PDA

View Full Version : What happened with AB1810 and AB1934?


diginit
08-02-2010, 4:48 PM
Did the legislature reconvene on today? Anyone know the outcome?

6114DAVE
08-02-2010, 5:35 PM
yeah, i heard AB1810 was gonna be voted on today?

diginit
08-02-2010, 6:00 PM
Here's a positive article in the Examiner about 1934.
http://www.examiner.com/x-26553-LA-History-Examiner~y2010m7d21-Democrat-gun-ban-creeps-along

According to the NRA, The vote was on Aug 2nd. According to the SF Examiner, It will be voted upon sometime between August 2nd and August 13th.
You think another 2A lawsuit will be necessary? Or will Mcdonald and SCOTUS make sense to our legislators?

Do they even know the difference between sense, scents or cents?

domokun
08-02-2010, 7:26 PM
AB1810 Status: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/09-10/bill/asm/ab_1801-1850/ab_1810_bill_20100714_status.html

AB1934 Status: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/09-10/bill/asm/ab_1901-1950/ab_1934_bill_20100630_status.html

MasterYong
08-02-2010, 7:40 PM
Yeah that tells me nothing...

diginit
08-02-2010, 7:52 PM
Tells me:

Active= waiting
Non-Urgency=Still waiting
Non-Appropriations=No money to be made
Majority Vote Required=agenda re-evaluation required
State-Mandated Local Program=Tax $ wasted
Fiscal Non-Tax Levy=the only good thing in this entire bill

thayne
08-02-2010, 7:53 PM
Here's a positive article in the Examiner about 1934.
http://www.examiner.com/x-26553-LA-History-Examiner~y2010m7d21-Democrat-gun-ban-creeps-along

According to the NRA, The vote was on Aug 2nd. According to the SF Examiner, It will be voted upon sometime between August 2nd and August 13th.
You think another 2A lawsuit will be necessary? Or will Mcdonald and SCOTUS make sense to our legislators?

Do they even know the difference between sense, scents or cents?

That article pretty much sums it up. I'd be more than happy to be a plaintiff :D

diginit
08-04-2010, 3:39 PM
OK, It was supposed to be voted on today,8/4/10. Any info yet?

hoffmang
08-04-2010, 8:05 PM
AB-1934 made it out of Aprops and to the Senate floor. I have nothing special to add on 1810 yet.

-Gene

mdouglas1980
08-07-2010, 5:30 PM
So would 1810 be retro-active? Or would it be like the Handgun registration? I.E. like a lot of the handguns that people bought in the 80's before the registration through PPT and so on? So would AB 1810 be like that for rifles? I just wouldn't want to shell out however much the DOJ would appoint for a fee to register my long guns.
Plus wouldn't 1810 eliminate the 50 year rule for everyone and end the C&R holder having long guns shipped directly to them?

hoffmang
08-07-2010, 6:09 PM
1810 would only impact new purchases and transfers.

-Gene

diginit
08-07-2010, 7:43 PM
1810 would only impact new purchases and transfers.

-Gene

So what would happen if someone should use an unregistered rifle or shotgun in self defence? It sounds like it would render any unregistered firearm useless in a defencive situation. Just another way to render the public completely defenceless against crime.

wildhawker
08-07-2010, 7:51 PM
So what would happen if someone should use an unregistered rifle or shotgun in self defence? It sounds like it would render any unregistered firearm useless in a defencive situation. Just another way to render the public completely defenceless against crime.

I'm afraid I do not follow. Could you elaborate on your concerns?

diginit
08-07-2010, 8:12 PM
Use of an unregistered weapon. Crime committed with a handgun not registered to you. This is applicable even in self defence situation with a handgun owned before registration was required. Would it then be the same for unregistered rifles?
Please read my 2 most recent posts in this forum. Then you will understand.

wildhawker
08-07-2010, 8:29 PM
No, I'm afraid I still don't.

A legal firearm's registration status does not cause an otherwise-lawful act of self-defense to be unlawful.

A crime is a crime, regardless of the registration status. Could you possibly explain a little better?

diginit
08-07-2010, 8:34 PM
People are telling me that if I use an unregistered hand gun in self defence, I will still have an additional charge of using an unregistered firearm in a crime. FUD?
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=329622
If true, Would it be the same for long guns if 1810 is passed?

stitchnicklas
08-07-2010, 8:53 PM
People are telling me that if I use an unregistered hand gun in self defense, I will still have an additional charge of using an unregistered firearm in a crime. FUD?
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=329622
If true, Would it be the same for long guns if 1810 is passed?

if you use a gun in self defense that is justifiable and the gun/you are NOT
a)the gun is not stolen or altered
b)illegal in the state of California
c)a sbs or sbr
d)you are not a prohibited person
e)in a prohibited area

then you should be ok for the most part,you might have some minor legal issues to clean up,but are not going to prison for 99 years...

mostly common sense stuff,there are tons of unregistered firearms/handguns/rifles/shotguns from before registration,all guns that are mandatory to register that are pre-law are most likely assault weapons type guns

PsychGuy274
08-07-2010, 8:58 PM
So if AB1810 goes through and passes into law, is it going to require registration of newly acquired C&R long guns? I'm assuming yes?

diginit
08-07-2010, 9:05 PM
I'm sure those giving me this info are just trying to help and simply misinterpet the PC or are stating the fud they have been told believing it to be fact. I have made this mistake myself and have learned by being corrected. I'm still learning. Making mental notes as I go.
This site is the most informative I have found! It's just a matter of knowing the most knowledgeble members.

diginit
08-07-2010, 9:08 PM
So if AB1810 goes through and passes into law, is it going to require registration of newly acquired C&R long guns? I'm assuming yes?

Now there's a good question. Not sure I want to know the answer...
FFL required for C&R?:(

wildhawker
08-08-2010, 12:32 AM
I'm sure those giving me this info are just trying to help and simply misinterpet the PC or are stating the fud they have been told believing it to be fact. I have made this mistake myself and have learned by being corrected. I'm still learning. Making mental notes as I go.
This site is the most informative I have found! It's just a matter of knowing the most knowledgeble members.

Your question (related to the concerns you expressed here) was answered, correctly, in the thread you reference above.

It's a bit more complicated than it should be. Factors such as age, family relationship between the parties (if any), duration, HSC, etc. all come into play. See here in the FAQ:

Loaning Questions (http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/index.php/FAQ#Loaning_Questions)

If he has to use it in a self-defense scenario and he lawfully possesses it at the time of use (including possessing it as a result of a loan) there should be no legal issues related to ownership/possession.

Thanks Griz, that answers all my questions.

The "handgun not registered to you" thing only applies to illegal carry. If you get caught illegally carrying a handgun that is not registered to you then the charge can be a felony instead of the normal misdemeanor. If you don't illegally carry the handgun then it doesn't matter to whom it is registered.

Bottom line: a legal firearm's registration status does not cause an otherwise-lawful act of self-defense to be unlawful.

Ron-Solo
08-08-2010, 10:31 AM
People are telling me that if I use an unregistered hand gun in self defence, I will still have an additional charge of using an unregistered firearm in a crime. FUD?
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=329622
If true, Would it be the same for long guns if 1810 is passed?

FUD.