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 > FIREARMS DISCUSSIONS > California handguns
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

California handguns Discuss your favorite California handgun technical and related questions here.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 09-03-2010, 9:34 AM
eldonvieira eldonvieira is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 59
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default makes no sense

I have a permit and walk into a gun store to do a ppt with my carry gun and have to leave my new gun there for 10 days but walk out with my carry gun on me
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 09-03-2010, 10:05 AM
ZombieTactics's Avatar
ZombieTactics ZombieTactics is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Roseville area, or wherever they pay my confiscatory rates for things only I know how to do (lol)
Posts: 3,694
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Yep cuz there's NO WAY you'd use the gun you already have to kill someone or rob a liquor store! :-)
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 09-03-2010, 10:11 AM
leelaw leelaw is offline
Junior Member
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Contra Costa
Posts: 10,458
iTrader: 57 / 100%
Default

Don't try to think about the laws rationally - the legislators didn't, either.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 09-03-2010, 10:13 AM
Greg-Dawg Greg-Dawg is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Where I have no use for a bullet button.
Posts: 7,796
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

Go do something about it...go to Sacramento!
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 09-03-2010, 10:14 AM
vta vta is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,706
iTrader: 29 / 100%
Default

the 10 day 'cool off' period probably has the opposite effect on a lot of people. i think if you already own a similar type firearm (pistol/rifle) you should be able to skip it. if any moron who already owns a gun is going to use it for crime, why the hell would they go get a new one? use the one they already got!
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 09-03-2010, 10:32 AM
flatovercrest's Avatar
flatovercrest flatovercrest is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 750
iTrader: 13 / 100%
Default

in the majority of countries in this world a civilian would never be allowed to purchase or own a firearm legally.
God Bless America and God Bless the Great State of California.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 09-03-2010, 10:39 AM
vta vta is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,706
iTrader: 29 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flatovercrest View Post
in the majority of countries in this world a civilian would never be allowed to purchase or own a firearm legally.
God Bless America and God Bless the Great State of California.
This is missing the point. we can still own guns in this country because people like here on calguns and NRA fought to keep them. if we didn't fight for these rights it would have gone away completely. CA has the 10 day cooling off period because the legislators had their way on an initiative and convince enough people that it was supposedly 'safer'.

if we are complacent about what we have, soon we will be thanking our government for letting us own knives. and soon after that we will thank them for letting us own staplers.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 09-03-2010, 10:50 AM
evidens83's Avatar
evidens83 evidens83 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Oceanside CA x Tacoma WA
Posts: 7,898
iTrader: 50 / 100%
Default

How many CA gun restrictions do make sense
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 09-03-2010, 11:03 AM
robcoe's Avatar
robcoe robcoe is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Long Beach
Posts: 8,666
iTrader: 12 / 100%
Default

If you try to apply logic to politics your brain will crawl out of your head and strangle you for abusing it.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 09-03-2010, 11:29 AM
Librarian's Avatar
Librarian Librarian is offline
Super Moderator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Concord
Posts: 36,681
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Blog Entries: 6
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by robcoe View Post
If you try to apply logic to politics your brain will crawl out of your head and strangle you for abusing it.
Oh, no - there's a guiding logic to politics, or at least politicians.
  • Politicians get perks.
  • Politicians get to spend other people's money.
Given those 2, the logical conclusion is that politicians want to be elected/appointed, and they want to keep those jobs.

In order to keep the jobs, they need to at least give the appearance of 'doing something'. For legislators, they need to introduce bills that become laws, so they can point to those laws as 'accomplishments' and thereby show those who vote that the legislator is 'doing something' and deserves to be kept in office.

To get bills voted for by other legislators, our legislator has to do one thing - vote the way the leadership wants on other bills. Then the leadership will tell those other legislators to vote for our legislator's bills.

A legislator who follows that path becomes eligible to be appointed to some office when s/he can no longer be elected.

Note that the content of the bills doesn't matter much.

A small number of legislators are perceived as 'doing something' enough when they oppose the things other legislators are trying to do.

An even smaller number of legislators actually has an agenda, a plan to accomplish something useful; in order to make any progress on that plan, they need their bills supported by other legislators - see above.

If occasionally something useful gets through the legislature, we should be a little bit grateful, though I don't think useful outweighs harmful/wasteful/useless.

[/cynicism]

Watch out for those tendrils squirming out of your head ...
__________________
[Carol Ann voice]The Legislature is baaa-ack .... [/Carol Ann voice]

There is no value at all complaining or analyzing or reading tea leaves to decide what these bills really mean or actually do; any bill with a chance to pass will be bad for gun owners.

The details only count after the Governor signs the bills.

Not a lawyer, just Some Guy On The Interwebs.


Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 09-03-2010, 12:27 PM
xxsleepyxx xxsleepyxx is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: 626
Posts: 774
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

There is actually a purpose to this law. It was enacted to prevent people from dealing arms. Thus limiting the quantity of purchases along with the 30 days per gun.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 09-03-2010, 4:16 PM
Droc101's Avatar
Droc101 Droc101 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Santa Cruz CA
Posts: 480
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

'shall not be infringed'

again logic plays no part in politics, only money.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 09-03-2010, 4:28 PM
vta vta is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,706
iTrader: 29 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by xxsleepyxx View Post
There is actually a purpose to this law. It was enacted to prevent people from dealing arms. Thus limiting the quantity of purchases along with the 30 days per gun.
this has nothing to do with the 30 day law. that is for hand guns only. the 10 days wait does not limit the quantity of firearms you buy as you can buy as many long guns as you want at one time and as many in any given month but each still has a 10 day 'cooling off' period associated with each DROS.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 09-03-2010, 4:35 PM
flatovercrest's Avatar
flatovercrest flatovercrest is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 750
iTrader: 13 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vta View Post
This is missing the point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vta View Post
this has nothing to do with the 30 day law.

Dude, relax a little with the tone of your replies..
It's obvious that you have more like a personal problem with the gun laws in sacramento, but let's keep an open mind on other's replies.

Last edited by flatovercrest; 09-03-2010 at 4:37 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 09-03-2010, 4:52 PM
vta vta is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,706
iTrader: 29 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flatovercrest View Post
Dude, relax a little with the tone of your replies..
It's obvious that you have more like a personal problem with the gun laws in sacramento, but let's keep an open mind on other's replies.


simply stating my opinion and facts as I understand them. the phrases you quoted from me are essential in establishing the points i am trying to make in the posts. if others are hurt my my tone i apologize and they can feel free to comment directly.

dude.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 09-03-2010, 5:27 PM
pyromensch's Avatar
pyromensch pyromensch is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: sacratomato
Posts: 6,869
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

they know that you are not going to use your ppt firearm, as a "drop" gun, so they figure you are buying the second one for that purpose
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 09-03-2010, 5:28 PM
pyromensch's Avatar
pyromensch pyromensch is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: sacratomato
Posts: 6,869
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flatovercrest View Post
in the majority of countries in this world a civilian would never be allowed to purchase or own a firearm legally.
God Bless America and God Bless the Great State of California.
or nevada, arizona, oregon.................
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 09-03-2010, 5:48 PM
xxsleepyxx xxsleepyxx is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: 626
Posts: 774
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

I took no offense. I was trying to tie something I didn't know to something I did. The 30 days per gun or whatever was originally an attempt to limit handguns/guns for a good reason. Simply, I don't really mind it's not a big deal. I don't make enough money to buy a gun every month anyway.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 09-03-2010, 5:55 PM
9mmlaw's Avatar
9mmlaw 9mmlaw is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Arizona 2016, native Of California for the previous 51 years
Posts: 249
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by xxsleepyxx View Post
I took no offense. I was trying to tie something I didn't know to something I did. The 30 days per gun or whatever was originally an attempt to limit handguns/guns for a good reason. Simply, I don't really mind it's not a big deal. I don't make enough money to buy a gun every month anyway.
And it is this kind of attitude that allows bad laws to be passed. Oh I don't need more than ten rounds in a magazine, oh I don't need an AR-15 without a bullet button etc etc etc.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 09-03-2010, 6:50 PM
deadlyapp deadlyapp is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 167
iTrader: 8 / 100%
Default

Turning this thread into a political statement might not be the best thing, but for those who are willing to bend over to the laws and say that it makes sense do no good to the gun owning community. California has given up so many of their rights already and sooner or later they'll be gone unless everyone uses their votes to tell the stupid politicians whats really up.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 09-03-2010, 6:59 PM
RTE's Avatar
RTE RTE is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Just over the bridge in AZ
Posts: 1,656
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

It's a marketing ploy

You now have 10 days to shop for accessories.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 09-03-2010, 7:36 PM
advocatusdiaboli's Avatar
advocatusdiaboli advocatusdiaboli is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Rural Central California
Posts: 5,324
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

I understand a waiting period for a first firearm--queue the Homer Simpson vignette "But I'm angry now!". But after that is makes no sense for the ostensible purpose (and therefore make me suspect ulterior motives such as with the ammo ban--just make it harder to own pistols). I can see many sheeple (um I mean glorious comrade legislators) going along with this with the idea it would be too expensive to verify prior ownership and therefore cheaper to just limit everyone. My answer to that is this: "Constitutional rights are not cheap--they are precious and worth under going cost to maintain."
__________________
Benefactor Member NRA, Life Member CRPA, CGN Contributor, US Army Veteran

