California Gun Owners Could Use Your Help Against SB249


PDA






Capybara
June 28, 2012, 05:28 PM
I originally posted this on the legal board and was directed that this would make more sense here on the activism board.

Senator Leland Yee, of San Francisco (I know, big surprise) has authored a horrible and misleading bill, SB249, that may end up with all AKs and ARs being declared illegal in California. The language of the bill is evolving at the moment and is deliberately vague and unclear so as to make the interpretation of the law confusing for LEOs and citizens. We already have bullet buttons and have survived the past few years with them, even though they are a compromise. Senator Yee only recently even became aware of what a BB is, then after hearing a news story about Mag Magnets, decided in his infinite wisdom and dominion over us stupid citizens that all AWs must go, no discussion, no negotiation. His viewpoint is very totalitarian, kind of surprising for a self-confessed liberal. It is interesting that he is a Chinese immigrant, he must obviously be used to totalitarian government edicts.

You may ask yourself, "I live in a free state, California is a lost cause, why should I care or help?" This is way beyond a gun issue, this is a civil rights issue. We must defeat this badly written exercise in publicity grabbing. Please go to http://stopsb249.org/sb-249-faq/ and help us to defeat this by signing the petition and posting this on your Facebook, there are links on the site.

Trying to get the word out on this and could use THR's help. If you disagree or do not want to help, fine, but anyone can quickly fill out the petition and anyone can quickly post it on their Facebook using the links on the StopSB249 website. Besides being a brilliant argument for term limits, this bill is everything that is bad about California politics, it was poorly authored by an out of touch politician, based upon his own
misinformation and mistaken perceptions of what the law already covers. Even if it is defeated, it sets a dangerous precedent for a state that really doesn't want it's citizens to keep and bear arms.

Thanks for any help. We really are on the front lines here and support from our fellow shooters in free states would mean a lot.

If you enjoyed reading about "California Gun Owners Could Use Your Help Against SB249" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
poolingmyignorance
June 29, 2012, 01:54 AM
Signed, and Shared. I hope it helps. And to all those that say "it's not worth it" Remember that when your rights are under attack. The Second Amendment sees no state lines. Heres one sig from Texas for ya.

Capybara
June 29, 2012, 01:09 PM
Thanks pool! That is very decent of you and I like that you see that this is only a California issue today. Attacking our rights knows no boundaries.

Demitrios
June 29, 2012, 01:29 PM
I live across the country in NJ and I signed it. I hope I'm not the only out of stater doing his part to try and help.

Sam1911
June 29, 2012, 01:30 PM
From the Activism Forum Sticky:

How this forum works (emphasis on WORK). READ THIS BEFORE POSTING!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This forum is dedicated to activism to promote the RKBA.

It is the place to share with others the actions you have taken on behalf of RKBA or to propose actions on behalf of RKBA.


actions taken or proposed on behalf of RKBA means that your post must describe an action taken or propose a plan of action on behalf of RKBA or it will be deleted.
...

Activism is about what you've actually done or what you propose we all practically do to affect change on behalf of RKBA so that others can follow your lead. It is not for FYI posts or negative comments or absurd hair shirt posturing.

...

This is not the place to debate ideas. This the place to outline action to be taken.

This is not the place to use RKBA as the excuse to promote a broader social or political agenda. STAY FOCUSED!

This is where we present practical effective actions we actually have carried out or action we want to carry out to make change happen.

There will be absolutely no arguments or comments about whether a given course of action is a good one. Such arguments always occur, about every single idea, and then no course of action is taken. This is the place to co-ordinate, not to talk somebody else out of doing anything.

If you cop a defeatist attitude in this forum, weíll boot you. We donít have time for crying.

Capybara
June 29, 2012, 03:38 PM
Thanks Demitrios. Pooling up above also helped and hopefully others are helping too and just not posting about it. Every signature helps and spreading awareness helps as well.

I know that you can tell us about how bad the gun laws are in your state, I watched that animation video on YouTube about the logic of the laws in your state, I think it may be even worse that my state and that's saying a lot.

Thanks!

RedTag
June 29, 2012, 04:10 PM
Signed! I hope this helps!!

Capybara
June 29, 2012, 05:24 PM
Thanks RedTag. Every signature, every person who tells another, posts the StopSB249 link to their Facebook, etc. it all helps.

Even though some don't think it, if you are shooter, we are all in this together.

bergmen
June 29, 2012, 06:12 PM
Signed. I don't do Facebook or Twitter.

Dan

RBid
June 29, 2012, 07:50 PM
I will sign and share this when I get home from work.

- from Oregon

hso
June 29, 2012, 08:22 PM
I'm in.

I've been in California twice this year for business and will probably be back again before the year is out. Such legislation not only impacts our members in California, my friends in California, but also provides encouragement for the Antis across the country.

