Calguns.net

Calguns.net (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/index.php)
-   California 2nd Amend. Political Discussion & Activism (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/forumdisplay.php?f=71)
-   -   AB 809 (2011) Feuer - EFFECTIVE JAN 1 2014, register long guns (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=399849)

Librarian 02-21-2011 4:16 PM

AB 809 (2011) Feuer - EFFECTIVE JAN 1 2014, register long guns
 
AB 809 passed. Read the text here: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/11-12/...chaptered.html

The effective date is Jan 1, 2014.

NO, you will not have to register long guns you already own.

YES, the DROS process will be changed so long gun information - make, model, serial number (if any) will be collected, and sent to CA-DOJ, and that information will be kept available.

YES, intrafamilial long gun transfers are affected - there will be new or modified forms, and you will have to send them in with a fee when you transfer long guns among parent/child/grandchild.

YES, if you move here in 2014 and later, you must report long guns within 60 days of bringing them into the state; there will be new or modified forms, and you will have to send them in with a fee.

YES, out of state C&R long gun purchases are affected; starting in 2014 a C&R licensee must report out of state long gun purchases. There will be new or modified forms, and you will have to send them in with a fee.

YES, in-state C&R long gun purchases are affected;
(1) Starting in 2014, long guns 50 years old and older must be transferred through an FFL; the exemption that is in the law now, that allows FTF of these, is repealed in 2014.
(2) Starting in 2014, a buyer who is a C&R licensee inside CA, with COE (Certificate of Eligibility), may buy guns without involving another FFL. The purchase must be reported; there will be new or modified forms, and you will have to send them in with a fee.

=================================================


http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/po...B&author=feuer

Maltese Falcon 02-21-2011 4:20 PM

Every time I see one of these piece of crap proposed new laws, it makes we want to go buy another high powered something or another to calm me down.

Donation to CGF and CRPA on the way...

.

aermotor 02-21-2011 4:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maltese Falcon (Post 5861261)
it makes we want to go buy another high powered something or another to calm me down.

Brilliant, definitely the thing to do. Just renewed my CG Membership this week too. Go get 'em.

What are the odds of this passing?

NotEnufGarage 02-21-2011 5:21 PM

Time to get that .50 DTC I've been thinking about.

bwiese 02-21-2011 5:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maltese Falcon (Post 5861261)
Every time I see one of these piece of crap proposed new laws, it makes we want to go buy another high powered something or another to calm me down.

Donation to CGF and CRPA on the way...

Thank you for both - and being both a board member of CGF as well as CRPA, may I suggest that if you are targeting legal activities your CRPA-targeted contribution is sent to "CRPA Foundation"??

Being a CRPA member helps too :)

PsychGuy274 02-21-2011 5:35 PM

If long gun registration failed last year, how can they propose it again?

GM4spd 02-21-2011 5:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PsychGuy274 (Post 5861754)
If long gun registration failed last year, how can they propose it again?

Easy. Pete

bwiese 02-21-2011 5:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PsychGuy274 (Post 5861754)
If long gun registration failed last year, how can they propose it again?

Just like we propose pro-gun laws that may not have made it in a prior session.

However its failure last year - due to cost/overhead considerations - will likely carry over this year.

You can be sure this is a Brady/LCAV bill given it's Feuer - they absolutely want to paper every gun they can.

The good news: this costs a lot of money. And last time I checked we were broke, DOJ BoF is understaffed, and we have a very cheap-arsed governor.

Librarian 02-21-2011 5:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PsychGuy274 (Post 5861754)
If long gun registration failed last year, how can they propose it again?

2011-2102 is a new legislative session. The sort-of-restriction is proposing substantially the same content in the SAME session.

So, a bill defeated in June 2011 cannot be re-introduced verbatim in Jan 2012, but it could be in Jan 2013, and a version of it could be reintroduced in Jan 2012 if the writer found a different avenue to theoretically accomplish the same goal as the defeated bill.

PsychGuy274 02-21-2011 7:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Librarian (Post 5861881)
2011-2102 is a new legislative session. The sort-of-restriction is proposing substantially the same contend in the SAME session.

So, a bill defeated in June 2011 cannot be re-introduced verbatim in Jan 2012, but it could be in Jan 2013, and a version of it could be reintroduced in Jan 2012 if the writer found a different avenue to theoretically accomplish the same goal as the defeated bill.

Got it, thanks!

zenmastar 02-21-2011 8:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bwiese (Post 5861879)
... and we have a very cheap-arsed governor.

Interesting choice of words. You are not saying pro-gun governor (or what is gun-friendly?) any longer. Any insights for this change?

