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
  #241  
Old 09-04-2013, 12:01 AM
G21Shooter's Avatar
G21Shooter G21Shooter is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Central Coast
Posts: 3,575
iTrader: 8 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by prometa View Post
The bill was amended in the assembly today. They added 6 months to the activation date, but more importantly, removed the ability for a non FFL to order ammo and have it shipped to an FFL for pickup. Now only licensed vendors can buy ammo online, period.

One step closer to an injunction I suppose.
By added 6 months to the activation date you mean we have a extra six months to buy ammo before the law takes effect(assuming it does)?

This bill needs to be stopped badly, just messed up on a lot of levels.
Reply With Quote
  #242  
Old 09-04-2013, 6:40 AM
javalos's Avatar
javalos javalos is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Valley Springs, CA
Posts: 884
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by advocatusdiaboli View Post
Yep. I have hunter friends who don't care that semi-autos are being restricted because they think it's not going to effect them—they don't realize there will be more and more restriction after this and the end game is to ban civilian possession and use of firearms including hunting. they also laughed about the ammo license and fingerprinting and said:"So what? No big deal."

Divided and conquered.
Hunters for the most part tend to be the most complacent thinking that their shotgun or bolt gun will be untouched....fools! The legislative terrorists that we have in Sacramento want to end gun ownership in this state by banning it or making it too expensive for us. They will pursue the issue of lead full hilt and then where will the hunters be? 6 more years till I retire and I am so out of this nanny state, meanwhile I'll fight as long as possible.
__________________
Better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it.
__________________________
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ!
Reply With Quote
  #243  
Old 09-04-2013, 7:52 AM
G21Shooter's Avatar
G21Shooter G21Shooter is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Central Coast
Posts: 3,575
iTrader: 8 / 100%
Default

No kidding, a lot of hunters are FUDs!

"I don't care what laws they pass, my shotgun and rifle will be okay". Wrong, try again. Next year if they get away with this current ****, they are going to classify scoped bolt action rifles as "assault sniper rifles". After that shotguns that hold over two rounds will be labeled "assault shotguns".
Reply With Quote
  #244  
Old 09-04-2013, 8:00 AM
taperxz taperxz is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Lake County
Posts: 14,891
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by javalos View Post
Hunters for the most part tend to be the most complacent thinking that their shotgun or bolt gun will be untouched....fools! .
BS! Generalize much?
Reply With Quote
  #245  
Old 09-04-2013, 8:01 AM
taperxz taperxz is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Lake County
Posts: 14,891
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by G21Shooter View Post
No kidding, a lot of hunters are FUDs!

"I don't care what laws they pass, my shotgun and rifle will be okay". Wrong, try again. Next year if they get away with this current ****, they are going to classify scoped bolt action rifles as "assault sniper rifles". After that shotguns that hold over two rounds will be labeled "assault shotguns".
Whats FUD's????? You don't know what you are talking about either.
Reply With Quote
  #246  
Old 09-04-2013, 8:06 AM
AceGirlsHusband's Avatar
AceGirlsHusband AceGirlsHusband is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 2,109
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by taperxz View Post
BS! Generalize much?
I understand his sentiment. Our legislature practices incrementalism... a little bit at a time invested towards a very large, future goal.
Reply With Quote
  #247  
Old 09-04-2013, 8:14 AM
AceGirlsHusband's Avatar
AceGirlsHusband AceGirlsHusband is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 2,109
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dutch3 View Post
And this is the reason they pander to law enforcement, exempting LE from the restrictions. They plan to call in a favor from LE while being tied to the stake by the constituents they have ignored.

Maybe 911 won't be working that day.
LE is not completely exempted from all points of the ammo bill. We don't have to sign for it, BUT we don't get to order it via internet anymore, either. We're all in the same boat on that issue.
Reply With Quote
  #248  
Old 09-04-2013, 8:47 AM
-hanko's Avatar
-hanko -hanko is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Bay Area & SW Idaho
Posts: 9,598
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by javalos View Post
Hunters for the most part tend to be the most complacent thinking that their shotgun or bolt gun will be untouched....fools!
Not those with whom I hunt...nobody's complacent as to laws, and we're all in a state with a constitutional amendment as to rkba. Not to mention complete preemption.

