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
  #281  
Old 09-04-2013, 2:46 PM
AceGirlsHusband's Avatar
AceGirlsHusband AceGirlsHusband is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 1,898
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....?
The section reads:
"(g) The department shall recover the reasonable cost of administering regulatory and enforcement activities related to the sale, purchase, possession, loan, or transfer of ammunition pursuant to this section by charging applicants an initial application fee not to exceed fifty dollars ($50), which shall be valid for two years, and not to exceed fourteen dollars ($14) for the biennial renewal application to include at a minimum, a new application and background check."

So, yes, it is possible the total for the new license could be at $100 or more if the prints run $50 or so. It will work to weed out a lot of casual shooters who just want to do some .22 plinking. And I'm sure this thrills the authors of this bill.
Reply With Quote
  #282  
Old 09-04-2013, 2:51 PM
SilverTauron SilverTauron is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 5,705
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Gleam View Post
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.
We must remember that most gun owners are not motivated shooters.Imagine how long you'd own an Xbox if buying games for it meant driving 6 hours across a state border.

The idea is to make owning a gun such a pain in the a--s that no one bothers to try.Since they cannot explicitly ban guns,they erect barriers to ensure people decide the RKBA is too much trouble.

And then there's next year's legislative session,which will doubtlessly he dedicated to the ending of the evil AMMO LOOPHOLE.......
__________________
The more prohibitions you have, the less virtuous people will be.
The more subsidies you have, the less self reliant people will be.
-Lao-Tzu, Tau Te Ching. 479 BCE

The 1911 may have been in wars for 100 years, but Masetro Bartolomeo Beretta was arming the world 400 years before John Browning was ever a wet dream.
Reply With Quote
  #283  
Old 09-04-2013, 3:13 PM
sbrad39 sbrad39 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 925
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AceGirlsHusband View Post
The section reads:
"(g) The department shall recover the reasonable cost of administering regulatory and enforcement activities related to the sale, purchase, possession, loan, or transfer of ammunition pursuant to this section by charging applicants an initial application fee not to exceed fifty dollars ($50), which shall be valid for two years, and not to exceed fourteen dollars ($14) for the biennial renewal application to include at a minimum, a new application and background check."

So, yes, it is possible the total for the new license could be at $100 or more if the prints run $50 or so. It will work to weed out a lot of casual shooters who just want to do some .22 plinking. And I'm sure this thrills the authors of this bill.

It will also put a lot of the elderly who want to protect themselves in harms way because they can't afford the extra hundred...a friend of the family's husband just passed away and he was a gun owner, had no ammo or she couldn't find it... one of the two... so she had to go out and get some...if she had to pay that fee it would not have happened...lives in a dicey neighborhood and hard enough to pay for medication....craziness
Reply With Quote
  #284  
Old 09-04-2013, 3:50 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

Quote:
Originally Posted by sbrad39 View Post
It will also put a lot of the elderly who want to protect themselves in harms way because they can't afford the extra hundred...a friend of the family's husband just passed away and he was a gun owner, had no ammo or she couldn't find it... one of the two... so she had to go out and get some...if she had to pay that fee it would not have happened...lives in a dicey neighborhood and hard enough to pay for medication....craziness
Good people are going to have to decide when to break the law based on their conscience.

Its a weird feeling that I think a lot of people are going to have to get used to.
__________________
Join the NRA
https://membership.nrahq.org/forms/signup.asp
Reply With Quote
  #285  
Old 09-04-2013, 3:58 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
Good people are going to have to decide when to break the law based on their conscience.

Its a weird feeling that I think a lot of people are going to have to get used to.
I am sure the courts will be sympathetic to her plight and our forces will find a case to use to represent that injustice. I have hope that many of these onerous bills , the ones that pass into law, will be defeated rather quickly in the courts by injunction and then a trial.
__________________
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
  #286  
Old 09-04-2013, 4:05 PM
sbrad39 sbrad39 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 925
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SanPedroShooter View Post
Good people are going to have to decide when to break the law based on their conscience.

Its a weird feeling that I think a lot of people are going to have to get used to.

