Calguns.net  

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

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 01-24-2019, 1:01 PM
CAHollowPoints CAHollowPoints is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 3
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default Gov. Newscum makes aggressive, early moves on his gun control agenda for Califor

Scary propositions.


https://www.latimes.com/politics/la-...125-story.html
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 01-24-2019, 1:09 PM
baggss's Avatar
baggss baggss is offline
Map Maker
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Ventura County
Posts: 3,439
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Is this surprising?
__________________
"The best gun is the one you'll have on you when you need it the most, the one you know how to use, the one that goes BANG every single time you pull the trigger. Whether that gun cost you $349 or $1,100 it's worth every penny if it saves your life, or the life of someone you love.” -Tim Schmit, CCW Magazine July 2015

NRA Lifetime Member : CalGuns Lifetime Member : GOA Lifetime Member

Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 01-24-2019, 1:25 PM
Drew Eckhardt Drew Eckhardt is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Silicon Valley, CA
Posts: 1,917
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Portantino said his revived proposal is needed to prevent straw purchases, in which an eligible owner buys many guns and then sells them to people not authorized to possess firearms. In one recent year, sales to individuals ranging from five to 54 long guns per month occurred on 1,787 occasions — totaling 12,090 guns, he said.
With all guns registered since 2014, no one with two brain cells would buy a gun through retail channels then sell it to a private party without going through the PPT process.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 01-24-2019, 1:28 PM
TruOil TruOil is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 1,844
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drew Eckhardt View Post
With all guns registered since 2014, no one with two brain cells would buy a gun through retail channels then sell it to a private party without going through the PPT process.
The obviousness of that observation is not relevant to our politicians as long as we still have guns.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 01-24-2019, 1:30 PM
baggss's Avatar
baggss baggss is offline
Map Maker
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Ventura County
Posts: 3,439
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drew Eckhardt View Post
With all guns registered since 2014, no one with two brain cells would buy a gun through retail channels then sell it to a private party without going through the PPT process.
Sadly, I know people who have done this. I've know people who have given firearms registered in their name to others (with no PPT) to pay off debt they owed them. All of this since 2014....
__________________
"The best gun is the one you'll have on you when you need it the most, the one you know how to use, the one that goes BANG every single time you pull the trigger. Whether that gun cost you $349 or $1,100 it's worth every penny if it saves your life, or the life of someone you love.” -Tim Schmit, CCW Magazine July 2015

NRA Lifetime Member : CalGuns Lifetime Member : GOA Lifetime Member

Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 01-24-2019, 2:16 PM
ugimports's Avatar
ugimports ugimports is offline
Vendor/Retailer
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Fremont, CA
Posts: 6,113
iTrader: 21 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drew Eckhardt View Post
With all guns registered since 2014, no one with two brain cells would buy a gun through retail channels then sell it to a private party without going through the PPT process.
The better question is how many of those 12090 were used in crimes.. my guess..close to 0

As for the 54 amount in 1 transaction..that might have been one of my customers that purchased a case of 50 lowers in 2016 + some other stuff...
__________________
UG Imports - Fremont, CA FFL - Transfers, New Gun Sales
Closure Schedule: http://ugimports.com/closed
web: http://ugimports.com/calguns / email: sales@ugimports.com
phone: (510) 371-GUNS (4867)

Crowdsourced 2A Calendar

I AM THE MAJORITY!!!

Amazon Links Posted May be Paid Links
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 01-24-2019, 2:27 PM
71MUSTY's Avatar
71MUSTY 71MUSTY is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 7,026
iTrader: 17 / 100%
Default

Only a matter of time before they start matching Dispensary Customer Lists with Firearm Registrations.
__________________
Only slaves don't need guns

Quote:
Originally Posted by epilepticninja View Post
Americans vs. Democrats
We stand for the Anthem, we kneel for the cross


We already have the only reasonable Gun Control we need, It's called the Second Amendment and it's the government it controls.


