being self defense/protection) of good cause for CCW issuance would be huge, and I would like to think that JB could be capable of doing this, at least before the election.

If he can put his money where his mouth is by issuing an amicus brief in the McDonald v. Chicago case favoring incorporation, he can certainly redefine good cause according to his office by issuing a new opinion on that subject.

This DROS fee reduction might be alright, but it's nothing to jump up & down, flop on the floor & foam at the mouth over.

Sorry if my attitude sucks, but I expect more considering what we have done and accomplished over the past few years.

Erik; waiting for more

tyrist
07-26-2010, 6:30 PM
Weak sauce

safewaysecurity
07-26-2010, 6:33 PM
So.... why couldn't you guys tell us today? Getting us all worked up on DROS fee reduction proposals? ugh..

loather
07-26-2010, 6:35 PM
Excellent - another step in the right direction!

Sick Boy
07-26-2010, 6:38 PM
It's nice to know that the DROS fee will be reduced, but that's not much compared to what I'd like to see.

A new opinion letter on the definition (being self defense/protection) of good cause for CCW issuance would be huge, and I would like to think that JB could be capable of doing this, at least before the election.

If he can put his money where his mouth is by issuing an amicus brief in the McDonald v. Chicago case favoring incorporation, he can certainly redefine good cause according to his office by issuing a new opinion on that subject.

This DROS fee reduction might be alright, but it's nothing to jump up & down, flop on the floor & foam at the mouth over.

Sorry if my attitude sucks, but I expect more considering what we have done and accomplished over the past few years.

Erik; waiting for more

+1

:(


Now I bet the LCAV monitors are laughing their ***'s off.

Shotgun Man
07-26-2010, 6:38 PM
So.... why couldn't you guys tell us today? Getting us all worked up on DROS fee reduction proposals? ugh..

Yeah, major letdown.

Politically, it may be a shrewd move on JB's part. He is stealthily and subtly reaching out to gun owners, and if he's ever called on it, he can tout how he ran his department so efficiently he was able to reduce the costs of a government-run program and return tangible savings to taxpayers.

383green
07-26-2010, 6:40 PM
I hardly consider any good news to be a letdown.

IrishPirate
07-26-2010, 6:41 PM
I'm sure the small business FFL's are most likely going to add dealer fees to keep the price of DROS the same so they can pocket more money since most people wont notice a change in price and wont think twice to ask for a break down. However, larger chain FFL's and the moderate sized FFL's that compete with them will most likely reduce the price to the bare minimum...at least that's what i would expect them to do if they wanted to keep their business up. I for one will be doing PPT's at places with bare minimum DROS fees.

N6ATF
07-26-2010, 6:41 PM
If he can put his money where his mouth is by issuing an amicus brief in the McDonald v. Chicago case favoring incorporation, he can certainly redefine good cause according to his office by issuing a new opinion on that subject.

Except it will just be another non-binding opinion, which CLEOs honor only if it supports their mission of disarming victims, or not.

AG opinions do not have the force of federal court injunctions backed up by contempt citations.

Now if he wrote a letter to the CLEOs saying "issue for self-defense, or else you will be investigated and prosecuted for bribery and RICO..."

trashman
07-26-2010, 6:44 PM
I guess the lower registration fee is good news for folks who buy a lot of guns....:whistling:

Never hurts to lower transactional costs for bulk purchases.

--Neill

CSDGuy
07-26-2010, 6:46 PM
Perhaps this is all a ruse to make you all think that the good news is a reduction in fees... because that filing with the OAL was on Friday.

or maybe it's just something to get us all a-twitter about...

jeffsenpai
07-26-2010, 6:48 PM
What a disappointing thread, I was very excited about all of the terrible laws and ordinances that could have been negated. This is good, but calguns hype leaves me wanting more!

loather
07-26-2010, 6:48 PM
Whether or not the news is the DROS fee reduction is immaterial. Either way, Gene and company say it's good for us, and we should be thanking the efforts of those who made it possible instead of whining about it not being good enough.

Shotgun Man
07-26-2010, 6:50 PM
I hardly consider any good news to be a letdown.

The letdown is of my own doing. I had fantastical images in my mind because of the original tweet. Bwiese's clarification should have reeled in my expectations.

I was expecting something that was more game-changing.

darksands
07-26-2010, 6:55 PM
Yea, it's not the reduced fee...

According to the PDF from the DOJ site:

(b)
After the end of Fiscal Year 2009/10 (ending on June 30, 2010) and at the end of each fiscal year thereafter, the department shall review its DROS revenues and DROS-related expenses during the prior fiscal year. Based upon the review, the department shall determine whether it is necessary to administratively adjust the DROS fee during the current fiscal year in order to cover all estimated costs of administering the programs funded by the DROS fee. The fee may be increased at a rate not to exceed any increase in the California Consumer Price Index as compiled and reported by the Department of Industrial Relations.
(c)
By November 1, 2010 and by November 1st each year thereafter, the department shall publish its determination whether to administratively adjust the DROS fee on its public website and make its determination available to the public upon request.
(d)
If the department determines it is necessary to administratively adjust the DROS fee, the department shall provide notice of the administrative adjustment, including the amount of the adjusted fee and the date when the adjustment takes effect, by doing both of the following at least 30 days before the adjustment takes effect:

OleCuss
07-26-2010, 7:06 PM
I dunno if bwiese is jerking our chain about the fees. It would be good news, though.

I was speculating along the lines of the AG has decided not to fight for AB962 in court. I'd think that would almost automatically kill AB962 - and it is something that the DOJ/AG can do since AB962 is clearly a violation of law and rights.

The other option that seemed plausible would be an opinion from the DOJ saying that self-defense fulfills the requirement for "good cause" for CCW.

But if it's a fee reduction, that's cool too.