2024 Gonzalez SB-1253 FSC for POSSESSION not ACQUISITION

[Preston-CLB]

I'm unsure about the Roe v Wade angle, but it's certainly possible. I would agree that SB2 was revenge for Bruen.

In terms of this bill, the 11% excise tax, and SB 1160, I think they are also a way around Bruen, but also a way to extract more money from Californians given the huge budget deficit. SB 1160 does say that the revenue will be used solely for admin of the bill, but we all know that's a crock of BS--they'll find a way to divert funds elsewhere. CA has been 'tax and spend' since God was a young man, and that's unlikely to change.
-P

[AlmostHeaven]

I'm unsure about the Roe v Wade angle, but it's certainly possible. I would agree that SB2 was revenge for Bruen.

In terms of this bill, the 11% excise tax, and SB 1160, I think they are also a way around Bruen, but also a way to extract more money from Californians given the huge budget deficit. SB 1160 does say that the revenue will be used solely for admin of the bill, but we all know that's a crock of BS--they'll find a way to divert funds elsewhere. CA has been 'tax and spend' since God was a young man, and that's unlikely to change.
-P

I agree. So-called abortion rights, LGBTQ+ rights, and immigration rights remain as robust as ever in California. Every session, the legislature further elevates these left-wing priorities. Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization allowed Republican-controlled states to roll back abortion legality, but people living in liberal states have only seen access expanded.

The extreme increase in tyranny, with concealed carry restrictions, excise taxes, safe storage requirements, FSC mandates, and annual registration fees, comes in response to the one area where progressives have been restrained by the Supreme Court.

[Silence Dogood]

Sam Paredes sounded good this morning. It only got one ?no? vote though.

https://www.senate.ca.gov/media-live-event/21641?format=video

[AlmostHeaven]

If the annual registration bill ends up failing, Democrats will certainly ram through the less-extreme, albeit certainly still unconstitutional, legislation such as SB 1253.

[TruOil]

The bill has passed out of committee and is awaiting the next steps. No surprises.

[AlmostHeaven]

The bill has passed out of committee and is awaiting the next steps. No surprises.

Although certainly unconstitutional, at least the impact of this specific bill should remain limited. Correct my understanding if necessary, but I believe anyone who has lawfully purchased a firearm in California within the past five years must possess a valid FSC.

[natman]

Although certainly unconstitutional, at least the impact of this specific bill should remain limited. Correct my understanding if necessary, but I believe anyone who has lawfully purchased a firearm in California within the past five years must possess a valid FSC.

There is an exception if you have a current hunting license. That's how I bought my last rifle. And this law requires an FSC to own a firearm, so if you have all the firearms you need (yes, it can happen!), you still have to get a license.

[splithoof]

The bill has passed out of committee and is awaiting the next steps. No surprises.

[AlmostHeaven]

There is an exception if you have a current hunting license. That's how I bought my last rifle. And this law requires an FSC to own a firearm, so if you have all the firearms you need (yes, it can happen!), you still have to get a license.

I see. Another year brings another new onerous restriction on the right to keep and bear arms.

[TruOil]

Although certainly unconstitutional, at least the impact of this specific bill should remain limited. Correct my understanding if necessary, but I believe anyone who has lawfully purchased a firearm in California within the past five years must possess a valid FSC.

Without a hunting license, yes, but this law means that you need to renew every five years even if you do not plan another purchase simply n order to keep your firearms. I suspect that MILLIONS of California gun owners who have all the guns they want or need (i.e. one or two) will be oblivious to this new law when/if it passes. My son would be one of those, since he has never purchased a firearm (thanks Dad!), and since he has a handgun or two, a shotgun, and a rifle, he is not buyer at present.

[AlmostHeaven]

Without a hunting license, yes, but this law means that you need to renew every five years even if you do not plan another purchase simply n order to keep your firearms. I suspect that MILLIONS of California gun owners who have all the guns they want or need (i.e. one or two) will be oblivious to this new law when/if it passes. My son would be one of those, since he has never purchased a firearm (thanks Dad!), and since he has a handgun or two, a shotgun, and a rifle, he is not buyer at present.

I stand corrected. As an enthusiast who trades or buys a new firearm at least twice per year, I forgot about the millions of people who own small gun collections and harbor no intentions to acquire more.

[Sam .223]

So this means my kids couldn't go shoot unless they have an FSC, even though they don't own the firearms? This is a ridicules law. I have a CCW so it doesn't effect me but my wife and kids are going to need these stupid "cards" just to shoot.

[AlmostHeaven]

So this means my kids couldn't go shoot unless they have an FSC, even though they don't own the firearms? This is a ridicules law. I have a CCW so it doesn't effect me but my wife and kids are going to need these stupid "cards" just to shoot.

Rendering the fundamental right to keep and bear arms as difficult and onerous to exercise as possible forms the entire basis of left-wing politicians' strategy to kill gun culture in America over the long-term.

[boltstop]

I stand corrected. As an enthusiast who trades or buys a new firearm at least twice per year, I forgot about the millions of people who own small gun collections and harbor no intentions to acquire more.

These same people probably don't store their firearms in rostered containers either so they will be guilty of 2 firearms related "crimes". If ever caught, they will almost certainly have their firearms confiscated, be prosecuted and thereafter be prohibited persons. Lovely. Won't prevent a single crime but hey! these clowns don't care about crime.

[AlmostHeaven]

These same people probably don't store their firearms in rostered containers either so they will be guilty of 2 firearms related "crimes". If ever caught, they will almost certainly have their firearms confiscated, be prosecuted and thereafter be prohibited persons. Lovely. Won't prevent a single crime but hey! these clowns don't care about crime.

Civilian disarmament proponents wish to monopolize the capability to project deadly force into an all-encompassing omnipotent unitary government. All the claimed justifications serve as nothing but excuses for advancing the ideological agenda, which explains why new legislation appears out of thin air after every exploitable tragedy before the bodies get cold.