Is the Handgun Roster saving you $$$$???

[TeddyBallgame]

and i mean that in a bad way

seems like every time I see a gun that peeks my interest its not on the roster

kind of limits my options, i've never bought a previously owned/USED firearm before, not that I wouldn't, I just don't actively search them out

i feel like we're never going to enjoy buying a new model firearm without buying it USED...i know there are some other avenues to buy, i don't feel like I should have to jump through a few hoops to buy a damn gun i like

how is this NOT going to get worse, i doubt anyone starts micro-stamping, so, that effectively screws us out of most new firearms



Sig Sauer P320, the first striker fire Sig...looks pretty sleek, polymer framed but i could live with it

[ADAM]

i feel your pane,glocks for 1500.00,mp for 1300.oo wtf

[L84CABO]

I know. I want a 320 in the worst way but ran out of time. Stoopid SSE.

[tophatjones]

The CA "safe" handgun roster is one of the most egregious violations of the 2nd Amendment. It is ...

1) ... Based on lies.
The roster exists purportedly to protect CA citizens from unsafe handguns. Modern handguns are extremely safe, most designs have firing pin blocks, striker blocks, hammer catches, half cock notches, trigger safeties, manual safeties, grip safeties, the list goes on.

Yet the government claims these features aren't enough, that the guns can be "more safe" with the addition of a) horrendous loaded chamber indicators with gigantic warnings only the most ignorant morons would need (in other words, the government thinks gun owners are ignorant morons), b) magazine disconnect safety, which is arguably LESS safe in an actual emergency, and c) microstamping, which essentially doesn't exist and is of dubious utility even if it did exist.

2) ... Hypocritical.
The handguns on the approved list are "safe" and any gun not on the list is "unsafe". So why are CA federal officers and law enforcement officers allowed to use "unsafe" handguns for both duty and personal usage? Do only these elite personnel have enough qualification to nullify the "unsafe" qualities of the unlisted guns? If "safe" handguns are better, why does any LEO department or LEO officer choose an "unsafe" gun for the job?

3) ... Rooted in a fallacy.
The fallacy is that the government can drive innovation through legislation. I've heard arguments that the safe handgun list is a defacto ban, and maybe it is, I don't know. However, one angle of demented logic the government has used now and again is to try to force the research and development of new technology by prohibiting or severely limiting current technology. The roster's microstamping requirement was designed to coerce handgun manufacturers to begin researching microstamping technology. The intimidation is clear: if manufacturers don't invest millions into the arguably useless concept of microstamping, they'd lose out on the ripe CA handgun market.

4) ... Possibly a form of extortion.
The testing standards are unreasonably difficult. Not difficult in a way that ensures a safe end product in the hands of civilians but a collection of rigamarole to make life difficult for gun manufacturers. Once the initial fees and tests are met, the manufacturer still has to pay a tax fee every year to keep a model on the roster. If the gun gets an upgrade or redesigned part, even if only a single part, the gun is now a new model and the entire process must be repeated. However, no new models or formerly approved models even with ONE new part will be approved without microstamping. http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/Th...n_List#Process

5) ... Clearly unconstitutional.
How can any list of approved guns be constitutional when one model of a certain color is approved and the EXACT same model with a different color is prohibited? How can any list of approved guns be constitutional when no new semi autos (except for the farce gun, Armatix) have been approved in years? How can any list of approved guns be constitutional when many of the guns on the list are being discontinued by manufacturers due to age? Finally, how can any list of approved guns be constitutional when it essentially "freezes in time" the choices of guns available to civilians. Imagine, if the roster exists in 2030, the only models available would be designs from approx 2010 and earlier. The rest of the nation (and CA LEO) would have guns 20 years more advanced and more safe than the sad sack Californian gun owners.

[orangeusa]

The microstamping and 'guns in different colors' really chaps my hide.

But the worst of all is the magazine disconnect. Almost no manufacturer wants to make those guns, so the amount of new guns is trivial and mostly revolvers.

Microstamping - a requirement that cant be built. How did that ever get passed? sorry - just irritates the heck out of me.

.

[The Gleam]

Actually, I think the Roster creates an atmosphere of taboo and scarcity connotation, to the point that people grow ravenous for handgun purchases, of either those items that can only be had by PPT, or will buy what is on the Roster of various makes an models whereby they might not have otherwise, being happy with just one gun to do the job. This impending doom of - "you had better get it now because you might not be able to get it later" sells more guns than without. It's the great unintended consequence of the Roster. It encouraged sales. California gun owners are gun-crazy compared to other "free" states. You go into a guns store in a "free state" and the selection is quite bland, pedestrian, and low-end; rarely anything collectible, and not much in the way of stocking dealers having vast supplied.

So the idea of what is common today will be a hot commodity tomorrow, is always looming, generating sales. And if not on the Roster and carries an element of rarity - forget it.

Look at what happened during SSE; people were nuts on buying sprees, making sure they bought a gun 1-per-30 days where I bet if there never was that threat, they would not have. Now instead of SSE, they'll turn back to PPT or SAE.

Look at what happened just after the Colorado and Sandy Hook shootings when the threat of Congress and Executive orders banning certain semi-auto rifles was floating around; people were nuts on buying sprees. Same for the time leading up to Roberti-Roos, the SB23 Features ban, AB50 .50BMG chambered rifle ban, among others.

The latter were all instant kills, and complacent and apathetic guns owners suddenly found themselves scrambling for whatever it was they had fear of never being able to get again. But the Roster has tricked them; mulling for 15 years to slowly ban one gun after another as they fell off the Roster, so only now are the boiling frogs starting to jump.

There are plenty of guns not on the Roster that aren't C&R either, that I'll often jump at when given the chance to get. A Walther P88 or SIG P210 is a good example. I suppose if I had the ever-present comfort that I could always get these particular models, I would be more reluctant to spend my money in the first place, and be more cavalier or indifferent when I saw one available that comes along.

As for things on the Roster, same could be said ironically. I keep meaning to get an SP-01. It just renewed for this year, so there is the impression I now have plenty of time to get one; but I wasn't so sure in December, and considered buying one in January when it still had not renewed. So now ti's on the Roster, I spend my money on a Colt Python or HK P7M13 that pops up instead of the SP-01, unless I find it on sale somewhere by chance.

[Jamesaaron61]

I do hope one day that is gets thrown out. I'll be moving to Southern California next May And well I'm trying to decid what handguns I can live with for quite a while.

[cire raeb]

Not yet, I have been buying accessories for my AR-15. So far this year I bought an ACOG M150 and planning to get an EoTech EXPS3-0 in a few months.

[63j300]

Yes, I want a 938

[RandyD]

I do hope one day that is gets thrown out. I'll be moving to Southern California next May And well I'm trying to decid what handguns I can live with for quite a while.

If you are smart, you will buy a lot of handguns that are not on CA's roster, and once you are in CA, you can sell them for a profit.

[Springfield45]

No. But the total ban on machine guns in Kalifornia does.

[GW]

Yeah its saving me money
I went ape**** last year and need a little recovery time.

[BigPimping]

It saves me mucho dinero. my wife loves it

[Tank 57]

Not at the moment.Was scheming on how to get a S&W 69 and it showed up on the roster.

[TKM]

I got an email today for a 10mm P220. So I thinks it's safe to say that California saved me from spending my taxed dollars once again.