CA "Gun Control" Bill basically bans all firearms
-
No new posts
Moderators: k9car363, alicefoeller | Reply |
![]() |
Slower Than You ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() It also makes criminals of those who already possess certain firearms that are "on-the-list." If the governor signs these, I wonder how they'll stand up in court? http://www.firearmspolicy.org/the-issues/california/2013-2014/ Summary: SB 683 [Firearms: Firearm Safety Certificate]....Passes 28-11 SB 53 [Ammunition: Purchase permits] ...Passes 22-14 Summary: Ammunition buyer permit requirement; face-to-face ammo sales only at licensed dealers. •Requires annual background check and permit for the purchase of ammunition. •Requires all ammunition sales to occur face-to-face. •Requires assistance from retail staff in a store to handle all ammunition for purchase. •Requires ammunition vendors to submit sales records to the CA Department of Justice. SB 396 [Firearms: Magazine Capacity] ....Passes 24-14 Summary: Magazine ban •Criminalizes the possession of high capacity magazines regardless of the date the magazine was acquired – full retroactive ban. •Results in a taking of property that was previously lawful. •Requires magazine bodies to be no longer than is necessary to accommodate 10 rounds of ammunition, the spring, and the follower. •Bans “10/30” style magazines and any factory magazine that is designed to accommodate large-frame handguns, rifles, and shotguns. SB 755 [Firearms: Prohibited Persons] ....Passes 25-12 Summary: Expands the list of “prohibited persons” •This bill vastly expands the list of prohibitions to firearms possession. •SB 755 adds several misdemeanors to the list of prohibiting offenses including hazing, transferring a firearm without completing the transaction through a licensed firearms dealer, furnishing ammunition to a minor, carrying ammunition onto school grounds, and several others. •Makes it a felony to possess a firearm if a person has been convicted of two or more crimes within a three-year period and was found to have been under the influence of drugs or alcohol during the commission of the crimes. •Makes it a felony to possess a firearm if a person has been convicted of possessing any controlled substance for sale. •Makes it a felony to possess a firearm if a person has violated any protective order that was issued due to a threat of violence. •Prohibits the possession of a firearm during court ordered outpatient for mental illness during that treatment. SB 47 [Firearms: Assault Weapons Bullet Buttons] ....Passes 22-14 Summary: Ban and forced registration of firearms. •Expands the definition of “assault weapon” to include rifles that have magazines which can be removed without disassembly of the “action”. •A firearm’s “action” is not defined in the bill, leaving it open to subjective interpretation by law enforcement officers, District Attorneys, judges, and juries. •Owners of “off list” “bullet button”, and other “mag-locked” firearms would be required to register (at the gun owner’s expense) each gun with the DOJ by July 1, 2014, or face imprisonment and other criminal liability. •Even after registration, transfer and inheritance of SB 47-regulated firearms would be banned – resulting in an effective taking of lawfully owned private property. SB 374 [Firearms: Assault Weapons registration] .....Passes 23-15 Summary: Ban and forced registration of all semi-automatic rifles (including rimfire) •Requires gun owners to register every semi-automatic rifle, including rimfire. •Requires gun owners of existing semi-auto rifles to submit fingerprints and forms to DOJ, which will be tracked in a government database. •Bans sales and transfers of virtually all semi-automatic rifles after Jan 1, 2014. •“Bullet button” and similarly “mag-locked” off-list (OLL) rifles would be considered banned “assault weapons”. Edited by bcart1991 2013-05-31 9:32 AM |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() ![]() |
Master![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() If I were governor I'd veto that just on the grounds that it'll put the state on the losing side of an endless stream of expensive lawsuits. And California is already broke. |
![]() ![]() |
![]() Originally posted by spudone If I were governor I'd veto that just on the grounds that it'll put the state on the losing side of an endless stream of expensive lawsuits. And California is already broke. That's never stopped them before. |
![]() ![]() |
![]() Originally posted by spudone If I were governor I'd veto that just on the grounds that it'll put the state on the losing side of an endless stream of expensive lawsuits. And California is already broke. Have you met our governor? Nicknamed Moonbeam? Idiot (the guv'ner, not you) |
![]() ![]() |
Master ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() Shockingly, after raising taxes again, the state is supposedly running a small surplus (a few billion is considered small in CA). The legislature is scrambling to spend the surplus ten times over, without addressing any debt, of course. Oh, and Moonbeam is increasing funding to inner city schools by up to 35% at the expense of funding to suburban schools. Is it any wonder they are now trying to ban all weapons & ammo? Cali is looking better by the day. |
|
RELATED POSTS
![]() | Wisconsin bill would eliminate workplace flu-shot requirement Pages: 1 2 | ||
![]() | Internet Sales Tax Bill Pages: 1 2 3 | ||
![]() | |||
![]() |
RELATED ARTICLES
| ||||
|
| |||
|
|