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
  #361  
Old 05-23-2023, 7:06 AM
Dvrjon's Avatar
Dvrjon Dvrjon is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor - Lifetime
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 10,797
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Infinitetrax View Post
Are all the ?sensitive places? still in the bill?
Yes. As of today, the bill is unchanged since Mar 1.

Post 338 by unusedusername.
__________________
"People say nothing is impossible, but I do nothing every day.”
"Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently-talented fool."
"The things that come to those who wait may well be the things left by those who got there first."

Last edited by Dvrjon; 05-23-2023 at 7:09 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #362  
Old 05-24-2023, 2:11 PM
PaIadin's Avatar
PaIadin PaIadin is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,451
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Is anyone else bothered by the lackluster media coverage on this bill?

Similar to 918, the media "suspiciously" seems to leave out that sensitive areas include parking lots of most shopping centers and banks in their stories on the issue.

It seems suspect that for other laws they will go out and interview people that could be impacted, no matter how slight, but for this law it's just silence.

Why not interview a small business shop keeper that can no longer carry a pistol to the night deposit box for the bank?

How about a person that will be prohibited from carrying on a hike?

Perhaps a story about a church that already permits carry but has a dentist, a liquor store that sells Mega Millions, or a restaurant that sells beer / wine in the same parking lot.
__________________
My opinion on the CA Government:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grover Norquist
I don't want to abolish government. I simply want to reduce it to the size where I can drag it into the bathroom and drown it in the bathtub.
Reply With Quote
  #363  
Old 05-24-2023, 7:18 PM
CitaDeL's Avatar
CitaDeL CitaDeL is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Redding, CA
Posts: 5,830
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PaIadin View Post
Is anyone else bothered by the lackluster media coverage on this bill?

Similar to 918, the media "suspiciously" seems to leave out that sensitive areas include parking lots of most shopping centers and banks in their stories on the issue.

It seems suspect that for other laws they will go out and interview people that could be impacted, no matter how slight, but for this law it's just silence.

Why not interview a small business shop keeper that can no longer carry a pistol to the night deposit box for the bank?

How about a person that will be prohibited from carrying on a hike?

Perhaps a story about a church that already permits carry but has a dentist, a liquor store that sells Mega Millions, or a restaurant that sells beer / wine in the same parking lot.
You forget which side the media is on.

Only criminals and cops solve their problems with guns.
__________________



Sometimes the law defends plunder and participates in it. Sometimes the law places the whole apparatus of judges, police, prisons and gendarmes at the service of the plunderers, and treats the victim -- when he defends himself -- as a criminal. Bastiat

“Everything the State says is a lie, and everything it has it has stolen.” Friedrich Nietzsche
Reply With Quote
  #364  
Old 05-25-2023, 10:06 AM
Rickybillegas Rickybillegas is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2022
Posts: 500
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PaIadin View Post
Is anyone else bothered by the lackluster media coverage on this bill?

Similar to 918, the media "suspiciously" seems to leave out that sensitive areas include parking lots of most shopping centers and banks in their stories on the issue.

It seems suspect that for other laws they will go out and interview people that could be impacted, no matter how slight, but for this law it's just silence.

Why not interview a small business shop keeper that can no longer carry a pistol to the night deposit box for the bank?

How about a person that will be prohibited from carrying on a hike?

Perhaps a story about a church that already permits carry but has a dentist, a liquor store that sells Mega Millions, or a restaurant that sells beer / wine in the same parking lot.
Yes, this is going to be a gigantic mess, which is one of the reasons law enforcement is probably against this. A gigantic headache for not just permitees, but for law enforcement, business owners and property owners to name some.
Reply With Quote
  #365  
Old 05-25-2023, 11:57 AM
taperxz taperxz is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 19,258
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Default

