PDA

View Full Version : Jerry Brown Screwed us yesterday!!!


Pages : [1] 2

WiKDMoNKY
10-10-2011, 6:39 AM
Here is the list of things he signed into law yesterday…

SB 819 (DROS funds can be used by DOJ)
AB 144 (Ban open carry)
AB 809 (Registration of long guns, that means shotguns too)
SB 610 (Standardization of CCW application process) This is actually good for us!

He only vetoed one of the firearm bills. SB 427 (Ammo registration) This is really good for us!

Here is a better explanation of the each law http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Read.aspx?ID=7123


Hopefully the NRA ILA will get some or all of them overturned.

Caladain
10-10-2011, 6:41 AM
Here is the list of things he signed into law yesterday…

SB 819 (DROS funds can be used by DOJ)
AB 144 (Ban open carry)
AB 809 (Registration of long guns, that means shotguns too)
SB 610 (Standardization of CCW application process) This is actually good for us!

He only vetoed one of the firearm bills. SB 427 (Ammo registration) This is really good for us!

Here is a better explanation of the each law http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Read.aspx?ID=7123


Hopefully the NRA ILA will get some or all of them overturned.

Registered OLLs...
Long Gun Registration ruled unconstitutional in DC last week.
DROS is now a tax and not a fee.
Carry license reform.
Excuse for not granting carry licenses destroyed.

I love it when a plan comes together!

http://www.ganiserhatli.com/image.axd?picture=2011%2F1%2Fcolonel_hannibal_smit h.jpg

-Gene

Less Doom/Gloom/BGOS, more helping the movement please.

BroncoBob
10-10-2011, 6:46 AM
Win some and lose some.

OleCuss
10-10-2011, 7:02 AM
OK, I don't like Brown. I didn't vote for him even though I wasn't thrilled with his opposition, either.

But Brown did more for us than he did for them.

And the militant UOCers (there are non-militants who play it smart) did more for LCAV than for anyone else.

BigDogatPlay
10-10-2011, 7:07 AM
Compared to the downstream effects of some of the other things the Governor signed over the weekend, his giving us a mixed bag of win and fail is actually small potatoes.

Still stings though. I sent a bunch of e-mails and called on the DROS fund grab. Oh well... that's how it works sometimes.

MolonLabe2008
10-10-2011, 7:10 AM
Jerry Brown can stick that "Amicus Brief" up is ***!!!!!!!!!!

And all those people on this board who kept sticking Jerry Brown's "Amicus Brief" in my face, what do you have to say for yourself now?? Hmmm!!!!!!!!

So, now you know (because I've always known) that Jerry Brown is a typical extreme liberal Democrat who will infringe on our 2nd-Amendment rights, impose extreme job killing environmental regulations and give our tax dollars to people who break our laws.

Good going all you Brown supporters.

I hope you are happy with yourselves.

Caladain
10-10-2011, 7:12 AM
Jerry Brown can stick that "Amicus Brief" up is ***!!!!!!!!!!

And all those people on this board who kept sticking Jerry Brown's "Amicus Brief" in my face, what do you have to say for yourself now?? Hmmm!!!!!!!!

Enjoy your carry license and your loaded handgun in public? :chris:

5thgen4runner
10-10-2011, 7:14 AM
So what I have to dros and register all my long guns now or just new purchases (I think I missed it somewhere)

Andy Taylor
10-10-2011, 7:14 AM
SB 427 was the worst of them, at least he vetoed that.
SB 610 is a good bill. He signed that.
SB 819, AB 144, & AB 809 are not good, but even though he was wrong here, I think we did well to get SB 427 vetoed and SB 610 signed.
Also between AB 144 and SB 610 it will make getting shall issue LTC easier.
Not that I supported AB 144, I just see a silver lining to the cloud, as many have. Perhaps Brown did too. Even though I am not happy with Brown, I think that had eMeg been in office, we would have had a worse outcome.

MolonLabe2008
10-10-2011, 7:15 AM
But Brown did more for us than he did for them.

And the militant UOCers (there are non-militants who play it smart) did more for LCAV than for anyone else.

BS!

Ubermcoupe
10-10-2011, 7:15 AM
So what I have to dros and register all my long guns now or just new purchases (I think I missed it somewhere)

Beginning Jan 1 2014.

Caladain
10-10-2011, 7:17 AM
Beginning Jan 1 2014.

It'll be dead before then, see the DC reg case.

5thgen4runner
10-10-2011, 7:18 AM
Beginning Jan 1 2014.

New purchases or current long guns I own?

uyoga
10-10-2011, 7:18 AM
So . . . human existence goes on . . . here in the People's Republyik of Kalyphornyia.

Much hopey . . no changey.

not-fishing
10-10-2011, 7:20 AM
I have a US Citizen friend who's family is from South Africa.

He told me this long gun registration is the way the (not-white) South African Government took the guns away from the populace.

I wonder how Australia is doing.

Gray Peterson
10-10-2011, 7:21 AM
So what I have to dros and register all my long guns now or just new purchases (I think I missed it somewhere)

It's only for DROS'd guns post January 1st, 2014. You do NOT have to register stuff that was bought before then, at all. It purely puts the same rules on the state keeping the data after the 10 day waiting period expires that they do for handguns.

bwiese and a few others have a plan already in place to make the registry quite ineffective (all of that is legal). Home builds are NOT effected by the registration.

coyotebait
10-10-2011, 7:22 AM
New purchases or current long guns I own

It's my understanding that it's new purchases.....for now at least.

Gray Peterson
10-10-2011, 7:22 AM
I have a US Citizen friend who's family is from South Africa.

He told me this long gun registration is the way the (not-white) South African Government took the guns away from the populace.



Given the numerous cases going up, the idea of South Africa-style gun control is unlikely to say the least.

MolonLabe2008
10-10-2011, 7:23 AM
So, Jerry Brown is NOT a 2nd-Amendment supporter and anyone who tries to justify it has their head up their backside.

Dark Mod
10-10-2011, 7:25 AM
Ok, we are no where near getting shall issue. Not even close. We lost a ton of rights today, and im not pleased at all. At least with Meg there would be no dream act

DocSkinner
10-10-2011, 7:25 AM
Jerry Brown can stick that "Amicus Brief" up is ***!!!!!!!!!!

And all those people on this board who kept sticking Jerry Brown's "Amicus Brief" in my face, what do you have to say for yourself now?? Hmmm!!!!!!!!

So, now you know (because I've always known) that Jerry Brown is a typical extreme liberal Democrat who will infringe on our 2nd-Amendment rights, impose extreme job killing environmental regulations and give our tax dollars to people who break our laws.

Good going all you Brown supporters.

I hope you are happy with yourselves.

Hey come on now - that there are more laws to fight in long drawn out legal battles that is FAR better than not having to deal with the BS to begin with isn't? But then preventing laws is 'impossible'.

and to a hammer everything looks like a nail. Why use a wrench to fix something when you can just beat on it with a hammer instead?

cmaynes
10-10-2011, 7:29 AM
when systems start to break down they become more vulnerable to mistakes and hubris.

check out whats happening at ATF....

these are exciting times which require resolve. but the rewards could be quite spectacular.

5thgen4runner
10-10-2011, 7:30 AM
It's only for DROS'd guns post January 1st, 2014. You do NOT have to register stuff that was bought before then, at all. It purely puts the same rules on the state keeping the data after the 10 day waiting period expires that they do for handguns.

bwiese and a few others have a plan already in place to make the registry quite ineffective (all of that is legal). Home builds are NOT effected by the registration.

Home builds as in ak,hk, etc and does that include stripped lowers/receivers

Kharn
10-10-2011, 7:31 AM
Chess, not checkers.
UOC ban plays directly into Richards (IIRC) which said UOC negated the need for shall-issue LTCs.
Registerd rifles/shotguns will face Heller II
And you can't tax a fundamental right, you can only assess reasonable fees to negate the secondary effects (paying police to stop traffic and the street sweeper to pick up the garbage of your parade, etc).

Icarus
10-10-2011, 7:31 AM
It looks like AB809 really screws you if you have a 03 C&R. No more old guns sent to your door. No more CMP rifles to your house. Or did I miss something?

Tack
10-10-2011, 7:31 AM
Don't worry. The die-hard Brown supporters on calguns will tell us he really supports the second amendment and our right to keep and bear arms.

taperxz
10-10-2011, 7:32 AM
So, Jerry Brown is NOT a 2nd-Amendment supporter and anyone who tries to justify it has their head up their backside.

This may be true, but then those that fail to understand politics and law and how to change things are only able to look at the dirty pictures as opposed to GETTING to read the article

Caladain
10-10-2011, 7:32 AM
Don't worry. The die-hard Brown supporters on calguns will tell us he really supports the second amendment and our right to keep and bear arms.

And the battered/bitter gun owners will tell you to give up all hope and leave the state.

taperxz
10-10-2011, 7:33 AM
Chess, not checkers.
UOC ban plays directly into Richards (IIRC) which said UOC negated the need for shall-issue LTCs.
Registerd rifles/shotguns will face Heller II
And you can't tax a fundamental right, you can only assess reasonable fees to negate the secondary effects (paying police to stop traffic and the street sweeper to pick up the garbage of your parade, etc).


This!

Barabas
10-10-2011, 7:34 AM
So, Jerry Brown is NOT a 2nd-Amendment supporter and anyone who tries to justify it has their head up their backside.

I'm going to go with the guys who have a track record in winning civil rights cases over a guy who is known mainly for getting banned in OT and the political forums for his over-exuberance.

G60
10-10-2011, 7:36 AM
The CGF did a lot of hard work to try to get DROS fees reduced and all that has been thrown out the window.

MaHoTex
10-10-2011, 7:37 AM
It looks like AB809 really screws you if you have a 03 C&R. No more old guns sent to your door. No more CMP rifles to your house. Or did I miss something?

I think you are right. At least, that is what I have read into this.

OleCuss
10-10-2011, 7:45 AM
The CGF did a lot of hard work to try to get DROS fees reduced and all that has been thrown out the window.

True enough, but it also means that we may kill the DROS fees entirely. Do remember that you don't get to tax a fundamental right. Since purchasing a firearm is certainly core to the RKBA this law is almost certainly a loser in court.

Now it goes a bit further than that. . . Since the fee was converted to a tax the State of California has effectively declared that so far as the State is concerned a DROS fee is pretty much the same thing as a DROS tax. That equivalency just might mean that we get to kill off DROS fees rather than just getting the tax converted back to a fee. But even if we do end up with a fee, I'd expect the court to order that the fees must be at a bare minimum necessary to process any necessary paperwork-type transactions. That might mean that California has to use the NICS rather than have their own system. . .

JB may have signed the death warrant for DROS as we have known and hated it for lo, these many years.

And yes, this is somewhat speculative in terms of the ultimate form, but I think it is not all that far off.

Bargearse
10-10-2011, 7:47 AM
I have a US Citizen friend who's family is from South Africa.

He told me this long gun registration is the way the (not-white) South African Government took the guns away from the populace.

I wonder how Australia is doing.

In Australia, state government requires their citizens to register their long arms regardless and a 7 day cooling off period.

Uxi
10-10-2011, 7:48 AM
Sounds logical that LTC should be easier... after another 5-6 years of court battles, probably. I'm still hoping for a SCOTUS ruling mandating LOC as the Constitutional standard one day, though, hopefully before I'm too old to care.

I don't see SCOTUS overturning registration.

But yeah, Moonbeam is definitely NOT our friend. He's mostly whored out to his public employee unions and they're not our friends, either.

BroncoBob
10-10-2011, 7:48 AM
True enough, but it also means that we may kill the DROS fees entirely. Do remember that you don't get to tax a fundamental right. Since purchasing a firearm is certainly core to the RKBA this law is almost certainly a loser in court.

Now it goes a bit further than that. . . Since the fee was converted to a tax the State of California has effectively declared that so far as the State is concerned a DROS fee is pretty much the same thing as a DROS tax. That equivalency just might mean that we get to kill off DROS fees rather than just getting the tax converted back to a fee. But even if we do end up with a fee, I'd expect the court to order that the fees must be at a bare minimum necessary to process any necessary paperwork-type transactions. That might mean that California has to use the NICS rather than have their own system. . .

JB may have signed the death warrant for DROS as we have known and hated it for lo, these many years.

And yes, this is somewhat speculative in terms of the ultimate form, but I think it is not all that far off.

Wouldn't this be nice......:)

stitchnicklas
10-10-2011, 7:50 AM
i am still..

:banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead:

CharlieK
10-10-2011, 7:51 AM
I'm recalling all the folks on this board who expounded last year on Brown's second amendment record, trying to tell us he'd be better the 2A than his opponent.

How's that working out for ya now?

MaHoTex
10-10-2011, 7:53 AM
I'm recalling all the folks on this board who expounded last year on Brown's second amendment record, trying to tell us he'd be better the 2A than his opponent.

How's that working out for ya now?

My thoughts exactly. Now it appears I will no longer be able to practice my hobby of C&R collecting without extra burden. Yup... Brown done me good I tell ya.

Caladain
10-10-2011, 7:53 AM
I'm recalling all the folks on this board who expounded last year on Brown's second amendment record, trying to tell us he'd be better the 2A than his opponent.

How's that working out for ya now?

Quite well. How's your Brady membership working for you?

Clownpuncher
10-10-2011, 7:54 AM
I have a US Citizen friend who's family is from South Africa.

He told me this long gun registration is the way the (not-white) South African Government took the guns away from the populace.

I wonder how Australia is doing.

We have an exchange military member in our unit that is from Australia. Lets just say that the gun grab in Australia isn't going as planned.

The only people who aren't being robbed or targeted for crimes are the farmers who were allowed to keep their guns.

TripleT
10-10-2011, 7:58 AM
The most telling of all the anti-gun legislation that the anti-gun Brown supported was the veto of the ammo bill that comes with the letter that stated they need to "keep their powder dry" and propose that legislation when the litigation on the last ammo bill is complete. Why people still cling to the hope that he is somehow on our side is beyond me. I find it particularly insulting that he would use the term "Keep our powder dry" as a reference to sticking it to us at a later date.

A leopard can't change his spots but he may use them as camouflage to get himself elected.

6172crew
10-10-2011, 8:06 AM
So, Jerry Brown is NOT a 2nd-Amendment supporter and anyone who tries to justify it has their head up their backside.

Yep, heard you the first time.

Ubermcoupe
10-10-2011, 8:06 AM
a DROS fee is pretty much the same thing as a DROS tax.


I like where this is headed. :thumbsup:

Jason P
10-10-2011, 8:08 AM
In more than just 2A related items too. Too bad Gary Johnson is not our governor.

Lc17smp
10-10-2011, 8:10 AM
How old does my son need to be before I gift him long guns again?

Tier One Arms
10-10-2011, 8:12 AM
Gary Johnson would be an awesome governor, and an even better president.

mdimeo
10-10-2011, 8:15 AM
Home builds are NOT effected by the registration.

Home builds meaning machined yourself from a block of metal, as opposed to stuffing parts in a dros'd lower. Right?

