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
  #201  
Old 08-21-2013, 12:32 PM
RandyTownsendman RandyTownsendman is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 3
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

IMHO, the idea that a Takings Challenge would succeed makes sense (outside of Kalifornia). KA Judges have proven hostile to the 2nd Amendment, and to expect support from "Hot Chocolate" Harris defies intelligent thought. Roos-Roberti was/is still the law, so the idea of banning possession of firearms is alive and well. KA is determined to have the most draconian gun laws in the country. Recalling any of them won't happen - Dims run the state. Of course, the hallowed "LE community" gets a pass, as do the politicians. Disappointing, but remember: KA DoJ estimates less than 10% of affected gun owners complied with Roos-Roberti. No reason to believe there will be a rush to had over a rifle that's been in anyone's family for 50 years just to comply with "the law".
Reply With Quote
  #202  
Old 08-21-2013, 12:58 PM
donw's Avatar
donw donw is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: between temecula and palm springs
Posts: 1,621
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by taperxz View Post
Certainly anything the government "takes from you" that was legally yours to begin with is a taking of property.

Mags for instance will be a taking with no compensation. (completely illegal)

Banning semi autos and creating an AW out of them with no ability to transfer is also a taking. (completely illegal as is the current AWB which has not met its real day in court)

The biggest problem with these bills for the most part is forcing an American to part with their legally owned and purchased possessions. I don't see how almost any of these bills can stand up in court. JMO
this is very logical..but keep in mind who you're dealing with...california legislators are not exactly Mr Spock...

it defies 'logic' to see why they approve of something they KNOW will be challenged and have a very good chance of being overthrown and yet try to pass it anyway...but...if they pass it and it goes unchallenged they win even if it's not constitutional...

if i understand it, correctly, as law exists now, a hi cap mag may be confiscated as being a "Public nuisance" even if owned as per california law without compensation.

law means very little to most of the california legislators...
__________________
NRA life member, US Army Veteran

i am a legend in my own mind...

we are told not to judge muslims by what a few do...yet, the NRA membership and firearms owners are ALL considered as radical...

"The second amendment ain't about your deer rifle..."

IMI .45 ACP, Spikes Tactical AR, and more, too...

Last edited by donw; 08-21-2013 at 1:02 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #203  
Old 08-21-2013, 12:59 PM
taperxz taperxz is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Lake County
Posts: 14,891
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RandyTownsendman View Post
IMHO, the idea that a Takings Challenge would succeed makes sense (outside of Kalifornia). KA Judges have proven hostile to the 2nd Amendment, and to expect support from "Hot Chocolate" Harris defies intelligent thought. Roos-Roberti was/is still the law, so the idea of banning possession of firearms is alive and well. KA is determined to have the most draconian gun laws in the country. Recalling any of them won't happen - Dims run the state. Of course, the hallowed "LE community" gets a pass, as do the politicians. Disappointing, but remember: KA DoJ estimates less than 10% of affected gun owners complied with Roos-Roberti. No reason to believe there will be a rush to had over a rifle that's been in anyone's family for 50 years just to comply with "the law".
You are missing a few components however. The law does not stop at CA borders. The SCOTUS would make a decision on this in the end.

Roberti-Roos was a law prior to Heller and McDonald. The 2A is now a true individual right in the eyes of the Supreme Court. Any taking of property involving a right will certainly be met with legal action that could go all the way to the SCOTUS.
Reply With Quote
  #204  
Old 08-21-2013, 1:01 PM
taperxz taperxz is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Lake County
Posts: 14,891
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by donw View Post
this is very logical..but keep in mind who you're dealing with...california legislators are not exactly Mr Spock...

it defies 'logic' to see why they approve of something they KNOW will be challenged and have a very good chance of being overthrown and yet try to pass it anyway...but...if they pass it and it goes unchallenged they win even if it's not constitutional...
There is no way the NRA won't fight these bills/laws. If they don't you will see other anti states trying to pass the same type of laws. The NRA can't and won't have any of that.
Reply With Quote
  #205  
Old 08-21-2013, 1:04 PM
BigART71's Avatar
BigART71 BigART71 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 181
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by taperxz View Post
You are missing a few components however. The law does not stop at CA borders. The SCOTUS would make a decision on this in the end.

