Banning bullet buttons in California because of Colorado and Wisconsin?

[danez71]

As far as CA laws spreading to the rest of the country, just look at the smog laws for cars. Parts of the country modeled their laws based on CA's and now those parts of the country that have no smog issues at all adhere to CA standard. Even the EPA modeled some of their laws based on CA laws.

 

[Kynoch]

As far as CA laws spreading to the rest of the country, just look at the smog laws for cars. Parts of the country modeled their laws based on CA's and now those parts of the country that have no smog issues at all adhere to CA standard. Even the EPA modeled some of their laws based on CA laws.

Indeed.

CA seismic laws have influenced the seismic laws of many state. CalOSHA has influenced OSHA. Many, many things -- both good and bad, begin in CA.

 

[RetiredUSNChief]

Why don't they just ban the ACT of assault and not focus on the millions of weapons that will never be used in a crime?

Heh! Funny you should mention that!

Assault is already on the books as a crime.

Seems to me that we have plenty of laws on the books already. We could do with a little enforcement of some of them instead of creating more laws to fix things we already have laws to deal with.

 

[Kynoch]

Remington Model 81 with an aftermarket "high capacity", removable magazine.

A fine "assault weapon" from 1936:

Remington Model 81

 

[danez71]

How about some examples of how California’s gun laws have spread ..........
...
...
...

Show me where California is making any progress forcing their anti-gun agenda at the Federal level.

Ok. Thats simple.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban

In addition to New York (see above), Massachusetts and New Jersey, have enacted similar bans. Cook County of Illinois has enacted a similar, but more restrictive ban. California enacted one of the first bans on semi-automatic rifles in 1989, adding stricter measures to the law several times since. Connecticut has enacted a partial ban that focuses on assault weapons with certain characteristics.

Its simple folks.

The NRA exists by UNITING pro 2A, hunting, and sport shooting folks from around the nation.

MOST people think thats a good strategy.

There is nothing wrong, and everything right, with Californians asking for support.

To turn your back on your fellow Americans, and worse, to mock them, who are trying to keep their 2A rights... is simply un-American.


United We Stand, Divided We Fall.

 

[splithoof]

^^^EXACTLY!
As a Californian, I could simply say to others: "I have had to accept the reality of heavy restrictions, so why can't you?" You in other states have all this stuff: RTC, standard/hi capacity mags, all kinds of stuff that can't even be sold here, etc. AND many of you others live in places where gun ownership is not seen/treated as a public health issue, with politicians, media types, celebrities, church leaders, etc., berating you as if you are some kind of loon.
But, I don't do that, I support EVERYONE, because I know that a lot of things that start over hear eventually spread like a cancer.

 

[coloradokevin]

I think the lack of enthusiasm toward California related issues stems from the fact that gun owners have had a very tough time gaining ground in that state. A couple of my good friends live out there, and they're both very pro-gun (I grew up shooting with the one friend, and she currently lives in southern California. I knew my other friend in college, and he's in northern California — both have probably sent tens to hundreds of thousands of rounds downrange).

There's no doubt that there are gun owners out there along the Pacific Coast, but it seems like we don't have the pull there that we do in other states. As such, it almost appears that our current predicament centers around the fact that many gun owners refuse to move to states like California (and others with highly restrictive laws). In doing so we probably lose even more pull in these states. Obviously that's an unfortunate reality, but for many of us it is reality. I had an opportunity to move to California some years ago, and the place really has a lot going for it: mountains, oceans, nice weather, good wine, etc. But, the politics turned me off to the idea.

I guess the real question (for me) is this: Aside from joining organizations like the NRA, what can gun owners who live outside of California do to help the situation there? After all, writing to legislators who don't have access to our votes will probably gain us little ground. I'd love to see the situation change for CA residents, but I'm not sure what I can do about the problem as an outsider.

I do agree that we all need to be concerned about the issues affecting California, since California is a very populous state (in the United States) with a lot of political pull. Lets face it, more than 1 of every 10 residents of this country currently calls California "home". As such, we had better pay attention to issues happening out there, and do what we can to help our fellow gun-owning Californians.

 

[Librarian]

There are FAR more AR/AK variant firearms in CA than any other two states combined.

Do you have a source for that claim?

Nobody really does, yet.

California DROS process does not record the detail of long guns when reporting to the state, so there are no state-level sales data beyond 'long gun'.

That data, such as it is, is available here: http://oag.ca.gov/sites/all/files/pdfs/firearms/forms/dros_chart.pdf? 'Long guns' includes ARs and AKs and bolt-action rifles and Ruger 10-22s and shotguns - no breakout possible.

Similarly, people moving to CA need not report their long guns to CA-DOJ the way they must report their handguns. What such poor souls brought here is not known.

NSSF has their 2011 sales report; they say 18.9% of all sales were 'modern sporting arms', that is, AR/AK types.