Patriot Man
10-10-2011, 8:16 AM
Given the numerous cases going up, the idea of South Africa-style gun control is unlikely to say the least.

Incrementalism. This is the frog in the kettle. Anything is possible.

I am very happy Brown vetoed the ammo bill. He is not hopeless.

tenpercentfirearms
10-10-2011, 8:16 AM
I find it particularly insulting that he would use the term "Keep our powder dry" as a reference to sticking it to us at a later date.

I am still trying to figure out what that means. Why use a reference to gun ownership if you are anti-gun?

Either way, lots of blame is being thrown around like anything we do legislatively in this state matters. It wouldn't have gotten to his desk if your liberal representatives hadn't vote yes on these bills.

If you want to start making a difference in this state, you need to get to the grassroots level. Who are you taking shooting? What are you doing to encourage responsible firearms ownership with a reflection on rights?

Hopefully we can keep the court decisions heading our way.

Super Spy
10-10-2011, 8:19 AM
With Long Gun Registration signed it seems that my 03 will be useful only when I run out of toilet paper. Thanks Brownstain!

Luieburger
10-10-2011, 8:23 AM
Less Doom/Gloom/BGOS, more helping the movement please.

We all knew that the pessimists on these forums would cry "I told you so!" when Jerry did his first anti-gun action(s). They think things couldn't get worse here in CA. I don't think they realize how much worse it could have been.

Zimz
10-10-2011, 8:24 AM
I have a US Citizen friend who's family is from South Africa.

He told me this long gun registration is the way the (not-white) South African Government took the guns away from the populace.

I wonder how Australia is doing.


My family is from Rhodesia, same thing happened there. Started with gun registrations, not long after all guns were confiscated. My family just threw theirs in the lake. There is no need for any registration, none at all. Any excuse is just unacceptable and needs to be fought tooth and nail.

MaHoTex
10-10-2011, 8:25 AM
With Long Gun Registration signed it seems that my 03 will be useful only when I run out of toilet paper. Thanks Brownstain!


Can we go to Nevada or Arizona an purchase C&Rs and just bring them home?

cmaynes
10-10-2011, 8:26 AM
I am still trying to figure out what that means. Why use a reference to gun ownership if you are anti-gun?

Either way, lots of blame is being thrown around like anything we do legislatively in this state matters. It wouldn't have gotten to his desk if your liberal representatives hadn't vote yes on these bills.

If you want to start making a difference in this state, you need to get to the grassroots level. Who are you taking shooting? What are you doing to encourage responsible firearms ownership with a reflection on rights?

Hopefully we can keep the court decisions heading our way.

Also politics is about money. If WE can get officials into office who share our views- who arent douche bags on other issues we win. They set standards which get noticed.

Harry Reid isnt in office because he is anti-gun.... thats for damn sure.

a1c
10-10-2011, 8:27 AM
Can we go to Nevada or Arizona an purchase C&Rs and just bring them home?

Most likely, if this piece of legislation stands, yes, you will still be able to do that, and like C&R handguns, will probably have to register them by mail.

RDak
10-10-2011, 8:27 AM
I joined today just to let all of you know how sorry I am that you have such a horrible legislature and governor.

You have my most sincere sympathies.

The rest of the country is getting better with their gun laws and California just seems to be always getting worse.

It's a shame and I am sorry!!

OleCuss
10-10-2011, 8:31 AM
Thank you for the sympathy.

But the fight is not over - and we are winning.

MaHoTex
10-10-2011, 8:31 AM
I joined today just to let all of you know how sorry I am that you have such a horrible legislature and governor.

You have my most sincere sympathies.

The rest of the country is getting better with their gun laws and California just seems to be always getting worse.

It's a shame and I am sorry!!

Thanks for the support RDak. We need it, badly.

Wherryj
10-10-2011, 8:32 AM
We have an exchange military member in our unit that is from Australia. Lets just say that the gun grab in Australia isn't going as planned.

The only people who aren't being robbed or targeted for crimes are the farmers who were allowed to keep their guns.

Sounds like the only part of "not going as planned" is that they forgot to take the farmers' guns as well.

RazzB7
10-10-2011, 8:32 AM
With the exception of the restriction on Jew-owned weapons, our current California laws are more restrictive than those that existed in Nazi Germany prior to WWII.

The 1938 German Weapons Act
The 1938 German Weapons Act, the precursor of the current weapons law, superseded the 1928 law. As under the 1928 law, citizens were required to have a permit to carry a firearm and a separate permit to acquire a firearm. Furthermore, the law restricted ownership of firearms to "...persons whose trustworthiness is not in question and who can show a need for a (gun) permit." Under the new law:
Gun restriction laws applied only to handguns, not to long guns or ammunition. Writes Prof. Bernard Harcourt of the University of Chicago, "The 1938 revisions completely deregulated the acquisition and transfer of rifles and shotguns, as well as ammunition."[4]
The groups of people who were exempt from the acquisition permit requirement expanded. Holders of annual hunting permits, government workers, and NSDAP party members were no longer subject to gun ownership restrictions. Prior to the 1938 law, only officials of the central government, the states, and employees of the German Reichsbahn Railways were exempted.[5]
The age at which persons could own guns was lowered from 20 to 18.[5]
The firearms carry permit was valid for three years instead of one year.[5]
Jews were forbidden from the manufacturing or ownership of firearms and ammunition.[6]
Under both the 1928 and 1938 acts, gun manufacturers and dealers were required to maintain records with information about who purchased guns and the guns' serial numbers. These records were to be delivered to a police authority for inspection at the end of each year.
On November 11, 1938, the Minister of the Interior, Wilhelm Frick, passed Regulations Against Jews' Possession of Weapons. This regulation effectively deprived all Jews of the right to possess firearms or other weapons.[7]

bwiese
10-10-2011, 8:32 AM
Jerry Brown can stick that "Amicus Brief" up is ***!!!!!!!!!!

And all those people on this board who kept sticking Jerry Brown's "Amicus Brief" in my face, what do you have to say for yourself now?? Hmmm!!!!!!!!

So, now you know (because I've always known) that Jerry Brown is a typical extreme liberal Democrat who will infringe on our 2nd-Amendment rights, impose extreme job killing environmental regulations and give our tax dollars to people who break our laws.

Good going all you Brown supporters.

I hope you are happy with yourselves.


Thanks.

You were an eMeg supporter in the past and we know Meg would have signed ALL (including 427 ammo bill) and NOT signed 610.

I know you'd rather trade incremental progress for just being a Reep.

Also: if I had to, I'd trade all votes for ALL bad bills to get one CA Amicus Brief.

It was vitally important and yet you're not smart enough to realize it.

Weren't you the guy last year that incorrectly and incompetently told us 962 hadn't passed and the phone calls fell off? Or was that Enthusiast.

Oh - call me when your Reep party in CA has one smidgen of relevance.

Neo Sharkey
10-10-2011, 8:32 AM
Does this mean that we (CGF) can sue for Must Issue License To Carry now, or do we have to wait for the open carry ban to go into effect?

(Readies checkbook)

5thgen4runner
10-10-2011, 8:33 AM
Ok all of this is bs but I have a question are cops going to register there personal firearms ...of course not and again we take it in *** backed by leos and worthless legislation.

RDak
10-10-2011, 8:36 AM
Thanks for the support RDak. We need it, badly.

You're welcome and try to hang in there.

It is very sad what is happening in California.

I just wish I could snap my fingers and change the horrible anti-gun sentiment running rampant throughout your State legislature.

ETA: Hopefully the decisions in Heller and McDonald can somehow be used to eventually change things in California.

bwiese
10-10-2011, 8:36 AM
Ok all of this is bs but I have a question are cops going to register there personal firearms ...of course not and again we take it in *** backed by leos and worthless legislation.

No, and you don't have to either.

The long gun registration law is for NEW purchases/xfers 2014 & later.

Just like unpapered handguns that you already have, you don't have to register what you already have.

bwiese
10-10-2011, 8:38 AM
Does this mean that we (CGF) can sue for Must Issue License To Carry now, or do we have to wait for the open carry ban to go into effect?

(Readies checkbook)


I thank you for the consideration, but the association between 144 and CCW is not that direct and guaranteed. Saying it leads to CCW is politically useful posturing before the bill was signed but we can and were getting CCW fixed without 144 and would be better off without it (or UOC drama, for that matter, which brought it along).

144 limitations will be mentioned in upcoming matters and may offer some help.

a1c
10-10-2011, 8:38 AM
With the exception of the restriction on Jew-owned weapons, our current California laws are more restrictive than those that existed in Nazi Germany prior to WWII.

Please don't earn Godwin points so easily.

OleCuss
10-10-2011, 8:39 AM
Ok all of this is bs but I have a question are cops going to register there personal firearms ...of course not and again we take it in *** backed by leos and worthless legislation.

Umm. . . I'm pretty sure that the cops register everything we do. What's more, their department has hooks into them that they don't have into the rest of us.

And it's time to recognize that most LEO's are friendly to us. And now even the LEO "leadership" is starting to recognize common cause with us.

It's way past time to be antagonizing law enforcement. Enlist them rather than throwing brickbats at them.

a1c
10-10-2011, 8:42 AM
No, and you don't have to either.

The long gun registration law is for NEW purchases/xfers 2014 & later.

Just like unpapered handguns that you already have, you don't have to register what you already have.

Can you confirm that under the new law C&R license holders won't be able to get C&R long guns shipped to their doorsteps anymore?

The Shadow
10-10-2011, 8:46 AM
I intend to send Portantino a big fat "THANK YOU !", followed up by "Let the games begin."

The antis are all agog over these "victories"; it will be so much fun watching them when we get shall issue and they're trying to figure out what happened as they're deciding if they want to scratch their heads or their a**es first.

Don't despair, we're winning, and they are unwittingly helping us.

5thgen4runner
10-10-2011, 8:46 AM
No, and you don't have to either.

The long gun registration law is for NEW purchases/xfers 2014 & later.

Just like unpapered handguns that you already have, you don't have to register what you already have.

That's what I mean in 2014 do they have to register their personal new firearm purchases ...

RazzB7
10-10-2011, 8:48 AM
Please don't earn Godwin points so easily.

LOL, I didn't even know what this meant. I had to google it.

Swatter911
10-10-2011, 8:50 AM
That's what I mean in 2014 do they have to register their personal new firearm purchases ...

Yes, we've always had to register our personal handgun purchases...just like you.

In 2014 we'll have to register our personal long gun purchases...just like you.

TeckLancer
10-10-2011, 8:52 AM
so it is now illegal to uoc?

m03
10-10-2011, 8:57 AM
I intend to send Portantino a big fat "THANK YOU !", followed up by "Let the games begin."

The antis are all agog over these "victories"; it will be so much fun watching them when we get shall issue and they're trying to figure out what happened as they're deciding if they want to scratch their heads or their a**es first.

Don't despair, we're winning, and they are unwittingly helping us.

+1

Too many people here are missing the bigger picture. These will ultimately turn into major victories for us.

Bruce
10-10-2011, 8:59 AM
Is anybody really surprised at this turn of events? Demokrat Governor plus Demokrat Legislature equals more gun control. No brainer really. :facepalm:

The lawyers on this board will tell us how this just plays into our hands and things will go better in court etcetera, etcetera, etcetera. :puke:
Of course this good for them. Unlike the rest of us mere mortals, they really get off on the courtroom and arguing the fine points of the law. Us non-lawyers just want to be able to walk into a gunshop and buy the same guns that are available in the rest of the country.

5thgen4runner
10-10-2011, 9:00 AM
Yes, we've always had to register our personal handgun purchases...just like you.

In 2014 we'll have to register our personal long gun purchases...just like you.

So are u and all your dept going to other dept and together going to others etc and fight, say something, write a letter do j brown do something to defeat a unconstitutional law or are you going to enforce it despite the fact " its your job" .

CharlieK
10-10-2011, 9:01 AM
Quite well. How's your Brady membership working for you?

Well? Really? Please tell us how things in California are going well for those of us that support 2A. What's going 'quite well'?

You really think I'd support the Brady campaign. What makes you think that?

Midian
10-10-2011, 9:02 AM
So California gun owners now have more hassle, yet the framework of that hassle opens the door for CGF to go in there and bore out all the slime. That takes time, but so do all things of merit.

There is no politician in any position of real power that gives a good goddamn about you, me, your dog, your guns. Herman Cain will not save you. Mitt Romney will not save you. There are no scary turban terrorists stalking the airports or the gymboree, no domestic militias out to blow up the Feds. Government likes to act like it protects you against the enemies it creates, but all it does is erect bastions against liberty, and they need to be resisted.

As it turns out, free men and women are the enemy the Nannystate truly fears, and their mission is to suppress that freedom.

Mssr. Eleganté
10-10-2011, 9:02 AM
How old does my son need to be before I gift him long guns again?

Until 2014 it's legal to gift long guns to your child while he is still in the maternity ward at the hospital. There is no age restriction for receiving long guns from your parent or from your grandparent with your parents permission. In 2014 the legal age to receive both handguns and long guns from your parent or grandparent will be 18 years.

MolonLabe2008
10-10-2011, 9:04 AM
You were an eMeg supporter in the past...


I never supported or endorsed Meg.

Stop mischaracterizing me without evidence!


Weren't you the guy last year that incorrectly and incompetently told us 962 hadn't passed and the phone calls fell off?


I have no idea what you are talking about here.

Stop mischaracterizing me without evidence!

383green
10-10-2011, 9:04 AM
I cannot find words to express my outrage at having been hurled into such a tangled briar patch of oppressive new laws.

MolonLabe2008
10-10-2011, 9:06 AM
Is anybody really surprised at this turn of events? Demokrat Governor plus Demokrat Legislature equals more gun control. No brainer really. :facepalm:

The lawyers on this board will tell us how this just plays into our hands and things will go better in court etcetera, etcetera, etcetera. :puke: Of course this good for them. Unlike the rest of us mere mortals, they really get off on the courtroom and arguing the fine points of the law. The us non-lawyers just want to be able to walk into a gunshop and buy the same guns that are available in the rest of the country.

......this^

paintballergb
10-10-2011, 9:08 AM
I don't know how any person could possibly trust a liberal when it comes to the 2nd amendment. So far Moonbeam has yet to surprise as a governor. He has done (or not done) every single thing I thought he would.

Kestryll
10-10-2011, 9:11 AM
Stop mischaracterizing me without evidence!

Okay, how about I correctly characterize you, and how about this for evidence:

Your issue with Brown is NOT that he signed these bills it's that there is a (D) after his name.

Your pathological partisanship has gotten you banned from OT and from the Obama section of the Election forum.

You have a history, well proven and documented, of both extreme right-wing partisanship AND of being openly insulting and demeaning of people whose views are left of your own. Even of conservatives who are not 'conservative enough'.

Tell me I'm wrong and I'll tell you you're lying, I've dealt with you for long enough to know and prove that I'm right.



And before you try to accuse me of being a Brown supporter you might want to know I did NOT vote for him, I did NOT endorse him and I wrote in McClintock.