This bill was just passed in the Senate
Reply With Quote
  #366  
Old 05-25-2023, 1:20 PM
TruOil TruOil is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 1,713
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rickybillegas View Post
Yes, this is going to be a gigantic mess, which is one of the reasons law enforcement is probably against this. A gigantic headache for not just permitees, but for law enforcement, business owners and property owners to name some.
I got lost in the discussion as to how difficult it will be, and how much time it will take, to implement this new law, other than that some parts may take a few years.
However, since it costs no money, I rather suspect the new carry limitations will take effect immediately. Do we know yet when the effective date of this bill will be? That will be really important to know and publicize. My experience is that an awful lot of gun owners do not pay attention to what goes on in Sacramento. I assume a bust in a no carry zone is grounds for revocation, and that increased revocations is one of the reasons for the restrictions. There is no actual evidence of any increased risk of harm in the record of hearings, except "more guns means more gun crime." Um hmm.
Reply With Quote
  #367  
Old 05-25-2023, 1:24 PM
Dvrjon's Avatar
Dvrjon Dvrjon is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor - Lifetime
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 10,797
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TruOil View Post
I got lost in the discussion as to how difficult it will be, and how much time it will take, to implement this new law, other than that some parts may take a few years.
However, since it costs no money, I rather suspect the new carry limitations will take effect immediately. Do we know yet when the effective date of this bill will be? That will be really important to know and publicize. My experience is that an awful lot of gun owners do not pay attention to what goes on in Sacramento. I assume a bust in a no carry zone is grounds for revocation, and that increased revocations is one of the reasons for the restrictions. There is no actual evidence of any increased risk of harm in the record of hearings, except "more guns means more gun crime." Um hmm.
If buried in the Budget: July 1.
If an Urgency Clsuse is added, effective upon signature.
If no Urgency: 1/1/2024
__________________
"People say nothing is impossible, but I do nothing every day.”
"Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently-talented fool."
"The things that come to those who wait may well be the things left by those who got there first."
Reply With Quote
  #368  
Old 05-25-2023, 1:37 PM
Helmut Helmut is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Posts: 677
iTrader: 34 / 97%
Default

Its going to be a spicy summer in CA I feel. Imagine not being able to carry in sensitive spaces when the spice gets spicey.
Reply With Quote
  #369  
Old 05-25-2023, 2:16 PM
abinsinia's Avatar
abinsinia abinsinia is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 3,379
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

here's the video of the vote,

https://www.senate.ca.gov/media/sena...20230525/video

starts at minute 24.
Reply With Quote
  #370  
Old 05-25-2023, 3:35 PM
9Cal_OC's Avatar
9Cal_OC 9Cal_OC is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: OC
Posts: 5,973
iTrader: 36 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by abinsinia View Post
here's the video of the vote,

https://www.senate.ca.gov/media/sena...20230525/video

starts at minute 24.
Those democrats just base it all on emotion and not statistics and logic

Glad for those that spoke out agains SB2.
__________________
Freedom isn't free...

Reply With Quote
  #371  
Old 05-26-2023, 6:56 AM
Sennasixty8 Sennasixty8 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: NorCal
Posts: 533
iTrader: 73 / 100%
Default

Thanks for the link!

Clearly CCW holders have never been involved in a Mass shooting, other than preventing or reducing the casualties on both a national and local level.



SB2 must be struck down.
Reply With Quote
  #372  
Old 05-27-2023, 3:07 AM
N0b0dy's Avatar
N0b0dy N0b0dy is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2022
Location: CA
Posts: 61
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

The video is frustrating. Clearly, Portantino does not care about Bruen or the constitution when he repeatedly calls California CCW a “privilege” instead of a right. I wish the few Senators who spoke out against it would have had better arguments about specifics such as the ridiculous inclusion of parking spaces in the list sensitive places.
Reply With Quote
  #373  
Old 05-27-2023, 8:40 AM
CitaDeL's Avatar
CitaDeL CitaDeL is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Redding, CA
Posts: 5,830
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by N0b0dy View Post
The video is frustrating. Clearly, Portantino does not care about Bruen or the constitution when he repeatedly calls California CCW a ?privilege? instead of a right. I wish the few Senators who spoke out against it would have had better arguments about specifics such as the ridiculous inclusion of parking spaces in the list sensitive places.
How is Portantino wrong?

A revocable carry license is a privilege. Licensing converts a right into something the government can regulate. Shall not be infringed does not apply when you trade the right for the license.

If we stop compromising with people in government who think that the second amendment doesnt mean what it says, we might get somewhere.
__________________



Sometimes the law defends plunder and participates in it. Sometimes the law places the whole apparatus of judges, police, prisons and gendarmes at the service of the plunderers, and treats the victim -- when he defends himself -- as a criminal. Bastiat

“Everything the State says is a lie, and everything it has it has stolen.” Friedrich Nietzsche
Reply With Quote
  #374  
Old 05-27-2023, 9:35 AM
Capybara's Avatar
Capybara Capybara is offline
CGSSA Coordinator
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Ventura County
Posts: 13,588
iTrader: 25 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PaIadin View Post
Is anyone else bothered by the lackluster media coverage on this bill?