Yea it seems that way, it's either that or move.....
Reply With Quote
  #287  
Old 09-04-2013, 5:10 PM
SamsDX's Avatar
SamsDX SamsDX is offline
Signal Out of Banned
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Unincorporated South Orange County
Posts: 1,053
iTrader: 7 / 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.
This change is a big deal, but I think even more significant is the automatic denial (as opposed to the previous automatic grant) if the DOJ can't make up their minds about you within 30 days. I don't know what kind of review it would be subject to, but in the worst case scenario, they can deny you the right to exercise a fundamental right if they don't like the way your name sounds or on any other arbitrary and capricious basis.
__________________
NRA Benefactor Life Member, SAF Life Member, CCRKBA Life Member

Gavin Newsom is a lying, cheating slickster and will be the worst mistake California has ever made if he gets elected Governor. Hollywood movie producers look to him and his oleaginous persona as a model for the corrupt "bad guy" politician character. This guy is so greasy, he could lubricate an entire arsenal of AR-15s just by breathing on them.
Reply With Quote
  #288  
Old 09-04-2013, 5:25 PM
Dutch3's Avatar
Dutch3 Dutch3 is offline
Dirt Farmer
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Butte County
Posts: 11,719
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Can we form a union? With the ability to make campaign contributions?

Just a thought.
__________________
Assembly Public Safety Chair Reginald Jones-Sawyer:
..."and with that I'd like to turn it over to my colleague Loni Hancock, Senate Public Safety Chair, and as I like to say, my partner in crime."

Senate Public Safety Chair Loni Hancock:
"Yeah, we do that quite a lot, actually..."

- Joint Legislative Informational Hearing on Firearms - Newsom Initiative #1756 - May 3rd 2016
Reply With Quote
  #289  
Old 09-04-2013, 5:38 PM
sirgrumps's Avatar
sirgrumps sirgrumps is offline
1911 & AR-15 fan
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,244
iTrader: 79 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SamsDX View Post
This change is a big deal, but I think even more significant is the automatic denial (as opposed to the previous automatic grant) if the DOJ can't make up their minds about you within 30 days. I don't know what kind of review it would be subject to, but in the worst case scenario, they can deny you the right to exercise a fundamental right if they don't like the way your name sounds or on any other arbitrary and capricious basis.
I agree, the automatic denial is a scary thing. It put the onus on the applicant, not the DOJ.
Just another Right they want to take away
Reply With Quote
  #290  
Old 09-04-2013, 6:14 PM
hoystory hoystory is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 162
iTrader: 0 / 0%
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.
Question: Does the amendment say what type of FFL license is required? I guess I can't really expect them to be so stupid to make that mistake, right?

But if they do... C&R here I come.
Reply With Quote
  #291  
Old 09-04-2013, 6:29 PM
CSACANNONEER's Avatar
CSACANNONEER CSACANNONEER is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Thousand Oaks
Posts: 40,376
iTrader: 125 / 100%
Blog Entries: 4
Default

CA may just force some more of us to get 07FFLs and SOTs. The local LEAs will love this since, there will be many more well stocked dealers with NFA items competing for their business. I wonder what Lee would think about being responsible for more AOWs and more cans in CA.
__________________
NRA Certified Pistol, Rifle, Shotgun and Metallic Cartridge Reloading Instructor
California DOJ Certified Fingerprint Roller
Ventura County approved CCW Instructor


Offering low cost private basic shooting and reloading classes for calgunners.

Reply With Quote
  #292  
Old 09-04-2013, 6:31 PM
Big D's Avatar
Big D Big D is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: so cal
Posts: 905
iTrader: 16 / 100%
Default

What about shooting ranges that rent guns? The non gun owner who wants to go shooting for the day?
Reply With Quote
  #293  
Old 09-04-2013, 6:40 PM
Sunday Sunday is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Shasta Co.
Posts: 5,376
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EXTREMEOPS1 View Post
Well my 200,000+ rounds should make me an ammo Barron so how do they expect to stop the reloaders out there.....ban the purchase of lead, gunpowder etc unless you have a permit OMG well guys and girls you got the government you all voted for....soon the bad guys will still be armed and we the "good guys" will be unarmed and vulnerable like the brits and the aussies...now you are really gonna have to wake up America !!! Stand by for the executive order to hand in your weapons by a certain date or face the felony charge...that's how the brits were disarmed.......almost overnight.
Well put and the Brits just rolled over and accepted it as we will. With just a whimper and a snivel.
__________________
California the only state in the union where the idiot gun owners vote in anti gun politicians and wonder where their gun rights have gone.
Reply With Quote
  #294  
Old 09-04-2013, 6:44 PM
RotaryRevn's Avatar
RotaryRevn RotaryRevn is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 868
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

The state will lose a ton of sales tax over this as most will go out of state to pick up their ammo.
Reply With Quote
  #295  
Old 09-04-2013, 6:47 PM
Stewdabaker23 Stewdabaker23 is offline
Free Mustache Rides
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Tuolumne County
Posts: 2,325
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

I already purchase all my ammo from out of state. Either online to avoid sales tax or in Nevada or Idaho and pay there lower sales tax.
Reply With Quote
  #296  
Old 09-04-2013, 6:56 PM
SoCalGunny's Avatar
SoCalGunny SoCalGunny is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 620
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

I'll be making quarterly trips out of state to stock up. CA's just hurting themselves with this but leave it to the retards in charge to not put 2 and 2 together.



Whats going to happen for the person that goes to the shooting range to rent a gun? They can't buy ammo? That has to be a severe violation of ones 2a rights.

I keep donating money but i don't nkow what can be done to fight this.
Reply With Quote
  #297  
Old 09-04-2013, 7:05 PM
prometa prometa is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 555
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SamsDX View Post
This change is a big deal, but I think even more significant is the automatic denial (as opposed to the previous automatic grant) if the DOJ can't make up their minds about you within 30 days. I don't know what kind of review it would be subject to, but in the worst case scenario, they can deny you the right to exercise a fundamental right if they don't like the way your name sounds or on any other arbitrary and capricious basis.
Holy crap, I didn't see that. It removes a right on the presumption of guilt and violates due process so obviously.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hoystory View Post
Question: Does the amendment say what type of FFL license is required? I guess I can't really expect them to be so stupid to make that mistake, right?

But if they do... C&R here I come.
Technically, an FFL is not required. A new, CA ammunition vendor license is required, which I presume they will only grant to licensed FFLs.
Reply With Quote
  #298  
Old 09-05-2013, 2:16 AM
Best sale's Avatar
Best sale Best sale is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: The land of the Free ...
Posts: 1,180
iTrader: 27 / 97%
Default

How I wish we can organize and sabotage their Evil plan. It would be lovely if nobody apply for the permit in the First one or two years if majority of gun owners can stock up ammo at reduced price before then.

******Time for some FCUK SB 53 AMMO price reduction SALES on the forum....
__________________

Last edited by Best sale; 09-05-2013 at 4:51 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #299  
Old 09-05-2013, 2:24 AM
Treadstone's Avatar
Treadstone Treadstone is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Irvine, CA
Posts: 194
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quartzite, AZ is gonna become an ammo Mecca, I just know it.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #300  
Old 09-05-2013, 7:24 AM
Hoooper Hoooper is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Petaluma
Posts: 2,401
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Treadstone View Post
Quartzite, AZ is gonna become an ammo Mecca, I just know it.
If Cabelas on the way to Reno can keep reasonable prices they could open an entire new sister store next door just for ammo
Reply With Quote
  #301  
Old 09-05-2013, 7:37 AM
Corbin Dallas's Avatar
Corbin Dallas Corbin Dallas is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: SD
Posts: 4,378
iTrader: 80 / 100%
Default

I for one will not purchase one ammo license. This state will not get a dime from me. I'll take all my cash to Arizona and come back with 1/2 ton of ammo supplies every 3-6 months.
Reply With Quote
  #302  
Old 09-05-2013, 7:50 AM
Wherryj's Avatar
Wherryj Wherryj is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Livermore
Posts: 8,811
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AceGirlsHusband View Post
The section reads:
"(g) The department shall recover the reasonable cost of administering regulatory and enforcement activities related to the sale, purchase, possession, loan, or transfer of ammunition pursuant to this section by charging applicants an initial application fee not to exceed fifty dollars ($50), which shall be valid for two years, and not to exceed fourteen dollars ($14) for the biennial renewal application to include at a minimum, a new application and background check."