ó
Not wasting any more time and energy tilting, Don Quixote-like, on a regulatory problem that, constitutionally, should not even exist in a free state.
I cannot change the world unlike my hero Samuel Adamsóbut I can change my place in it.
Gone fishin' for now and soon gone from California.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 09-03-2010, 7:44 PM
eldonvieira eldonvieira is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 59
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

spent all the money on the gun and reloading stuff for it so no more accessories for a while. The gun is mainly to teach my wife and kids to shoot I needed something a little smaller than my 45
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 09-03-2010, 8:01 PM
vta vta is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,706
iTrader: 29 / 100%
Default

I am glad at least some of you share the same sentiment as myself. complacency is what caused other countries like the United Kingdom and Australia to lose much of their ability to own firearms. Some don't like to think of it as a slippery slope but if we are not passionate and take these issues personally, we will eventually head down that same path. Thanks to the NRA and CGF, we are working hard to restore what is lost here in California.


Quote:
Originally Posted by advocatusdiaboli View Post
I understand a waiting period for a first firearm--queue the Homer Simpson vignette "But I'm angry now!". But after that is makes no sense for the ostensible purpose (and therefore make me suspect ulterior motives such as with the ammo ban--just make it harder to own pistols). I can see many sheeple (um I mean glorious comrade legislators) going along with this with the idea it would be too expensive to verify prior ownership and therefore cheaper to just limit everyone. My answer to that is this: "Constitutional rights are not cheap--they are precious and worth under going cost to maintain."
my point exactly. its the hidden ulterior motives behind these laws that are frustrating.


Quote:
Originally Posted by RTE View Post
It's a marketing ploy

You now have 10 days to shop for accessories.
you might be on to something here

Last edited by vta; 09-03-2010 at 8:07 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 09-03-2010, 9:01 PM
Fishslayer's Avatar
Fishslayer Fishslayer is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: SanDawg, PRK
Posts: 12,310
iTrader: 50 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by eldonvieira View Post
I have a permit and walk into a gun store to do a ppt with my carry gun and have to leave my new gun there for 10 days but walk out with my carry gun on me
Quote:
Originally Posted by leelaw View Post
Don't try to think about the laws rationally - the legislators didn't, either.
There you guys go again. Thinking our gun laws have anything to do with public safety...
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 09-03-2010, 10:26 PM
subijitsu's Avatar
subijitsu subijitsu is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 294
iTrader: 11 / 100%
Default

I had never been mad enough to use a gun to kill someone until I had to wait 10 days to get the new gun I purchased. That REALLY pissed me off.

j/k

Either way, I can only read/learn/hear about our gun laws here before I become really confused. Not as much confused by the laws but by the reasoning (or lack thereof) behind them. It makes me dizzy. I am waiting to see references to unicorns, leprechauns, and fairys written into the laws.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 09-03-2010, 11:01 PM
Anothercoilgun Anothercoilgun is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 176
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by eldonvieira View Post
I have a permit and walk into a gun store to do a ppt with my carry gun and have to leave my new gun there for 10 days but walk out with my carry gun on me
Never has. Yet makes good deal of money for those drafting and passing bills. They get paid by their puppeteers.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 09-04-2010, 12:07 AM
scidx's Avatar
scidx scidx is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Yes
Posts: 1,093
iTrader: 57 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Dude, relax a little with the tone of your replies..
This always makes me laugh. (I've been told many times that my work emails have an angry or impolite tone.)

How does written text have a tone. It's black letters on a white background. Tone would suggest a recieved wave frequency. I cannot hear text. I undestand that any language can be a work of art. And, art can have a visual "tone" (synonym, evoking emotion). But, if art is a reflection of the artist's attempt to evoke emotion, and the receiver's subconscious draws the emotion evoked; then, wouldn't the reader be responsible for the tone perceived?

Does Gangsta-Rap music beget violence, or does violence beget Gangsta-Rap music?

Sorry for the sarcastic tone.

Oh wait, I'm not threadjacking...
...yeah, that sucks about your ten day wait, dude.
__________________


"Never go through a door without a full magazine in your weapon." --Capt. Eric A. Sykes--

"(experts), of course, have long recognized the .45 as possessing killing power completely out of proportion to the scientific reality of its cross-sectional area, sectional density and available kinetic energy." --G&S online--
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 09-04-2010, 12:13 AM
Bill Carson's Avatar
Bill Carson Bill Carson is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 3,350
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pyromensch View Post
they know that you are not going to use your ppt firearm, as a "drop" gun, so they figure you are buying the second one for that purpose
What is a "Drop Gun" ?
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 09-04-2010, 12:14 AM
Bill Carson's Avatar
Bill Carson Bill Carson is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 3,350
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by xxsleepyxx View Post
There is actually a purpose to this law. It was enacted to prevent people from dealing arms. Thus limiting the quantity of purchases along with the 30 days per gun.
FUD
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 11:27 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.