Similar to 918, the media "suspiciously" seems to leave out that sensitive areas include parking lots of most shopping centers and banks in their stories on the issue.

It seems suspect that for other laws they will go out and interview people that could be impacted, no matter how slight, but for this law it's just silence.

Why not interview a small business shop keeper that can no longer carry a pistol to the night deposit box for the bank?

How about a person that will be prohibited from carrying on a hike?

Perhaps a story about a church that already permits carry but has a dentist, a liquor store that sells Mega Millions, or a restaurant that sells beer / wine in the same parking lot.
The media is owned and ran by the Commies, why would they report on something that highlights their leaders tyranny?
__________________
NRA Certified Metallic Cartridge Reloading Instructor, Shotgun Instructor and Range Safety Officer

Reply With Quote
  #375  
Old 05-27-2023, 11:01 AM
Rickybillegas Rickybillegas is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2022
Posts: 500
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sennasixty8 View Post
Thanks for the link!

Clearly CCW holders have never been involved in a Mass shooting, other than preventing or reducing the casualties on both a national and local level.



SB2 must be struck down.
An interesting poll was released yesterday by CNN. Besides the usual (skewed?) results about guns control. The poll said that 36% of those polled felt less safe with gun owners carrying in public, while 32% said they feel safer with people carrying. Of course the article framed it as 'Americans split over feeling safer with people carrying'. But then admitted that the rest of the 32% said they don't feel safer or less safe. That means 64% do not feel less safe with people carrying.

To me surprising result. Doesn't make a hoot of difference either way, because rights are not based on polls as much as the media would like them to be.

Still, I found that result surprising and encouraging.
Reply With Quote
  #376  
Old 05-27-2023, 12:16 PM
TruOil TruOil is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 1,713
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Comments from people in other states suggest that after a while, even openly carried firearms go unnoticed or unremarked, and most CCWers are invisible. Without showing that there is an increase in crime in other states that have gone shall issue or so-called con carry associated with persons legally carrying undermines the "more guns more gun crime" narrative. The one down side are the well-publicized road rage incidents involving firearms, without recognition that those incidents have been occurring all along with baseball bats and tire irons.
Reply With Quote
  #377  
Old 05-27-2023, 12:56 PM
mshill mshill is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Beyond the reach...
Posts: 4,185
iTrader: 8 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TruOil View Post
Comments from people in other states suggest that after a while, even openly carried firearms go unnoticed or unremarked, and most CCWers are invisible. Without showing that there is an increase in crime in other states that have gone shall issue or so-called con carry associated with persons legally carrying undermines the "more guns more gun crime" narrative. The one down side are the well-publicized road rage incidents involving firearms, without recognition that those incidents have been occurring all along with baseball bats and tire irons.
With half the states having permit less carry I'm sure that if "blood was running in the streets" they would have found it by now.
__________________
Quote:
The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money.
Reply With Quote
  #378  
Old 05-28-2023, 6:40 AM
Ash359 Ash359 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 171
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rickybillegas View Post
An interesting poll was released yesterday by CNN. Besides the usual (skewed?) results about guns control. The poll said that 36% of those polled felt less safe with gun owners carrying in public, while 32% said they feel safer with people carrying. Of course the article framed it as 'Americans split over feeling safer with people carrying'. But then admitted that the rest of the 32% said they don't feel safer or less safe. That means 64% do not feel less safe with people carrying.

To me surprising result. Doesn't make a hoot of difference either way, because rights are not based on polls as much as the media would like them to be.

Still, I found that result surprising and encouraging.
Do you have a link to that poll? It could come in handy but I can't find it.
Reply With Quote
  #379  
Old 05-28-2023, 7:01 AM
Kt90 Kt90 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2022
Posts: 5
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ash359 View Post
Do you have a link to that poll? It could come in handy but I can't find it.

Think it?s this one.

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2023/05/26/p...aws/index.html


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #380  
Old 05-28-2023, 8:19 AM
Teachu2's Avatar
Teachu2 Teachu2 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 824
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Default