What doesn't kill me, better run
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 01-24-2019, 2:27 PM
Mayor McRifle's Avatar
Mayor McRifle Mayor McRifle is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Central Valley
Posts: 7,647
iTrader: 23 / 100%
Default

A gun-grabbing governor and a pro-2A Supreme Court . . . the stage is being set.

Let's get ready to rumble!

Attachment 772229
__________________
Anchors Aweigh


Last edited by Mayor McRifle; 07-09-2019 at 3:29 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 01-24-2019, 2:34 PM
RobG's Avatar
RobG RobG is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Land of Oppression
Posts: 4,887
iTrader: 100 / 100%
Default

Shocking

He will sign every bill that comes across his corrupted desk. One a month is just a start. I could see a "one a year" bill being drafted. With the CA court system, what's to stop them?

Feel bad for you gun shop owners. I can see you guys getting more grief in the not so distant future.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 01-24-2019, 2:51 PM
Kyle1886's Avatar
Kyle1886 Kyle1886 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: N. San Diego Co.
Posts: 2,570
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobG View Post
Shocking

He will sign every bill that comes across his corrupted desk. One a month is just a start. I could see a "one a year" bill being drafted. With the CA court system, what's to stop them?

Feel bad for you gun shop owners. I can see you guys getting more grief in the not so distant future.
Another "Choke" scheme in the making, akin to the banks. Retailers dwindle, out of state sales become more restrictive and the "beloved" Roster shrinks even more.

I really feel for the CA firearm retailers. Not firearm related but we tried for over 25 years to keep our businesses afloat. We failed.

To the CA firearm retailers you have my blessings and best wishes.

Respectfully
Kyle
__________________
Thank you for another day!

Leadership, logistics, communications, and will.

"Doing nothing is doing something"

_________+__________
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 01-24-2019, 6:05 PM
Messerschmitts's Avatar
Messerschmitts Messerschmitts is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: southeast Alaska
Posts: 882
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

SO relieved I finally "bit the bullet" and moved out of Kommiefornia. But even though he no longer has direct power over me, Newscum can continue to screw the rest of the country. He is increasing funding to that stupid "Gun violence" research group at UC Davis which will be used to cook up data to support "Guns bad, mmkay?" which will be used as ammunition (no pun intended) by anti gun groups everywhere.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 01-24-2019, 6:15 PM
chris's Avatar
chris chris is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: OC
Posts: 19,400
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by baggss View Post
Is this surprising?
it shouldn't be.
__________________
http://govnews.ca.gov/gov39mail/mail.php

Thank your neighbor and fellow gun owners for passing Prop 63. For that gun control is a winning legislative agenda.
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.
NRA Life Member.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 01-24-2019, 7:46 PM
TheVazha TheVazha is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 114
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

It is a given that GN is a tool.
It is a given that is acting purely to satisfy his unhinged base. I mean, they’ve seriously lost it. I am in utter disbelief at how whacked out these people are.

Serious question that I never understood, is it really bad to have extra stringent background checks? Is is bad that felons shouldn’t be allowed to own guns? Is is bad that mentally unstable people should not have access to guns?

Besides the additional fees and waiting periods, I’d like to think good and honest gun owning peoples would encourage extra measures to keep guns out of the hands of people who really shouldn’t have them.

I get it, most of the policies are insane - like trading a fin for a bullet button. But other than that don’t we agree that they should make it harder to get guns? I mean, I’m happy to wait 10 days. I’m glad to give my fingerprint to buy guns and ammo. I’m glad to do it because I’m not a deadbeat and I don’t plan to commit crimes.

So if the big picture is an ultimate across the board gun grab, then I agree and get it. If not, please let me know why the disdain for additional gun policies/restrictions..

- freedom gun loving Angelino.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 01-24-2019, 8:11 PM
joeliberty joeliberty is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 134
iTrader: 9 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheVazha View Post
It is a given that GN is a tool.
It is a given that is acting purely to satisfy his unhinged base. I mean, they’ve seriously lost it. I am in utter disbelief at how whacked out these people are.

