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 01-30-2013, 12:50 PM
Librarian's Avatar
Librarian Librarian is offline
Super Moderator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Concord
Posts: 32,267
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Blog Entries: 6
Default 2013 CA SB 140 Leno - Amend budget to allow DROS funds - SIGNED BY GOV

http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/fa...arch_keywords=

LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST

SB 140, as introduced, Leno. Budget Act of 2012: firearms.
The Budget Act of 2012 made appropriations for the support of state government for the 2012-13 fiscal year.
This bill would amend the Budget Act of 2012 by revising an item of appropriation for the Department of Justice relating to the Armed Prohibitive Persons System (APPS).
This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Digest Key
Vote: 2/3 Appropriation: YES Fiscal Committee: YES Local Program: NO
Bill Text
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:

SECTION 1.
The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:
(a) California is the first and only state in the nation to establish an automated system for tracking handgun and assault weapon owners who might fall into a prohibited status.
(b) The online database, which is currently known as the Armed Prohibited Persons System (APPS), cross-references all handgun and assault weapon owners across the state against criminal history records to determine persons who have been, or will become, prohibited from possessing a firearm subsequent to the legal acquisition or registration of a firearm or assault weapon.
(c) Each day, the list of armed prohibited persons in California grows by about 15 to 20 people. There are currently more than 19,000 armed prohibited persons in California. Collectively, these individuals are believed to be in possession of over 34,000 handguns and 1,590 assault weapons.
(d) Neither the Department of Justice nor local law enforcement has sufficient resources to confiscate the enormous backlog of weapons, nor can they keep up with the daily influx of newly prohibited persons.
(e) It is the intent of the Legislature in enacting this measure to allow the Department of Justice to utilize additional Dealers’ Record of Sale Special Account funds for the limited purpose of addressing the current APPS backlog and the illegal possession of these firearms, which presents a substantial danger to public safety.
__________________
Calguns Wiki, Magazine Qs, Knife laws

Unless there is some way to amend a bill so you would support it,
the details do not matter until the Governor signs or allows the bill to become law.

Ask CA law questions in the How CA Laws Apply to/Affect Me Forum
- most questions that start 'Is it legal ...' go there.

Not a lawyer, just Some Guy On The Interwebs.


Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 01-30-2013, 1:07 PM
Hogstir Hogstir is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 327
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Why are legal firearms purchasers the ones who have to pay for the DOJ to do its job. Those buzzards will probably raise DROS fees now
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 01-30-2013, 1:12 PM
wildhawker's Avatar
wildhawker wildhawker is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: California
Posts: 14,407
iTrader: 84 / 100%
Default

They're looking to use the DROS surplus to:

[a] make NRA's DROS case difficult to win,
[b] justify keeping DROS fees at current levels, perhaps higher,
[c] acquire data for future bills and to defend against lawsuits assuming intermediate scrutiny.

SB 140, an urgency bill, is a key item for the opposition.

-Brandon
__________________
Brandon Combs

I do not read private messages, and my inbox is usually full. If you need to reach me, please email me instead.

My comments are not the official position or a statement of any organization unless stated otherwise. My comments are not legal advice; if you want or need legal advice, hire a lawyer.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 01-30-2013, 2:43 PM
NorCalMik's Avatar
NorCalMik NorCalMik is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 138
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wildhawker View Post
SB 140, an urgency bill, is a key item for the opposition.

-Brandon
It's a budget trailer bill. Several of them on an annual basis are urgency measures. Note that it is revising last year's budget.
__________________
"Nothing in the world can take the place of Persistence. Talent will not; nothing is more common than unsuccessful men with talent. Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost a proverb. Education will not; the world is full of educated derelicts. Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent. The slogan 'Press On' has solved and always will solve the problems of the human race." Calvin Coolidge

Last edited by NorCalMik; 01-30-2013 at 2:49 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 03-05-2013, 11:31 AM
NorCalMik's Avatar
NorCalMik NorCalMik is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 138
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

In case you missed it, there is testimony on SB 140 from yesterday's hearing here: http://calchannel.granicus.com/Media...=7&clip_id=970
__________________
"Nothing in the world can take the place of Persistence. Talent will not; nothing is more common than unsuccessful men with talent. Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost a proverb. Education will not; the world is full of educated derelicts. Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent. The slogan 'Press On' has solved and always will solve the problems of the human race." Calvin Coolidge
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 03-07-2013, 2:03 PM
NorCalMik's Avatar
NorCalMik NorCalMik is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 138
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la...2910994.column

