[California]: do you lknow any CA cops having (likely) illegal assault weapons?

[TAB]

It goes alot further then that... they can Own AW, they can buy off list hand guns, they can buy "hi cap mags" They can also own all the class III stuff, if thier cheif signs off... does not happen very otfen.

So why can officer bob buy a fully built race gun from say STI, but the average person can't?

I have no doubt several LEOs out there are making big bucks buying guns that normal people can't buy new and then selling them.( saw it happen all the time working for a FFL)

 

[billwiese]

billwiese wrote:
The only way to take down CA's AW law is by tactics like these.

Jeff White wrote:
I don't know about that. You could always participate in the legislative process and elect representatives that would vote it out. That's the traditional way these things are done. Of course I guess the framers of the constitution were just totally off their rockers when they devised it. We all know the real way to get rid of a bad law is to turn people in for violating it...

Cute, and devoid of reality. The undercurrent of your statement is "don't bust my fellow buddies in blue for felony conduct". I note you're from Illinois, which in some ways is more screwed up than CA (i.e, lack of FOID card = illegal, etc.) I think CA gun laws will befar more fixable in the next 3-5 years than Illinois' will - we're gonna get RKBA incorporation soon.

CA's problems are screwed by urban demographics plus a state Republican party that has screwed itself into oblivion by being seen by many as a religious party - as opposed to the party of small gov't, growth, etc.

And no one said we're turning in dirty cops. But the problem is large enough now that it goes way beyond the individual cop and requires a systemic solution.

If the cops do get popped what'll happen is that the judge'll hold things up for "deferred adjudication", the PD or Sheriff's office will magically generate a "we approve Ossifer Fife to have an AW..." letter they formerly wouldn't sign/issue, and then the DOJ Firearms Bureau will issue an AW registration for that gun, cleaning up the situation for the cop (other than perhaps a nastygram in his personnel file). Nevertheless, the fact that the cop had felonious conduct for some period of his career will have a variety of interesting side effects.


Bill Wiese
San Jose CA

 

[billwiese]

Rifleman73 wrote:
Out of stater here. I think that nobody has mentioned the word "exclusion." As in police in most states get exclusions from some laws to allow them to do their jobs more effectively. So the Peoples' Republic of California has a law against ownership of magazines with over 10 rounds. That same law probably has an exclusion in it allowing police officers to have, use and possession magazines that hold more than 10 rounds. That is what is meant as "a brass pass".

This is a perfect example of why I had asked for outta-staters to not reply because, as usual, they don't have CA-relevant info and live in a league of misinformation about CA matters.

Yes, CA *magazine* law has a direct allowance for officer exemption.

Yes, CA "safe handgun" law has a direct allowance for officer exemption.

No, CA *assault weapons* law does not have a *direct* officer exemption (unless it's a department/agency issue duty gun, which bypassess everything). Officers wanting a personal AW have to get a letter signed by command in their agency, after which they can get a registration from DOJ Firearms Bureau - after which they can acquire the specified AW or convert the non-AW into an AW configuration. If they don't have this paperwork for the specific gun they are in violation of the law: they are in felonious possession of an AW and are likely transporting it illegally as well (separate charge).


Bill Wiese
San Jose CA

 

[Gewehr98]

Umm, not to belabor the obvious...

But it ain't just cops keeping hidden weapons banned by the California DOJ.

This long-time California resident left there in 1999 just as SB-23 went into effect. I took my collection of banned firearms with me, and all the illegal magazines they didn't want me to have. As an example, I had 300 each 30-round AK mags in my household goods shipment, alone.

One thing I heard from my fellow gun owners as I left California was that they simply were going to ignore the requirements to register their now-banned firearms. As I read the DOJ registration paperwork, which basically forced you to deed the firearm to them and lease it back until the day you died, at which point it couldn't go to your children or heirs, then I knew that civil disobedience would be the norm vs. the exception. I've been back a couple times since then, to visit family and friends. I'm not about to rat them out, but they have indeed ignored Lockyer since 1 Jan 2000.

Somewhere out there one can find a news article or three listing the DOJ's dismay at the abysmally few numbers of banned firearms that were actually registered with them, compared to the estimate of guns that were supposed to be submitted. It would appear that the DOJ was simply ignored by the majority of folks out there who were supposed to comply.

It was ironic to me that a short time after I left, I received a forwarded postcard from then AG Lockyer's office, notifying me of my requirement to register my AK/AR/FAL etc. within so many days, or else. I'm assuming they got the address through the 4473s of my purchases, which is onerous in and of itself. I sent the postcard back, telling them in no uncertain terms that they were more than welcome to try to take them from my home in Florida.

It's way larger than just cops that went underground. Compliance with Roberti-Roos was estimated to be maybe all of 15%. I'd wager compliance with SB-23 would be near that, too. Lockyer went on record to report they had all of 10,000 guns registered with the $20 fee before the 1 Jan 2000 deadline. That speaks volumes about California gunowners, and what they really thought about SB-23.

 

[Jeff White]

Cute, and devoid of reality. The undercurrent of your statement is "don't bust my fellow buddies in blue for felony conduct". I note you're from Illinois, which in some ways is more screwed up than CA (i.e, lack of FOID card = illegal, etc.) I think CA gun laws will befar more fixable in the next 3-5 years than Illinois' will - we're gonna get RKBA incorporation soon.

Outside of the ignorant FOID card, we have much better gun laws then California. We can have any evil assault rifle we want as long as we don't live in Cook County. My statement has nothing to do with don't bust my "fellow buddies in blue" but everything to do with wondering how that will influence the legislature to change the law. If you think you are going to fix your gun laws in 3 to 5 years with this campaign, I've got some prime oceanfront property here in Southern Illinois I think,you should look at, it's a heck of a deal....

CA's problems are screwed by urban demographics plus a state Republican party that has screwed itself into oblivion by being seen by many as a religious party - as opposed to the party of small gov't, growth, etc.

And your present campaign is going to fix the urban demographics, get conservatives into leadership positions in the state republican party and fix their image as the voice of the religious right how?

And no one said we're turning in dirty cops. But the problem is large enough now that it goes way beyond the individual cop and requires a systemic solution.

And you think the systematic solution to the problem will be to repeal your assault weapons ban? I think that's pretty naive thinking. There are all kinds of systematic solutions that wouldn't involve repealing the law.

If the cops do get popped what'll happen is that the judge'll hold things up for "deferred adjudication", the PD or Sheriff's office will magically generate a "we approve Ossifer Fife to have an AW..."

That could happen, or they could write an exemption into the law and make it retroactive to the date it was enacted. What makes you think the California Attorney General won't take fast action to clean the mess up.

Nevertheless, the fact that the cop had felonious conduct for some period of his career will have a variety of interesting side effects.

And just what interesting side effects to you expect to happen? Despite everything you read on the gun forums, for the most part, cops are pretty law abiding people. If you think that the training officers are going to approve the on duty use of illegal weapons, you are dreaming. The liability if an officer was ever involved in a shooting with an illegal weapon is staggering. I would bet money that if you were to file FOIA requests you could find out how many letters were issued. I assume that California has a state law that somewhat mirrors the federal law or some other open government laws.

My personal opinion is that you are jealous and just trying to stir the pot. I'm interested in hearing how you think this will force the legislature to repeal the law. Show me a real plan and I'll believe you are sincere.

 

[billwiese]

Jeff,

I am not jealous of cops. Out here in Silicon Valley we laugh at 'em and how they're breaking our city budgets with their $100K salaries and 90% pensions @ 55 indexed for inflation.

I will not tilt my hand, but having cops commit felonies is an untenable situation with significant side effects in the justice system.


Bill Wiese
San Jose CA

 

[chriso]

Im sure you know the laws better than me and I don't really care I just think you shouldn't worry about what's in other peoples safes. Haha wow that makes you cool you know the laws better than me... jee wiz man... good luck at arresting a cop for having a class 3 weapon or weapon on the AWB. HAHA

 

[TAB]

I don't know, I think its rather important to know if the people that are there to protect the population and up hold the law are commiting felonys.

 

[Tyris]

I am not jealous of cops. Out here in Silicon Valley we laugh at 'em and how they're breaking our city budgets with their $100K salaries and 90% pensions @ 55 indexed for inflation.

Not to worry. California's pending default on debt will fix that problem.


Bill Wiese, good on you. The more corrupt police you can throw under the bus the better.

-T

 

[Beatnik]

billwiese, I fully realize I have no more business getting involved than you do in Virginia politics, and I have stated as much in the past - you stay out of my state, and I stay out of yours....

....but I also need to let you know that I too see clearly what others here do not.

having cops commit felonies is an untenable situation with significant side effects in the justice system.

I think most THR readers need to tatoo this backwards on their foreheads so they can read it clearly every time they wash their faces.

The US Constitution - the supreme law of the land - is more than just the 27 words of the 2nd Amendment. Setting up police officers as a separate caste of citizen with assumed legal immunities is as unconstitutional as the AWB is.

I commend you for your effort.

 

[JImbothefiveth]

Now police have progressed to current hardware

And how is using modern weapons a bad thing?

The National Guard helicopters used in the Waco Siege were allowed because they said drugs were involved even when none were.

That wasn't the work of local law enforcement, and would you please cite a source for the "drugs were involved" thing?

 

[billwiese]

Bumpitybump.
If we could please have the out-of-staters restrain themselves it'd be appreciated.

-Bill

 

[BHP FAN]

I pretty much agree with the guy from Virginia.

 

[Jefferson Herb]

Bill, I moved my bushmaster xm15 to another state to meet compliance.I will someday follow.BHP is right ,we have an x chief being prosicuted for class3 and silencer,and the arrogant form of trash does'nt think it's wrong

 

[billwiese]

Bumpity-bump.
Any more responses from Californians w/relevant info appreciated.

-Bill

 

[Sinixstar]

Bumpity-bump.
Any more responses from Californians w/relevant info appreciated.

You might have better luck on a CA specific site...

 

[billwiese]

sinixstar wrote:
You might have better luck on a CA specific site...

I am getting good results from a variety of CA-specific forums & subforums as well as from here (and **.us).

Figured there'd be some THR-only folks that are not on other forums.

Bill Wiese
San Jose CA

 

[BHP FAN]

and like Beatnik from Va. said:
''I commend you for your effort...''