|
California 2nd Amend. Political Discussion & Activism Discuss gun rights activism and 2A related political topics here. All advice given is NOT legal counsel. |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
||||
|
||||
Why was the CA gun roster introduced?
I don’t want this question to start political discord and turmoil. Sounds ridiculous, but we all know what politics+keyboard can do to people. Anyway...
#1 Why was the CA gun roster introduced? A. What was the reason the politicians were using? B. What do you think the real agenda was? (Obviously confiscation is an easy answer, however, did they have an end game? An immediate goal? A 10 year plan?) |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
#1....To "F" gun owners by limiting choices/availability and drive up prices. A....For the Children. B....[refer to #1] |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
In an overall sense, the thought process which was publicly touted and continues to be was the idea of 'safety' or, more specifically, 'public safety.' You can see it in the original bill... Quote:
Confiscation is not the 'easy' or even an 'immediate' answer in most cases insofar as the roster, at least in an overall sense. In fact, in many respects, that's one of the inherent contradictions; i.e., the grandfathered firearms were 'safe' yesterday, but became 'unsafe' the day the roster was implemented, yet there is no call for confiscation of the 'unsafe' firearms? Oh... That would be an unconstitutional taking? The 'real agenda' is, primarily, two-fold and both are discussed regularly on this site. "Short term" is to create sufficient hassle so as to persuade both consumers and retailers/manufacturers that California is not a suitable market place for handgun sales or ownership. This has resulted in things such as the charge for testing, unavailability of numerous models (not simply 'new'), ever more Draconian requirements to meet the 'safety' standard (think 'microstamping'), etc. It's also resulted in exceptions and work arounds which create their own, unique laws and enforcement; i.e., creates new classes of 'criminals' which the Government, if it so chooses, can actually 'get at' for a time and, thereby, feed the PR machine. "Long term" is what many consider to be the 'real' agenda; e.g., a long fuse 'ban' on handguns. You will find numerous threads and articles batting about numbers, with some saying there are fewer models available than claimed, others claiming a consistency, still others claiming we're quickly running short of options, and some even trying to claim all three at once. The real problem and, for the last 6 years along with the foreseeable future, insurmountable problem was the 2013 decision by Kamala Harris to claim that microstamping was now considered viable. It has severely reduced the number of handguns which can be added to the roster. By default, that means a gradual reduction in the number of options available on the roster as models are discontinued, manufacturers refuse to create models specifically for sale in California, et al. One of the concerns being an eventual fight under the Heller standard of how "in common use" is defined. Unfortunately, the State and, thus far, the Courts don't see that as a 'problem.' Their thinking or, at least, their publicly declared rationale is that so long as we have options, our rights have not been infringed. It's simply our choice and/or a business decision, not actions by the Government which 'limits' our options. In fact, there ARE ways 'around' the roster; but, it does add considerable cost to the firearm, noticeable hassle to obtaining it, and does not make them 'equally available' to everyone. Such exceptions also lend credibility to the claim(s) that 'safety' was not the paramount issue motivating the roster; despite public pronouncements to the contrary. Thus, the roster has become a political weapon where gun owners/manufacturers can be 'punished/harassed' or the time frame to the end game enhanced or similar with new requirements added and, effectively, with little if any recourse through the courts. But, you don't want this to devolve into a political discourse. So... Last edited by TrappedinCalifornia; 01-13-2020 at 3:40 AM.. |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
The original reason was safety, to prevent cheap and unsafe "Saturday night specials" from being sold -- that was the drop test. Later additions were the loaded chamber indicator and magazine safeties, which were supposed to prevent accidents by A) making it super obvious when a pistol was loaded; and B) preventing tragedy when a dummy assumed the firearm was unloaded after the magazine was dropped.
Initial $ and forced re-evaluation when a major change is made or if a part is changed from manufacturing process A (e.g. forged) to manufacturing process B (e.g. MIM) seem reasonable since there is a cost for the state to do the re-evaluation work. However, $ and forced re-evaluation for different colors, immaterial change (grip materials, change in manufacturing location) are BS, as is micro-stamping. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
nothing more than this
The idea that a firearm is determined to be unsafe for me to use, but perfectly safe for the government to use says all you need to know. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
I have not noticed this in the past, but is this a thing, in the new year a flurry of people sign up and then start asking broad, open ended questions to gather opinions held by gun owners?
|
#11
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
They are trolls/trolling... They are DU minions trying to get info...opinions of evil people...or, see item above... They are truly new to the sport/issue...and are curious...
__________________
Wilson Protector .45, Springer 9mm Loaded, Franchi Instinct SL .12ga. and some other cool stuff for the kiddos... |
#12
|
||||
|
||||
And +10 round magazines.
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
This. If the idea really is safety, then sure as sh*t no one should be OK with LEOs acquiring and using those dangerous firearms.
__________________
"No personal computer will ever have gigabytes of RAM" - Scott Nudds |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Never forget that gun control is not about crime or safety!
It's about control.....total control! So, what is the next question from the DOJ? Take care Abenaki
__________________
"Waiting periods are only a step. Registration is only a step. The prohibition of private firearms is the goal." U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno, December 1993 I'd rather be a Boomer, than generation crybaby! |
#15
|
||||
|
||||
Moved to CA Politics and activism.
