Calguns.net

Calguns.net (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/index.php)
-   California handguns (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/forumdisplay.php?f=66)
-   -   The California ‘safe gun list’ (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=81127)

Librarian 01-04-2008 5:54 PM

The California ‘safe gun list’
 
The California ‘safe gun list’

(This thread is so-named because that is the colloquial name for the Roster of Handguns Certified for Sale. )

Information is correct as of January, 2008; remember, the Legislature could change this at any time. The author is Not A Lawyer; for Real Legal Advice, consult a licensed California Attorney.
Quote:

PC 12125. (a) Commencing January 1, 2001, any person in this state who manufactures or causes to be manufactured, imports into the state for sale, keeps for sale, offers or exposes for sale, gives, or lends any unsafe handgun shall be punished by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year.
Quote:

PC 12131. (a) On and after January 1, 2001, the Department of Justice shall compile, publish, and thereafter maintain a roster listing all of the pistols, revolvers, and other firearms capable of being concealed upon the person that have been tested by a certified testing laboratory, have been determined not to be unsafe handguns, and may be sold in this state pursuant to this title. The roster shall list, for each firearm, the manufacturer, model number, and model name.
Is the Roster even about safety?
No. The original intent was to put ‘Ring of Fire’ gun manufacturers out of business. Unfortunately for that intent, the guns – Davis, Lorcin, Bryco etc. – passed the tests.

It is also intended to establish the legislature’s ability to classify some guns as ‘bad’, and others as ‘less bad’. In this they have succeeded.
How does a gun get on the Roster?
A manufacturer or an importer (and ONLY those) submits a handgun for testing. They must supply THREE copies of the gun to be tested, and pay a fee. (PC 12130)

The gun must pass a defined firing requirement (PC 12127) and a drop safety test (PC 12128). It must also meet other requirements in effect at the time it is submitted for testing, currently a magazine disconnect and a loaded chamber indicator for semi-automatic handguns. (PC 12126(b)(5))
The Roster shows an expiration date; what is that for?
That means it is time for the manufacturer/importer to pay the annual $200 fee for that model. If the fee is paid, the handgun stays on the Roster. Nothing else has to happen. If the fee is paid, no new requirements apply after an expiration date.
What happens to a gun if the manufacturer/importer does not pay the fee?
The gun drops off the Roster. Ordinarily, this happens because the manufacturer no longer sells that model.

Sometimes there is an administrative reason a fee is not paid. In at least one case, a manufacturer was allowed to certify that the gun as manufactured at that time was identical to the gun as tested when put on the Roster, and the gun was just put back on. [ 11 CA ADC § 4070(e) ]
If a manufacturer stops paying the fee, can someone else pay to keep it on the list?
No. 11 CA ADC § 4059(c) and § 4071
Quote:

(c) Other than the DOJ, only the manufacturer/importer of a handgun model is authorized to submit that handgun model to a DOJ-Certified Laboratory for testing.
The Legislature passed a new law about handguns (e.g. microstamping); what does that mean for guns on the Roster?
Unless the Legislature writes the law differently, nothing. Guns on the Roster are not affected by laws passed after the gun was listed; so far, the changes have been required only for guns not yet on the Roster and offered for testing to get on the Roster after the effective date of the law.
I don’t get it. Guns on the Roster don’t have to meet the new laws?
Right. Example: A Glock pistol was added to the Roster in 2001. Glock, Inc. continues to pay the annual fee.

Effective 2007, all semi-automatic handguns submitted for testing to get on the Roster must have both a magazine disconnect and a loaded-chamber indicator.

This requirement has no effect on guns already on the Roster, because the law is written as
Quote:

(5) Commencing January 1, 2007, for all center fire semiautomatic pistols that are not already listed on the roster pursuant to Section 12131, it does not have both a chamber load indicator and if it has a detachable magazine, a magazine disconnect mechanism.
THEREFORE, the Glock does NOT need the magazine disconnect or loaded chamber indicator – it is already on the Roster, and the law is written to exclude guns already on the Roster.
Practically, what does it mean when a gun is NOT on the Roster, or a manufacturer lets one fall off the Roster?
California FFL dealers are not allowed to sell it to ‘civilians’ from dealer stock.
Huh? That’s it?
Yes.

