California

Status
Not open for further replies.

xd9

Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2009
Messages
45
Location
Surprise, Az
:fire:I currently live in the liberal state of california where if some residents have it their way guns would be illegal. you can't own a "assualt rifle " unless it has a sealed 10 round magazine, nothing in california can have a round capicity of more than 10 rounds. 10 day waiting period on ALL guns. in some counties it is souly up the the discretion of the sheriff of who can get a ccw and guess what no one gets it. but they will tell you can apply for one and send in youre money and then they deny youre application. you can't carry a gun in plain sight unless in a rual area. they are now trying to pass a law where you would only be able to buy 50 rounds a month. What is this world comming to if these laws are passing is all i want to know. can't wait for the day I get out of here.
 
which facts are wrong not to be rude i would just like to know so i dont repeat them again. if its about the Assult rifle deal i know there are other factors to make an assult rife ca legal but i just listed the main thing that irritated me the mot but please let me know what was wrong mabe it will make me feel a little more free in this state
 
California is way too anti-2nd Amendment to ever change, so you're only choices are to stay and take it or move. If you move, I'd suggest my state of Missouri; anything goes here. The only way we could possibly be more pro-gun is if we made it legal to carry concealed without getting a permit (like Vermont). But you can buy "assault weapons", no limit on what a magazine holds, you can buy NFA weapons; and we have castle doctrine law and stand your ground laws that extend to your vehlicle. And you can carry a loaded handgun in your car, even if you don't have a conceal permit, provided you are eligible to own a handgun and you keep it stored in the glove compartment.

It doesn't get much better than that. Get out of the People's Republic!
 
I appreciate your moxy, but your facts are not all correct. I suggest calguns.net
It is full of good info for legal Cali gun owners.

Exercise you rights and buy as much as you can....
 
I currently live in the liberal state of california where if some residents have it their way guns would be illegal.

California is far from the "liberal" paradise that many think it is.

you can't own a "assualt rifle " unless it has a sealed 10 round magazine,

Incorrect. Register assault weapons are alive and well in CA. You can't own a new assualt rifle with a removable mag unless it doesn't have a pistol grip.

nothing in california can have a round capicity of more than 10 rounds.

Incorrect. High caps were grandfathered in along with AWs. You can also own all of the parts of the mag, but cannot assemble it unless it is limited to 10 rounds.

10 day waiting period on ALL guns.

True, save for black powder. They are not considered a firearm by the DOJ.

in some counties it is souly up the the discretion of the sheriff of who can get a ccw and guess what no one gets it. but they will tell you can apply for one and send in youre money and then they deny youre application.

In all counties it is up the the discretion of the sheriff. Technically though, a city police chief can grant a CCW, but I know of no police chiefs that do so.

you can't carry a gun in plain sight unless in a rual area.

Unloaded open carry is allowed, but may be restricted by local ordinance. Check your local laws. There are other situations that allow for carrying, even loaded, but they are relatively limited.

they are now trying to pass a law where you would only be able to buy 50 rounds a month.

Yes they are. It is on the Governor's desk.

What is this world comming to if these laws are passing is all i want to know.

A court battle.

can't wait for the day I get out of here.

Don't let the Sierras hit you on the way out ;) Honestly though, other states have pluses, but I have never been to one that I would rather live in.

You should really consider getting an up to date copy of "How to own a gun in California and stay out of jail". It is a really good book, and will fill you in on the laws far batter than sitting down with the PC codes.
 
California can be changed. The guys at the Calguns Foundation are working on changing it. The very problem with the state is that people are discouraged with it and leave, so there's fewer firearms owners to have political weight enough to fight effectively. Also gun owners don't stand up for their rights enough because they're too afraid of being "outed" and ostracized from their social circles or even possibly their jobs. They get treated as a minority because they refuse to assert themselves as a majority. If more people would respond to the leftists in that state blabbing about "evil guns" by standing up for themselves instead of cowering you'd have a lot better situation there.
 
mrtuffpaws you seem irritated about my rant and my bashing of the state of ca. i grew up in phoenix where the gun laws are much more relaxed this i where my frustration comes from. thank you for going into depth on the topcs that i brought up i do not see where i was wrong though. i was generalizing in my rant though i did not say that, it seems that you just went into the specifics of the laws, most of what i said is true for a new person to ca who dosent meet the grandfather parts. and most of my generalizations come from the california handgun certificate study guide, and from information from the attourny generals web site and yes some of it is hearsay that i got from talking to people in gun stores not from sitting down with pc codes but none the less thanks for the clairfication
 
paragraphs are your friend and they make stuff a lot easier to read you know most people here already know about California and perhaps you might have thought about that before signing up on an internet forum and ranting because we've all heard it before some of us have moved away from California for that and other reasons maybe you should move away, too, or else go to calguns.net and meet other shooters who have managed to get by in California did you enjoy trying to read that because i didn't enjoy reading your post either.
 
Running from your problems does not solve them. Just because CA is restrictive, moving away will not fix that.

