Members Login
Username 
 
Password 
    Remember Me  
Post Info TOPIC: 2nd ammendment


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 730
Date:
2nd ammendment
Permalink  
 


If anybody is interested.

 

Rally_zpsdd22db92.jpg



__________________

Winter eats heat the way darkness swallows light. The terrors of failed power and frozen stems are stymied with fire, smoke and white ash.

Cedarville, Mi



Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 1808
Date:
Permalink  
 

Obama would rewrite the constitution if he could. Damn country is ran by, and fullof a bunch of god damn panzy's.



-- Edited by shon42073 on Wednesday 9th of January 2013 06:45:00 PM

__________________


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 209
Date:
Permalink  
 

The organizers of this rally should also be aware that state legislators go home on the weekend.  They'll be protesting in front of the janitors.



__________________


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 730
Date:
Permalink  
 

Yup.  There is another protest in February that is slated for mid-week.



__________________

Winter eats heat the way darkness swallows light. The terrors of failed power and frozen stems are stymied with fire, smoke and white ash.

Cedarville, Mi



Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 158
Date:
Permalink  
 

I've been a hunter my whole life, but I don't see any reason to have automatic assault weapons. To blame your problems on Obama is mindless. Didn't mean to upset you but that's how I feel.

__________________


Veteran Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 66
Date:
Permalink  
 

I second that ed.

__________________


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 730
Date:
Permalink  
 

I've been a hunter my whole life, yet I don't see any reason for the government to regulate semi-automatic firearms.  I don't blame Obama but rather the misguided and ill informed.

 

Military weapon from the 1770's

 

images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSPyUzAET9LcODI2b4RP--dICwu71GfsFzCnGa-70yQY8jdeqRsIw

 

BTW, I'd guess what you consider a "automatic assault weapon" to be is an m-16.  Which was a copy of an ar-15 that was initially developed for sporting purposes prior to the development of the m-16.

 

They should ban hands, fists and feet first!!!!!

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8



__________________

Winter eats heat the way darkness swallows light. The terrors of failed power and frozen stems are stymied with fire, smoke and white ash.

Cedarville, Mi



Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 158
Date:
Permalink  
 

I'll make this my last comment seeing how there is a first amendment, and I don't want to get into an inane argument on a fishing forum. I'm 66 and have never taken more then 3 shots at anything in my life. As I recall you still have to aim and not just pull the trigger. Seeing how you choose to define an assault weapon for me, let me just say again that I see no reason for any hunter or anyone else to have an assault weapon, nor do I see any reason for any hunter to have a clip that will allow any traditional weapon to go into full auto mode spraying bullets into the general direction of a target without aiming. I have heard nothing about semi's nor have I heard any discussion of ending the 4th amendment.

__________________


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 730
Date:
Permalink  
 

Per the FBI from 2007-2011 there were 68,000 murders in the U.S.A.

2.7% of those were committed with weapons.  The FBI inludes poison, explosives, fire, narcotics, arms, hands, feet, drowning etc etc etc as being weapons while compiiing their data.

Of those committed with firearms, 1,874 of 46,313 were committed with a rifle.  The FBI counts all rifles the same, regardless of the make, model or design.  The actual use of an AR style is in "mass" shootings is roughly 3%.

WAY TO IDENTIFY THE PROBLEM.

And of course, more guns are a bad thing.  Sacramento Bee or you could just look at Chicago.

But an "assault weapons ban" would be awesome

btw there are roughly 240,000 legaly owned fully automatic weapons in the U.S.A. 

Waatts, Rodney King, Katrina, much worse?

tinfoil hat time.......

A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200 years.

Great nations rise and fall. The people go from bondage to spiritual truth, to great courage, from courage to liberty, from liberty to abundance, from abundance to selfishness, from selfishness to complacency, from complacency to apathy, from apathy to dependence, from dependence back again to bondage.



__________________

Winter eats heat the way darkness swallows light. The terrors of failed power and frozen stems are stymied with fire, smoke and white ash.

Cedarville, Mi



Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 209
Date:
Permalink  
 

I hunted a lot as a kid and the people I hunted with took great pride in killing what they shot at with one shot. Not that anyone did, but had someone shown up on a hunt with a rapid fire weapon with a dozen or more rounds in a magazine, they'd have been laughed at a lot and sent home.