Serious question that I never understood, is it really bad to have extra stringent background checks? Is is bad that felons shouldn’t be allowed to own guns? Is is bad that mentally unstable people should not have access to guns?

Besides the additional fees and waiting periods, I’d like to think good and honest gun owning peoples would encourage extra measures to keep guns out of the hands of people who really shouldn’t have them.

I get it, most of the policies are insane - like trading a fin for a bullet button. But other than that don’t we agree that they should make it harder to get guns? I mean, I’m happy to wait 10 days. I’m glad to give my fingerprint to buy guns and ammo. I’m glad to do it because I’m not a deadbeat and I don’t plan to commit crimes.

So if the big picture is an ultimate across the board gun grab, then I agree and get it. If not, please let me know why the disdain for additional gun policies/restrictions..

- freedom gun loving Angelino.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You just stated the answer in your question. All of these additional restrictions that ostensibly keep guns out of the hands of criminals don’t work, and they are just an incremental step with the ultimate goal of taking away our guns, or making it so costly or burdensome that people feel it’s not worth it to exercise their right to bear arms. And remember, it is a right. All of the amendments in the bill of rights pose significant risks to our security, but imagine if they made you wait 10 days to exercise your right to free speech, or to not quarter soldiers in your home, or to prevent illegal search and seizure, or any of the others. “A right delayed is a right denied.” This is not hyperbole, and quite frankly your willingness to accept these arbitrary and unproven restrictions is distressing. Check yo self before you wreck yo self, and the rest of us for that matter.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 01-24-2019, 8:22 PM
Flogger23m Flogger23m is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,215
iTrader: 21 / 96%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheVazha View Post
Serious question that I never understood, is it really bad to have extra stringent background checks? Is is bad that felons shouldn’t be allowed to own guns? Is is bad that mentally unstable people should not have access to guns?

I mean, I’m happy to wait 10 days. I’m glad to give my fingerprint to buy guns and ammo. I’m glad to do it because I’m not a deadbeat and I don’t plan to commit crimes.
Waiting periods have proven time and time again to be practically useless. Most people who are mentally unstable will not be deterred by waiting a day, three days, or thirty days. That is a chronic mental issue that won't disappear over the course of a few days. Therefore the law is pointless as it accomplishes nothing productive.

Permits, finger printing, banning of online ammo sales drives costs up & makes it hard for people to purchase ammunition. What if someone does not pay utility bills? What if the utility bills are in someone else's name? Should they not be allowed to purchase ammunition? And how will this prevent crime?

Does wanting to buy or trade ammunition without going to a gun store and paying a transfer fee & the associated wait worthy of calling someone a deadbeat? I'm not really sure what you're trying to get at here. How do these proposals even reduce crime?

Likewise, practically everyone is "mentally ill" these days. The definition will continue to expand much like the "assault weapon" term has. Minor depression on record? No firearms. Are you a shy, introverted person who cannot obtain enough "good character" recommendations before purchasing a firearm or ammo? No gun rights for you. Clearly, introverts are mentally ill. Go to the hospital, take a certain kind of medication and find out it disqualifies you from firearm ownership? Too bad, you were in the emergency room and had no idea about what medication would trigger a firearm confiscation from you.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 01-24-2019, 8:29 PM
mshill mshill is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Beyond the reach...
Posts: 4,227
iTrader: 8 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheVazha View Post
It is a given that GN is a tool.
It is a given that is acting purely to satisfy his unhinged base. I mean, they’ve seriously lost it. I am in utter disbelief at how whacked out these people are.

Serious question that I never understood, is it really bad to have extra stringent background checks? Is is bad that felons shouldn’t be allowed to own guns? Is is bad that mentally unstable people should not have access to guns?

Besides the additional fees and waiting periods, I’d like to think good and honest gun owning peoples would encourage extra measures to keep guns out of the hands of people who really shouldn’t have them.