Voted off the Senate Floor today 31-0.

http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalert...t-efforts.html
__________________
"Nothing in the world can take the place of Persistence. Talent will not; nothing is more common than unsuccessful men with talent. Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost a proverb. Education will not; the world is full of educated derelicts. Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent. The slogan 'Press On' has solved and always will solve the problems of the human race." Calvin Coolidge
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 03-07-2013, 2:32 PM
wildhawker's Avatar
wildhawker wildhawker is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: California
Posts: 14,407
iTrader: 84 / 100%
Default

Norcal, I have no idea what point you were trying to make above.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 03-07-2013, 2:44 PM
Markinsac Markinsac is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 563
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wildhawker View Post
Norcal, I have no idea what point you were trying to make above.
The bill was passed in the Senate 31-0, and is being sent over to the Assembly.

http://www.sacbee.com/2013/03/07/524...-approves.html
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 03-07-2013, 3:27 PM
NorCalMik's Avatar
NorCalMik NorCalMik is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 138
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wildhawker View Post
Norcal, I have no idea what point you were trying to make above.
Just providing an update of what took place along with some articles written about the proceedings.
__________________
"Nothing in the world can take the place of Persistence. Talent will not; nothing is more common than unsuccessful men with talent. Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost a proverb. Education will not; the world is full of educated derelicts. Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent. The slogan 'Press On' has solved and always will solve the problems of the human race." Calvin Coolidge
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 03-07-2013, 3:29 PM
big jim's Avatar
big jim big jim is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 308
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

So some people are being delayed months and instead of hiring more analysts to speed that up they want to use the money for something it was not originally for?
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 03-07-2013, 4:10 PM
NorCalMik's Avatar
NorCalMik NorCalMik is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 138
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by big jim View Post
So some people are being delayed months and instead of hiring more analysts to speed that up they want to use the money for something it was not originally for?
IIRC, during the committee testimony this was brought up by the pro-2A advocates and even mention of upgrading the database like other states but this point was largely lost on the committee.

Simple answer to your question is yes.
__________________
"Nothing in the world can take the place of Persistence. Talent will not; nothing is more common than unsuccessful men with talent. Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost a proverb. Education will not; the world is full of educated derelicts. Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent. The slogan 'Press On' has solved and always will solve the problems of the human race." Calvin Coolidge
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 03-07-2013, 5:21 PM
CBruce's Avatar
CBruce CBruce is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 1,994
iTrader: 8 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Librarian View Post
http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/fa...arch_keywords=

LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST

SB 140, as introduced, Leno. Budget Act of 2012: firearms.
The Budget Act of 2012 made appropriations for the support of state government for the 2012-13 fiscal year.
This bill would amend the Budget Act of 2012 by revising an item of appropriation for the Department of Justice relating to the Armed Prohibitive Persons System (APPS).
This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Digest Key
Vote: 2/3 Appropriation: YES Fiscal Committee: YES Local Program: NO
Bill Text
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:

SECTION 1.
The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:
(a) California is the first and only state in the nation to establish an automated system for tracking handgun and assault weapon owners who might fall into a prohibited status.
(b) The online database, which is currently known as the Armed Prohibited Persons System (APPS), cross-references all handgun and assault weapon owners across the state against criminal history records to determine persons who have been, or will become, prohibited from possessing a firearm subsequent to the legal acquisition or registration of a firearm or assault weapon.
(c) Each day, the list of armed prohibited persons in California grows by about 15 to 20 people. There are currently more than 19,000 armed prohibited persons in California. Collectively, these individuals are believed to be in possession of over 34,000 handguns and 1,590 assault weapons.
(d) Neither the Department of Justice nor local law enforcement has sufficient resources to confiscate the enormous backlog of weapons, nor can they keep up with the daily influx of newly prohibited persons.
(e) It is the intent of the Legislature in enacting this measure to allow the Department of Justice to utilize additional Dealers’ Record of Sale Special Account funds for the limited purpose of addressing the current APPS backlog and the illegal possession of these firearms, which presents a substantial danger to public safety.
How are DROS funds used now?
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 03-07-2013, 5:28 PM
anthonyca anthonyca is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 5,083
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CBruce View Post
How are DROS funds used now?
There is a surplus of millions. Imagine that, a government program with a surplus. That just shows that the DROS fees are inexcusably high. Think about how excessive a government fee has to be that they can not squander every penny and more.

