SB 1366 (DeSaulnier) 2012: report stolen firearms 48 hours

[adampolo13]

[QUOTE=greg36f;8623515]
Sometimes I read these threads and I see; "the sky is falling", "they are out to get us" QUOTE]

I have to say that from my perspective "the sky is falling" mentality that you claim we have in these threads is out of touch with reality, is false.

It is called incramentalism or death by a thousand cuts. The goal is to get people accustomed to Civil Rights control (I am no longer refering to it as gun control) a little at a time. We accept this bill because it's "not so bad" or "I can understand their point" and we gave up just a little more ground.

This is not just a 2A issue, there is a 4A issue in this Country as well. How many people get stopped by Boarder Patrol everyday, asked for papers, undergone searches.

Laws like these repressent the governements attempt to control everything we do. The framework for the U.S. Government is the Constitution, which was intended to LIMIT the governments power. The only thing the government is suppose to do is protrect my natural rights as a human being. Life, Liberty, Property.

Most of the time when laws are written, the people assign the governement more power. OPPOSITE of the Constitution!!!! At this point, we have so many freaking Laws in this Country we don't need any more. Lets enforce the ones we have, and get rid of the ones we dont need. The more power the government has, the more currurpt it becomes. Just look at the TSA... Massive powers given following 9/11 to "protect" USA from Terrorist. What has happened? Now my wife gets padded down to the point of humiliation. I call B.S. on the Government.

Sorry, I'm rambling here. But my point is we don't need more laws that dictate we do or don't do things. As long as my actions don't violate some one elses natural rights leave me the FU** alone!

[rogervzv]

Completely wrong headed and an affront to gun owners in California. We know the purpose of this is to make it more of a legal hazard to own firearms than it already is. DeSaulnier can shove it. For all the civility, that gun owners continually muster in our state, everyone should be hot about this one.

+1 ... exactly right. The idea here is to keep making the ownership of a firearm a bigger liability to the owner. Well, you people keep electing these Democrats.

[Subotai]

So we can be sued for all crimes committed with our stolen firearms, even if we report them stolen?

[adampolo13]

So we can be sued for all crimes committed with our stolen firearms, even if we report them stolen?

A person can be sued at any time for almost anything....

[Jason P]

wait so i could go to jail for 6 months for not telling a LEA my guns were stolen? so if they dont find them in 48 hours can i fine them?

Yes, but they are not going to pay you.

[Wherryj]

Do I hear a second for a PART TIME LEGISLATURE????

But on a sidenote if any of my firearms gets stolen I will definatly be filling out a police report. To me this is a law looking for a problem to fix. Not a problem that we "need" to fix with another crappy feel good do nothing law!

So long as part time means NO TIME.

[Wherryj]

A person can be sued at any time for almost anything....

Yes, but law suits cost money and most lawyers don't want to waste their time on a case with little or no chance of success. It wastes their time and money.

That's probably why you don't see many cases where someone gets sued for having their gun/car/hair dryer stolen and used in a crime.

[Wherryj]

Not surprising, coming from you, but I'll bite:

1. Many people have large gun collections. They don't do inventories daily, either. Reasonably should have known opens a path for prosecution/persecution (because this is what gun laws usually amount to, especially in CA). As with most laws open to interpretation, you may still win, but it'll cost you a lot of money to defend yourself, with no recourse against the government employee, who decided to prosecute you under this law.

2. Same thing as above, but sans large collections. This opens another avenue to prosecute a gun owner, who committed no crime. Basically, it creates another crime out of thin air. We have enough madeup crimes as it is.

3. This opens an avenue to prosecute a victim of the crime, based on him being a gun owner. You don't get prosecuted for failing to report your car stolen (I hope so, anyway). You don't get prosecuted for having your knife stolen, and not having reported it.

4. As for helping the police, I don't think so. Most people would report their guns (or most other valuable property) stolen as soon as they discover it. So this law doesn't really add anything to it, other than opening an avenue for persecuting gun owners. Moreover, it may make some people not report such theft, if the guns weren't registered (a lot of people legally have unregistered guns, including the long guns that never went through an FFL (which is still a form of registration)), and they discovered their disappearance after 48 hrs. Why risk potential prosecution (and before you object, are you going to claim that people never get arrested for having perfectly legal OLLs, for example, or for not breaking other such laws?), and potentially spend tens of thousands of dollars for the potential return (and that's not a certainty, especially given the reluctance of a lot of PDs to return firearms in general, added to the likelihood of that gun being found, which isn't that great, and added to the fact that if it was ever used in a crime, it'll be in the evidence room for years anyway) of a gun worth a few hundred dollars? So this law isn't likely to improve on much, even taking its claimed purpose at face value, and it can also work against the claimed purpose.

5. As was pointed out before, it does look like slippery slope towards European-style storage requirements. Once again, before you claim that governments don't operate that way, and we can trust the government (which is what your arguments usually amount to), you'd have to explain how we went from NFA to the current state of gun laws.

This is why, if this law passes, I intend to file DAILY reports that I have "reason" to believe that my firearms were stolen. After all, you never know WHEN they MIGHT have been. No reason to take the risk of being charged.

[TimRB]

Do I not report it at all because I've missed the deadline and filling out a report now would be self-incriminating?

Now that's an interesting observation. This law would seem to be literally unenforcable, using the same reasoning that felons cannot be required to register firearms since they are not supposed to have them in the first place, thus making registration an admission of a crime.

Tim

[readysetgo]

Email Governor Brown to veto the bill.

http://gov.ca.gov/m_contact.php

My message to the Governor:
Please veto this bill. Making criminals out of victims of theft is unreasonable. Thank you.

I'm sure he'll respect my wishes!

[Mg911guy]

Sent Moonbeam an email also!

[Mesa Tactical]

If you get your gun stolen, you have to report it within 48 hours. That releases you from liability and helps the police catch crooks.

For those of you on vacation, it even adds "reasonably knows" and "with exceptions".

Other than angering the NO ONE tells me what to do (even if it's the most reasonable thing in the world) crowd, I fail to see what is wrong with this?

If someone stole one of your screwdrivers, how many months would go by before you realized it? Isn't a good thing there is no legal requirement to report stolen screwdrivers within an absurdly short timeframe?

[Schlyme]

Wrote my letter just now. I think it's the third one on this bill I've written lol

[rogervzv]

The worst part of this wretched totalitarianist bill is that it requires you to report a firearm stolen within 48 hours of when "you should have known...." Who gets to determine that? Big Brother, of course. And forget about prosecutors exercising reasonable discretion here. They are looking for convictions, not justice.

[Subotai]

Yes, Officer, yes, 47 hours ago, I'm sure of it.