PDA

View Full Version : makes no sense


eldonvieira
09-03-2010, 9:34 AM
I have a permit and walk into a gun store to do a ppt with my carry gun and have to leave my new gun there for 10 days but walk out with my carry gun on me

ZombieTactics
09-03-2010, 10:05 AM
Yep cuz there's NO WAY you'd use the gun you already have to kill someone or rob a liquor store! :-)

leelaw
09-03-2010, 10:11 AM
Don't try to think about the laws rationally - the legislators didn't, either.

Greg-Dawg
09-03-2010, 10:13 AM
Go do something about it...go to Sacramento!

vta
09-03-2010, 10:14 AM
the 10 day 'cool off' period probably has the opposite effect on a lot of people. i think if you already own a similar type firearm (pistol/rifle) you should be able to skip it. if any moron who already owns a gun is going to use it for crime, why the hell would they go get a new one? use the one they already got!

flatovercrest
09-03-2010, 10:32 AM
in the majority of countries in this world a civilian would never be allowed to purchase or own a firearm legally.
God Bless America and God Bless the Great State of California.

vta
09-03-2010, 10:39 AM
in the majority of countries in this world a civilian would never be allowed to purchase or own a firearm legally.
God Bless America and God Bless the Great State of California.

This is missing the point. we can still own guns in this country because people like here on calguns and NRA fought to keep them. if we didn't fight for these rights it would have gone away completely. CA has the 10 day cooling off period because the legislators had their way on an initiative and convince enough people that it was supposedly 'safer'.

if we are complacent about what we have, soon we will be thanking our government for letting us own knives. and soon after that we will thank them for letting us own staplers.

evidens83
09-03-2010, 10:50 AM
How many CA gun restrictions do make sense ;)

robcoe
09-03-2010, 11:03 AM
If you try to apply logic to politics your brain will crawl out of your head and strangle you for abusing it.

Librarian
09-03-2010, 11:29 AM
If you try to apply logic to politics your brain will crawl out of your head and strangle you for abusing it.

Oh, no - there's a guiding logic to politics, or at least politicians.

Politicians get perks.

Politicians get to spend other people's money.

Given those 2, the logical conclusion is that politicians want to be elected/appointed, and they want to keep those jobs.

In order to keep the jobs, they need to at least give the appearance of 'doing something'. For legislators, they need to introduce bills that become laws, so they can point to those laws as 'accomplishments' and thereby show those who vote that the legislator is 'doing something' and deserves to be kept in office.

To get bills voted for by other legislators, our legislator has to do one thing - vote the way the leadership wants on other bills. Then the leadership will tell those other legislators to vote for our legislator's bills.

A legislator who follows that path becomes eligible to be appointed to some office when s/he can no longer be elected.

Note that the content of the bills doesn't matter much.

A small number of legislators are perceived as 'doing something' enough when they oppose the things other legislators are trying to do.

An even smaller number of legislators actually has an agenda, a plan to accomplish something useful; in order to make any progress on that plan, they need their bills supported by other legislators - see above.

If occasionally something useful gets through the legislature, we should be a little bit grateful, though I don't think useful outweighs harmful/wasteful/useless.

[/cynicism]

Watch out for those tendrils squirming out of your head ...

xxsleepyxx
09-03-2010, 12:27 PM
There is actually a purpose to this law. It was enacted to prevent people from dealing arms. Thus limiting the quantity of purchases along with the 30 days per gun.

Droc101
09-03-2010, 4:16 PM
'shall not be infringed'

again logic plays no part in politics, only money.

vta
09-03-2010, 4:28 PM
There is actually a purpose to this law. It was enacted to prevent people from dealing arms. Thus limiting the quantity of purchases along with the 30 days per gun.

this has nothing to do with the 30 day law. that is for hand guns only. the 10 days wait does not limit the quantity of firearms you buy as you can buy as many long guns as you want at one time and as many in any given month but each still has a 10 day 'cooling off' period associated with each DROS.

flatovercrest
09-03-2010, 4:35 PM
This is missing the point.

this has nothing to do with the 30 day law.


Dude, relax a little with the tone of your replies..
It's obvious that you have more like a personal problem with the gun laws in sacramento, but let's keep an open mind on other's replies.

vta
09-03-2010, 4:52 PM
Dude, relax a little with the tone of your replies..
It's obvious that you have more like a personal problem with the gun laws in sacramento, but let's keep an open mind on other's replies.

:confused:

simply stating my opinion and facts as I understand them. the phrases you quoted from me are essential in establishing the points i am trying to make in the posts. if others are hurt my my tone i apologize and they can feel free to comment directly.

dude.

pyromensch
09-03-2010, 5:27 PM
they know that you are not going to use your ppt firearm, as a "drop" gun, so they figure you are buying the second one for that purpose:confused:

pyromensch
09-03-2010, 5:28 PM
in the majority of countries in this world a civilian would never be allowed to purchase or own a firearm legally.
God Bless America and God Bless the Great State of California.

or nevada, arizona, oregon.................

xxsleepyxx
09-03-2010, 5:48 PM
I took no offense. I was trying to tie something I didn't know to something I did. The 30 days per gun or whatever was originally an attempt to limit handguns/guns for a good reason. Simply, I don't really mind it's not a big deal. I don't make enough money to buy a gun every month anyway.