Roberti-Roos was a law prior to Heller and McDonald. The 2A is now a true individual right in the eyes of the Supreme Court. Any taking of property involving a right will certainly be met with legal action that could go all the way to the SCOTUS.
I hope it does. So once and for all, the liberals learn in infinite finality they can't go after law abiding citizens anymore.
Reply With Quote
  #206  
Old 08-21-2013, 1:19 PM
donw's Avatar
donw donw is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: between temecula and palm springs
Posts: 1,621
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RabidSquirrel View Post
Is that a Colt New Army? Odd that he'd be using an "old west" gun.

Does anyone know if his rifle was an RAW? I'm really curious if he obtained it legally, given how many "high capacity" mags are shown in the picture below. Some of them look pretty new to me. If he obtained all of these outside of California Law (as I suspect he did), it might be a decent argument for how ineffective and pointless the AWB and related legislation are.

a loaded "Old west gun" on display...geeeeeeeeeeeeee...very observant
__________________
NRA life member, US Army Veteran

i am a legend in my own mind...

we are told not to judge muslims by what a few do...yet, the NRA membership and firearms owners are ALL considered as radical...

"The second amendment ain't about your deer rifle..."

IMI .45 ACP, Spikes Tactical AR, and more, too...
Reply With Quote
  #207  
Old 08-22-2013, 12:29 PM
dwightlooi dwightlooi is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 331
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Here's how the crooks can get their guns if they actually BUY one from a store. Go to Arizona or whichever of the 30-something states without a waiting period or registration requirement. Find a local mule, tell him what he wants. The mule who is NOT a convicted criminal and has a local drivers license go to a store, buy the gun, give it to him in a parking lot. Since the gun is not registered even if it gets recovered at a crime scene it wont actually lead back to the mule. He takes it back into California. Alternatively, he calls the mule, he does all of the above and bring the gun to him. There, it's that easy.

Any state AW ban or magazine capacity limit has zero tangible effect on individuals willing to break the law to obtain and use them. It just disarms the law abiding folks. Now the home owner won't have a CHOICE to defend himself effectively against a mob in the aftermath of a disaster or multiple assailants in a home invasion using an AR-15 with a 30 round mag. The criminals though are just as well armed as ever. And the crazies won't have any trouble getting his arsenal to commit mass murder either.
Reply With Quote
  #208  
Old 08-22-2013, 12:38 PM
BigART71's Avatar
BigART71 BigART71 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 181
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

To bad are politicians are too stupid to understand common sense like this.
Reply With Quote
  #209  
Old 08-24-2013, 5:06 PM
Drathen Drathen is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: San Joaquin County
Posts: 52
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dwightlooi View Post
Here's how the crooks can get their guns if they actually BUY one from a store. Go to Arizona or whichever of the 30-something states without a waiting period or registration requirement. Find a local mule, tell him what he wants. The mule who is NOT a convicted criminal and has a local drivers license go to a store, buy the gun, give it to him in a parking lot. Since the gun is not registered even if it gets recovered at a crime scene it wont actually lead back to the mule. He takes it back into California. Alternatively, he calls the mule, he does all of the above and bring the gun to him. There, it's that easy.