In the short term, sure. Move from CA to NV and wow, no more raddlocks and bullet buttons, now you can own every gun known to man, woohoo! But that only delays the problem.

The more restrictive states, NJ, NY, CA, etc. are also the ones with the most influence in congress. People like Mayor Bloomberg have made it clear that they don't want to just make the gun laws restrictive in their cities, or their states, but also the whole damn country (and some people like Soros, the world).

If you simply flee from those states you only buy a short amount of time before they just get what they want done federally. Look at the Assault Weapons ban of 1994. Think that would've passed in the Tennesse state house? Texas? But they got enough votes from states like NJ and NY and CA to cram it down the whole country's throat.

Stay in CA, meet CA shooters, and work to make California the place it once was.
 
I’ve been watching the RKBA fight in California for about 25 years- it has been a consistent string of losses, and I see no reason to believe the future will bring change. I also note that California’s anti-gun owner legislation has not spread to adjacent states, nor has it been adopted successfully at the Federal level… I do understand why some people would want to exaggerate that possibility to justify continuing a lost battle though.
 
TT is correct.

Bottom line? If California changes, it's because other states have led the way and California's laws seem stupid in context, and/or courts have stricken some California laws. It won't be because someone fought for some incremental improvement in California, even if they won, which has happened about once in 100 tries. The last instance of "winning" I can think of is when the waiting period was shortened from 15 to 10 days. Woohoo. Big whoop.
 
MrTuffPaws I would say most of what he said he correct in general. While I am pretty well versed on California firearm laws, what he said applies for the majority of people. Prior registration of "assault weapons" for a limited number of people that is not available to others anymore, and magazine types owned prior to 2000 which are no longer legal for others aside it is the law.
They placated current owners at the time with exemptions, and now with no new numbers joining the ranks of people with those legal allowances, and many new joining the ranks of other gun owners, as well as the antis, those with those items are a shrinking minority that will become less and less represented.

Incorrect. Register assault weapons are alive and well in CA. You can't own a new assualt rifle with a removable mag unless it doesn't have a pistol grip.

Those are not "assault weapons" then, a magical legal term that varies year to year and state to state.
You only think you know what an "assault weapon" is.
A tube fed semi auto centerfire rifle would be an "assault weapon" if its fixed magazine held over 10 rounds. Even if it 'looked' like it belonged in an old western movie.

While we have come to accept the pistol grip feature as the most important, it also includes a host of other features that while less of a hassle to do without also place the rifle with a detachable magazine into the bad category.
I wouldn't mind a bayonet on a semi-auto defensive rifle for example, but that would make it an "assault weapon". Even without the bayonet, a bayonet lug is a great extra attachment point, often built to withstand hard blows and therefore quite a durable point to attach other accessories.
Just a threaded barrel makes a handgun an "assault weapon", and there is a lot of nice accessories that you could use with threads besides "evil" silencers/suppressors. From custom sights, barrel extensions, or muzzle breaks, or various new things people invent that could make use of extra attachment points on a firearm.
In fire prone California they even banned "flash suppressors". Hunting in the dry brush? Don't install a "flash suppressor". A vehicle might require a "spark arrestor" to drive in the same area, but a firearm is prohibited from having a "flash suppressor".
Of course vehicles are also required to have a muffler by law, and those are prohibited on firearms as well. So there is consistency!

A "pistol grip" may be the biggest limiting pain to change, but is far from the only feature. You have just become so used to not having any of the others due to the law that it is all you notice now. But things like a bayonet lug were once a great point to build accessories to attach to.

Incorrect. High caps were grandfathered in along with AWs. You can also own all of the parts of the mag, but cannot assemble it unless it is limited to 10 rounds.

You are correct, but that is only part of the story. Non grandfathered "assault weapons" (technically non "assault weapons"), like current offlist ARs using a fixed magazine to not be an "assault weapon" are still limited to 10 rounds. It does not matter if you have a 30 round legal grandfathered magazine.
If you install your legal 30 round magazine on a "fixed magazine" new gun, one that is perfectly legal with a 10 round magazine, you just created an "assault weapon".
Firearms with fixed magazines that hold over 10 rounds are "assault weapons".
So any gun that gets around the "assault weapon" ban by having a fixed magazine cannot have a perfectly legal pre 2000 magazine installed without being in violation of the law.
You would be surprised how many people I have seen in felony violation of that law. Believing they can freely install thier legal grandfathered magazines on such firearms.



Unloaded open carry is allowed, but may be restricted by local ordinance. Check your local laws. There are other situations that allow for carrying, even loaded, but they are relatively limited.
Unloaded "open carry" is not open carry.
In reality it is just a "loophole" in what is allowed to transport a firearm which allows some people to use it to "open carry" while unloaded.
Open Carry was banned in response to the black panthers, and except under limited exemptions in limited circumstances is illegal in public.
Since it is only illegal to conceal a handgun (PC12025) or have a loaded firearm (PC12031), having a non-concealed and unloaded handgun is legal.
Which enables someone to transport thier gun from say the trunk to thier house without breaking the law outside of a locked container.
That it also allows someone to strap it on thier side unloaded if they so desire certainly does not qualify as "open carry".