I get it, most of the policies are insane - like trading a fin for a bullet button. But other than that don’t we agree that they should make it harder to get guns? I mean, I’m happy to wait 10 days. I’m glad to give my fingerprint to buy guns and ammo. I’m glad to do it because I’m not a deadbeat and I don’t plan to commit crimes.

So if the big picture is an ultimate across the board gun grab, then I agree and get it. If not, please let me know why the disdain for additional gun policies/restrictions..

- freedom gun loving Angelino.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Are you okay with a maximum of five rounds in your carry gun, or be able to buy just 20 rounds a month? Cause that's what the Democrat loons in Oregon are proposing. The anti-2A legions are not even hiding their disdain for legal gun owners. None of anything they propose is to stop violence but to make gun ownership undesirable.

Do criminals have to wait ten days or go through a background or psych exam before they buy a gun on the street or desire to carry a loaded weapon for whatever purpose? They just don't give a **** about these laws so none of them affect crime or the criminals that commit them.
__________________
Quote:
The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 01-24-2019, 8:54 PM
TheVazha TheVazha is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 114
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by joeliberty View Post
You just stated the answer in your question. All of these additional restrictions that ostensibly keep guns out of the hands of criminals don’t work, and they are just an incremental step with the ultimate goal of taking away our guns, or making it so costly or burdensome that people feel it’s not worth it to exercise their right to bear arms. And remember, it is a right. All of the amendments in the bill of rights pose significant risks to our security, but imagine if they made you wait 10 days to exercise your right to free speech, or to not quarter soldiers in your home, or to prevent illegal search and seizure, or any of the others. “A right delayed is a right denied.” This is not hyperbole, and quite frankly your willingness to accept these arbitrary and unproven restrictions is distressing. Check yo self before you wreck yo self, and the rest of us for that matter.


Rrright.

So you’re ok with felons owning guns? Mentally unstable people owning guns?

You know how they say that a border wall will keep criminals out? And how the left says that it’s “mostly good people”? And how we say “yeah but if one criminal gets through and kills one person, wouldn’t the wall be worth it?”

Yeah, it’s actually exactly like that. If all the regulations, and all the bull**** fees, and all the waiting periods keep even ONE bad guy from buying a gun and killing someone, wouldn’t that be worth it?

As far as the other freedoms you’d like me to imagine them taking, I prefer to take their suggestions at face value and just focus on the criminals and the insane.

You still have your AR’s I’m assuming? Your AK’s? Your 300 Wins and your 500’s? Slugs? Buck? Bird? Name it, I bet it’s still on the shelf at your local shop.

So they took 30 round mags and full auto. One is useless, and the other is very expensive.

The new rules make it hard for guys like us to have the toys we want. But, they make it next to impossible for a bad guy to walk down the street to the local shop and buy a gun to do harm. I just don’t see what the problem with that is.

You still haven’t provided me with a good reason not to allow extensive background checks and restrictions of gun ownership to felons. Besides imagining what could be, let’s focus on what is.

If the though of some imaginary future where your freedoms are being taken away is scarier than a mentally insane person being able to buy a gun freely, than you sir need to “check yo self”. Respectfully of course.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 01-24-2019, 9:01 PM
TheVazha TheVazha is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 114
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flogger23m View Post
Waiting periods have proven time and time again to be practically useless. Most people who are mentally unstable will not be deterred by waiting a day, three days, or thirty days. That is a chronic mental issue that won't disappear over the course of a few days. Therefore the law is pointless as it accomplishes nothing productive.



Permits, finger printing, banning of online ammo sales drives costs up & makes it hard for people to purchase ammunition. What if someone does not pay utility bills? What if the utility bills are in someone else's name? Should they not be allowed to purchase ammunition? And how will this prevent crime?



Does wanting to buy or trade ammunition without going to a gun store and paying a transfer fee & the associated wait worthy of calling someone a deadbeat? I'm not really sure what you're trying to get at here. How do these proposals even reduce crime?