I know from calling the DOJ, the funds are not used to hire people who will actually do their job.
__________________
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Union...70812799700206

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wherryj View Post
I am a physician. I am held to being "the expert" in medicine. I can't fall back on feigned ignorance and the statement that the patient should have known better than I. When an officer "can't be expected to know the entire penal code", but a citizen is held to "ignorance is no excuse", this is equivalent to ME being able to sue my patient for my own malpractice-after all, the patient should have known better, right?
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 03-07-2013, 6:39 PM
Librarian's Avatar
Librarian Librarian is offline
Super Moderator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Concord
Posts: 32,267
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Blog Entries: 6
Default

PC 28225 says
Quote:
28225. (a) The Department of Justice may require the dealer to
charge each firearm purchaser a fee not to exceed fourteen dollars
($14), except that the fee may be increased at a rate not to exceed
any increase in the California Consumer Price Index as compiled and
reported by the Department of Industrial Relations.
(b) The fee under subdivision (a) shall be no more than is
necessary to fund the following:
(1) The department for the cost of furnishing this information.
(2) The department for the cost of meeting its obligations under
paragraph (2) of subdivision (b) of Section 8100 of the Welfare and
Institutions Code.
(3) Local mental health facilities for state-mandated local costs
resulting from the reporting requirements imposed by Section 8103 of
the Welfare and Institutions Code.
(4) The State Department of State Hospitals for the costs
resulting from the requirements imposed by Section 8104 of the
Welfare and Institutions Code.
(5) Local mental hospitals, sanitariums, and institutions for
state-mandated local costs resulting from the reporting requirements
imposed by Section 8105 of the Welfare and Institutions Code.
(6) Local law enforcement agencies for state-mandated local costs
resulting from the notification requirements set forth in subdivision
(a) of Section 6385 of the Family Code.
(7) Local law enforcement agencies for state-mandated local costs
resulting from the notification requirements set forth in subdivision
(c) of Section 8105 of the Welfare and Institutions Code.
(8) For the actual costs associated with the electronic or
telephonic transfer of information pursuant to Section 28215.
(9) The Department of Food and Agriculture for the costs resulting
from the notification provisions set forth in Section 5343.5 of the
Food and Agricultural Code.
(10) The department for the costs associated with subdivisions (d)
and (e) of Section 27560.
(11) The department for the costs associated with funding
Department of Justice firearms-related regulatory and enforcement
activities related to the sale, purchase, possession, loan, or
transfer of firearms pursuant to any provision listed in Section
16580.
PC 28230 says
Quote:
28230. (a) The Department of Justice may charge a fee sufficient to
reimburse it for each of the following but not to exceed fourteen
dollars ($14), except that the fee may be increased at a rate not to
exceed any increase in the California Consumer Price Index as
compiled and reported by the Department of Industrial Relations:
...
(2) For the actual processing costs associated with the submission
of a Dealers' Record of Sale to the department.
SB 140 currently says
Quote:
30015.
(a) The sum of twenty-four million dollars ($24,000,000) is hereby appropriated from the Dealers’ Record of Sale Special Account in the General Fund to the Department of Justice to address the backlog in the Armed Prohibited Persons System (APPS) and the illegal possession of firearms by those prohibited persons.
LaMalfa's SB 269 http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/fa...201120120SB269 now says
Quote:
SECTION 1.
Section 28237 is added to the Penal Code, to read:

28237.
(a) The Department of Justice, on or before July 1 shall annually issue a report to the Legislature regarding the status of the revenues generated by the Dealers’ Record of Sale fees pursuant to this article. The report shall contain all of the following:
(1) The balance of the Dealers’ Record of Sale Special Account of the General Fund as of July 1 of the year previous to the issuance of the report.
(2) The balance of the Dealers’ Record of Sale Special Account of the General Fund as of June 30 of the same year as the year the report is issued.
(3) Itemized expenditures of funds in the Dealers’ Record of Sale Special Account of the General Fund. Each itemized expenditure in the report shall include a reference to the statutory authority authorizing that expenditure.
(4) Information regarding every loan made from funds in the Dealers’ Record of Sale Special Account of the General Fund including the date, amount, recipient, and reimbursement status of every loan.
(b) The report shall be submitted in compliance with Section 9795 of the Government Code.
The Manual of State Funds describes the DROS fund here.