Capybara
June 29, 2012, 09:23 PM
You guys are all awesome, thank you!

The petition only has 5155 signatures, we need 10,000 more so spread the word. It is our fervent hope that this bill will go down in flames but even if it does, it will just the latest attack by the antis.

I, for one, will be glad to sign any petitions or bills that come up in other states. If they are anti-gun or anti RKBA, count me in on the fight.

danez71
June 29, 2012, 09:29 PM
I'm in.


As a former CA native for 35ish yrs ... that moved to AZ and will be moving back to CA sometime this year... I cant wait to start voting in CA but not eager to be unfairly restricted.

Capybara
June 29, 2012, 10:13 PM
The company I work for has an office in Scottsdale. All I can say is you are going to really miss the firearms freedom of AZ here.

Snag
June 30, 2012, 01:06 AM
Signed.

RBid
June 30, 2012, 02:27 AM
Signed and shared, as promised.

EBShooting
June 30, 2012, 12:25 PM
+1 from SoCal for ya

Capybara
June 30, 2012, 12:27 PM
Thanks to everyone who has signed the petition and who can help in other ways. I am here at the Oak Tree Gun Club today, taking a class. I sure hope that I will be able to keep shooting my ARs here at this time next year. We must defeat this insanity and the antis who want us to be compliant little droids like Senator Yee.

Redlegvzv
June 30, 2012, 12:36 PM
Fellow HighRoaders, please sign this petition. We here in Socialist California are under constant attack by the Brady types. This Yee character is bad news and this SB249 needs to get defeated.

Fred_G
June 30, 2012, 02:03 PM
Signed. I have a friend in CA, you folks over there sure don't need any more gun laws.

whalerman
June 30, 2012, 03:21 PM
I'm seeing if you agree with this, you can post. So everyone agrees. Nice. I'm guessing the trick is to pick a effort the Mods agree with. That should be a criteria for posting.

bikerdoc
June 30, 2012, 08:34 PM
I signed.

Ngative stuff never got much done.

CABob
June 30, 2012, 08:47 PM
Signed, shared. I live in Ca. It's a mess.

BullfrogKen
June 30, 2012, 09:25 PM
Signed.


Keep fighting out there.

ArcherandShooter
July 1, 2012, 12:07 AM
Signed. Get us an update when you have more news, and hang in there. In know it's gotta be tough some days.

jdberger
July 1, 2012, 12:12 AM
Thanks to all of you who took the time to sign the petition.

As y'all probably know - when it comes to gun control, bad ideas start in California. The "Assault Weapon Ban" started in California. The idea to ban "Saturday Night Specials" started in California. Safe Storage laws, lost & stolen reporting, "cooling off periods" - all started in California.

State Senator Leland Yee used up valuable political capital to launch this bill. Stopping it damages him. It demonstrates that those who take up the banner of gun control will have to pay a political price to do so. It will demonstrate that gun control is political poison.

But we still need the help of the rest of you.

There are more than 200 million gun owners in the US. There isn't another constituency with as much potential political power. We simply need to exercise it.

By signing this petition, you exercise some of that power.

Please help.

Thank you.

Josh Berger
Director - The Calguns Foundation

Frank Ettin
July 1, 2012, 12:19 AM
Signed.

And hello, Josh. I didn't know you visited over here. Good to see you.

jdberger
July 1, 2012, 12:37 AM
Not that often. But this was a great reason to see if my password still worked. :D

Did you see that we finally got a gunshop plaintiff?

Frank Ettin
July 1, 2012, 12:44 AM
Did you see that we finally got a gunshop plaintiff? Saw that. I know John from the days he owned the Castro Valley shop. I guess Steve is Ron Nobriga's son? Never met him, but I knew Ron.

Let me know if I can help.

zxcvbob
July 1, 2012, 12:47 AM
I'm not sure an out-of-state signature will help, but it can't hurt. Signed.

JSolie
July 1, 2012, 01:52 AM
Keep up the momentum! Tuesday July 3 is the date that this bill (and some other bad firearms legislation) is being heard by the Assembly Public Safety Committee.

Race Bannon
July 1, 2012, 05:09 AM
Signed.

Caliper_RWVA
July 1, 2012, 09:54 AM
Signed, hope it makes a difference for a Michigander to add their name to the list.

My experience is that even legislators within Mi don't care what you think unless you live in THEIR district.

grampster
July 2, 2012, 10:28 AM
Another Michigander helping out. Good luck.

CharlieDeltaJuliet
July 2, 2012, 10:36 AM
Signed and shared... Good luck

ArfinGreebly
July 2, 2012, 01:38 PM
See new post up at the Noisy Room (http://noisyroom.net/blog/2012/07/02/california-senate-bill-249-making-citizens-into-criminals/) blog. Readership is > 3 million hits / month.

Petition signed and flares fired off.

