Two lines of questioning and reasoning to take to any one for more gun regulation


PDA






rd_zzyzx
February 9, 2013, 11:25 AM
Two lines of questioning for those that want stricter gun regulation:

For those that want to make a list of firearms and accessories that are illegal:

Instead of describing what an illegal firearm is, please describe a legal firearm. Trying to define something by what it is not is open ended. You can not list the infinite number of things something is not. Therefore describe what a legal firearm is, a firearm that meets your definition of a firearm that upholds the 2nd Amendment.

(This will take us off of the slippery slope and directly to where they really want to go.)




For those that want to increase taxes on bullets, have fees for registration, fees for training, and fees for background checks:

Do you support the 2nd Amendment? Is the 2nd Amendment a right for the poor? Will there be vouchers for the poor to receive bullets relative to their ability to pay, as well as vouchers for registration fees and training fees? Or is the 2nd Amendment only for the wealthy?

(This will expose the slippery slope of infringement and show that regulation restricts persons by their ability to afford to pay the fees and taxes. How will it settle in the stomaches of the tax payers to know that they are funding low income persons to purchase firearms and ammunition? Especially those against firearms completely.)


Please spread these questions around so that others can bring them up in town meetings, letters with their elected officials, etc.
Also, please add your list of questions to this thread so we all can benefit.

If you enjoyed reading about "Two lines of questioning and reasoning to take to any one for more gun regulation" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Art Eatman
February 9, 2013, 01:58 PM
Add some specific Bill numbers, to bring this in line for "on topic" for this forum. Describe particulars to which your points pertain.

steelerdude99
February 9, 2013, 02:16 PM
Two lines of questioning for those that want stricter gun regulation:

For those that want to make a list of firearms and accessories that are illegal:

Instead of describing what an illegal firearm is, please describe a legal firearm. Trying to define something by what it is not is open ended. You can not list the infinite number of things something is not. Therefore describe what a legal firearm is, a firearm that meets your definition of a firearm that upholds the 2nd Amendment.

...


rd_zzyzx,
I love the thinking on this; it will get an anti to admit outright that they don't want any guns whatsoever. So much for so called "common-sense gun laws" and "compromise".

chuck

rd_zzyzx
February 9, 2013, 03:21 PM
Add some specific Bill numbers, to bring this in line for "on topic" for this forum. Describe particulars to which your points pertain.

"We respect the Second Amendment right of law-abiding citizens to have guns for hunting, for sport, for protecting their homes and families. But loopholes in California's tough gun laws have been exploited long enough," state Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento, said Thursday.
http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_22544460/californias-state-senate-democrats-roll-out-big-gun


http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/02/08/gun-confiscation-bill-introduced-in-california-we-can-save-lives/

And here are the bills:

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/13-14/bill/sen/sb_0001-0050/sb_47_bill_20130124_amended_sen_v98.html



BILL NUMBER: SB 47 AMENDED
BILL TEXT

AMENDED IN SENATE JANUARY 24, 2013

INTRODUCED BY Senator Yee
( Coauthors: Senators De
León and Steinberg )
( Coauthor: Assembly Member
Dickinson )

DECEMBER 18, 2012

An act relating to assault weapons. An act
to amend Sections 30515 and 30900 of, and to add Section 30680 to,
the Penal Code, relating to firearms.


LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST


SB 47, as amended, Yee. Assault Firearms:
assault weapons.
(1) Existing law generally prohibits the possession or transfer of
assault weapons, except for the sale, purchase, importation, or
possession of assault weapons by specified individuals, including law
enforcement officers. Under existing law, "assault weapon" means,
among other things, a semiautomatic, centerfire rifle or a
semiautomatic pistol that has the capacity to accept a detachable
magazine and has any one of specified attributes, including, for
rifles, a thumbhole stock, and for pistols, a second handgrip.

This bill would revise these provisions to mean a semiautomatic,
centerfire rifle or a semiautomatic pistol that does not have a fixed
magazine but has any one of those specified attributes.
This bill would also define "fixed magazine" to mean an ammunition
feeding device contained in, or permanently attached to, a firearm
in such a manner that the device cannot be removed without
disassembly of the firearm action.
By expanding the definition of an existing crime, the bill would
impose a state-mandated local program.
(2) Existing law requires that any person who, within this state,
possesses any .50 BMG rifle, except as otherwise provided, be
punished by a fine of $1,000, imprisonment in a county jail for a
period not to exceed one year, or by both that fine and imprisonment.

This bill would exclude from those provisions a person who
possessed an assault weapon prior to July 1, 2014, if specified
requirements are met.
(3) Existing law requires that, with specified exceptions, any
person who, prior to January 1, 2001, lawfully possessed an assault
weapon prior to the date it was defined as an assault weapon, and
which was not specified as an assault weapon at the time of lawful
possession, register the firearm with the Department of Justice.

