PDA

View Full Version : MSNBC on AB 962


Agent Orange
01-25-2011, 4:36 AM
Here's the article. It's actually today's front page headline.

http://redtape.msnbc.com/2011/01/online-ammunition-sales-to-continue-for-now.html

Vtec44
01-25-2011, 7:04 AM
Felons can still buy bullets even after AB962 .... doh!!

Blackhawk556
01-25-2011, 7:30 AM
Is it illegal to kick Deleon in the face??? Damn that guy is full of fail. Always the same freaking argument from the antis, "It's for the children"

PatriotnMore
01-25-2011, 7:33 AM
Is it illegal to kick Deleon in the face??? Damn that guy is full of fail. Always the same freaking argument from the antis, "It's for the children"


Until politicians and reporters get called on it routinely by the public, and as often as they spew it, that is not going to change. We have to let our voices be heard, and the call them on FUD.

AndrewMendez
01-25-2011, 7:39 AM
"In California right now, we have no idea who sells ammunition and who buys it," De Leon said.


Ok....whats the problem?

cdtx2001
01-25-2011, 7:40 AM
"De Leon pointed to research that found 10,000 rounds of ammunition were purchased by felons during one three-month stretch in Los Angeles -- 2.5 percent of all purchases -- after that city passed a face-to-face requirement in 1998. A similar study in Sacramento conducted in 2008 after that city’s law was implemented found a 3 percent felony purchaser rate. In each case, police discovered the felons during spot checks done after the purchases; the infrastructure is not yet in place to conduct real-time background checks on ammunition purchases."


So if LA already had a FTF ordinance in place, and criminals can still get ammo, then obviously it doesn't work.

dfletcher
01-25-2011, 7:45 AM
Nice of them to put in a link to "Luckygunner" online ammo sales - now there's a little jab, kind of like putting a link to a liquor store in a MADD article .....:)

Interesting how they present "1 in 10 states restrict" as opposed to "90% of states do not restrict".

AndrewMendez
01-25-2011, 7:53 AM
What the crap is a spot check?!? Sounds like an illegal search to me. Stopping random people to see if their a felon??

CEDaytonaRydr
01-25-2011, 7:55 AM
De Leon pointed to research that found 10,000 rounds of ammunition were purchased by felons during one three-month stretch in Los Angeles -- 2.5 percent of all purchases -- after that city passed a face-to-face requirement in 1998.


I'd like to know what "research" he's pointing to. I'm sure it's completely unbiased.... :rolleyes:

tonelar
01-25-2011, 8:00 AM
What the crap is a spot check?!? Sounds like an illegal search to me. Stopping random people to see if their a felon??

meaning LE can check the records at local gun shops and run the list of names against their criminal database

where they got their figures for felons purchasing ammo in LA and Sacto


What the antis fail to point out is that there used to be a regulation that required buyers to sign for handgun ammo in the past (think it was in the mid 90's) but the program was scrapped as it was deemed ineffective (at the time). Someone in here is bound to remember better than me...

Wherryj
01-25-2011, 8:01 AM
Felons can still buy bullets even after AB962 .... doh!!

But, "it's about the children". You can't be for children being harmed, can you?

"The law's sponsor, Democratic State Sen. Kevin De Leon of Los Angeles, said the decision was outrageous.

"I'm disappointed because the NRA went shopping for the right court and the right judge and it looks like they found him," he said. "It was a politicized decision. ... In light of what just took place in Tucson as well as a string of shootings that took place last week in Los Angeles ... its disappointing. What were trying to do is to protect families and children, not trying to prevent anyone from lawfully getting ammunition.

AndrewMendez
01-25-2011, 8:03 AM
meaning LE can check the records at local gun shops and run the list of names against their criminal database

where they got their figures for felons purchasing ammo in LA and Sacto


What the antis fail to point out is that there used to be a regulation that required buyers to sign for handgun ammo in the past (think it was in the mid 90's) but the program was scrapped as it was deemed ineffective (at the time). Someone in here is bound to remember better than me...

Linkie? or are ya guessin?

SupportGeek
01-25-2011, 8:19 AM
But, "it's about the children". You can't be for children being harmed, can you?

"The law's sponsor, Democratic State Sen. Kevin De Leon of Los Angeles, said the decision was outrageous.

"I'm disappointed because the NRA went shopping for the right court and the right judge and it looks like they found him," he said. "It was a politicized decision. ... In light of what just took place in Tucson as well as a string of shootings that took place last week in Los Angeles ... it’s disappointing. What we’re trying to do is to protect families and children, not trying to prevent anyone from lawfully getting ammunition.”

First, yes you are, or the mail order purchase part would not be included in the bill.
But treating lawful legal purchasers of said ammunition like criminals certainly doesnt seem unreasonable to you does it Mr, DeLeon?

“In Sacramento, they found 150 felons had purchased handgun ammunition. Three were murderers. They went to their homes and found thousands of rounds of ammunition, rifles, and automatic weapons,” De Leon said. “Quite a few of them were on probation.”

Hm, so its already illegal for felons to purchase or possess firearms, yet the ones you mention did, and LE didnt know about them. Id say that law did not work, why would your ammunition ban work then?

He should be happy, the part that says prohibited persons are not allowed to possess ammunition DID pass in AB962, with his logic, that will stop all criminals from using the ammunition for fear of doing something illegal.

SupportGeek
01-25-2011, 8:20 AM
Linkie? or are ya guessin?

