Calguns.net  

Home My iTrader Join the NRA Donate to CGSSA Sponsors CGN Google Search
CA Semiauto Ban(AW)ID Flowchart CA Handgun Ban ID Flowchart CA Shotgun Ban ID Flowchart
Go Back   Calguns.net > POLITICS, LITIGATION AND ACTIVISM > California 2nd Amend. Political Discussion & Activism
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

California 2nd Amend. Political Discussion & Activism Discuss gun rights activism and 2A related political topics here. All advice given is NOT legal counsel.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 01-24-2013, 10:06 PM
Markinsac Markinsac is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 570
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default 2013 CA AB 170 Bradford - AB-170 Assault weapons and .50 BMG rifles

This one will only allow an individual to register or renew an "assault weapon" permit - no corporations, LLCs, etc. It would probably put any of the ranges that rent them out for shooting from keeping them.

http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/fa...201320140AB170

Quote:
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST


AB 170, as introduced, Bradford. Assault weapons and .50 BMG rifles.
Existing law, subject to exceptions, generally prohibits the possession of an assault weapon or a .50 BMG rifle, as defined. Violation of these prohibitions is a criminal offense. Existing law requires a person who wishes to acquire an assault weapon or .50 BMG rifle to obtain a permit from the Department of Justice. Existing law defines “person” as an individual, partnership, corporation, limited liability company, association, or any other group or entity, regardless of how it was created, for these permit purposes and other purposes related to the regulation of assault weapons and .50 BMG rifles. Existing law requires a permit to possess a machinegun. Violation of these provisions is a criminal offense.
This bill would define “person” as an individual for those permit purposes for assault weapons, .50 BMG rifles, and machineguns, and other purposes related to the regulation of assault weapons and .50 BMG rifles. The bill would except application of that definition from provisions that generally prohibit the manufacture, distribution, transportation, importation, keeping for sale, offering for sale, exposing for sale, giving, or lending, of an assault weapon or .50 BMG rifle, and from provisions imposing specified sentencing enhancements related to violations of law relating to assault weapons or .50 BMG rifles. The bill would make additional conforming changes, including changes relating to annual inspections, for security and safe storage purposes, of certain permitees possessing assault weapons or .50 BMG rifles, as specified.
By changing provisions of law regulating the acquisition of assault weapons and .50 BMG rifles, the violation of which is a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.
The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.
This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Digest KeyVote: MAJORITY Appropriation: NO Fiscal Committee: YES Local Program: YES

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Text

The people of the State of California do enact as follows:


SECTION 1. Section 16970 of the Penal Code is amended to read:

16970. (a) As used in Sections 16790 and 17505 and in Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 30500) of Division 10 of Title 4, 30600, and 30615, “person” means an individual, partnership, corporation, limited liability company, association, or any other group or entity, regardless of how it was created.
(b) As used in Section 16970 and Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 30500) of Division 10 of Title 4, except for Sections 30600 and 30615, “person” means an individual.

SEC. 2. Section 31000 of the Penal Code is amended to read:

31000. (a) Any person who lawfully acquired an assault weapon before June 1, 1989, or a .50 BMG rifle before January 1, 2005, and wishes to use it in a manner different than specified in Section 30945 shall first obtain a permit from the Department of Justice in the same manner as specified in Article 3 (commencing with Section 32650) of Chapter 6.
(b) Any person who lawfully acquired an assault weapon between June 1, 1989, and January 1, 1990, and wishes to keep it after January 1, 1990, shall first obtain a permit from the Department of Justice in the same manner as specified in Article 3 (commencing with Section 32650) of Chapter 6.
(c) Any person who wishes to acquire an assault weapon after January 1, 1990, or a .50 BMG rifle after January 1, 2005, shall first obtain a permit from the Department of Justice in the same manner as specified in Article 3 (commencing with Section 32650) of Chapter 6.
(d) On and after January 1, 2014, no partnership, corporation, limited liability company, association, or any other group or entity, regardless of how the entity was created, may be issued a permit to posses an assault weapon or a .50 BMG rifle.

