Shooters Forum banner
1 - 20 of 30 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
547 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
WOW!!! :eek:

Story by the Associated Press; curated by Dave Urbanski

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California Gov. Jerry Brown vetoed a bill Friday that would have imposed the nation’s toughest restrictions on gun ownership, saying it was too far-reaching.

“I don’t believe that this bill’s blanket ban on semi-automatic rifles would reduce criminal activity or enhance public safety enough to warrant this infringement on gun owners’ rights,” the Democratic governor wrote in his veto message.

The legislation would have banned future sales of most semi-automatic rifles that accept detachable magazines, part of a firearms package approved by state lawmakers in response to mass shootings in other states.

It was lawmakers’ latest attempt to close loopholes that have allowed manufacturers to work around previous assault weapon bans. Gun rights groups had threatened to sue if the semi-automatic weapons ban became law.

You Won’t Believe Which Governor Just Vetoed an Anti-Gun Bill That Would Have Been America’s Most Resticitive — Or Why He Shot It Down | TheBlaze.com
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,834 Posts
I wonder how soon he runs for office again(?)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
547 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Not to far I think. The Colorado thing hurt worse than people care to admit.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,418 Posts
The Quoted article (via Link) does not mention some other Rather Badly Written and "Draconian" legislation as to if it had been signed,vetoed, or still to be considered.

One BAD piece provides "Ex Post Facto" criminalization of possession of 'any Bullet Feeding device that can contain more than ten bullets or appears to contain more than ten bullets and adds fines or imprisonment for up to one year for EACH such item possessed.

I am hoping that Governor Brown Does NOT sign that one.

A tubular magazine 22 rifle that can contain more than ten rounds, especially if it holds ten LR and you load Shorts, would get the possessor a year in jail, and possible loss of the right to possess firearms for ten years or more.

Best Regards,
Chev. William
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
87 Posts
Some of the bills that were on Jerry's' desk were just absolutely crazy.

Our state legislature here is made up of mostly nutty anti-gun Democrats.

Thank god he only signed a few and not all of them.
But look out next year.
I am sure these nuts will try again to outlaw gun in this state.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,667 Posts
I just got an email from a buddy that transmitted a Sportsmans' Alliance news release saying Governor Brown just signed a law banning all lead in ammunition in California.

Webley
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
87 Posts
The ban is for hunting in certain hunting regions.

He signed 4 out of about a dozens, no lead bullets for hunting, bans magazine rebuild kits if over 10 rounds, requires a $35 firearm safety certificate to purchase any gun and make it illegal to store a loaded firearm where a child could get to it.

These are not that big a deal.
The bills he didn't sign were really bad.
Enough to seriously look at leaving the state.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
87 Posts
Not a big deal compared to what they wanted to shove down our throats.
Not a big deal compared to the registration we already have.
Just not as restrictive as it could have been if the governor signed all the bills
Now that would have been a big deal.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,947 Posts
Seems like a big enough deal to me to not ever want to move there. That's their plan, pass lots of "little" things so that you won't be concerned cause they're only little things.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,667 Posts
The WoodCrafter,

I think it is a Big Deal for California muzzleloader hunters. If not lead in frontloaders, what? As for the $35 certificate to buy a gun, which clause is that in the Second Amendment I missed? Are criminals EXEMPTED, or can they get their Certificate from their Probation Officer? Is the $35 certificate a One Time deal or is it required for each gun purchase?

I saw an old movie on TV the other night and the Police Superintendent said to his minions, "Go round up the usual suspects." It seems Governor Brown wants to "round up the usual guns and lead ammunition." I am glad I live in Pennsylvania. The antis endorse COMPROMISE; they will take HALF now and HALF later! It may not seem like a BIG DEAL, but it sure seems like a bad deal for the honest gun owners.

Webley
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,834 Posts
Baddad is right. It's an incremental process.... like climbing stairs.... a step at a time until they've reached their goal.

Now, here's a pretty happy li'l guy.... Sgt Paul Weber explaining current CA firearms laws. If I were Paul, I wouldn;t be so smiling-ash happy - I'd be nauseas. In fact, I am after reading this.

http://lapd.com/assets/tbl_weber_aug2012.pdf

Here are a couple of short quotes that belong in this thread:

- Rand T. Lennox said:
"Those gun control activists advocating exchanging a liberty for safety should recall that the safest place on earth is solitary confinement at Leavenworth."
- JD Filkins said:
"When the law disallows both the means and moral authority to defend one's self and property, crime and violence fill the void between common sense and the 'hoped for' utopia."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
87 Posts
I can see how you guys with way less restrictive gun laws find these new laws oppressive.

well us living in this over regulated state see these new laws as minimal compared to what we already have and what they are trying to legislate.

True that any anti-gun laws are not in our best interest but again these are not as bad as they could have been.