Quote:
Originally Posted by G21Shooter View Post
No kidding, a lot of hunters are FUDs!

"I don't care what laws they pass, my shotgun and rifle will be okay". Wrong, try again. Next year if they get away with this current ****, they are going to classify scoped bolt action rifles as "assault sniper rifles". After that shotguns that hold over two rounds will be labeled "assault shotguns".
See above.

Obviously, any scoped sniper rifle can shoot right through a school, and shotguns can put hundreds of pellets in the air faster than a rifle. Keep your seat belt on, that's next on your legislature's agenda.

-hanko
__________________
"Tactical" is like boobs...you can sell anything with it....arf


Originally Posted By System Message:
Why can't you guys participate in a simple discussion about some guy's mom making a porno without violating the COC? This is why we can't have nice things.



“Heaven goes by favor. If it went by merit, you would stay out and your dog would go in.”
Mark Twain
Reply With Quote
  #249  
Old 09-04-2013, 9:19 AM
sirgrumps's Avatar
sirgrumps sirgrumps is offline
1911 & AR-15 fan
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,250
iTrader: 79 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by -hanko View Post
Obviously, any scoped sniper rifle can shoot right through a school, and shotguns can put hundreds of pellets in the air faster than a rifle. Keep your seat belt on, that's next on your legislature's agenda.

-hanko
The next target will be hunting rifles. They are military style sniper rifles.
Reply With Quote
  #250  
Old 09-04-2013, 9:58 AM
javalos's Avatar
javalos javalos is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Valley Springs, CA
Posts: 884
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by taperxz View Post
BS! Generalize much?
If I offended a particular group, my apology's, my opinion is solely based on interaction with types of gun owners and their interests. It just seems to me that many hunters that I have chatted with have come to believe that their firearms are innocuous compared others that have handguns or shoot various types of semi-auto rifles. I warned them their their scatter guns and bolt guns are the next round of targeted firearms by the legislative terrorists in Sacramento.
__________________
Better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it.
__________________________
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ!
Reply With Quote
  #251  
Old 09-04-2013, 11:33 AM
sbrad39 sbrad39 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 925
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

what's in this bill to stop someone from going to the state line and stocking up on ammo....?
Reply With Quote
  #252  
Old 09-04-2013, 12:18 PM
IVC's Avatar
IVC IVC is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Temecula
Posts: 10,502
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sbrad39 View Post
what's in this bill to stop someone from going to the state line and stocking up on ammo....?
Nothing except the inconvenience. I believe there will also be workarounds with re-shipping.
__________________
NRA Benefactor Member
Reply With Quote
  #253  
Old 09-04-2013, 12:19 PM
Losd619's Avatar
Losd619 Losd619 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: San Diego
Posts: 868
iTrader: 17 / 100%
Default

why would you bring this up? loose lips sink ships friend.
Reply With Quote
  #254  
Old 09-04-2013, 12:44 PM
advocatusdiaboli's Avatar
advocatusdiaboli advocatusdiaboli is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Rural Central California
Posts: 5,330
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Losd619 View Post
why would you bring this up? loose lips sink ships friend.
Agreed. You'd think the members of Calguns have no sense of OpSec at all. Sure the anties are generally ignorant of such things, but that is to be expected of leftists. We should know better. Loose lips aid the enemy and help their research for future regulations.
__________________
Benefactor Member NRA, Life Member CRPA, CGN Contributor, US Army Veteran


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 Adams—but I can change my place in it.
Gone fishin' for now and soon gone from California.
Reply With Quote
  #255  
Old 09-04-2013, 12:49 PM
SanPedroShooter's Avatar
SanPedroShooter SanPedroShooter is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Los Angeles Harbor
Posts: 9,739
iTrader: 25 / 100%
Default

Unions to the rescue?!

