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
  #1  
Old 02-20-2014, 8:11 PM
peterabbits's Avatar
peterabbits peterabbits is offline
CGSSA Rimfire Coordinator
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Fresno, CA
Posts: 1,224
iTrader: 25 / 100%
Default CA AB 1964 - Dickinson 2014 - unsafe handguns - Signed 7/18/14, Effective 1/1/15

http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/fa...01320140AB1964

Quote:
This bill would instead make the provisions defining and governing unsafe handguns inapplicable to a single-shot pistol with a break top or bolt action. The bill would make this exemption inapplicable to a semiautomatic pistol that has been temporarily or permanently altered so that it will not fire in a semiautomatic mode. By expanding the definition of a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 02-20-2014, 8:13 PM
riderr riderr is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 3,855
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

yeah... it was expected.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 02-20-2014, 8:37 PM
John Galt John Galt is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 139
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Out of the seventh district, Sacramento.
https://www.facebook.com/assemblymemberdickinson
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 02-20-2014, 8:53 PM
EBR Works's Avatar
EBR Works EBR Works is offline
Vendor/Retailer
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Prescott, AZ
Posts: 9,445
iTrader: 110 / 100%
Default

It's been fun. 10 months and counting..
__________________


Check out our e-commerce site here:

www.ebrworks.com

Now serving you from Prescott, AZ

Last edited by EBR Works; 02-20-2014 at 8:57 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 02-20-2014, 9:02 PM
rjackson1986 rjackson1986 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 303
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

So this bill was just submitted?
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 02-20-2014, 9:03 PM
arrix's Avatar
arrix arrix is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: The Dark Web
Posts: 1,210
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Sacramento must have sour grapes.
__________________
Quote:
There is no week nor day nor hour, when tyranny may not enter upon this country, if the people lose their supreme confidence in themselves -- and lose their roughness and spirit of defiance -- Tyranny may always enter -- there is no charm, no bar against it -- the only bar against it is a large resolute breed of men.

-Walt Whitman

Last edited by arrix; 02-21-2014 at 1:51 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 02-20-2014, 9:04 PM
Capt.Dunsel Capt.Dunsel is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: On Someones Ignore List
Posts: 967
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

And people laughed at me when I started collecting TC Contenders many moons ago.

But have no fear they will be next.
__________________
Let those without fault cast the first stone .

Bweise says "I have to say the situation was not at all helped by 22 yr old former Airsoft douches who kept touting here, "But possession is not illegal!" "

Those that live in glass houses should not throw stones , cause I got a sling shot

Fighting on the internet is like being in the special Olympics , everybody wins but your still retarded.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 02-20-2014, 9:12 PM
bobbodaggit bobbodaggit is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Roseville
Posts: 259
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

What is the pressing need for this bill? Does the honorable member from Sacramento provide ANY evidence that these are somehow "unsafe"? Or is the one-party-state that is CA so far gone that evidentiary hearings are irrelevant? And as an aside, how would a 'permanently altered' semi auto pistol be functionally different than a break action or bolt action? The case has to be ejected somehow.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 02-20-2014, 9:19 PM
riderr riderr is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 3,855
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bobbodaggit View Post
What is the pressing need for this bill? Does the honorable member from Sacramento provide ANY evidence that these are somehow "unsafe"? Or is the one-party-state that is CA so far gone that evidentiary hearings are irrelevant? And as an aside, how would a 'permanently altered' semi auto pistol be functionally different than a break action or bolt action? The case has to be ejected somehow.
It's a piece of cake for any anti-gun. 100% guarantee it passes and gets signed by JB. They will get an easy credit

Last edited by riderr; 02-20-2014 at 9:22 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 02-20-2014, 9:32 PM
cdtx2001's Avatar
cdtx2001 cdtx2001 is offline
Hooligan
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Over Here
Posts: 6,391
iTrader: 71 / 100%
Default

I am soooooo glad the state can determine what is and is not safe for me.
__________________
Custom made Tail Gunner Trailer Hitch for sale.
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...php?p=17820185

"Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side kid" -Han Solo

"A dull knife is as useless as the man who would dare carry it"
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 02-20-2014, 9:50 PM
Blownmotor's Avatar
Blownmotor Blownmotor is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: San Mateo County
Posts: 715
iTrader: 21 / 96%
Default

Well it was fun while it lasted.
__________________
"No man's life, liberty, or property are safe while legislature is in session" Mark Twain
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 02-20-2014, 9:55 PM
bobbodaggit bobbodaggit is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Roseville
Posts: 259
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

No so sure. Jerry vetoed this garbage last year.