Any state AW ban or magazine capacity limit has zero tangible effect on individuals willing to break the law to obtain and use them. It just disarms the law abiding folks. Now the home owner won't have a CHOICE to defend himself effectively against a mob in the aftermath of a disaster or multiple assailants in a home invasion using an AR-15 with a 30 round mag. The criminals though are just as well armed as ever. And the crazies won't have any trouble getting his arsenal to commit mass murder either.
This.... same thing can be done by the crooks if the ammo legislation gets passed. While all of us are dealing with ammo restrictions/shortages the crooks can simply loaded up in another state and drive it into CA. I've just recently jailed my first firearm and have been reading through this site the past few weeks and I'm surprised by some of the anti-2A legislation that is going through the system. I was completely unaware of most of this legislation until I found this site. Its a bit disturbing that legislators want to handicap/punish law abidding gunowners while leaving the back door open for crooks.
Reply With Quote
  #210  
Old 08-24-2013, 5:16 PM
mrdd mrdd is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: San Francisco Bay
Posts: 1,675
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dwightlooi View Post
Here's how the crooks can get their guns if they actually BUY one from a store. Go to Arizona or whichever of the 30-something states without a waiting period or registration requirement. Find a local mule, tell him what he wants. The mule who is NOT a convicted criminal and has a local drivers license go to a store, buy the gun, give it to him in a parking lot. Since the gun is not registered even if it gets recovered at a crime scene it wont actually lead back to the mule. He takes it back into California. Alternatively, he calls the mule, he does all of the above and bring the gun to him. There, it's that easy.

Any state AW ban or magazine capacity limit has zero tangible effect on individuals willing to break the law to obtain and use them. It just disarms the law abiding folks. Now the home owner won't have a CHOICE to defend himself effectively against a mob in the aftermath of a disaster or multiple assailants in a home invasion using an AR-15 with a 30 round mag. The criminals though are just as well armed as ever. And the crazies won't have any trouble getting his arsenal to commit mass murder either.
This won't work. The feds can track the gun beginning at the manufacturer to the person who bought it at the store. Even in AZ you need to fill out a 4473 at the gun store.
Reply With Quote
  #211  
Old 08-24-2013, 5:26 PM
G21Shooter's Avatar
G21Shooter G21Shooter is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Central Coast
Posts: 3,508
iTrader: 8 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drathen View Post
This.... same thing can be done by the crooks if the ammo legislation gets passed.
If the ammo legislation gets passed, there will be a black market for ammo in California just like there is for cocaine and meth.

The gang bangers just need to hijack a semi truck, drive to a couple Vegas gun shows and load it up. Come back and make tons of money selling to criminals who could not otherwise purchase ammo. A criminal does not need a stock pile of ammo to do their evil deeds, a box or two will do.

Criminals will always have guns and ammo that is just the way it is, why these idiot politicians can't figure that one out is beyond me.
Reply With Quote
  #212  
Old 08-24-2013, 7:48 PM
bigbob76's Avatar
bigbob76 bigbob76 is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Orange County
Posts: 3,676
iTrader: 121 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by G21Shooter View Post
If the ammo legislation gets passed, there will be a black market for ammo in California just like there is for cocaine and meth.

The gang bangers just need to hijack a semi truck, drive to a couple Vegas gun shows and load it up. Come back and make tons of money selling to criminals who could not otherwise purchase ammo. A criminal does not need a stock pile of ammo to do their evil deeds, a box or two will do.

Criminals will always have guns and ammo that is just the way it is, why these idiot politicians can't figure that one out is beyond me.
I think that is giving politicians too much credit. I suspect that often the reason for more gun laws is much worse; incremental removal of all guns from citizens.
__________________
WTS
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s....php?t=1150245
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s....php?t=1118352
Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8I9pLmuyyA
Reply With Quote
  #213  
Old 08-24-2013, 11:36 PM
MacDaddy's Avatar
MacDaddy MacDaddy is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 268
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drathen View Post
This.... same thing can be done by the crooks if the ammo legislation gets passed. While all of us are dealing with ammo restrictions/shortages the crooks can simply loaded up in another state and drive it into CA. I've just recently jailed my first firearm and have been reading through this site the past few weeks and I'm surprised by some of the anti-2A legislation that is going through the system. I was completely unaware of most of this legislation until I found this site. Its a bit disturbing that legislators want to handicap/punish law abidding gunowners while leaving the back door open for crooks.
Welcome to California.
__________________
NRA Life Member
Reply With Quote
  #214  
Old 08-25-2013, 12:58 PM
G21Shooter's Avatar
G21Shooter G21Shooter is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Central Coast
Posts: 3,508
iTrader: 8 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MacDaddy View Post
Welcome to California.
No kidding! I feel sorry for guys just getting into guns now...
Reply With Quote
  #215  
Old 08-25-2013, 1:09 PM
Emdawg's Avatar
Emdawg Emdawg is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Santa Maria (sad I know)
Posts: 4,018
iTrader: 18 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RabidSquirrel View Post
Is that a Colt New Army? Odd that he'd be using an "old west" gun.