I've been meaning to join CRPA. This just reminded me, and the wife and I just joined.
Reply With Quote
  #381  
Old 05-28-2023, 11:13 AM
Rickybillegas Rickybillegas is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2022
Posts: 500
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TruOil View Post
I got lost in the discussion as to how difficult it will be, and how much time it will take, to implement this new law, other than that some parts may take a few years.
However, since it costs no money, I rather suspect the new carry limitations will take effect immediately. Do we know yet when the effective date of this bill will be? That will be really important to know and publicize. My experience is that an awful lot of gun owners do not pay attention to what goes on in Sacramento. I assume a bust in a no carry zone is grounds for revocation, and that increased revocations is one of the reasons for the restrictions. There is no actual evidence of any increased risk of harm in the record of hearings, except "more guns means more gun crime." Um hmm.
Revocation of your permit will be the least your problems.
Portantino wants you charged with a crime, either a misdemeanor or a felony.
Reply With Quote
  #382  
Old 05-28-2023, 1:08 PM
Capybara's Avatar
Capybara Capybara is offline
CGSSA Coordinator
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Ventura County
Posts: 13,588
iTrader: 25 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rickybillegas View Post
Revocation of your permit will be the least your problems.
Portantino wants you charged with a crime, either a misdemeanor or a felony.
The Commies want you a prohibited person for life. Easy to way to eliminate lawful gun owners. Plus then, they'll send you to prison where it will be impossible to even be an unlawful gun owner.
It's a gun grabbers wet dream, double down on disarmament.
__________________
NRA Certified Metallic Cartridge Reloading Instructor, Shotgun Instructor and Range Safety Officer

Reply With Quote
  #383  
Old 05-28-2023, 2:24 PM
bruss01's Avatar
bruss01 bruss01 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 5,301
iTrader: 25 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Capybara View Post
The Commies want you a prohibited person for life. Easy to way to eliminate lawful gun owners. Plus then, they'll send you to prison where it will be impossible to even be an unlawful gun owner.
It's a gun grabbers wet dream, double down on disarmament.
Que the quote :


"Did you really think we want those laws observed?" said Dr. Ferris. "We want them to be broken. You'd better get it straight that it's not a bunch of boy scouts you're up against... We're after power and we mean it... There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced or objectively interpreted ? and you create a nation of law-breakers ? and then you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system, Mr. Reardon, that's the game, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with."
― Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
__________________
The one thing worse than defeat is surrender.
Reply With Quote
  #384  
Old 05-28-2023, 2:53 PM
johnnyv5 johnnyv5 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Posts: 138
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

From the text of the bill, seems like it'll only be a misdemeanor if caught in "sensitive place"?
Reply With Quote
  #385  
Old 05-28-2023, 4:39 PM
9Cal_OC's Avatar
9Cal_OC 9Cal_OC is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: OC
Posts: 5,973
iTrader: 36 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by johnnyv5 View Post
From the text of the bill, seems like it'll only be a misdemeanor if caught in "sensitive place"?
That?s enough to be put on probation and have a 10-yr firearm prohibition.
__________________
Freedom isn't free...

Reply With Quote
  #386  
Old 05-28-2023, 9:12 PM
MajorSideburns's Avatar
MajorSideburns MajorSideburns is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 1,157
iTrader: 61 / 100%
Default

The bill makes the entire state a sensitive place. What is even the point of a CCW now?
Reply With Quote
  #387  
Old 05-28-2023, 10:20 PM
AlmostHeaven AlmostHeaven is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2023
Location: Virginia
Posts: 1,237
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MajorSideburns View Post
The bill makes the entire state a sensitive place. What is even the point of a CCW now?
That is the whole point of these bills.

States like New York, New Jersey, Maryland, and California used to deny carry permits to ordinary law-abiding citizens. The Supreme Court ruled in Bruen that concealed carry was a right, and permits must be issued using objective standards.

Now, these states are defying the spirit of the ruling by making permits useless in practice.
Reply With Quote
  #388  
Old 05-29-2023, 10:36 AM
Rickybillegas Rickybillegas is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2022
Posts: 500
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MajorSideburns View Post
The bill makes the entire state a sensitive place. What is even the point of a CCW now?
I haven't scoured through the whole bill in detail, but I think you will still be able to carry in your car and public sidewalks (expect near school zones and a few other exceptions), also on non-commercial property.

But this bill will be struck down. We will probably get an injunction soon after the bill goes into effect. How long that will last is anyone's guess.
In NY, they got relief from two judges (Suttaby and Sinatra) that lasted 7-8 weeks total. Now, the 2nd Circuit is considering it with a stay.
In New Jersey, however, Judge Bumb has injuncted certain parts since January.

We have to hope that SCOTUS will intercede on some of the sensitive places at least in the next year or so. An emergency appeal was denied in January, but believe me, SCOTUS knows exactly what's going on.