Comments and links to that post are also invited.

Quiet
July 5, 2012, 04:18 AM
https://sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn1/534807_10151903288905038_65436807_n.jpg

tomrkba
July 5, 2012, 09:05 AM
I was under the impression that civil rights are different than inalienable rights. Civil rights are granted by government and may be violated if the established procedures are followed. There is no right to keep and bear arms in the California constitution. Therefore, the conditions under which California citizens and illegal aliens may keep and bear arms are subject to the whims of politicians. You will never win this politically and it will never end. Get out and move to a state that is not failing.

Quiet
July 5, 2012, 11:12 AM
Get out and move to a state that is not failing.

If the pro-gun community gives up on CA, then it is setting itself up for failure down the road.

CA has the most Congressmen in the Union and makes up approximately 12% of the House of Representatives and their job is to make FEDERAL LAWS, which effect all of the USA.

Instead of giving up and advocating others to flee from fighting for something they believe in, why not support those struggling to make a difference?

zxcvbob
July 5, 2012, 12:28 PM
The page says 764 signatures. What happened to the >5000 that were there a couple of days ago?

apachejack
July 5, 2012, 12:35 PM
Signed and I hope it does some good. It's an endless battle to keep the constitution safe from the idiot politicians.

JSolie
July 5, 2012, 09:38 PM
The page says 764 signatures. What happened to the >5000 that were there a couple of days ago?

If it's the one on the main page, that one is for those who have signed to tell the Assembly Committee on Appropriations "No!" If you're looking for the main petition, it's here (https://www.change.org/petitions/stop-sb-249) and is up to 8,350 as I type this.

Hope this helps, and Thank You to those who have helped. This one's not over yet, and I, for one, really do appreciate your help.

Scott Farkus
July 5, 2012, 09:51 PM
As much as I'd like to help your cause, I'm not sure I understand exactly what this petition does for you. I'm in Texas - I can't imagine my signature would count for squat on anything having to do with a proposed California state law. Is it just a symbolic show of support? That's fine if it is, I just want to make sure I'm not missing anything.

hso
July 6, 2012, 11:58 AM
I travel to California for work and if this bill goes through there won't be any range time for me with my friends and colleagues who have already gone through the draconian rules in California.

California has a lot of influence outside the state. Their Congresscritters have influence on the national level and they use their representation of the people of California as the justification for much of what they do. Block the trend to ever more restrictive firearms laws in California and you remove the foundation upon which other states emulate them and upon which their national level politicians justify their Anti stance.

bromdenlong
July 6, 2012, 05:54 PM
Petition signed, email to assembly committee sent, shared on Facebook 3 times. Thanks to everyone else for participating. Living in CA is so frustrating sometimes.

Capybara
August 2, 2012, 12:52 PM
Thought I would update this thread. Senator Yee has amended SB249 again. In this upcoming revision, the language has been modified to include the bullet button so that any BB'd AR or AK will be banned in California next year. Next, they will undoubtedly go after featureless.

After Aurora, I am sure that even those of you who live in free states are starting to get the idea that we, as gun owners, nationally, will stand or fall together. The proposed 10 round magazine law, the screams for renewal of the national AW ban, we must stand together and defeat this madness.

If we lose ARs and AKs in California, it is only a matter of time before your rights will be attacked in your states.

www.stopsb249.org to see how you can help us.

TT
August 2, 2012, 02:13 PM
I donít think you are doing your side any favors by telling Red Staters that what happens in California is a harbinger for them. Californiaís leftist electorate has been electing gun-haters and supporting anti-gun legislation for decades and there is no evidence that Red States are following their lead, or that California has enough political muscle to force anything through at the Federal level.

Capybara
August 4, 2012, 01:20 PM
So even though there is a major high level push on renewing the national AWB, banning hi cap mags and the new national Internet ammunition restrictions that was just proposed, life for shooters in the free states is just going to continue on its merry way?

Don't you read all of the firearms boards, American Rifleman and the national press, these things are going to affect you. We are the front lines where all of this B.S. begins. California has some of the most strict gun laws in the nation and is seen as the leader in the "fight" by anti-gunners. Sure, red states have a stronger legislative base to fight from but there are plenty of anti-gunners in red states too and they are in this fight.

I am obviously not going to convince you to change your mind but perhaps if you look into the stuff that is coming down from Washington, you will gain some awareness that your rights are in jeopardy and that we, in California, are the front lines of the fight. Things can and will be changing for firearms owners nationally, it won't matter which state you live in so you can ignore it and hope it doesn't affect you or be proactive and do something about it.

tomrkba
August 4, 2012, 01:50 PM
As I stated before, Californians have the right to keep (not bear*) arms only at the will of their legislature. There will be no bans in my state because our constitution has the right to keep and bear arms. Federal regulation is based on the commerce clause and is being used to override the Second Amendment. This shall not continue and the SAF is in the process of challenging the commerce clause's supremacy over amendments.