AR-15s are not hunting weapons. They are not self defense weapons. They are people killing weapons.

I'm not going to comment any further on this subject either because when people start quoting Patrick Henry and comparing our democratically elected government to the absentee monarchy of George III, then I think they are missing the point of the whole 1776 independence fight. We won. We have liberty. We have representation with our taxation. We choose our leaders, we make our laws, and we get to replace them if they fail to live up to our expectations. We don't need an arsenal in the basement to fight tyranny. Time for America to grow up and embrace and enjoy the nation Jefferson, Washington, Franklin and the rest bequesthed to us instead of fearing it and undermining it through a constant threat of armed insurrection.

2 cents from a proud, happy, confident in our structures of government and our decisions as a people, and most importantly, unafraid American.

__________________


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 730
Date:
Permalink  
 

"AR-15s are not hunting weapons. They are not self defense weapons. They are people killing weapons"

To me, just my opinion,  that sounds like an increadibly emotional statement with little substance.  A factual statement would  be AR-15's are used extensivly in the hunting community, work exceptionally well as a self defense weapon (probably more so than ANY other firearm available), and the most common caliber (5.56/.223) is rather poor at killing people.

Should somebody break into my house and be a threat to myself or my family, I would prefer to use my AR over any other firearm that I own, to use in self defense.

With that said, I purchased my AR to hunt wild pigs with.  I chose a caliber and configuratiion that should work extreamly well for pigs.  I have done a lot of pig hunting in my life and feel that this rifle is just about perfect for my intended use.  Others may or may not agree, which is fine.

The 2nd ammendment isn't a law.  If the elected officials/states agree on making a change to the 2nd ammendment then that's fine.  Interesting to note that Jefferson, Washington and Franklin, whom you mentioned, endorsed the 2nd ammendment because they feared government.  Quite the opposite of what you wrote.

Comments and debats on issues are a blessing that this country allows.  I worry about or stuctures of government and the decisions of  high population centers, which drive elections and policy, scare the hell out of me as an American.

I'm more than happy to discuss further.



__________________

Winter eats heat the way darkness swallows light. The terrors of failed power and frozen stems are stymied with fire, smoke and white ash.

Cedarville, Mi



Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 463
Date:
Permalink  
 

We can all agree that there needs to be stricter back ground checks. That's the end of it.


__________________


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 209
Date:
Permalink  
 

Ok I'm gonna break my own rule just to ask about the AR15 being a good tool for self or home defense. I'm not an expert on the weapon but to the best of my knowledge it was designed to engage targets at a distance as well as to put rounds through things like walls and vehicles. If a guy breaks into my house at night the very last thing I'd reach for is an AR15, it's not a good close quarters weapon, for its size it has lousy stopping power, and when you start shooting at that intruder you really have no idea where the rounds are going to end up...they'll go through him the wall behind him and into a kids bedroom.

If there's someone in or trying to get into my house at night with mischief in mind they'll be greeted with a much more effective close quarters home defense weapon. A 12 gauge.

__________________


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 730
Date:
Permalink  
 

Shotguns make good home defense weapons.  Make one of those three rounds count, unless you removed the plug or have some sort of tacticool shotgun.    They still need to be aimed, just like any other firearm, as a pattern inside a home is suprisingly small. I'd prefer to have 30 but will settle for 10 (California) if the life of my family or I depend on it.

Interior walls really don't do much to stop a shotgun .  Overpenetration is a concern with any type of firearm when used in home defense.  For home defense, I wouldn't recommend full metal jacket rounds out of an AR any more than a handgun or slugs out of a shotgun.  If your interested in penetration of different firearms and ammunition, spend some time snooping around "The Box 'O Truth".  It's a very informative site and changed my views on some things.

While I disagree with your evaluation on an AR based firearm for home defense, I respect your decision to use a shotgun if the need arrises.  I would make a different choice and have no desire to restrict yours.



__________________

Winter eats heat the way darkness swallows light. The terrors of failed power and frozen stems are stymied with fire, smoke and white ash.

Cedarville, Mi



Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 217
Date:
Permalink  
 

Robert,

I appreciate your level-headed response and expected something more along the lines of the poker dudes I mentioned earlier who get awfully emotional about this issue.