This bill would require that any person who, from January 1, 2001,
to December, 31, 2013, inclusive, lawfully possessed an assault
weapon that does not have a fixed magazine, as defined, and including
those weapons with an ammunition feeding device that can be removed
readily from the firearm with the use of a tool, register the firearm
before July 1, 2014, with the Department of Justice.
(4)The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse
local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the
state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that
reimbursement.
This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this
act for a specified reason.
Existing law finds and declares that the proliferation and use of
assault weapons poses a threat to the health, safety, and security of
Californians. Existing law generally prohibits the possession or
transfer of assault weapons, except for the sale, purchase,
importation, or possession of assault weapons by specified
individuals, including law enforcement officers.
Under existing law, a person who lawfully possessed an assault
weapon before the assault weapon was a prohibited firearm is
authorized to retain possession of the assault weapon if the person
registered the assault weapon with the Department of Justice.

This bill would state the intent of the Legislature to enact
legislation relating to assault weapons.
Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: no
yes . State-mandated local program: no
yes .


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

SECTION 1. It is the intent of the Legislature
to enact legislation relating to assault weapons.
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 does not
have a fixed magazine but has 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 does not have a fixed
magazine but has 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.
(b) For purposes of this section, "fixed magazine" means an
ammunition feeding device contained in, or permanently attached to, a
firearm in such a manner that the device cannot be removed without
disassembly of the firearm action.
(b)
(c) The Legislature finds a significant public purpose
in exempting from the definition of "assault weapon" pistols that are
designed expressly for use in Olympic target shooting events.
Therefore, those pistols that are sanctioned by the International
Olympic Committee and by USA Shooting, the national governing body
for international shooting competition in the United States, and that
were used for Olympic target shooting purposes as of January 1,
2001, and that would otherwise fall within the definition of "assault
weapon" pursuant to this section are exempt, as provided in
subdivision (c) (d) .
(c)
(d) "Assault weapon" does not include either of the
following:
(1) Any antique firearm.
(2) Any of the following pistols, because they are consistent with
the significant public purpose expressed in subdivision (b)
(c) :
MANUFACTURER MODEL CALIBER
BENELLI MP90 .22LR
BENELLI MP90 .32 S&W LONG
BENELLI MP95 .22LR
BENELLI MP95 .32 S&W LONG
HAMMERLI 280 .22LR
HAMMERLI 280 .32 S&W LONG
HAMMERLI SP20 .22LR
HAMMERLI SP20 .32 S&W LONG
PARDINI GPO .22 SHORT
PARDINI GP-SCHUMANN .22 SHORT
PARDINI HP .32 S&W LONG
PARDINI MP .32 S&W LONG
PARDINI SP .22LR
PARDINI SPE .22LR
WALTHER GSP .22LR
WALTHER GSP .32 S&W LONG
WALTHER OSP .22 SHORT
WALTHER OSP-2000 .22 SHORT


(3) The Department of Justice shall create a program that is
consistent with the purposes stated in subdivision (b)
(c) to exempt new models of competitive pistols
that would otherwise fall within the definition of "assault weapon"
pursuant to this section from being classified as an assault weapon.
The exempt competitive pistols may be based on recommendations by USA
Shooting consistent with the regulations contained in the USA
Shooting Official Rules or may be based on the recommendation or
rules of any other organization that the department deems relevant.
SEC. 2. Section 30680 is added to the
Penal Code , to read:
30680. Notwithstanding the meaning of "assault weapon" under
Section 30515, as amended by the act that added this section, Section
30610 shall not apply to the possession of an assault weapon by a
person who initially possessed the assault weapon prior to July 1,
2014, if all of the following are applicable:
(a) During the person's possession, the person was eligible to
register that assault weapon pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section
30900.
(b) The person lawfully possessed that assault weapon on January
1, 2014.
(c) During the person's possession, the person was otherwise in
compliance with the then-applicable version of former Chapter 2.3
(commencing with Section 12275) of Title 2 of Part 4 or this chapter,
as the case may be.
SEC. 3. Section 30900 of the Penal Code
is amended to read:
30900. (a) Any person who, prior to June 1, 1989, lawfully
possessed an assault weapon, as defined in former Section 12276, as
added by Section 3 of Chapter 19 of the Statutes of 1989, shall
register the firearm by January 1, 1991, and any person who lawfully
possessed an assault weapon prior to the date it was specified as an
assault weapon pursuant to former Section 12276.5, as added by
Section 3 of Chapter 19 of the Statutes of 1989 or as amended by
Section 1 of Chapter 874 of the Statutes of 1990 or Section 3 of
Chapter 954 of the Statutes of 1991, shall register the firearm
within 90 days with the Department of Justice pursuant to those
procedures that the department may establish.
(b) Except as provided in Section 30600, any person who lawfully
possessed an assault weapon prior to the date it was defined as an
assault weapon pursuant to former Section 12276.1, as it read in
Section 7 of Chapter 129 of the Statutes of 1999, and which was not
specified as an assault weapon under former Section 12276, as added
by Section 3 of Chapter 19 of the Statutes of 1989 or as amended at
any time before January 1, 2001, or former Section 12276.5, as added
by Section 3 of Chapter 19 of the Statutes of 1989 or as amended at
any time before January 1, 2001, shall register the firearm by
January 1, 2001, with the department pursuant to those procedures
that the department may establish.
(c) Any person who, from January 1, 2001, to December 31, 2013,
inclusive, lawfully possessed an assault weapon that does not have a
fixed magazine, as defined in Section 30515, and including those
weapons with an ammunition feeding device that can be removed readily
from the firearm with the use of a tool, shall register the firearm
before July 1, 2014, with the department pursuant to those procedures
that the department may establish.
(c)
(d) The registration shall contain a description of the
firearm that identifies it uniquely, including all identification
marks, the full name, address, date of birth, and thumbprint of the
owner, and any other information that the department may deem
appropriate.
(d)
(e) The department may charge a fee for registration of
up to twenty dollars ($20) per person but not to exceed the actual
processing costs of the department. After the department establishes
fees sufficient to reimburse the department for processing costs,
fees charged shall increase at a rate not to exceed the legislatively
approved annual cost-of-living adjustment for the department's
budget or as otherwise increased through the Budget Act but
not to exceed the actual processing costs of the
department . The fees shall be deposited into the Dealers'
Record of Sale Special Account.
SEC. 4. No reimbursement is required by this act
pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California
Constitution because the only costs that may be incurred by a local
agency or school district will be incurred because this act creates a
new crime or infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or
changes the penalty for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of
Section 17556 of the Government Code, or changes the definition of a
crime within the meaning of Section 6 of Article XIII B of the
California Constitution.