Crom 02-21-2011 8:24 PM

This is not about crime control. This is pure gun control. :( I'll send some cash to CRPA Foundation ASAP.

taperxz 02-21-2011 8:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zenmastar (Post 5862901)
Interesting choice of words. You are not saying pro-gun governor (or what is gun-friendly?) any longer. Any insights for this change?

I wouldn't read to much into that. Put it this way if JB was a total anti he would find the funds to make this law. What Bill said was this would not be high on the governors list of potential laws that would be worth funding. Beyond that, do the math. AKA "cheap arse"

bwiese 02-21-2011 8:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zenmastar (Post 5862901)
Interesting choice of words. You are not saying pro-gun governor (or what is gun-friendly?) any longer. Any insights for this change?

It's not a change it's just yet another justification for doing something with a broad sweep.

A progun action done with cover of budgetary restraint is still a progun action.

A legislator who may not tout pro-gun sentiments but who puts in IP sole-source restrictions in the microstamping law has done something very pro-gun.

It's not about flag-waving, it's about results.

Gray Peterson 02-21-2011 10:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zenmastar (Post 5862901)
Interesting choice of words. You are not saying pro-gun governor (or what is gun-friendly?) any longer. Any insights for this change?

You know, sometimes words are just words.

Wherryj 02-22-2011 8:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maltese Falcon (Post 5861261)
Every time I see one of these piece of crap proposed new laws, it makes we want to go buy another high powered something or another to calm me down.

Donation to CGF and CRPA on the way...

.

The previous long gun registration attempts resulted in my purchase of a Mossberg and an AR-15-purchases that I have previously delayed for whatever reason.

These bills are highly effective at increasing the number of weapons available.

Swiss 04-04-2011 11:41 AM

Received the article below via NRA-ILA and called my local PD with questions. The watch commander said he (personally) flat out opposes such an intrusion into privacy and agrees it would not be effective. The only people with registered weapons will be those who obey the law. Though a large department, they don't even enter handgun regs into their CAD system and there's no way they'll do it for long guns. This pretty much eliminates any claims for improved officer safety when responding to domestic violence or other calls.

If such a system were in place I think it would increase the danger to civilians. If PD responds to a home with the knowledge that the occupant is "armed" the likelihood of a tragic mistake is quite great.

Can someone point me to information that supports or debunks the claim that "1/3 of crime guns are long guns"?

Read the full article

Quote:

LA City Council supports proposed state gun law

Daily News Wire Services
Posted: 04/01/2011

VAN NUYS - The Los Angeles City Council voted unanimously Friday to support a former colleague's proposed state law that would require records of purchases of shotguns, rifles and other "long guns" be preserved like handgun purchase records.
Under current law, the state is required to destroy records of long-gun purchases five days after the transaction.

Assembly Bill 809, introduced by Democratic Assemblyman and former Los Angeles City Councilman Mike Feuer, would treat the records the same as records for handguns, beginning in 2013.

The bill is in the early stages of the legislative process and scheduled for a hearing before the Assembly Public Safety Committee.

unusedusername 04-04-2011 11:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Swiss (Post 6136965)
LA City Council supports proposed state gun law

Daily News Wire Services
Posted: 04/01/2011

In other news, the sky is still blue.

Librarian 04-04-2011 11:57 AM

CA doesn't break it out by handgun/long gun.

Feds (UCR, 2009) say Homicide victims: 6452 killed with handguns, 348 rifles, 418 shotguns.

Even FBI doesn't break down other crime stats by firearm type.

Swiss 04-04-2011 12:13 PM

Thanks! So 12% are long guns but only of homicides not the more general "crime guns" the city councilman is using. Perhaps the stats they claim are for LA only.

jnojr 04-04-2011 12:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PsychGuy274 (Post 5861754)
If long gun registration failed last year, how can they propose it again?

Easily! They just "propose" it again. And again. And again. Until it passes.

winxp_man 04-04-2011 10:48 PM

^^^ if it's ever seen as a law that helps instead of a law that will just waste government money that they don't have.

darkwater 06-02-2011 10:42 AM

AB 809 just passed the Assembly, so on to the Senate. No discussion on this bill as the Republicans had walked out of the Assembly a few bills prior to this, when a bill related to healthcare by Feuer came up and they couldn't stop it. (this is the official AB 809 thread, isn't it?)

Wherryj 06-02-2011 10:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by unusedusername (Post 6137005)
In other news, the sky is still blue.

And the LA City Council is still certifiably insane. In other words, business as usual here in the PRK.

BlindRacer 06-02-2011 11:49 AM

Edit...ignore my post. This was 'AB' not 'SB' 809. The assembly was on the floor earlier today, so they must have already voted on it I guess.