Likewise, practically everyone is "mentally ill" these days. The definition will continue to expand much like the "assault weapon" term has. Minor depression on record? No firearms. Are you a shy, introverted person who cannot obtain enough "good character" recommendations before purchasing a firearm or ammo? No gun rights for you. Clearly, introverts are mentally ill. Go to the hospital, take a certain kind of medication and find out it disqualifies you from firearm ownership? Too bad, you were in the emergency room and had no idea about what medication would trigger a firearm confiscation from you.


A+ sir. All very valid and solid points. Answered like a scholar and not a nut.

Thank you, this is the answer I was looking for.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 01-24-2019, 9:07 PM
denpython denpython is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,829
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Default

Bad guys usually don't get firearms legally.

And even some perps pass all the hoops and later turn sour.
I say give the benefit of the doubt to the rights of law abiding citizens.
My 2 cents
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 01-24-2019, 9:21 PM
-hanko's Avatar
-hanko -hanko is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Bay Area & SW Idaho
Posts: 14,176
iTrader: 12 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheVazha View Post
...
The new rules make it hard for guys like us to have the toys we want. But, they make it next to impossible for a bad guy to walk down the street to the local shop and buy a gun to do harm. I just don’t see what the problem with that is.

You still haven’t provided me with a good reason not to allow extensive background checks and restrictions of gun ownership to felons. Besides imagining what could be, let’s focus on what is.

If the though of some imaginary future where your freedoms are being taken away is scarier than a mentally insane person being able to buy a gun freely, than you sir need to “check yo self”. Respectfully of course.
As to what you call "the problem", reread what Ben Franklin had to say about liberty v. security.

Laws as to possession by a felon are already state and federal laws, and within the 2nd Amendment.

And a "good reason" is the 2nd Amendment.



[/QUOTE]
__________________
True wealth is time. Time to enjoy life.

Life's journey is not to arrive safely in a well preserved body, but rather to slide in sideways, totally worn out, shouting "holy schit...what a ride"!!

Heaven goes by favor. If it went by merit, you would stay out and your dog would go in. Mark Twain

A man's soul can be judged by the way he treats his dog. Charles Doran
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 01-24-2019, 9:31 PM
Hooligan Hooligan is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 335
iTrader: 14 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheVazha View Post

Serious question that I never understood, is it really bad to have extra stringent background checks?

Ask the same question about any other Constitutional right. Should we have background checks before people are allowed to vote?


Is is bad that felons shouldn’t be allowed to own guns?

If they are still dangerous, shouldn't they be locked up, or are you placing judgement on them for some future crime they may commit, because sometime in the past they did. If we could convicted on potential, we'd all be locked up.

Is is bad that mentally unstable people should not have access to guns?

Yet we allow them to vote and drive cars which have the potential to kill far more than any gun could.

I get it, most of the policies are insane

I agree.

But other than that don’t we agree that they should make it harder to get guns?

Nope, the instant background check should be enough, and even that is overreach. I could buy a chainsaw and kill more on a crowded bus or store, but we don't regulate that.


I mean, I’m happy to wait 10 days. I’m glad to give my fingerprint to buy guns and ammo.

That is too bad you've given in to the MSM hype.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Added comments in response
__________________
On the firing line- depending on the day, determines which side of the line I'm supposed to stand on!
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 01-24-2019, 10:11 PM
TheVazha TheVazha is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 114
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hooligan View Post
Added comments in response


Serious question that I never understood, is it really bad to have extra stringent background checks?

Ask the same question about any other Constitutional right. Should we have background checks before people are allowed to vote?

Maybe not, but I think Valid ID’s are a good start. Besides, stay on point. My question was in regards to background checks for gun ownership, not voting.

Is is bad that felons shouldn’t be allowed to own guns?

If they are still dangerous, shouldn't they be locked up, or are you placing judgement on them for some future crime they may commit, because sometime in the past they did. If we could convicted on potential, we'd all be locked up.