Since you ask, I believe that in a perfect world we would all be responsible and healthy adults and nobody would have to regulate anyone or anything (i.e., libertarianism would work).  However, that is not the world we live in.  So we don't allow people to have mini-guns or RPG's or other big ordnance because these weapons can cause a boatload of damage if used by the wrong crazy people or accidentally discharged by the careless.  IMO, it really comes down to where you draw the line and what you are willing to give up to keep our society safe and sane.

Being a tinkerer (and a software developer), I am interested in all kinds of guns and am fascinated by the fact that a lot of the engineering was developed in the early 1900's and lives on today (think John Browning).  I also believe that having a few effective weapons makes our household more secure although my wife disagrees with this.  However, because I believe that we have to be open to compromise in the name of the overall good, I am willing to give up access to certain firearms to get them out of the hands of the irresponsible.  The situation is out of hand: the other day I saw that in many states the Barrett .50 cal military grade sniper rifle is legal.  WTF?

If you are concerned with home defense, a Mossberg 500 or Remington 870 and maybe a .357 magnum revolver if as much firepower as you will ever need.  And nobody is talking about eliminating hunting rifles.  With these weapons a crazy person can still kill, but not on the devastating scale we have seen in the last few years.

I realize this is controversial, but if we don't outlaw the sale of semi-automatic weapons then any legislation will be just for show.  I might not be safe when the zombies attack, but I feel that my 2nd amendment rights will still be intact. 

Finally, if anyone has a reason to be paranoid about the government coming into their house and taking it over, it would be me since the exact thing happened to my parents 70 years ago.  And I don't think it's likely.



-- Edited by iamamultitasker on Friday 11th of January 2013 01:29:06 PM

__________________


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 217
Date:
Permalink  
 

Bob Loblaw wrote:

I hunted a lot as a kid and the people I hunted with took great pride in killing what they shot at with one shot. Not that anyone did, but had someone shown up on a hunt with a rapid fire weapon with a dozen or more rounds in a magazine, they'd have been laughed at a lot and sent home.

AR-15s are not hunting weapons. They are not self defense weapons. They are people killing weapons.

I'm not going to comment any further on this subject either because when people start quoting Patrick Henry and comparing our democratically elected government to the absentee monarchy of George III, then I think they are missing the point of the whole 1776 independence fight. We won. We have liberty. We have representation with our taxation. We choose our leaders, we make our laws, and we get to replace them if they fail to live up to our expectations. We don't need an arsenal in the basement to fight tyranny. Time for America to grow up and embrace and enjoy the nation Jefferson, Washington, Franklin and the rest bequesthed to us instead of fearing it and undermining it through a constant threat of armed insurrection.

2 cents from a proud, happy, confident in our structures of government and our decisions as a people, and most importantly, unafraid American.


Matt (and Ed),

I couldn't agree more with you guys.   Furthermore, when you talk about shotguns as an effective home defense weapon it is disingenuous for people to bring up a 3 round capacity restriction which only applies to hunting.  If you are concerned with home defense a Remington 870 or even a chinese clone ($200) is all you need.  I play poker with several guys who have a whacky view of the US government and think their AR-15's and a billion rounds is going to make them secure against a meltdown of society.  I wonder how happy they can be full of Alex Jones induced fear and paranoia.

However, there is a point to be made in looking at the FBI statistics which show that that an overwhelming number of firearm homicides occur with a handgun.  IMO, this means that to do anything meaningful in gun control, a new law will have to limit access to handguns, not just assault rifles.  In the Sandy Hook shootings, the kid could have done just as much damage with just his Glock and SS.

Agree that a fishing message board is not an appropriate area to debate this, but when brought up, I feel like we have to put out our opinions so others don't think we tacitly approve.

Signed,

A responsible firearm owner.



__________________


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 730
Date:
Permalink  
 

Clay,

Thank you for the response.  It seems we disagree a little about shotguns, which is fine.  I did make thdis laimer of removing the plug to attain more than 3 rounds.  I know from experience with 3 different models it was a pita but probably pilot error on my part.  Two (bird guns) have plugs in them and one (coyote gun) does not.

