PDA

View Full Version : Why Hasn't Anyone Created a AW Permits Bill?


VeryCoolCat
09-10-2006, 9:08 PM
I mean, we have some posibilities on these. Why hasn't anyone even attempted to force the DOJ to issue AW permits (allowing the registration of firearms to those qualified particuarly for civilians in private security maybe with the requirement of ownership of a safe and a safety/cert class).

There was a bill a while back but i believe it was abandoned.

Perhaps this bill could nullify the 10 day waiting period and instead an instant nics check or a phone/fax check to verify the permit is legit and could be called a "Collectors Permit" or "Security Permit" for private security or even a "Sportsman Liscence" or we can keep it under an umbrella term so there isn't a class distinction. It could also be used to circumvent the drop test as you had taken the class and know how to safely handle a firearm.

I could see a chance of this passing with PROPER support and signicant argument for.

Like for security.... they have to be wary for overarmed criminals with signicant armament.

Personal weapons were deemed "assault weapons" by the state even such weapons used by olympic sport shooters. This means the state hinders olympic sport shooting.

I don't know, but this I honestly feel is the best way to seperate us legal civilian populace from the criminals. We could always use "the state discriminates us legal gun owners and puts us into the same category as criminals by making specific laws"

Why is the Saiga banned and not the M1A? It discriminates against those who can't afford the expensive target rifles for sporting.

Maybe we could get a bunch of minorities to be there in protest for the bill. Lets see the state "NOT DISCRIMINATE" against a group of minority gun owners.

Maybe we could put a $50 Registration fee per weapon... That way it could also bring money into the state.

ghettoshecky
09-10-2006, 10:55 PM
wow i'm not the only one who was thinking about that, so where do we start?

xenophobe
09-10-2006, 11:19 PM
Legislative intent of Roberti-Roos was to issue permits to those who would want them. DOJ, with regulatory interpretation, made those permits nearly impossible to get if you're not an FFL.

grammaton76
09-11-2006, 3:42 AM
Legislative intent of Roberti-Roos was to issue permits to those who would want them. DOJ, with regulatory interpretation, made those permits nearly impossible to get if you're not an FFL.

I agree..

To the folks above, I don't believe that we should be pushing for any new class of people, or some kind of new permit, etc. As Xeno observes, the intent was that permits should be available, and we already do have the framework in place. The main problem is that, like with CCWs, the permits were regarded as discretionary and not mandatory. Trying to create some kind of new system would be an uphill battle, more so than adding "clarification" to the existing regs.

The real deal here, is that we need to push for a modification to the statute that would "clarify" their requirement to issue permits in the absence of disqualifying circumstances.

...now, whether that would best be done by some kind of initiative, or what, that's a question.

PanzerAce
09-11-2006, 7:25 AM
IIRC, there was a bill that would make it so that if you got a COE, you automatically got a AW permit at the same time. I dont remember what happened to it though.

AntiBubba 2.1
09-11-2006, 9:26 AM
Shove that! First thing we ought to be doing is working to get Poochigian into the AG's office. If anything, Brown would be even worse than Lockyer.

rocketboy
09-11-2006, 9:34 AM
The permit thing may be kind of hard. Probably because of equal representation.

mikehaas
09-11-2006, 2:07 PM
NRA tried to loosen the permit process this last session for certain groups.

http://calnra.com/legs.shtml?year=2006&summary=ab2131

Maybe next time. Now that calguns and NRA are working together, and if we can get others on board - those are the kinds of things we need to do to move the ball.

Mike

mikehaas
09-11-2006, 2:16 PM
If anything, Brown would be even worse than Lockyer.
Doubt it. My understanding is that Brown is pro-gun. This is more blanket condemnation of specific candidates because of party. I'm not stumping for Brown or Poochigian (unless NRA tells me to), but NRA's Project Exile was implemented on Brown's watch. The NRA Members' Council of Alameda County reports favorable interactions with him when he was mayor. (Note: that is not an endorsement - NRA makes the endorsements, not Members' Councils. We're volunteers.) And I still am waiting for someone to document an anti-gun vote or action he's taken.

If we're going to make progress in this state, we need to stop making knee-jerk reactions, especially when it may be insulting to someone who might be able to help us.

Mike

luvtolean
09-11-2006, 2:29 PM
Yes, I think Poochigan would probably be better for gun owners, but even on his "moveon" anti-Brown site in the Brown says portion, Brown makes a pro-gun statement.

I have some exceptionally liberal friends who are pro-second amendment. Remember, JFK accepted an NRA lifetime membership.

It certainly seems like Brown or Poochigan would be better for us than Lockyer, and that's good news. :)

jnojr
09-11-2006, 3:36 PM
I think we need to ask both Brown and Poochigian about this... will they issue AW permits? Will they work to solve the unequal CCW issuance problem? How?

http://www.pooch4ag.com/contactus/

http://jerrybrown.org/contact

PanzerAce
09-11-2006, 4:16 PM
well, just asked both of them, Ill post their reply (assuming I ever get one)