Since the 'bullet button' experience began in 2007, and AB 2728 made it impossible to add to the list of 'assault weapons' effective in 2007, it's my opinion that a lot of pent-up demand for AR/AK types, from 2000 (when the 'features' law became effective) -2007 makes the percentage of long guns sold in CA 2007 and forward a lot higher than 18.9%.

If we conservatively use the 18.9% on just the 1,233,000 total of long guns 2007-2011, we get 233K; I suggest that's a floor. Those DROS numbers don't break out long guns until 1991. If we assume that 18.9% proportion is valid (and there is no reason to accept or reject that number) for 1991-1999 (the last year AR/AK could be bought before the 2000 law) , another 308K are implied. That gets us to 541K. (If I use the NSSF 18.9% of ALL sales, the number is 806K before 2000, 450K from 2007-2011 ...)

It doesn't account for all that kind of rifle purchased before 1990 - by repute from testimony given in the Legislature, they think about 10% of the 'assault weapons' subject to registration actually were registered. The number registered stands at about 152K today.

I'd be comfortable with around 2 million as the number in state. Can't prove it, but that's what back-of-the envelope inference leads to.

 

[tarosean]

some data on states vs. firearms sales. course there is no way in hell of determining what type or private transfers. etc. etc. etc.


NCIS Checks (http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2010/06/28/states-with-the-most-guns.html)

*KY numbers inflated due to routine NCIS of CHL/CCW holders.

1, Kentucky
Population:4,314,113
NICS background checks per 100,000 residents (Dec. 2008 – May 2010): 134,028

2, Utah
Population:2,784,572
NICS background checks per 100,000 residents: 30,315

3, Montana
Population:974,989
NICS background checks per 100,000 residents: 25,745

4, Wyoming
Population:544,270
NICS background checks per 100,000 residents: 22,827

5, Alaska
Population:698,473
NICS background checks per 100,000 residents: 22,273

6, West Virginia
Population:1,819,777
NICS background checks per 100,000 residents: 21,455

7, South Dakota
Population:812,383
NICS background checks per 100,000 residents: 19,062

8, North Dakota
Population:646,844
NICS background checks per 100,000 residents: 17,829

9, Arkansas
Population:2,889,450
NICS background checks per 100,000 residents: 17,483

10, Alabama
Population:4,708,708
NICS background checks per 100,000 residents: 16,860

11, Tennessee
Population: 6,296,254
NICS background checks per 100,000 residents: 16,684

12, Oklahoma
Population: 3,687,050
NICS background checks per 100,000 residents: 15,801

13, Idaho
Population: 1,545,801
NICS background checks per 100,000 residents: 15,764

14, Colorado
Population: 5,024,748
NICS background checks per 100,000 residents: 15,086

15, Missouri
Population: 5,987,580
NICS background checks per 100,000 residents: 14,712

16, New Hampshire
Population: 1,324,575
NICS background checks per 100,000 residents: 14,522

17, Mississippi
Population: 2,951,996
NICS background checks per 100,000 residents: 14,165

18, Illinois
Population: 12,910,409
NICS background checks per 100,000 residents: 13,879

19, Connecticut
Population: 3,518,288
NICS background checks per 100,000 residents: 13,783

20, New Mexico
Population: 2,009,671
NICS background checks per 100,000 residents: 13,408


Another once based on NCIS v Population. (http://www.mainstreet.com/slideshow/lifestyle/most-trigger-happy-states)

Least armed places.

State - % per 100 residents

FL 2.5 per 100
WI 2.2 per 100
DE 1.9 per 100
CA 1.8 per 100
MD 1.4 per 100
MA 1.3 per 100
RI 1.2 per 100
NY 1.0 per 100
NJ .5 per 100
Washington D.C. 0.1 per 100
Most
KY 41.8 per 100
WY 30.2 per 100
WV 15.4 per 100
MT 8.8 per 100
UT 8.2 per 100
AK 7.3 per 100
SD 6.4 per 100
ND 6.2 per 100
AR 5.9 per 100
ID 5.4 per 100



I think its safe to assume more residents doesn't equate to more weapons.

 

[Kynoch]

some data on states vs. firearms sales. course there is no way in hell of determining what type or private transfers. etc. etc. etc.


NCIS Checks (http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2010/06/28/states-with-the-most-guns.html)

*KY numbers inflated due to routine NCIS of CHL/CCW holders.

1, Kentucky
Population:4,314,113
NICS background checks per 100,000 residents (Dec. 2008 – May 2010): 134,028

2, Utah
Population:2,784,572
NICS background checks per 100,000 residents: 30,315

3, Montana
Population:974,989
NICS background checks per 100,000 residents: 25,745

4, Wyoming
Population:544,270
NICS background checks per 100,000 residents: 22,827

5, Alaska
Population:698,473
NICS background checks per 100,000 residents: 22,273

6, West Virginia
Population:1,819,777
NICS background checks per 100,000 residents: 21,455

7, South Dakota
Population:812,383
NICS background checks per 100,000 residents: 19,062

8, North Dakota
Population:646,844
NICS background checks per 100,000 residents: 17,829

9, Arkansas
Population:2,889,450
NICS background checks per 100,000 residents: 17,483

10, Alabama
Population:4,708,708
NICS background checks per 100,000 residents: 16,860

11, Tennessee
Population: 6,296,254
NICS background checks per 100,000 residents: 16,684

12, Oklahoma
Population: 3,687,050
NICS background checks per 100,000 residents: 15,801

13, Idaho
Population: 1,545,801
NICS background checks per 100,000 residents: 15,764

14, Colorado
Population: 5,024,748
NICS background checks per 100,000 residents: 15,086

15, Missouri
Population: 5,987,580
NICS background checks per 100,000 residents: 14,712

16, New Hampshire
Population: 1,324,575
NICS background checks per 100,000 residents: 14,522

17, Mississippi
Population: 2,951,996
NICS background checks per 100,000 residents: 14,165

18, Illinois
Population: 12,910,409
NICS background checks per 100,000 residents: 13,879

19, Connecticut
Population: 3,518,288
NICS background checks per 100,000 residents: 13,783

20, New Mexico
Population: 2,009,671
NICS background checks per 100,000 residents: 13,408


Another once based on NCIS v Population. (http://www.mainstreet.com/slideshow/lifestyle/most-trigger-happy-states)

Least armed places.

State - % per 100 residents

FL 2.5 per 100
WI 2.2 per 100
DE 1.9 per 100
CA 1.8 per 100
MD 1.4 per 100
MA 1.3 per 100
RI 1.2 per 100
NY 1.0 per 100
NJ .5 per 100
Washington D.C. 0.1 per 100
Most
KY 41.8 per 100
WY 30.2 per 100
WV 15.4 per 100
MT 8.8 per 100
UT 8.2 per 100
AK 7.3 per 100
SD 6.4 per 100
ND 6.2 per 100
AR 5.9 per 100
ID 5.4 per 100



I think its safe to assume more residents doesn't equate to more weapons.

I hope you know that not all NCIS are the same... Particularly when it comes to Kentucky...

 

[tarosean]

I hope you know that not all NCIS are the same... Particularly when it comes to Kentucky...

*KY numbers inflated due to routine NCIS of CHL/CCW holders.

I guess you missed that part?


while Im not claiming the stats are a 100% picture of our nations gun ownership... Its certainly gives somewhat of picture of people filing to own a firearm. certainly better than a guess or a unsubstantiated claim that "There are FAR more AR/AK variant firearms in CA than any other two states combined."

 

[michaelbsc]

I said in another thread 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

 

[Rob Aught]

Vigilance is still the best weapon. There are far more states allowing some form of carry than not these days. California is no longer the trendsetter for new regulation. If anything, many look to the bankrupt and imploding state as a model of how not to do things anymore.

As the state budget continues to go out of control and local cities and counties feel financial strain, the best the state can do is worry about bullet buttons? The last major piece of legislation I saw them pass was around shark fin soup, and even that had dissenters.

That does not mean "People of the Gun" should ever relax or become complacent. At the same time, there is little to worry about here for the rest of the country aside from some grandstanding politicians trying to score cheap political points from recent tragedies.

 

[checkmyswag]

I'm glad that until reading this... I didn't know what a "bullet button" was.

 

[Kynoch]

I said in another thread 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

Thank goodness.

 

[Kynoch]

Vigilance is still the best weapon. There are far more states allowing some form of carry than not these days. California is no longer the trendsetter for new regulation. If anything, many look to the bankrupt and imploding state as a model of how not to do things anymore.

As the state budget continues to go out of control and local cities and counties feel financial strain, the best the state can do is worry about bullet buttons? The last major piece of legislation I saw them pass was around shark fin soup, and even that had dissenters.

That does not mean "People of the Gun" should ever relax or become complacent. At the same time, there is little to worry about here for the rest of the country aside from some grandstanding politicians trying to score cheap political points from recent tragedies.

There you go again. Envy, envy, envy. If California were to "implode" (which ain't gonna happen) the whole nation would "implode." Just how many state budgets are flush these days? Name the state and more likely than not it's not the sort of place I would want to spend my earthly life.

 

[Robert]

Ok we are done. Too much focus on everything but stupid firearms laws. California is not perfect, neither is Texas, Colorado or any other state. They all have their flaws. Some have more than others.

We as gun owners should be focused on helping folks in other states cast off the chains of stupid laws. Whatever state that may be. Not sit around and point the finger and focus on the negatives. We have a lot of work to do in many states, but until we mature beyond name calling and finger pointing nothing will get done.