Quantcast

California set to ban most semi-auto rifles.

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by Zoogster, May 21, 2016.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Zoogster

    Zoogster Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2006
    Messages:
    5,288
    The California senate has passed and pushed some laws towards assembly that will do a lot of things if they make it through the entire process.
    Here is probably the simpliest break down:
    http://www.latimes.com/la-pol-sac-e...e-gun-control-propo-1463685378-htmlstory.html


    1. Bullet buttons are proposed to be banned. This is how most guns with detachable magazines are sold in California. They require a small object to press a recessed button instead of a normal magazine release button you can press with your finger.
    However it appears to also target all semi-automatic rifles with detachable magazines as well.
    This means things allowed in the expired federal AWB would also be banned, like M1As, mini-14s, and all similar rifles without pistol grips that were not targeted previously.


    2. There is also legislation requiring a background check for ammunition, and requiring a state license to sell it. This could result in a cost to process a background check at the purchase of ammunition, current CA DROS checks for example cost $35 per gun purchase. While a gun is a big purchase ammunition is often not.
    This could place a prohibitive cost on casual shooting, reducing new gun owners. If you have to pay a decent sum in addition to the ammunition, small purchases no longer are cost effective, and new casual shooters are unlikely to shell out for large ammunition purchases. Imagine paying for a background check to pick up some .22lr
    In addition to making internet sales illegal since they won't do a background check or have a CA license, which really sucks if you have calibers not frequently stocked at local stores and primarily available online. Nevermind the loss of the ability to find good deals.



    3. A bill also banning previously grandfathered magazines possessed prior to 2000 the year in which magazines over 10 rounds were banned from being purchased or transferred after that date.
    They grandfathered them only to take them later.

    4. "Ghost gun" bill now removes the ability to make your own firearm, an American right going back to the founding of the nation, unless you file paperwork and register the gun you have not even made yet.
    Keep in mind lowers for semi auto rifles would be illegal to make anyways under the bill banning bullet buttons and all semi auto rifles. This targets everything. 3d printer? Mill? You can have whatever valuable or expensive tools you want and they become a lot less fun.

    5. Requirement to report lost or stolen guns in 5 days.
    Seems reasonable? Actually it is how they charge you with a crime if they show up to take your guns and you claim they were lost in a "boating accident" as was a popular saying on here.
    If you cannot account for them, guilty, under arrest, and probable cause for a warrant to search for them.
    Keep in mind reporting something lost or stolen that is not lost or stolen is also a crime, lying to police and filing a false police report.
    It is a law that on the surface doesn't seem as bad as it is. But it is a tool used for current and future gun control to punish if you resist disarmament by not having or turning guns over for confiscation when required.

    6.Loaning guns is also being removed as a legal option. While not something I see done much, and already legally limited to like 90 days or something, it does have an impact. Want to loan a girlfriend a gun? Maybe keep one at her place so she has protection? Perhaps when someone potentially dangerous has started harassing them? That won't be okay.

    7. Creation of tax payer funded Anti-Gun University think tank to come up with reports on how bad guns are and how to reduce them in society. Their whole purpose from the start to study guns and gun laws from an Anti gun point of view and come up with solutions to the 'problem'.
     
    Last edited: May 21, 2016
  2. MTMilitiaman

    MTMilitiaman Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2005
    Messages:
    3,146
    Location:
    Missoula, Montana
    California is a lost cause, a Nanny State, and to the rest of us, a cruel joke. It should be apparent by now that they have no intention of ever rejoining the Union and becoming a free state. If you are a freedom loving American, I encourage you to return to America and leave that Communist sympathizing, hippie-spawned liberal cesspool.

    You know how California is like a granola bar? Once you get rid of all the fruit and nuts, all that is left is the flakes.

    In MT, we have no idea what a bullet button is...
     
  3. DLam

    DLam Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2015
    Messages:
    60
    Location:
    West Columbia, SC
    I wonder if we could sell California to North korea?

    Sent from my SM-G530T using Tapatalk
     
  4. Zoogster

    Zoogster Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2006
    Messages:
    5,288
    I post this partially to inform and also to help motivate people to try and stop it.
    The process is not complete yet, and they have a little more resistance in the Assembly. Giving up helps these things pass.


    Does the Heller decision and Scalia's legacy mean nothing? Heller's incorporation in McDonald vs Chicago mean nothing?
    How do the most popular rifles in America get banned when Heller mentioned 'In common use' as something you cannot ban. These are the most commonly used rifles in the United States.

    Why do all the police carry firearms standard that the average person is not even allowed to purchase? When every patrol car has an AR-15 with full capacity magazines (typically 30 rounds ) and the normal citizen is not even allowed a semi auto rifle at all, or a magazine that holds over 10 rounds. That is something seen in authoritarian regimes. Is the day of being a law abiding citizen and still owning modern effective guns over?
     