LEOs can buy them. Someone can move into California as a legal owner of one or many handguns not on the Roster and bring them into the state. Any California resident can transfer a non-Roster handgun to another California resident using Private Party Transfer. That has to happen at an FFL dealer, but the Roster does not apply to PPT.

Inherited guns and intra-family (within California only) transfers – which do not use FFLs – are exempt from being on the Roster. Out of state to CA intra-family gifts are also exempt from the Roster, even though they must go through an FFL.

Falling off the Roster does not make handguns illegal and certainly does not make them unsafe in any meaningful usage of the term.
Why can’t I buy ‘gun x’, not on the Roster, from Joe Smith, or even Joe Smith, FFL, when those folks are out of state?
Federal law requires interstate transfer to go to an FFL in the receiver’s state. [18 USC 922 (a)(3) and (a)(5)] If you live in California, you can’t receive a handgun from out of state unless you have an FFL – and an FFL cannot sell a non-Roster gun to a non-LEO.
What guns do NOT have to be on the Roster?
Firearms listed as curios or relics, as defined in Section 478.11 of Title 27 of the Code of Federal Regulations. A list of Olympic target pistols, and
Quote:

12133. (a) The provisions of this chapter shall not apply to a single-action revolver that has at least a 5-cartridge capacity with a barrel length of not less than three inches, and meets any of the following specifications:
(1) Was originally manufactured prior to 1900 and is a curio or relic, as defined in Section 478.11 of Title 27 of the Code of Federal Regulations.
(2) Has an overall length measured parallel to the barrel of at least 71/2 inches when the handle, frame or receiver, and barrel are assembled.
(3) Has an overall length measured parallel to the barrel of at least 71/2 inches when the handle, frame or receiver, and barrel are assembled and that is currently approved for importation into the United States pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (3) of subsection (d) of Section 925 of Title 18 of the United States Code.

(b) The provisions of this chapter shall not apply to a single-shot pistol with a barrel length of not less than six inches and that has an overall length of at least 101/2 inches when the handle, frame or receiver, and barrel are assembled.
Why is the ‘blue’ one on the Roster, and the ‘stainless’ one not?
Manufacturer’s choice. Every model sold by FFLs in California must be on the Roster and paid for, every year.

A manufacturer can save testing fees by certifying that one gun is different from another only in ‘minor’ attributes
Quote:

12131.5. (a) A firearm shall be deemed to satisfy the requirements of subdivision (a) of Section 12131 if another firearm made by the same manufacturer is already listed and the unlisted firearm differs from the listed firearm only in one or more of the following features:
(1) Finish, including, but not limited to, bluing, chrome-plating, oiling, or engraving.
(2) The material from which the grips are made.
(3) The shape or texture of the grips, so long as the difference in grip shape or texture does not in any way alter the dimensions, material, linkage, or functioning of the magazine well, the barrel, the chamber, or any of the components of the firing mechanism of the firearm.
(4) Any other purely cosmetic feature that does not in any way alter the dimensions, material, linkage, or functioning of the magazine well, the barrel, the chamber, or any of the components of the firing mechanism of the firearm.
but even those models must be added to the Roster.
Who’s responsible for this SNAFU?
It was SB15, in December of 1998 that started it.The bill went into effect January, 2001. The author was Senator Richard G. Polanco (D-Los Angeles). That bill created PC 12125.

There have been two major modifications since then: Senator Scott’s 2003 SB 489 for loaded chamber indicator/magazine disconnect, and Assembly Member Feuer’s 2007 AB 1471, microstamping.

heyjak 01-04-2008 6:01 PM

Question
 
So, if my SON in Texas sells a handgun (not on the Kali approved list) to me in Kalifornia, it will be legal if we use an FFL for the transfer?

bwiese 01-04-2008 6:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by heyjak (Post 918789)
So, if my SON in Texas sells a handgun (not on the Kali approved list) to me in Kalifornia, it will be legal if we use an FFL for the transfer?

Yes...

....because that is exempt from matters of rostering per 12132PC due to 12078(c) PC 'interfamily exemption' The CA FFL is just used to keep the Feds happy for interstate transactions.

If your son were a CA resident, you wouldn't need an FFL as an intermediary.
You'd just need to hold a valid HSC card and send in a form to DOJ along with $19 fee.