SEC. 3. Section 31110 of the Penal Code is amended to read:

31110. (a) Except as provided in subdivision (b), the Department of Justice shall, for every person, firm, or corporation to whom a permit is issued pursuant to this article, annually conduct an inspection for security and safe storage purposes, and to reconcile the inventory of assault weapons.
(b) A person, firm, or corporation with an inventory of fewer than five devices that require any Department of Justice permit shall be subject to an inspection for security and safe storage purposes, and to reconcile inventory, once every five years, or more frequently if determined by the department.

SEC. 4. Section 32650 of the Penal Code is amended to read:

32650. (a) The Department of Justice may issue permits for the possession, manufacture, and transportation or possession, manufacture, or transportation of machineguns, upon a satisfactory showing that good cause exists for the issuance of the permit to the applicant. No permit shall be issued to a person who is under 18 years of age.
(b) A permit for possession issued pursuant to this section may only be issued to an individual, and may not be issued to a partnership, corporation, limited liability company, association, or any other group or entity, regardless of how that entity was created.

SEC. 5. No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution because the only costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school district will be incurred because this act creates a new crime or infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the Government Code, or changes the definition of a crime within the meaning of Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution.

Last edited by Librarian; 01-25-2013 at 12:46 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 01-24-2013, 10:27 PM
Apocalypsenerd's Avatar
Apocalypsenerd Apocalypsenerd is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Oceanside, CA
Posts: 921
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Registration ALWAYS precedes confiscation.
__________________
Let me handle your property needs and I will donate 10% of the brokerage total commission to CG.
Buy or sell a home.
Property management including vacation rentals.
We can help with loans and refi's. 10% of all commissions will be donated to CG.

Serving the greater San Diego area.

Aaron Ross - BRE #01865640
CA Broker
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 01-24-2013, 10:33 PM
LOW2000's Avatar
LOW2000 LOW2000 is offline
Senior Member
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Lakewood, CA
Posts: 944
iTrader: 8 / 100%
Default

Looks like they take seriously the idea that if a DWP can be issued to a corporation, that opens floodgates potentially. Looks like the idea has merit.
__________________
All comments are solely for educational purposes and are spoken in a hypothetical manner. The poster follows any and all statutes, codes, mandates, etc to the letter of the law.

Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 01-24-2013, 10:40 PM
cleonard cleonard is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 98
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

So no more so called assault weapons and 50 BMGs in Hollywood movies after 2014?
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 01-24-2013, 10:43 PM
Rusty_Rebar Rusty_Rebar is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Chico, CA
Posts: 274
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

would this have any impact on a gun trust?
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 01-24-2013, 10:50 PM
fizux's Avatar
fizux fizux is offline
Senior Member
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 1,541
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rusty_Rebar View Post
would this have any impact on a gun trust?
It depends.
__________________
Nationwide Master List of Current 2A Cases, courtesy of Al Norris @ TFL.

Reloading Clubs: SF, East Bay

Case Status: Peña v. Cid (Handgun Roster). SF v. 44Mag (Mag Parts Kits). Bauer v. Harris (DROS Fees). Davis v. LA (CCW policy). Jackson v. SF (Ammo/Storage). Teixeira (FFL Zoning). First Unitarian v. NSA (Privacy). Silvester (Waiting Period). Schoepf (DROS Delay). Haynie (AW ban). SFVPOA v. SF (10+ mag possession ban). Bear in Public: Drake (3CA); Moore (7CA); Richards, Peruta, McKay (9CA).
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 01-25-2013, 7:01 AM
Hoooper Hoooper is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Petaluma
Posts: 2,399
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

so, would this affect any/all the firearms manufacturers in the state including suppliers to DoD?
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 01-25-2013, 8:29 AM
spamsucker spamsucker is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 707
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

way to ruin the propmasters industry. Bye bye hollywood.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 01-25-2013, 8:32 AM
Ubermcoupe's Avatar
Ubermcoupe Ubermcoupe is offline
★ Junior G Man ✈
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: This information has been redacted in accordance with Title 18 USC Section 798
Posts: 12,677
iTrader: 52 / 100%
Blog Entries: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LOW2000 View Post
Looks like they take seriously the idea that if a DWP can be issued to a corporation, that opens floodgates potentially. Looks like the idea has merit.
My thoughts exactly.
__________________
Hauoli Makahiki Hou