Mssr. Eleganté
10-10-2011, 9:11 AM
Can you confirm that under the new law C&R license holders won't be able to get C&R long guns shipped to their doorsteps anymore?

I just glanced over the text of AB 809, and I'm not sure if it was the final version of the bill, but it says that C&R FFLs can still have C&R long guns shipped to them in California. There are two changes though. The C&R FFL now has to also have a COE and now the long guns don't have to be 50+ years old.

So having to get a COE is bad, but many California C&R FFLs already have them. Getting rid of the 50+ year rule is good.

But it looks like non-C&R FFLs can no longer transfer 50+ year old C&R long guns without going through a California dealer.

sasc40cal
10-10-2011, 9:13 AM
How old does my son need to be before I gift him long guns again?

It will all depend on his tanning bed use, and when he last got his HPV without you knowing.

Time and time again the good folks here at CGF told us to , oops scratch that, they suaded oops scratch that again, they were strong with their support for someone that wrote a brief to SCOTUS.

sasc40cal
10-10-2011, 9:15 AM
I thank you for the consideration, but the association between 144 and CCW is not that direct and guaranteed. Saying it leads to CCW is politically useful posturing before the bill was signed but we can and were getting CCW fixed without 144 and would be better off without it (or UOC drama, for that matter, which brought it along).

144 limitations will be mentioned in upcoming matters and may offer some help.

In 2 more weeks....

jrr
10-10-2011, 9:16 AM
Elegante beat me to it. And its true, the 50 year rule is gone. Opens up a couple interesting rifles... for example a Yugo SKS is on the C&R listing I believe, but previously not importable because it is less than fifty years old, as of 2014 you will be able to get it.

The COE is bad though, and it also adds a registration requirement. Its similar to the personal handgun importer form from the sound of it. Send a form and a five dollar fee for every acquisition.

What will be interesting is whether the "registration" requirements getting challenged in court would affect the C&R provisions of the bill, or if those would remain.

Also, as I read it this does not affect inheriting or gifting firearms to family members. So, if you have a gun off the books it will stay off the books as long as its in the family.

a1c
10-10-2011, 9:16 AM
I just glanced over the text of AB 809, and I'm not sure if it was the final version of the bill, but it says that C&R FFLs can still have C&R long guns shipped to them in California. There are two changes though. The C&R FFL now has to also have a COE and now the long guns don't have to be 50+ years old.

So having to get a COE is bad, but many California C&R FFLs already have them. Getting rid of the 50+ year rule is good.

But it looks like non-C&R FFLs can no longer transfer 50+ year old C&R long guns without going through a California dealer.

Then I completely misread that piece of legislation. That is embarrassing. I'll dig through the CA legislature website again to make sure I read the version that got signed. But I'm confused though - you're saying that +50 years old rule wouldn't apply to FFL03 holders anymore? Maybe in the eyes of the CA DOJ it wouldn't, but certainly in the eyes of the ATF it would.

I'm more confused than ever.

Ripon83
10-10-2011, 9:17 AM
Don't worry. The die-hard Brown supporters on calguns will tell us he really supports the second amendment and our right to keep and bear arms.


It's all right a lot of them are public employees who paid a lot of dues to keep their pensions phat....gun control is a 2 hand issue to them not as important politically as their $$$$

Super Spy
10-10-2011, 9:17 AM
I just glanced over the text of AB 809, and I'm not sure if it was the final version of the bill, but it says that C&R FFLs can still have C&R long guns shipped to them in California. There are two changes though. The C&R FFL now has to also have a COE and now the long guns don't have to be 50+ years old.

So having to get a COE is bad, but many California C&R FFLs already have them. Getting rid of the 50+ year rule is good.

But it looks like non-C&R FFLs can no longer transfer 50+ year old C&R long guns without going through a California dealer.

That sounds like a little good news....I'll have to pony up for a COE, but at least I won't have to pay $75 every time I transfer a C&R longgun....of course most of the Gunbroker sellers will be even more difficult to deal with.

Flopps1
10-10-2011, 9:20 AM
Gun rights in Cali is like a slow cancer. They are taking away our guns rights one issue at a time. I don't see a light at the end of the tunnel!!!!!!

Neo Sharkey
10-10-2011, 9:22 AM
Until 2014 it's legal to gift long guns to your child while he is still in the maternity ward at the hospital. There is no age restriction for receiving long guns from your parent or from your grandparent with your parents permission. In 2014 the legal age to receive both handguns and long guns from your parent or grandparent will be 18 years.

Is there anything in particular I need to do to gift my 8 year old son a rifle? Or is it as simple as writing up a notarized letter?

sasc40cal
10-10-2011, 9:23 AM
Incrementalism. This is the frog in the kettle. Anything is possible.

I am very happy Brown vetoed the ammo bill. He is not hopeless.

Yes he is worthless, he will end up signing something over ammo, it is just a matter of time.

jrr
10-10-2011, 9:24 AM
Also, whether you like Jerry or not, its fair to say that him signing these bills is not favorable. Whether Meg would do any different is up for debate. Remember Arny screwed us REALLLY badly with his bill passages, so an "R" in the front of their name really means nothing in CA.

And Personally, I think it is incredibly unfair to be blaming CalGuns for any of this. Stop acting like children people. They do what they can with the limited resources they have, and in a state that is incredibly hostile to gun rights. I'd say they are doing a darn fine job working with what they've got.

If you don't like the way they do things, thats fine. But you don't have to post here, you dont have to support them, you dont have to crap all over the boards. There are plenty of gun boards out there that are 100% ultra right, do nothing, bi$%ch about everything places to hang out. CalGuns is a place to share information, new ideas, and see what is actually being DONE to HELP gun owners in CA.

Get a grip people, CalGuns are the good guys. They don't have a magic wand to fix CA or make the Governor do anything. All they can offer is their best guess as to how things will play out based on the info they have. They are human ya know.
so.... rant/off.. :chillpill:

Just Dave
10-10-2011, 9:25 AM
Jerry Brown? Trampling all over the Constitution?

I'm shocked I tell you shocked!

The criminal element of society will have no part of these shenanigans!

Uxi
10-10-2011, 9:27 AM
For all the talk of progress, it does seem this State is further and further off the deep end. I wanted to have to eat crow about Moonbeam. I'm extremely annoyed that I didn't. :\

Deadbolt
10-10-2011, 9:28 AM
Please don't earn Godwin points so easily.

if the stark comparison unsettles you, perhaps you'd have your time better spent fixing the issue, rather than asking us to ignore the facts.

sasc40cal
10-10-2011, 9:29 AM
Thank you for the sympathy.

But the fight is not over - and we are winning.

Dont you think it is a shame that we have to keep fighting? When will it ever end. The fight is ongoing never ending. And we lost today. I dont know how you can say we are winning, true there have been some good outcomes in part due to CGF and the rest, but when it comes to Kalifornia we take one step foward and 10 leaps backwards.

SoCalCitizen
10-10-2011, 9:30 AM
So California gun owners now have more hassle, yet the framework of that hassle opens the door for CGF to go in there and bore out all the slime. That takes time, but so do all things of merit.

There is no politician in any position of real power that gives a good goddamn about you, me, your dog, your guns. Herman Cain will not save you. Mitt Romney will not save you. There are no scary turban terrorists stalking the airports or the gymboree, no domestic militias out to blow up the Feds. Government likes to act like it protects you against the enemies it creates, but all it does is erect bastions against liberty, and they need to be resisted.

As it turns out, free men and women are the enemy the Nannystate truly fears, and their mission is to suppress that freedom.

This. I believe the above two comments from this gallery, bottom line this for the majority of us gun lovers, who just want to be able to participate like our brothers and sisters in the free parts of these United States. Good luck.

morrcarr67
10-10-2011, 9:31 AM
So, Jerry Brown is NOT a 2nd-Amendment supporter and anyone who tries to justify it has their head up their backside.

Unless that person has had a "Plateyotomy"



A "Plateyotomy" is when someone has a section of the stomach and chest removed and replaced with "plexiglass" so that they can still see what they are doing while they have their head shoved up their backside.

SoCalCitizen
10-10-2011, 9:32 AM
Is anybody really surprised at this turn of events? Demokrat Governor plus Demokrat Legislature equals more gun control. No brainer really. :facepalm:

The lawyers on this board will tell us how this just plays into our hands and things will go better in court etcetera, etcetera, etcetera. :puke:
Of course this good for them. Unlike the rest of us mere mortals, they really get off on the courtroom and arguing the fine points of the law. Us non-lawyers just want to be able to walk into a gunshop and buy the same guns that are available in the rest of the country.

This

ckprax
10-10-2011, 9:32 AM
Is there anything in particular I need to do to gift my 8 year old son a rifle? Or is it as simple as writing up a notarized letter?

If you want to gift a rifle/shot gun now:

Purchase long gun, wait 10 days, pick up long gun, hand to child. That easy.

Wrangler John
10-10-2011, 9:33 AM
Now, raise yourselves up, men! We push on to Trenton!

a1c
10-10-2011, 9:36 AM
if the stark comparison unsettles you, perhaps you'd have your time better spent fixing the issue, rather than asking us to ignore the facts.

It's not a very smart nor stark comparison. It makes me think of those entitled kids who were asked to stop chewing gum in class by their teachers, and who would call him a fascist.

I dedicate time to fixing the issue, thank you very much. I suspect - given your attitude - that I probably turned more antis into gun owners than you have.

goldrush
10-10-2011, 9:43 AM
I'm going to go with the guys who have a track record in winning civil rights cases over a guy who is known mainly for getting banned in OT and the political forums for his over-exuberance.

You do know that courts have an institutional bias to respect the will of the people and to find every reason not to overturn legislation, right? Hoping for courts to save you is slow, expensive and uncertain. Far better to win in the legislature.

Gun owners in California got bloodied, yesterday. They had a very bad day. If I were in charge of the gun movement, I'd demand a change in lobbyists and tactics.

Kestryll
10-10-2011, 9:44 AM
Dont you think it is a shame that we have to keep fighting? When will it ever end. The fight is ongoing never ending.

The fight IS never-ending and it WILL go on forever.

Even if we win everything we want or desire we will have to continue fighting to keep it.

This is not a skirmish or short term battle, this is a never-ending task to restore and then to maintain our rights.
This is why it is vital that we welcome in and train the younger generation to continue the fight when we're gone.

We will win and we will buttress our victory with court cases, SCOTUS decisions, legislation and more but that will never stop thse who have designs on our freedoms from working to remove them.

sasc40cal
10-10-2011, 9:44 AM
I wish James Madison were alive lol...

Don'tBlink
10-10-2011, 9:47 AM
Jerry Brown can stick that "Amicus Brief" up is ***!!!!!!!!!!

And all those people on this board who kept sticking Jerry Brown's "Amicus Brief" in my face, what do you have to say for yourself now?? Hmmm!!!!!!!!

So, now you know (because I've always known) that Jerry Brown is a typical extreme liberal Democrat who will infringe on our 2nd-Amendment rights, impose extreme job killing environmental regulations and give our tax dollars to people who break our laws.

Good going all you Brown supporters.

I hope you are happy with yourselves.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AIlzYD4tk78

Bhobbs
10-10-2011, 9:48 AM
Thanks.

You were an eMeg supporter in the past and we know Meg would have signed ALL (including 427 ammo bill) and NOT signed 610.

I know you'd rather trade incremental progress for just being a Reep.

Also: if I had to, I'd trade all votes for ALL bad bills to get one CA Amicus Brief.

It was vitally important and yet you're not smart enough to realize it.

Weren't you the guy last year that incorrectly and incompetently told us 962 hadn't passed and the phone calls fell off? Or was that Enthusiast.

Oh - call me when your Reep party in CA has one smidgen of relevance.

Who cares what Meg would have done? Brown was the guy and he screwed us.

Browns veto for 427 sure sounded like he wanted to sign it but didn't due to pending litigation.
144 MAY give us a better chance of LTC.
809 MAY fall to other challenges.
819 MAY lead to the DROS being over turned.

That is a lot of may and a lot of for sure back peddling. I support CGF when I can but I'm poor so that isn't very often.

sasc40cal
10-10-2011, 9:48 AM
The fight IS never-ending and it WILL go on forever.

Even if we win everything we want or desire we will have to continue fighting to keep it.

This is not a skirmish or short term battle, this is a never-ending task to restore and then to maintain our rights.
This is why it is vital that we welcome in and train the younger generation to continue the fight when we're gone.

We will win and we will buttress our victory with court cases, SCOTUS decisions, legislation and more but that will never stop thse who have designs on our freedoms from working to remove them.

I understand this completly, I just think it is wrong and we shouldnt have to. There are many things that are upsetting, not just 2A, but a lot of things as of late. It is sad that we always have to keep an eye over our shoulder and get ready for the next attack on our liberties. The constitution lays it all out but it is always challeneged by those on either the left or the right. It is a shame that we cant just follow the guidelines that were drawn out for us as a country. James Madison would be crapping himself right now.

Legasat
10-10-2011, 9:49 AM
The truth is, we were going to get screwed no matter who got elected last time.

The Gov's signings could have been worse, but that doesn't mean I have to like what he did.

They will never stop coming after us! Be vigilant, be smart!!!

taperxz
10-10-2011, 9:49 AM
While no new gun law is great, i must admit there are some caveats to these new laws.

registration: not till 2014, and federally questionable. Probably won't happen

Dros: There has been no increase for fees, it also opens up DOJ to extensive, expensive audits, an eventual costly expansion of the system that they can't pay for and all based on a tax that will be considered unconstitutional federally as it is applied to a civil right.

UOC: this form of carry according to SCOTUS has never been constitutionally protected. Any and all references to the carry of firearms have been "functional" or as we commonly call "loaded"

Richards was granted an extension for this very reason. Yolo argued that UOC was the reason not to make YOLO a shall issue county. They are arguing that UOC is a viable option to shall issue LTC. HOW IS THAT WORKING FOR THEM NOW?

The ammo bill is a huge win! It was the one bill that would have taken our rights and ability to shoot our firearms. True micro managed registration of what you are doing on a day to day basis in regards to firearms use.

610 helps clarify to the sheriffs what the actual law is in regards to LTC apps and mainstreams their wild opinions of the law.

Ripon83
10-10-2011, 9:51 AM
So it's not ok to oppose people who side or adopt a political party you disagree with, and normally attacks the majority of positions on issues like gun con control.

I'm about ready to stop donating here.



Okay, how about I correctly characterize you, and how about this for evidence:

Your issue with Brown is NOT that he signed these bills it's that there is a (D) after his name.

Your pathological partisanship has gotten you banned from OT and from the Obama section of the Election forum.

You have a history, well proven and documented, of both extreme right-wing partisanship AND of being openly insulting and demeaning of people whose views are left of your own. Even of conservatives who are not 'conservative enough'.

Tell me I'm wrong and I'll tell you you're lying, I've dealt with you for long enough to know and prove that I'm right.