Additionally California has its own state version of the Gun Free School Zone Act, known as the California Gun Free School Zone Act, requiring anyone with a firearm to keep a long distance (1,000 feet). A distance greater than the width of most streets.
So you could not really open carry unloaded, except at pre-planned destinations far from any school as some form of political demonstration. It is nearly impossible to travel through a medium size city without going within 1,000 feet of a school. Making it nearly impossible to "open carry" unloaded without violating the California law, even if the federal version of the law causes little trouble for people in other states.
 
Last edited:
While we have come to accept the pistol grip feature as the most important, it also includes a host of other features that while less of a hassle to do without also place the rifle with a detachable magazine into the bad category.
I wouldn't mind a bayonet on a semi-auto defensive rifle for example, but that would make it an "assault weapon". Even without the bayonet, a bayonet lug is a great extra attachment point, often built to withstand hard blows and therefore quite a durable point to attach other accessories.
Just a threaded barrel makes a handgun an "assault weapon", and there is a lot of nice accessories that you could use with threads besides "evil" silencers/suppressors. From custom sights, barrel extensions, or muzzle breaks, or various new things people invent that could make use of extra attachment points on a firearm.
In fire prone California they even banned "flash suppressors". Hunting in the dry brush? Don't install a "flash suppressor". A vehicle might require a "spark arrestor" to drive in the same area, but a firearm is prohibited from having a "flash suppressor".
Of course vehicles are also required to have a muffler by law, and those are prohibited on firearms as well. So there is consistency!

A "pistol grip" may be the biggest limiting pain to change, but is far from the only feature. You have just become so used to not having any of the others due to the law that it is all you notice now. But things like a bayonet lug were once a great point to build accessories to attach to.



actually you can have a monsterman style grip or a u-15 stock (both pictured in my assault weapon id fllowcharts and have a 30 rounder if you have a perm attached MUZZLE break (not a flash hider) and a fixed stock. you can have detachable 30 rounders all day long (if you had prior to 2000)
 
yellofin said:
California can be changed. The guys at the Calguns Foundation are working on changing it. The very problem with the state is that people are discouraged with it and leave, so there's fewer firearms owners to have political weight enough to fight effectively. Also gun owners don't stand up for their rights enough because they're too afraid of being "outed" and ostracized from their social circles or even possibly their jobs. They get treated as a minority because they refuse to assert themselves as a majority. If more people would respond to the leftists in that state blabbing about "evil guns" by standing up for themselves instead of cowering you'd have a lot better situation there.
well, said.


freonr22 said:
I wouldn't mind a bayonet on a semi-auto defensive rifle for example, but that would make it an "assault weapon". Even without the bayonet, a bayonet lug is a great extra attachment point, often built to withstand hard blows and therefore quite a durable point to attach other accessories.
In CA, bayonets and bayonet lugs are 100% legal on any type of firearm.
So, not sure why you think bayonet/bayonet lugs make a semi-auto rifle an "assault weapon".

THE DARK KNIGHT said:
In the short term, sure. Move from CA to NV and wow, no more raddlocks and bullet buttons, now you can own every gun known to man, woohoo! But that only delays the problem.
Correct.
Following the CA to NV example, Southern NV is starting to look/feel a lot like Southern CA East. This is due to all the liberals from CA moving to Clark County and pushing to change the laws to be like CA.
 
Last edited:
... they will tell you can apply for one and send in youre money and then they deny youre application.

You don't pay for the permit, fingerprinting or training until you are approved.
 
Quiet: Following the CA to NV example, Southern NV is starting to look/feel a lot like Southern CA East. This is due to all the liberals from CA moving to Clark County and pushing to change the laws to be like CA.

Perhaps you can point to some recent anti-gun legislation passed by the Nevada legislature as evidence to support your contention?
 
TT said:
Perhaps you can point to some recent anti-gun legislation passed by the Nevada legislature as evidence to support your contention?
The recent push/lawsuit by new residents to stop the opening/developement of the 2900 acre Clark County Shooting Park. The new residents (mostly from CA) cited safety (people traveling through their neighborhoods with guns) as the reason to have it closed.

Loss of use of the NV CCW permit as an exemption to NICS.
NV legislature failed to pass a law bring the NV CCW permit in compliance to BATFE requirements to allow for the exemption.
There was a bill to make it do so, but would have increased (2-3 times) the cost of the CCW permit.

Compromises to the NV preemption law, that allows Clark County to retain is't handgun registration program. Stance from the new NV Attorney General and NVSCA that the preemption law did not void out all the local ordinances that had been in effect before the law as passed, even though the law states that the only exemption is the Clark County handgun registration requirement.

The LVMPD stance on open carry due to public compliants/concerns.
 
*yawn* Another California-bashing thread. Remember, assault-shift-keys and assault-punctuation are illegal here.

Tim
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top