Nathaniel Firethorn
Member
Why do I have this urge to donate to NRA-ILA after every election?
- NF
- NF
Handgun Ban passes in San Francisco
- Thread starter Len_in_Phoenix
- Start date
- Status
AnthonyRSS
Member
So now criminals will turn in their guns, right?
That can't be bad, can it?
Anthony,
That can't be bad, can it?
Anthony,
Dave Dembinski
Member
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2005
- Messages
- 249
hillbilly said:
My guess is there will be a lot of handguns "stolen" between now and April. Anyone who insists on both living in San Fran and owning guns is probably ornery enough.
B
boofus
Guest
I wonder if they will prosecute shootings with this new law. When the badguy leaves a bullet in you it is a kind of 'transfer' isn't it ? Somehow I doubt it, so only formerly law abiding residents will be the ones hit by the law.
If you are pro RKBA and you choose to still live in SF, just remember it's your choice. I will try to do my part to make sure this is overturned, but if it's not...... and you stay there..... it's going to be quite obvious that no one is holding a gun to your head to keep you there (unless it's a criminal). I'll be anxious to see the incidents of breaking and entering into houses now that no law abiding citizen will have a hand gun.
CentralTexas
Member
As far as the recruiting thing in the Bay Area
They won't really ban them as it will affect federal funding, but for years many of the public schoolsfrom San Jose to San Fran:
1-when recruiters visit they must sit in the back area of the Library while the kids are outside enjoying the sun
2-You might be escorted by an "educator" to monitor you
3-If you are seen speaking FIRST to a student you will be asked to leave
4-Literature must be placed in a "Special" box unlike the multiple racks for STD's, environment or other colleges.
5-You may be hassled or shouted over by kids at a career fair. Of course if you aren't military they wouldn't allow it.
6-You can't put up posters or advertise in the school paper
CT
They won't really ban them as it will affect federal funding, but for years many of the public schoolsfrom San Jose to San Fran:
1-when recruiters visit they must sit in the back area of the Library while the kids are outside enjoying the sun
2-You might be escorted by an "educator" to monitor you
3-If you are seen speaking FIRST to a student you will be asked to leave
4-Literature must be placed in a "Special" box unlike the multiple racks for STD's, environment or other colleges.
5-You may be hassled or shouted over by kids at a career fair. Of course if you aren't military they wouldn't allow it.
6-You can't put up posters or advertise in the school paper
CT
Of course, we all know the REAL reason why San Fran passed this ban.
Just look at the other threads.
The REAL reason why San Fran passed this ban is because the Republicans aren't allies of RKBA, but actually working against it!
It's ther Republicans, I tell you, the Republicans.
They are the reason why this ban was passed!!!!!!!
hillbilly
Just look at the other threads.
The REAL reason why San Fran passed this ban is because the Republicans aren't allies of RKBA, but actually working against it!
It's ther Republicans, I tell you, the Republicans.
They are the reason why this ban was passed!!!!!!!
hillbilly
Harve Curry
Member
halvey The sad part is the people VOTED to deny themselves 2nd amendment rights and deny others said:
Standing Wolf
Member in memoriam
The leftist nitwits have spoken. Well, maybe they haven't quite spoken, but they've at least managed to snivel and whine and strike ludicrous postures.
Quite an accomplishment for many of them.
Quite an accomplishment for many of them.
AirForceShooter
Member
I'm going to wait and see what really happens. New York City is pretty much in line with this and it's estimated there are at least 1 million illegal hand guns floating around.
And Ohh My, just wait for the earthquake and it's aftermath.
AFS
And Ohh My, just wait for the earthquake and it's aftermath.
AFS
G36-UK
Member
This sucks. My sympathies to all of SF. Us Scots got the same thing too not that long ago.
Why is it that whenever gun misuse is brought up, the "solution" is to pass an irresponsible law which penalizes/criminalizes law-abiding gun owners?
(on a lighter note, anyone think that the name "Proposition H" is kind of apt for this law?)
Why is it that whenever gun misuse is brought up, the "solution" is to pass an irresponsible law which penalizes/criminalizes law-abiding gun owners?
(on a lighter note, anyone think that the name "Proposition H" is kind of apt for this law?)
Kaylee
Member
Take the homosexuality sub-thread off to http://armedpolitesociety.com/ please.
Otherwise this thread will be closed.
-K
Otherwise this thread will be closed.
-K
B
boofus
Guest
Preparation H is a good name for the law. But Proposition City of Helpless Dumbasses is a better one.