Fix your constitution and your problem goes away. Fight this battle, but you should spend more time on an amendment.

* The open carry ban should be all the proof you need.

Capybara
August 4, 2012, 05:45 PM
I agree, I would love to fix our state constitution but gun owners have very miniscule political power and advertising budgets in this state.

Coming to an ammo vendor that you use soon. http://www.nraila.org/legislation/federal-legislation/2012/anti-gun-lawmakers-push-ammunition-sales-ban.aspx

States rights won't matter much if the antis cut off affordable, convenient ammo supplies. A lot people feel that this is the next big anti agenda, they are losing the war against gun control but they may be able to do other things that make shooting too expensive and inconvenient.

No different than acquiring an AOW in California. Perfectly legal, a few people do it. I wanted to do it but the money, time, hassle and hoops I have to go through have made me talk myself out of it. This is the type of "slow death" strategy that many of the more intelligent antis are pushing for, over regulate it, tax the heck out of it, ban it where you can and eventually, generationally, the old geezers like us will die off and the younger generation will not see the value of pursuing the war on guns.

TT
August 5, 2012, 06:25 PM
So even though there is a major high level push on renewing the national AWB, banning hi cap mags and the new national Internet ammunition restrictions that was just proposed, life for shooters in the free states is just going to continue on its merry way?

There arenít too many people who think an AWB or mag ban has any chance at the Federal level, while California has had both for years. Again, Californiaís problems are unique to California. Nothing wrong with asking for help, but donít portray the fight as Californians working to protect the rest of the country- thatís not what it is.

michaelbsc
August 5, 2012, 06:42 PM
...Nothing wrong with asking for help, but donít portray the fight as Californians working to protect the rest of the country- that's not what it is.

I agree that it isn't a case of "Californian's working to save the rest of the country." That particular characterization is skewed.

Having said that, however, We should be mindful that California's zealous regulatory candor has the habit of spreading to other places, and via DC is a particularly vexing vector.

I'm reminded of the "Smoking Settlement" lawsuits some years back when NC fell to giant awards. I believe it was RJ Reynolds's attorney who commented "if you can't win in NC where can you win?" Shortly thereafter the whole industry defense imploded.

Contrarily if California can be wrestled to the ground about 2A rights then that does bode well for the rest of the country. No guarantee mind you. But if they can't restrict California where can they restrict.

MB

hso
August 6, 2012, 09:57 AM
But if they can't restrict California where can they restrict

That's a more accurate approach than "Since they do it here they'll do it to you" when I'm sitting in TN, Como is in Alaska and others are in other states with strong RKBA and weak Anti sentiments.

This is more like keeping the enemy tied up elsewhere on the front so they don't have the strength to fight in your backyard.

Regardless of how you want to view it, helping fight Anti legislation in California is at least enlightened self-interest.

C0untZer0
August 6, 2012, 11:02 AM
If you look at where the most important 2A cases have come from - they've come from the most restrictive states / district:

Washington DC - Heller case
Chicago, IL - McDonald
Chicago, IL - Ezell
Chicago, IL - Moore/Shepard v Madigan

Maybe if it wasn't a national election year the NRA would spend more money in California and Illinois, but I think they have national politics to worry about.

TT
August 6, 2012, 11:39 AM
Contrarily if California can be wrestled to the ground about 2A rights then that does bode well for the rest of the country.

A nice thought, but so far the RKBA fight in California has been a nearly continuous string of losses.

Capybara
August 6, 2012, 11:56 PM
Much more savvy legal minds than mine are posting over on the 2A board on Calguns that if this thing does pass, the recriminations by injunctions and rulings by the SCOTUS could have unintended consequences for the authors of this badly written bill.

I was not trying to portray California shooters as the saviors of the free states at all, but as michaelbsc astutely stated, "We should be mindful that California's zealous regulatory candor has the habit of spreading to other places, and via DC is a particularly vexing vector."

I think that his eloquent choice of words are the thought I was trying to ineffectively convey.

talldragon
August 7, 2012, 12:32 AM
Signed it. It is hard to change things here in Kali.....:rolleyes:

Capybara
August 8, 2012, 06:32 PM
Thanks Talldragon. Please get all of your friends to sign it, post it on your Facebook if you have one, etc. Every little bit helps and even if Yee manages to ram this through, I have been told repeatedly, that it could have huge POSITIVE implications for 2A in California, but it will be a long, court battle with involvement with the 9th and the SCOTUS.

tomrkba
August 8, 2012, 07:20 PM
deleted

Quiet
August 8, 2012, 07:50 PM
On 08-07-2012, SB 249 was amended again.

The newest amended version of SB 249 redefines "detachable magazine" to include those magazines that can be removed from a firearm without disassembling the firearm, this includes those magazines that can be removed with using a tool or tip of a bullet.