One last thought. This week I believe the bill is going through the assembly.
It has already had one reading and 'held at desk'. We have to hope some assembly people will ask for some changes before the bill is finalized.
This is the last chance to make changes before this bill becomes law.
Reply With Quote
  #389  
Old 05-31-2023, 8:30 AM
Ash359 Ash359 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 171
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

One point you can make to your assemblyman is that this law will result in a great deal more guns being left in cars.

Which is where a huge number of guns get stolen from, making the situation much worse.

Also, think about the domestic abuse survivor who has a restraining order against his/her ex and a CCW license. This law will make her much more vulnerable.
Reply With Quote
  #390  
Old 05-31-2023, 10:23 AM
ritter ritter is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: North Bay Area
Posts: 685
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ash359 View Post
One point you can make to your assemblyman is that this law will result in a great deal more guns being left in cars.

Which is where a huge number of guns get stolen from, making the situation much worse.

Also, think about the domestic abuse survivor who has a restraining order against his/her ex and a CCW license. This law will make her much more vulnerable.
I made those very points to my reps. I received no reply whatsoever. Shocker.

This will also result in a whole lot more gun sightings as carriers don/doff at their cars to comply. Neat.
Reply With Quote
  #391  
Old 05-31-2023, 11:18 AM
Rickybillegas Rickybillegas is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2022
Posts: 500
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

So far three Federal court judges have ruled many of the 'sensitive places' unconstitutional (Sinatra, Suttaby, and Bumb). No Court or Judge has yet found these sensitive places constitutional. 2nd Circuit is considering these now. If 2nd circuit makes an unconstitutional ruling, an emergency appeal to SCOTUS is likely as in Jan. Then, it will not be interlocutory and very possible that SCOTUS will intercede (As Thomas and Alito encouraged plaintiffs).

Deliverance from the worst of this is on our side. Patience will be required.
Remember how long it took for some of us to get our permits. Some of us as long as 9-15 months, even more. We had to be patient and wait. We might have to wait again like before.
Reply With Quote
  #392  
Old 05-31-2023, 2:05 PM
AlmostHeaven AlmostHeaven is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2023
Location: Virginia
Posts: 1,237
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rickybillegas View Post
Deliverance from the worst of this is on our side. Patience will be required. Remember how long it took for some of us to get our permits. Some of us as long as 9-15 months, even more. We had to be patient and wait. We might have to wait again like before.
There's nothing to do except wait, unfortunately. Seeing as the idiot masses of California keep electing supermajority Democratic state legislatures and "progressive" tyrant governors into office, and the California Supreme Court has ruled that there is no right to keep and bear arms at all, the only possibility of relief is from the Federal judiciary.

Pray that the Republican-appointed Justices live for decades to come.
Reply With Quote
  #393  
Old 05-31-2023, 3:17 PM
Usual_Suspect Usual_Suspect is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Henderson, NV
Posts: 281
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

The usual political delay tactics. Portotino knows it's unconstitutional, I will put $$$ on a bet saying the majority of those who voted yes know it's unconstitutional. They also know it will take years for it to work it's way through the courts and be found unconstitutional. Look at standard magazines, long guns that are popular, the roster, all delay tactics. The Legislature knows the 9th will side with them, hope the 9th drags their feet, then hope it will sit at SCOTUS awaiting a date, and even longer for the opinion. It's the typical wash, rinse, repeat.
Reply With Quote
  #394  
Old 05-31-2023, 3:25 PM
AlmostHeaven AlmostHeaven is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2023
Location: Virginia
Posts: 1,237
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

There is not enough political will or capital to implement such a policy, but you know what we really need?

National preemption of all gun laws. The Federal laws are currently the floor. They should also be the ceiling.

Make these leftist state legislatures as able to enact new gun control as city councils in Virginia.
Reply With Quote
  #395  
Old 05-31-2023, 5:48 PM
mk2dave mk2dave is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2021
Posts: 707
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Usual_Suspect View Post
The usual political delay tactics. Portotino knows it's unconstitutional, I will put $$$ on a bet saying the majority of those who voted yes know it's unconstitutional. They also know it will take years for it to work it's way through the courts and be found unconstitutional. Look at standard magazines, long guns that are popular, the roster, all delay tactics. The Legislature knows the 9th will side with them, hope the 9th drags their feet, then hope it will sit at SCOTUS awaiting a date, and even longer for the opinion. It's the typical wash, rinse, repeat.
*emphasis mine

I think (hope might be a better word) exactly the opposite will happen. The SC stated in Bruen that efforts to circumvent will be addressed in an expedited manner.