Interesting that you feel AR based guns should be regulated after mentioning the use of handguns and the FBI statistics.  High end sportscars go too fast and cause death/injury so lets regulate them and Toyota Carollas???????  Your decisions/opinions seem to be based off of the statistical data (FBI) data.  Based on that data, how do you justify your stance regarding regulation of AR's?

For a real eye opener, take a peak at where those FBI stats occur.  Though not exclusive, it certainly is a soc ial/demographic  issue.

I consider myself a libertarian, yet I spend a lot of time surfing the democratic underground.  Limiting my discussions to a bunch of like minded people with similar ideas yeilds no insight or opposing views.  I feel this is an xcellent forum to dscuss this issue as it can enlighten individuals on both sides of the fence.



__________________

Winter eats heat the way darkness swallows light. The terrors of failed power and frozen stems are stymied with fire, smoke and white ash.

Cedarville, Mi



Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 730
Date:
Permalink  
 

"IMO, it really comes down to where you draw the line and what you are willing to give up to keep our society safe and sane."

That right there is a key point.  Different people have different opinions on where they are drawing the line and what they are willing to give up.  Aside from the usual standby argument of it's the constitutional right granted by the 2nd ammendment I'm a little up in odds as to which way to lean.  If I had any reason to believe that limiting my rights and imposing those limitations on others would result in a positive outcome, then I would have to consider that option.  Unfortunatly, crime data has proven without a doubt that gun control does nothing to prevent violent crime.  If you dobt that, just for starters, take a look at Chicago.  Chicago has shown the exact opposite, an increase in gun regulations has been meet with an unprecedented rise in violent crime.

It is interesting to note that per the FBI, over the last 20 years, violent crime rates in the U.S.A. have droped on average from roughly  20%-60% depending on category.  This has happend as the number of firearms in the U.S.A has grown exponentially.  If you snoop around the FBI page I linked above and take a look at some of the other charts, the demographics of violent crime really stands out.  As I stated above, IF I had any reason to believe that limiting my rights and imposing those limitations on others would result in a positive outcome, then I would have to consider that option. 

It would be a hard pill to swollow; accepting restrictions on myself to supposibly curb violent crime of individuals that live in very defineably areas.  These areas are ghetto, is their any reason to possibly belive that condoning the government to  regulate my firearm access is going to have one iota of a chance to reduce violent crime in those areas.

"I am willing to give up access to certain firearms to get them out of the hands of the irresponsible."

Do you honestly think that gun restrictions will keep a gang banger from shooting another gang banger?

Earlier it was mentioned that why regulate an AR based weapon when stats dictate that they were used seldom, especially compared to handguns.  I'm not aware of ANY violent crimes that were committed with a .50 bmg.  To the best of my knowledge, they are used primairly for long range target practice and limitied hunting.  The .50 bmg is illegal in the state of California but there are a large number of other calibers that are just as capable.  Even the lowly .308 deer rifle round is used in 1,000 yard target matches.

We already talked about shotguns etc in the use of home defense.  Different opinions, and I won't impose upon you what you are allowed to use and would expect the same.

Though, interesting news even from today regarding handguns and home defense by the way.  Basically a women with kids hid in an attic room to avoid an armed (crowbar) intruder in their house.  He broke through 2 doors to get to them, at which point she shot 6 times, hitting him with 5, before fleeing the house.  The intruder left the house and drove away in his car.  She had a revolver and was out of ammunition.

The day of Sandyhook, how many kids did the nutjob in China kill with a knife?  How many kids did Timothy McVeigh kill?  Yes those questions were a little over the top.

Now for tinfoil hat time....if the government tries to confiscate semi-automatic weapons.....I strongly believe there will be a civil war in this country.

I would love to see some justification for your stance regarding outlawing semi-automatic weapons, AR's etc but so far it's been nothing but personal opinion. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

And yes, DiFi HAS targeted hunting rifles and shotguns.



__________________

Winter eats heat the way darkness swallows light. The terrors of failed power and frozen stems are stymied with fire, smoke and white ash.

Cedarville, Mi



Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 217
Date:
Permalink  
 

Alright then.  This is starting to go the way I thought it would in the beginning.