Bottom line:
SB 249 now bans the possession of "bullet button" maglock equipped semi-auto pistols, semi-auto rifles and semi-auto shotguns.

If passed SB 249 will go into effect on 07-01-2013.
There will be no "grandfathering" or registering affected firearms as assault weapons, all affected firearms will be subject to confiscation without compensation.
Affected firearms must be transported out-of-state or surrendered to law enforcement prior to 07-01-2013.


As amended, SB249...
Penal Code 30515
(d)(1) For the purposes of this section, "detachable magazine" means any ammunition feeding device that can be removed from the firearm without disassembly of the firearm action. "Detachable magazine" includes, but is not limited to, a magazine that may be detached from the firearm by depressing a button on the firearm either with the finger or by use of a tool or a bullet.
(2) The Attorney General shall adopt those rules and regulations that may be necessary or proper to carry out the purposes and intent of this chapter.
(3) This subdivision shall become operative on July 1, 2013.
__________________

tomrkba
August 9, 2012, 04:24 PM
If passed SB 249 will go into effect on 07-01-2013.
There will be no "grandfathering" or registering affected firearms as assault weapons, all affected firearms will be subject to confiscation without compensation.
Affected firearms must be transported out-of-state or surrendered to law enforcement prior to 07-01-2013.

Is confiscation like this constitutional at all? If so, will gun owners line up to turn them in? Did this happen with other guns in the past?

beerbeer95648
August 9, 2012, 08:37 PM
CA legislators have never cared if something is constitutional. But, when the assault weapons ban first appeared, the state opened up a registration program for residents to register their weapons as RAW's (registered assault weapons). Not the case this time.

Capybara
August 10, 2012, 12:07 AM
Politicians in this state's capital have U.S. Constitution toilet paper in all of the bathrooms.

Quiet
August 10, 2012, 02:08 AM
Riverside County Sheriff Stan Sniff's letter to the CA legislature to oppose SB249.

https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc6/s720x720/269791_487665297928029_11073662_n.jpg
https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc6/246897_487665354594690_1077457297_n.jpg
https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc7/484005_487665454594680_2038425730_n.jpg

Pistola
August 10, 2012, 12:41 PM
I always knew that frisco was rabid anti gun, but this is insane.

These have "detachable magazine", so would my walther ppk, buckmark
and ruger 10/22 be illegal?

michaelbsc
August 10, 2012, 02:40 PM
I always knew that frisco was rabid anti gun, but this is insane.

These have "detachable magazine", so would my walther ppk, buckmark
and ruger 10/22 be illegal?

That's my read. From what I could figure out only revolvers would still be legal.

bergmen
August 10, 2012, 03:06 PM
That's my read. From what I could figure out only revolvers would still be legal.

No, not true. See this thread, very authoritative:

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=605484

Dan

danez71
August 12, 2012, 02:53 AM
This looks like it applies to 'assualt weapons'. Not all guns.

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/11-12/bill/sen/sb_0201-0250/sb_249_bill_20120807_amended_asm_v93.html


'Assaualt weapons' are define by being center fire and have certain 'features'.

The features are defined below.


The bulk of it read as follows:


SB 249, as amended, Yee. Firearms: assault weapon
conversion kits. Assault weapons.
Existing law, with certain exceptions, prohibits the possession of
an assault weapon, as defined, and makes violations subject to
criminal penalties. Existing law defines a firearm as an assault
weapon, in part, based upon whether it has a detachable magazine.

This bill would define "detachable magazine" for this purpose to
mean any ammunition feeding device that can be removed from the
firearm without disassembly of the firearm action, and to include a
magazine that may be detached from the firearm by depressing a button
on the firearm either with the finger or by use of a tool or a
bullet. The bill would declare that these amendments are declaratory
of existing law, would direct the Attorney General to adopt
regulations, and would make these amendments operative July 1, 2013.
By expanding the definition of existing crimes, this bill would
impose a state-mandated local program
.....
.....
.....
....

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. Section 30515 of the Penal
Code is amended to read:
30515. (a) Notwithstanding Section 30510, "assault weapon" also
means any of the following:
(1) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has the capacity to
accept a detachable magazine and any one of the following:
(A) A pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action
of the weapon.
(B) A thumbhole stock.
(C) A folding or telescoping stock.
(D) A grenade launcher or flare launcher.
(E) A flash suppressor.
(F) A forward pistol grip.
(2) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has a fixed magazine
with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds.
(3) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has an overall length
of less than 30 inches.
(4) A semiautomatic pistol that has the capacity to accept a
detachable magazine and any one of the following:
(A) A threaded barrel, capable of accepting a flash suppressor,
forward handgrip, or silencer.
(B) A second handgrip.
(C) A shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely
encircles, the barrel that allows the bearer to fire the weapon
without burning the bearer's hand, except a slide that encloses the
barrel.
(D) The capacity to accept a detachable magazine at some location
outside of the pistol grip.
(5) A semiautomatic pistol with a fixed magazine that has the
capacity to accept more than 10 rounds.
(6) A semiautomatic shotgun that has both of the following:
(A) A folding or telescoping stock.
(B) A pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action
of the weapon, thumbhole stock, or vertical handgrip.
(7) A semiautomatic shotgun that has the ability to accept a
detachable magazine.
(8) Any shotgun with a revolving cylinder.

