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
  #201  
Old 06-21-2018, 11:40 AM
vairox vairox is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 55
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HUTCH 7.62 View Post
And getting their door kicked in, by DOJ thugs
Would be a bad day, badge or not for anyone kicking in my door, I carry 24/7 and if you aren't going to defend yourself or your rights what do you have any firearms for? You will definitely get me, but I will get at least 1, maybe 2 or 3 of you. With that said I am a LEO, I won't want to do that, I registered my **** and I obey all laws I am aware of, but if it comes to that you can believe you won't be getting a free lunch, no sir, seek an easier target down the street where someone will gladly gift wrap their property for you.
Reply With Quote
  #202  
Old 06-21-2018, 11:55 AM
God Bless America's Avatar
God Bless America God Bless America is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 3,363
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ColdDeadHands1 View Post
Don't deal with the mess. Don't register. Go fixed mag for the easiest and least intrusive solution. Lots of great options out there.
Thank you Gavin Newsom. Or Diane Feinstein. Or Barbara Boxer. Or Nancy Pelosi. Or Kevin Leon. Or Brady Bunch. You are known by the company you keep - why keep company with the anti-gunners? Why make them happy?
Reply With Quote
  #203  
Old 06-21-2018, 1:06 PM
ColdDeadHands1's Avatar
ColdDeadHands1 ColdDeadHands1 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Santa Cruz Mountains
Posts: 3,229
iTrader: 67 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SmallShark View Post
that is what the CADOJ wants you to do.
Disagree completely. The DOJ wants you to register like a good peasant so they know who, what, and where to come confiscate your property later.
__________________


"Let me guess... This isn't about the alcohol or tobacco?"
Reply With Quote
  #204  
Old 06-21-2018, 1:07 PM
ColdDeadHands1's Avatar
ColdDeadHands1 ColdDeadHands1 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Santa Cruz Mountains
Posts: 3,229
iTrader: 67 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by God Bless America View Post
Thank you Gavin Newsom. Or Diane Feinstein. Or Barbara Boxer. Or Nancy Pelosi. Or Kevin Leon. Or Brady Bunch. You are known by the company you keep - why keep company with the anti-gunners? Why make them happy?
Huh?
__________________


"Let me guess... This isn't about the alcohol or tobacco?"
Reply With Quote
  #205  
Old 06-21-2018, 1:10 PM
ColdDeadHands1's Avatar
ColdDeadHands1 ColdDeadHands1 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Santa Cruz Mountains
Posts: 3,229
iTrader: 67 / 100%
Default

By the way, you people railing against fixed mag solutions do know you still have to push a button with a tool to release your now government registered rifle's magazine, right? Are you "keeping company" with the anti gunners too?
__________________


"Let me guess... This isn't about the alcohol or tobacco?"
Reply With Quote
  #206  
Old 06-21-2018, 1:21 PM
SmallShark's Avatar
SmallShark SmallShark is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Sacramento 95834
Posts: 1,401
iTrader: 27 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ColdDeadHands1 View Post
Disagree completely. The DOJ wants you to register like a good peasant so they know who, what, and where to come confiscate your property later.
that is why they want you use correct model name?

Vepr-12 Molot is not enough, and they want "Vepr-12"


if their goal is confiscation, why they are making it more difficult than necessary?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #207  
Old 06-21-2018, 1:58 PM
70runner's Avatar
70runner 70runner is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Avocado country
Posts: 36
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SmallShark View Post
that is why they want you use correct model name?

Vepr-12 Molot is not enough, and they want "Vepr-12"


if their goal is confiscation, why they are making it more difficult than necessary?
"their" goal isn't confiscation, "they" are simply implementing the latest registration directives by current PRK politicians.

With the registration database in place, Newscum will then possess the ability to implement his confiscation plan. Probably be the primary platform for his run at Commander In Chief.
Reply With Quote
  #208  
Old 06-21-2018, 2:23 PM
Discogodfather's Avatar
Discogodfather Discogodfather is online now
Low-Functioning Genius
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 5,076
iTrader: 3 / 80%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ColdDeadHands1 View Post
Don't deal with the mess. Don't register. Go fixed mag for the easiest and least intrusive solution. Lots of great options out there.
Deal with all messes with the idea that one mess will be less of a mess than others. It's much easier to end up with no firearms when you put all your eggs into one basket.

If you bought anything post 2011 in CA you are most likely registered already and post 2014 you are 100% registered.

The AW registry has stood unmolested for 29 years in CA. No one has had anything confiscated simply because they appeared in the registry. The only Californians with actual standard rifles in CA are those that registered in 89, 00/01.

