Post: #1

Another blow dealt to the 2nd amendment in California:

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-s...story.html

Quote:"State Senate approves sweeping new gun control laws for California"

by Patrick McGreevy

The state Senate on Thursday approved sweeping new restrictions on using guns in California in response to the December mass shooting by two terrorists that left 14 dead in San Bernardino.

Lawmakers approved 11 bills including measures mandating background checks for Californians buying ammunition and outlawing the manufacture and sale of semiautomatic rifles with detachable magazines.

The bills, which next go to the Assembly for consideration, represent the most ambitious effort at gun control in decades in California, which already has some of the strictest gun laws in the nation.

Gun bills have traditionally had a harder time in the Assembly, but Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon said this week he is committed to pushing them through. The bills also must pass muster with Gov. Jerry Brown, who has vetoed some gun control measures in the past that he felt were overreaching.

“Gun violence has reached epidemic proportions across our nation,” Senate President Pro Tem Kevin De León (D-Los Angeles) told his colleagues. He said 30,000 people are killed by guns every year in the United States.

“We cannot stand by while our communities suffer from this horrific violence,” he said. “These proposals take common sense steps to keep weapons and ammunition out of the hands of criminals.”

Republican senators opposed all but one of the bills, arguing that criminals will find a way to get guns and ammunition despite the proposed new laws.

“The criminals will not be affected,” state Sen. Jim Nielsen of Gerber said during the floor debate. “They will not pay any attention to these bills. These bills disarm the law-abiding public.”

State Sen. Ted Gaines (R-Rocklin) called the bills “an assault on our 2nd Amendment rights.”

The measures banning rifles with detachable magazines and requiring background checks for ammo buyers are opposed by the National Rifle Assn., Gun Owners of California and the National Shooting Sports Foundation, the trade association for the firearms industry.

The prohibition on semiautomatic guns with detachable magazines would result in “banning many popular semiautomatic firearms currently legal under California law while doing nothing to keep guns out of the hands of criminals,” the foundation said in a statement.

The gun laws rose out of public outrage over the Dec. 2 San Bernardino shootings, which also resulted in a separate gun control initiative by Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom that is expected to qualify for the Nov. 8 ballot.

The massacre shed light on loopholes in California’s 1989 ban on assault rifles.

Two of the bills approved by the Senate would ban the manufacture and sale of semiautomatic rifles with detachable magazines as well as semiautomatic, center-fire rifles with “bullet buttons,” a recessed button that, when pressed by a sharp object, allows removal of the magazine.

Those already possessing such guns would have to register them with the state as assault rifles.

State Sen. Isadore Hall (D-Compton) said his bill on “bullet buttons” addresses the kinds of guns used in the San Bernardino shooting. ”These types of firearms have no legitimate use for sport hunters or competitive shooters,” Hall said. “They have been designed to facilitate the maximum destruction of human life.”

Another measure approved Thursday would ban the possession of large-capacity magazines, those holding more than 10 bullets. Sen. Loni Hancock (D-Berkeley) told her colleagues that large-capacity magazines were found at the scene of the San Bernardino shooting.

"If the shooters had a 10-round magazine, four of [14 victims] would still be alive," she said.

Sen. Jeff Stone (R-Murrieta) said the bill drew opposition from gun owners contacting his office.

“This represents the incremental beginning of the taking of weapons by government,” he said. Hancock said the bill allows owners to sell the magazines to licensed gun dealers or out of state.

Yet another bill approved Thursday, authored by De León, would require those buying ammunition to present identification, which would be used by the seller to check to make sure the buyer is not a felon or otherwise prohibited from possessing guns.

That bill is supported by Los Angeles Police Chief Charlie Beck and Los Angeles County Sheriff Jim McDonnell as a way to make sure criminals do not get ammunition. It passed on a 24-15 vote, with all Republicans opposing it, along with Democratic Sens. Richard Roth of Riverside and Cathleen Galgiani of Stockton.

Stone said the ammo bill would impose “drastic and unjustified restrictions on law-abiding citizens.”

De León said special procedures have been taken to try to get the bills approved by end of June so that Newsom would have the ability to withdraw his initiative, although the lieutenant governor said he is going to the ballot regardless of any legislative action.

Other bills approved Thursday by the Senate would:

-- Require owners of homemade guns to get a serial number for the firearms, register them with the state and undergo a background check.

-- Ask voters in November to reverse a provision of 2014’s Proposition 47 that made thefts of guns worth $950 or less a misdemeanor. The measure would allow felony charges in all gun theft cases. Republicans supported this measure.

-- Mandate that gun owners report lost or stolen firearms to the authorities within five days of discovery that they are missing. Some straw purchasers illegally sell guns and then later claim they were stolen.

-- Limit lending of firearms to specified family members.