SB 53 (DeLeon) Opposed By Coalition of Labor Leaders and Organizations as It Moves to Assembly Floor

http://users.focalbeam.com/fs/distri.../daid/.preview
__________________
Join the NRA
https://membership.nrahq.org/forms/signup.asp
Reply With Quote
  #256  
Old 09-04-2013, 12:57 PM
advocatusdiaboli's Avatar
advocatusdiaboli advocatusdiaboli is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Rural Central California
Posts: 5,330
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SanPedroShooter View Post
Unions to the rescue?!

SB 53 (DeLeon) Opposed By Coalition of Labor Leaders and Organizations as It Moves to Assembly Floor

http://users.focalbeam.com/fs/distri.../daid/.preview
They are looking out for their members—many hunt and shoot.

Unions are too often universally maligned because the abuse of some powerful ones.

At the turn of the 20th century, mine owners routinely pulled out their mules when there was danger of a cave in and let men pull and push the carts instead: mules cost money upfront to replace while men's labor can be had for less and nothing down. Unions fixed that. And child labor too and more like employer healthcare for on-the-job injuries and disability for work-relaled injuries.

Just because some unions now, flush with power, abuse it, is no reason to "throw the baby out with the bath water". Fix unions that abuse power but they still serve people.
__________________
Benefactor Member NRA, Life Member CRPA, CGN Contributor, US Army Veteran


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 Adams—but I can change my place in it.
Gone fishin' for now and soon gone from California.
Reply With Quote
  #257  
Old 09-04-2013, 1:07 PM
sbrad39 sbrad39 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 925
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Losd619 View Post
why would you bring this up? loose lips sink ships friend.

because I want to know, and I'm not accustomed to tip-toeing or cowering in fear because of real or perceived boogeymen....last I checked communism isn't the order of the day...try as they might.....
Reply With Quote
  #258  
Old 09-04-2013, 1:24 PM
advocatusdiaboli's Avatar
advocatusdiaboli advocatusdiaboli is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Rural Central California
Posts: 5,330
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sbrad39 View Post
because I want to know, and I'm not accustomed to tip-toeing or cowering in fear because of real or perceived boogeymen....last I checked communism isn't the order of the day...try as they might.....
We are at war for our rights. It may not feel like war because there isn't any violence and won't be as it is fought in the legislatures and courts, but it's as serious a war as every has been fought on this soil. The Constitution is being assaulted by the very people who took an oath to protect it because it stands in the way of their establishing a government led by elitists who will decide what is best for you in all aspects of life, and they intend to either re-educate those who disagree on the grounds of liberty or drive them away.

So some discretion is advised lest you play into their hands.
__________________
Benefactor Member NRA, Life Member CRPA, CGN Contributor, US Army Veteran


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 Adams—but I can change my place in it.
Gone fishin' for now and soon gone from California.
Reply With Quote
  #259  
Old 09-04-2013, 1:26 PM
meaty-btz's Avatar
meaty-btz meaty-btz is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 8,989
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sbrad39 View Post
because I want to know, and I'm not accustomed to tip-toeing or cowering in fear because of real or perceived boogeymen....last I checked communism isn't the order of the day...try as they might.....
Actually, their rule is the order of the day currently.
__________________
...but their exists also in the human heart a depraved taste for equality, which impels the weak to attempt to lower the powerful to their own level, and reduces men to prefer equality in slavery to inequality with freedom.
Reply With Quote
  #260  
Old 09-04-2013, 1:28 PM
glock_this's Avatar
glock_this glock_this is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Under your skin
Posts: 8,248
iTrader: 48 / 98%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Losd619 View Post
why would you bring this up? loose lips sink ships friend.
Some of you guys really seriously think they don't think of these things and somehow his post is tipping them off to an earth shattering idea they never considered?