And if that were your brother/sister, uncle, or cousin, etc instead of your son - it would not be the case - since only grandparents, parents, children & grandchildren are the authorized parties for exempt interfamily transfers.

avidone 01-04-2008 6:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by heyjak (Post 918789)
So, if my SON in Texas sells a handgun (not on the Kali approved list) to me in Kalifornia, it will be legal if we use an FFL for the transfer?

Quote:

Originally Posted by bwiese (Post 918825)
Yes...

....because that is exempt from matters of rostering per 12132PC due to 12078(c) PC 'interfamily exemption' The CA FFL is just used to keep the Feds happy for interstate transactions.

If your son were a CA resident, you wouldn't need an FFL as an intermediary.
You'd just need to hold a valid HSC card and send in a form to DOJ along with $19 fee.

And if that were your brother/sister, uncle, or cousin, etc instead of your son - it would not be the case - since only grandparents, parents, children & grandchildren are the authorized parties for exempt interfamily transfers.

Thanks for the Q and A on this! I was not clear on the details of the interfamily exemption.

hawk81 01-04-2008 7:24 PM

Don't you just love California.:D

retired 01-04-2008 11:34 PM

Not really. I've lived here for all but 2 of my 57yrs. and if it wasn't for my family living here and not able/willing to move, I'd be gone. Family is more important and I have the luxury of a le ccw and exemption from the HSC.

If it becomes so draconian that gun/ammo manufacturers stop selling in this state, then I will move and visit my family when I can.

BaronW 01-05-2008 4:30 AM

This thread should be stickied.

sammy 01-05-2008 7:54 AM

So could my brother in AZ do a PPT to me here in CA?

CAL.BAR 01-05-2008 8:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sammy (Post 919566)
So could my brother in AZ do a PPT to me here in CA?

No - both you and your bro have to be here in CA. Your bro would have to move into CA with the gun. Register it with DOJ then PPT it to you with both of you and the gun at the same gun shop at the same time.

heyjak 01-05-2008 11:15 AM

"Loving California"
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by retired (Post 919325)
Not really. I've lived here for all but 2 of my 57yrs. and if it wasn't for my family living here and not able/willing to move, I'd be gone. Family is more important and I have the luxury of a le ccw and exemption from the HSC.

If it becomes so draconian that gun/ammo manufacturers stop selling in this state, then I will move and visit my family when I can.

I don't have a ccw (yet) or HSC exemption, but after 61 years here as a 3rd generation, I'm having the same thoughts about leaving. :(

heyjak 01-05-2008 11:17 AM

Thanks Bill!

melw 01-05-2008 8:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by heyjak (Post 918789)
So, if my SON in Texas sells a handgun (not on the Kali approved list) to me in Kalifornia, it will be legal if we use an FFL for the transfer?

How about the other way around. My father in Tx. sells me a pistol not on the list. Can it be transferred to me here in Ca?
Thanks
Mel W.

bwiese 01-05-2008 9:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by melw (Post 920819)
How about the other way around. My father in Tx. sells me a pistol not on the list. Can it be transferred to me here in Ca?
Thanks
Mel W.


Yes, the direction (father->son, son->father) is irrelevant.

The only family-exempt parties are grandparents, parents, children and grandchildren. Brothers/sisters, aunts/uncles, cousins, great uncles, etc. are not eligible for the interfamily exemption.

A grandchild can give/sell a non-Rostered handgun to his grandma, or a daughter can gift a non-Rostered handgun to her dad, or vice versa.

bwiese 01-05-2008 10:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sammy (Post 919566)
So could my brother in AZ do a PPT to me here in CA?

No, PPTs are only between CA residents - and your brother is not an authorized exempt interfamily member (only transfers btwn grandparents/parents/ children/grandchildren are exempt from Rostering).

elenius 01-06-2008 7:27 AM

Quote:

If a manufacturer stops paying the fee, can someone else pay to keep it on the list?

No. 11 CA ADC § 4059(c)
Quote:

(c) Other than the DOJ, only the manufacturer/importer of a handgun model is authorized to submit that handgun model to a DOJ-Certified Laboratory for testing.

This doesn't seem correct. The paragraph mentions submitting a handgun, not renewing it.