And before you try to accuse me of being a Brown supporter you might want to know I did NOT vote for him, I did NOT endorse him and I wrote in McClintock.

Uriah02
10-10-2011, 9:52 AM
I could accept AB144, but AB809 I find no excuse for, Heller II or not!

imtheomegaman
10-10-2011, 9:52 AM
feels like getting punched in the gut every time a bill is signed in this state, not a good day for our side

goldrush
10-10-2011, 9:53 AM
Thank you for the sympathy.

But the fight is not over - and we are winning.

At reading this, I could only think of the irrepressible optimists Charlie Sheen and Baghdad Bob.

Deadbolt
10-10-2011, 9:54 AM
It's not a very smart nor stark comparison. It makes me think of those entitled kids who were asked to stop chewing gum in class by their teachers, and who would call him a fascist.

I dedicate time to fixing the issue, thank you very much. I suspect - given your attitude - that I probably turned more antis into gun owners than you have.

I'll extend the assumptive courtesy you allowed me and thus we avoid a "swordfight" over converting antis and related speculation.

My concern is that the dismissal of relative comparison, while laden with hyperbole, is slighting the significance of the continual "taking of an inch" in terms of our privacy and true freedom as a citizen. You can not control what you do not measure. Consider that - then consider what exactly they hope to control through this measurement.

blazeaglory
10-10-2011, 9:56 AM
So California gun owners now have more hassle, yet the framework of that hassle opens the door for CGF to go in there and bore out all the slime. That takes time, but so do all things of merit.

There is no politician in any position of real power that gives a good goddamn about you, me, your dog, your guns. Herman Cain will not save you. Mitt Romney will not save you. There are no scary turban terrorists stalking the airports or the gymboree, no domestic militias out to blow up the Feds. Government likes to act like it protects you against the enemies it creates, but all it does is erect bastions against liberty, and they need to be resisted.

As it turns out, free men and women are the enemy the Nannystate truly fears, and their mission is to suppress that freedom.


+1000

lrdchivalry
10-10-2011, 9:57 AM
I understand this completly, I just think it is wrong and we shouldnt have to. There are many things that are upsetting, not just 2A, but a lot of things as of late. It is sad that we always have to keep an eye over our shoulder and get ready for the next attack on our liberties. The constitution lays it all out but it is always challeneged by those on either the left or the right. It is a shame that we cant just follow the guidelines that were drawn out for us as a country. James Madison would be crapping himself right now.

That is why our founding fathers had told us to always remain vigilant in defense of our liberties, unfortunately for the most part that has not happened and that is why the .gov has been able to slowly erode the Constitution and our individual liberties.

Kes is right, we need to remain ever vigilant, fight for our liberties and educate the younger generation so that they can continue to fight and maintain their liberties.

SandDiegoDuner
10-10-2011, 9:58 AM
I think you are right. At least, that is what I have read into this.

Here is the section regarding C&R purchases.

SEC. 28. Section 27565 of the Penal Code is amended to read:
27565. (a) This section applies in the following circumstances:
(1) A person is licensed as a collector pursuant to Chapter 44
(commencing with Section 921) of Title 18 of the United States
Code and the regulations issued pursuant thereto.
(2) The licensed premises of that person are within this state.
(3) The licensed collector acquires, outside of this state, a
handgun, and commencing January 1, 2014, any firearm.
(4) The licensed collector takes actual possession of that firearm
outside of this state pursuant to the provisions of subsection (j) of
Section 923 of Title 18 of the United States Code, as amended by
Public Law 104-208, and transports the firearm into this state.
(5) The firearm is a curio or relic, as defined in Section 478.11
of Title 27 of the Code of Federal Regulations.
(b) Within five days of transporting a firearm into this state
under the circumstances described in subdivision (a), the licensed
collector shall report the acquisition of that firearm to the
department in a format prescribed by the department.

It doesn't really spell out completely and I don't have time to track down and read the other sections this applies to.

CycloSteve
10-10-2011, 9:59 AM
In Australia, state government requires their citizens to register their long arms regardless and a 7 day cooling off period.

Should this ever come to our shores I see a number of unfortunate boating accidents happening.

goldrush
10-10-2011, 9:59 AM
So are u and all your dept going to other dept and together going to others etc and fight, say something, write a letter do j brown do something to defeat a unconstitutional law or are you going to enforce it despite the fact " its your job" .

Very good question. We all know the supreme law says the "right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

How can anyone, in good conscience, enforce a law contrary to the highest law?

Kestryll
10-10-2011, 10:00 AM
So it's not ok to oppose people who side or adopt a political party you disagree with, and normally attacks the majority of positions on issues like gun con control.
Opposition and voicing your opinion is fine, in fact it's encouraged.
However it helps to be honest about your position and motivation.

Before you play the indignant card you might want to make yourself aware of the past several years of history.
I don't care that Molon has his views, my comments were in regards to his claim that he was misrepresented.
No one who has been here for any length of time, including Molon, can deny that in all things his primary and overriding motivation is a partisan hatred of anyone who is a Democrat.

I'm about ready to stop donating here.
Do what you gotta do to feel right.

Ima2Avoter
10-10-2011, 10:01 AM
And the battered/bitter gun owners will tell you to give up all hope and leave the state.

Sorry, he's not done yet. Yes, leaving is an option and not sorry for planning on doing it. In the note sent to his cronies, it's obvious he's still gonna do it sometime. Whether it's now or later, it's on his plate. Message link here:

http://gov.ca.gov/docs/SB_427_Veto_Message.pdf

nicki
10-10-2011, 10:03 AM
I will trust the "key people" here in their assessments of what really happened.

This is a "chess game" and I have "confidence" and "faith" in the "right people" here, there is much behind the scenes that won't be posted on this board.

There are differences between "taxes" and "fees". Cali will find out soon enough about "taxing" rights.

If any of you are trully worried about keeping your guns unregistered from the government, then you need to build your own gun. Remember those 4473 forms you fill out.

Those records at the gunshops are better maintained than any government agency.

I will trust Bill Weise's assessment about the Long gun registration not surviving, but just in case, I would suggest building unpapered flats.

AB144 presents some interesting issues, since open carry is now not an option, it just eliminated the UOC weasel tactic of all the CCW lawsuits.

I wouldn't be surprised if Chuck Michel/Don Kilmer already have canned motions on their CCW cases.

IMHO, UOC has become a form of "political expression", kinda like "Flag Burning".

Nicki

sasc40cal
10-10-2011, 10:05 AM
Given the numerous cases going up, the idea of South Africa-style gun control is unlikely to say the least.

Gray no offense but what I take from this is something that Martin Niemöller said.....
First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me.

I am not trying to compare this to the 2A siutation but if we have the attitude that this wont happen is not very settling with me. Look at the U.N. gun bill....

goldrush
10-10-2011, 10:05 AM
Sorry, he's not done yet. In the note sent to his cronies, it's obvious he's still gonna do it sometime. Whether it's now or later, it's on his plate. Message link here:

http://gov.ca.gov/docs/SB_427_Veto_Message.pdf

Very prophetic. He'll sign it as soon as doing so doesn't create a further legal mess. His message was clear.

California gun owners have lost this issue. You already know how he's going to vote. All that's left is waiting for the axe to fall.

SteveH
10-10-2011, 10:06 AM
Yes, he did.

Hopefully gun owners will remember this next time they consider voting for a Democrat.

Caladain
10-10-2011, 10:07 AM
Sorry, he's not done yet. Yes, leaving is an option and not sorry for planning on doing it. In the note sent to his cronies, it's obvious he's still gonna do it sometime. Whether it's now or later, it's on his plate. Message link here:

http://gov.ca.gov/docs/SB_427_Veto_Message.pdf

I don't read it that way. Read his *other vetoes*. He gives off fun remarks like that all the time. The word choice means very little, the meaning behind them of "Stop trying to amend things currently being litigated" has some nice implications.

sasc40cal
10-10-2011, 10:07 AM
I will trust the "key people" here in their assessments of what really happened.

This is a "chess game" and I have "confidence" and "faith" in the "right people" here, there is much behind the scenes that won't be posted on this board.

There are differences between "taxes" and "fees". Cali will find out soon enough about "taxing" rights.

If any of you are trully worried about keeping your guns unregistered from the government, then you need to build your own gun. Remember those 4473 forms you fill out.

Those records at the gunshops are better maintained than any government agency.

I will trust Bill Weise's assessment about the Long gun registration not surviving, but just in case, I would suggest building unpapered flats.

AB144 presents some interesting issues, since open carry is now not an option, it just eliminated the UOC weasel tactic of all the CCW lawsuits.

I wouldn't be surprised if Chuck Michel/Don Kilmer already have canned motions on their CCW cases.

IMHO, UOC has become a form of "political expression", kinda like "Flag Burning".

Nicki

I wonder if Judge England would change his opine on this now that open carry is no longer legal?

Ima2Avoter
10-10-2011, 10:08 AM
I'm recalling all the folks on this board who expounded last year on Brown's second amendment record, trying to tell us he'd be better the 2A than his opponent.

How's that working out for ya now?

^^^^^^^
This! +1000

GutPunch
10-10-2011, 10:09 AM
HA! I knew it. Where are all the troll who kept posting that Moonbeam WAS the only choice for 2A voters? His court briefs mean NOTHING in the light of actually having to deal with your base voters and special interests as a Gov.

That being said, hopefully the NRA ILA has already sent in the Lawyers that they had warming up. In additional, I hope this Open Carry ban gives the guys at CGF that extra ammo for pushing statewide normilization of CCW. I know a lot of them were thinking this could be turned to some what of an advantage. (This coming from a non-open carry guy who has a CCW).

darthnugget
10-10-2011, 10:11 AM
I see no hope for California on multiple levels. Recently we have been forced to have our children indoctrinated with perversion in the public school system, our basic 2A rights are squeezed more and more, and there is nothing that helps in solving our financial situation.

Our family is planning on leaving the state soon. I admire everyone, including CGF, that are staying to fight it out but I see no hope in sight for becoming free in this state. I wish the best for everyone here.

stix213
10-10-2011, 10:16 AM
Jerry Brown can stick that "Amicus Brief" up is ***!!!!!!!!!!

And all those people on this board who kept sticking Jerry Brown's "Amicus Brief" in my face, what do you have to say for yourself now?? Hmmm!!!!!!!!


I say at least we weren't foolish enough to put Meg in office to sign that ammo bill. We dodged a registered bullet on that one.

You are living in a fantasy world if you think she would have vetoed any of the anti bills, so if you're arguing against JB you are arguing for Meg and thus for ammo registration. geez take your partisan blinders off for freaking 5 seconds here.... :facepalm:

Tier One Arms
10-10-2011, 10:16 AM
What really makes me mad is the amount of time and money we are going to have to spend to fight this crap. Not to mention that even after spending all that time and money, we may not get a favorable ruling.

5thgen4runner
10-10-2011, 10:19 AM
HA! I knew it. Where are all the troll who kept posting that Moonbeam WAS the only choice for 2A voters? His court briefs mean NOTHING in the light of actually having to deal with your base voters and special interests as a Gov.

That being said, hopefully the NRA ILA has already sent in the Lawyers that they had warming up. In additional, I hope this Open Carry ban gives the guys at CGF that extra ammo for pushing statewide normilization of CCW. I know a lot of them were thinking this could be turned to some what of an advantage. (This coming from a non-open carry guy who has a CCW).

The thing I don't get is why do I need to have another license to carry my hg concealed its already registered to my name its serial number is with the state. Why all this bs back and forth in the court. If I use it ill get possibly charged the same. I hope this push for ccw is a push for not needing a ltc its my gun my civil right my *** if I don't have one in the time of need. If I use it in a illegal way and drop it there they know who to look for anyways. So imo ltc doesn't mean **** unless I can carry without one. Ltc isrestriction on civil rights

Swatter911
10-10-2011, 10:21 AM
So are u and all your dept going to other dept and together going to others etc and fight, say something, write a letter do j brown do something to defeat a unconstitutional law or are you going to enforce it despite the fact " its your job" .


Will I? Yes and I already have. I will continue to do so in the future.

Will my department? No, they're apolitical. The chiefs of police will follow the direction of their city councils and managers; the sheriffs are elected officials and will follow their own conscience. I don't and won't speak for any of them, ask your own CoP or Sheriff that question.

Will it be enforced? (Checks department issued crystal ball) Probably. Not everyone believes as you do that this is unconstitutional. For the record I believe as you do that it is a violation of the 2A and fortunately for both of us I have great discretion in how I enforce laws.

Wernher von Browning
10-10-2011, 10:23 AM
>> Originally Posted by RazzB7
With the exception of the restriction on Jew-owned weapons, our current California laws are more restrictive than those that existed in Nazi Germany prior to WWII.

Please don't earn Godwin points so easily.

But he's right. Go look it up.

bwiese
10-10-2011, 10:23 AM
Yes, he did.

Hopefully gun owners will remember this next time they consider voting for a Democrat.

Really?

If I voted for the Republican, eMeg, we'd be better off? Hardly. Everything would have gone thru, no 427 veto and no 610.

(And 427 is DEAD, regardless of what the uninformed think.)

Oh - and call me when the Reeps are relevant in CA. They can't even get above 1/3 the legislature and will likely lose that shortly.

It behooved gunnies to support Brown in response to his favorable behavior as AG on the very useful Supreme Ct brief, the downsizing of DOJ to a bureau, cashiering various DOJ employees and/or muzzling them to allow black rifle sales uninterrupted.

Not supporting someone who had helped you is politically stupid: "My car is running so I'm gonna throw gravel in my oil supply."

Remember that much gun control in CA was fostered by CA Reeps in past... key votes that could have blocked didn't happen....
- party mgmt wants the gun vote but won't discipline antigun Rs
- local Reeps are often antigun (ABAG is full of 'pro-biz' antigun Reeps)

This set of votes is far better than Schwarzenneggger's past votes... lead ammo ban, microstamping, etc.

Most of the people complaining about Brown thus are not complaining about the gun vote since his opponent was way worse on guns, and are voicing non gun opinions using gun issues as cover.

Bhobbs
10-10-2011, 10:23 AM
I say at least we weren't foolish enough to put Meg in office to sign that ammo bill. We dodged a registered bullet on that one.

You are living in a fantasy world if you think she would have vetoed any of the anti bills, so if you're arguing against JB you are arguing for Meg and thus for ammo registration. geez take your partisan blinders off for freaking 5 seconds here.... :facepalm:

The fact is you don't know what she would have done. The people here pushing Brown "knew" he wouldn't sign these bills but he did anyways.

bwiese
10-10-2011, 10:24 AM
I say at least we weren't foolish enough to put Meg in office to sign that ammo bill. We dodged a registered bullet on that one.

You are living in a fantasy world if you think she would have vetoed any of the anti bills, so if you're arguing against JB you are arguing for Meg and thus for ammo registration. geez take your partisan blinders off for freaking 5 seconds here.... :facepalm:

Bingo.

5thgen4runner
10-10-2011, 10:24 AM
Will I? Yes and I already have. I will continue to do so in the future.