I see this getting signed, but stayed. But I also have been known for being overly optimistic.
Reply With Quote
  #396  
Old 05-31-2023, 7:57 PM
EM2's Avatar
EM2 EM2 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,658
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AlmostHeaven View Post
There is not enough political will or capital to implement such a policy, but you know what we really need?

National preemption of all gun laws. The Federal laws are currently the floor. They should also be the ceiling.

Make these leftist state legislatures as able to enact new gun control as city councils in Virginia.
Ahem, been there, done that.

__________________
F@$% Joe Biden

Quote:
If violent crime is to be curbed, it is only the intended victim who can do it. The felon does not fear the police, and he fears neither judge nor jury. Therefore what he must be taught to fear is his victim.
Col. Jeff Cooper
Quote:
Originally Posted by SAN compnerd View Post
It's the flu for crying out loud, just stop.
Reply With Quote
  #397  
Old 06-01-2023, 7:25 AM
WithinReason WithinReason is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 480
iTrader: 9 / 100%
Default

So, today I applied for a membership with CRPA. While I have donated in the past, it seems to me that there will be an upcoming lawsuit against SB 2, and CRPA will be leading the fight.
Reply With Quote
  #398  
Old 06-01-2023, 9:49 PM
PaIadin's Avatar
PaIadin PaIadin is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,451
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Usual_Suspect View Post
The usual political delay tactics. Portotino knows it's unconstitutional, I will put $$$ on a bet saying the majority of those who voted yes know it's unconstitutional. They also know it will take years for it to work it's way through the courts and be found unconstitutional. Look at standard magazines, long guns that are popular, the roster, all delay tactics. The Legislature knows the 9th will side with them, hope the 9th drags their feet, then hope it will sit at SCOTUS awaiting a date, and even longer for the opinion. It's the typical wash, rinse, repeat.
Just want to point out that Portotino is getting paid by YOUR tax dollars.

The states attorneys that will defend this law?
Paid for by your tax dollars.

The executive hotel suite the attorneys will get by the federal courthouse?
Your tax dollars.

Their gourmet meals?
Your tax dollars.

Their morning avocado toast and Kombucha?
Your tax dollars.

Any legal settlement and attorney fees for our attorneys?
Yup, your money.

Finally, when this state has to make up for the legal seattlement in the next budget?
Well, their is hand of the government in your wallet taking more of YOUR money to pay for their mistakes till they bleed you dry.

Keep this in mind when your budget gets tight and you have to cut back. The government is getting fat off of your sweat.

I wish I could treat Portotino and his ilk like the robbers they are.
__________________
My opinion on the CA Government:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grover Norquist
I don't want to abolish government. I simply want to reduce it to the size where I can drag it into the bathroom and drown it in the bathtub.
Reply With Quote
  #399  
Old 06-03-2023, 6:09 AM
dawgcasa dawgcasa is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 407
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rickybillegas View Post
An interesting poll was released yesterday by CNN. Besides the usual (skewed?) results about guns control. The poll said that 36% of those polled felt less safe with gun owners carrying in public, while 32% said they feel safer with people carrying. Of course the article framed it as 'Americans split over feeling safer with people carrying'. But then admitted that the rest of the 32% said they don't feel safer or less safe. That means 64% do not feel less safe with people carrying.

To me surprising result. Doesn't make a hoot of difference either way, because rights are not based on polls as much as the media would like them to be.

Still, I found that result surprising and encouraging.
Studies of crime data from Texas and Florida (states with prolific issuance of CCW permits, thus a large sample set) showed that the probability of any person walking around in public being criminally shot (i.e., an unjustified shooting) by a CCW permit holder is about equivalent to their odds of being struck by lightning. In fact, they would be eight times MORE likely to be unlawfully shot by a LEO.
Reply With Quote
  #400  
Old 06-03-2023, 10:01 AM
Rickybillegas Rickybillegas is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2022
Posts: 500
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgcasa View Post
Studies of crime data from Texas and Florida (states with prolific issuance of CCW permits, thus a large sample set) showed that the probability of any person walking around in public being criminally shot (i.e., an unjustified shooting) by a CCW permit holder is about equivalent to their odds of being struck by lightning. In fact, they would be eight times MORE likely to be unlawfully shot by a LEO.
And our gov., Att. Gen, and our legislators are aware of this.
Which proves (at least to me), it's not about saving lives, at least not this bill.
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 10:59 PM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2023, 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 2002-2021, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.
All opinions, statements and remarks made by Calguns.net on this web site and elsewhere are solely attributable to Calguns.net.



Seams2SewBySusy