  5. MErl

    MErl Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2006
    Messages:
    1,283
    Isn't the ammunition one a ballot initiative?
     
  6. glennv

    glennv Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2006
    Messages:
    232
    I love the last one. Using tax dollars to fund an "anti-gun think tank." They tried that here in RI too but thankfully it failed.
     
  7. Zoogster

    Zoogster Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2006
    Messages:
    5,288
    Not the one mentioned here. There is also some anti gun ballot initiatives in November, and may include that as well
    These are things being pushed by legislators without voters right now though.


    Add this:
    http://www.mercurynews.com/californ...ia-gun-control-senate-passes-first-few-series

    "Given the complexity of firearms policy, I believe the legislative process is the most responsible path forward," said de León, who hasn't spoken with Newsom in several weeks. "We owe it the voters to tackle tough issues and not force them to do our jobs for us."

    Which really means: "We do not trust voters to ban guns and impose the restrictions we want. Firearm supporters can mobilize and be powerful voting blocks, let us pass something quick and not let them prepare or it get to the ballot where it might be defeated.


    Many of these things will also be on the ballot in November, if they don't pass them in the next couple weeks like they are trying to. If they are able to pass them now, then they hope to remove the ballot initiative because it will not be necessary anymore:
     
    Last edited: May 21, 2016
  8. newbutold

    newbutold Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2016
    Messages:
    8
    When Reagan was our governor, the libs were kept in check. Vote the crooks out, regardless of party affiliation. They are in every state.
     
  9. CLP

    CLP Member

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2010
    Messages:
    1,381
    Location:
    Alabama
    Isn't that the truth- Alabama
     
  10. LiveLife

    LiveLife Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2010
    Messages:
    20,296
    Location:
    Northwest Coast
    Old and sad news for us Californians.

    It's been a very frustrating year for California with Antis on a full on war path by introducing massive amounts of bills, many to address the "loopholes" previous bills left open (like the bullet button) and some downright illogical that will make law abiding citizens felons (Not all gun owners keep up with latest law changes in Sacramento :eek:) - http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=1142291

    Chances are, some of them were sacrificial bills that would allow the governor to veto some while signing most into laws so they could claim consolation. :barf:

    If you plan to stay in California, plan to register your "qualifying" firearms. If you don't like that, start making plans to move out of California or pursue a different hobby.

    I live very close to Oregon and my contingency plan is to relocate as my last ditch option, which I actually would prefer as there's no sales tax, no smog check, much cheaper vehicle registration, cheaper gas and don't have to pump my gas ... Dang, some days I wonder why we haven't moved to Oregon yet. :D

    Is it a lost cause for Californians? Not sure, but I have decided to not lose sleep over it anymore and simply enjoy what I do have for now and hope Hillary doesn't win the election in November. ;)
     
  11. danez71

    danez71 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    4,469
    Location:
    CAAZ

    Reagan banned open carry - Mulford Act of 1967

    That was VERY damaging as it strengthened the Anti's and portrayed the idea that striping away Rights was 'reasonable' because he was a well liked Republican.


    Reagan stated that the Mulford Act “would work no hardship on the honest citizen.”



    I find it odd that people have such hatred for Bill Ruger for saying 'no honest man needs more than 10 rounds' but put Reagan on a pedestal as some conservative godsend.



    Zoog, you listed 7. I think it was 11 that made it through the Senate?
     
  12. LiveLife

    LiveLife Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2010
    Messages:
    20,296
    Location:
    Northwest Coast
    It doesn't matter how many made it through the senate ... they will keep coming. ;)

    With democrat controlled Sacramento, it is matter of time now, which they have plenty of.
     
  13. danez71

    danez71 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    4,469
    Location:
    CAAZ


    In regards to the bolded part, maybe someone can help me understand something.

    Since all firearms go through the DROS system... they ARE already registered. (rifles included a few years ago)



    What does CA gain by having them registered as 'assault weapons'? (Besides revenue and creating more govt jobs)


    Shouldn't it be challenged on the basis of burdening the People Rights while providing zero benefit to the Govt or public safety?
     
  14. ofitg

    ofitg Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2010
    Messages:
    434
    Here's an interesting read on Scalia's Heller opinion, and his interpretation of the 1939 Miller case -

    http://www.law.gmu.edu/assets/files/publications/working_papers/09-01 Second Amendment.pdf

    Short-barreled shotguns may have been in common use prior to 1934, but NFA'34 changed all that. In Scalia's opinion, short-barreled shotguns were not in common use by the time of the 1939 Miller case, and that was the operative principle.

    Interesting how that works.....
     
  15. newbutold

    newbutold Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2016
    Messages:
    8
    The Mulford Act was the wrong approach to deal with the Black Panther party.
     