Lots of great options out there? Please. There is only one fixed mag option out there that has in writing from the DOJ a confirmation that it meets the definitions in the law because the manufacturer contacted the DOJ and they responded in emails. All others are directly misleading people into thinking they meet the definition when this is TOTALLY subjective at this point. Any break open BB v2.0 style designs have absolutely no grantee that they meet the legal definition.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by doggie View Post
Someone must put an end to this endless bickering by posting the unadulterated indisputable facts and truth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PMACA_MFG View Post
Not checkers, not chess, its Jenga.
"The California matrix of gun control laws is among the harshest in the nation and are filled with criminal law traps for people of common intelligence who desire to obey the law." - U.S. District Judge Roger T. Benitez

Reply With Quote
  #209  
Old 06-21-2018, 2:47 PM
Califpatriot Califpatriot is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 863
iTrader: 12 / 100%
Default

[QUOTE=Discogodfather;21789537] There is only one fixed mag option out there that has in writing from the DOJ a confirmation that it meets the definitions in the law because the manufacturer contacted the DOJ and they responded in emails./QUOTE]

Which one?
__________________
In case it wasn't obvious, nothing I write here should be interpreted as legal advice.
Reply With Quote
  #210  
Old 06-21-2018, 2:54 PM
Discogodfather's Avatar
Discogodfather Discogodfather is online now
Low-Functioning Genius
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 5,076
iTrader: 3 / 80%
Default

You sir are a Patriot.

Quote:
Originally Posted by God Bless America View Post
Not me! I converted one to featureless!

__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by doggie View Post
Someone must put an end to this endless bickering by posting the unadulterated indisputable facts and truth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PMACA_MFG View Post
Not checkers, not chess, its Jenga.
"The California matrix of gun control laws is among the harshest in the nation and are filled with criminal law traps for people of common intelligence who desire to obey the law." - U.S. District Judge Roger T. Benitez

Reply With Quote
  #211  
Old 06-21-2018, 2:56 PM
Discogodfather's Avatar
Discogodfather Discogodfather is online now
Low-Functioning Genius
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 5,076
iTrader: 3 / 80%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Califpatriot View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Discogodfather View Post
There is only one fixed mag option out there that has in writing from the DOJ a confirmation that it meets the definitions in the law because the manufacturer contacted the DOJ and they responded in emails.
Which one?
Franklin Armory DFM. Contact him, he is on this forum all the time. He can produce the DOJ correspondence.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by doggie View Post
Someone must put an end to this endless bickering by posting the unadulterated indisputable facts and truth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PMACA_MFG View Post
Not checkers, not chess, its Jenga.
"The California matrix of gun control laws is among the harshest in the nation and are filled with criminal law traps for people of common intelligence who desire to obey the law." - U.S. District Judge Roger T. Benitez

Reply With Quote
  #212  
Old 06-21-2018, 5:10 PM
Califpatriot Califpatriot is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 863
iTrader: 12 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Discogodfather View Post
Franklin Armory DFM. Contact him, he is on this forum all the time. He can produce the DOJ correspondence.
Thanks, I'll ask him.

On an unrelated note, have there been any concerns raised on the boards about the Patriot mag release. I've had a very high opinion of Darin Prince and his product's mechanics seem solid from a legal perspective, but am I missing something?
__________________
In case it wasn't obvious, nothing I write here should be interpreted as legal advice.
Reply With Quote
  #213  
Old 06-21-2018, 7:06 PM
Discogodfather's Avatar
Discogodfather Discogodfather is online now
Low-Functioning Genius
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 5,076
iTrader: 3 / 80%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Califpatriot View Post
Thanks, I'll ask him.

On an unrelated note, have there been any concerns raised on the boards about the Patriot mag release. I've had a very high opinion of Darin Prince and his product's mechanics seem solid from a legal perspective, but am I missing something?
There are so many fixed mag / BB v2.0 variants out there it's tough to say anything. Those that advertise that it's a device to meet California compliance are telling the truth in the sense that it's a device crafted around the "break open action" language. Those that advertise that it is in fact "approved" by the DOJ are most likely not telling the truth unless they can prove that there was some kind of correspondence with the DOJ that said in some way that they thought the device did or did not meet their definitions. That's not exactly an "approval" either but it means that the DOJ said something about it.

Unfortunately it's like circa 2005 again. People are making things that they think will satisfy the law, which it may or may not, and then the DOJ gets to do whatever the hell it wants in terms of interpreting the law. People forget that it wasn't until 2011 that a DOJ letter essentially said they would not prosecute for the original bullet button. They never approved the BB and never said it was legal or illegal, they simply said they would not prosecute people for doing it.

That's the trick here- it has something to do with common law rights. As we develop as a society and interpret our own laws, consensus forms. When hundreds and thousands of people accepted BB and used it then LGS felt comfortable then retailers then manufacturers.....

Problem is when DOJ decides to nip things in the bud, which is why the initial couple of years will be very important to pay attention to the arrests and litigation around all these devices.