Does anyone know if his rifle was an RAW? I'm really curious if he obtained it legally, given how many "high capacity" mags are shown in the picture below. Some of them look pretty new to me. If he obtained all of these outside of California Law (as I suspect he did), it might be a decent argument for how ineffective and pointless the AWB and related legislation are.



Ummmm... why is that still loaded?

Imbeciles probably don't even know how to disassemble it.


Man, only if Feinstein or Steinburg picked that up and swept the reporters with it.
__________________
*sniff* *sniff* Commies...
Reply With Quote
  #216  
Old 08-25-2013, 9:49 PM
Drathen Drathen is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: San Joaquin County
Posts: 52
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by G21Shooter View Post
No kidding! I feel sorry for guys just getting into guns now...
Yeah, tell me about it... I feel like I've had my head stuck in the sand for the last 20 years. I'm trying to figure out what I need to buy now before something gets passed that makes it difficult or impossible to buy later. I have a lot of learning to do!
Reply With Quote
  #217  
Old 08-28-2013, 5:23 PM
IncVoid IncVoid is offline
Member
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Stockton, CA
Posts: 391
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Angry Gov owns AWs?

Quote:
Originally Posted by bwiese View Post
I generally agree with taperxz.

And Gov. Brown won't ban guns he owns. :-)
Any idea what makes/models Our Governor owns?
Does he own AWs?
IF the law passes, will he own Assault Weapons? Does that look bad on him?

Don't think it matters to the anti's agenda, making more guns into legal AW's just puts a timeline on its destruction when the owner passes away.
__________________
__________
Now happy with my muzzelite ruger 10/22 bullpup stock.
Reply With Quote
  #218  
Old 08-28-2013, 6:32 PM
dwightlooi dwightlooi is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 331
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IncVoid View Post
Any idea what makes/models Our Governor owns?
Does he own AWs?
IF the law passes, will he own Assault Weapons? Does that look bad on him?

Don't think it matters to the anti's agenda, making more guns into legal AW's just puts a timeline on its destruction when the owner passes away.
Actually, that is not strictly speaking true.

You do not have to surrender an assault weapon upon death. You can will it to your descendants or anyone. They just cannot take possession of them or have the assault weapon registration transferred to them in California. It is not unlike the fact that while you are alive you CANNOT sell or give the "registered assault weapon" to a California resident in California, you can sell, give or otherwise transfer ownership and possession to anyone out of California or someone who will store it outside of California.

It is not illegal to possess an assault weapon as a Californian. It is just illegal to possess it inside California. Eg. You can be a Californian resident. You can own 100 assault weapons that are not registered with the CA DOJ. They are legally your property. The state has no claim to it and you haven't broken any laws. You just cannot bring them into California. If you have them in a storage locker in Montana or your vacation home in Texas, then that's perfectly legal.

To avoid the limbo of the recipient being unable to legally take possession and hence cannot legally take it out of California. You can will all you registered assault weapons in a written will to a trust or corporation owned by you and your intended beneficiary that is setup outside of California. Upon your death, the property -- the weapon(s) -- will then be fully legal to be moved out of state. It'll be like you willing it to your Texan grandson who is a Texas resident. Except here it's a trust or corporation in Texas.