And again, I ask my two questions in a slightly different way - 1) What is the reason we NEED this particular law, rather than anything else that could be authored . . . Right Now? And 2) how is a semi-automatic pistol altered to fire a single shot functionally ANY different than the now exempt break action and bolt action pistols. Why are these specifically unsafe?
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 02-20-2014, 9:57 PM
repomanNWP repomanNWP is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Henderson, NV
Posts: 1,026
iTrader: 27 / 100%
Default

the gun grabbing progressives never stop.... stay vigilant my friends.
__________________
sigpic10698_2.jpeg
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 02-20-2014, 9:58 PM
riderr riderr is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 3,855
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bobbodaggit View Post
No so sure. Jerry vetoed this garbage last year.
Last year the bill included two provisions - limiting the number of off-roster gun sales and eliminating SSE. JB objected the first part, but showed his support to the second one. So, he'll sign it without another thought.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobbodaggit View Post
2) how is a semi-automatic pistol altered to fire a single shot functionally ANY different than the now exempt break action and bolt action pistols. Why are these specifically unsafe?
well.... 'cause it can be converted back, so you can shaft the roster.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 02-20-2014, 10:14 PM
bobbodaggit bobbodaggit is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Roseville
Posts: 259
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Read the proposed 32100b text. The bill seeks to remove those semi auto handguns frim sse that have been 'temporarily or permanently altered so that it cannot be fired in semiautomatic mode (what ever the h*** that mode is). So again, I inquire, how exactly is a "permanently altered" off list normally semi-auto handgun that "cannot be fired in semiautomatic mode" functionally any more unsafe than the break action and bolt actions that still remain sse exempt. In a sane world this bill should get no votes.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 02-20-2014, 10:19 PM
Gio's Avatar
Gio Gio is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: In A Box Under The Freeway
Posts: 10,286
iTrader: 333 / 100%
Default

Sucks! Hope this can be challenged and defeated!
__________________
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 02-20-2014, 10:23 PM
riderr riderr is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 3,855
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bobbodaggit View Post
Read the proposed 32100b text. The bill seeks to remove those semi auto handguns frim sse that have been 'temporarily or permanently altered so that it cannot be fired in semiautomatic mode (what ever the h*** that mode is). So again, I inquire, how exactly is a "permanently altered" off list normally semi-auto handgun that "cannot be fired in semiautomatic mode" functionally any more unsafe than the break action and bolt actions that still remain sse exempt. In a sane world this bill should get no votes.
I think "permanent" vs "temporary" is about the intent. I can buy Glock 4 SSE and keep it like that considering it's a permanent change for me. Then I sell it to you (in 31 day from the purchase date ) and you convert it back to semi-auto Glock 4.

Anyways, it's just a speculation. What's more important is that the bill kills SSE process for off-roster guns.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 02-20-2014, 10:24 PM
krammitthefrog krammitthefrog is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 73
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Just phenomenal.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 02-20-2014, 10:25 PM
riderr riderr is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 3,855
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gio View Post
Sucks! Hope this can be challenged and defeated!
On what grounds? They can't successfully challenge 10+ mag, bullet button, etc. Do you expect to successfully throw away SSE ban in the court?
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 02-20-2014, 10:28 PM
Rob7.62's Avatar
Rob7.62 Rob7.62 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Washington City, Utah
Posts: 511
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Just another reason to support splitting the state up. These laws go unchallenged it seems.
__________________
I prefer dangerous freedom over peaceful slavery.
- Thomas Jefferson
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 02-20-2014, 10:29 PM
Capybara's Avatar
Capybara Capybara is offline
CGSSA Coordinator
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Ventura County
Posts: 11,307
iTrader: 20 / 100%
Default

We all knew this was going to happen last year. No more AR/AK pistols, no more AOWs, no more off roster pistols. Get what you want this year.
__________________
NRA Certified Metallic Cartridge Reloading Instructor, Shotgun Instructor and Range Safety Officer



Sign up now for the next Ventura County Reloading Workshop!
VC Reloading Club on Facebook
VC Reloading Club on Twitter @VCReloading
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 02-20-2014, 10:38 PM
mossy's Avatar
mossy mossy is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: equestria
Posts: 6,314
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gio View Post
Sucks! Hope this can be challenged and defeated!
not gonna happen, if it passes we are stuck with it. i have a sneaky feeling some of the "right people" here want the bill to pass because of the court case challenging the roster. but that has been going on since 2009 so who knows when we will get any movement out of that turtle................
__________________
best troll thread in calguns history
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...d.php?t=406739



Quote:
Originally Posted by waterfern View Post
Not at all. Trump is a loser and will lose amazingly on Tuesday. It's going to be so big, we are all going to be sick and tired of how much he loses on Tuesday.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doheny View Post
Nah, no sense in replying to the personal attacks/baiting.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 02-20-2014, 10:40 PM
mossy's Avatar
mossy mossy is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: equestria
Posts: 6,314
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob7.62 View Post
Just another reason to support splitting the state up. These laws go unchallenged it seems.
sort of true. all the laws passed rely on the roster if that is successfully taken down all this becomes moot. but the case was started in 2009 so i would not hold my breath.
__________________
best troll thread in calguns history
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...d.php?t=406739



Quote:
Originally Posted by waterfern View Post
Not at all. Trump is a loser and will lose amazingly on Tuesday. It's going to be so big, we are all going to be sick and tired of how much he loses on Tuesday.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doheny View Post
Nah, no sense in replying to the personal attacks/baiting.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 02-20-2014, 10:42 PM
bobbodaggit bobbodaggit is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Roseville
Posts: 259
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Yes, I do. The Second Amendment has been incorporated to state action as we know, which means citizens can sue the state of CA for violating 2d am rights under color of state law under 42 usc sec 1983. FWIW, I believe it would fail even the weakest rational basis 'ole it on through' constitutional scrutiny - which is far below the 2d Am standard - because old boy Dickinson hasn't provided any evidence that these SSE 'temporarily or permanently' altered handguns that can no longer operate in 'semiautomatic mode' are in any way more unsafe - i.e. the state has no rational reason to deprive us of our 2d am right to possess them - than those he intends to still allow under SSE. But Dickinson can say he 'did something.' And I guess that's all that matters.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 02-20-2014, 10:44 PM
Fatgunman's Avatar
Fatgunman Fatgunman is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Orange County, Commiefornia
Posts: 881
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Let's just hope the lawsuit challenging the roster goes our way, unfortunately if there is any hope left at all to end this crap it lies in us winning that case.
__________________
BOOO anti-gun people, HOOORAAAYY GUNS!
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 02-20-2014, 10:44 PM
mossy's Avatar
mossy mossy is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: equestria
Posts: 6,314
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bobbodaggit View Post
Yes, I do. The Second Amendment has been incorporated to state action as we know, which means citizens can sue the state of CA for violating 2d am rights under color of state law under 42 usc sec 1983. FWIW, I believe it would fail even the weakest rational basis 'ole it on through' constitutional scrutiny - which is far below the 2d Am standard - because old boy Dickinson hasn't provided any evidence that these SSE 'temporarily or permanently' altered handguns that can no longer operate in 'semiautomatic mode' are in any way more unsafe - i.e. the state has no rational reason to deprive us of our 2d am right to possess them - than those he intends to still allow under SSE. But Dickinson can say he 'did something.' And I guess that's all that matters.
silly filly, you are forgetting this is CA. they dont care about laws, precedent or the constitution they will pass anything they want.
__________________
best troll thread in calguns history
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...d.php?t=406739



Quote:
Originally Posted by waterfern View Post
Not at all. Trump is a loser and will lose amazingly on Tuesday. It's going to be so big, we are all going to be sick and tired of how much he loses on Tuesday.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doheny View Post
Nah, no sense in replying to the personal attacks/baiting.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 02-20-2014, 10:53 PM
OlderThanDirt's Avatar
OlderThanDirt OlderThanDirt is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Dumbfookistan
Posts: 3,381
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EBR Works View Post
It's been fun. 10 months and counting..
Well, I'll try and do my part to make your last 10 months a little brighter. Aside from that little m2Hb, order incoming.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 02-20-2014, 11:01 PM
Tarn_Helm's Avatar
Tarn_Helm Tarn_Helm is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 2,113
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Exclamation

Quote:
Originally Posted by mossy View Post
silly filly, you are forgetting this is CA. they dont care about laws, precedent or the constitution they will pass anything they want.
True.
__________________
"The Religion of Peace": Islam: What the West Needs to Know.
". . . all [historical] experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms
[of governmental abuses and usurpations] to which they are accustomed."
Decl. of Indep., July 4, 1776

NRA Benefactor/Life Member; Lifer: CRPA, GOA, SAF & JPFO


Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 02-20-2014, 11:29 PM
2nd Mass 2nd Mass is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 3,253
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cdtx2001 View Post
I am soooooo glad the state can determine what is and is not safe for me.
We all know it has nothing to do with safety since LEO's can carry "unsafe" weapons. This is about backdoor gun control. Always is. Time to get ready to write legislatures.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 02-21-2014, 10:06 AM
mag360 mag360 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 5,084
iTrader: 8 / 100%
Default

It will be fun to ask him "what is unsafe about a single shot handgun?" Lol
__________________
just happy to be here. I like talking about better ways to protect ourselves.

Shop at AMAZON to help Calguns Foundation

CRPA Life Member. Click here to Join.

NRA Member JOIN HERE/
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 02-21-2014, 10:39 AM
taperxz taperxz is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 16,655
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Default

Closing this loophole in the roster process could very well be really bad for Kamala Harris and DOJ since no one has micro stamping available and all guns will fall off the roster within two years.

It will in effect make it illegal to purchase any semi auto pistol in CA.

If this goes to court and it will and is in the works already, It will open the door for our side to say that in this state it is impossible to buy an auto loading hand gun.

This would be in direct violation of what is said in Heller.

Let them pass it! They are only putting more nails in their coffin.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 02-21-2014, 10:46 AM
Bigedski Bigedski is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 769
iTrader: 9 / 100%
Default

If this passes how will it effect all the SSE that have already been done.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 02-21-2014, 10:58 AM
EBR Works's Avatar
EBR Works EBR Works is offline
Vendor/Retailer
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Prescott, AZ
Posts: 9,445
iTrader: 110 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigedski View Post
If this passes how will it effect all the SSE that have already been done.
It won't affect completed purchases.
__________________


Check out our e-commerce site here:

www.ebrworks.com

Now serving you from Prescott, AZ
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 02-21-2014, 1:33 PM
Capybara's Avatar
Capybara Capybara is offline
CGSSA Coordinator
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Ventura County
Posts: 11,307
iTrader: 20 / 100%
Default

If I am not mistaken, this will even make home build pistols illegal. Really sucks.
__________________
NRA Certified Metallic Cartridge Reloading Instructor, Shotgun Instructor and Range Safety Officer



Sign up now for the next Ventura County Reloading Workshop!
VC Reloading Club on Facebook
VC Reloading Club on Twitter @VCReloading
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 02-21-2014, 2:07 PM
bwiese's Avatar
bwiese bwiese is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Jose
Posts: 26,989
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

There are several openings here to exploit, though they will be costlier than basic SSE.

I WILL NOT DISCUSS THEM with anyone.

AND YOU SHOULD NOT SPECULATE IN PUBLIC HERE if you've figured out any unique approaches.

The battle for now is to beat the bill; we can do the workarounds after it passes if necessary and then put the "Dick" in "Dickinson".
__________________

Bill Wiese
San Jose, CA

CGF Board Member / NRA Benefactor Life Member / CRPA life member

No postings of mine here, unless otherwise specifically noted, are
to be construed as formal or informal positions of the Calguns.Net
ownership, The Calguns Foundation, Inc. ("CGF"), the NRA, or my
employer. No posts of mine on Calguns are to be construed as
legal advice, which can only be given by a lawyer.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 02-21-2014, 2:26 PM
Dano3467 Dano3467 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: 85 mi south of Oregon
Posts: 6,365
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

LEO's should stop buying all these unsafe handguns those things might hurt someone.

Ca GOV is going full retard. unsafe for CA law abiding citizens, but not for anyone else.

If it's unsafe then IT"S UNSAFE PERIOD NO EXCEPTIONS, LAW ENFORCEMENT/MILITARY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sorry we all lose or nobody looses... It's only fair, Oh forgot
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 02-21-2014, 2:44 PM
sevendayweekend's Avatar
sevendayweekend sevendayweekend is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 830
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Default

Press Release -

Wednesday, February 19 2014
Dickinson Introduces Legislation to Close Loophole in Gun Sales Law

Sacramento – Today, Assemblymember Roger Dickinson (D-Sacramento), introduced Assembly Bill 1964. The bill would close a loophole in current law that allows any person to purchase an “unsafe handgun” if it was previously modified to be a single shot weapon. These modifications are easily undone after the sale of the gun, returning the weapon to its original illegal semi-automatic configuration.

“AB 1964 will ensure that all handguns purchased through a dealer in California are handguns which meet all safety and firing tests and contain all state required handgun safety features,” said Assemblymember Roger Dickinson. “By limiting the guns available for sale we can further protect our families and our communities from gun violence,” he added.

The California Department of Justice maintains a roster of handguns that are safe to operate under California law. These guns meet all statutory safety standards and pass safety tests. Handguns not on the roster, also known as unsafe handguns, are handguns most people cannot buy from a manufacturer through a licensed dealer. Examples of unsafe handguns are guns that fail specified firing and drop safety tests, and guns that do not have a specified safety device such as a chamber load indicator.

However, since the enactment of the Unsafe Handgun law in 2001, the statute has been amended several times to add exemptions to the prohibitions on buying and selling these weapons. One of the most significant loopholes concerns single shot handguns. Under current law, a person may purchase a handgun which is manufactured or altered to only accept a single bullet (no semi-automatic reload of a bullet in the firing chamber), even if the handgun is considered by DOJ as “unsafe.”

Up until 2009, no more than 1,100 single shot handguns which did not contain state required safety features or failed state safety tests, were purchased and registered each year, often far fewer than that. However, beginning in 2010, the number of unsafe single shot handguns purchased and registered skyrocketed. In 2013 alone, more than 18,000 of these weapons were purchased in California.

The jump in the purchase of unsafe single shot handguns coincides with the enactment of new handgun safety requirements such as bullet chamber load indicators and micro-stamping of bullets. In essence, more people are using the exemption to acquire guns they would otherwise be unable to legally purchase if the gun was bought in its original semi-automatic configuration. This single shot modification is easily undone, and the loophole provides an easy way for anyone to circumvent the law.

AB 1964 would close this loophole by eliminating the exemption for single shot handguns in the state Unsafe Handgun law. AB 1964 would halt the growing trend of people buying and converting unsafe handguns to get around the Unsafe Handgun law.

AB 1964 contains similar provisions as AB 169, carried by Dickinson in 2013, but vetoed by Governor Brown because it restricted private party sales of unsafe handguns to two per year. That provision has been removed from the new bill. AB 1964 is supported by the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence and will be heard by the legislature in the coming months.


http://www.asmdc.org/members/a07/pre...-gun-sales-law
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 02-21-2014, 2:57 PM
mjmagee67's Avatar
mjmagee67 mjmagee67 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Free America, Idaho.
Posts: 2,626
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Again another failure to address the real public safety problem in Kaliforniastan AB109 Realignment.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 02-21-2014, 3:00 PM
hornswaggled's Avatar
hornswaggled hornswaggled is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,652
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

More fuel for the roster challenge. Good.
__________________
NRA Endowment Member
SAF Defender's Club
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 02-21-2014, 3:01 PM
Swagman00's Avatar
Swagman00 Swagman00 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: East bay Nor-Cal (Not Oakland!)
Posts: 3,892
iTrader: 16 / 100%
Default

Typical nanny state lobbyist pandering control freaks with nothing else better to do then waste more tax dollars on worthless legislation.

Keep up the fight all and see that it gets no further then the trash bin.
__________________
Anyway...here's a dearth of reasoning to ponder: http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Guns

Recently I've been hung up on Synthwave that scatters Youtube.
Feel free to join if curious.
*Edit: His livestream went south. Try this until TPT is back online: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SF58Lsvqg5E&t=31s



Quote:
Originally Posted by movie zombie View Post
and you guys wonder why women are fed up with bad behavior?!
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 9:38 AM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Proudly hosted by GeoVario the Premier 2A host.
Calguns.net, the 'Calguns' name and all associated variants and logos are ® Trademark and © Copyright 2002-2018, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.
Calguns.net and The Calguns Foundation have no affiliation and are in no way related to each other.
All opinions, statements and remarks made by Calguns.net on this web site and elsewhere are solely attributable to Calguns.net.