DOJ Budget (via the proposal for 2013-2014) here.
__________________
Calguns Wiki, Magazine Qs, Knife laws

Unless there is some way to amend a bill so you would support it,
the details do not matter until the Governor signs or allows the bill to become law.

Ask CA law questions in the How CA Laws Apply to/Affect Me Forum
- most questions that start 'Is it legal ...' go there.

Not a lawyer, just Some Guy On The Interwebs.



Last edited by Librarian; 03-07-2013 at 6:49 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 03-07-2013, 6:57 PM
OleCuss OleCuss is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Kalifornia
Posts: 5,984
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

I'm thinking there should be litigation on this one. . .

It seems to me that the DROS fee is effectively a tax on a fundamental right.

Using the DROS fees for crime fighting means that the fee is not actually aimed at enabling the exercise of that fundamental right. To me that means the right is clearly being infringed.

Also, why are they bothering? I bet they're not really going to incarcerate the felons for more than a few minutes and they'll be right out on the street again buying another firearm.

We have idiots ruling us.
__________________
CGN's token life-long teetotaling vegetarian. Not qualified to give any legal opinion so pay attention at your own risk.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 03-07-2013, 7:27 PM
freonr22's Avatar
freonr22 freonr22 is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: San Jose
Posts: 11,807
iTrader: 28 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OleCuss View Post
I'm thinking there should be litigation on this one. . .

It seems to me that the DROS fee is effectively a tax on a fundamental right.

Using the DROS fees for crime fighting means that the fee is not actually aimed at enabling the exercise of that fundamental right. To me that means the right is clearly being infringed.

Also, why are they bothering? I bet they're not really going to incarcerate the felons for more than a few minutes and they'll be right out on the street again buying another firearm.

We have idiots ruling us.
What is one of the nations largest industry? Corrections. $74,000,000,000 a few years ago. Why not make it bigger?
__________________
<img src=http://calgunsfoundation.org/images/stories/San-Benito.jpg border=0 alt= />[IMG]file:///C:/Users/PCMECH%7E1/AppData/Local/Temp/moz-screenshot-3.png[/IMG][IMG]file:///C:/Users/PCMECH%7E1/AppData/Local/Temp/moz-screenshot-4.png[/IMG]
Quote:
Originally Posted by dantodd View Post
We will win. We are right. We will never stop fighting.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bwiese View Post
They don't believe it's possible, but then Alison didn't believe there'd be 350K - 400K OLLs in CA either.
Quote:
Originally Posted by louisianagirl View Post
Our fate is ours alone to decide as long as we remain armed heavily enough to dictate it.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 03-08-2013, 8:46 AM
lakersandguns lakersandguns is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: At the poker game
Posts: 5,832
iTrader: 52 / 93%
Default CA senate approves $24 million for gun confiscation

Quote:
SACRAMENTO -- The California Senate approved a $24-million expenditure on Thursday to speed the confiscation of guns from people who have been disqualified from owning firearms because of criminal convictions or serious mental illness.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/po...,1291214.story


Sorry if dupe
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 03-08-2013, 8:51 AM
OleCuss OleCuss is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Kalifornia
Posts: 5,984
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by freonr22 View Post
What is one of the nations largest industry? Corrections. $74,000,000,000 a few years ago. Why not make it bigger?
Here in California re-alignment has kicked a lot of very bad folk out of our prisons and onto the street or into our jails.

In part due to this, property crimes in my area result in incarceration measured in hours in most cases and a few days at most. You can move them through the courts but they simply are not going to be punished.

I'd be utterly shocked if the folk from whom they plan to confiscate weapons will (on average) spend any significant time incarcerated. And since they have already demonstrated that they will be armed even if prohibited, they will arm themselves again almost as fast as their firearms are confiscated.

You could argue for making more jails/prisons, but the regulatory and other governmental requirements are so burdensome that they just aren't going to build enough to lock up those who are not actively assaulting people.
__________________
CGN's token life-long teetotaling vegetarian. Not qualified to give any legal opinion so pay attention at your own risk.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 03-08-2013, 8:54 AM
MaHoTex's Avatar
MaHoTex MaHoTex is offline
You're a daisy if you do!
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Isola di Linosa
Posts: 4,431
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Wonder how many people will have their house stormed and end up dead due to an error creating a raid on the wrong house.