Why should they be locked up? If you drive drunk you get your license taken away. If you are convicted of felony, you have proved that you are not capable of being an asset to society. Why then should you be able to buy a gun? For example, during a riot there are two types of people. Those who help keep peace and uphold the law, and those who see an opportunity to break the law, plunder, and steal. I’m just saying that I prefer the latter group have a harder time to buy guns. Am I crazy??

Is is bad that mentally unstable people should not have access to guns?

Yet we allow them to vote and drive cars which have the potential to kill far more than any gun could.

This I agree with entirely.

I get it, most of the policies are insane

I agree.

But other than that don’t we agree that they should make it harder to get guns?

Nope, the instant background check should be enough, and even that is overreach. I could buy a chainsaw and kill more on a crowded bus or store, but we don't regulate that.

You’re right, I’ve seen people stabbed to death with a 4” folder (about 10 ft away from me, not tv). Doesn’t change the fact that on any day of the week I can walk into a shop and buy whatever the hell I want, and a criminal can’t. That is a good thing.

I mean, I’m happy to wait 10 days. I’m glad to give my fingerprint to buy guns and ammo.

That is too bad you've given in to the MSM hype.

I’m not sure what you mean. I don’t watch as much TV as you do.

Again, I’m not a fan of 95% of the legislation by any means. I guess I just don’t understand why it’s so bad that felons and the insane shouldn’t be allowed to own guns is bad. Not anything else you mention, specifically this portion. This was my initial question. I understand the rest.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 01-24-2019, 10:46 PM
njineermike's Avatar
njineermike njineermike is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: CO
Posts: 9,784
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ugimports View Post
The better question is how many of those 12090 were used in crimes.. my guess..close to 0

As for the 54 amount in 1 transaction..that might have been one of my customers that purchased a case of 50 lowers in 2016 + some other stuff...
These clowns probably include 5.11 pants and a ruger window sticker as "firearms".
__________________
NRA lifetime member
2AF Defender member

When did I go from being a "citizen" to a "taxpayer"?

Jon Lovitz: ‘I can’t wait to go to a hospital run by the DMV!’

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kestryll View Post
Dude went full CNN...
Peace, love, and heavy weapons. Sometimes you have to be insistent." - David Lee Roth
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 01-24-2019, 11:49 PM
DentonandSasquatchShow's Avatar
DentonandSasquatchShow DentonandSasquatchShow is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Southern California
Posts: 935
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Newsom proposed adding $5.6 million — about 50% more than in Brown’s budget this year — to seize guns from thousands more people who are ineligible to possess firearms because of criminal convictions or mental illness.
Beccera had both the money and manpower to go get guns from those people and chose not to.

Quote:
Newsom made it clear that the issue would be a priority in his Jan. 7 inaugural speech, when he said “there are powerful forces arrayed against us,” including “a gun lobby willing to sacrifice the lives of our children to line their pockets.”
He cares about children when it has to do with guns but has no problem letting illegals rape, murder and assault them.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 01-25-2019, 4:41 AM
MaHoTex's Avatar
MaHoTex MaHoTex is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Isola di Linosa
Posts: 5,002
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheVazha View Post
Rrright.

So you’re ok with felons owning guns? Mentally unstable people owning guns?
PSSST.... It is not an either or scenario. I do not have to be ok with felons owning guns while not encouraging all the measures you seem to be ok with.
__________________
NRA Life Member



Mr. President, I can't take any more winning! Make it stop Mr. President. The winning is YUGGEEEE!

"If you've got a problem with the US, you better make sure it's not a military problem." SSgt Leslie Edwards
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 01-25-2019, 5:24 AM
Kyle1886's Avatar
Kyle1886 Kyle1886 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: N. San Diego Co.
Posts: 2,570
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Each new law, or regulation, restriction just makes the law abiding more likely to unwittingly become a new felon.

That satisfies pro gun advocates and gun control folks alike: felons, old pros or newly minted ones are bad. Everybody wins right?

Respectfully
Kyle
__________________
Thank you for another day!

Leadership, logistics, communications, and will.