-- Establish a Firearm Violence Research Center at one of the University of California campuses to study potential policies to reduce shooting deaths and injuries.

Post: #2

Gun violence is actually going down in the US. Yet there is this push to further regulate guns.

Post: #3

There was a "health and guns" study that came out about a half a year ago. It found a correlation between assault weapons bans and increased gun deaths. Didn't get much publicity...

Post: #4

I don't understand how the push for all this anti-gun legislation isn't raising more red flags. I feel people must be blind or willfully ignorant not to see what's going on here. I think it's worth sharing a few quotes from notable men on the importance of arms:

[attachment=31613]

[attachment=31614]

[attachment=31615]

[attachment=31616]

There's a reason why our forefathers saw it fit to include the 2nd amendment. Anyone trying to deprive us of our constitutional right to bear arms should be looked upon with great suspicion.

Post: #5

The way these creeps clothe their intentions with a moral imperative is enough to make one sick.

Post: #6

I live in CA.

Alot of my shooting buddies are pissed about this.

It's a good thing I made my unserialized AR-15, don't have to report shit the gov doesn't know you have.

You're going to see a shit ton of guns and gun accessories orders start flowing in before this gets approved.

The only way around this is to purchase shit in Nevada/Arizona. Which of course has been done in the past.

Post: #7

Take direct action and support the NRA, Gun Owners of America and US Concealed Carry Association:

https://home.nra.org/
Donald Trump Video
https://www.nranews.com/series/speeches/...l-meetings
Donald Trump to the NRA "I WILL NOT LET YOU DOWN"

http://www.gunowners.org/

https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/ and their excellent insurance to protect you in case you are forced to take a life in self defense:

https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/shield/
God forbid you ever have to use your firearm in self-defense… but if you do, you’re going to need help. Good, solid, legal help. As a USCCA PLUS member you’re protected by the Self-Defense SHIELD. This is an insurance-backed benefit that may help pay for your legal defense in the event of a self-defense shooting.

Post: #8

Don't you just love how the limousine liberals in California are so anti-gun? Their money and paid security details insulate them from the threats the rest of us may face. How anyone could think disarming the population makes that population safer is a fucking mystery to me.

The arrogance of this generation to think it knows better than any generation who lived before it is astounding. The forefathers were smart fucking guys and now the SJWs are trying to discredit them because they're viewing the past through a modern filter of politically correct bullshit.

Here are some quotes we need to be sharing, some reminders of what this gun control push is all about:

[attachment=31617]

[attachment=31618]

[attachment=31619]

[attachment=31620]

Post: #9

I'm glad I don't live in CA.

Post: #10

(05-20-2016 04:12 PM)kaotic Wrote:  I live in CA.

Alot of my shooting buddies are pissed about this.

It's a good thing I made my unserialized AR-15, don't have to report shit the gov doesn't know you have.

You're going to see a shit ton of guns and gun accessories orders start flowing in before this gets approved.

The only way around this is to purchase shit in Nevada/Arizona. Which of course has been done in the past.

Did you see that part of the lgeislation specifically targets 80% lowers? They want to require the owners to somehow get a serial number on them. Eventually they'll have a cutoff time to get it registered, and if you're caught without it afterward, you face penalties which naturally include forfeiture.

Post: #11

(05-20-2016 06:22 PM)porscheguy Wrote:  

(05-20-2016 04:12 PM)kaotic Wrote:  I live in CA.

Alot of my shooting buddies are pissed about this.

It's a good thing I made my unserialized AR-15, don't have to report shit the gov doesn't know you have.

You're going to see a shit ton of guns and gun accessories orders start flowing in before this gets approved.

The only way around this is to purchase shit in Nevada/Arizona. Which of course has been done in the past.

Did you see that part of the lgeislation specifically targets 80% lowers? They want to require the owners to somehow get a serial number on them. Eventually they'll have a cutoff time to get it registered, and if you're caught without it afterward, you face penalties which naturally include forfeiture.

I purchased mine cash, I'm not going to get that registered.

They can't prove I ever bought it, I shoot at a private range only right by my house and have no intention of taking it to the desert or public range.

I'm actually going to ask a buddy to get me 2 more lowers.

You can literally get them for $120 + machining costs.

California is becoming retarded when it comes to guns, I'm going to fight it tooth and nail.

Post: #12

The gun argument is interesting when you throw actual real life matters into the mix.

If a woman is anti-gun you should pick up on her fears of a man breaking and entering into her home and nobody else is around to help. Cops are 5 minutes away at best and he is less than 30 seconds from you.

What would she go for? What would be her first thought?

"I'll grab a knife"

Why not a gun? At least a gun gives the would-be murderer pause for thought.

Post: #13

All these people are anti-gunners until someone breaks into their house while they're sleeping.