Stupid Stupid Stupid.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 03-08-2013, 9:01 AM
lakersandguns lakersandguns is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: At the poker game
Posts: 5,832
iTrader: 52 / 93%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MaHoTex View Post
Wonder how many people will have their house stormed and end up dead due to an error creating a raid on the wrong house.

Stupid Stupid Stupid.
Yup. Wondering if that's why some of us are being delay by DoJ.
Maybe on purpose.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 03-08-2013, 9:07 AM
OleCuss OleCuss is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Kalifornia
Posts: 5,984
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Yeah, it's a dupe.

But understand, they want to take your DROS fees to do this - which means that they are ripping off firearms owners.

Oh, and 8 Republicans joined in the effort to continue screwing us over and effectively linking legitimate gun owners with the prohibited ones.

There is absolutely no excuse for stealing our money used for legitimate gun ownership and then use that money for law enforcement purposes.
__________________
CGN's token life-long teetotaling vegetarian. Not qualified to give any legal opinion so pay attention at your own risk.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 03-08-2013, 9:08 AM
SkyMag68's Avatar
SkyMag68 SkyMag68 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: StockTon
Posts: 355
iTrader: 8 / 100%
Default

Where are they getting that 24 mill from?got it, dam politicians.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 03-08-2013, 9:11 AM
tleeocinca tleeocinca is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Central Valley
Posts: 903
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

The only ones who are being delayed on DROS are those with something in their past. If you have a clean record, you are gtg
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 03-08-2013, 9:17 AM
jdberger's Avatar
jdberger jdberger is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 8,912
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tleeocinca View Post
The only ones who are being delayed on DROS are those with something in their past. If you have a clean record, you are gtg
You wish.

If a sitting Senator can get on the Terrorist No-Fly list, what recourse do you expect the plebes will have?

G-d forbid you have a name like Bob Smith, Tom Jones or Jesus Martinez.

Bending your neck to tyranny just exposes it to the headsman's axe.
__________________
Rest in Peace - Andrew Breitbart. A true student of Alinsky.

90% of winning is simply showing up.

"Let's not lose sight of how much we reduced our carbon footprint by telecommuting this protest." 383green


NRA Benefactor Member
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 03-08-2013, 9:19 AM
obiwan obiwan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Spanish Springs, NV
Posts: 673
iTrader: 25 / 100%
Default

$24 MILLION to confiscate firearms from 19K people?

Something is not to scale here...
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 03-08-2013, 9:23 AM
OleCuss OleCuss is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Kalifornia
Posts: 5,984
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by obiwan View Post
$24 MILLION to confiscate firearms from 19K people?

Something is not to scale here...
It may be a ridiculous price tag, but you have to understand that the cost is being borne by those who have legally purchased firearms.

This money is not coming out of the general fund. This is where the government has effectively decided that your law-abiding citizen who legally purchases a firearm is responsible for felons owning firearms and should be paying for their confiscation.

It is an insult to the law-abiding, and likely to be incredibly ineffective as well.
__________________
CGN's token life-long teetotaling vegetarian. Not qualified to give any legal opinion so pay attention at your own risk.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 03-08-2013, 9:24 AM
Mike494 Mike494 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: stockton
Posts: 77
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OleCuss View Post
Yeah, it's a dupe.

But understand, they want to take your DROS fees to do this - which means that they are ripping off firearms owners.

Oh, and 8 Republicans joined in the effort to continue screwing us over and effectively linking legitimate gun owners with the prohibited ones.

There is absolutely no excuse for stealing our money used for legitimate gun ownership and then use that money for law enforcement purposes.
It's for the children????
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 03-08-2013, 9:24 AM
mmayer707's Avatar
mmayer707 mmayer707 is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mountain House, CA
Posts: 683
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tleeocinca View Post
The only ones who are being delayed on DROS are those with something in their past. If you have a clean record, you are gtg
Not true, but are you implying that if you have something in your past that does not have anything to do with the legal ownership of firearms or you were charged but not convicted you should be delayed your 2nd amendment right?
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 03-08-2013, 9:27 AM
tleeocinca tleeocinca is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Central Valley
Posts: 903
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Most of the delays that I am hearing of sound a little like this " I bought a gun and was delayed. I called DOJ and found out they've delayed me because of that arrest I had 10 years ago for DV and I forgot all about it".
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 03-08-2013, 9:30 AM
HighWildFree's Avatar
HighWildFree HighWildFree is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Orange County
Posts: 851
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

$1.2 million per person... hell for that price I would perform a few raids myself.