-------
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 01-25-2013, 8:35 AM
CABilly's Avatar
CABilly CABilly is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,287
iTrader: 35 / 100%
Default

Hollywood can use airsoft and CGI. They don't need the real thing any more than the peasants do.
__________________
WTB: C&R sxs 12g shotgun, ammo cans.

WTT: 1K rounds 9mm for ???

Don't feed the cannibals.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 01-25-2013, 8:55 AM
compulsivegunbuyer compulsivegunbuyer is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,816
iTrader: 56 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CABilly View Post
Hollywood can use airsoft and CGI. They don't need the real thing any more than the peasants do.
Their intent on bankrupting the state anyways, so why sould they care. Hollywood has been leaving for more cost friendly places for a while now.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 01-25-2013, 10:28 AM
Whiterabbit Whiterabbit is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 5,397
iTrader: 12 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CABilly View Post
Hollywood can use airsoft and CGI. They don't need the real thing any more than the peasants do.
Arent they in LA? Doesnt that mean their airsoft props need to be painted bright orange?
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 01-25-2013, 10:38 AM
nothinghere2c's Avatar
nothinghere2c nothinghere2c is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 2,282
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Whiterabbit View Post
Arent they in LA? Doesnt that mean their airsoft props need to be painted bright orange?


yes, considering they can be, with minimal work, converted into machine guns.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 01-25-2013, 10:39 AM
PhillyGunner PhillyGunner is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Back East
Posts: 750
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Let me see if I get this right. Corporations are protected under the 1st Amendment, but not the 2nd?
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 01-25-2013, 10:43 AM
kmca's Avatar
kmca kmca is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Jose
Posts: 2,354
iTrader: 21 / 100%
Default

There's those pesky old "may issue" and "show good cause" statements again.
There's usually an exception for the movie business.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 01-25-2013, 10:58 AM
HiveDR. HiveDR. is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: california
Posts: 265
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Who is going to pay for the inspectors to drive all around Ca.? Are they just going to show up without an appointment? This could cost the state a lot of money.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 01-25-2013, 11:02 AM
mag360 mag360 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 5,037
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

they are just pissed that the Office of Administrative Law or something like that said they couldnt ban corps from sharing their permit with all employees, costing the state precious $$$ in licensing *each* and *every* person working with the guns.
__________________
just happy to be here. I like talking about better ways to protect ourselves.

Shop at AMAZON to help Calguns Foundation

CRPA Life Member. Click here to Join.

NRA Member JOIN HERE/
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 02-08-2013, 9:30 AM
franklinarmory's Avatar
franklinarmory franklinarmory is online now
Vendor/Retailer
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Morgan Hill
Posts: 1,175
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

This legislation is directly related to the fact that we won when we petitioned OAL. It is a DOJ coverup to clear up the matter since they were unwilling to follow their own written law.

I have great respect for law enforcement, but that does not include agencies that would seek to deprive my rights under the color of authority. Even if this passes (which it likely will,) this issue is not over. Agency administrators have intentionally used their office to illegally prevent my company from even applying for an AW license. They may believe that they are immune from prosecution or that their agency provides them some sort of personal liability coverage. However, I suspect their policies do not condone blatantly illegal acts that violate any entity's right to "due process."