9mmlaw
09-03-2010, 5:55 PM
I took no offense. I was trying to tie something I didn't know to something I did. The 30 days per gun or whatever was originally an attempt to limit handguns/guns for a good reason. Simply, I don't really mind it's not a big deal. I don't make enough money to buy a gun every month anyway.

And it is this kind of attitude that allows bad laws to be passed. Oh I don't need more than ten rounds in a magazine, oh I don't need an AR-15 without a bullet button etc etc etc.

deadlyapp
09-03-2010, 6:50 PM
Turning this thread into a political statement might not be the best thing, but for those who are willing to bend over to the laws and say that it makes sense do no good to the gun owning community. California has given up so many of their rights already and sooner or later they'll be gone unless everyone uses their votes to tell the stupid politicians whats really up.

RTE
09-03-2010, 6:59 PM
It's a marketing ploy

You now have 10 days to shop for accessories.

advocatusdiaboli
09-03-2010, 7:36 PM
I understand a waiting period for a first firearm--queue the Homer Simpson vignette "But I'm angry now!". But after that is makes no sense for the ostensible purpose (and therefore make me suspect ulterior motives such as with the ammo ban--just make it harder to own pistols). I can see many sheeple (um I mean glorious comrade legislators) going along with this with the idea it would be too expensive to verify prior ownership and therefore cheaper to just limit everyone. My answer to that is this: "Constitutional rights are not cheap--they are precious and worth under going cost to maintain."

eldonvieira
09-03-2010, 7:44 PM
spent all the money on the gun and reloading stuff for it so no more accessories for a while. The gun is mainly to teach my wife and kids to shoot I needed something a little smaller than my 45

vta
09-03-2010, 8:01 PM
I am glad at least some of you share the same sentiment as myself. complacency is what caused other countries like the United Kingdom and Australia to lose much of their ability to own firearms. Some don't like to think of it as a slippery slope but if we are not passionate and take these issues personally, we will eventually head down that same path. Thanks to the NRA and CGF, we are working hard to restore what is lost here in California.


I understand a waiting period for a first firearm--queue the Homer Simpson vignette "But I'm angry now!". But after that is makes no sense for the ostensible purpose (and therefore make me suspect ulterior motives such as with the ammo ban--just make it harder to own pistols). I can see many sheeple (um I mean glorious comrade legislators) going along with this with the idea it would be too expensive to verify prior ownership and therefore cheaper to just limit everyone. My answer to that is this: "Constitutional rights are not cheap--they are precious and worth under going cost to maintain."

my point exactly. its the hidden ulterior motives behind these laws that are frustrating.


It's a marketing ploy

You now have 10 days to shop for accessories.

you might be on to something here :)

Fishslayer
09-03-2010, 9:01 PM
I have a permit and walk into a gun store to do a ppt with my carry gun and have to leave my new gun there for 10 days but walk out with my carry gun on me

Don't try to think about the laws rationally - the legislators didn't, either.

There you guys go again. Thinking our gun laws have anything to do with public safety...:rolleyes:

subijitsu
09-03-2010, 10:26 PM
I had never been mad enough to use a gun to kill someone until I had to wait 10 days to get the new gun I purchased. That REALLY pissed me off.

j/k

Either way, I can only read/learn/hear about our gun laws here before I become really confused. Not as much confused by the laws but by the reasoning (or lack thereof) behind them. It makes me dizzy. I am waiting to see references to unicorns, leprechauns, and fairys written into the laws.

Anothercoilgun
09-03-2010, 11:01 PM
I have a permit and walk into a gun store to do a ppt with my carry gun and have to leave my new gun there for 10 days but walk out with my carry gun on me

Never has. Yet makes good deal of money for those drafting and passing bills. They get paid by their puppeteers.

scidx
09-04-2010, 12:07 AM
Dude, relax a little with the tone of your replies..

This always makes me laugh. (I've been told many times that my work emails have an angry or impolite tone.)

How does written text have a tone. It's black letters on a white background. Tone would suggest a recieved wave frequency. I cannot hear text. I undestand that any language can be a work of art. And, art can have a visual "tone" (synonym, evoking emotion). But, if art is a reflection of the artist's attempt to evoke emotion, and the receiver's subconscious draws the emotion evoked; then, wouldn't the reader be responsible for the tone perceived?

Does Gangsta-Rap music beget violence, or does violence beget Gangsta-Rap music?

Sorry for the sarcastic tone.:walkman:

Oh wait, I'm not threadjacking...
...yeah, that sucks about your ten day wait, dude.

Bill Carson
09-04-2010, 12:13 AM
they know that you are not going to use your ppt firearm, as a "drop" gun, so they figure you are buying the second one for that purpose:confused:

What is a "Drop Gun" ?

Bill Carson
09-04-2010, 12:14 AM
There is actually a purpose to this law. It was enacted to prevent people from dealing arms. Thus limiting the quantity of purchases along with the 30 days per gun.

FUD