Librarian
August 12, 2012, 05:12 AM
The operative part of the bill is (d), added to 30515 (d) (1) For the purposes of this section, "detachable magazine"
means any ammunition feeding device that can be removed from the
firearm without disassembly of the firearm action. "Detachable
magazine" includes, but is not limited to, a magazine that may be
detached from the firearm by depressing a button on the firearm
either with the finger or by use of a tool or a bullet.
(2) The Attorney General shall adopt those rules and regulations
that may be necessary or proper to carry out the purposes and intent
of this chapter.
(3) This subdivision shall become operative on July 1, 2013.
The words "this section" refer only to PC 30515 - the fully specified 'name' for 30515 is

Penal Code
.. Part 6
..... Title 4
........ Division 10
........... Chapter 2
.............. Article 1
................. Section 30515

As Penal Code - PEN
PART 6. CONTROL OF DEADLY WEAPONS [16000. - 34370.]
( Part 6 added by Stats. 2010, Ch. 711, Sec. 6. )

TITLE 4. FIREARMS [23500. - 34370.]
( Title 4 added by Stats. 2010, Ch. 711, Sec. 6. )

DIVISION 10. SPECIAL RULES RELATING TO PARTICULAR TYPES OF FIREARMS OR FIREARM EQUIPMENT [30210. - 33690.]
( Division 10 added by Stats. 2010, Ch. 711, Sec. 6. )

CHAPTER 2. Assault Weapons and .50 BMG Rifles [30500. - 31115.]
( Chapter 2 added by Stats. 2010, Ch. 711, Sec. 6. )

ARTICLE 1. General Provisions [30500. - 30530.]
( Article 1 added by Stats. 2010, Ch. 711, Sec. 6. )Not that most folks need to know about the technical organization of California Penal Code ...

(All that "Stats. 2010, Ch. 711, Sec. 6" stuff? In their great wisdom, the Legislature thought re-arranging the Penal Code about 'Dangerous Weapons' would be fun, and so we got new numbers and stuff moved all around, effective Jan 1, 2012.)

Kynoch
August 12, 2012, 07:43 AM
I originally posted this on the legal board and was directed that this would make more sense here on the activism board.

Senator Leland Yee, of San Francisco (I know, big surprise) has authored a horrible and misleading bill, SB249, that may end up with all AKs and ARs being declared illegal in California. The language of the bill is evolving at the moment and is deliberately vague and unclear so as to make the interpretation of the law confusing for LEOs and citizens. We already have bullet buttons and have survived the past few years with them, even though they are a compromise. Senator Yee only recently even became aware of what a BB is, then after hearing a news story about Mag Magnets, decided in his infinite wisdom and dominion over us stupid citizens that all AWs must go, no discussion, no negotiation. His viewpoint is very totalitarian, kind of surprising for a self-confessed liberal. It is interesting that he is a Chinese immigrant, he must obviously be used to totalitarian government edicts.

You may ask yourself, "I live in a free state, California is a lost cause, why should I care or help?" This is way beyond a gun issue, this is a civil rights issue. We must defeat this badly written exercise in publicity grabbing. Please go to http://stopsb249.org/sb-249-faq/ and help us to defeat this by signing the petition and posting this on your Facebook, there are links on the site.

Trying to get the word out on this and could use THR's help. If you disagree or do not want to help, fine, but anyone can quickly fill out the petition and anyone can quickly post it on their Facebook using the links on the StopSB249 website. Besides being a brilliant argument for term limits, this bill is everything that is bad about California politics, it was poorly authored by an out of touch politician, based upon his own
misinformation and mistaken perceptions of what the law already covers. Even if it is defeated, it sets a dangerous precedent for a state that really doesn't want it's citizens to keep and bear arms.

Thanks for any help. We really are on the front lines here and support from our fellow shooters in free states would mean a lot.
He came to the USA with his parents when he was 3. :(

danez71
August 12, 2012, 09:49 AM
The operative part of the bill is (d), added to 30515 The words "this section" refer only to PC 30515 - the fully specified 'name' for 30515 is

Penal Code
.. Part 6
..... Title 4
........ Division 10
........... Chapter 2
.............. Article 1
................. Section 30515

As Not that most folks need to know about the technical organization of California Penal Code ...