Quote:
Originally Posted by advocatusdiaboli View Post
but it's as serious a war as every has been fought on this soil.
Easy with the drama, this is nothing near as awful as war, not even close.
__________________
10 +1 in the chamber

WTS: Gun stuff & things

Last edited by glock_this; 09-04-2013 at 1:32 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #261  
Old 09-04-2013, 1:31 PM
advocatusdiaboli's Avatar
advocatusdiaboli advocatusdiaboli is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Rural Central California
Posts: 5,330
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by glock_this View Post
Some of you guys really seriously think they don't think of these things and somehow his post is tipping them off to an earth shattering idea they never considered?
I guess time for an OpSec refresher: you keep lips sealed about everything no matter how innocuous. Why? 1) habits become reflex, become second-nature—and information is safe, and 2) they used our forums to re-write the assault on the bullet button to great effect and once people get in the habit of blurting things out, serious info finds it's way out.

Better to say tool little here than too much.
__________________
Benefactor Member NRA, Life Member CRPA, CGN Contributor, US Army Veteran


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 Adams—but I can change my place in it.
Gone fishin' for now and soon gone from California.
Reply With Quote
  #262  
Old 09-04-2013, 1:36 PM
glock_this's Avatar
glock_this glock_this is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Under your skin
Posts: 8,248
iTrader: 48 / 98%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by advocatusdiaboli View Post
I guess time for an OpSec refresher: you keep lips sealed about everything no matter how innocuous. Why? 1) habits become reflex, become second-nature—and information is safe, and 2) they used our forums to re-write the assault on the bullet button to great effect and once people get in the habit of blurting things out, serious info finds it's way out.

Better to say tool little here than too much.


Dude, it is a public forum. What do you really expect? Every sort of idea and topic possible is discussed here. Heck, you sit here and give some sort of funny "OpSec refresher" and you are just tipping your hands to your tactics by giving definitions in writing on the forums of how one should act. So really, if you followed your own advice, you would not even comment.

And on this actual topic at hand, a 5 year old could figure out the workaround to this law. It didn't take someone posting it here as a major revelation.
__________________
10 +1 in the chamber

WTS: Gun stuff & things
Reply With Quote
  #263  
Old 09-04-2013, 1:37 PM
mshill's Avatar
mshill mshill is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,454
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by glock_this View Post
Some of you guys really seriously think they don't think of these things and somehow his post is tipping them off to an earth shattering idea they never considered?
^^^^^this.

I was present at the Senate Public Safety meeting where this was debated and when it was brought up the response was "so what, let them buy it in Nevada just not here without a permit."

Its not a secret.
Reply With Quote
  #264  
Old 09-04-2013, 1:38 PM
The Gleam's Avatar
The Gleam The Gleam is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 5,984
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by taperxz View Post
BS! Generalize much?
Sorry. TOO LARGE of a percentage of hunters DID ignore and give in to apathy over any involvement with AB50, to my face and to the opposition itself, and that led to the first time a bolt-action rifle had been banned and declared as an "Assault Weapon" in the United States, requiring registration of the same.

I saw it first hand while trying to drum up support against AB50 at gun shows, dealers, and other gatherings, where way too often I hear "that's a crazy person's round, it should be banned" or "there is no need for such a destructive cartridge, it destroys the meat" or "you can't hunt anything in America with that round" more than once, from self-proclaimed "avid" hunters. Equally I saw the same with previous "Assault Weapon" bills and even recently concerning SB249 last year and anything BB related.

if they didn't learn this from AB50, I have no idea WHAT will teach them to not turn their heads (albeit as the Cowboy Action guys did with the SB15 that eventually became the CA Roster - so long as they could carve out their little "piece" to not be affected, they didn't care one way or the other ).

The Zumbos of the world really DO exist, unfortunately, and they are not persuaded or swayed until the knock is on THEIR door.

To say ALL hunters have no concern is a bit too broad, but I am willing to bet a large percentage of traditional bolt-action only hunters have only a 1/2-concern at best. It will be all too unfortunate too, when they are then the next in line to have their Remington 700-DM or Steyr SSG-69 rifles banned (among others) because they use a detachable mag.
__________________
-----------------------------------------------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Librarian View Post
What compelling interest has any level of government in knowing what guns are owned by civilians? (Those owned by government should be inventoried and tracked, for exactly the same reasons computers and desks and chairs are tracked: responsible care of public property.)

