Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

The Sheriff of Los Angeles states.."insert trash here"

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • dieselpower
    Banned
    • Jan 2009
    • 11471

    The Sheriff of Los Angeles states.."insert trash here"

    The Sheriff of Los Angeles states:

    Under current law, only handgun purchase and transfer
    records are retained by the Department of Justice
    (DOJ) and entered into the Automated Firearms System
    (AFS). Handgun records are an important tool for law
    enforcement to trace crime guns, identify and disarm
    hundreds of convicted felons, and return stolen
    handguns to their rightful owners
    . BULLLLLLLPOOOOP

    Assembly Bill 1810 would close this loophole in state WHAT LOOPHOLE?
    law by removing existing exceptions that require the
    destruction of long gun sales and transfer records and
    require all firearms, including long guns, are input
    into AFS. This bill would require the preservation of
    records for long guns sold or transferred after July
    1, 2012. Data from the California Department of
    Justice shows that more than half the guns recovered
    from armed and prohibited persons are long guns.
    BULLLLPOOP and why does that require longarm registration even if true?

    This bill would also increase the safety of law
    enforcement by providing better information regarding
    the guns we may face. An officer responding to a call
    or serving a domestic violence warrant could access
    the AFS database and be forewarned of the likelihood
    of encountering both handguns and long guns. Many
    long guns put officers at greater risk because of
    their fire power and ability to shoot through
    protective vests. Moreover, even a poorly aimed
    shotgun could greatly injure a law enforcement officer
    or anyone else.

    I can not beleive someone is so stupid as to think a criminal will have a longarm registered inorder to warn LEO before they arrive, OR that an LEO will feel safer seeing no guns are regisitered at an address. CROCK-O-BULLLPOOP flowing out of this officer.

    I was looking up the current bills and came across this added to AB1810 on 6/28/2010.
  • #2
    Wherryj
    I need a LIFE!!
    • Mar 2010
    • 11085

    Originally posted by dieselpower
    The Sheriff of Los Angeles states:

    Under current law, only handgun purchase and transfer
    records are retained by the Department of Justice
    (DOJ) and entered into the Automated Firearms System
    (AFS). Handgun records are an important tool for law
    enforcement to trace crime guns, identify and disarm
    hundreds of convicted felons, and return stolen
    handguns to their rightful owners
    . BULLLLLLLPOOOOP

    Assembly Bill 1810 would close this loophole in state WHAT LOOPHOLE?
    law by removing existing exceptions that require the
    destruction of long gun sales and transfer records and
    require all firearms, including long guns, are input
    into AFS. This bill would require the preservation of
    records for long guns sold or transferred after July
    1, 2012. Data from the California Department of
    Justice shows that more than half the guns recovered
    from armed and prohibited persons are long guns.
    BULLLLPOOP and why does that require longarm registration even if true?

    This bill would also increase the safety of law
    enforcement by providing better information regarding
    the guns we may face. An officer responding to a call
    or serving a domestic violence warrant could access
    the AFS database and be forewarned of the likelihood
    of encountering both handguns and long guns. Many
    long guns put officers at greater risk because of
    their fire power and ability to shoot through
    protective vests. Moreover, even a poorly aimed
    shotgun could greatly injure a law enforcement officer
    or anyone else.

    I can not beleive someone is so stupid as to think a criminal will have a longarm registered inorder to warn LEO before they arrive, OR that an LEO will feel safer seeing no guns are regisitered at an address. CROCK-O-BULLLPOOP flowing out of this officer.

    I was looking up the current bills and came across this added to AB1810 on 6/28/2010.
    http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/po...B&author=feuer
    I tend to agree with you. I doubt that there are many LEOs dumb enough to let their guard down on ANY sort of call. Just because the home doesn't list a registered firearm doesn't mean that there isn't an illegal firearm (or perhaps one sold before Jan 2014).

    I would believe that the firearm of most danger to the LEO would be the illegal sort...Those who follow gun laws are more likely to follow other laws (like don't kill Police officers) than those who break gun laws.
    "What is a moderate interpretation of the text? Halfway between what it really means and what you'd like it to mean?"
    -Antonin Scalia, Supreme Court Justice
    "Know guns, know peace, know safety. No guns, no peace, no safety.
    I like my guns like the left likes their voters-"undocumented".

    Comment

    • #3
      Untamed1972
      I need a LIFE!!
      • Mar 2009
      • 17579

      If registration was such an amazing crime fighting, crime solving tool then why haven't many other states adopted it? Can CA show that they have a significantly higher rate of solving gun crimes then states w/o registration? If not then I think they might miss the mark on the strict scutiny of showing a narrowly taylored infringement to meet a compelling state interest.
      "Freedom begins with an act of defiance"

      Quote for the day:
      "..the mind is the weapon and the hand only its extention. Discipline your mind!" Master Hao, Chenrezi monastery, Valley of the Sun

      Comment

      • #4
        Brianguy
        Veteran Member
        • Sep 2009
        • 3836

        Time to stock up

        Comment

        Working...
        UA-8071174-1