If the DOJ says something in writing it is very powerful and essentially sets the standards. In the past it was letters but we are seeing more and more emails and written statements on websites.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by doggie View Post
Someone must put an end to this endless bickering by posting the unadulterated indisputable facts and truth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PMACA_MFG View Post
Not checkers, not chess, its Jenga.
"The California matrix of gun control laws is among the harshest in the nation and are filled with criminal law traps for people of common intelligence who desire to obey the law." - U.S. District Judge Roger T. Benitez

Reply With Quote
  #214  
Old 06-21-2018, 7:24 PM
maidenrules29 maidenrules29 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 245
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ColdDeadHands1 View Post
Don't deal with the mess. Don't register. Go fixed mag for the easiest and least intrusive solution. Lots of great options out there.
I'm doing a Thorsden stock.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J727A using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #215  
Old 06-21-2018, 10:44 PM
steelrain82's Avatar
steelrain82 steelrain82 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: ventura county
Posts: 3,392
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by solidfreshdope View Post
To clarify I am not okay with the law. I am okay with registering my rifle, as I bought it to register. As in I purchased my AR15 before I could no longer. I can always build a featureless rifle. I registered to keep my options open.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
You know you could have made your ar pistol fixed mag and been good to go. No registration needed. Other than volreg that is, if it was originally built from an 80% lower.
__________________


BNIB M40 Gas Mask (medium)
Reply With Quote
  #216  
Old 06-21-2018, 10:55 PM
Discogodfather's Avatar
Discogodfather Discogodfather is online now
Low-Functioning Genius
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 5,076
iTrader: 3 / 80%
Default

I always wondered why people seem to have a subconscious (or conscious) hierarchy of "registration". It seems like most have some idea that just a DROS is not the same as a BBAW reg, but I can't figure out why. Since 2011 we are basically dealing with the government knowing you have something and since 2014 they know exactly what it is.

Records before then are spotty but they do know many things. They particularity seem to have taken this information on pistols, more or less. Even though they adamantly say they didn't, My own AFS checks have revealed they know almost all pistols I have, but rifles not so much.

I guess my point is, once you are on the radar, you are there. It doesn't matter one way or the other. Just because they asked for all kinds of useless information on the BBAW form doesn't mean we are "more registered" than someone that bought a stripped lower in 2012 or a pistol in 2003. It's in the system.

I had a friend who bought a AR in 2015 refuse to register and went featureless. He claimed it was because he didn't want them to know- even though they basically know everything. He claimed the pictures and other information was too much- but could not explain why exactly. Seems to me the record is more similar than it is different.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by doggie View Post
Someone must put an end to this endless bickering by posting the unadulterated indisputable facts and truth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PMACA_MFG View Post
Not checkers, not chess, its Jenga.
"The California matrix of gun control laws is among the harshest in the nation and are filled with criminal law traps for people of common intelligence who desire to obey the law." - U.S. District Judge Roger T. Benitez

Reply With Quote
  #217  
Old 06-21-2018, 11:11 PM
Califpatriot Califpatriot is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 863
iTrader: 12 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Discogodfather View Post
I always wondered why people seem to have a subconscious (or conscious) hierarchy of "registration". It seems like most have some idea that just a DROS is not the same as a BBAW reg, but I can't figure out why. Since 2011 we are basically dealing with the government knowing you have something and since 2014 they know exactly what it is.

Records before then are spotty but they do know many things. They particularity seem to have taken this information on pistols, more or less. Even though they adamantly say they didn't, My own AFS checks have revealed they know almost all pistols I have, but rifles not so much.

I guess my point is, once you are on the radar, you are there. It doesn't matter one way or the other. Just because they asked for all kinds of useless information on the BBAW form doesn't mean we are "more registered" than someone that bought a stripped lower in 2012 or a pistol in 2003. It's in the system.

I had a friend who bought a AR in 2015 refuse to register and went featureless. He claimed it was because he didn't want them to know- even though they basically know everything. He claimed the pictures and other information was too much- but could not explain why exactly. Seems to me the record is more similar than it is different.
BBAW registration is not the same as DROS registration in that it imposes a number of requirements on the owner that don't exist with possession of a registered non-AW. I don't care that the government knows I have guns (I mean, I'd rather they didn't, but c'est la vie.) But I don't want to be prosecuted for stopping at a McDonald's on the way from the range.

That's not to say that people don't have valid reasons for registering through the SB880 process (the endless arguments between featureless, RAW, and fixed are inane.) Just saying that not all registration is the same.
__________________
In case it wasn't obvious, nothing I write here should be interpreted as legal advice.
Reply With Quote
  #218  
Old 06-21-2018, 11:12 PM
Califpatriot Califpatriot is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 863
iTrader: 12 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Discogodfather View Post
That's the trick here- it has something to do with common law rights. As we develop as a society and interpret our own laws, consensus forms. When hundreds and thousands of people accepted BB and used it then LGS felt comfortable then retailers then manufacturers.....

Problem is when DOJ decides to nip things in the bud, which is why the initial couple of years will be very important to pay attention to the arrests and litigation around all these devices.
Yep, very true.
__________________
In case it wasn't obvious, nothing I write here should be interpreted as legal advice.
Reply With Quote
  #219  
Old 06-21-2018, 11:44 PM
Discogodfather's Avatar
Discogodfather Discogodfather is online now
Low-Functioning Genius
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 5,076
iTrader: 3 / 80%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Califpatriot View Post
Just saying that not all registration is the same.
I agree in terms of what the law tells you what you cannot do with AW and it's less than what you can do with non-AW. But from a registration perspective, in terms of information, I don't see any difference. We appear in a centralized registry. When I AFS myself it give it all ti me- pistols I purchased 20 years ago, some rifles, tons of C&R, etc. including RAW and BBAW. All on the same page. The registry is the Leger and it is essentially the same info.