If some level of government had that information, what would they do with it? How would having that info benefit public safety? How would it benefit law enforcement?
Reply With Quote
  #265  
Old 09-04-2013, 1:44 PM
advocatusdiaboli's Avatar
advocatusdiaboli advocatusdiaboli is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Rural Central California
Posts: 5,330
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by glock_this View Post


Dude, it is a public forum. What do you really expect? Every sort of idea and topic possible is discussed here. Heck, you sit here and give some sort of funny "OpSec refresher" and you are just tipping your hands to your tactics by giving definitions in writing on the forums of how one should act. So really, if you followed your own advice, you would not even comment.

And on this actual topic at hand, a 5 year old could figure out the workaround to this law. It didn't take someone posting it here as a major revelation.
Right, did a 5 yo get the first BB law wrong? Yes. Did a 5 yo get the first ammo sale ban wrong? Yes. Did those 5 yos in order to make their laws better, among many things, monitor this board for suggestions and make better laws the next time? Yes.

Look use your discretion, but discretion is the better part of valor as we all know. Once people get to talking in forums, the boundaries are pushed and pushed until someone does say something of value. Why to you think Gene and others post so rarely? Me? I'd rather stay silent on my strategies and tactics than unwittingly encourage others to blurt out something of value one day and aid our enemies. That's all I am saying. You do as you wish. Ridicule the idea all you wish. I don't care.
__________________
Benefactor Member NRA, Life Member CRPA, CGN Contributor, US Army Veteran


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 Adams—but I can change my place in it.
Gone fishin' for now and soon gone from California.
Reply With Quote
  #266  
Old 09-04-2013, 2:02 PM
sbrad39 sbrad39 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 925
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Yea, I'm sure it's no secret....my thought is, how much is the permit and how many times are you going to have to renew it...., then how many poor and minority folks are going to be able to afford such permits...

In essence you have to have a permit to legally be in possession of ammunition...It looks like the purposeful creation of a black market...one in which, like the pseudo confiscation of weapons law they have, you can be searched and seized for the possibility of having too much ammunition or ammunition in general...more fodder for the police and prison industries. More oppression of the poor and minority communities they claim to be on the side of....
Reply With Quote
  #267  
Old 09-04-2013, 2:18 PM
advocatusdiaboli's Avatar
advocatusdiaboli advocatusdiaboli is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Rural Central California
Posts: 5,330
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sbrad39 View Post

In essence you have to have a permit to legally be in possession of ammunition....you can be searched and seized for the possibility of having too much ammunition or ammunition in general
It's a transparent ply to restrict firearms by restricting the ammunition that makes them at all useful. We'll see if that passes muster in the courts.
__________________
Benefactor Member NRA, Life Member CRPA, CGN Contributor, US Army Veteran


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 Adams—but I can change my place in it.
Gone fishin' for now and soon gone from California.
Reply With Quote
  #268  
Old 09-04-2013, 2:25 PM
kmca's Avatar
kmca kmca is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Jose
Posts: 2,362
iTrader: 23 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sbrad39 View Post
Yea, I'm sure it's no secret....my thought is, how much is the permit and how many times are you going to have to renew it...., then how many poor and minority folks are going to be able to afford such permits...

In essence you have to have a permit to legally be in possession of ammunition...It looks like the purposeful creation of a black market...one in which, like the pseudo confiscation of weapons law they have, you can be searched and seized for the possibility of having too much ammunition or ammunition in general...more fodder for the police and prison industries. More oppression of the poor and minority communities they claim to be on the side of....
The permit shouldn't cost anything. If they put back the $24M they stole from the surplus fees
Reply With Quote
  #269  
Old 09-04-2013, 2:32 PM
sbrad39 sbrad39 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 925
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by advocatusdiaboli View Post
It's a transparent ply to restrict firearms by restricting the ammunition that makes them at all useful. We'll see if that passes muster in the courts.
It's more than that....because what happens if the police come to your house on a no knock warrant or something similar or CPS....and you have a large stash of ammunition that you can't show a local receipt and or not in possession of a permit....does it get confiscated, are your children removed, prison time....

And what if an elderly person living hand to mouth in a bad neighborhood can't afford the permit and jacked up prices of ammo because of taxation...to defend themselves from intruders as we have seen in the news recently....

It goes far beyond taking away your rights, it's a very foul, dangerous and oppressive law....
Reply With Quote
  #270  
Old 09-04-2013, 2:34 PM
sbrad39 sbrad39 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 925
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kmca View Post
The permit shouldn't cost anything. If they put back the $24M they stole from the surplus fees


LOL...yea, good luck with that....
Reply With Quote
  #271  
Old 09-04-2013, 2:40 PM
advocatusdiaboli's Avatar
advocatusdiaboli advocatusdiaboli is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Rural Central California
Posts: 5,330
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kmca View Post
The permit shouldn't cost anything. If they put back the $24M they stole from the surplus fees
Yeah, and chocolate shouldn't make you fat, but guess what?
__________________
Benefactor Member NRA, Life Member CRPA, CGN Contributor, US Army Veteran


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 Adams—but I can change my place in it.
Gone fishin' for now and soon gone from California.
Reply With Quote
  #272  
Old 09-04-2013, 2:53 PM
jonc's Avatar
jonc jonc is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: THE 626
Posts: 6,950
iTrader: 176 / 100%
Default

ummmmm
Reply With Quote
  #273  
Old 09-04-2013, 3:00 PM
advocatusdiaboli's Avatar
advocatusdiaboli advocatusdiaboli is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Rural Central California
Posts: 5,330
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jonc View Post
ummmmm
It's from a film: Mission IMpossible III. I would have said beer, but I wanted to quote ;-) Maybe they needed it to be PG-13. It is meant to imply something which we don't like but it inevitable.
__________________
Benefactor Member NRA, Life Member CRPA, CGN Contributor, US Army Veteran


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 Adams—but I can change my place in it.
Gone fishin' for now and soon gone from California.

Last edited by advocatusdiaboli; 09-04-2013 at 3:02 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #274  
Old 09-04-2013, 3:11 PM
AceGirlsHusband's Avatar
AceGirlsHusband AceGirlsHusband is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 2,109
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sbrad39 View Post
Yea, I'm sure it's no secret....my thought is, how much is the permit and how many times are you going to have to renew it...., then how many poor and minority folks are going to be able to afford such permits...

....
What I've read in the verbage so far is up to $50 for original submission (including prints), then $14 for each 2-year renewal.
Reply With Quote
  #275  
Old 09-04-2013, 3:18 PM
advocatusdiaboli's Avatar
advocatusdiaboli advocatusdiaboli is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Rural Central California
Posts: 5,330
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AceGirlsHusband View Post
What I've read in the verbage so far is up to $50 for original submission (including prints), then $14 for each 2-year renewal.
Key operative word being "original". Final fees may be different and fees go up.

And why do they want your prints? They already have mine (as veteran—if they can find them). But I wouldn't give my DNA voluntarily—evidence can be abused and implicate innocent people. Better not let stray sued brass out of your site which might implicate you if reloaded.
__________________
Benefactor Member NRA, Life Member CRPA, CGN Contributor, US Army Veteran


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 Adams—but I can change my place in it.
Gone fishin' for now and soon gone from California.
Reply With Quote
  #276  
Old 09-04-2013, 3:27 PM
The Gleam's Avatar
The Gleam The Gleam is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 5,984
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AceGirlsHusband View Post
What I've read in the verbage so far is up to $50 for original submission (including prints), then $14 for each 2-year renewal.
People will simply stock up in high volume when on occasional trips outside of CA - so who benefits from this? Nobody. All this does is reduce revenue to small businesses in CA, and further reduce taxes CA will collect, because CA will be losing purchases to other states on something that people will buy anyway. They'll just do it in bulk, somewhere else. yet another stupid stunt in how CA is driving businesses to leave CA. Hell, I'll be inclined to set up an ammo and reloading shop right across the board in either Nevada or AZ.