Will my department? No, they're apolitical. The chiefs of police will follow the direction of their city councils and managers; the sheriffs are elected officials and will follow their own conscience. I don't and won't speak for any of them, ask your own CoP or Sheriff that question.

Will it be enforced? (Checks department issued crystal ball) Probably. Not everyone believes as you do that this is unconstitutional. For the record I believe as you do that it is a violation of the 2A and fortunately for both of us I have great discretion in how I enforce laws.

Then you sir are one awesome leo. Thank you

Uxi
10-10-2011, 10:26 AM
I say at least we weren't foolish enough to put Meg in office to sign that ammo bill. We dodged a registered bullet on that one.

You are living in a fantasy world if you think she would have vetoed any of the anti bills, so if you're arguing against JB you are arguing for Meg and thus for ammo registration. geez take your partisan blinders off for freaking 5 seconds here.... :facepalm:

The argument was that Moonbeam was a better alternative. He only kicked us in the stomach whereas Meg would have also kicked us in the crotch, too. That's hardly a ringing endorsement for Moonbeam. He's now proven he's not on our side.

bwiese
10-10-2011, 10:27 AM
The fact is you don't know what she would have done. The people here pushing Brown "knew" he wouldn't sign these bills but he did anyways.

There's always a risk.

Remember that several bills were LE-driven - and look what the UOCers did to irritate LE.

I'm not particularly irritated by the long gun registration anyway. It's either fixable at Fed level (due to a Heller II holding) or somewhat irrelevant (I can figure out from personal data mining services fairly reliably for under $100 if you own guns.)

Don29palms
10-10-2011, 10:28 AM
I say at least we weren't foolish enough to put Meg in office to sign that ammo bill. We dodged a registered bullet on that one.

You are living in a fantasy world if you think she would have vetoed any of the anti bills, so if you're arguing against JB you are arguing for Meg and thus for ammo registration. geez take your partisan blinders off for freaking 5 seconds here.... :facepalm:

Why do people keep saying that? That was atleast one other choice I know of.

Curley Red
10-10-2011, 10:28 AM
Yes, he did.

Hopefully gun owners will remember this next time they consider voting for a Democrat.

Just remember that it was a republican that first attacked our rights to open carry loaded, but it was a democrat that put in the final nail. So you just can't simply say we need to remember this when thinking of voting for a democrat.

Silverback
10-10-2011, 10:29 AM
+1

Too many people here are missing the bigger picture. These will ultimately turn into major victories for us.


Before I'm dead or after?:facepalm:

Bhobbs
10-10-2011, 10:29 AM
There's always a risk.

Remember that several bills were LE-driven - and look what the UOCers did to irritate LE.

I'm not particularly irritated by the long gun registration anyway. It's either fixable at Fed level (due to a Heller II holding) or somewhat irrelevant (I can figure out from personal data mining services fairly reliably for under $100 if you own guns.)

I get that there was a risk but Brown was pushed as not being a risk. And there are still people saying he is better than Meg.

GutPunch
10-10-2011, 10:30 AM
The fact is you don't know what she would have done. The people here pushing Brown "knew" he wouldn't sign these bills but he did anyways.

This. How can you claim that you know what Meg would have done? Yes she instituted a set of rules for her companies which were tied to risk management. Nobody is denying that. But that is a far cry from terminal performance and interpretation of individual rights as a Gov. Its no different that McDonnalds not selling hotdogs... they didn't want it in the wheelhouse. Ok that their choice (and potential loss of business :)).

berto
10-10-2011, 10:30 AM
Brown beat Whitman by 1,300,000+ votes. Point fingers and play "I told you so" if it makes you feel better (does it really?) but realize that those of us who guessed/hoped wrong on JB didn't swing the election. Go ahead and blame me if it makes you happy, as a white male I'm used to being the fall guy for everything. Let's move forward in our fight.

gbp
10-10-2011, 10:31 AM
well at least he made kamala happy

""Attorney General Kamala D. Harris Applauds Governor's Signature on Bill to Take More Prohibited Firearms off the Streets.........""

Balance can be read here http://oag.ca.gov/news/press_release?id=2570

Bhobbs
10-10-2011, 10:34 AM
well at least he made kamala happy

""Attorney General Kamala D. Harris Applauds Governor's Signature on Bill to Take More Prohibited Firearms off the Streets.........""

Balance can be read here http://oag.ca.gov/news/press_release?id=2570

I am sick morons in control. :facepalm:

Mssr. Eleganté
10-10-2011, 10:35 AM
...But I'm confused though - you're saying that +50 years old rule wouldn't apply to FFL03 holders anymore? Maybe in the eyes of the CA DOJ it wouldn't, but certainly in the eyes of the ATF it would.

I'm more confused than ever.

California's 50+ year old requirement is completely unrelated to the Feds 50+ year old rule for C&R firearms.

Currently, California law says that in order to be exempt from California's dealer transfer requirements a long gun must be C&R under Federal law and over 50 years old. Any California residents can use this exemption. AB 809 gets rid of the 50+ year old restriction, but adds the restriction that you now have to be a C&R FFL with a COE to be eligible for such transfers in California.

Federal law says that firearm over 50 years old are C&R. Nothing is changing about the definition of C&R firearms.

SteveH
10-10-2011, 10:40 AM
The argument was that Moonbeam was a better alternative. He only kicked us in the stomach whereas Meg would have also kicked us in the crotch, too. That's hardly a ringing endorsement for Moonbeam. He's now proven he's not on our side.

Brown's supporters don't think that way. They think its okay to sign antigun bills into law as long as its the guy they supported doing it.

They wont admitt that meg and jerry were both bad for gun owners.

SteveH
10-10-2011, 10:44 AM
Before I'm dead or after?:facepalm:

Gene has said shall issue CCW withen 36 months. I don't really care about that as one can simply move across the county line and get a CCW permit today.

I want the AW bans overturned. Though i doubt it will happen before I leave the state in 10-years.

Fortunately even though California gets worse for gun rights every year, the majority of other states have been getting better.

frankm
10-10-2011, 10:49 AM
This thread has become anti-revolutionary, comrades.

Ima2Avoter
10-10-2011, 10:49 AM
I don't read it that way. Read his *other vetoes*. He gives off fun remarks like that all the time. The word choice means very little, the meaning behind them of "Stop trying to amend things currently being litigated" has some nice implications.

All due respect, sir, I respectfully disagree with your perspective. It was similar to the old quote used in the Revolutionary War "Don't shoot 'till you see the whites of their eyes". It was a statement to preface legislation that is waiting in the wings, once the litigation is finished/decided. It's a sad state of affairs that this state and it's politicians refuse to abide by the Constitution. Once it is realized this document isn't "living" and ever-changing, that our rights aren't given by man and thusly not able to be abdicated or abolished by people, we'll be better off. Thank you all for allowing me to add to this discussion.

J.S.Riesch
10-10-2011, 10:49 AM
While no new gun law is great, i must admit there are some caveats to these new laws.

registration: not till 2014, and federally questionable. Probably won't happen

Dros: There has been no increase for fees, it also opens up DOJ to extensive, expensive audits, an eventual costly expansion of the system that they can't pay for and all based on a tax that will be considered unconstitutional federally as it is applied to a civil right.

UOC: this form of carry according to SCOTUS has never been constitutionally protected. Any and all references to the carry of firearms have been "functional" or as we commonly call "loaded"

Richards was granted an extension for this very reason. Yolo argued that UOC was the reason not to make YOLO a shall issue county. They are arguing that UOC is a viable option to shall issue LTC. HOW IS THAT WORKING FOR THEM NOW?

The ammo bill is a huge win! It was the one bill that would have taken our rights and ability to shoot our firearms. True micro managed registration of what you are doing on a day to day basis in regards to firearms use.

610 helps clarify to the sheriffs what the actual law is in regards to LTC apps and mainstreams their wild opinions of the law.

THIS...

Just Dave
10-10-2011, 10:55 AM
The truth is, we were going to get screwed no matter who got elected last time.

We don't know that.
When you take a look at all of the states in the union the ones with the most restrictive gun laws share a "common thread".

When people sign on to this "common thread's" agenda we get what is expected.

I am not surprised at all that Jerry Brown pulled this.

The next stop will be the courts.

jbburrows
10-10-2011, 10:56 AM
Really?

If I voted for the Republican, eMeg, we'd be better off? Hardly. Everything would have gone thru, no 427 veto and no 610.

(And 427 is DEAD, regardless of what the uninformed think.)

Oh - and call me when the Reeps are relevant in CA. They can't even get above 1/3 the legislature and will likely lose that shortly.

It behooved gunnies to support Brown in response to his favorable behavior as AG on the very useful Supreme Ct brief, the downsizing of DOJ to a bureau, cashiering various DOJ employees and/or muzzling them to allow black rifle sales uninterrupted.


Not supporting someone who had helped you is politically stupid: "My car is running so I'm gonna throw gravel in my oil supply."

Remember that much gun control in CA was fostered by CA Reeps in past... key votes that could have blocked didn't happen....
- party mgmt wants the gun vote but won't discipline antigun Rs
- local Reeps are often antigun (ABAG is full of 'pro-biz' antigun Reeps)

This set of votes is far better than Schwarzenneggger's past votes... lead ammo ban, microstamping, etc.

Most of the people complaining about Brown thus are not complaining about the gun vote since his opponent was way worse on guns, and are voicing non gun opinions using gun issues as cover.

Copy that. Brown may have been the more rational choice on gun issues, but isn't it pathetic that CA voters only had a choice between bad and worse? What happened to this state? When I was first assigned here 20+ years ago, CA was a decent place to live. Now, normalcy is being driven into small enclaves as the fringe Left claims their prize.

gbp
10-10-2011, 10:56 AM
as far as the elections are concerned there is not much point in talking about it nor arguing about it now. everyone on this board has a free mind and will to vote as they feel right. to blame someone else for your vote is beyond ridiculous. it's done.

until the republican party in this state puts up someone other than a rino candidate to run for gov. this will continue. i am sure that i am not the only one totally disgusted with the republican party here and their choices for office hire than senate

Ima2Avoter
10-10-2011, 11:00 AM
California's 50+ year old requirement is completely unrelated to the Feds 50+ year old rule for C&R firearms.

Currently, California law says that in order to be exempt from California's dealer transfer requirements a long gun must be C&R under Federal law and over 50 years old. Any California residents can use this exemption. AB 809 gets rid of the 50+ year old restriction, but adds the restriction that you now have to be a C&R FFL with a COE to be eligible for such transfers in California.

Federal law says that firearm over 50 years old are C&R. Nothing is changing about the definition of C&R firearms.
So, now I must get the COE on top of the C&R FFL3 I had to get to buy older firearms :eek: ? And there's more fees on top of that process :( ? I, too, am unfortunately confused with this now.:confused: :facepalm:

radioburning
10-10-2011, 11:00 AM
I get that there was a risk but Brown was pushed as not being a risk. And there are still people saying he is better than Meg.

The way I remember it...
Whitman was definitely known as being anti-gun, Brown was known as being 50/50.
These were the two electable choices we were handed.
I'd take 50/50 odds over 100% chance of fail odds any day.

Besides...what berto said:
Brown beat Whitman by 1,300,000+ votes. Point fingers and play "I told you so" if it makes you feel better (does it really?) but realize that those of us who guessed/hoped wrong on JB didn't swing the election. Go ahead and blame me if it makes you happy, as a white male I'm used to being the fall guy for everything. Let's move forward in our fight.

From the NRA this morning...
When the Governor signed Senate Bill 610, he presented NRA's lobbyist with a copy of the signed bill. Clearly, Governor Brown appreciates NRA-ILA California State Liaison Ed Worley.
https://mail.google.com/mail/?ui=2&ik=bd83183d37&view=att&th=132ecb644738adc5&attid=0.2&disp=emb&zw

Just Dave
10-10-2011, 11:01 AM
as far as the elections are concerned there is not much point in talking about it nor arguing about it now. everyone on this board has a free mind and will to vote as they feel right. to blame someone else for your vote is beyond ridiculous. it's done.

until the republican party in this state puts up someone other than a rino candidate to run for gov. this will continue. i am sure that i am not the only one totally disgusted with the republican party here and their choices for office hire than senate

The problem is that CA is a blue state; lock, stock and barrel. If we were to run a conservative, libertarian or a constitutionalist (if there is such a thing) they would lose.

blazeaglory
10-10-2011, 11:03 AM
Copy that. Brown may have been the more rational choice on gun issues, but isn't it pathetic that CA voters only had a choice between bad and worse? What happened to this state? When I was first assigned here 20+ years ago, CA was a decent place to live. Now, normalcy is being driven into small enclaves as the fringe Left claims their prize.

Yes I agree. It makes me want to cry.

It doesnt matter who we vote for because in the long run this is a left state and it is getting further left by the day. Complaining who would have done worse is irrelevant at this point. What matters now is the good fight that CGF is fighting and we all need to come together for the benefit of 2A.

Left or Right. We must fight the good fight!

radioburning
10-10-2011, 11:03 AM
We don't know that.
When you take a look at all of the states in the union the ones with the most restrictive gun laws share a "common thread".


What's the "common thread", politicians like Arnie?:D

kwansao
10-10-2011, 11:06 AM
This is truly a dark day for California.

Just Dave
10-10-2011, 11:07 AM
What's the "common thread", politicians like Arnie?:D

Maybe!
How was Arrrnnnnod's record with the 2A?

Bhobbs
10-10-2011, 11:08 AM
The way I remember it...
Whitman was definitely known as being anti-gun, Brown was known as being 50/50.
These were the two electable choices we were handed.
I'd take 50/50 odds over 100% chance of fail odds any

She was an anti to the people that pushed Brown.

radioburning
10-10-2011, 11:13 AM
Face it, we're never gonna win/protect our civil gun rights in the politics arena of CA. It's all gonna have be in the courts. Be glad it wasn't as bad as it could have been, be thankful for the hard work and consequent successes of the CGF, and donate some money so we can win these battles on the only front we really can.

Or, if you still want to keep whining about it, go "occupy" Sacramento...

Bhobbs
10-10-2011, 11:15 AM
Face it, we're never gonna win/protect our civil gun rights in the politics arena of CA. It's all gonna have be in the courts. Be glad it wasn't as bad as it could have been, be thankful for the hard work and consequent successes of the CGF, and donate some money so we can win these battles on the only front we really can.

Or, if you still want to keep whining about it, go "occupy" Sacramento...

The only real positive was 610 being passed. His 427 veto message seemed to me to imply that he wants the current litigation to work out before he will sign and ammo ban.

radioburning
10-10-2011, 11:19 AM
She was an anti to the people that pushed Brown.

http://articles.sfgate.com/2009-02-13/bay-area/17190174_1_sen-john-mccain-abortion-rights-budget-gap
Whitman said she...believes tough gun laws like assault weapon bans and handgun control are appropriate for California.
While Meg was head of E Bay, it donated money to Gun Control causes.