rd_zzyzx
February 9, 2013, 03:22 PM
You can find this for yourself:

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/bilinfo.html

Search on keywords.

rd_zzyzx
February 9, 2013, 03:29 PM
I guess I got the cart before the horse, but now you have in front of you the news I was reading, the statements from those proposing new law, and one of the actual bills.

:-)

CarolinaChuck
February 9, 2013, 08:58 PM
First off, vote with your feet and get out of California. The best way to not have the argument, is to elect officals who won't start the argument in the first place.

The 2nd question is outright Tyarrny and should be spoken out against for what it is. Taxing something to keep you from your Rights is Tyarrny.

All one needs to do is look at the Declaration of Independence and understand our Rights come from God, and not from men or their Governments, in order to grap onto the idea that all of the arguments they make are false.

For some reason, people want to give creadence to the idea that there is some legitiment argument to be made for more gun laws then we have now; and there isn't any. They either can't, or won't, enforce the laws that are on the books right now; what in Heavens name makes you think we need more, or that they will somehow get it right this time?

Reject the premise and ask the idiot making the claim to explain him or herself... Why in the world would you want to make a 1/2 idiotodical idea and argue it is somehow better? The world is a place that has evil in it; removing guns from it ain't going to change that.

Chuck

Art Eatman
February 10, 2013, 12:06 AM
Carolina Chuck, when you're dealing with people for whom your views are irrelevant, you're better off to throw the load on them: Request that they name even one law which has reduced the rate of violent crimes with firearms in the U.S. Just name one.

They can't.

bergmen
February 10, 2013, 01:59 PM
First off, vote with your feet and get out of California. The best way to not have the argument, is to elect officals who won't start the argument in the first place.


Will you, and everybody else who says this, PLEASE KNOCK IT OFF?

Born here 63 years ago, gonna die here. The elections here have been rigged for years with jerrymandered districts that lock in their power base, they have nothing whatsoever to lose by taking the positions they do. Solidifying power, immune to the will of people in rural areas, is what California politicians do, better than most in the country.

We can holler all we want to, their positions are not at risk because we do not have the votes to get rid of them. PERIOD.

These nut cases are elected from the densely populated megalopolis' around San Francisco, Los Angeles and Sacramento, the rest of us matter nothing to these idiots.

Dan

BigBore44
February 11, 2013, 05:50 AM
Bergmen I understand not wanting to leave your "home". And if you are willing to live with the corrupt government, then by all means. But it would seem there are so many advantages to leaving that state it doesn't make sense to stay. Just go visit from time to time. Between the gun laws, taxes, fuel prices, and illegals, you honestly couldn't pay me to live there (well, maybe a cabin in the north country). I have been to California many times. It used to be a place that was the envy of the country. And there are still plenty of good, honest, hardworking people there. And I wish all of them would move east and let California collapse. Then move back and repopulate. Truth is, only the die hards would move back. But what do I know. We still ride horses and live in tepees where I'm from (I actually was asked that by a person in Cali once).....amazing.

DeadMoneyDrew
February 11, 2013, 10:43 PM
Of all of the silliness in these various "assault weapons" bans, the part that I understand the least is: what is it about a shotgun having a telescoping stock and a pistol grip that makes it more deadly than a shotgun with a fixed stock and a standard grip?

I find it easier to refute or counter someone's argument when I understand the reasoning behind it. This one I just don't get. What is it? Concealability?

If you enjoyed reading about "Two lines of questioning and reasoning to take to any one for more gun regulation" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!