Since I still don't think this is an appropriate forum for discussing (or in your case, debating) the issue, I would like to leave you with the fact that nowhere in any of my posts did I advocate "CONFISCATION" or "OUTLAWING."  I stated:

"if we don't outlaw the sale of semi-automatic weapons then any legislation will be just for show"

Making it illegal to sell semi-automatic weapons is very different than confiscation or making the mere possesion of semi's illegal.



__________________


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 730
Date:
Permalink  
 

iamamultitasker wrote:

Alright then.  This is starting to go the way I thought it would in the beginning.

Since I still don't think this is an appropriate forum for discussing (or in your case, debating) the issue, I would like to leave you with the fact that nowhere in any of my posts did I advocate "CONFISCATION" or "OUTLAWING."  I stated:

"if we don't outlaw the sale of semi-automatic weapons then any legislation will be just for show"

Making it illegal to sell semi-automatic weapons is very different than confiscation or making the mere possesion of semi's illegal.


My bad, you are correct in that you did NOT advocate the confiscation or outlawing of semi-automait weapons.  I should have paid a little more attention to detail.

If we outlaw the sale of semi-automatic weapons then those that have them now, well good for them.  Those that don't, gee tough luck, my bad so sad. 

Is that really that much different that the 10 round magazine restriction in this state?  The high capacity (whatever that magice number really is, but we shall call it 11+) magazines that were owned pior to the state ban are still legal.  The same holds true for pre ban AR weapon systems and .50 cal rifles.

If I wanted to I could drive across state lines and purchase a high capacity magazine to bring back into this state, though I choose not to as that would be a criminal act with rather stiff consequences. 

Do you believe that somebody with I'll attentions or perhaps a criminal history/gang banger etc really cares if they break the law by going out of state to get a high capacity magazine?

"I still don't think this is an appropriate forum for discussing (or in your case, debating) the issue"

The absolute beauty of that is you and a few others (here, private messages and emails) do in fact discuss this issue.  Again, whats the purpose/benefit of preaching to the chor...and this is the rants and raves section.  I'm guessing it is out of the comfort zone of some individuals and that's why they are not posting to the open forum but contacting via other means.  Again, just my hunch.

I have presented hard number data and mixed in some opinions and a few questions.

Do you honestly think that gun restrictions will keep a gang banger from shooting another gang banger?

I would love to see some justification for your stance regarding outlawing semi-automatic weapons, AR's etc but so far it's been nothing but personal opinion. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Your decisions/opinions seem to be based off of the statistical data (FBI) data.  Based on that data, how do you justify your stance regarding regulation of AR's?

I have asked other questons outside of this thread that do no have a response either.  If somebody could not defend their stance on a position and just state that they "feel" it's the right thing to do regardless of what they do or do not think they know, at least they are giving an honest response to an honest question.

This one was kind of touchy and I shied away from it at first, but the recent death of the original "Crocodile Dundee" in Australia had me change my mind. 

"Finally, if anyone has a reason to be paranoid about the government coming into their house and taking it over, it would be me since the exact thing happened to my parents 70 years ago.  And I don't think it's likely."

Think Hitler....... [Indeed, there was no need for the Nazis to pass a law like that, because the earlier Weimar government had already passed gun registration laws. When I asked Cramer about his research, he said, "The laws adopted by the Weimar Republic intended to disarm Nazis and Communists were sufficiently discretionary that the Nazis managed to use them against their enemies once they were in power." In other words, they didn't need to pass additional laws. The Nazis did pass a weapons law in 1938, but that only added restrictions to the previous law, especially for Jews and other "non-citizens.]

By the way, how do you think the authorities knew where to go while confiscating firearms in New Orleans following hurricane Katrina?

back to tinfoil hats again....maybe Obama will just issue an executive order or join the UN guns treaty?



__________________

Winter eats heat the way darkness swallows light. The terrors of failed power and frozen stems are stymied with fire, smoke and white ash.

Cedarville, Mi



Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 730
Date:
Permalink  
 

Facts v opinions.
Figured as much.

Feinsteins bill might surprise a few if they actually dug into it. It takes a few "days" to read.

__________________

Winter eats heat the way darkness swallows light. The terrors of failed power and frozen stems are stymied with fire, smoke and white ash.