GutPunch
10-10-2011, 11:24 AM
Face it, we're never gonna win/protect our civil gun rights in the politics arena of CA. It's all gonna have be in the courts. Be glad it wasn't as bad as it could have been, be thankful for the hard work and consequent successes of the CGF, and donate some money so we can win these battles on the only front we really can.

Or, if you still want to keep whining about it, go "occupy" Sacramento...

That part about having to take it to the courts is quite right. But remember not everyone is a 1 issue voter. For those of us who have 2A on a list of other things, Brown was already bad cause he was (is!) going to hit me for being a 1) working, productive member of society and 2) homeowner. So not only did I get screwed on 2A (which I always expect to occur) but he is going to hit my finances as well.

radioburning
10-10-2011, 11:26 AM
Maybe!
How was Arrrnnnnod's record with the 2A?

Not good...

Quser.619
10-10-2011, 11:28 AM
Well, I voted against Brown because of his fiscal policies & did not believe he was truly pro-2A. Neither candidate seemed real pro2A, so I didn't use that as a metric & argued against those who supported Brown. Both fiscally & 2A-wise, he has proven himself to be what I believed - though in some respects he has been more fiscally sound than I imagined.

I hold no animosity against those who said Brown was pro-2A, I still support the commonality of our goal here. I do see the set backs & possible advantages that are now available to us.

Who here didn't really think that gaining back our rights wouldn't be the fight of lives, both in time & scope?

I'm not quitting, I'm not turning away from those who hold different political views. I'm not assigning blame to my fellow CalGunners

While we may gain our rights back through the courts - however long that may take - it will be the historically disastrous fiscal policies that will be the undoing of the majority of the anti-gunner side... some Republican, almost all Democrat. That is when I foresee a Legislature that will be truly Civil Rights Minded, not nanny-state motivated. That is when I will place my faith for 2A rights into politician's hands.

For now, my faith is with you, YOU ALL, & our allies throughout the country fighting the same fight same & sharing the same successes & failures.

radioburning
10-10-2011, 11:29 AM
That part about having to take it to the courts is quite right. But remember not everyone is a 1 issue voter. For those of us who have 2A on a list of other things, Brown was already bad cause he was (is!) going to hit me for being a 1) working, productive member of society and 2) a homeowner.

Do you think Meg the RINO would have been better for you on those other issues?

For the record, there wasn't a candidate that I really liked. Just the lesser of two evils.

jetspeedz
10-10-2011, 11:31 AM
Politicians are politicians, no matter what side they run with they are concerned about getting elected, everything after that is fair game depending on where the pressure comes from and how corrupt they are.

bwiese
10-10-2011, 11:32 AM
The problem is that CA is a blue state; lock, stock and barrel. If we were to run a conservative, libertarian or a constitutionalist (if there is such a thing) they would lose.

California is in part a small-L personal libertarian state.

Once the CA Reep party recognizes that and focuses on gov't efficiency and business instead of demonizing folks' lifestyles in relation to "family values" and 'pro life" issues, then they start winning seats again.

Once legislative seats are won, a bench can be built so that someone can rise to Gov's office. Right now, there is no bench (how can there be when there's ~1/3 seats held and no statewide offices held?) for CA Reeps.

Most of CA Reep irrelevance today has been due to self-immolation more than a huge change in swing voter base. The CA Reep internal politics and money flow demands that the candidates become 'more conservative' (by their definition) when that is really the PROBLEM, not the solution.

negolien
10-10-2011, 11:36 AM
Enjoy your carry license and your loaded handgun in public? :chris:

Yes, after you wait 1 year to turn in your paper work ROFL your a sucker and half you probably work for the guys keeping us down to begin with.

NEp8ntballer
10-10-2011, 11:39 AM
I love living a couple hours away from Reno... Where you can buy long guns without any BS. And also having residency in a different state. I can't wait to move in a couple years.

Caladain
10-10-2011, 11:40 AM
Yes, after you wait 1 year to turn in your paper work ROFL your a sucker and half you probably work for the guys keeping us down to begin with.

Unlike you, i'm at least trying to help this fight. When was the last time you donated to CGF? NRA?

Took new *never touched a gun or seen one upclose before* shooters and converted them? I'm up to 12 this year alone. I'm running out of folks in my life (personal and work) who don't own a gun.

War is never pretty. It never goes smooth. These help us more than hurt us, and we'll slam them in court even more.

gobler
10-10-2011, 11:41 AM
So, with what was just signed, what are the chances of state wide shall issue (including LA County) by April 2012?

CrazyCobraManTim
10-10-2011, 11:42 AM
I see no hope for California on multiple levels. Recently we have been forced to have our children indoctrinated with perversion in the public school system, our basic 2A rights are squeezed more and more, and there is nothing that helps in solving our financial situation.

Our family is planning on leaving the state soon. I admire everyone, including CGF, that are staying to fight it out but I see no hope in sight for becoming free in this state. I wish the best for everyone here.

God willing - I'm not far behind you.....

Caladain
10-10-2011, 11:44 AM
So, with what was just signed, what are the chances of state wide shall issue (including LA County) by April 2012?

The number 36, the word months, and the name gene was floating around on one of these out-of-control threads.

No plan survives contact with the enemy of course, but with SCOTUS looking at picking up a 2A case this term, things could get very interesting.

Even if SCOTUS gave us Pure 2A tomorrow, we'd still have people here moaning and complaining..Battered/Bitter gun owner syndrome.

cmaynes
10-10-2011, 11:46 AM
Yes, he did.

Hopefully gun owners will remember this next time they consider voting for a Democrat.

and how many here voted for Arnold.... did that work out for you?

kcbrown
10-10-2011, 11:46 AM
True enough, but it also means that we may kill the DROS fees entirely. Do remember that you don't get to tax a fundamental right. Since purchasing a firearm is certainly core to the RKBA this law is almost certainly a loser in court.


I think the fight on that may be harder than you think.

Fundamental rights can be taxed as long as the tax isn't solely targeted at the right in question. Don't believe me? Try buying a printing press locally without paying sales tax.

However, DROS fees explicitly target firearms, and that makes them much more vulnerable than they would be otherwise.

rogervzv
10-10-2011, 11:48 AM
All the geniuses who provocatively practiced UOC at the shopping malls, thereby upsetting all the little mommies, just to show that they legally could sure helped our cause, didn't they?

Leftists can pass ten anti-gun laws for every one that we can get overturned, after years of efforts, in the courts. The only real solution is to not elect Democrats. But this State is determined to elect Democrats right up to the time California falls off the fiscal cliff.

OleCuss
10-10-2011, 11:49 AM
California is in part a small-L personal libertarian state.

Once the CA Reep party recognizes that and focuses on gov't efficiency and business instead of demonizing folks' lifestyles in relation to "family values" and 'pro life" issues, then they start winning seats again.

Once legislative seats are won, a bench can be built so that someone can rise to Gov's office. Right now, there is no bench (how can there be when there's ~1/3 seats held and no statewide offices held?) for CA Reeps.

Most of CA Reep irrelevance today has been due to self-immolation more than a huge change in swing voter base. The CA Reep internal politics and money flow demands that the candidates become 'more conservative' (by their definition) when that is really the PROBLEM, not the solution.

Some of your best!

I don't fully agree with you in that I think that a large part of the Republican problem has been that they have tried to put forth candidates who look as much like Democrats as they can - and then there isn't much reason to vote for the Republican. After all, who wants a warmed over Democrat when they can have the real thing? The conservatives have been isolated and mostly not supported by the party.

But I fully agree with your analysis of where the California voter is. If the Republicans would get behind a ticket of small government and not interfering in people's lives they could build a dynamic and young political base which could make them at least relevant in California politics for decades.

As it is I think there is a small chance that revulsion for where the state is going could cause some major surprises in 2012, but I don't think the Republican party is ready to exploit the opportunity.

dixieD
10-10-2011, 11:55 AM
It's my understanding that it's new purchases.....for now at least.

Sorry for the thread jack, but your signature is great. Do you sell stickers?

sasc40cal
10-10-2011, 11:57 AM
All the geniuses who provocatively practiced UOC at the shopping malls, thereby upsetting all the little mommies, just to show that they legally could sure helped our cause, didn't they?

Leftists can pass ten anti-gun laws for every one that we can get overturned, after years of efforts, in the courts. The only real solution is to not elect Democrats. But this State is determined to elect Democrats right up to the time California falls off the fiscal cliff.

Wouldnt it be nice to split the state in 2. We could draw the line at SF .

OleCuss
10-10-2011, 11:58 AM
I think the fight on that may be harder than you think.

Fundamental rights can be taxed as long as the tax isn't solely targeted at the right in question. Don't believe me? Try buying a printing press locally without paying sales tax.

However, DROS fees explicitly target firearms, and that makes them much more vulnerable than they would be otherwise.

I don't think we have a major disagreement on this.

Since in this case the tax appears to be meant as a revenue stream for the State rather than as simply a fee system which allows for necessary processing of firearms ownership related papers and such, I do think that this one is nearly a slam-dunk loser for the State.

What is not as clear is whether they will be able to re-institute a DROS fee. The state has shot itself in the foot somewhat but that doesn't necessarily mean that they won't be able to end up with some sort of DROS fee. But I'd bet that the court would put significant restrictions on the amount of the fee and on the use of the fee so that the fee is not simply a tax by another name.

It also may cause problems for California that certain monies associated with Obamacare have been billed as fees or taxes depending on whether they were talking to the Congress/constituents as opposed to when they talked to the court.

Anyway, I consider it possible that a court will kill the DROS tax and tell them that they can't go back to their previous DROS fee system - and we could end up using the NICS system in a manner much more similar to that of other states.

But IANAL. . .

sasc40cal
10-10-2011, 12:00 PM
Some of your best!

I don't fully agree with you in that I think that a large part of the Republican problem has been that they have tried to put forth candidates who look as much like Democrats as they can - and then there isn't much reason to vote for the Republican. After all, who wants a warmed over Democrat when they can have the real thing? The conservatives have been isolated and mostly not supported by the party.

But I fully agree with your analysis of where the California voter is. If the Republicans would get behind a ticket of small government and not interfering in people's lives they could build a dynamic and young political base which could make them at least relevant in California politics for decades.

As it is I think there is a small chance that revulsion for where the state is going could cause some major surprises in 2012, but I don't think the Republican party is ready to exploit the opportunity.


There would be a better chance at this if the borders were closed. They love to have an open border it helps then with a strong voter base.If you work pay taxes and abide by the law then there is no place for you in Kalifornia. If break the law (come here illegally) then you will be benefited as long as you keep voting for the guy that gives you the handouts.

cmaynes
10-10-2011, 12:06 PM
the Civil Rights angle is key- people can be shamed via it- Public Safety is an easy one for the anti's- because there is a lot of intangibles in it. However throwing down the race card really is tough to dismiss.

the examples of DC, NYC and Chicago are great ones for the argument against gun control. we need to focus on pointing out the failures of our enemies (word chosen carefully) more than the importance of our right to bear arms. the right to bear arms has to be seen as something as natural as free speech. If we go about forcing it, people will feel threatened and wonder why its so important when they have gotten along without it all these years- a much better path is educating them as to its value- even when it might not be needed. And you don't need to be open carrying to do that- discretion is sometimes more helpful there.

bulgron
10-10-2011, 12:10 PM
I don't have the time or the patience to read through this entire thread.

Jerry Brown is the ultimate politician.

He has effectively handed us shall-issue LTC, opened the DROS tax to a major challenge in federal court, and he signed a registration bill that's probably unconstitutional. And yet the anti's cry success and some gunnies cry failure.

I am amused.

By the way, the DROS tax now takes a super-majority to raise, for as long as it exists, which hopefully won't be very long at all. I am really amused.

OleCuss
10-10-2011, 12:12 PM
I'd like to see CRPA or similar get the funding to put up billboards that would read something like this:

Gang-bangers carry firearms!
Why can't you?
Support CRPA.



Or maybe: Mexican drug cartels are armed and dangerous in your neighborhood.
Why can't you have a pistol to defend yourself?
Support CRPA!

I dunno if they would actually be beneficial though. . . I don't spend time with focus groups.

cmaynes
10-10-2011, 12:13 PM
As to the blame of the legislature- you wave a million dollars in front of any of those folks and you will have someone willing to get an "A grade" from the NRA- its about money and power.... the issues are not important to them.

and wtf does a 12 year now have consent power for vaccines?

taperxz
10-10-2011, 12:13 PM
I think the fight on that may be harder than you think.

Fundamental rights can be taxed as long as the tax isn't solely targeted at the right in question. Don't believe me? Try buying a printing press locally without paying sales tax.

However, DROS fees explicitly target firearms, and that makes them much more vulnerable than they would be otherwise.

While this may be true for an individual, that same purchase can be a write off for one doing charitable work, or a business, in the end no tax was then paid.

Just Dave
10-10-2011, 12:13 PM
California is in part a small-L personal libertarian state.

Once the CA Reep party recognizes that and focuses on gov't efficiency and business instead of demonizing folks' lifestyles in relation to "family values" and 'pro life" issues, then they start winning seats again.

Once legislative seats are won, a bench can be built so that someone can rise to Gov's office. Right now, there is no bench (how can there be when there's ~1/3 seats held and no statewide offices held?) for CA Reeps.

Most of CA Reep irrelevance today has been due to self-immolation more than a huge change in swing voter base. The CA Reep internal politics and money flow demands that the candidates become 'more conservative' (by their definition) when that is really the PROBLEM, not the solution.

I know 3 people who did not vote at all because Whitman and Brown shared the same "values" on certain issues that you've mentioned.

Their personal beliefs and convictions kept them out of the voting booth.

bwiese
10-10-2011, 12:14 PM
I think the fight on that may be harder than you think.

Fundamental rights can be taxed as long as the tax isn't solely targeted at the right in question. Don't believe me? Try buying a printing press locally without paying sales tax.

However, DROS fees explicitly target firearms, and that makes them much more vulnerable than they would be otherwise.

DROS fees if they stay at a "trivial" level (a la driver's license or less and reflect basic paperwork costs) will be hard to challenge.

bwiese
10-10-2011, 12:16 PM
I know 3 people who did not vote at all because Whitman and Brown shared the same "values" on certain issues that you've mentioned.

Their personal beliefs and convictions kept them out of the voting booth.

This could actually help us over time. If they stay out over multiple cycles, the party doesn't have to appeal to them and the opposition can't fight them on the issue and it dies out.

SteveH
10-10-2011, 12:21 PM
and how many here voted for Arnold.... did that work out for you?

I voted for McClintock. Not Arnould Kennedy Shiver. Arnould, like Davis and Brown was anti-gun.

The lesson from this is do not support antigun candidates. Period. If two antigun candidates are filling the Republicant and Democrap slots then vote third party or not at all for that office.

Just Dave
10-10-2011, 12:24 PM
In contrast look at what Wisconsin did this past year.

http://hotair.com/archives/2011/06/23/wisconsin-residents-finally-regain-their-second-amendment-rights/

BigDogatPlay
10-10-2011, 12:26 PM
As a lifelong Goldwater conservative Republican, and from having studied how things are in Sacramento for the last 40 years.......