(All that "Stats. 2010, Ch. 711, Sec. 6" stuff? In their great wisdom, the Legislature thought re-arranging the Penal Code about 'Dangerous Weapons' would be fun, and so we got new numbers and stuff moved all around, effective Jan 1, 2012.)



Forgive me.....


So are you agreeing with me that this only* applies to 'assualt weapons'?





*only: I say 'only' in the sense that it doesnt affect rimfires and other featureless centerfire guns. Its a terrible law on many levels and I dont mean to use the word 'only' as to trivialize it.

Quiet
August 12, 2012, 11:17 AM
I say 'only' in the sense that it doesnt affect rimfires and other featureless centerfire guns. Its a terrible law on many levels and I dont mean to use the word 'only' as to trivialize it.

It affects:
semi-auto centerfire rifles
semi-auto centerfire & rimfire pistols
semi-auto shotguns

Librarian
August 12, 2012, 04:58 PM
So are you agreeing with me that this only* applies to 'assualt weapons'?
Yes. (which includes certain semi-auto centerfire rifles
semi-auto centerfire & rimfire pistols
semi-auto shotguns)

Kynoch
August 12, 2012, 05:07 PM
There arenít too many people who think an AWB or mag ban has any chance at the Federal level, while California has had both for years. Again, Californiaís problems are unique to California. Nothing wrong with asking for help, but donít portray the fight as Californians working to protect the rest of the country- thatís not what it is.

Hardly. Tell that to IL, NJ, MA, etc. Denial isn't a river...

danez71
August 12, 2012, 09:48 PM
Yes. (which includes certain )


semi-auto centerfire rifles
semi-auto centerfire & rimfire pistols
semi-auto shotguns






I'm not trying to be a stick in the mud. I value your interpretation.


Correct me if I'm wrong, the bill is targeting 'assaul weapons'. Assault weapons are define by:

SECTION 1. Section 30515 of the Penal
Code is amended to read:
30515. (a) Notwithstanding Section 30510, "assault weapon" also
means any of the following:
(1) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has the capacity to
accept a detachable magazine and any one of the following:
(A) A pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action
of the weapon.
(B) A thumbhole stock.
(C) A folding or telescoping stock.
(D) A grenade launcher or flare launcher.
(E) A flash suppressor.
(F) A forward pistol grip.
(2) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has a fixed magazine
with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds.
(3) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has an overall length
of less than 30 inches.
(4) A semiautomatic pistol that has the capacity to accept a
detachable magazine and any one of the following:
(A) A threaded barrel, capable of accepting a flash suppressor,
forward handgrip, or silencer.
(B) A second handgrip.
(C) A shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely
encircles, the barrel that allows the bearer to fire the weapon
without burning the bearer's hand, except a slide that encloses the
barrel.
(D) The capacity to accept a detachable magazine at some location
outside of the pistol grip.
(5) A semiautomatic pistol with a fixed magazine that has the
capacity to accept more than 10 rounds.
(6) A semiautomatic shotgun that has both of the following:
(A) A folding or telescoping stock.
(B) A pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action
of the weapon, thumbhole stock, or vertical handgrip.
(7) A semiautomatic shotgun that has the ability to accept a
detachable magazine.
(8) Any shotgun with a revolving cylinder.


If I'm reading this right, a glock wont be effected because it does not have

(4) A semiautomatic pistol that has the capacity to accept a
detachable magazine and any one of the following:
(A) A threaded barrel, capable of accepting a flash suppressor,
forward handgrip, or silencer.
(B) A second handgrip.
(C) A shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely
encircles, the barrel that allows the bearer to fire the weapon
without burning the bearer's hand, except a slide that encloses the
barrel.


And lets say a plain jane Ruger mini 14 wont be affected as long as it dowsnt have the features' listed
here:

(1) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has the capacity to
accept a detachable magazine and any one of the following:
(A) A pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action
of the weapon.
(B) A thumbhole stock.
(C) A folding or telescoping stock.
(D) A grenade launcher or flare launcher.
(E) A flash suppressor.
(F) A forward pistol grip.
(2) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has a fixed magazine
with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds.
(3) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has an overall length
of less than 30 inches.



And I dont see were rimfire 22lr, say a plain jane Ruger 10/22, would be effected.

Librarian
August 14, 2012, 01:31 AM
The bill is targeting 'assault weapons'. You are reading it correctly.

It's bad enough as it is.

danez71
August 14, 2012, 01:39 AM
The bill is targeting 'assault weapons'. You are reading it correctly.

It's bad enough as it is.

Thank you for clarifying. I value your posts... a lot.

And I do agree.

I was born and lived in CA most of my life and will be moving back soon.

I'm not happy about the gun laws but I'm eager to join to voting pool again.