Last edited by dwightlooi; 08-28-2013 at 6:41 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #219  
Old 08-29-2013, 8:00 PM
midlife midlife is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 711
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

So. Whats chance each bill will become law now? Can some update us.
Reply With Quote
  #220  
Old 08-31-2013, 8:58 PM
Michael Ehline's Avatar
Michael Ehline Michael Ehline is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Redondo Beach, CA
Posts: 1,100
iTrader: 8 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by taperxz View Post
I think there will be quite a few veto's. Those that are not are clearly taking by the government without due process.





My predictions:

47 dies Its a Yee thang. If passes, Yee will be responsible for putting hundreds of thousands of AW's on the streets too.

53 dies at the hands of the Governor. (been there done that Kevin)

374 dies at the hands of the Governor. Or is met with an injunction via NRA

396 dies at the hands of the Governor. Pure and simple, illegal taking.

567 toss up

683 May withstand scrutiny

755 May withstand scrutiny
The problem is that there are so many commie judges now, that it could take years for the Supremes to rule. By that time, comrade zerobama, or Hillary will probably have packed SCOTUS with a few more anti American judges. And as far as Brown vetoing. He does not have to do anything. Even if he does veto, the commies hold supermajorities in CA.
Reply With Quote
  #221  
Old 08-31-2013, 9:11 PM
Michael Ehline's Avatar
Michael Ehline Michael Ehline is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Redondo Beach, CA
Posts: 1,100
iTrader: 8 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ptmtnmn View Post
It's called "gerrymandering." The voting districts were gerrymandered to give the Democrats eternal control of CA( see some voting districts. They are shaped like cancer tumors) ( I believe Gerrymandering was ruled illegal twice by the Supreme Court.) Arguably, we do not have a legitimate state government, but then, the rule of law has been replaced by the rule of politics in this state.
I am pretty sure comrade president has declared anyone who disagrees with his and his Stalinist friends in California are "racist"?
Reply With Quote
  #222  
Old 08-31-2013, 9:22 PM
golfguy golfguy is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 469
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

These type of politicians are now going to be the norm forever in CA. They have a super majority and can override any veto. There is no voting them out of their districts.Besides, we pay them to create these really useless laws (taxes) and we donate to NRA, CRPA, and CalGuns to try and fight them. They eventually will bleed us dry and have their own way. This is the future of CA. Just like Detroit, but on a grander scale.
Reply With Quote
  #223  
Old 09-01-2013, 10:44 AM
chris's Avatar
chris chris is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: O.C. CA. now Occupied Territory.
Posts: 16,468
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

As I have said before taper puts way too much confidence in brown . I do not. I truly hope that brown sees that these bills will do nothing but create criminals instead of stopping them.

At this point let's flood the Governor with letters,calls, faxes and emails.
Reply With Quote
  #224  
Old 09-01-2013, 10:59 AM
chris's Avatar
chris chris is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: O.C. CA. now Occupied Territory.
Posts: 16,468
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bwiese View Post
I generally agree with taperxz.

And Gov. Brown won't ban guns he owns. :-)

I think he'll see/be shown that Dickinson's Roster bill also stops legitimate transfers of the bulk of handguns in CA, making any practical disposal for cash near-impossible. [It would also make it difficult for him to transfer his dad's (Pat Brown's) legacy Colt 32 revolver. ;-)]

Brown recognizes that semiauto stuff is "in litigation", plus I believe he owns some one or two semiauto rifles at his ranch in NorCal. I don't see him signing anything confiscatory. He's a good lawyer with a good legal mind - we may not always agree with him, but he does understand problems with takings, compensation, etc.

Unsure about the "revolving shotgun matter". That could be argued as a 'clarification' of past law confusing cylinder vs magazine and shotgun/rifle. The actual worry is the details leaking out to affect other gun classes, not just a single weird Taurus/Rossi rifle shooting 410.

I see him signing as a "split the baby" + "public safety" issue the SB683 training bill (Block) - the 'average Joe' nonanalytically sees that as a "good thing".