California is in part a small-L personal libertarian state.

Yes.... California is decidedly blue in the urban areas and decidedly red in the more rural areas. What both sides of that population agree on, however, is that individual liberties are at the core. Most Californians, in my lifetime of living here, don't give a hoot about how anyone else lives their life... they want to be left alone to live theirs the way they see fit. That is the ethos of the West, it's built into the DNA of much of our native population here.

The political ruling class in California, however, is far more polarized and the differences with how each of us chooses to live become wedge issues that drive the political discourse (in the Legislature and in the media) and policy directions. Pandering to the various small groups and building larger coalitions of those groups is what Democrats in California have excelled at over the past three decades plus, and is what Republicans in California have abjectly failed at.

Once the CA Reep party recognizes that and focuses on gov't efficiency and business instead of demonizing folks' lifestyles in relation to "family values" and 'pro life" issues, then they start winning seats again.

The opportunity is there for the taking.... the decades of progressively more leftist control in Sacramento have built a political and economic house of cards waiting to be toppled. Yet the Republicans continue to bungle it away by doing exactly what Bill suggests they shouldn't do. Amazing, isn't it?

Once legislative seats are won, a bench can be built so that someone can rise to Gov's office. Right now, there is no bench (how can there be when there's ~1/3 seats held and no statewide offices held?) for CA Reeps.

This is more prescient than an average observer might think. California, historically, loves to elect Republicans as governor. In fact there were but four Democrats elected Governor in the 20th century.... two of them named Brown. Until the Republicans in California become more pragmatic about social issues that they cannot change, and more focused on economic and regulatory issues pushed by statist Democrats that have pushed the state to the brink, the Republicans are never going to win more than the safe number of seats they've been allotted, and they won't win statewide offices in any significant number.

Most of CA Reep irrelevance today has been due to self-immolation more than a huge change in swing voter base. The CA Reep internal politics and money flow demands that the candidates become 'more conservative' (by their definition) when that is really the PROBLEM, not the solution.

Again, spot on analysis. The ability of the California Republican party to light it's own head on fire can not be ignored. The party leadership over the past twenty years has been utterly incapable of developing and energizing more than a small handful of truly attractive candidates. Those few are more often than not ground up in the legislature, and wind up running for Congress or get out of the game entirely rather than risk the humiliation of being pummeled in a run for statewide officer by a Democrat machine fueled by a cooperative and willing media.

The Democrats are, any more, little better. Jerry Brown.... governor... really? There was no one in the wings they could find that didn't have other issues? Arnold Schwarzenegger poisoned the well for Republicans for at least a couple of cycles, maybe more. He left office so unpopular that a dead man could have run against Meg Whitman and won.

California politics... they really are that strange.

Just Dave
10-10-2011, 12:30 PM
This could actually help us over time. If they stay out over multiple cycles, the party doesn't have to appeal to them and the opposition can't fight them on the issue and it dies out.

The "party" isn't winning, California is a peoples republic...I'm afraid it is only going to get worse.

People who abstain from voting because they want a clean conscience along with people who've given up and moved out of the state guarantee that the trashing of our rights will continue.

vonderplatz
10-10-2011, 12:31 PM
Really?

If I voted for the Republican, eMeg, we'd be better off? Hardly. Everything would have gone thru, no 427 veto and no 610.

(And 427 is DEAD, regardless of what the uninformed think.)

Oh - and call me when the Reeps are relevant in CA. They can't even get above 1/3 the legislature and will likely lose that shortly.

It behooved gunnies to support Brown in response to his favorable behavior as AG on the very useful Supreme Ct brief, the downsizing of DOJ to a bureau, cashiering various DOJ employees and/or muzzling them to allow black rifle sales uninterrupted.

Not supporting someone who had helped you is politically stupid: "My car is running so I'm gonna throw gravel in my oil supply."

Remember that much gun control in CA was fostered by CA Reeps in past... key votes that could have blocked didn't happen....
- party mgmt wants the gun vote but won't discipline antigun Rs
- local Reeps are often antigun (ABAG is full of 'pro-biz' antigun Reeps)

This set of votes is far better than Schwarzenneggger's past votes... lead ammo ban, microstamping, etc.

Most of the people complaining about Brown thus are not complaining about the gun vote since his opponent was way worse on guns, and are voicing non gun opinions using gun issues as cover.

This is a straw man argument. Meg is not Governor, and therefore cannot veto or sign any bill, so when you say she would have signed all of them, that is a straw man argument because she didn't. What should we say "Thank God for Jerry Brown, at least he's not Meg"?

I did not vote for Meg, and she would have been a horrible Governor, but Meg had nothing to do with signing those bills into law. The Honorable Jerry Brown signed them into law, and our Democrat Legislators were primarily responsible for getting them to the Governors desk. As a group they are not friends of the 2A. What more do they need to do to prove it?

I am not saying the Republicans would have done better because I don't know, but neither do you. Blame the people who did this, and hold them accountable next election cycle.

SoCalCitizen
10-10-2011, 12:50 PM
Wide spread LTC in 2 weeks!

newbee1111
10-10-2011, 12:50 PM
Since the DROS is now basically a tax, was it passed by a 2/3 majority? Can the state legally take money money collected for a fee and then use it more general purposes?

I don't think you need the 2nd amendment to get the DROS clobbered in court now, all you need is prop-13.

Shellshocker66
10-10-2011, 12:52 PM
Well Brown or NutMeg, who knows what would of happened. It could of been worse, doubt it would of been better.

I'm ok with what we were dealt. I'm in that county that argues UOC is an acceptable replacement for LTC. So there goes their argument! I also now have a standard application, although according to the Yolo county website today I still need to have 3 references (which I don't think is part of the standard application, correct me if I'm wrong). So while I still don't fit the definition of good cause in my county it is improving and now they can't require me to take training prior to submitting my application (which saves money, for something that is going to be denied).

I'm doing the happy dance over the veto on the ammo bill! That one would of really hurt.

Long gun registration, well we have 2 years to fight it. Although I think many dealers (especially C&R) will decide to stop selling to CA because no one is reading the fine print that its 2014 before it goes into law! Sorry this one is probably my fault I just sent off for my 03 and bad luck follows me.

DROS fees we have to pay them no matter what, but I think Brown shot himself in the foot with the terminology on that one. Hopefully it leads to a reduced fee in the future.

Ifticar
10-10-2011, 12:52 PM
A big thanks to all of you who insisted on making a big show of your "right" to openly carry. You wanted attention. You got attention. Your attention grabbing militancy spoiled it for the rest of us.

BigDogatPlay
10-10-2011, 12:55 PM
The whole "is it a fee or a tax?" thing as relates to Prop 13 is, IMO, very much at the core of the question. Along with the obvious fee required to exercise an enumerated individual right. While cities can charge for and grant permits to assemble peaceably, a 1A right, those assemblies are of impact to a larger community and require community resources to police, clean up after, etc. etc..

I equate the DROS 'tax' to a poll tax.... something that is long dead constitutionally. On that basis I think it can be attacked, particularly now that the state is seeing fit to use it as a revenue stream to fund things other than what it was originally intended to fund.

IrishPirate
10-10-2011, 12:58 PM
Chess, not checkers.
UOC ban plays directly into Richards (IIRC) which said UOC negated the need for shall-issue LTCs.
Registerd rifles/shotguns will face Heller II
And you can't tax a fundamental right, you can only assess reasonable fees to negate the secondary effects (paying police to stop traffic and the street sweeper to pick up the garbage of your parade, etc).

This is why i'm not too worried. The anti's think they have some small victories but really, i think we they just moved their queen to take our pawn, and now their king is left undefended. (ie. this gives us direct cause to go to SCOTUS and get alot of stuff overturned FOR GOOD!!)

For people who don't like guns, they sure do shoot themselves in the foot alot!!!

KeithNH
10-10-2011, 12:59 PM
Our family is planning on leaving the state soon. I admire everyone, including CGF, that are staying to fight it out but I see no hope in sight for becoming free in this state. I wish the best for everyone here.

Have you heard of the Free State Project? Liberty activists from all over the US are moving to New Hampshire which is currently the freest state. In fact, just this year a couple good weapons / self-defense laws passed.

Oceanbob
10-10-2011, 1:12 PM
well at least he made kamala happy

""Attorney General Kamala D. Harris Applauds Governor's Signature on Bill to Take More Prohibited Firearms off the Streets.........""

Balance can be read here http://oag.ca.gov/news/press_release?id=2570

I guess with all that DROS money they can hire more agents and start kicking down doors.........:mad:

Quote:

The Bureau of Firearms has identified more than 18,000 Californians who illegally possess tens of thousands of firearms. Every day, 15 to 20 names are added to the list of prohibited persons who own firearms. SB 819 allows the Department of Justice to use a surplus from the Dealer's Record of Sale account to enforce APPS.

END quote.

Expect some problems folks.......

Be well,
Bob

Caladain
10-10-2011, 1:16 PM
Have you heard of the Free State Project? Liberty activists from all over the US are moving to New Hampshire which is currently the freest state. In fact, just this year a couple good weapons / self-defense laws passed.

As a work transplant from Cali to NH, i can't wait to get back to Cali or MD or someplace more restrictive..

Not because the laws or better, or anything of that nature, but because i want to be back on the front lines instead of behind them.

I really do wish there was a CGF for the east coast...maybe there is an i just haven't found it.

EGL
10-10-2011, 1:18 PM
Also, whether you like Jerry or not, its fair to say that him signing these bills is not favorable. Whether Meg would do any different is up for debate. Remember Arny screwed us REALLLY badly with his bill passages, so an "R" in the front of their name really means nothing in CA.

And Personally, I think it is incredibly unfair to be blaming CalGuns for any of this. Stop acting like children people. They do what they can with the limited resources they have, and in a state that is incredibly hostile to gun rights. I'd say they are doing a darn fine job working with what they've got.

If you don't like the way they do things, thats fine. But you don't have to post here, you dont have to support them, you dont have to crap all over the boards. There are plenty of gun boards out there that are 100% ultra right, do nothing, bi$%ch about everything places to hang out. CalGuns is a place to share information, new ideas, and see what is actually being DONE to HELP gun owners in CA.

Get a grip people, CalGuns are the good guys. They don't have a magic wand to fix CA or make the Governor do anything. All they can offer is their best guess as to how things will play out based on the info they have. They are human ya know.
so.... rant/off.. :chillpill:

Amen to this!
"If you don't like the way they do things, thats fine. But you don't have to post here, you dont have to support them, you dont have to crap all over the boards. There are plenty of gun boards out there that are 100% ultra right, do nothing, bi$%ch about everything places to hang out. CalGuns is a place to share information, new ideas, and see what is actually being DONE to HELP gun owners in CA. "

hoffmang
10-10-2011, 1:19 PM
kcbrown - There is a strong difference between a general tax applied evenly to all goods in commerce like a sales tax and a tax that specifically targets a fundamental right. Sales tax applies to both printing presses and firearms sold at retail in California. DROS fees can only be there to cover the cost of running the scheme. The bill proves that DROS fees clearly are too high since there was a balance to raid.

The only truly disappointing item in this bill package was long gun registration. Anyone who can get elected governor of California was signing AB-144. Far longer than I was saying that Governor Brown was the far lesser of two evils, I've been saying that the only thing UOC would do was get UOC banned.

I'm very happy that Jerry Brown effectively vetoed the bill that Republican Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed. Governor Brown has kept ammo shipping, affordable, and not a privacy risk.

I had been of the opinion that registration was unwinnable but Heller II is forcing me to change that opinion.:

The majority wrote starting on page 18,
These early registration requirements, however, applied with only a few exceptions solely to handguns — that is, pistols and revolvers — and not to long guns. Consequently, we hold the basic registration requirements are constitutional only as applied to handguns. With respect to long guns they are novel, not historic.

The dissent concurred though Judge Kavanaugh would hold registration requirements more broadly unconstitutional, Whether we apply the Heller history- and tradition-based approach or strict scrutiny or even intermediate scrutiny, D.C.’s ban on semi-automatic rifles fails to pass constitutional muster. D.C.’s registration requirement is likewise unconstitutional.

The Heller II decision is here (http://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/DECA496973477C748525791F004D84F9/$file/10-7036-1333156.pdf).

-Gene

newbee1111
10-10-2011, 1:23 PM
The whole "is it a fee or a tax?" thing as relates to Prop 13 is, IMO, very much at the core of the question. Along with the obvious fee required to exercise an enumerated individual right. While cities can charge for and grant permits to assemble peaceably, a 1A right, those assemblies are of impact to a larger community and require community resources to police, clean up after, etc. etc..

I equate the DROS 'tax' to a poll tax.... something that is long dead constitutionally. On that basis I think it can be attacked, particularly now that the state is seeing fit to use it as a revenue stream to fund things other than what it was originally intended to fund.

Prop-13 is an easy shortcut. Its already settled law, no messy arguments over core rights vs non-core rights. If the DROS fee is now paying other stuff then its a tax in drag and taxes need to be approved by 2/3 majority of the legislature. If the legislature wants to find some way to fund the DOJ then they can sack-up and pass a tax for it.

MudCamper
10-10-2011, 1:24 PM
Most Californians, in my lifetime of living here, don't give a hoot about how anyone else lives their life... they want to be left alone to live theirs the way they see fit. That is the ethos of the West, it's built into the DNA of much of our native population here.

You are describing native Californians. The problem is, California is constantly flooded with immigrants from the east coast, and they bring their screwed up anti-gun politics with them.

CessnaDriver
10-10-2011, 1:24 PM
This is why i'm not too worried. The anti's think they have some small victories but really, i think we they just moved their queen to take our pawn, and now their king is left undefended. (ie. this gives us direct cause to go to SCOTUS and get alot of stuff overturned FOR GOOD!!)

For people who don't like guns, they sure do shoot themselves in the foot alot!!!

I would think that if this is going to be the case, it won't take long.
Next year we should know?

sasc40cal
10-10-2011, 1:25 PM
A big thanks to all of you who insisted on making a big show of your "right" to openly carry. You wanted attention. You got attention. Your attention grabbing militancy spoiled it for the rest of us.

I dont get this statement at all. I did not ever do any UOC'ing, but what do you mean they ruined for the rest of us? If you were by yourself and were to UOC and had the police called on you, are you saying that you wanted attention? I see it as those that are excersing their rights. Granted there were some that did it as a show or to say hey we want a ccw.

If this bill wasnt signed into law would you go around and UOC? After all you are saying they ruined it for the rest of us. How so?

1911 Fan
10-10-2011, 1:29 PM
Y'all who think this is good are in a state of denial and have a problem with reality. Oh yes and I told you so in 2010 regarding liberal politicians. I'm done.

a1c
10-10-2011, 1:34 PM
You are describing native Californians. The problem is, California is constantly flooded with immigrants from the east coast, and they bring their screwed up anti-gun politics with them.