As far as pictures and other info, I am not even sure they will keep it. We all assumed that the extra info for BBAW reg was due to them wanting this information for nefarious purposes. Not sure what they can do with my eye color info.

So then the idea was that the extra info was for purposes of keeping things the way they were, and that's turned out to be completely refuted by the DOJ web FAQ. They don't care at all about our configuration beyond the initial application.

So why would they care at all? I always thought maybe it was due to them wanted to secretly make registration fail itself, which is what I want to believe.

But the reality seems to have been the whole reason for all the useless over-specific info was simply to prevent people from registering things that were NOT in a legal congratulation or not able to be legally registered. They cared that people would try and reg things illegally purchased in illegal configurations and then using the registration as a shield against being charged with serious felonies. Without the pics they couldn't tell, and without the sworn information we put on where and when we obtained they wouldn't know (especially pre 2011).
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by doggie View Post
Someone must put an end to this endless bickering by posting the unadulterated indisputable facts and truth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PMACA_MFG View Post
Not checkers, not chess, its Jenga.
"The California matrix of gun control laws is among the harshest in the nation and are filled with criminal law traps for people of common intelligence who desire to obey the law." - U.S. District Judge Roger T. Benitez

Reply With Quote
  #220  
Old 06-21-2018, 11:47 PM
big red's Avatar
big red big red is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 826
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Arguing exercises the brain and every once in a while a good idea pops up. but why not go the simple route and hire a great criminal hacker to go in and wipe out all the computers? they would never know the differences with all the glitches they have now. just food for thought and not one shot fired. Electronic warfare might be the wave of the future. can't find the guns if the computers are wiped clean by a virus.
Reply With Quote
  #221  
Old 06-21-2018, 11:49 PM
Discogodfather's Avatar
Discogodfather Discogodfather is online now
Low-Functioning Genius
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 5,076
iTrader: 3 / 80%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by big red View Post
Arguing exercises the brain and every once in a while a good idea pops up. but why not go the simple route and hire a great criminal hacker to go in and wipe out all the computers? they would never know the differences with all the glitches they have now. just food for thought and not one shot fired. Electronic warfare might be the wave of the future. can't find the guns if the computers are wiped clean by a virus.
Have you been watching Mr. Robot too? Great show.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by doggie View Post
Someone must put an end to this endless bickering by posting the unadulterated indisputable facts and truth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PMACA_MFG View Post
Not checkers, not chess, its Jenga.
"The California matrix of gun control laws is among the harshest in the nation and are filled with criminal law traps for people of common intelligence who desire to obey the law." - U.S. District Judge Roger T. Benitez

Reply With Quote
  #222  
Old 06-22-2018, 1:02 AM
curtisfong's Avatar
curtisfong curtisfong is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 5,747
iTrader: 9 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Discogodfather View Post
the whole reason for all the useless over-specific info was simply to prevent people from registering things that were NOT in a legal congratulation or not able to be legally registered.
The DoJ was actually pretty specific about this, IIRC. They did not want people registering 100000 80% non-existant lowers, or even a dozen real lowers and nothing else.
__________________
The Rifle on the Wall

"“[S]cientific proof” of both gun-rights and gun-control theories “is very hard to get”; therefore, requiring “some substantial scientific proof to show that a [firearm] law will indeed substantially reduce crime and injury” is tantamount to applying strict scrutiny to, and almost certainly will lead to invalidation of, the law." - Kamela Harris

Lawyers and their Stockholm Syndrome
Reply With Quote
  #223  
Old 06-22-2018, 5:34 AM
solidfreshdope solidfreshdope is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 599
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by steelrain82 View Post
You know you could have made your ar pistol fixed mag and been good to go. No registration needed. Other than volreg that is, if it was originally built from an 80% lower.


I’d rather not go fixed mag on a gun built from an 80%.
__________________
Welcome to the United Snakes.
Reply With Quote
  #224  
Old 06-22-2018, 7:27 AM
Dirk Tungsten's Avatar
Dirk Tungsten Dirk Tungsten is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: the basement
Posts: 1,027
iTrader: 34 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by curtisfong View Post
The DoJ was actually pretty specific about this, IIRC. They did not want people registering 100000 80% non-existant lowers, or even a dozen real lowers and nothing else.
Also, remember what happened in Canada when long gun registration was established: people were registering lawn mowers, blenders, etc. Anything with a serial number and manufacturer's name was registered with the specific intent of gumming up the works.

Pretty funny in retrospect.
Reply With Quote
  #225  
Old 06-22-2018, 12:12 PM
walmart_ar15 walmart_ar15 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: SoCal
Posts: 911
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Discogodfather View Post

But the reality seems to have been the whole reason for all the useless over-specific info was simply to prevent people from registering things that were NOT in a legal congratulation or not able to be legally registered. They cared that people would try and reg things illegally purchased in illegal configurations and then using the registration as a shield against being charged with serious felonies. Without the pics they couldn't tell, and without the sworn information we put on where and when we obtained they wouldn't know (especially pre 2011).
This would make sense, and also indicates that from DOJ's perspective, if a weapon is registered, it now becomes a Government "approved" ownership that further action against it will be difficult. A special protected class of firearms. And because they did it this way, it now default as the shield for legal action against a registered firearm. "It was inspected, and approved by DOJ!"