  16. Gordon
    • Contributing Member

    Gordon Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    9,692
    Location:
    Southern Oregon
    "when guns are outlawed , only outlaws will have guns"
    And everyone wonders why I went 1% biker in my old age :)

    My words for mexifornia is "remember the Alamo !
     
  17. LiveLife

    LiveLife Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2010
    Messages:
    20,296
    Location:
    Northwest Coast
    To capture firearms made from kits currently not registered. Firearms already registered as assault weapon won't need to be registered again as they already know who has them. ;)

    Registration = Eventual confiscation which is the ultimate end game for the Antis.

    If/when that happens, I will be moved out of state so that won't be an issue for me.

    I do believe California is a lost cause and now think "nationally" how we can change federal laws to advance 2A - First step is preventing Hillary to the whitehouse so SCOTUS replacements the next 8 years are pro 2A.
     
  18. danez71

    danez71 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    4,469
    Location:
    CAAZ

    Ok... sure... fine.

    But you really quoted me out of context and didn't answer what I was asking.



    What do they gain by this?

    (I'm thinking 'nothing', officially. CA cant say 'what we gain is the ability to effectively confiscate in the future)

    and if that's the case, I then asked,


     
  19. LiveLife

    LiveLife Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2010
    Messages:
    20,296
    Location:
    Northwest Coast
    While challenges could be made, it will fall on deaf ears in Sacramento which is now controlled mostly by democrats.

    I now believe federal rulings by SCOTUS and federal laws that override California laws is the way to go to undo the damage done by California law makers.
     
  20. Zoogster

    Zoogster Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2006
    Messages:
    5,288
    What do they gain?

    Well they gain registration of many they don't know about.
    This is important because they wish to eventually confiscate them.
    Down the road in a big move, but in closer times individually. A lot of misdemeanors make a person prohibited in CA for 10 years or life for example, and if you become prohibited CA has a special disarmament task force that goes to homes to collect guns of people with registered guns that have become prohibited.
    You can also have your guns taken if family or police feel you are dangerous, per a law passed last year, no crimes need have been committed.
    And other things like restraining orders which are common in custody disputes and divorces can make you prohibited in CA. A large number of people in long term custody disputes get accusations and restraining orders that come and go as they get accused of various things which are later found to be untrue.
    So when any of these things happen they have a list of the guns someone legally owns. So they know which guns must be taken away from them.

    But they already have a list of long guns since 2014, and handguns since 1991 you say? Yes but they want them all, and they also would no longer be able to be purchased by new owners, slowly marginalizing existing registered owners until they are the minority without a voice.
    Then they can be banned outright, just like the magazines they previously grandfathered are being banned outright right now.
    Except when they are banned outright, they will also have a list of who needs to turn them in, and exactly what they need to turn in, or be charged.


    They also turn those not registered into serious felonies. Many people will not register, because they know the purpose is eventual confiscation. Others because they are unaware. Your already registered rifle still has to be registered again as an assault weapon, typically within a 90 day window or becomes a 10 year felony per gun to own.

    Possession of an unregistered assault weapon in CA is a 10 year felony offense.
    This would include most semi auto rifles.
    So as they stumble across people with them they can arrest them. Like when someone defends their home with one, or is transporting one and gets pulled over.
    Even if they get little time behind bars, they will be a felon and not legally able to own any guns anymore, a win for the legislators that would rather no citizens outside of the police and their bodyguards be armed.
     
    Last edited: May 21, 2016
  21. LiveLife

    LiveLife Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2010
    Messages:
    20,296
    Location:
    Northwest Coast
    If AB1663 is signed into law by the governor, then Californians have one year to register qualifying firearms - https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160AB1663
     
  22. X-Rap

    X-Rap Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2006
    Messages:
    6,657
    Is the Jefferson movement still active?

    Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
     
  23. Aragon

    Aragon member

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2014
    Messages:
    887
    Location:
    The Golden State of California
    CA is far from a "lost cause." Those envious of CA have been making the claim that it is since at least 1989.

    I really do wish that MT was a nice enough place to live in order to attract more people from CA to it. I wish that of most states as a matter of fact.
     
  24. Aragon

    Aragon member

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2014
    Messages:
    887
    Location:
    The Golden State of California
    LOL!! Anyone with knowledge of where political power is most concentrated in CA -- by far its most populous county, Los Angeles, would not ask that question.
     
  25. Aragon

    Aragon member

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2014
    Messages:
    887
    Location:
    The Golden State of California
    Depending on what any litigation might bring.

    It's interesting to think about the OCEAN of legal firearms that would flow into CA over the next ~18-24 months if this legislation became law.

    FWIW, I don't expect the current governor to sign anything. He recently vetoed similar anti-2A bills.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice