CA Handgun-Free

[miket92]

Didn't want to start a new thread for something that has probably come up before (tried to look for a rant thread)...buuutttt...have you guys seen the approved handgun roster added and removed lists? If you haven't lemme include links:

http://oag.ca.gov/sites/oag.ca.gov/files/pdfs/firearms/removed.pdf

and

http://oag.ca.gov/sites/oag.ca.gov/files/pdfs/firearms/recentlyadded.pdf

Dude, CA is gunna be gun free in a matter of time! What the heck?!?!? How is this not causing a freakin storm? I can't possibly be the only person pissed about this....

[Librarian]

Generically, that goes into CA 2A Politics, and the overall solution is getting rid of the Roster. There's a lawsuit for that. http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/Pena_v._Cid

[miket92]

Oops that's my bad, how does that get moved? I don't know, it seems like lawsuits in CA are a lost cause...the dumb lawsuits win and the logical constitutional lawsuits never seem to help or change anything..

[GOLDEN GUN]

The second we actually lose all the handguns.. The entire roster becomes unconstitutional and the roster disappears entirely... It will be some time and wel suffer a bit but it is a self destructing mechanism of law that will inevitable result in our favor

[elSquid]

It's a good time to learn how to shoot a revolver. DA or SA - the choice is yours!

-- Michael

[miket92]

I still don't see how telling us what we can buy is even close to constitutional...having any sort of law that controls what we purchase seems restrictive to our freedom...freedom that seems less and less like freedom everyday. I know freedom doesn't mean do whatever you want, but there are limits that, in my opinion, have been exceeded. Just the way I perceive it tho.

[GOLDEN GUN]

the problem is that the SCOTUS has not determined what level of scrutiny the 2nd amendment holds when determining if the law is unconstitutional

if strict scrutiny the law must be necessary to achieve a compelling government purpose.

if intermediate scrutiny then the law must be substantially related to an important government purpose

if rational basis the only has to be rationally related to a legitimate government purpose.

so the real question is what level of purpose does the government have to ban the sale of new "unsafe handguns" into the stream of commerce.

is no new unsafe handguns a compelling government purpose to promote safety, is it important, or is it only legitimate...

it will absolutely pass rationally related but there is little to no chance that a 2nd amendment will only be a rational basis test so the question is if it is strict scrutiny or intermediate. the trend shows to be that it would be strict because it is a fundamental liberty. which means that the banning of new unsafe handguns must be necessary and there is no less restrictive means and the law is narrowly tailored to the point that public safety is endangered enough that the government is compelled to restrict it.

that is the standard the handgun roster must endure to determine if your rights are infringed or not.. if compelling under strict scrutiny, then they are not infringed...

none of this has been through the supreme court yet.... 2nd amendment bans and restive laws are pretty new in the eyes of the Supreme court. My guess is that it would not pass strict scrutiny and highly doubtful that it would pass intermediate even

[L84CABO]

The second we actually lose all the handguns.. The entire roster becomes unconstitutional and the roster disappears entirely... It will be some time and wel suffer a bit but it is a self destructing mechanism of law that will inevitable result in our favor

Kinda makes you wish the MFG's would get together and say "enough."

[miket92]

Kinda makes you wish the MFG's would get together and say "enough."

Only thing is, if the MFGs all pulled out then it wouldn't really be a constitutional issue at that point, right? I think our Cali gov wouldn't mind all the MFGs pulling out of Cali..that would just boost their agenda in a direction that we don't want it to go...

[osis32]

If they all changed a screw or something dumb like that and had to reapply for the roster they would fail without microstamping. They wouldn't be pulling out they would be prohibited by the roster then CA politicos would be screwed.

[titan2]

How are the added 'Pistols' new to California? I don't believe that they started using 'Micro Stamping' on the new 'Autos' as that was one of the new requirements!

Anyone have an idea?

Didn't want to start a new thread for something that has probably come up before (tried to look for a rant thread)...buuutttt...have you guys seen the approved handgun roster added and removed lists? If you haven't lemme include links:

http://oag.ca.gov/sites/oag.ca.gov/files/pdfs/firearms/removed.pdf

and

http://oag.ca.gov/sites/oag.ca.gov/files/pdfs/firearms/recentlyadded.pdf

Dude, CA is gunna be gun free in a matter of time! What the heck?!?!? How is this not causing a freakin storm? I can't possibly be the only person pissed about this....

[titan2]

The second we actually lose all the handguns.. The entire roster becomes unconstitutional and the roster disappears entirely... It will be some time and wel suffer a bit but it is a self destructing mechanism of law that will inevitable result in our favor

With the exception of the 'Revolvers'....they will still be on there and the list will survive. We still have a choice...it'll be limited to only which 'Revolver' would you like???

[titan2]

Kinda makes you wish the MFG's would get together and say "enough."

A few already have and dropped the renewal of their handguns in California.

They weren't going to employ the "New" micro stamping technology that is now added to the requirements of the roster for new hand guns.

That's why I'm curious about the two Colt hand guns that's been added to the roster.....Micro Stamped or NOT......what gives???

[miket92]

If they all changed a screw or something dumb like that and had to reapply for the roster they would fail without microstamping. They wouldn't be pulling out they would be prohibited by the roster then CA politicos would be screwed.

I could see how that could be an option except that CA still allows handguns to be sold in the State...it is up to the MFGs to follow through with everything necessary to have their product sold in CA. You know? CA hasn't YET said no handguns ever...they are just making it enormously more difficult every year to keep guns on the roster and to keep MFGs interested in selling their guns in CA. From the very very far outside looking in, it looks like CA would be totally ok selling handguns to residents, but in reality they have set standards for handguns so high that nobody wants to sell their product in CA...which is exactly what they really want IMHO.

[miket92]

Also, I'm no lawyer so I don't really 100% understand this....but it seems like the lawsuit was shot down...

http://ia801400.us.archive.org/30/items/gov.uscourts.caed.191444/gov.uscourts.caed.191444.94.0.pdf