Its insane for example, IMO, when a Ruger mini 14 is fine... until you put a folding stock on it and then it becomes an 'assault rifle'.

The proposed laws is a terrible idea on so many levels.


I'm glad to see the Riverside Sheriff come out against it.

Thanks again.

montanaoffroader
August 14, 2012, 04:01 AM
Signed and shared. Hope it does some good.

Mike

Librarian
August 15, 2012, 07:38 PM
Rumor mill on this is active Wed, Aug 16.

IMO, it is not dead until we know it is not on the Governor's desk in time. That time is Sept 2 at dawn (or, strictly, 00:00:01 of Sunday, Sept 2).

The legislature still can suspend rules, or simply ignore them, to get the bill considered up through August 31, and they can make Aug 31 last all the way through Sept 1 with the 'stop the clock in the chamber' trick.

fxstchewy
August 15, 2012, 09:44 PM
Signed.

Kynoch
August 15, 2012, 10:30 PM
The California Assembly Appropriations Committee has tabled SB249. It's not going anywhere right now.

http://sd08.senate.ca.gov/news/2012-08-15-assault-weapon-bill-held-committee

Quiet
August 15, 2012, 11:59 PM
Keep up the grassroots pressure on the legislature.

Currently, there are reports that SB249 has been removed from the Assembly Appropriations Committee hearing that is scheduled for Thursday. According to information that is about five minutes old, SB249 is still scheduled for that hearing! The source of this information is the Assembly Appropriations Committee chief-of-staff.

NRA's lobbyist Ed Worley and CRPA lobbyist Tom Pedersen have just left the Assembly Appropriations Committee Office and were told that information.

What are the facts, and what are the possibilities?

FACT: THERE ARE NO RULES IN THE CAPITOL!!! They can change the "rules" just about any time the desire.

FACT: Our efforts to oppose SB249 are resulting in a tremendous number of calls, faxes, letters, and email into the Capitol.

FACT: Even if they claim that SB249 is dead, it is NOT dead until the legislative deadline has passed. Why would we trust that they would not bring it up with a "rule waiver"?????

POSSIBILITY: They could hear the SB249 pretty-much whenever they want to.

QUESTION: Why should we let-up the pressure in opposition to SB249?

ANSWER: We shouldn't. And we won't!!!!!

FACT: We are getting more and more law enforcement opposition to SB249. The pressure is mounting and it is doing so at the right time in the legislative process.

Please think about this: No matter what we hear out of the Capitol about SB249, if we are winning -- why would we let up? If we are not winning -- why would we let up?

PLEASE CONTINUE TO KEEP UP THE PRESSURE UNTIL WE CONFIRM THAT WE HAVE DEFEATED SB249.

Note: I was not planning to post anything regarding SB249 because so many people are already commenting on it. And off course, there are those who are complaining that they don't believe that the NRA has been involved in the fight against SB249 from the beginning --- because we don't post our strategy and tactics on the Internet for the anti-gunners to read. Oh well, complain if you want. But I won't roll around in the mud and argue with anyone. It doesn't accomplish anything.

H. Paul Payne, NRA Liaison to the Executive Vice President

In the past, there have been a few bills that were tabled, then brought back as soon as public outcry stopped.

Quiet
August 16, 2012, 12:04 AM
The California Assembly Appropriations Committee has tabled SB249. It's not going anywhere right now.

http://sd08.senate.ca.gov/news/2012-...held-committee

Misinformation, to get people to stop pressuring their legislature.

CA Assembly Appropriations Committee (http://apro.assembly.ca.gov/hearings) Schedule for Thursday 08-16-2012
Item #5. S.B. No. 249 Yee. Assault weapons.

Kynoch
August 16, 2012, 02:02 AM
Misinformation, to get people to stop pressuring their legislature.

CA Assembly Appropriations Committee (http://apro.assembly.ca.gov/hearings) Schedule for Thursday 08-16-2012
Item #5. S.B. No. 249 Yee. Assault weapons.

Sure it is.

powder
August 16, 2012, 06:44 PM
SO what happened?

Jon_Snow
August 16, 2012, 07:11 PM
SO what happened?

It failed to make it out of committee. That doesn't mean they can't "rule waiver" it, so the danger isn't past until midnight on the 31st, but it's a very good sign.

hexum77
August 17, 2012, 05:49 PM
signed

Quiet
August 18, 2012, 12:10 AM
It failed to make it out of committee. That doesn't mean they can't "rule waiver" it, so the danger isn't past until midnight on the 31st, but it's a very good sign.

What he said.

But, the NRA (http://www.calnra.com/legs.shtml?summary=sb249&year=2012) is saying it died, for this legislative session, when it could not get out of the appropriations committee.


THANKS EVERYONE FOR THEIR SUPPORT!

If you enjoyed reading about "California Gun Owners Could Use Your Help Against SB249" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!