Then, they rush to their phones to call Men Wearing Uniforms With Guns to take care of the bad guys. How long does it take the guns to show up? It's not the <5 seconds it takes to unlock my pistol safe. They better hope their invader isn't violent.

The US is safe enough that these people in general don't have to face the direct consequences of their idiocy. Eventually, it will correct itself.

I'll be observing the correction, poolside, with my AR-15, AK-47, a horde of ammo, and cute girls to go shooting with.

Post: #14

^^^ I remeber Reagan fondly but the 1986 machine gun ban was lame. Made that shit way too expensive.

Post: #15

(05-20-2016 06:30 PM)kaotic Wrote:  I purchased mine cash, I'm not going to get that registered.

They can't prove I ever bought it, I shoot at a private range only right by my house and have no intention of taking it to the desert or public range.

I'm actually going to ask a buddy to get me 2 more lowers.

You can literally get them for $120 + machining costs.

California is becoming retarded when it comes to guns, I'm going to fight it tooth and nail.

Here's the thing though. Assume the worst happens and you somehow get caught with this "illegal unregistered assault" weapon. You could be facing felony weapons chargers, years in prison, and the complete end of life as you know it.

That is what they're banking on. They know law abiding people have too much at stake, and will... abide by the law. Terrorists, madmen, and criminals will not be deterred by gun laws; they are already committed to carrying out acts with worse penalties than illegal possession of firearms, so that lesser charge is not going to be a deal-breaker for them.

This is about anarcho-tyranny, pure and simple. You pass laws to target the law abiding. Passing anti-gun laws is a way to ensure only criminals and the state have the ability to carry out violence, and that the average American can only be a helpless target of that violence visited on him by criminals and the state.

Post: #16

(05-20-2016 07:28 PM)Foolsgo1d Wrote:  The gun argument is interesting when you throw actual real life matters into the mix.

If a woman is anti-gun you should pick up on her fears of a man breaking and entering into her home and nobody else is around to help. Cops are 5 minutes away at best and he is less than 30 seconds from you.

What would she go for? What would be her first thought?

"I'll grab a knife"

Why not a gun? At least a gun gives the would-be murderer pause for thought.

The average time for 911 response is 10 minutes, not counting the parts of the country you are in, in small towns and rural areas you can be as far as 30 minutes away from the closest cop.

I rather have a Glock with me.

Post: #17

Quote:"In response to the San Bernardino shootings"

Yet banning immigration from Saudi Arabia/Pakistan, much more effective and easier than banning guns, never occurs to them...

Post: #18

I'd like to see Trump get in and then mandate gun ownership. It says "the right to bear arms shall not be infringed". Nothing in there stopping it being encouraged. If they can constitutionally force people to buy health insurance they can force them to buy a gun.

Post: #19

Sorry to go off topic, but any references to Spartans being some gold standard of "armed and free" is bullshit.

I suppose technically their multitudinous slaves were not "Spartans" but none-the-less, it would be like enshrining the slave traders of Africa as exemplars of libertarian free market enterprise.

Post: #20

Quoted stuff from here.

Quote:Ammunition regulation: SB 1235 by Senate leader Kevin de León (D-Los Angeles) requires background checks to buy ammunition. It also creates a license to sell ammunition, and creates a new system for collecting information about those sales.

This will do nothing to stop or slow crime. It's just an excuse for the state to make it harder for law abiding people to buy ammunition, and for the state to collect fees and stick a few more leeches on the public teat.

They tried the same thing in NY. As far as I know, the background check system never got made and eventually the idea went away.

Also, I suppose they've never heard of one of these:



All case preparation included, I can load several thousand rounds in a single day on my progressive press. Even including my labor it is either on par with, or much cheaper than, buying ammo at a store. Just depends what I'm loading.

Quote:Ban on large ammunition magazines: SB 1446 by Sen. Loni Hancock (D-Berkeley) bans the ownership of any ammunition clip that holds more than 10 rounds.

When has this ever made a difference? Besides the fact that a criminal could simply buy some normal capacity magazines in Nevada with cash and nobody would bat an eye--assuming there weren't any readily available on the black market--a magazine change only takes a few seconds. 3 seconds for a rifle, 2.5 seconds for a pistol is easy with practice if you're coordinated. Many people are significantly faster than that.

And of course, I don't know of any clips that hold more than 10 rounds anyway.



Speaking of, why didn't they outlaw Garands? Don't they know how the Garand was designed for mass MurderDeathKill and even ejects the clip for you, so you can get right back to killing as fast as possible?

Quote:Bullet buttons: SB 880 by Sen. Isadore Hall (D-Compton) expands the legal definition of an "assualt weapon" to include a group of rifles with ammunition clips that can be quickly swapped out by using a bullet to push a small release button.