"Doing nothing is doing something"

_________+__________
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 01-25-2019, 6:40 AM
TheVazha TheVazha is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 114
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MaHoTex View Post
PSSST.... It is not an either or scenario. I do not have to be ok with felons owning guns while not encouraging all the measures you seem to be ok with.


Good point MahoTex, it’s not as cut and dry as I’d like to believe.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 01-25-2019, 6:41 AM
TheVazha TheVazha is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 114
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle1886 View Post
Each new law, or regulation, restriction just makes the law abiding more likely to unwittingly become a new felon.



That satisfies pro gun advocates and gun control folks alike: felons, old pros or newly minted ones are bad. Everybody wins right?



Respectfully

Kyle


Interesting perspective, and you are absolutely right.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 01-25-2019, 7:34 AM
Half Cocked's Avatar
Half Cocked Half Cocked is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Stuck in the Socialist Republik of Kalifornistan
Posts: 750
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Messerschmitts View Post
SO relieved I finally "bit the bullet" and moved out of Kommiefornia. But even though he no longer has direct power over me, Newscum can continue to screw the rest of the country. He is increasing funding to that stupid "Gun violence" research group at UC Davis which will be used to cook up data to support "Guns bad, mmkay?" which will be used as ammunition (no pun intended) by anti gun groups everywhere.
If you want to get really pissed-off check this out:



Taxpayer dollars at work to pay for Wintemute's junk science.

.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 01-25-2019, 7:38 AM
EvoXguy's Avatar
EvoXguy EvoXguy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Idaho
Posts: 736
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

I expect ca to be just like ny with regards to 2a infringement within 5 years or less.
__________________
Peace through superior firepower
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 01-25-2019, 8:00 AM
REH's Avatar
REH REH is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 1,510
iTrader: 30 / 100%
Default

So, the $26,000,000.00 they stole from the DES system finally ran out.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 01-25-2019, 8:05 AM
Jimi Jah's Avatar
Jimi Jah Jimi Jah is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: North San Diego County
Posts: 16,466
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mayor McRifle View Post
A gun-grabbing governor and a pro-2A Supreme Court . . . the stage is being set.
For the cowardly SC to ignore us and those stacks of unconstitutional gun laws already passed.

Got 30 more years? That's how long it will take to address them, if at all. Gun rights will not come from a black robe, they will come from the end of a barrel.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 01-25-2019, 8:11 AM
CitaDeL's Avatar
CitaDeL CitaDeL is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Redding, CA
Posts: 5,841
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EvoXguy View Post
I expect ca to be just like ny with regards to 2a infringement within 5 years or less.
Less. Much less.
__________________



Sometimes the law defends plunder and participates in it. Sometimes the law places the whole apparatus of judges, police, prisons and gendarmes at the service of the plunderers, and treats the victim -- when he defends himself -- as a criminal. Bastiat

“Everything the State says is a lie, and everything it has it has stolen.” Friedrich Nietzsche
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 01-25-2019, 8:22 AM
madjack956's Avatar
madjack956 madjack956 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The mountains of Arizona
Posts: 2,618
iTrader: 9 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheVazha View Post
It is a given that GN is a tool.
It is a given that is acting purely to satisfy his unhinged base. I mean, they’ve seriously lost it. I am in utter disbelief at how whacked out these people are.

Serious question that I never understood, is it really bad to have extra stringent background checks? Is is bad that felons shouldn’t be allowed to own guns? Is is bad that mentally unstable people should not have access to guns?

Besides the additional fees and waiting periods, I’d like to think good and honest gun owning peoples would encourage extra measures to keep guns out of the hands of people who really shouldn’t have them.

I get it, most of the policies are insane - like trading a fin for a bullet button. But other than that don’t we agree that they should make it harder to get guns? I mean, I’m happy to wait 10 days. I’m glad to give my fingerprint to buy guns and ammo. I’m glad to do it because I’m not a deadbeat and I don’t plan to commit crimes.