Librarian 01-06-2008 12:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elenius (Post 921336)
This doesn't seem correct. The paragraph mentions submitting a handgun, not renewing it.

Right - the clarification is later in the regs:
Quote:

11 CCR § 4071

Cal. Admin. Code tit. 11, § 4071

BARCLAYS OFFICIAL CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS

TITLE 11. LAW
DIVISION 5. FIREARMS REGULATIONS

CHAPTER 5. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE REGULATIONS FOR LABORATORY CERTIFICATION AND HANDGUN TESTING

ARTICLE 9. ROSTER OF CERTIFIED HANDGUNS; ROSTER OF CERTIFIED HANDGUN LISTING RENEWAL PROCEDURES

This database is current through 12/21/07, Register 2007, No. 51
§ 4071. Roster of Certified Handgun Listing Renewal Procedures.

A handgun model listing on the Roster of Certified Handguns must be renewed prior to expiration in order to remain valid. The following is the procedure for renewal of a listing:

(a) The DOJ will mail a renewal notice to each manufacturer/importer or other responsible person 60 days prior to the expiration of the handgun model listing.

(b) The manufacturer/importer or other responsible person wishing to renew the listing shall submit to the DOJ a copy of the renewal notice with the annual maintenance fee set forth in s 4072.

(c) Once these requirements are met and the request has been processed, the DOJ will send a notification that the listing has been renewed.

(d) If the manufacturer/importer or other responsible person fails to comply with these renewal requirements, the handgun model listing shall expire by operation of law at midnight on the date of expiration of the listing and the model will be removed from the Roster.
Only the stated entities may submit the gun for testing and subsequent listing.

The renewal notification is sent only to the entity that last submitted, therefore renewal is also restricted to manufacturers/importers.

The point I missed making is that not just anybody can volunteer to pay the fee; no informal group of collectors or gun club can do it, nor can any random individual.

Thanks for the reminder to be more complete; main post updated. It's really close to the 10,000 character limit, so I can't get the whole reply into that one.

And that 'other responsible person'? 11 CCR § 4070(d) (sorry, Westlaw links time out. Rats. Start here. )

Quote:

(d) A handgun model may remain on the Roster after a manufacturer/importer discontinues manufacturing/importing the model or goes out of business provided that all of the following requirements are met:

(1) Evidence is provided that the manufacturer/importer has either discontinued manufacturing/importing the handgun model or gone out of business.

(2) The manufacturer/importer is no longer offering the handgun model to licensed firearms dealers.

(3) Either a fully licensed wholesaler, distributor, or dealer submits a written request to continue the listing and agrees to pay the annual maintenance fee as set forth in s 4072 of these regulations. The request shall be submitted to the DOJ stating that all of the above conditions have been met.

Key concept: fully licensed wholesaler, distributor, or dealer

Any of our FFL members want to think about that?

jamesob 01-18-2008 5:45 PM

if you have a parent that lives out of state and " they have a gun you want " there is no restrictions on transfer between the son / daughter and there parents. so if they have a gun that is not on the list you still can receive the gun from your parents or vise versa. i know this because i did this on the ca. doj information they gave me. this is how i got my non rostered gun. my brother lives in oregon and gave my dad a desert eagle 50ae. my dad later gave it to me. of course you have to do your transfer but totally legal.

tony stark 01-30-2008 9:53 PM

the list
 
is there a way to find out if a gun is going to be tested?
the s&w 5" 952 is on the list, but the 6" longslide is not.

Librarian 01-30-2008 10:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tony stark (Post 972157)
is there a way to find out if a gun is going to be tested?
the s&w 5" 952 is on the list, but the 6" longslide is not.

Only S&W will know for sure.

mymonkeyman 02-03-2008 10:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jamesob (Post 946331)
if you have a parent that lives out of state and " they have a gun you want " there is no restrictions on transfer between the son / daughter and there parents. so if they have a gun that is not on the list you still can receive the gun from your parents or vise versa. i know this because i did this on the ca. doj information they gave me. this is how i got my non rostered gun. my brother lives in oregon and gave my dad a desert eagle 50ae. my dad later gave it to me. of course you have to do your transfer but totally legal.