Anyone know the outcome?

http://www.calchannel.com/channel/live/

CSACANNONEER 06-02-2011 12:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aermotor (Post 5861279)
Brilliant, definitely the thing to do. Just renewed my CG Membership this week too. Go get 'em.

What are the odds of this passing?

You do realize that your CGN "membership" is to help support the costs of opperating this forum, right? It has NOTHING to do with the CGF or their work. If you want to contribute towards the por 2A work that the CGF does, you need to make a donation dirrectly to them.

darkwater 06-02-2011 12:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlindRacer (Post 6517571)
Edit...ignore my post. This was 'AB' not 'SB' 809. The assembly was on the floor earlier today, so they must have already voted on it I guess.

Anyone know the outcome?

http://www.calchannel.com/channel/live/

Yeah, look up two posts from your last post...;)

BlindRacer 06-02-2011 12:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by darkwater (Post 6517772)
Yeah, look up two posts from your last post...;)

Wow, my bad! I hadn't been keeping that close of an eye on this the last few days, and saw something that it was going to be on the assembly floor soon.

Guess I'll go back to watching this one instead of failing to contribute.

zvardan 06-02-2011 7:50 PM

Would this mean my c&r license is essentially going to be useless?

Obese Penguin 06-02-2011 10:24 PM

In the midst of a recession, the great minds in Sacramento keep thinking of new ways to blindly spend money. I wouldn't be surprised if this bill bankrupts California.

jwkincal 06-27-2011 6:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Librarian (Post 5861237)
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/po...B&author=feuer
I think it says DROS now will include long-gun info - amends 11106 - but long-gun info is still supposed to be destroyed after 5 days. Frankly, I don't quite follow Section 2 (amends 11106) and Section 2.5 (ADDS 11106)... MEGO (My Eyes Glaze Over).

Glad I'm not the only one... but if YOU can't understand it then who the hell can??? It does say that the DROS info for "not handguns" is destroyed after 5 days, but it gets real convoluted after that...

And this thing is written such that it is supposed to fund itself (pipe dream city, right there); it wasn't even going to go Appropriations... looks like the Public Safety committee thought that it should and has referred it there in the course of passing (5-1).

Cylarz 07-08-2011 6:04 PM

How does this affect C&R FFL holders if passed?

Wernher von Browning 07-08-2011 6:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by taperxz (Post 5863080)
AKA "cheap arse"

I have no problem with that.

If we had a few thousand more with that attitude, on both sides of the aisle, we wouldn't be in such deep doo-doo right now, as a state and as a nation.

It's the ones who throw out bundles of cash to every dim-bulb idea or open hand that comes along, that cause the fiscal crises. (Look at the handwringing right now in Washington).

Wernher von Browning 07-08-2011 6:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cylarz (Post 6736022)
How does this affect C&R FFL holders if passed?

Don't know about C&R FFL but it will put an end to face-to-face transfers for C&R guns between ordinary civilians.

warbird 07-08-2011 6:40 PM

If it restricts the right of an honest citizen then oppose it and make sure your elected officials know it all the way up the line. Vote for this bill and guess who i vote against in the next election and then keep your word.

EBR Works 07-08-2011 6:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wernher von Browning (Post 6736055)
Don't know about C&R FFL but it will put an end to face-to-face transfers for C&R guns between ordinary civilians.


... and those with a C&R license would no longer be able to mail order 50+ year old long guns from out of state vendors without using an FFL.

blazeaglory 07-08-2011 6:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Librarian (Post 5861881)
2011-2102 is a new legislative session. The sort-of-restriction is proposing substantially the same content in the SAME session.

So, a bill defeated in June 2011 cannot be re-introduced verbatim in Jan 2012, but it could be in Jan 2013, and a version of it could be reintroduced in Jan 2012 if the writer found a different avenue to theoretically accomplish the same goal as the defeated bill.

Yeah I read some of it and it will commence (if approved) in Jan 2013. Right now I think its on its way to the fiscal committee for review?

Cant someone stop him from reintroducing the same stuff over and over again as non-cost effective? Such as, "hey bro, knock it off, its getting old'? Are they that hard headed? Wait, I know the answer to that one

Smoothshifter41 07-08-2011 9:24 PM

Would this mean that long guns that citizens currently own would have to be registered? Or is it for all new purchases?

RomanDad 07-08-2011 9:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Smoothshifter41 (Post 6737165)
Would this mean that long guns that citizens currently own would have to be registered? Or is it for all new purchases?

Same question.

EBR Works 07-09-2011 8:43 PM

My understanding is that this would apply to new purchases only.
.
.
.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 8:33 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.