I read it that way too in the context of the article

CMonfort
01-25-2011, 10:16 AM
I'd like to know what "research" he's pointing to. I'm sure it's completely unbiased.... :rolleyes:


He's referring to the Rand Study in LA a few years back. The NRA has already debunked it and exposed the study's flaws, and used it to defeat similar restrictions in other cities.

Lrchops
01-25-2011, 10:21 AM
Felons can still buy bullets even after AB962 .... doh!!

If a felon is found by Law Enforcement to be in possession of ammunition, it is a fresh felony charge. So there are laws in place to deal with Felons. Typical of the left to couch the decision as one being in favor of felon rights, when on the left you have deeply rooted Inmate Advocate Groups, Inmates Rights Groups, and felons with more protections that the average citizen,,,,THANKS TO THE LEFT WING DEMS!

Wherryj
01-25-2011, 10:24 AM
Felons can still buy bullets even after AB962 .... doh!!

As a physician in CA, I can tell you that it isn't just the Second Amendment that gets such attention. We've had a "triplicate" medication system that was SUPPOSED to reduce drug diversion and abuse.

It required a prescription with two carbonless copies. The physician was required to keep one copy and the patient took the other two to the pharmacy. The phamacist kept a copy in a shoebox somewhere on the premises in case of one of those "random audits".

The problem is, just as with AB962 (had it gone "online"), the copies just SIT in the box. NO ONE ever knows that there is a problem until the problem is noted by some other means and the authorities are alerted to the need to "look in the shoebox".

At least the "triplicate" program has moved to a single "protected" script-it still costs me about 10 times the amount of a standard prescription, but doesn't cost me 100 times like the old duplicate scripts. I can tell you that it does ABSOLUTELY the same thing, however.

These laws make politicians feel better and they give the politician an opportunity to tell their constituents that they did something about the constituents "pet peeve". If you have voters who hate drugs, tell them about your wonderful piece of paper in a box that will solve all ills. If you have voters who hate guns, tell them about your wonderful signature in a box...

CEDaytonaRydr
01-25-2011, 11:27 AM
He's referring to the Rand Study in LA a few years back. The NRA has already debunked it and exposed the study's flaws, and used it to defeat similar restrictions in other cities.

Saves me the trouble... :rolleyes:

Chester
01-25-2011, 12:09 PM
Comments on that board piss me off... I think I've realized though that NONE of this has anything to do with safety (yeah I know, "duh", but I'm trying to put myself in the shoes of a gun grabber). I think with all the division and partisan crap we've had to endure for the last 10 years, the only thing any of this is about anymore is how much one side can F over the other.

I seriously doubt a stereotypical Liberal actually cares about reducing gun violence (because if they did, they'd honestly make less retarded arguments), but is more interested in spiting his or her political opposite out of pure hatred.

Dark Paladin
01-25-2011, 4:10 PM
Comments on that board piss me off... I think I've realized though that NONE of this has anything to do with safety (yeah I know, "duh", but I'm trying to put myself in the shoes of a gun grabber). I think with all the division and partisan crap we've had to endure for the last 10 years, the only thing any of this is about anymore is how much one side can F over the other.

I seriously doubt a stereotypical Liberal actually cares about reducing gun violence (because if they did, they'd honestly make less retarded arguments), but is more interested in spiting his or her political opposite out of pure hatred.

"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."

Although in our situation, I think ignorance plays more of a factor. A common theme I've been finding when talking to non-Calgunners is that as the regular use of firearms fades from the general populace (specifically urban centers), citizens devalues firearms at the same time where the latest shiny object on TV provides ample distraction for the politicians to start stripping away our rights and freedoms. There are other social (parenting) and economic (budget guns/ammo or food/shelter?) factors. . . and its become too entangled over the years to easily fix.

I still think proper education and introduction to those who have not been around firearms is the correct way to rectify this deficiency in today's society, and this is a process that will take years. . . more than likely decades. . . to undo the damage that's already been done to the public psyche.

(obvious caveat here being that we can't really fix stupid, no matter how hard we try)

chris
01-25-2011, 4:43 PM
this part here is so full of SH*T it's not even funny. Deleon needs to get the fact straight before using emotion instead of logic.

I'm disappointed because the NRA went shopping for the right court and the right judge and it looks like they found him," he said. "It was a politicized decision. ... In light of what just took place in Tucson as well as a string of shootings that took place last week in Los Angeles ... it’s disappointing. What we’re trying to do is to protect families and children, not trying to prevent anyone from lawfully getting ammunition.”



the last part in red is a blatent lie and he knows it. we know it also. he can suck it knowing that his law was found Un Constitutionally vague. he bears direct resposibility for his law failing. even though it was failed legislation from the get go by not clearly defining what he was trying to do. sorry Deleon that pesky Constitution beat you now deal with it. i know that liberal Democrats that are in the legislature despise the Constitution suck it up that precious document was written by men that are far greater than you could ever dream of.

ghostrider4evr
01-25-2011, 4:48 PM
Ok....whats the problem?

Haha, well said.

yellowfin
01-25-2011, 4:50 PM
How is it again that they can claim to be interested in protecting children while advocating abortion? I'm confused. You can kill them before they're born, but somehow they're concerned they'll be shot?

N6ATF
01-25-2011, 4:52 PM
They're not concerned they'll be shot. They WANT children to be shot. And stabbed. And beaten. And...

That is what their victim disarmament achieves. Children, with everyone prohibited from protecting them.

safewaysecurity
01-25-2011, 4:59 PM
including laws banning so-called “Cop Killer” bullets that can pierce body armor
:banghead::banghead: How do they still get away with saying this crap...