...and yes, I'm sure DOJ staff will read this at some point. If you're a shot caller on this deal, shame on you for not following the law! We still are a Constitutional Democracy, right? You did swear an oath to defend that Constitution, right? Your day in Federal Court is coming.
__________________

www.franklinarmory.com
info@franklinarmory.com
ONLINE STORE: http://franklin-armory.myshopify.com/
Franklin Armory - Manufacturer of Quality, California Legal AR's, the F17 Series rimfire rifles in 17 WSM, the CSW, the Release Firing System, the Binary Firing System, and the NEW DFM Magazine!!!
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 08-29-2013, 3:45 AM
Dutch3's Avatar
Dutch3 Dutch3 is offline
Dirt Farmer
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Butte County
Posts: 11,712
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

It looks like AB 170 is on the Senate daily file for a third reading today. Item #57.
__________________
Assembly Public Safety Chair Reginald Jones-Sawyer:
..."and with that I'd like to turn it over to my colleague Loni Hancock, Senate Public Safety Chair, and as I like to say, my partner in crime."

Senate Public Safety Chair Loni Hancock:
"Yeah, we do that quite a lot, actually..."

- Joint Legislative Informational Hearing on Firearms - Newsom Initiative #1756 - May 3rd 2016
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 08-29-2013, 5:46 AM
sl0re10 sl0re10 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 6,681
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CABilly View Post
Hollywood can use airsoft and CGI. They don't need the real thing any more than the peasants do.
The studios have been testing the waters outside of California for a long time. Just means shoot more scenes out of state.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 08-29-2013, 7:40 AM
MustangSteveGT's Avatar
MustangSteveGT MustangSteveGT is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Redwood Country
Posts: 790
iTrader: 8 / 100%
Default

Yet another special interest group of shooters (Hollywood gun handlers) who was all for this back when the orginal ban to us regular 'peons'. Guess what Hollywood, now they are coming after your goods too. Just like all the hunters who say, "What do you stupid kids need an AR15 for anyways?" Guess what elmer fudd, they're going after your sport as well with AB711.

AB170 is yet another example of how if the entire industry and population of gun owners IS united against ALL comprimise, that is the only way we maintain anything in the long run. Inch by inch, every window is closed one by one.

Next will be if SB 375 passes and exempts rimfire... "The government isnt after our guns, what did you need your semi auto magazine fed gun for anyways. All I ever needed was my cowboy guns and these rimfire hunting rifles."-say fence sitting closet turncoat gun owner U.S.A.

This is an issue in our country where if you are for our gun rights, you really need to pick sides because every little comprimise is leading to us losing everything. The slippery slope.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 08-29-2013, 7:57 AM
chris's Avatar
chris chris is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: In Texas for now
Posts: 17,321
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HiveDR. View Post
Who is going to pay for the inspectors to drive all around Ca.? Are they just going to show up without an appointment? This could cost the state a lot of money.
They dont care its not their money.
__________________
http://govnews.ca.gov/gov39mail/mail.php

Quote:
Public Safety Chairman Reggie Jones Sawyer, D-Los Angeles said, “This is California; we don’t pay too much attention to the Constitution,”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z6Dj8tdSC1A
contact the governor
https://govnews.ca.gov/gov39mail/mail.php
In Memory of Spc Torres May 5th 2006 al-Hillah, Iraq. I will miss you my friend.
When Hell is full the dead will walk the Earth. (Dawn of the Dead)
NRA Life Member.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 08-29-2013, 7:59 AM
chris's Avatar
chris chris is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: In Texas for now
Posts: 17,321
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MustangSteveGT View Post
Yet another special interest group of shooters (Hollywood gun handlers) who was all for this back when the orginal ban to us regular 'peons'. Guess what Hollywood, now they are coming after your goods too. Just like all the hunters who say, "What do you stupid kids need an AR15 for anyways?" Guess what elmer fudd, they're going after your sport as well with AB711.

AB170 is yet another example of how if the entire industry and population of gun owners IS united against ALL comprimise, that is the only way we maintain anything in the long run. Inch by inch, every window is closed one by one.

Next will be if SB 375 passes and exempts rimfire... "The government isnt after our guns, what did you need your semi auto magazine fed gun for anyways. All I ever needed was my cowboy guns and these rimfire hunting rifles."-say fence sitting closet turncoat gun owner U.S.A.

