Attention California Gun Owners

[newglockguy]

Here's what we're looking at

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/20...thering-no-detachable-mags-mandatory-license/

 

[ThePenguinKnight]

I noticed this story on a couple sites invluding the note that they were 'considering' confiscation of all registered semi autos in that state-- but I cant find the bills nor can I find any confirmation on that. Anyone have more information?

 

[gunnutery]

WOW. I see a MAJOR 2A court battle coming soon. And I suspect we'll get sweeping rights BACK or lose them ALL forever.

 

[Thursday45]

Yea, it depends on when said court battle takes place. If it takes place in a court that has 2-3 Obama appointees? Uh-oh. I'd think the sooner this court battle happens the better. I'm afraid time is not on our side.

 

[efeng9622]

What mean “ 10 round magazine limit” ? Ban magazine itself or ban all gun can be loaded more than 10?
If I have a gun which can be loaded more than 10, but I can destroy the magazine and try to find another magazine which can only loaded
not more than 10 late , Can I still keep this gun legally?

 

[TJx]

I think now even you possess hi-caps they have to be kept dis-assembled and you can't move to the state with them.
I'm glad I don't live there anymore so I don't have to worry about getting gone from there.

 

[Delawarean]

Looks like Cali is really declaring war on the 2nd Amendment...

Hopefully it won't pass, but if it does I can imagine much of it being struck down under the common use part of Heller.

 

[JonnyGringo]

From the article:
Among the measures is one that would outlaw the future sale of semi-automatic rifles with detachable magazines. The restriction would prevent quick reloading by requiring bullets to be loaded one at a time.




http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...6rIcbIYI4MZEuQjad6VFzGg&bvm=bv.42080656,d.dmQ

No, I'm not a Huffpo fan. The article was on Drudge earlier, Not that I'm a Drudge fan either..........

 

[gbran]

All of these gun bills are coming from Democrats who now hold super majorities in the state legislature. There are many pro-2a Democrats in CA, but I suspect much (not all) of what they are proposing will pass. Republicans in CA are now mathmatically irrelevant.

 

[splithoof]

^^^ Exactly what he said. Democrats have no problem pushing laws they know are against the constitution. Their reply is usually something like this: "take it court afterwards, let the courts hash it out". They know how long that will take, and in the meantime use their powers to put down the citizen. With the big-city liberal lapdog police chiefs and sheriffs eager to beat down the common citizen in the war over firearm civil rights, the Dems are quick to make California a state that "leads the nation".

 

[gunnutery]

Yes, ever "leading the nation", "forward" and with "progression." They also seem to be the most bankrupt state. Which I guess mirrors the federal .gov too. My question is where are they leading us progressivly forward to? They all openly admit these laws won't affect criminals, so how do we get to this utopia they're dreaming of.

 

[BHP FAN]

I'll let you in on a little secret about our politicians, known only to Californians....they're all high. Their Utopia doesn't exist anywhere in the real world, and only the train to Crazy Town stops there.

 

[Fishslayer]

Their Utopia doesn't exist anywhere in the real world, and only the train to Crazy Town stops there.

But it's a high speed bullet train...

 

[BHP FAN]

''But it's a high speed bullet train...''

yepper.

 

[efeng9622]

Can some one tell me what is the definition of the following two items in the list of CA proposed ?
“10 round magazine limit”
“100% prohibition of all magazines greater than 10 rounds. All previous grandfathered magazines become illegal. Felony if you keep one.”

Answer 1) You can’t possess this kind of magazine in your gun, but you still
can own the gun without the magazine or with a refitted magazine.
Answer 2) You can't possess any kind of gun which has a more than 10 rounds magazine.

If answer 2) is correct , why said “All previous grandfathered magazines become illegal” instead of “ all previous guns which have this kind of magazine become illegal”?

 

[Manco]

Democrats have no problem pushing laws they know are against the constitution. Their reply is usually something like this: "take it court afterwards, let the courts hash it out". They know how long that will take, and in the meantime use their powers to put down the citizen.

That's what injunctions are for, and we currently have some of those in effect, too (e.g. ammunition purchases)--the law doesn't actually take effect until it's been through the courts. Of course, we'd have to get judges to actually give us injunctions, but it's a possibility, anyway.

Yes, ever "leading the nation", "forward" and with "progression." They also seem to be the most bankrupt state. Which I guess mirrors the federal .gov too.

Yes, some of the highest tax rates (if not THE highest) and the greatest amount of debt of any state. Those two characteristics seem to go hand-in-hand, don't they?

My question is where are they leading us progressivly forward to?

Economically, to eventual collapse and martial law, just like the federal government. That pretty much covers rights, too, I guess.

They all openly admit these laws won't affect criminals, so how do we get to this utopia they're dreaming of.

The one they're dreaming of or the one they're advertising? For the latter, all they need to do in order to satisfy the sheep is something that "feels right" (i.e. banning scary-looking guns), and for the former they will need to eventually disarm the population to fully usurp power. The same goes for the federal government, although they'll face a much tougher fight.

 

[danez71]

- A ban on all semi-automatic rifles with detachable magazines.

- A retroactive ban on high-capacity magazine. Gun owners would have to sell off or dispose of any magazine that holds more than 10 rounds within a given time period

What I dont get is that if they ban "all semi-automatic rifles with detachable magazines
", then what is the purpose of saying you cant have a 11+ mag at all?

 

[Alec]

1. To get rid of "high cap" bolt actions too.
2. Don't try to use so much logic in understanding gun laws; the legislators sure aren't.