Wow totally misplaced the decimal point on that one!


Damn college, only thing they taught me about math is to hire someone else to do it. lol
__________________
"Bangarang Peter!"

Last edited by HighWildFree; 03-08-2013 at 3:44 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 03-08-2013, 9:31 AM
Kopis's Avatar
Kopis Kopis is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 450
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

$24,000,000 for 19,000 people? How many robocops do they need to build to get the job done?
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 03-08-2013, 9:33 AM
mmayer707's Avatar
mmayer707 mmayer707 is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mountain House, CA
Posts: 683
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Comes out to about $1,236 a person. Actually sounds about right.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 03-08-2013, 9:36 AM
IVC's Avatar
IVC IVC is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Temecula
Posts: 9,353
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by obiwan View Post
$24 MILLION to confiscate firearms from 19K people?

Something is not to scale here...
The money is not for the reimbursement since these are prohibited persons to begin with and their firearms will be *confiscated.* The money is for the law enforcement effort to find and visit those people.
__________________
NRA Benefactor Member
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 03-08-2013, 9:37 AM
IVC's Avatar
IVC IVC is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Temecula
Posts: 9,353
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HighWildFree View Post
$1.2 million per person... hell for that price I would perform a few raids myself.
Watch the decimal point .
__________________
NRA Benefactor Member
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 03-08-2013, 9:40 AM
stphnman20's Avatar
stphnman20 stphnman20 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: SCV
Posts: 6,607
iTrader: 26 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IVC View Post
Watch the decimal point .
lol.

24,000,000/19,000 = 1,263.15
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 03-08-2013, 9:41 AM
heedless619's Avatar
heedless619 heedless619 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: San Diego
Posts: 818
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Let's see how that goes
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 03-08-2013, 9:41 AM
anthonyca anthonyca is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 5,083
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tleeocinca View Post
The only ones who are being delayed on DROS are those with something in their past. If you have a clean record, you are gtg
You need to do more research.

There will be some murdered puppies before all of this money is spent.
__________________
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Union...70812799700206

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wherryj View Post
I am a physician. I am held to being "the expert" in medicine. I can't fall back on feigned ignorance and the statement that the patient should have known better than I. When an officer "can't be expected to know the entire penal code", but a citizen is held to "ignorance is no excuse", this is equivalent to ME being able to sue my patient for my own malpractice-after all, the patient should have known better, right?
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 03-08-2013, 9:42 AM
readysetgo's Avatar
readysetgo readysetgo is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Ventura County
Posts: 4,370
iTrader: 28 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HighWildFree View Post
$1.2 million per person... hell for that price I would perform a few raids myself.
24 mil / 19k = 1263.15

Quote:
The Senate voted 31-0 to approve an urgency bill that would take the $24 million over three years from a Department of Justice account funded by gun owners who pay a fee when they register their guns with the state.
Do we start a pool? At the end of three years I place money they will not have reduced the "backlog of 19,000 people who have improper possession" to under 17.5k
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 03-08-2013, 9:43 AM
Maltese Falcon's Avatar
Maltese Falcon Maltese Falcon is offline
Ordo Militaris Templi
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Glendale, CA
Posts: 5,035
iTrader: 68 / 100%
Default

From what I read, they do not have warrants so they need permission to enter a residence, plus they need the individual to admit that they have the firearm, then they can enter w/o consent. So shut up and say la pistola no esta aqui. Unless of course, they come when you are not home and your SO let's them in not knowing but likely intimidated by 6 swat guys yelling at her.

This does not apply to parolees. YMMV

.
__________________
The deterioration of every government begins with the decay of the principles on which it was founded. Charles-Louis de Secondat (1689-1755) Baron de Montesquieu


In America, freedom and justice have always come from the ballot box, the jury box, and when that fails, the cartridge box.
Steve Symms, ex-U.S. Senator, Idaho


Last edited by Maltese Falcon; 03-08-2013 at 9:49 AM.. Reason: typo
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 03-08-2013, 9:45 AM
ElvenSoul's Avatar
ElvenSoul ElvenSoul is online now
Free at Last!
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: TEXAS!
Posts: 14,416
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Thank you Nanny State for protecting me....Not!
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 9:11 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.