Big Mike
Member
I think we'll see this challenged in court immediately. I remember hearing the discussions on this driving through CA earlier this year thinking it would never happen. I wonder if John Lott ever threw in his 2 cents? Mike
cbsbyte
Member
What is interesting is that this win is not plastered on all the news channels, Internet, and the papers. One would believe this would be all over the news. I actually had to do a seach on the web to find a online article of the results.
Anyway, I was not suprised that SF citizens passed this, and the anti-recuting bill. SF is the the most Liberal city in the nation, and it made no sense for them not to have a complete gun ban. Other large cities either in Califorina or else where will probably follow suit, but I am not sure if any of this will be able up hold in court. It is going to be a interesting time for the RKBA, for the next few years.
Anyway, I was not suprised that SF citizens passed this, and the anti-recuting bill. SF is the the most Liberal city in the nation, and it made no sense for them not to have a complete gun ban. Other large cities either in Califorina or else where will probably follow suit, but I am not sure if any of this will be able up hold in court. It is going to be a interesting time for the RKBA, for the next few years.
wolf
Member
los angeles and adjoining communities are in line for that ban..and will probably have as much resistance getting it passed..i can see an entire state ban on handguns in the not too distance future..the dems will take over in 2008 and will get as many "pet projects" passed as possible..gay marriage will be one of them..and gun control will be revived big time..
wolf
wolf
sicorican
Member
NRA to file suit....
For those wondering if the NRA would challenge this:
http://www.nraila.org/News/Read/Releases.aspx?ID=6839
NRA to File Lawsuit Challenging
San Francisco Gun Ban
Wednesday, November 09, 2005
Fairfax, VA - Even with opposition from San Francisco law enforcement and major media outlets, Proposition H -- a measure banning the lawful possession, sale and manufacture of handguns and ammunition within city limits -- passed yesterday. The National Rifle Association (NRA) will file a lawsuit challenging this severe gun ban.
NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre stated, “We are disappointed, but this fight is just beginning. Lawful residents of San Francisco are being stripped of their freedom because of an illegal measure that defies common sense. We will fight this outrageous assault on the rights of law-abiding San Franciscans and I believe that we will prevail.”
Many San Francisco residents who initially supported the ban changed their opinion after NRA and local volunteers began voter education efforts throughout the city. The campaign received an additional boost when the San Francisco Police Officers Association condemned the gun ban, declaring it would "nullify the personal choice of city residents to lawfully possess a handgun for self-defense purposes.” Major San Francisco newspapers also voiced opposition to Proposition H.
In response to the passage of this proposition, NRA will lead a coalition of organizations to immediately file a lawsuit against this illegal ban in San Francisco. Proposition H, in addition to violating federal guarantees, also violates various California state laws and is therefore preempted.
Chris W. Cox, NRA’s chief lobbyist, concluded, “This is a hollow victory for the gun control lobby because this scheme is in clear violation of California law. We will file suit and fight this to the highest courts in the country until good sense prevails once again in San Francisco.”
For those wondering if the NRA would challenge this:
http://www.nraila.org/News/Read/Releases.aspx?ID=6839
NRA to File Lawsuit Challenging
San Francisco Gun Ban
Wednesday, November 09, 2005
Fairfax, VA - Even with opposition from San Francisco law enforcement and major media outlets, Proposition H -- a measure banning the lawful possession, sale and manufacture of handguns and ammunition within city limits -- passed yesterday. The National Rifle Association (NRA) will file a lawsuit challenging this severe gun ban.
NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre stated, “We are disappointed, but this fight is just beginning. Lawful residents of San Francisco are being stripped of their freedom because of an illegal measure that defies common sense. We will fight this outrageous assault on the rights of law-abiding San Franciscans and I believe that we will prevail.”
Many San Francisco residents who initially supported the ban changed their opinion after NRA and local volunteers began voter education efforts throughout the city. The campaign received an additional boost when the San Francisco Police Officers Association condemned the gun ban, declaring it would "nullify the personal choice of city residents to lawfully possess a handgun for self-defense purposes.” Major San Francisco newspapers also voiced opposition to Proposition H.
In response to the passage of this proposition, NRA will lead a coalition of organizations to immediately file a lawsuit against this illegal ban in San Francisco. Proposition H, in addition to violating federal guarantees, also violates various California state laws and is therefore preempted.
Chris W. Cox, NRA’s chief lobbyist, concluded, “This is a hollow victory for the gun control lobby because this scheme is in clear violation of California law. We will file suit and fight this to the highest courts in the country until good sense prevails once again in San Francisco.”
