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
  #41  
Old 10-15-2017, 5:14 AM
Kyle1886's Avatar
Kyle1886 Kyle1886 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: N. San Diego Co.
Posts: 1,591
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BluNorthern View Post
Middle America yes....but California will take this as a decree to attempt to ban all semi autos.

And they'll pass it, too.

Some people here say it won't happen, I don't agree.
It very well may happen, or the attempt in CA. If it's left up to CA. voters, history tells us it will eventually happen locally; nationally I have doubts.

Respectfully
Kyle
__________________
Take responsibility for your own actions!

WE are the NRA.

___________________
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 10-15-2017, 6:01 AM
Maulerrr Maulerrr is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: San Diego
Posts: 237
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

****
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 10-15-2017, 6:02 AM
BluNorthern's Avatar
BluNorthern BluNorthern is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Lassen County
Posts: 9,880
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

This is the specific purpose of voter initiatives in California. Our legislators are well aware of how stupid the vast majority of California voters are, and how easily duped they are by the wording on these initiatives, if...and that's a huge if...the voters even read it. "Releasing criminals back onto the streets will make you safer!" Nobody in their right mind would think that, yet that's the line fed to the retards here for Props 47 and 57...and they bought it.

Gets the legislators off the hook...they just point and say "we didn't do nuttin, the voters put this in place."


Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle1886 View Post
It very well may happen, or the attempt in CA. If it's left up to CA. voters, history tells us it will eventually happen locally; nationally I have doubts.

Respectfully
Kyle
__________________
"I don't do these things to other people, and I require the same from them."

Gun control is like trying to reduce drunk driving by making it tougher for sober people to own cars.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 10-15-2017, 3:32 PM
TMB 1's Avatar
TMB 1 TMB 1 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: 530
Posts: 4,729
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BluNorthern View Post
This is the specific purpose of voter initiatives in California. Our legislators are well aware of how stupid the vast majority of California voters are, and how easily duped they are by the wording on these initiatives, if...and that's a huge if...the voters even read it. "Releasing criminals back onto the streets will make you safer!" Nobody in their right mind would think that, yet that's the line fed to the retards here for Props 47 and 57...and they bought it.

Gets the legislators off the hook...they just point and say "we didn't do nuttin, the voters put this in place."
They do that because they have areas in CA that have more votes than it has voters.

__________________

Last edited by TMB 1; 10-15-2017 at 4:58 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 10-16-2017, 1:33 PM
DerekG DerekG is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 5
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Thumbs down

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigBamBoo View Post
And still....gun owners refuse to join the NRA. We should have 5 million NRA members in CA alone.



.
Are you serious? This bill, (which outlaws possession of detachable magazines) is co-sponsored by a congressmen with an "A" rating from the NRA. Ed Royce.
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 10-16-2017, 4:36 PM
byf_43 byf_43 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 1
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Can someone explain why this bill would, as the thread title suggests, "ban semi autos"? The bill is painfully vague insofar as what would fall under the umbrella of "parts that is designed and functions to increase the rate of fire of a semiautomatic rifle but does not convert the semiautomatic rifle into a machinegun" but I'm not getting how this is a "ban" of semi autos, nor do I understand OP's statement of "DO NOT LET THEM REDEFINE SEMI AUTOMATIC FIRE". Can someone walk me through this? On its face, it sounds like they're trying to ban bumpfire stocks and "trigger crank" devices; I get that the vague language means they could potentially use this to then target trigger pull reduction springs and etc, but I'm still not seeing how this is a "ban" on semi autos.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 10-16-2017, 5:23 PM
chris's Avatar
chris chris is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: In Texas for now
Posts: 18,180
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BluNorthern View Post
Middle America yes....but California will take this as a decree to attempt to ban all semi autos.

And they'll pass it, too.

Some people here say it won't happen, I don't agree.
It's coming. Give it in the first year of Newsom's governorship or right after it will be introduced.
__________________
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
  #48  
Old 10-16-2017, 7:30 PM
Allhailflintlocks Allhailflintlocks is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 115
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

First year of Coke Head Newsome's governorship? I expect a ban bill to be rammed through immediately beginning next year.

But let's keep in mind that its not 100% guaranteed Coke Boy will be governor. A lot can happen over the next year - he OD's, he forgets to look both ways before crossing the street, he gets caught by a very jealous husband.....
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 10-16-2017, 10:41 PM
BajaFishin BajaFishin is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 14
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

EVERYONE.... here are their office numbers, this is way more effective then email and way more effective then facebook or twitter the only thing that carries more weight is a hand written letter. please call them flood their phone lines voicing your opinion.

the Washington office is less effective than the county offices. call the county offices first. especially if you live in that state. thumbs this up to get this put in the description and so more people see it.

We lost Commiefornia, we surly don't want to lose the Unite States.

Let call them, call all of them.