So, yes, it is possible the total for the new license could be at $100 or more if the prints run $50 or so. It will work to weed out a lot of casual shooters who just want to do some .22 plinking. And I'm sure this thrills the authors of this bill.
It must always be a thrill for our professional legislators to strip the rights of the unwashed masses.
__________________
"What is a moderate interpretation of the text? Halfway between what it really means and what you'd like it to mean?"
"The cases will publish forever the discouraging truth that the Supreme Court of the United States favors some laws over others, and is prepared to do whatever it takes to uphold and assist its favorites."
-Anton Scalia, Supreme Court Justice
Reply With Quote
  #303  
Old 09-05-2013, 7:51 AM
Wherryj's Avatar
Wherryj Wherryj is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Livermore
Posts: 8,811
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Corbin Dallas View Post
I for one will not purchase one ammo license. This state will not get a dime from me. I'll take all my cash to Arizona and come back with 1/2 ton of ammo supplies every 3-6 months.
I may need to talk the wife into a twice yearly vacation in Vegas.
__________________
"What is a moderate interpretation of the text? Halfway between what it really means and what you'd like it to mean?"
"The cases will publish forever the discouraging truth that the Supreme Court of the United States favors some laws over others, and is prepared to do whatever it takes to uphold and assist its favorites."
-Anton Scalia, Supreme Court Justice
Reply With Quote
  #304  
Old 09-05-2013, 7:52 AM
Wherryj's Avatar
Wherryj Wherryj is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Livermore
Posts: 8,811
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by prometa View Post
Holy crap, I didn't see that. It removes a right on the presumption of guilt and violates due process so obviously.



Technically, an FFL is not required. A new, CA ammunition vendor license is required, which I presume they will only grant to licensed FFLs.
...and most likely with even more costs and restrictions.
__________________
"What is a moderate interpretation of the text? Halfway between what it really means and what you'd like it to mean?"
"The cases will publish forever the discouraging truth that the Supreme Court of the United States favors some laws over others, and is prepared to do whatever it takes to uphold and assist its favorites."
-Anton Scalia, Supreme Court Justice
Reply With Quote
  #305  
Old 09-05-2013, 7:57 AM
Stewdabaker23 Stewdabaker23 is offline
Free Mustache Rides
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Tuolumne County
Posts: 2,325
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

I will not comply with any of this BS whether it be these ammo permits or registering my so-called "assault weapons". Yee, de Leon, Steinberg, etc can go pound sand.

Lets give all these politicians a gun and 10 rounds and drop them into Afghanistan. See how well they fair???
Reply With Quote
  #306  
Old 09-05-2013, 8:18 AM
Hoooper Hoooper is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Petaluma
Posts: 2,401
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stewdabaker23 View Post
I will not comply with any of this BS whether it be these ammo permits or registering my so-called "assault weapons". Yee, de Leon, Steinberg, etc can go pound sand.

Lets give all these politicians a gun and 10 rounds and drop them into Oakland, at night. See how well they fair???
fixt
Reply With Quote
  #307  
Old 09-05-2013, 8:27 AM
cpatbay cpatbay is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: TEXAS!!
Posts: 1,650
iTrader: 42 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Corbin Dallas View Post
I for one will not purchase one ammo license. This state will not get a dime from me. I'll take all my cash to Arizona and come back with 1/2 ton of ammo supplies every 3-6 months.
The Libtards will change the border fruit checkpoints to ammo checkpoints ....
Reply With Quote
  #308  
Old 09-05-2013, 8:34 AM
OneFunGuy's Avatar
OneFunGuy OneFunGuy is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Boulder Creek, CA
Posts: 329
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Yeah, most of the solutions mentioned here revolve around going out
of state to buy ammo. What do you bet that the next session in Sacto
will include bills to stop that "loophole".

There are already fees and regulations concerning importing many things,
such as gasoline, cars and guns.

It will come down to, "if the left one don't get ya, then the right one will".
__________________
I am not an attorney, but sure, go ahead.

Earth provides enough to satisfy every mans needs, but not every mans greed.
Reply With Quote
  #309  
Old 09-05-2013, 8:35 AM
SilverTauron SilverTauron is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 5,705
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cpatbay View Post
The Libtards will change the border fruit checkpoints to ammo checkpoints ....
Naw,they'll pass a law next year requiring ammo sold in CA to have a state tax seal .Get caught with an unmarked box of WWB and you'll pay a $1000 fine.

Sure it violates the Constitution,but so does gun control in general.With a leftist in DC,the holplophobes know Washington's got their back.
__________________
The more prohibitions you have, the less virtuous people will be.
The more subsidies you have, the less self reliant people will be.
-Lao-Tzu, Tau Te Ching. 479 BCE

The 1911 may have been in wars for 100 years, but Masetro Bartolomeo Beretta was arming the world 400 years before John Browning was ever a wet dream.
Reply With Quote
  #310  
Old 09-05-2013, 11:45 AM
The Gleam's Avatar
The Gleam The Gleam is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 5,632
iTrader: 0 / 0%
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.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverTauron View Post
We must remember that most gun owners are not motivated shooters.Imagine how long you'd own an Xbox if buying games for it meant driving 6 hours across a state border. The idea is to make owning a gun such a pain in the a--s that no one bothers to try.Since they cannot explicitly ban guns,they erect barriers to ensure people decide the RKBA is too much trouble.
Oh, I was implying the same if by subtext only. Of course that is their goal, make no mistake about that. If it's too much of a hassle, it will kill interest in firearms, as an underhanded usurpation by way of attacking the mechanical aspects of the interest.
__________________
-----------------------------------------------
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
  #311  
Old 09-05-2013, 11:49 AM
Losd619's Avatar
Losd619 Losd619 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: San Diego
Posts: 866
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Default

Why do some people on this site just freely speak about future loop holes and how they can be closed etc. do you guys like to feed our opposition with stuff like that? Loose lips sink ships.
Reply With Quote
  #312  
Old 09-05-2013, 12:05 PM
The Gleam's Avatar
The Gleam The Gleam is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 5,632
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Losd619 View Post
Why do some people on this site just freely speak about future loop holes and how they can be closed etc. do you guys like to feed our opposition with stuff like that? Loose lips sink ships.
Following the law as written is not a "loop hole" as is the case with most of these Anti-2nd Amendment bills and laws already on the books, as they do not leave much ambiguity nor omission for a loop-hole to be realized.

Our following of these laws to the letter therefore is not a loop-hole.
__________________
-----------------------------------------------
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
  #313  
Old 09-05-2013, 12:10 PM
advan031 advan031 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 540
iTrader: 53 / 100%
Default

Stock up what you can now..just in case.
Reply With Quote
  #314  
Old 09-05-2013, 12:13 PM
Bhobbs's Avatar
Bhobbs Bhobbs is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Chino CA
Posts: 10,549
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Losd619 View Post
Why do some people on this site just freely speak about future loop holes and how they can be closed etc. do you guys like to feed our opposition with stuff like that? Loose lips sink ships.


Any loophole we have now will be eliminated next time around. Our goal is to get rid of these laws, not live with them.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #315  
Old 09-05-2013, 12:56 PM
SilverTauron SilverTauron is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 5,705
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Losd619 View Post
Why do some people on this site just freely speak about future loop holes and how they can be closed etc. do you guys like to feed our opposition with stuff like that? Loose lips sink ships.
The ship has already sunk pardner.