It won't stop crime, it won't stop buying of ammo. And it won't stop crime from buying ammo.

In fact, I bet 10-to-1 you will see an INCREASE in the amount of ammo CA people buy (again, all outside of CA) and increase how much they stock-pile, merely because when they do, they will do it in high-volume spending to tide them over until the next need for ammo, or so they don't have to make any little purchases in CA. I know I will. AS it is now I already buy most of my ammo from sources OUTSIDE of CA. Ban my internet puchasing ability, I'll simply buy it all in gobs a few trips to NV or AZ every few months. Regulate ammo purchasing, and I'll be buying NONE in CA - that's one further less trip to buy ammo that I would also spend, say buying gear, optics, cases, gun leaning materials, grips, stocks, parts, whatever at the store where I would have been inclined to buy ammo.

What happens then? Guys with surplus sell off their ammo to "Joe" down the street anyway, who they think is a good neighbor; but little do they know he is a convicted violent felon. More to go around will lead to a "black market" of sorts and an increase in burglaries/theft - where one never existed.

And it will entice an increase in criminals to particularly seek out the homes of suspected gun-owners and shooting-sports enthusiasts of whom they suspect will also have large reserves of ammo DUE to such ridiculous purchase-control laws.

Unintended consequences will be rampant with this one.
__________________
-----------------------------------------------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Librarian View Post
What compelling interest has any level of government in knowing what guns are owned by civilians? (Those owned by government should be inventoried and tracked, for exactly the same reasons computers and desks and chairs are tracked: responsible care of public property.)

If some level of government had that information, what would they do with it? How would having that info benefit public safety? How would it benefit law enforcement?

Last edited by The Gleam; 09-04-2013 at 3:34 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #277  
Old 09-04-2013, 3:35 PM
advocatusdiaboli's Avatar
advocatusdiaboli advocatusdiaboli is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Rural Central California
Posts: 5,330
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Gleam View Post
so who benefits from this? Nobody. All this does is reduce revenue to small businesses in CA,
You correct about workarounds and unintended consequences, but you are wrong about the above. They *want* to hurt certain businesses by making it very expensive and difficult to stay in business: firearms and ammunitions retailers. the fewer they are, the harder it is for us to buy firearms and ammunition and the more expensive it will be. All part of their plan.
__________________
Benefactor Member NRA, Life Member CRPA, CGN Contributor, US Army Veteran


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 Adams—but I can change my place in it.
Gone fishin' for now and soon gone from California.
Reply With Quote
  #278  
Old 09-04-2013, 3:39 PM
sbrad39 sbrad39 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 925
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AceGirlsHusband View Post
What I've read in the verbage so far is up to $50 for original submission (including prints), then $14 for each 2-year renewal.

So it's close to $100.00 just to get that initial permit 50 for the permit 38 for the prints....plus ammo....why would anyone do that....?
Reply With Quote
  #279  
Old 09-04-2013, 3:43 PM
advocatusdiaboli's Avatar
advocatusdiaboli advocatusdiaboli is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Rural Central California
Posts: 5,330
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sbrad39 View Post
So it's close to $100.00 just to get that initial permit 50 for the permit 38 for the prints....plus ammo....why would anyone do that....?
Few would today...but...I am sure you can think of how they might force it on us with subsequent legislation without straining yourself.
__________________
Benefactor Member NRA, Life Member CRPA, CGN Contributor, US Army Veteran


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 Adams—but I can change my place in it.
Gone fishin' for now and soon gone from California.
Reply With Quote
  #280  
Old 09-04-2013, 3:44 PM
BigStiCK's Avatar
BigStiCK BigStiCK is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: ReTard Capital of the World
Posts: 2,559
iTrader: 54 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by advocatusdiaboli View Post
You correct about workarounds and unintended consequences, but you are wrong about the above. They *want* to hurt certain businesses by making it very expensive and difficult to stay in business: firearms and ammunitions retailers. the fewer they are, the harder it is for us to buy firearms and ammunition and the more expensive it will be. All part of their plan.
Yup.
__________________
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 1:22 AM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, 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.