CURBELO
(202)-225-2778 Washington office
(305) 222-0160 Miami office
(305) 292-4485 Key west office
(305) 247-1234 Florida city office


KING
(202) 225-7896 Washington office
(516) 541-4225 Massapequa Park District Office

LANCE
(202) 225-5361 Washington office
(908) 788-6900 Flemington District Office
(908) 518-7733 Westfield District Office

MEEHAN
(202) 225-2011 Washington office
(610) 690-7323 Springfield office

ROYCE
(202) 225-4111 Washington office
(714) 255-0101 / (909) 420-0010 DISTRICT OFFICE
(626) 964-5123 LOS ANGELES COUNTY OFFICE


SMITH
(202) 225-3765 Washington office
(732) 780-3035 Monmouth county office
(609) 585-7878 Mercer county office
(609) 286-2571 Ocean county office

PAULSEN
(202) 225-2871 Washington office
(952) 405-8510 Minnesota Office

COSTELLO
(202) 225-4315 Washington office
(610) 696-2982 WEST CHESTER OFFICE
(610) 376-7630 WYOMISSING OFFICE

Ros Lehtinen
(202) 225-3931 Washington office
(305) 668-2285 Miami Office

DENT
(202)-225-6411 Washington office
(610) 562-4281 Berks county office
(610) 770-3490 LEHIGH VALLEY office
(717) 533-3959 DAUPHIN COUNTY office
(717) 867-1026 LEBANON COUNTY

Please pass it on.
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 10-17-2017, 9:31 AM
gunsandrockets's Avatar
gunsandrockets gunsandrockets is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,346
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

doesn't this thread belong in the national forum?
__________________
Guns don't kill people, Democrats kill people
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 10-17-2017, 10:12 AM
CAL.BAR CAL.BAR is offline
CGSSA OC Chapter Leader
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: South OC
Posts: 4,395
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

I fail to see the "crazy" in this. CA has had the SAME ban for DECADES and even in gun hating CA, it has NEVER been interpreted or even attempted to be interpreted so as to ban all semi-autos. How is THIS bill any different?

NEW BILL:
“(aa) It shall be unlawful for any person—


“(1) in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, to manufacture, possess, or transfer any part or combination of parts that is designed and functions to increase the rate of fire of a semiautomatic rifle but does not convert the semiautomatic rifle into a machinegun; or...

CA LAW (in part)
As used in this part, a "multiburst trigger activator" means either of the following:

(a) A device designed or redesigned to be attached to a semiautomatic firearm, which allows the firearm to discharge two or more shots in a burst by activating the device.

(b) A manual or power-driven trigger activating device constructed and designed so that when attached to a semiautomatic firearm it increases the rate of fire of that firearm.

So help me out. How is the proposed Fed. law a ban on ALL semi-autos when even in CA that same language obviously is not.
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 10-17-2017, 10:50 AM
Discogodfather's Avatar
Discogodfather Discogodfather is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 4,133
iTrader: 2 / 75%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CAL.BAR View Post
I fail to see the "crazy" in this. CA has had the SAME ban for DECADES and even in gun hating CA, it has NEVER been interpreted or even attempted to be interpreted so as to ban all semi-autos. How is THIS bill any different?

NEW BILL:
“(aa) It shall be unlawful for any person—


“(1) in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, to manufacture, possess, or transfer any part or combination of parts that is designed and functions to increase the rate of fire of a semiautomatic rifle but does not convert the semiautomatic rifle into a machinegun; or...

CA LAW (in part)
As used in this part, a "multiburst trigger activator" means either of the following:

(a) A device designed or redesigned to be attached to a semiautomatic firearm, which allows the firearm to discharge two or more shots in a burst by activating the device.

(b) A manual or power-driven trigger activating device constructed and designed so that when attached to a semiautomatic firearm it increases the rate of fire of that firearm.

So help me out. How is the proposed Fed. law a ban on ALL semi-autos when even in CA that same language obviously is not.
CA could choose to interpret what is or is not a semi auto at any time. Chances are they are foaming at the mouth to do it. Thing preventing that is......Federal law.

3999 goes into effect, next Hitlery in office declares that you get 1 shot per minute, period. Do you really want to open the door to re-defining what a semi auto is?
__________________
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
  #53  
Old 10-17-2017, 7:03 PM
GW's Avatar
GW GW is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 14,287
iTrader: 23 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by harbormaster View Post
Ok here is a firestorm question for NRA fans. What, besides hire and pay lawyers, has the NRA done for CA's politically? All I see them do is hire lawyers and pray judges won't be radical anti gun zealots (like the 9th) and file law suits. Some they win and some they lose. I don't see them supporting marches, and unless you call the fund raising dinner I go to a rally they don't support those either. Why would a RINO republican or a democrat for that matter fear the NRA especially in California? They aren't getting people elected or un elected.
Silly and ignorant. Look up what the NRA does for California before you post.
__________________
NRA Benefactor Member
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 12:11 AM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, 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.