Somewhere in Sacramento there's a list on a document marked "How We'll Disarm California".The contents of that list have doubtlessly been discussed.
__________________
The more prohibitions you have, the less virtuous people will be.
The more subsidies you have, the less self reliant people will be.
-Lao-Tzu, Tau Te Ching. 479 BCE

The 1911 may have been in wars for 100 years, but Masetro Bartolomeo Beretta was arming the world 400 years before John Browning was ever a wet dream.
Reply With Quote
  #316  
Old 09-05-2013, 4:17 PM
Stewdabaker23 Stewdabaker23 is offline
Free Mustache Rides
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Tuolumne County
Posts: 2,325
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

Losd619- I haven't purchased ammo in this state for a very long time.
If you truly believe that these politicians don't already know about out of state purchasing then your an idiot.
I refuse to give any more money than I have to to this state which consistently screws me.
Reply With Quote
  #317  
Old 09-05-2013, 7:24 PM
Mel101 Mel101 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 10
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

You know, I'm not sure what this is going to be like in the future. I already hate it, especially since I became a gun owner this year. To be honest with you, all the news about how California is becoming more restrictive is what motivated me to buy what I have. And buying ammo in bulk and using it at the range was my favorite thing to do. For all you folks who keep saying that you're moving, seriously....go away because I don't care about you. Your opinions are no longer needed here and I don't see how announcing you're leaving California on CalGuns makes things better. For all of you who say that this is just a bump in the road, I really hope you open your eyes a little. It makes sense that the lawmakers make incremental, forward progress to slowly disarm California. I'm new to this and all it took was Google and maybe an hour of my time and sure enough I saw how the freedoms we used to take for granted were slowly being stripped. I will continue to fight and continue to donate money. Although I should donate more to Calguns since I will forever be a California resident and things need to change. I will do my best to fight this and do my best not to let this get under my skin, and unplug from the media every so often. But mostly, I really wish we can be united in the fight. There are too many differences of opinion here and sometimes I wonder why some of you hate other Calgun members when we all are united in that we don't want our right to exercise the 2nd Amendment to be infringed upon. Fight the government, not each other. Put your differences between each other aside, and work WITH each other to help get these bills vetoed. And don't stop fighting.
Reply With Quote
  #318  
Old 09-05-2013, 7:30 PM
OneFunGuy's Avatar
OneFunGuy OneFunGuy is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Boulder Creek, CA
Posts: 329
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

LOSD619;

Do you really believe that you and the other "loose lips sink ships" curmudgeons,
are smarter than the Sacto Nazis?

They have legal staff, researchers, gofer interns and general office staff.
You have your boner and a Cal-guns SignOn.

You need to accept that we, our brothers of like mind, are standing up against
an outrageous take away of our rights.

The battle will start with our open discussions ans strategies.
It will end with all of us paying into a defense fund or funds.

Our front line warriors are the legal teams.
They will enjoin and halt all these aggressions of our rights.

We have only begun to fight!

Tommy Jansson
__________________
I am not an attorney, but sure, go ahead.

Earth provides enough to satisfy every mans needs, but not every mans greed.
Reply With Quote
  #319  
Old 09-06-2013, 7:15 AM
Hoooper Hoooper is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Petaluma
Posts: 2,401
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OneFunGuy View Post
Do you really believe that you and the other "loose lips sink ships" curmudgeons, are smarter than the Sacto Nazis?
I get what youre saying and there are definitely times that the loose lips thing is overplayed, but I am undoubtedly much smarter than the sacto nazis. Its not brainpower that they have to lord over us, its the brainless zombie voters giving them their brainless nazi power that they lord over us.
Reply With Quote
  #320  
Old 09-06-2013, 7:23 AM
G21Shooter's Avatar
G21Shooter G21Shooter is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Central Coast
Posts: 3,546
iTrader: 8 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Corbin Dallas View Post
I for one will not purchase one ammo license. This state will not get a dime from me. I'll take all my cash to Arizona and come back with 1/2 ton of ammo supplies every 3-6 months.
Hopefully so few people buy ammo permits, they decide its not worth the money to keep the system in place.

I for one will not get a ammo permit, I have enough ammo stocked up right now for 5 years of my regular shooting needs, I will stock another 5 years worth before they pull the plug on mail order.
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 11:13 PM.




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.