I see some handwaving on Wolk's 10yr ban given due process arguments - I think some even in legislature see this as issue. (Adjudication? Rights restoral? etc.) If this were addressed somewhat rationally Brown may sign.
Bill while i agree with what you say many times here i truly hope that Brown sees the litigation that this state will have to fight if/when these bills are signed into law.

also Brown should either veto or sign these bills and not just let them sit and become law without signature signalling a no position on the bills brought to his desk and embolden the STATISTS in sac.

if and i mean IF he vetoes many of these bills i can only wonder if it will really deter these people since the chances of Newsome or Harris being our next governor and that they WILL sign any of these stupid bills we saw this year.
__________________
http://govnews.ca.gov/gov39mail/mail.php

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boberama View Post
Ok. You should know how to play. I say I see something that begins with a letter.
You find out what it is.
I spy with my little eye something that begins with a "C".
Quote:
Originally Posted by DannyInSoCal View Post
Chlamydia?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottyXbones View Post
The silhouette of an AR-15 is as appealing to the general public as a dildo.
In Memory of Spc Torres May 5th 2006 al-Hillah, Iraq. I will miss you my friend.
When Hell is full the dead will walk the Earth. (Dawn of the Dead)
NRA Life Member.
Reply With Quote
  #225  
Old 09-02-2013, 6:26 PM
volksweegle's Avatar
volksweegle volksweegle is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Santa Clarita Valley
Posts: 154
iTrader: 9 / 100%
Default

I will say that Brown will sign all bills that get passed. He doesn't want to be the bad guy and also doesnt want to piss off the libtard base. We all know (Brown included) that most of these bills will have an injunction on all of them and will eventually get overturned by the supreme court.

I know, wishful thinking.
__________________
Support www.moderndefensetraining.com
Reply With Quote
  #226  
Old 09-03-2013, 8:20 PM
ROCKofGLOVE's Avatar
ROCKofGLOVE ROCKofGLOVE is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Inland Empire
Posts: 143
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

http://youtu.be/nv_hGPkKzmA

SB 374 California Assault Weapons Ban predictions.
__________________
"Nothing is more destructive of respect for the government and the law of the land than passing laws which cannot be enforced." -Albert Einstein
Reply With Quote
  #227  
Old 09-03-2013, 11:49 PM
Panchira!'s Avatar
Panchira! Panchira! is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Silent Hill
Posts: 1,093
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Intresting vid. I checked out the ar mr-2 craaaaaaapola 54 bucks!!! Ouch!!!
__________________
I don't remember the time I was human that's why I don't understand anybody.
Quote:
The sound of a cat puking is the most effective alarm clock.
There's danger lurking around every corner, that's why I propose we make all of our buildings round.
Reply With Quote
  #228  
Old 09-05-2013, 11:49 AM
volksweegle's Avatar
volksweegle volksweegle is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Santa Clarita Valley
Posts: 154
iTrader: 9 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ROCKofGLOVE View Post
http://youtu.be/nv_hGPkKzmA

SB 374 California Assault Weapons Ban predictions.

Well said sir.
__________________
Support www.moderndefensetraining.com
Reply With Quote
  #229  
Old 09-05-2013, 5:54 PM
Mendo223's Avatar
Mendo223 Mendo223 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,221
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Default

thanks for the video rock, i totally agree with you, no reason to flee the state of CA we need to stay and FIGHT!

i guess being able to take the BB off is a small consolation for getting *** rammed...

how true is the following statement, because i hear it left and right. "EVEN IF BROWN VETOES, the DEM HOLD MAJORITY AND WILL PASS IT ANYWAYS"


how does that even ****ing work!!!!! how are a select few able to ramrod legislation down the publics throat without any consideration, studies, facts, or even local press coverage!