Henry Bowman
Senior Member
No. They saw that as a serious shortcoming of Chicago's ban.
Move them out of the city (either by transferring them to someone else or storing them elsewhere) or turn them in (w/o compensation).
My prediction: This will get overturned before it goes into effect. Much NRA and taxpayer money will be spent on lawyers.
If it does not get overturned, it will give us another example of the failure and unintended consequences of gun control.Why is it that the grabbers' cries of "Blood in the streets" and "Streets flooded with assault weapons" never happens, but when we predict a crime wave as a result of idiotic, misguided gun control, we don't have to wait long to see it? I wonder what the moonbats are saying over at DU? Not much, I bet.
HighVelocity
Member
agricola said:
On city campuses recruiters will still be allowed since barring them would cause the schools to lose federal money.
What a crock! 
San Francisco Voters Approve Handgun Ban
SAN FRANCISCO - Voters approved ballot measures to ban handguns in San Francisco and urge the city's public high schools and college campuses to keep out military recruiters.
The gun ban prohibits the manufacture and sale of all firearms and ammunition in the city, and makes it illegal for residents to keep handguns in their homes or businesses.
Only two other major U.S. cities — Washington and Chicago — have implemented such sweeping handgun bans.
With all precincts reporting early Wednesday, 58 percent of voters backed the proposed gun ban while 42 percent opposed it.
Although law enforcement, security guards and others who require weapons for work are exempt from the measure, current handgun owners would have to surrender their firearms by April.
A coalition led by the National Rifle Association has said it plans to challenge the initiative in court, arguing that cities do not have the authority to regulate firearms under California law.
The military recruitment initiative won with 60 percent in favor and 40 percent against.
The measure, dubbed "College Not Combat," opposes the presence of military recruiters at public high schools and colleges. However, it would not ban the armed forces from seeking enlistees at city campuses, since that would put schools at risk of losing federal funding.
It encourages city officials and university administrators to exclude recruiters and create scholarships and training programs that would reduce the military's appeal to young adults.
"We now have the moral weight of the city behind us, and it's definitely a valuable asset to have in our corner," said Bob Matthews, an activist for the proposition.
It would be great is this gay liberal mecca could fall into the bay
SAN FRANCISCO - Voters approved ballot measures to ban handguns in San Francisco and urge the city's public high schools and college campuses to keep out military recruiters.
The gun ban prohibits the manufacture and sale of all firearms and ammunition in the city, and makes it illegal for residents to keep handguns in their homes or businesses.
Only two other major U.S. cities — Washington and Chicago — have implemented such sweeping handgun bans.
With all precincts reporting early Wednesday, 58 percent of voters backed the proposed gun ban while 42 percent opposed it.
Although law enforcement, security guards and others who require weapons for work are exempt from the measure, current handgun owners would have to surrender their firearms by April.
A coalition led by the National Rifle Association has said it plans to challenge the initiative in court, arguing that cities do not have the authority to regulate firearms under California law.
The military recruitment initiative won with 60 percent in favor and 40 percent against.
The measure, dubbed "College Not Combat," opposes the presence of military recruiters at public high schools and colleges. However, it would not ban the armed forces from seeking enlistees at city campuses, since that would put schools at risk of losing federal funding.
It encourages city officials and university administrators to exclude recruiters and create scholarships and training programs that would reduce the military's appeal to young adults.
"We now have the moral weight of the city behind us, and it's definitely a valuable asset to have in our corner," said Bob Matthews, an activist for the proposition.
It would be great is this gay liberal mecca could fall into the bay
entropy
Member
It's a beautiful city, but this crap is why I'll never visit it again. I think if they ban the military, when the inevitable quake comes, .gov ought to stand back and watch it slide into the sea.
*Note to THR members in the Bay area: [Demonic voice] Get Out![/Demonic voice] *
*Note to THR members in the Bay area: [Demonic voice] Get Out![/Demonic voice] *
Not according to the 9th circuit. Last year they decided that the individual has no right to own a gun under the 2nd amendment. The supreme court failed to take up the case, so in the states under the 9th circuit, you have no constitutional right to own a gun.
Now this S.F. law might be struck down on the state-law pre-emption grounds, but you are out of luck on 2nd amendment grounds -- if you live in the 9th circuit you no longer have 2nd amendment rights.
Oleg Volk
Moderator Emeritus
Tennessee has room. Please consider Nashville.
- Status