See also the wiki article, http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/in...e_Handgun_List and read the analyses at http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/fa...=199920000SB15
__________________
ARCHIVED Calguns Foundation Wiki here: http://web.archive.org/web/201908310...itle=Main_Page "The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane."Ann Althouse: “Begin with the hypothesis that what they did is what they wanted to do. If they postured that they wanted to do something else, regard that as a con. Work from there. The world will make much more sense.” Not a lawyer, just Some Guy On The Interwebs. Last edited by Librarian; 01-13-2020 at 11:58 AM.. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
DiaHero Foundation - helping people manage diabetes. Sending diabetes supplies to Ukraine now, any help is appreciated. DDR AK furniture and Norinco M14 parts kit: https://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/....php?t=1756292 |
#17
|
||||
|
||||
#1 backway to a gun ban (it’s kinda like pulling a table cloth off the food table very slowly the dumb people won’t notice it until it gets pulled all the way off every year more guns slip off the table only the smart people will question while the dumb won’t)
#2 money California likes money and will find anyway to screw someone or some company in to getting there money #3 to give the most updated guns to cops, after all shooting a person 22 times says that they are all good to handle “unsafe firearms” although a lot of them aren’t gun savvy or check the camber to see if their gun is unloaded before they clean it but hey what can I say I’m a civilian... |
#19
|
||||
|
||||
The CA gun Roster was introduced for the supposed reasons that there were unsafe "Saturday Night Special' guns
on the market that could fire when dropped. However, the modern versions of these guns passsed the tests just fine (Jennings, Lorcin, Davis, etc). Once a law is in place, however, it becomes FAR EASIER to tack things on (vs generating a fresh new law to control that additional aspect). Thus we got things like mag disconnect safeties, loadec chamber indicators, and microstamping. BTW, passage of the Unsafe Handgun Act (UHA) was only by a narrow margin at the time. NRA had gunned up lots of opposition. However, the SASS cowboy group hired their own lobbyist - NRA traitor Richard Feldman - as their lobbyist. When fence-sitting legislators saw that supposedly "not all gun groups" were opposed to the UHA, some voted for it. SASS was so willing to protect their precision cowboy guns they sold us down the river on ALL modern handguns. I will never, ever give SASS money, and I love single action revolvers esp Ruger Bisleys. During the 20XXs under the far more gun favorable AG Brown administration, Roster regulations were fairly clear. Once Kamala Harris stepped in all sortsa new interpretations of "what a Rostered handgun is" started floating outta DOJ BoF, the "minor changes to parts == a new gun ==> must be Re-Rostered" standpoint started occurring.
__________________
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. Last edited by bwiese; 01-13-2020 at 7:03 PM.. |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
It wasn't about safety like they said. It was about the Saturday Night Specials though. They wanted to get rid of the $40 guns that were cheap enough to throw away and soft enough to destroy the serial number easily after you shot that other gang banger.
|
#22
|
||||
|
||||
I see your point.
The words I used word discord and turmoil. That said, political discussion is this forum. It was my effort to get some thoughtful answers. That’s all.
Quote:
|
#23
|
||||
|
||||
Well put.
That seems to be super accurate. Maybe these same politicians came out of the Vietnam war era and think guns are evil. Idk.
Quote:
|
#24
|
||||
|
||||
The only way to know of things, is to ask for others knowledge.
It’s a genuine question. I care for no opinion. “But that’s what you’re asking for newbie, you new scum!” Lol. Read every other answer. They are all very good. I am also a gun owner...shocking.
Asking questions is important. Don’t stifle other people with their desire to learn. |
#25
|
||||
|
||||
I am new to firearms. I own a ruger 10/22 a ruger 556 that i had to just send back for repair. A springfield XD 9 (boo Springfield right?) and I’m getting a ruger mark iv and sig 365 for carry. Do you suggest any particular mark iv for this particular DOJ person? Lol
[/PHP] |
#26
|
||||
|
||||
80% great answers. Thank you. 20% paranoid people thinking I’m someone other than genuinely asking a question. I HATE THE ROSTER. There are so many guns i want to buy. But why do I need to explain this? We all hate the roster. Don’t be paranoid folks, at the end of your days conspiracies true or not won’t matter. Enjoy life, its too short to think everyone (besides politicians, lol) have a terrible agenda.
|
#27
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
A. As "common sense" gun control laws that prevented "unsafe" handguns from being sold to the public. As soon as certain "pro-gun" groups were able to acquire exemptions for their special interests, they switched from opposing the legislation to either supporting it or becoming neutral to it. Anti-gun politicians then used that cooperation to sell to the voting public that the legislation was so "common sense" that "pro-gun" groups were for it. B. Elimate the amount of handguns available for public sale. |
#28
|
||||
|
||||
Calguns Private Party. Anything that is already owned by the public aside from AW/FA is available to PPT. Yes the prices are higher, but think of it as an investment.
The new laws in 2020 restricts to 1 gun purchase per month. So plan ahead on your monthly gun DROS. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Someone else sorta touched on the Single action exemption
I forgot to mention that the one firearm guaranteed to fail the drop test (Colt 1873 SAA) was specifically exempted from the safety testing requirements.
The law, as enacted, has ZERO to do with safety. |
#30
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
The fixed tubular magazine on lever-action firearm exemption to CA large capacity magazine laws was payment to cowboy action shooting groups to switch from opposing the large capacity magazine legislation to supporting it. |
#31
|
||||
|
||||
First they made it hard to buy a gun in California. Then they made it hard to sell guns in California.
The problem is, while there's fewer guns on the roster every year, Californians are still armed to the teeth and are buying more guns every day.
__________________
Freedom is the dream you dream while putting thought in chains. - Giacomo Leopardi |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|