The $35 firearm safety certificate is not big deal.
We already have a Handgun Safety Certificate requirement to purchase a handgun.
This will now be for ALL firearm purchases and not just handguns.
You renew it every 5 years.

You ask if this is for each gun purchase, NO.
But we already do have to pay a DROS fee for every gun purchase. It is $35.
$25 to the state and $10 to the dealer, minimum. Some dealers charge more.
This is the background check and registration paperwork.

The law about storing a loaded firearm is fine.
What complete F'ing fool leaves a loaded gun around little kids anyway.

The repair kits for more than 10 round sucks if you want a magazine with more than 10 rounds.
We already have a 10 round magazine restriction in this state.

I don't hunt so I do not know what NO lead bullets does to hunters.
I understand there are many alternatives available anyway.

So I think we were lucky this past legislative season.
We were lucky they didn't BAN all semi-automatic rifles with detachable magazines like they wanted to.
Lucky they didn't pass SB53 that would have required an ammunition purchase permit with a finger print and paperwork filed with the DOJ for every purchase. This one would have BANNED internet ammunition sales completely.

I still think we were lucky and dodged a bullet ( so to speak) this year.

I envy you guys in gun friendly states.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
4,911 Posts
One BAD piece provides "Ex Post Facto" criminalization of possession of 'any Bullet Feeding device that can contain more than ten bullets or appears to contain more than ten bullets', and adds fines or imprisonment for up to one year for EACH such item possessed.
This would have been sued instantly. The US constitution absolutely disallows any ex-post facto laws. If murder was legal on Monday and you murdered someone late Monday night, the government cannot make murder illegal early on Tuesday morning and subsequently charge you for the murder committed on Monday night. The Framers put that in so the federal government could not go back and make something illegal that was legal at some time prior. The British did things like this. We made laws against such things.

Under this dumb law that was vetoed, a dummy 30-round magazine that in reality holds just six rounds would get you thrown into jail for a year? Is that not the deaf leading the blind that such incompetence ever made it through the channels of law to Jerry Moonbeam's desk? I ask again: Why would anybody want to live in Kalifonia?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,667 Posts
Stretch,

You are far too logical. These incremental steps will lead to the extinction of gun rights. As Ben Franklin said, "A man can get used to anything-even hanging." I am sure the anti-gunners will provide the rope.

Webley
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,834 Posts
........................
well us living in this over regulated state see these new laws as minimal compared to what we already have and what they are trying to legislate.

....................................
I still think we were lucky and dodged a bullet ( so to speak) this year.

...........................


See Webley's post above: RE: The Ben Franklin quote.

But of course current laws don;t seem too terribly bad to Californians - you've "evolved".... as they knew you would. I would like to see all conservative and gun-owning Californians move from that State, including you WoodCrafter. But NOT the communists. They belong there, rolling in their own....eh...muck. In return (and just to be fair to them) we would ship to them all violent criminals who've served their time. And there they would stay.

I'm reminded of the kid who needed $10 from his Dad. He asked for $25, causing a ruckus in the house. He then dropped to $20 and his Dad's screaming still didn;t stop. Finally, his father said "Tell you what... I'll give you ten". The kid was happy. Dad was happy. After all, Dad dodged a bullet (so to speak).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
87 Posts
I ask again: Why would anybody want to live in Kalifonia?
I came to California in 1975. I came for the sun and fun.
The non-restrictive car laws. Where you can register a hot rod with no fenders.
NO yearly car inspections by the DMV.(except for smog)
The fantastic climate year round.
You can go swimming in the ocean in the morning and skiing in the mountains in the afternoon.
You can see all 4 seasons within a hours drive.

We still have those things here but the state is highly restrictive in many other ways.
Gun laws are just crazy.
We let illegal aliens have drivers licenses.
You can't build a house without paying 10 of thousands of dollars in school taxes.
Business climate is one of the worst in the country.
We are a state where the illegal alien has more rights and privileges than citizens.

It is a different state now.
And now almost 40years later I would not make the same choice.

The entire country is different now.
It is a place where if you smoke you are an out-cast.
If you don't recycle you are wasteful.
It is a place where you don't want to offend anyone with the truth.
A place where they don't keep score during kids softball games because someone may get upset when they loose.
It is a place where many people hold the government responsible and not themselves.

Quite a different place now.
 

·
The Hog Whisperer (Administrator)
Joined
·
37,489 Posts
Hang in there. Maybe the democrats will finally annoy enough gun owners that they will get voted out of office. Who knows....

Sometimes it has to get worse before it gets better.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
87 Posts
A tubular magazine 22 rifle that can contain more than ten rounds, especially if it holds ten LR and you load Shorts, would get the possessor a year in jail, and possible loss of the right to possess firearms for ten years or more.

Best Regards,
Chev. William
I am sure tubular magazine were exempt from this.
 
1 - 20 of 30 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top