And again for the Registration = Confiscation crowd, it will not happen. Remember registration is only for ONE generation. Once you're dead, weapon is gone. Why open the can of worms with confiscation, when RAW will be effectively banned/removed within one generation?
Reply With Quote
  #226  
Old 06-22-2018, 12:48 PM
Dirtlaw Dirtlaw is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 75
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by walmart_ar15 View Post
This would make sense, and also indicates that from DOJ's perspective, if a weapon is registered, it now becomes a Government "approved" ownership that further action against it will be difficult. A special protected class of firearms. And because they did it this way, it now default as the shield for legal action against a registered firearm. "It was inspected, and approved by DOJ!"

And again for the Registration = Confiscation crowd, it will not happen. Remember registration is only for ONE generation. Once you're dead, weapon is gone. Why open the can of worms with confiscation, when RAW will be effectively banned/removed within one generation?
Same theory is used elsewhere by government attorneys. Starve it or stop it from growing and it will eventually die off. That's a lot easier than paying for something or dealing with a lot of litigation. The ones registered now can't be transferred or inherited -- in one generation they will ALL be history (legally speaking). And because it dies slowly the whole thing is gradual and everyone gets used to it.
Reply With Quote
  #227  
Old 06-22-2018, 2:00 PM
Supersapper Supersapper is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 572
iTrader: 33 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by B.J.F. View Post
Legally, but whats to stop someone that knows they are dying soon from passing it to someone they know before they die and it just disappears from existence. The government is only going to know your dead when your dead, not those that are dying. They cant prosecute your dead corpse and obtaining search warrants on everyone you know or have spoken to would be logistically impossible.

Honestly, the best way for you to make sure the person gets what you want them to have after you die is to give it to them before hand. Probate is a joke....
100% agree with your last. My mom died in January and the estate is a mess, with my dad considering stealing the house (he's delayed the sale for his own purposes), my brother the executor checked out and my sister thinks she controls the entire process and grabbed everything she could.

My mom held on to everything until it was too late to do anything about it.

That was six months ago and none of it was firearm related. I told her 2 months before she died (even she knew the end was near...her condition was terminal) if she wanted things to go to specific people, she needed to give it to them now, while there could be no question. She didn't and now we are in a real mess.
__________________
Since you see light before you hear sound, is that why so many people appear bright until you hear them speak?

Ask me about low cost Commander memberships to Frontsight!

Quote:
Originally Posted by ar15barrels View Post
Don't attempt to inject common sense into an internet pissing contest.
Reply With Quote
  #228  
Old 06-22-2018, 2:37 PM
Discogodfather's Avatar
Discogodfather Discogodfather is online now
Low-Functioning Genius
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 5,076
iTrader: 3 / 80%
Default

I think everyone needs to step back and try and view the situation objectively. What really has changed in CA?

When I walk into an LGS I can still buy an AR-15, people will comment on the neutered this and that and no folding and fins and such, but in reality these simple things and be removed in less than a few minutes.

There really isn't much difference between a standard rifle, a RAW, a BBAW, a featureless, etc. that can't be undone with a screwdriver.

I have met and discussed at length with anti-gun ideologues and they truly want a gun free society and it's an incremental aim of theirs. So there is truth to that. But that is a long term goal. Very long term.

The way their agenda works is modeled after what conservatives did to marijuana in the early 70's. The right realized that it was a "hippie" culture thing, and since no one really used it in the conservative world they knew it was extremely low lying fruit. They could persecute marijuana users because the vast majority were on the left- and that meant that the issue hurt the left. And it did, making weed a schedule 1 drug set off consequences we still live with today. Endless litigation and misery, coupled with a government sponsored propaganda campaign that expressly spread FUD. Harsh and ever increasing consequences, both legal and economic for those that used it.

Sound familiar? Just substitute "weed" for "gun" and "left" for "right" in the above paragraph and we get to where we are now in the State of CA as a gun owner. People who are politically active on the left (mostly urban) can wage war on gun owners and the 2nd without any personal consequences because they just do not own guns. For them, they can target who they believe the enemy with impunity. I'm not trying to equate the war on guns with the war on drugs, one is a defense of a basic human right and the other is clearly not, but the structure of this "cultural warfare" is too similar to not be pointed out.

But we also now know how the whole marijuana thing turned out. As time went on it wasn't as much of a "left thing". The culture changed and these days it's not nearly as much of a partisan issue as it was. Much of the propaganda has been debunked and it's extremely hard to find a person that still fells comfortable that it's a schedule 1 drug. The narrative that it's super dangerous, rots peoples minds, and leads directly to crime and is inherently evil, and that it is public safety hazard seems comical to most people. I could care less, I don't take any drugs at all, but in my lifetime we have seen a complete shift of the paradigm- and I can objectively see how this "cultural warfare" experiment that started in the late 60's has almost completely reversed itself- and that it was wrong do demonize in the first place.

Could we see the same thing happen with guns in the next 30 years? It's the last hope I have for private gun ownership in CA, long term.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by doggie View Post
Someone must put an end to this endless bickering by posting the unadulterated indisputable facts and truth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PMACA_MFG View Post
Not checkers, not chess, its Jenga.
"The California matrix of gun control laws is among the harshest in the nation and are filled with criminal law traps for people of common intelligence who desire to obey the law." - U.S. District Judge Roger T. Benitez

Reply With Quote
  #229  
Old 06-22-2018, 3:09 PM
SmallShark's Avatar
SmallShark SmallShark is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Sacramento 95834
Posts: 1,401
iTrader: 27 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Supersapper View Post
100% agree with your last. My mom died in January and the estate is a mess, with my dad considering stealing the house (he's delayed the sale for his own purposes), my brother the executor checked out and my sister thinks she controls the entire process and grabbed everything she could.

My mom held on to everything until it was too late to do anything about it.

That was six months ago and none of it was firearm related. I told her 2 months before she died (even she knew the end was near...her condition was terminal) if she wanted things to go to specific people, she needed to give it to them now, while there could be no question. She didn't and now we are in a real mess.
your dad is stealing the house? how so?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #230  
Old 06-22-2018, 10:51 PM
Supersapper Supersapper is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 572
iTrader: 33 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SmallShark View Post
your dad is stealing the house? how so?
In a nutshell with the back story:

My mom and dad got divorced 26 years ago. My mom got 53% ownership in the house which she has claimed was ours (the kids) upon her death. She never told us or even showed a will but she did state that this was a done deal.

Here's the problem. My parents held title to the house as a tenancy with right of survivorship and the original will stated that we were to be placed on title at the time of her death. This was something my mom neglected to mention or bring up with the new will, which btw superseded the previous one. Now my dad is the only person on title; he knows it and that we're to get it, but his history of blackmail with others and lack of transparency up to now is chilling. He's all about money, control and arrogance. He refuses to even acknowlege that we have any share in the house despite seeing BOTH wills. The DAY my mom passed away, he demanded the estate pay all of the bills on the house, something that has not been the case for 26 years (he had full encumbrances on the house when the divorce happened).

The executor never filed with the county and then basically checked out.

There's not enough value in the house to fight it legally, so if he decides to abscond (which is likely, since he's selling the house), there's little we can do.
__________________
Since you see light before you hear sound, is that why so many people appear bright until you hear them speak?

Ask me about low cost Commander memberships to Frontsight!

Quote:
Originally Posted by ar15barrels View Post
Don't attempt to inject common sense into an internet pissing contest.
Reply With Quote
  #231  
Old 06-23-2018, 12:11 AM
SmallShark's Avatar
SmallShark SmallShark is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Sacramento 95834
Posts: 1,401
iTrader: 27 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Supersapper View Post
In a nutshell with the back story:

My mom and dad got divorced 26 years ago. My mom got 53% ownership in the house which she has claimed was ours (the kids) upon her death. She never told us or even showed a will but she did state that this was a done deal.

Here's the problem. My parents held title to the house as a tenancy with right of survivorship and the original will stated that we were to be placed on title at the time of her death. This was something my mom neglected to mention or bring up with the new will, which btw superseded the previous one. Now my dad is the only person on title; he knows it and that we're to get it, but his history of blackmail with others and lack of transparency up to now is chilling. He's all about money, control and arrogance. He refuses to even acknowlege that we have any share in the house despite seeing BOTH wills. The DAY my mom passed away, he demanded the estate pay all of the bills on the house, something that has not been the case for 26 years (he had full encumbrances on the house when the divorce happened).

The executor never filed with the county and then basically checked out.

There's not enough value in the house to fight it legally, so if he decides to abscond (which is likely, since he's selling the house), there's little we can do.
let it go. dont go to the court, not worth it.

my son is 16 month old. we are about to draft our first will. me and my wife already agree not to get divorced no matter what happens in the future until our son gets married.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #232  
Old 06-24-2018, 12:02 PM
Supersapper Supersapper is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 572
iTrader: 33 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SmallShark View Post
let it go. dont go to the court, not worth it.

my son is 16 month old. we are about to draft our first will. me and my wife already agree not to get divorced no matter what happens in the future until our son gets married.
It may come to just that. There is no fighting it legally, unless I just want to play in small claims as the booby prize.

My recommendation to you because it's your first will: be VERY detailed in the will. EVERYTHING that's worth more than say...$200-$300. All investments including the house and things like firearms, of course. Update it EVERY year or two and make CERTAIN people know it exists and can find it.

My parents divorced after 22 years of marriage and no one knew about my mom's will. It was 25 years old and did not reflect the current situation.

Lastly: no matter how tight knit your family is, death brings out the ABSOLUTE worst in people. I've seen it in others and now I'm experiencing it myself. The more detailed the will, the less infighting can be done.
__________________
Since you see light before you hear sound, is that why so many people appear bright until you hear them speak?

Ask me about low cost Commander memberships to Frontsight!

Quote:
Originally Posted by ar15barrels View Post
Don't attempt to inject common sense into an internet pissing contest.
Reply With Quote
  #233  
Old 06-24-2018, 12:38 PM
liber's Avatar
liber liber is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 1,845
iTrader: 24 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by B.J.F. View Post
I registered all my BB weapons.


Quote:
Originally Posted by B.J.F. View Post
He agreed that while registration can ultimately lead to confiscation, it simply has not happened yet even with the first or second ban's that triggered registration.
Wrong way to look at it, IMO. They won't come and take everyone's guns, that would be far from impossible. What they will do is use the information to try and solve criminal cases or use the information with other medical or similar data that will allow them to take a single person's firearms. You know, you tell the doctor you got a headache and they check to see if you own any firearms, and go get 'em. Or you get old and are on Social Security, those people are easy, like plucking candy from a baby, crap almost every old person had gotten a headache at some time in their life...

Why give them any information? There is absolutely no advantage to doing so.

Quote:
Originally Posted by B.J.F. View Post
That all weapons purchased after 2014 are registered with the state anyways and even weapons before that can be traced to at least the original purchaser.
Well, I have never registered or purchased anything from an FFL in my life.. My Dad did, but you didn't need to register back then.

Quote:
Originally Posted by B.J.F. View Post
He also agreed that they are in fact wanting to ban all weapons at some point and will come after the featureless builds eventually. So will you register a featureless rifle?
Let them come. They had better have a warrant, when they step foot on my property or I'll have to ask them to leave. I will never give them the combination to my safe. They will need to have some probably cause that I even have firearms.

There are millions of unregistered firearms. What will they do, go door to door?

Quote:
Originally Posted by B.J.F. View Post
Ultimately we have had only 3 viable choices. Register, Featureless or Relocate.
Or do nothing. What will they do?

Quote:
Originally Posted by B.J.F. View Post
Final thoughts are the more that register, the less likely they will door knock to confiscate because they wont get through many confiscations with out you or your neighbor saying enough is enough and it wakes the sleeping giant in CA that results in loss of life on the LE side that is trying to take them.
You're living in a pipe dream. There's not gonna be a **** hits the fan, there's not gonna be a mass confiscation, they will do it one at a time...wake up. And where will you run when all states start adopting this BS?
__________________
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/signaturepics/sigpic203197_1.gif
--------- liber --------

From my cold dead end mill...
Reply With Quote
  #234  
Old 06-24-2018, 1:25 PM
liber's Avatar
liber liber is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 1,845
iTrader: 24 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Discogodfather View Post
The way their agenda works is modeled after what conservatives did to marijuana in the early 70's.
That's right. Those of us that took the beatings where massive. The incarcerations for people that possessed a joint, even a cannabis seed...

Yes, Cali paved the way for what is now going to bring it out of it's "prohibition" state. (not to be confused with States)

But the difference is the gun community are rolling over like a bunch of pansies, and that is a far cry from what the so called "hippies" did with cannabis.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Discogodfather View Post
Sound familiar? Just substitute "weed" for "gun" and "left" for "right" in the above paragraph and we get to where we are now in the State of CA as a gun owner.
I don't know, Cali is a different place these days. I was born and raised here and lived here most of my years...I have traveled most every piece of coastline from San Diego to Crescent City and from Modoc to the Grand Canyon...

There aren't too many hippies anymore...

The people are not like it was 50 years ago. Heck, many of them were not even citizens 50 years ago...nowadays there's a lot of 'tards from many persuasions.

If we continue to let those 'tards into America, we will eventually become a 'tarded society...

They will vote it in, they will become the majority, they will take over.

Silicon Valley a case in point.
__________________
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/signaturepics/sigpic203197_1.gif
--------- liber --------

From my cold dead end mill...
Reply With Quote
  #235  
Old 06-24-2018, 6:57 PM
Supersapper Supersapper is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 572
iTrader: 33 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by liber View Post




Wrong way to look at it, IMO. They won't come and take everyone's guns, that would be far from impossible. What they will do is use the information to try and solve criminal cases or use the information with other medical or similar data that will allow them to take a single person's firearms. You know, you tell the doctor you got a headache and they check to see if you own any firearms, and go get 'em. Or you get old and are on Social Security, those people are easy, like plucking candy from a baby, crap almost every old person had gotten a headache at some time in their life...

Why give them any information? There is absolutely no advantage to doing so.



Well, I have never registered or purchased anything from an FFL in my life.. My Dad did, but you didn't need to register back then.



Let them come. They had better have a warrant, when they step foot on my property or I'll have to ask them to leave. I will never give them the combination to my safe. They will need to have some probably cause that I even have firearms.

There are millions of unregistered firearms. What will they do, go door to door?



Or do nothing. What will they do?



You're living in a pipe dream. There's not gonna be a **** hits the fan, there's not gonna be a mass confiscation, they will do it one at a time...wake up. And where will you run when all states start adopting this BS?
Actually...I think it will be even easier than what you say.

You're right...it won't be armed take over or SHTF. If even 1 in 10 gun owners resisted violently and only got 1 LEO/Guardsman before they died, the state would run out of LEO/Guardsmen long before they ran out of gun owners and then they lose. Too costly in terms of men/material and a PR nightmare. There'd be no libtard / Dem party after that debacle.

If they come to the point of confiscation, all they have to do is stop you from registering your car til you turn it in. Or hold up your tax refund, or assess fees to your property taxes because you have the potential to be a danger or menace to society. Then you ask....how much is that rifle really worth?
__________________
Since you see light before you hear sound, is that why so many people appear bright until you hear them speak?

Ask me about low cost Commander memberships to Frontsight!

Quote:
Originally Posted by ar15barrels View Post
Don't attempt to inject common sense into an internet pissing contest.
Reply With Quote
  #236  
Old 06-24-2018, 7:00 PM
SmallShark's Avatar
SmallShark SmallShark is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Sacramento 95834
Posts: 1,401
iTrader: 27 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Supersapper View Post
Actually...I think it will be even easier than what you say.

You're right...it won't be armed take over or SHTF. If even 1 in 10 gun owners resisted violently and only got 1 LEO/Guardsman before they died, the state would run out of LEO/Guardsmen long before they ran out of gun owners and then they lose. Too costly in terms of men/material and a PR nightmare. There'd be no libtard / Dem party after that debacle.

If they come to the point of confiscation, all they have to do is stop you from registering your car til you turn it in. Or hold up your tax refund, or assess fees to your property taxes because you have the potential to be a danger or menace to society. Then you ask....how much is that rifle really worth?
Simply a letter will be sufficient
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #237  
Old 06-24-2018, 9:04 PM
Supersapper Supersapper is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 572
iTrader: 33 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SmallShark View Post
Simply a letter will be sufficient
Maybe...I was thinking about all the folks who will "ignore" the actual request, who would resist every attempt to take it short of violence.

The state just has to act by fiat. "Click": no car registration until it's turned in.

Lazy buzzards up at state wouldn't even have to draft anything. Junior just goes to DMV and Voila! Car not get to go anymore.
__________________
Since you see light before you hear sound, is that why so many people appear bright until you hear them speak?

Ask me about low cost Commander memberships to Frontsight!

Quote:
Originally Posted by ar15barrels View Post
Don't attempt to inject common sense into an internet pissing contest.
Reply With Quote
  #238  
Old 06-24-2018, 11:23 PM
curtisfong's Avatar
curtisfong curtisfong is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 5,747
iTrader: 9 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Supersapper View Post
Maybe...I was thinking about all the folks who will "ignore" the actual request, who would resist every attempt to take it short of violence.

The state just has to act by fiat. "Click": no car registration until it's turned in.

Lazy buzzards up at state wouldn't even have to draft anything. Junior just goes to DMV and Voila! Car not get to go anymore.
Even issuing a warrant doesn't put any cops in jeapordy. They never have to serve it. Just having it on your record means no travel, no job, no credit, no nothing. And one day you'll get pulled over and its game over.

No, nobody is going door to door.
__________________
The Rifle on the Wall

"“[S]cientific proof” of both gun-rights and gun-control theories “is very hard to get”; therefore, requiring “some substantial scientific proof to show that a [firearm] law will indeed substantially reduce crime and injury” is tantamount to applying strict scrutiny to, and almost certainly will lead to invalidation of, the law." - Kamela Harris

Lawyers and their Stockholm Syndrome
Reply With Quote
  #239  
Old 06-25-2018, 6:20 AM
Supersapper Supersapper is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 572
iTrader: 33 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by curtisfong View Post
Even issuing a warrant doesn't put any cops in jeapordy. They never have to serve it. Just having it on your record means no travel, no job, no credit, no nothing. And one day you'll get pulled over and its game over.

No, nobody is going door to door.
Yup. That's what I'm saying.
__________________
Since you see light before you hear sound, is that why so many people appear bright until you hear them speak?

Ask me about low cost Commander memberships to Frontsight!

Quote:
Originally Posted by ar15barrels View Post
Don't attempt to inject common sense into an internet pissing contest.
Reply With Quote
  #240  
Old 06-25-2018, 11:50 AM
liber's Avatar
liber liber is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 1,845
iTrader: 24 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by curtisfong View Post
Even issuing a warrant doesn't put any cops in jeapordy. They never have to serve it. Just having it on your record means no travel, no job, no credit, no nothing. And one day you'll get pulled over and its game over.

No, nobody is going door to door.
You're correct, so anyone who purchased a firearm or registered at any point in time should be happy to know this could happen to them.

Could happen to anyone, *BUT*, they still need to believe you have firearms to issue the warrant and they pretty much have their records for that...

Sure, go ahead and give them all your info and register for the latest bullet button lottery, maybe you'll win! (not speaking to you specific Curis)
__________________
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/signaturepics/sigpic203197_1.gif
--------- liber --------

From my cold dead end mill...
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 8:21 PM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, 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 2002-2018, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.
Calguns.net and The Calguns Foundation have no affiliation and are in no way related to each other.
All opinions, statements and remarks made by Calguns.net on this web site and elsewhere are solely attributable to Calguns.net.