So if the big picture is an ultimate across the board gun grab, then I agree and get it. If not, please let me know why the disdain for additional gun policies/restrictions..

- freedom gun loving Angelino.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
There are freedom loving gun owners in other states that dont have to put up with any of that nonsense and things are just fine.

As soon as you understand the only "common sense" goal the anti's care about is total gun restriction the better off you'll be.

So, you go wait your 10 days, along with all your other restrictions on sales, ammo, configuration, capacity, etc. and I'll enjoy my freedoms without any of that nonsense.
If you have to compromise a right to get at best half measures, somethings terribly wrong.
__________________
Paralyzed Veterans of America www.pva.org
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 01-25-2019, 8:51 AM
robertkjjj's Avatar
robertkjjj robertkjjj is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 900
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Hard to believe any of of you are actually trying to debate this "TheVazha " guy. It's pretty da*n obvious he's a gun-hating troll.
__________________
NRA Lifetime Member. Hunter & Target Shooter.
San Diego County.
Passionate supporter of RTKBA.
Supporter of conceal and open-carry.[/SIZE]
"It's called the Bill Of Rights. Not the Bill of Needs."[/SIZE]
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 01-25-2019, 9:25 AM
Den60's Avatar
Den60 Den60 is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: San Diego
Posts: 2,504
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hooligan View Post
Added comments in response
__________________


Mojave Lever Crew Member

"It is time for us to do what we have been doing and that time is every day. Every day it is time for us to agree that there are things and tools that are available to us to slow this thing down." - Kamala "Heels Up" Harris

Slava Ukraini (Слава Україні)
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 01-25-2019, 9:26 AM
EvoXguy's Avatar
EvoXguy EvoXguy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Idaho
Posts: 736
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimi Jah View Post
For the cowardly SC to ignore us and those stacks of unconstitutional gun laws already passed.

Got 30 more years? That's how long it will take to address them, if at all. Gun rights will not come from a black robe, they will come from the end of a barrel.

I tend to agree
__________________
Peace through superior firepower
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 01-25-2019, 9:28 AM
EvoXguy's Avatar
EvoXguy EvoXguy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Idaho
Posts: 736
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CitaDeL View Post
Less. Much less.

Well I was trying to be optimistic but yes it's more like 2 years the way things are going.
__________________
Peace through superior firepower
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 01-25-2019, 10:13 AM
lhecker51's Avatar
lhecker51 lhecker51 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Formerly From People's Republic of Dumphucistan
Posts: 704
iTrader: 8 / 100%
Default

" Originally Posted by TheVazha View Post
...
The new rules make it hard for guys like us to have the toys we want. "

Toys? Please don't assume gun owners are children and that guns are "toys". It is never proper and is very reckless to refer to firearms as toys.
__________________
NRA Life Member***I have not and will not ever comply****
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 01-25-2019, 11:57 AM
robertmneal93 robertmneal93 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: East Bay
Posts: 138
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 71MUSTY View Post
Only a matter of time before they start matching Dispensary Customer Lists with Firearm Registrations.
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/f...01720180AB2402

"26161.5. (a) A licensee shall not disclose a consumer’s personal information to a third party, except to the extent necessary to allow responsibility for payment to be determined and payment to be made or if the consumer has consented to the licensee’s disclosure of the personal information. This section does not prohibit the disclosure of nonpublic personal information to the State of California or a city, county, or city and county to perform official duties pursuant to this division or a local ordinance."

AKA they would need a warrant to be able to link you, your consent, or a bull**** law to pass to link you. Be careful what you agree to and be aware of what laws are passing around you.

The best part about that law though, is that it does not give an auto exemption to the fed, unless you have consented, or if there is a warrant, I presume.
__________________
Welcome to California; Where the liberals are liberals and the conservatives are too!
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 10:41 AM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, 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 2002-2021, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.
All opinions, statements and remarks made by Calguns.net on this web site and elsewhere are solely attributable to Calguns.net.



Seams2SewBySusy