INFURIATING.
Reply With Quote
  #230  
Old 09-05-2013, 7:17 PM
chris's Avatar
chris chris is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: O.C. CA. now Occupied Territory.
Posts: 16,468
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ROCKofGLOVE View Post
http://youtu.be/nv_hGPkKzmA

SB 374 California Assault Weapons Ban predictions.
great video. I'm not too sure about when you register your so called "assault weapon" that you can toss the bullet button.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mendo223 View Post
thanks for the video rock, i totally agree with you, no reason to flee the state of CA we need to stay and FIGHT!

i guess being able to take the BB off is a small consolation for getting *** rammed...

how true is the following statement, because i hear it left and right. "EVEN IF BROWN VETOES, the DEM HOLD MAJORITY AND WILL PASS IT ANYWAYS"


how does that even ****ing work!!!!! how are a select few able to ramrod legislation down the publics throat without any consideration, studies, facts, or even local press coverage!

INFURIATING.
IIIRC the dems lost their majority to override a veto. also IIRC they wont over ride a veto from Brown because he is a democrat.
__________________
http://govnews.ca.gov/gov39mail/mail.php

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boberama View Post
Ok. You should know how to play. I say I see something that begins with a letter.
You find out what it is.
I spy with my little eye something that begins with a "C".
Quote:
Originally Posted by DannyInSoCal View Post
Chlamydia?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottyXbones View Post
The silhouette of an AR-15 is as appealing to the general public as a dildo.
In Memory of Spc Torres May 5th 2006 al-Hillah, Iraq. I will miss you my friend.
When Hell is full the dead will walk the Earth. (Dawn of the Dead)
NRA Life Member.

Last edited by chris; 09-05-2013 at 7:30 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #231  
Old 09-05-2013, 8:17 PM
2nd4ever 2nd4ever is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 124
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Registering your so called Bullet button firearm as a so-called AW is not a good option. You really want to convert it into a fixed magazine device.
SB 53 explicitly calls for ammo prohibitions on registered AW owners.
Combined with SB 374, SB 53 makes ammo purchases for RAW owners impossible.
Reply With Quote
  #232  
Old 09-05-2013, 8:53 PM
2meterB's Avatar
2meterB 2meterB is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Sac Area
Posts: 1,298
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2nd4ever View Post
Registering your so called Bullet button firearm as a so-called AW is not a good option. You really want to convert it into a fixed magazine device.
SB 53 explicitly calls for ammo prohibitions on registered AW owners.
Combined with SB 374, SB 53 makes ammo purchases for RAW owners impossible.

Would that even matter since many will still have threaded barrels et cetera?
Reply With Quote
  #233  
Old 09-05-2013, 8:59 PM
2nd4ever 2nd4ever is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 124
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Good points here:
http://youtu.be/rsK44Wn9gPo
http://youtu.be/jupbDdJ0PhY
http://youtu.be/O1vUIhgqUzk
http://youtu.be/2M_5YWl2jls

The El Dorado county sheriff John D'Agostini and
Sheriff Dean Wilson's speeches are exemplary.
Reply With Quote
  #234  
Old 09-05-2013, 9:15 PM
umd's Avatar
umd umd is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Santa Barbara
Posts: 1,636
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2nd4ever View Post
Registering your so called Bullet button firearm as a SB 53 explicitly calls for ammo prohibitions on registered AW owners.
Combined with SB 374, SB 53 makes ammo purchases for RAW owners impossible.
How do you figure that?
Reply With Quote
  #235  
Old 09-05-2013, 9:18 PM
SemperFi1775's Avatar
SemperFi1775 SemperFi1775 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 686
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2meterB View Post
Would that even matter since many will still have threaded barrels et cetera?
threaded barrels restriction only applies to pistol aw...
__________________
"What the hell happened to land of the free and home of the brave???"

"I want the truth! You can't handle the truth!!!" A Few Good Men
Reply With Quote
  #236  
Old 09-05-2013, 9:27 PM
2nd4ever 2nd4ever is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 124
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

umd: here is what I am reading in section 30005 part(c):

(c) If the department determines that, pursuant to subdivision (a) or (b), the subject has an entry in the Consolidated Firearms Information System indicating possession or ownership of a firearm on or after January 1, 1991, or an assault weapon registration, or a .50 BMG rifle registration, the following information shall be entered into the Prohibited Armed Persons File.