You could also have bought the listed Desert Eagle .44 from an instate FFL and then bought the .50ae barrel and magazines online. Although I'm sure you probably saved money the way you did it.

It's too bad more pistols with easily interchangeable barrels did not get on the list before the LCI requirement went into effect.

InvictusManeo 02-05-2008 6:34 PM

So I was looking through the roster, and noticed for the first time (don't ask how I hadn't noticed before) that there are no SPECIFIC model numbers listed. For example, the taurus list has "pt-92" followed by a brief description, like "blued steel". There are more detailed descriptions of some of the models, but "blued steel" covers half of the line. How can a person be 100% sure that they found the gun they want, and not another one that fits the description? Is there another version of the roster hidden somewhere that actually has mfr part numbers? Or is this just an even more flawed system than I had previously realized?

yellowfin 02-06-2008 12:53 PM

Do both parties have to be CA residents just because one is and/or is physically present in CA?

Librarian 02-06-2008 2:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yellowfin2 (Post 985261)
Do both parties have to be CA residents just because one is and/or is physically present in CA?

No, it's because federal law - as above, 18 USC 922 (a)(3) and (a)(5) - says crossing state lines requires an FFL in the buyer's state, and a seller may not sell to someone he knows does not live in the same state as the seller does business.
Quote:

Why can’t I buy ‘gun x’, not on the Roster, from Joe Smith, or even Joe Smith, FFL, when those folks are out of state?

Federal law requires interstate transfer to go to an FFL in the receiver’s state. [18 USC 922 (a)(3) and (a)(5)] If you live in California, you can’t receive a handgun from out of state unless you have an FFL – and an FFL cannot sell a non-Roster gun to a non-LEO.

Bruce 02-06-2008 10:09 PM

It would seem that SB15 regulates interstate commerce. Why is California allowed to get away with usurping a power that Constitutionally belongs to Congress? It would seem that if one buys a handgun from an out of state party for their own use, one would not be "importing for sale etc..". Further, if I buy a handgun from "X" in Texas, there is no "sale" in California.

mymonkeyman 02-07-2008 1:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bruce (Post 986426)
It would seem that SB15 regulates interstate commerce. Why is California allowed to get away with usurping a power that Constitutionally belongs to Congress? It would seem that if one buys a handgun from an out of state party for their own use, one would not be "importing for sale etc..". Further, if I buy a handgun from "X" in Texas, there is no "sale" in California.

The power to regulate commerce by Congress does not necessarily imply that states lack the power to regulate commerce. Given the Supreme Court's most recent interpretation of the commerce clause (i.e. the Feds can regulate almost anything), it would mean the states had almost no power. The only relevant limitation is the so-called dormant commerce clause which generally says that states cant' discriminate in commerce in favor of in-state entities/goods/services to the detriment of out-of-state entities/goods/services (subject to a myriad of broad exceptions).

Librarian 02-09-2008 1:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bruce (Post 986426)
It would seem that SB15 regulates interstate commerce. Why is California allowed to get away with usurping a power that Constitutionally belongs to Congress? It would seem that if one buys a handgun from an out of state party for their own use, one would not be "importing for sale etc..". Further, if I buy a handgun from "X" in Texas, there is no "sale" in California.

The state isn't doing that - it's the Feds which require that only a FFL holder may receive an interstate transfer. That means the sale is
  • Texas-owner to California-FFL, then, in a new sale,
  • California-FFL to California buyer
and California certainly, with the current state of the law, can regulate what its state-licensed FFLs can sell.

Federal law 18 USC 922 (a)(3) and (a)(5) have been posted on Calguns a bunch of times, or look it up for yourself.

bwiese 02-09-2008 1:16 PM

A big problem with SB15 is that it effectively creates monopolies on replacement parts.

A gun appears to lose its Roster status if modified, even if identical replacement part(s) of equivalent quality/behavior/tolerances were dropped in.

I don't think a rostered Colt 1911 using, say, a replacement Wilson combat or other quality 1991 trigger or hammer or barrel would be regardable as the same gun that was tested/Rostered. [A separate issue may involve Harrott-like listing criteria, however - and that 'listing' (Rostering) is 'good enough.]

This is kinda like saying your GM car's emissions warranty/certification ability to be resold in CA being controlled by required use Delco oil filters, radiator hoses, etc. - but if you buy them from another vendor, your car can't be sold in CA. That'd effectively segment out a nice guaranteed monopoly in repair/warrant parts for Delco. Perhaps some Magnussen-Moss issues and certainly Berkey v Kodak-relevant matters pop up here relating to SB15.

Bruce 02-11-2008 12:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Librarian (Post 991728)
The state isn't doing that - it's the Feds which require that only a FFL holder may receive an interstate transfer. That means the sale is
  • Texas-owner to California-FFL, then, in a new sale,
  • California-FFL to California buyer
and California certainly, with the current state of the law, can regulate what its state-licensed FFLs can sell.

Federal law 18 USC 922 (a)(3) and (a)(5) have been posted on Calguns a bunch of times, or look it up for yourself.


I'm aware that the firearm has to go to an FFL, but the FFL isn't selling anything. He is only receiving the firearm per U.S. law. The buyer isn't "importing for sale" etc, but for his (or her) own use.

bwiese 02-11-2008 12:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bruce (Post 994458)
I'm aware that the firearm has to go to an FFL, but the FFL isn't selling anything. He is only receiving the firearm per U.S. law. The buyer isn't "importing for sale" etc, but for his (or her) own use.

The FFL is regarded as making the sale if he's bringing in a gun for you. The handwaving of you mailing the money to the dude in Nebraska or Texas is just, um, handwaving: the CA FFL is the gatekeeper, the "nexus".

Bruce 02-11-2008 4:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bwiese (Post 994478)
The FFL is regarded as making the sale if he's bringing in a gun for you. The handwaving of you mailing the money to the dude in Nebraska or Texas is just, um, handwaving: the CA FFL is the gatekeeper, the "nexus".

So why has the vaunted NRA done absolutely nothing about repealing, or at the very least, modifying the so-called safe list. Why do they proclaim it a great victory to allow Jan Libourel or Phil Spangenberger test out the latest "unsafe" firearms, but let BULLSH*T like the safe list stand. :mad:

bwiese 02-11-2008 7:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bruce (Post 994560)
So why has the vaunted NRA done absolutely nothing about repealing, or at the very least, modifying the so-called safe list. Why do they proclaim it a great victory to allow Jan Libourel or Phil Spangenberger test out the latest "unsafe" firearms, but let BULLSH*T like the safe list stand. :mad:

In case you haven't noticed, we're in 'occupied territory'. NRA CA leadership would of course love to make it all go away with a magic wand.
If you have the ability to show those folks how to remove it given the current seating in the legislature, I'm sure they'd wanna hire you ;)

NRA is just a few folks PLUS YOU on the phones/email.

But we were stabbed in the back by CAFR/CRPA' Kathy Lynch and Gerry Upholt.

We got the safe gun list in SB15 because of CRPA/CAFR screwup (in conjunction with SASS). It passed by a very few votes and when CRPA's + SASS lobbyists didn't object - since it helped protect large gun dealer/distributors as it gave them a competitive advantage over smaller gun dealers (who couldn't deal with the added inventory costs of turning around guns that fell off the Roster, unlike big guys that could just rotate 'em back to the distributor). The SASS guy got bought off when he got his precious single-actions protected.

When fence-sitting legislators saw a split amongst the 'gun people' - not realizing the deatils - they figured it wasn't unified enough and therefore a 'safe vote' to vote for.

Rolling back gun control is an incremental thing and often best done in the courts.

The recent 'journalists' exemption' is something that can slide thru and can be enhanced in future legislation.

Hell, many Calgunners might be able to use it if we start a Products Review column for makes/models :)

Bruce 02-11-2008 6:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bwiese (Post 994652)
Rolling back gun control is an incremental thing and often best done in the courts.

And at the glacial pace the NRA is moving, our great,great, great, great,great, great, great, great, great, great grandchildren will be allowed to look at a pencil sketch of an arquebus, under proper supervision of course, without being arrested.(Counselling will be required afterward.) :mad:
It seems like the NRA so afraid of losing that they promote meaningless legislation and trumpet the great "victory" when it gets passed. They refused to support the California 2nd Ammendment initiative. They weren't even in favor of Heller until it got to SCOTUS! Once it did they jumped on the band wagon.

