CGF Lawsuit: OOIDA v. Lindley - AB-962 Unconstitutional

[hoffmang]

I hope those who coined the term Ring of Fire now understand what happens when you throw gasoline on a fuming teenager.

Damn straight! Payback is a *****.

And yeah, I know the filters will catch that, but it needs to be said.

-Gene

[Window_Seat]

I hope those who coined the term Ring of Fire now understand what happens when you throw gasoline on a fuming teenager.

This one is worthy of a sig line, but I don't have enough room in mine, (I don't think), can I try, or maybe someone else can?

Erik.

[Shotgun Man]

nope. common misconception though.

How come the State Ammunition lawsuit talks so much about bullets, clips, etc.? Is he challenging existing law as well as AB 962?

[ke6guj]

How come the State Ammunition lawsuit talks so much about bullets, clips, etc.? Is he challenging existing law as well as AB 962?

OK, yes, components are part of AB962, but not part of the mail-order ban portion of 962. The handgun ammo mail-order ban, 12318, uses a defintion of handgun ammo that does not not include components.

the portion of AB962 that includes components is this.

12316 (b) (1) No person prohibited from owning or possessing a firearmunder Section 12021 or 12021.1 of this code or Section 8100 or 8103
of the Welfare and Institutions Code shall own, possess, or have
under his or her custody or control, any ammunition or reloaded
ammunition.
(2) For purposes of this subdivision, "ammunition" shall include,
but not be limited to, any bullet, cartridge, magazine, clip, speed
loader, autoloader, or projectile capable of being fired from a
firearm with a deadly consequence. "Ammunition" does not include
blanks.

and this;

12317. (a) Any person, corporation, or firm who supplies,
delivers, sells, or gives possession or control of, any ammunition to
any person who he or she knows or using reasonable care should know
is prohibited from owning, possessing, or having under his or her
custody or control, any ammunition or reloaded ammunition pursuant to
paragraph (1) or (4) of subdivision (b) of Section 12316, is guilty
of a misdemeanor, punishable by imprisonment in a county jail not
exceeding one year, or a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars
($1,000), or by both that fine and imprisonment.

(c) For purposes of this section, "ammunition" shall include, but
not be limited to, any bullet, cartridge, magazine, clip, speed
loader, autoloader, or projectile capable of being fired from a
firearm with deadly consequence. "Ammunition" does not include
blanks.

those definitions of "ammunition" that include componentsonly apply to those specific sections of AB962.

They do not apply to the sequestiziation of handgun ammo that is effect now, nor does it it apply to the parts of AB962 that go into effect next year ( the mail-order ban and the logging of FTF sales).



What State Ammo is doing is showing that there are confusing definitions of ammo in AB962.

[hill billy]

Right on! With regard to Bill's statement on the first occasionally a gang bang is what people want to see. Lord knows I do.

[hoffmang]

How come the State Ammunition lawsuit talks so much about bullets, clips, etc.? Is he challenging existing law as well as AB 962?

Even some attorneys don't understand it as well as Librarian. Counsel in State Ammo and I have been playing phone tag on the issue.

-Gene

[Citadelonline]

A question for legal counsel:
I'm extremely grateful this action was brought to challenge AB 962 and for the participating plaintiffs, but where are the big manufacturers like Winchester, Remington and Federal? For that matter where are the small ammo makers? Shouldn't they all be part of this? Seems to me if an entire state was preparing to essentially boycott my product I'd want to be on board.

[wildhawker]

If the manufacturers and distributors donated 5% of what we'll be opening up for them over the next decade, we'd be in very good shape.

[+etco2]

I'm pretty new here and want to become Calguns literate. Can someone provide context for the "ring of fire" and "gasoline/fuming teenager" comments. Thanks

[dantodd]

I'm pretty new here and want to become Calguns literate. Can someone provide context for the "ring of fire" and "gasoline/fuming teenager" comments. Thanks

Can't help with the teenager reference but "ring of fire" you can read about here.

Jason Davis (one of the good attorneys who support CalGunners and advertises and posts on this forum) is from one of the Ring of Fire families and includes a "ring of fire" in his law office's logo.

[jdberger]

I'm pretty new here and want to become Calguns literate. Can someone provide context for the "ring of fire" and "gasoline/fuming teenager" comments. Thanks

The "Ring of Fire" was a term coined by the Antis in the '90s to describe a number of gun manufacturers who were making inexpensive semi-automatic pistols. These guns went my the manufacture names of Raven, Jennings, Phoenix Arms, Bryco, Davis, etc.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/guns/ring/hazard.html

These guns were inexpensive by design. They weren't designed for high volume shooting or competition. They were designed to provide an affordable product to people who couldn't spend $700 on a Colt.

Since they were inexpensive they ended up in economically disadvantaged neighborhoods which had a higher per-capita incidence of violent crime. The Antis claimed that the "Ring of Fire" companies were deliberately marketing to criminals.

To combat the acquisition of guns by poor (and colored) people, the Antis devised the "Safe Handgun Roster". The idea was that the inexpensive guns wouldn't pass the stringent "safety" tests. Only expensive guns would be available for purchase.

The Antis also sponsored a ton of litigation against the "Ring of Fire" companies. The lawsuits claimed that Davis, et al. was responsible for crimes committed with their guns. They also claimed that the guns were "unsafe". The expense of the litigation was so onerous that it essentially ran most of them out of business.

I'll leave the gasoline/fuming teenager explanation to someone else as I don't know if I have permission to relate the story.

[huck]

If the manufacturers and distributors donated 5% of what we'll be opening up for them over the next decade, we'd be in very good shape.

I think those manufacturers tend to fund the NRA and leave it at that.

[+etco2]

Thanks for the answers. I can't wait to hear the rest.... maybe?????

[Charlie50]

Thanks

Thank you for helping to support gun owners in California. It is sometimes a little depressing for some life-time residents of this state. We've gone so far down this quagmire of a road that its hard to believe - time to get the wheels out of the muddy ruts, get some traction and move forward. Thanks again Calgun contributors! To those of you lurking about, donate some money.

[GuyW]

Can't help with the teenager reference but "ring of fire" you can read about here.

Jason Davis (one of the good attorneys who support CalGunners and advertises and posts on this forum) is from one of the Ring of Fire families and includes a "ring of fire" in his law office's logo.

LOL! somehow I missed this linkage....very kool...

.