That's not even accurate, and just as simplistic. Californians come in all sorts of flavors, native or not: conservative farmers, granola libs, OC Republicans, pot-smoking libertarians, etc. It's a much more complicated demo than that.

pingpong
10-10-2011, 1:34 PM
It looks like AB809 really screws you if you have a 03 C&R. No more old guns sent to your door. No more CMP rifles to your house. Or did I miss something?

From my interpretation of the text of the AB, it looks like C&Rs are exempt from registration.

OleCuss
10-10-2011, 1:37 PM
I dont get this statement at all. I did not ever do any UOC'ing, but what do you mean they ruined for the rest of us? If you were by yourself and were to UOC and had the police called on you, are you saying that you wanted attention? I see it as those that are excersing their rights. Granted there were some that did it as a show or to say hey we want a ccw.

If this bill wasnt signed into law would you go around and UOC? After all you are saying they ruined it for the rest of us. How so?

I don't know of any of us who objected to individuals who believed that they were more secure if they were UOC'ing going ahead and doing so.

But doing it as an attention-grabbing stunt has resulted in infringement on our free speech rights.

Consider that if I wanted to UOC I can no longer do so? That means that my free speech rights have been violated even though I never did a single obnoxious thing.

It is highly likely that if there had been no militant UOC shows that the legislature would never have passed this obnoxious legislation and it would still be an option for those individuals who perceived they were safer UOC'ing.

cadmium
10-10-2011, 1:37 PM
If it's only for purchases starting jan 2014, my savings account is going to take a huge hit in the next 2 years.

But seriously CA is ridiculous on so many different levels.

MolonLabe2008
10-10-2011, 1:39 PM
This is a straw man argument. Meg is not Governor, and therefore cannot veto or sign any bill, so when you say she would have signed all of them, that is a straw man argument because she didn't. What should we say "Thank God for Jerry Brown, at least he's not Meg"?

I did not vote for Meg, and she would have been a horrible Governor, but Meg had nothing to do with signing those bills into law. The Honorable Jerry Brown signed them into law, and our Democrat Legislators were primarily responsible for getting them to the Governors desk. As a group they are not friends of the 2A. What more do they need to do to prove it?

I am not saying the Republicans would have done better because I don't know, but neither do you. Blame the people who did this, and hold them accountable next election cycle.

.......this^

Uxi
10-10-2011, 1:43 PM
California is in part a small-L personal libertarian state.

I wish it were so, but it's not even close to being so. There's a streak of it in the increasingly impotent rural areas but the Bay and LA area are deep deep "blue" and dominate the rest of the State politically and neither have any inclination at all to smaller or even more efficient government.

What we're seeing is the overwhelming of the rural areas by the urban areas and the logical conclusion of Reynolds v. Sims.

BigDogatPlay
10-10-2011, 1:49 PM
Prop-13 is an easy shortcut. Its already settled law, no messy arguments over core rights vs non-core rights. If the DROS fee is now paying other stuff then its a tax in drag and taxes need to be approved by 2/3 majority of the legislature. If the legislature wants to find some way to fund the DOJ then they can sack-up and pass a tax for it.

Agreed on point, but Prop 13 is not necessarily as easy a shortcut as it might seem. Not in state courts, anyway.

You are describing native Californians. The problem is, California is constantly flooded with immigrants from the east coast, and they bring their screwed up anti-gun politics with them.

True enough.... again to a point.

There are any number of transplants who believe as native Westerners do. Underneath it all that is part of the allure that is the golden west. We actually, still, outnumber the statists and progressives. the problem is that an overwhelming majority of people would rather go along to get along and become easily swayed by emotional messages. Appealing to common sense and small L libertarian values (to coin Bill's phrase) is a way for us to leverage and get people more involved.

ETA:

Originally posted by A1c

That's not even accurate, and just as simplistic. Californians come in all sorts of flavors, native or not: conservative farmers, granola libs, OC Republicans, pot-smoking libertarians, etc. It's a much more complicated demo than that.

It's simplistic only because you think it so. Yes, California is diverse. But what did all those people come here for? Same thing my family came here for in 1850... the opportunity to live, work and prosper in a land of boundless opportunity and being left alone to live their lives.

Unfortunately, the political ruling class has largely destroyed the opportunity and most of the freedom along with it. The problem is that the vast majority of people are either too stupid, too lazy, too dependant upon the state for sustinence, or too comfortable to notice or care.

That is what we, as a community, have to help change.

sasc40cal
10-10-2011, 1:50 PM
I don't know of any of us who objected to individuals who believed that they were more secure if they were UOC'ing going ahead and doing so.

But doing it as an attention-grabbing stunt has resulted in infringement on our free speech rights.

Consider that if I wanted to UOC I can no longer do so? That means that my free speech rights have been violated even though I never did a single obnoxious thing.

It is highly likely that if there had been no militant UOC shows that the legislature would never have passed this obnoxious legislation and it would still be an option for those individuals who perceived they were safer UOC'ing.

Well which is it for you, 1A or 2A? I care about both equally, but if your county wasnt willing to let you have a LTC, then you had the option of UOC'ing. They did come out and make a big show about it, that I cannot argue with. I wished they hadnt either. But I think either way it would have been done, maybe not this soon, but eventually it would have. There would have been more false arrest lawsuits etc that would have garnered attention one way or another.

As far as your 1A, I get what you are saying about not being able to excersise your free speech, but you still can.

As for 2A, this is what I am more concerned with when it comes to legislation being passed that limits and takes it away.

I am not trying to argue with you at all - I just see it as they would have gone after it sooner or later anyway, maybe not at this speed but eventually it would have been done IMHO.

OleCuss
10-10-2011, 1:55 PM
Yeah, the good thing is that we will likely get Shall Issue concealed carry in the next year or two and then we can start leveraging the 1A issue further to get LOC.

I'm pretty confident that in the next 5-7 years we'll have both concealed carry and LOC.

kcbrown
10-10-2011, 2:05 PM
kcbrown - There is a strong difference between a general tax applied evenly to all goods in commerce like a sales tax and a tax that specifically targets a fundamental right. Sales tax applies to both printing presses and firearms sold at retail in California. DROS fees can only be there to cover the cost of running the scheme. The bill proves that DROS fees clearly are too high since there was a balance to raid.


I completely agree with you on this. Where I was going with that is that it raises the possibility of the Constitutionality of a targeted, but more broad, tax. For instance, a "dangerous items" tax that happens to include firearms, but also includes a variety of other things. This is California, and I have little reason to believe the state won't try something like that. This is, after all, where the Constitutional minimums are going to be determined...

The fact that a broad tax (such as a sales tax) is Constitutional even when levied against items that are necessary for the exercise of fundamental rights opens the door to taxes such as the one I describe above.


But yes, DROS fees themselves are highly vulnerable in their new state.

BoxesOfLiberty
10-10-2011, 2:33 PM
California is in part a small-L personal libertarian state.

Once the CA Reep party recognizes that and focuses on gov't efficiency and business instead of demonizing folks' lifestyles in relation to "family values" and 'pro life" issues, then they start winning seats again.

Once legislative seats are won, a bench can be built so that someone can rise to Gov's office. Right now, there is no bench (how can there be when there's ~1/3 seats held and no statewide offices held?) for CA Reeps.

Most of CA Reep irrelevance today has been due to self-immolation more than a huge change in swing voter base. The CA Reep internal politics and money flow demands that the candidates become 'more conservative' (by their definition) when that is really the PROBLEM, not the solution.

This right here.

There are quite a few Californians who are more about individual liberty and keeping the State out of their affairs than they are about D vs R.

There are also a good number of Californians on both sides of the aisle and on neither side of it that would get behind a limited government platform for economic reasons.

Probably the best chance for the California Republican Party to regain some relevance would be to recognize that fact and start supporting pro-liberty fiscally responsible candidates and messages.

otteray
10-10-2011, 2:48 PM
It's all right a lot of them are public employees who paid a lot of dues to keep their pensions phat....gun control is a 2 hand issue to them not as important politically as their $$$$

To be fair, sir; although not a majority, there are a lot of folks who quit the socialist, anti-gun led unions or else became "service fee payers" (like myself:) ) because they realize how important it is to have the 2nd with the Constitution. Many union members are not aware that they can do just that (and maintain their privacy about it), because it is not widely advertised by the union mailers and information sheets.
I have done my best at my local county government workplace to spread the good news of non- participation in SEIU dues being used for political lobbying/busing/voter fraud and the like. Every day, I encourage fellow workers to do the same and be a thorn in the saddle of gun grabbing policy makers.

Ray

DVSmith
10-10-2011, 3:05 PM
California is in part a small-L personal libertarian state.

Once the CA Reep party recognizes that and focuses on gov't efficiency and business instead of demonizing folks' lifestyles in relation to "family values" and 'pro life" issues, then they start winning seats again.

Once legislative seats are won, a bench can be built so that someone can rise to Gov's office. Right now, there is no bench (how can there be when there's ~1/3 seats held and no statewide offices held?) for CA Reeps.

Most of CA Reep irrelevance today has been due to self-immolation more than a huge change in swing voter base. The CA Reep internal politics and money flow demands that the candidates become 'more conservative' (by their definition) when that is really the PROBLEM, not the solution.

Although I agree with your observation, i don't see the CA-R's turning that corner anytime soon. I really believe we are better off supporting conservative dems. Looking for candidates that can be elected without union backing, and that includes LE unions/associations. And yes, I am a lifelong CA-R.

Uxi
10-10-2011, 3:12 PM
Although I agree with your observation, i don't see the CA-R's turning that corner anytime soon. I really believe we are better off supporting conservative dems. Looking for candidates that can be elected without union backing, and that includes LE unions/associations. And yes, I am a lifelong CA-R.

What conservative Dems, though? If he was right, we'd see some statewide and their primaries could mean something. Moonbeam is as conservative as it gets and look at him, from the Prison Guards to Dream Act to Long Gun Registration...

Blaze Kenobi
10-10-2011, 3:32 PM
I guess with all that DROS money they can hire more agents and start kicking down doors.........:mad:

Quote:

The Bureau of Firearms has identified more than 18,000 Californians who illegally possess tens of thousands of firearms. Every day, 15 to 20 names are added to the list of prohibited persons who own firearms. SB 819 allows the Department of Justice to use a surplus from the Dealer's Record of Sale account to enforce APPS.

END quote.

Expect some problems folks.......

Be well,
Bob


Are you sure it is not one californian that possess like 18,000 glocks of all colors and they just want some of that collection Oceanbob? :D

Blaze Kenobi
10-10-2011, 3:36 PM
You are describing native Californians. The problem is, California is constantly flooded with immigrants from the east coast, and they bring their screwed up anti-gun politics with them.

Amen Brother!!! Especially all the ones that go into the entertainment industry and really spew their garbage through the medium.

donw
10-10-2011, 3:40 PM
My family is from Rhodesia, same thing happened there. Started with gun registrations, not long after all guns were confiscated. My family just threw theirs in the lake. There is no need for any registration, none at all. Any excuse is just unacceptable and needs to be fought tooth and nail.

i have a friend who had to flee Rhodesia. he was a member of the constabulary when the overthrow took place.

we all know, and realize, what gun "registration" is about don't we?

some things come to mind about this whole episode:

1. once enacted, ANY law is difficult at easiest to have rescinded, especially when it comes to firearms.

2. do NOT rely on any legislator to be "On our side". they have a way of changing sides; we have to elect, and remove, those from office who are NOT detrimental to our cause. too many say they are supporters of the 2A but will not elaborate beyond that statement; what they actually mean is they support LE/LEA having firearms. many, if not most, even thought they've "Studied" the constitution, don't grasp what the 2A is REALLY about!

most legislators still don't understand they create more problems than they solve!

3. some have voiced the opinion "It was not as bad as it could have been."...i feel that's a very true statement. if the ammo bill would have been passed, it in itself would have been darn near enough to strangle firearms activities here in Kaliphornia.

4. if we give in now...what will be the next major loss?

BMartin1776
10-10-2011, 3:48 PM
I'm recalling all the folks on this board who expounded last year on Brown's second amendment record, trying to tell us he'd be better the 2A than his opponent.

How's that working out for ya now?

Yea I had an NRA rep tell me at a San Diego gunshow before he got elected that "Brown is a friend to gunowners" Yea uhhuh sure. I see him again Im going to lay into him. What are odds we get Alan Gura in to take this to SCOTUS & argue 2A is being violated.

I want a CCW but based on what I have learned there is no way I can get one as I dont have a business or have a high profile lifestyle requiring it.

Blaze Kenobi
10-10-2011, 3:53 PM
Theories of where this will take us in the future.

1) it will lead to getting ccw and it will somehow better our position and strengthen our rights. (Doubt it)

2) It will add fuel to the left wing thinking and they will want to enact more laws that they see as good, till we can't even carry a slingshot like David in the Bible. (Let them and they'll do it.)

3) By registering all long guns it is easier to confiscate them and find the owners of them in case of Martial Law due to a Natural Disaster, War, or a New World Order (That used to sound crazy but now it doesn't.)

4) It is another way of financially seperating the masses from owning guns due to economic strains put upon them. Another way for the system to suck up more money to mishandle while they have shown that they can't keep a balanced budget to justify additional control of its citizens through bigger government. ( This one is a obvious.)

ElvenSoul
10-10-2011, 3:54 PM
You guys really thought he would VETO! Come on how long ya been a 2A Supporter? Don't you know we have to sue their a@@es in court to get any rights.

caduckgunner
10-10-2011, 3:54 PM
Good thing everyone here was preaching about how pro gun Moonbeam is :rolleyes:

Tarn_Helm
10-10-2011, 3:58 PM
Jerry Brown can stick that "Amicus Brief" up is ***!!!!!!!!!!
And all those people on this board who kept sticking Jerry Brown's "Amicus Brief" in my face, what do you have to say for yourself now?? Hmmm!!!!!!!!

So, now you know (because I've always known) that Jerry Brown is a typical extreme liberal Democrat who will infringe on our 2nd-Amendment rights, impose extreme job killing environmental regulations and give our tax dollars to people who break our laws.

Good going all you Brown supporters.

I hope you are happy with yourselves.
(bold edit by me)

. . . all the way up, and out the top.
:chris:

Gryff
10-10-2011, 4:14 PM
So, now you know (because I've always known) that Jerry Brown is a typical extreme liberal Democrat who will infringe on our 2nd-Amendment rights.

So you got that out of his signature/veto actions today? Seriously?

thmpr
10-10-2011, 4:24 PM
on its all on the news right now.

gregorylucas
10-10-2011, 4:46 PM
Originally Posted by hoffmang
Registered OLLs...
Long Gun Registration ruled unconstitutional in DC last week.
DROS is now a tax and not a fee.
Carry license reform.
Excuse for not granting carry licenses destroyed.

I love it when a plan comes together!

Did I miss something about Long Gun Registration being ruled unconstitutional? I thought all of DC's laws were upheld or is this referencing another case?

-Greg

daves100
10-10-2011, 4:52 PM
Assembly Bill 144 would ban the open carrying of an unloaded handgun.


so does this mean the next open carry event will be held with AR15 and AK rifles?