RRangel 02-11-2008 6:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bruce (Post 995821)
And at the glacial pace the NRA is moving, our great,great, great, great,great, great, great, great, great, great grandchildren will be allowed to look at a pencil sketch of an arquebus, under proper supervision of course, without being arrested.(Counselling will be required afterward.) :mad:
It seems like the NRA so afraid of losing that they promote meaningless legislation and trumpet the great "victory" when it gets passed. They refused to support the California 2nd Ammendment initiative. They weren't even in favor of Heller until it got to SCOTUS! Once it did they jumped on the band wagon.

Since you know exactly what needs to be done why don't you enlighten us? By all means I'd love to hear it.

wooger 02-11-2008 6:42 PM

Wake up and look around this site to see what the NRA and its members can do.

Bruce 02-11-2008 6:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by forumguy (Post 995839)
Since you know exactly what needs to be done why don't you enlighten us? By all means I'd love to hear it.

I know that waiting until the anti's pass every restriction they can dream up and then "incrementally" trying to undo the damage isn't a viable strategy. It hasn't worked so far.
Sorry you don't like my exposing that "the emperor has no clothes". Why don't you enlighten me on what the NRA has accomplished in California since 1999?
I'm an NRA member. But I have begun to wonder why I am when the great legislative victory of 2007 was an exemption for a bunch of hack magazine writers.

Bruce 02-11-2008 7:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wooger (Post 995842)
Wake up and look around this site to see what the NRA and its members can do.

You mean like a semi-auto rifle with a permanently attached magazine? whoopee. Where's the great legal or legislative effort to get SB23 tossed?

RRangel 02-11-2008 7:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bruce (Post 995866)
I know that waiting until the anti's pass every restriction they can dream up and then "incrementally" trying to undo the damage isn't a viable strategy. It hasn't worked so far.
Sorry you don't like my exposing that "the emperor has no clothes". Why don't you enlighten me on what the NRA has accomplished in California since 1999?
I'm an NRA member. But I have begun to wonder why I am when the great legislative victory of 2007 was an exemption for a bunch of hack magazine writers.

The anti's passing any restriction is the fault of those who elect them, and not the NRA. They do not control elections or those who think up numerous ideas to remove our rights. If it wasn't for NRA and its members I'm certain we wouldn't have the guns we have in this state.

You're either venting, or you must not realize how bad this state really is when it comes to socialism. Venting on this forum won't help you. The deck is stacked against guns, and gun owners in this state. Liberals are just looking for excuses to pass more gun control. I don't doubt for one moment they're looking for every reason to ignore gun owners, and the NRA. We're outnumbered, and that's just a reality. With so much energy why don't you volunteer at your local NRA members council?

Bruce 02-11-2008 7:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by forumguy (Post 995956)
The anti's passing any restriction is the fault of those who elect them, and not the NRA. They do not control elections or those who think up numerous ideas to remove our rights. If it wasn't for NRA and its members I'm certain we wouldn't have the guns we have in this state.

You're either venting, or you must not realize how bad this state really is when it comes to socialism. Venting on this forum won't help you. The deck is stacked against guns, and gun owners in this state. Liberals are just looking for excuses to pass more gun control. I don't doubt for one moment they're looking for every reason to ignore gun owners, and the NRA. We're outnumbered, and that's just a reality. With so much energy why don't you volunteer at your local NRA members council?

I really upset you didn't I?

Librarian 02-11-2008 7:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bruce (Post 995881)
You mean like a semi-auto rifle with a permanently attached magazine? whoopee. Where's the great legal or legislative effort to get SB23 tossed?

Where are the votes in the Legislature?

If you can figure out how to get 21 in the State Senate and 41 in the Assembly, I'd be very interested in hearing your plan.

Legal? With the 9th Circuit governing California? We need something to change 9th Circuit's legal analysis. Got something in the last 16 years that would overturn Fresno Rifle? If so, please share.

BTW, not to rain on your parade, but kindly start a new thread for NRA discussions; this one is for the Roster of Handguns Certified for Sale and related inanities.

RRangel 02-11-2008 7:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bruce (Post 995966)
I really upset you didn't I?

I'm not the one venting.

;)

This site was created years ago so that people may get involved. Stop complaining and do something.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 4:10 AM.

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