Do we call for Veto on AB 2728 or not?

Can'thavenuthingood · #1 09-08-2006, 03:05 PM

So after again reading the thread http://calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=39164
on AB 2728, it seems this DOJ sponsored bill may be a way for the AG/DOJ to back away gracefully from listing legal only lowers. No point in going there as more unlisted lowers will just pop up.

This bill allows for the DA's to decide for themselves if they want to continue the persecutions or prosecutions.

Looks to me like we ought to request the Governor to sign this bill into law.

Is this a correct interpretation?

Which way do we want it as a state law?

Vick

USMC_2651_E5 · #2 09-08-2006, 03:14 PM

I'm wondering that if it was to pass, would it nullify the lawsuit pending against B.L. to list?

**blkA4alb** · #3 09-08-2006, 03:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MC_2651_E5

I'm wondering that if it was to pass, would it nullify the lawsuit pending against B.L. to list?

What are you talking about?

**grammaton76** · #4 09-08-2006, 03:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blkA4alb

What are you talking about?

I believe he's talking about the detrimental reliance suit that Bill's been kicking around, which could perhaps be made vs AM's letters. I'm of the opinion that it would at the very least add extra hurdles to a DR suit if they can delay the case's resolution past Jan 1st.

**blkA4alb** · #5 09-08-2006, 03:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by grammaton76

I believe he's talking about the detrimental reliance suit that Bill's been kicking around, which could perhaps be made vs AM's letters. I'm of the opinion that it would at the very least add extra hurdles to a DR suit if they can delay the case's resolution past Jan 1st.

Ah, from his post he made it sound like there was a pending case. Not a prospective one.

Ragweed · #6 09-08-2006, 04:43 PM

I am not sure that I understand this. If you are caught with an assualt weapon, it would be considered a public nuisance pushishable by fine of up to $300.00 on the first offense. If the weapon was used in a crime it would be destroyed.

A pinned mag rifle is not considered an assualt weapon therefore no crime is being commited.

Does anyone know if "permantly attached" has been defined yet?

**blkA4alb** · #7 09-08-2006, 04:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ragweed

I am not sure that I understand this. If you are caught with an assualt weapon, it might be considered a public nuisance pushishable by fine of up to $300.00 on the first offense. If the weapon was used in a crime it would be destroyed.

I fixed your post, the DA still has the option to charge you with a felony. It just makes it easier to charge you and get the rifle. This doesn't change the felony for transportation either if you get caught at the range.

VeryCoolCat · #8 09-08-2006, 04:51 PM

Well the downside its way easier to prosecute a public nuisence misdemeanor than a felony assault weapons charge.

At least its a quick, this happened... we take your gun end of story. No lawyer talk... just end of story. You lose.