This is just a continuation of the idiocy in the previous bill.

This guy's not particularly fast, but he can still reload an SKS, which doesn't even have detachable magazines (as built), in a few seconds. First reload is at ~40 seconds.

Quote:SB 894 by Sen. Hannah-Beth Jackson (D-Santa Barbara) requires reporting most lost or stolen guns within five days.

Or what? This is supposedly to combat straw purchases, but straw purchases are already illegal. You think people who knowingly commit crimes are going to go talk to the cops and draw attention to themselves? This is just going to fuck with normal, law abiding gun owners. You know, like every other gun law does.

Quote:"Ghost guns": SB 1407 by De León requires a person to get a serial number from state officials before making or assembling a gun.

More fees here, I suspect. And again, not going to stop criminals. I'm not saying it's never happened, but I've never heard of a case where someone used a homebuilt gun in a violent crime. Criminals aren't into doing things the hard way.

Quote:Gun violence research: SB 1006 by Sen. Lois Wolk (D-Davis) creates a new University of California center for researching gun-related violence.

More leeches, and it will certainly serve as a propaganda outlet.

Quote:Two other bills, both of which originated in the Assembly, were amended by Senate Democrats.

Gun theft: AB 1176 would make the theft of a gun a felony, a change in the 2014 law passed by voters as Proposition 47. As such, this proposal would have to be approved by voters on the Nov. 8 statewide ballot.

Why are guns being treated as special? Like someone is less dead if I brain them with a sledgehammer?

Quote:Gun lending: AB 1511 places tighter rules on lending someone a gun -- limiting those loans to family members or a licensed hunter.

More fucking with law abiding people for no reason at all.

-------------------------

None of these proposals will do anything but make it harder for normal people to defend themselves while sucking more money out of their wallets. So the only question is, are the CA legislators stupid, ignorant, and incompetent, or are they malicious and simply lying about why they are making the lives of criminals easier at the expense of good people? I'm sure the answer is somewhere in the middle.

Post: #21

"Sorry to go off topic, but any references to Spartans being some gold standard of "armed and free" is bullshit."

This just draws us to an even better example against gun control. The spartans held the much more numerous helots in perpetual slavery and tyranny by keeping themselves armed and the helots disarmed. It's just a nation-level version of a hostage situation.

This is why the state aspect of the purpose of gun rights needs to be emphasized. Individual self-defence against criminals was only ever a minor aspect of it. Collective self-defence against the state was always the primary reason.

This is why even though he did a reasonable job economically, I can never respect John Howard. His line "it's not a left right issue, it's a public safety issue" merely showed his leftist taint. The biggest threat to public safety isn't a lone gunman, but the state.

Post: #22

^Doesnt matter, just as long as he reloads faster than all those unarmed school kids or moviegoers can run.

Post: #23

The past few years, post Sandy Hook, have seen the antis get more brazen with their attacks on the 2A. Because we're winning. Gun rights have miraculously made more progress during the last 10 or so years then at any other time in several decades, building upon the Heller and McDonald decisions with remandings like Caetano.

Just this month the 9th Circuit rules buying guns is protected under 2A

Also see Grace vs DC which was a rather epic smackdown with pages 27, 38, 39, and 43 of particular interest.

It's not, nor has it ever been about guns (or smoking/public health/seat belts/etc) its about control. Every action, every cause du jour, every protected class, is aimed at eviscerating the loyalties of a normal healthy society. If we are busy fighting among each other, we ignore the elephant in the room which is government powerful enough to give you everything you need and to take away everything you have. The destruction of the family unit, of conservative religion, the sanctity of life, etc is all being erased and replaced with loyalty to the state which desires an exclusive monopoly on all forms of human action.

So all is not lost, we have to keep up the press and give the antis no quarter.

Post: #24

(05-20-2016 01:50 PM)LeoneVolpe Wrote:  -- Ask voters in November to reverse a provision of 2014’s Proposition 47 that made thefts of guns worth $950 or less a misdemeanor. The measure would allow felony charges in all gun theft cases. Republicans supported this measure.

A reversal of an earlier kickback to the black and hispanic communities, since they are more than likely the largest share of arrestees under such offenses.

Quote:-- Establish a Firearm Violence Research Center at one of the University of California campuses to study potential policies to reduce shooting deaths and injuries.

[/quote]

An obvious kickback to the state university system.

Post: #25

The death rate in the US just rose for the first time in a decade. The cause was not guns. It was drugs and suicide. The political movement at the moment seems to be toward more legalization. An influential liberal recently began touting full legalization of all drugs. This is something that libertarians like Ron Paul has favored for years. However, the liberal writer's twist on legalization is having full government control over drug production and distribution.

Imagine a future where the government restricts gun ownership but supplies everyone with affordable narcotics.