The text of the bill is extremely complex, so complex that most ordinary law abiding citizens like me can't quite figure out if ammo purchases are possible.
Reply With Quote
  #237  
Old 09-05-2013, 9:55 PM
umd's Avatar
umd umd is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Santa Barbara
Posts: 1,636
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2nd4ever View Post
umd: here is what I am reading in section 30005 part(c):

(c) If the department determines that, pursuant to subdivision (a) or (b), the subject has an entry in the Consolidated Firearms Information System indicating possession or ownership of a firearm on or after January 1, 1991, or an assault weapon registration, or a .50 BMG rifle registration, the following information shall be entered into the Prohibited Armed Persons File.

The text of the bill is extremely complex, so complex that most ordinary law abiding citizens like me can't quite figure out if ammo purchases are possible.
You have to read parts a and b...

Quote:
(a) Upon entry into the Department of Justice’s records of a disposition for a conviction of any felony, a conviction for any firearms-prohibiting charge specified in Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 29800), a conviction for an offense described in Chapter 3 (commencing with Section 29900), a firearms prohibition pursuant to Section 8100 or 8103 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, or any firearms possession prohibition identified by the federal National Instant Criminal Background Check System, the Department of Justice shall determine if the subject has an entry in the Consolidated Firearms Information System indicating possession or ownership of a firearm on or after January 1, 1991, or an assault weapon registration, or a .50 BMG rifle registration, or commencing July 1, 2015, acquisition of ammunition.

(b) Upon an entry into any department automated information system that is used for the identification of persons who are prohibited by state or federal law from acquiring, owning, or possessing firearms, the department shall determine if the subject has an entry in the Consolidated Firearms Information System indicating ownership or possession of a firearm on or after January 1, 1991, or an assault weapon registration, or a .50 BMG rifle registration.
Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think it means what you think it means, unless it was amended again after 9/3 (this is the latest on leginfo).
Reply With Quote
  #238  
Old 09-06-2013, 9:54 AM
chris's Avatar
chris chris is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: O.C. CA. now Occupied Territory.
Posts: 16,468
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2nd4ever View Post
Registering your so called Bullet button firearm as a so-called AW is not a good option. You really want to convert it into a fixed magazine device.
SB 53 explicitly calls for ammo prohibitions on registered AW owners.
Combined with SB 374, SB 53 makes ammo purchases for RAW owners impossible.
so if you own a RAW you cannot buy ammo for it.
__________________
http://govnews.ca.gov/gov39mail/mail.php

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boberama View Post
Ok. You should know how to play. I say I see something that begins with a letter.
You find out what it is.
I spy with my little eye something that begins with a "C".
Quote:
Originally Posted by DannyInSoCal View Post
Chlamydia?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottyXbones View Post
The silhouette of an AR-15 is as appealing to the general public as a dildo.
In Memory of Spc Torres May 5th 2006 al-Hillah, Iraq. I will miss you my friend.
When Hell is full the dead will walk the Earth. (Dawn of the Dead)
NRA Life Member.
Reply With Quote
  #239  
Old 09-06-2013, 10:23 AM
umd's Avatar
umd umd is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Santa Barbara
Posts: 1,636
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chris View Post
so if you own a RAW you cannot buy ammo for it.
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...&postcount=127
Reply With Quote
  #240  
Old 09-06-2013, 11:27 AM
PixelBender PixelBender is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Venice Beach
Posts: 357
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ojisan View Post
We wlll see if logic and law prevails.
We're still talking about California right?
__________________
CRPA - 2AF - JPFO Member
California Honey badger. It makes the laws it wants to make.

“Gun control is like trying to reduce drunk driving by making it tougher for sober people to own cars.” -Unknown

"Remember that it’s far easier to keep the dogs of war at bay, when they’re not barking in your own backyard." -Unknown

CA Bears Target Shooters' on MEETUP
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 4:59 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.