This is an issue in our country where if you are for our gun rights, you really need to pick sides because every little comprimise is leading to us losing everything. The slippery slope.
I hunt and never ever supported any gun legislation that will ban one type of firearm and not another. Those hunters who do are idiots.
__________________
http://govnews.ca.gov/gov39mail/mail.php

Quote:
Public Safety Chairman Reggie Jones Sawyer, D-Los Angeles said, “This is California; we don’t pay too much attention to the Constitution,”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z6Dj8tdSC1A
contact the governor
https://govnews.ca.gov/gov39mail/mail.php
In Memory of Spc Torres May 5th 2006 al-Hillah, Iraq. I will miss you my friend.
When Hell is full the dead will walk the Earth. (Dawn of the Dead)
NRA Life Member.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 08-29-2013, 8:09 AM
MustangSteveGT's Avatar
MustangSteveGT MustangSteveGT is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Redwood Country
Posts: 790
iTrader: 8 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chris View Post
I hunt and never ever supported any gun legislation that will ban one type of firearm and not another. Those hunters who do are idiots.
I apologize because I think my comment sounded too generalized but unfortunately I have encountered more than a few of this category of gun owner in my conversations with people since Sandy Hook.
It makes no sense to me because they identify as gun owners/hunters/sportsman but at the same time have a hatred for their own gun rights that allow them to do it.

Then again there's also people what stay in the U.S. and enjoy our living conditions and way of life but claim we would be better off as a socialist government. Even had a guy yesterday at work trying to convince me that we shouldnt even have the internet because people use the information to commit crimes. I tell the guy, "you've got to make the good with the bad." There really are a lot of people who would suffice to let the government have complete control because they buy the crap the media is putting out and the fear mongering of our own rights and liberties that us Americans. Guns, being one such right under fire.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 08-29-2013, 12:12 PM
a1fabweld's Avatar
a1fabweld a1fabweld is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 4,422
iTrader: 14 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by spamsucker View Post
way to ruin the propmasters industry. Bye bye hollywood.
FK Hollywood & the liberal hypocrites. May they get exactly what they whished for. NO GUNS. I'd like to see how Rambo 7 turn out if "Sly" is packing a tactical baseball bat instead of a belt-fed.
__________________
.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 11-28-2013, 5:53 PM
16 Bus Shelter 16 Bus Shelter is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 33
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Does this mean that if a corporation is an FFL in California that it won't be able to apply for an assault weapons license?
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 11-28-2013, 6:17 PM
MEDIC!'s Avatar
MEDIC! MEDIC! is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Apple Valley
Posts: 426
iTrader: 12 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by spamsucker View Post
way to ruin the propmasters industry. Bye bye hollywood.
I was the set medic on the first 2 seasons of Top Shot. ... They've long left. Too much BS here in CA. Not sure if the armorer for the show is still doing business in CA. I'm sure they won't be pleased by this though.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 11-28-2013, 7:35 PM
guntrust's Avatar
guntrust guntrust is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: South Orange County, where I regularly provide free training in Estate Planning and Concealed Carry
Posts: 405
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rusty_Rebar View Post
would this have any impact on a gun trust?
With very few exceptions, a trust is not an entity but a relationship between individuals, so this law is very unlikely to affect gun trusts.

The only major exception i am aware of is the National Firearms Act, which treats trusts as entities. It is also possible that a statutory business trust or a trust drafted and used for attracting investment and apportioning economic benefit may be treated as an "association" but i think this would be rarely encountered, if ever. The typical gun trust is not used to organize a business and most businesses would organize as a corp or LLC.
__________________
Estate Planning for Gun Owners
Free public webinar schedule here:
http://lawnews.tv/webinar/
Free member training here:


Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 6:11 AM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Proudly hosted by GeoVario the Premier 2A host.
Calguns.net, the 'Calguns' name and all associated variants and logos are ® Trademark and © Copyright 2002-2016, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.