Cedarville, Mi



Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 730
Date:
Permalink  
 

List of Proposed California Gun Control Measures -- 500 Round Max, No Grandfathering, No Detachable Mags, Mandatory License | The Truth About Guns
^^Video in link if you can stomach it.

A press conference just wrapped up in California where the Democrats (who have an overwhelming majority in the state) unveiled their latest gun control agenda. And since the Democratic majority is so strong, these aren’t proposals — it’s a preview of things to come. According to one person who was watching the press conference, the following new restrictions on personal liberties will be coming to the most “liberal” state in the union . . .


-Possession of hollow point bullets and similar assault bullets a felony.
-Must register and report ammo purchases. Only purchase max 500 rounds.
10 round magazine limit
-ALL magazines must be fixed to the gun (can not be removed without the use of a tool)
100% prohibition of all magazines greater than 10 rounds. All previous grandfathered magazines become illegal. Felony if you keep one.
-Changing definition of shotgun revolving cylinder — Basically only single shot shotguns will remain legal.
-Bullet Buttons will become illegal — All AR and AK style rifles that are currently equipped with them will be designated Assault Weapons. Felony to possess.
-All gun owners now must be licensed like drivers.
-All gun owners must carry gun liability insurance



__________________

Winter eats heat the way darkness swallows light. The terrors of failed power and frozen stems are stymied with fire, smoke and white ash.

Cedarville, Mi



Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 730
Date:
Permalink  
 

 

 

California's Anti-Gun Senate Democrats Announce Plans to Further Infringe on the Second Amendment

Last week, anti-gun Assembly Democrats announced their plans to eliminate the right of law-abiding citizens to exercise their Second Amendment rights.  Yesterday, anti-gun Senate Democrats did the same.  In a press release, Senate Democrats announced several egregious anti-gun bills they are planning to promote and pursue in the 2013 legislative session.
 
According to the Brady Campaign’s national ranking of state gun control laws, California is already THE “best” (most restrictive) state in the nation and has already banned pseudo "assault weapons."  So, even though California is considered the most restrictive state, anti-gun state Senators seem to think more gun laws will reduce their violent crime problem where current gun control laws have failedBy definition, violent and insane criminals violate laws, especially gun control laws.  They neither obey gun bans, nor register their firearms and absolutely do not comply with any gun control schemes whatsoever.  As a result, innocent law-abiding citizens are the only ones who pay the price and are left defenseless and made victims or criminals.
 
The language in several of these onerous bills have not been finalized or assigned a bill number, but below we have listed the bill explanations according to the press release.
 
Detachable Magazines, introduced by "F" rated state Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg, prohibits the sale, purchase, manufacture, importation or transfer of all semi-automatic rifles that can accept detachable magazines.
 
"High Capacity" Magazines, introduced by "F" rated state Senator Loni Han****, bans the possession of "high capacity" ammunition magazines over ten rounds.
 
Shotgun Definition, introduced by "F" rated state Senator Hanna-Beth Jackson, redefines a banned shotgun with a revolving cylinder to include the new technology of a shotgun-rifle combination.
 
Ownership Record, also introduced by Senator Steinberg, requires firearm ownership records on ALL firearms.
 
Gun Loans, introduced by "F" rated state Senator Marty Block, bans unregulated gun loans, with exceptions, including hunting.
 
APPS Expansion, introduced by "F" rated state Senator Mark Leno, expands Armed Prohibitive Persons System (APPS) list to include more than two DUIs, among other crimes, and would prohibit those individuals from residing in a home with any firearms.
  
Firearm Safety Certificate, introduced by Senator Block, establishes a safety certificate for handguns, mirroring the training currently required annually to lawfully carry a concealed weapon (CCW).
 
Senate Bill 47, again introduced by "F" rated state Senator Leland Yee, requires the registration of most semi-automatic centerfire rifles with detachable magazines sold between January 2001 to December 2013 and bans tools ("bullet button") used to detach and replace magazines from semi-automatic rifles.
 
Senate Bill 53, introduced by "F" rated state Senator Kevin de Leon, requires ammunition purchasers in California to obtain an ammunition purchase permit first by passing a full and complete background investigation, registration and thumb printing for all ammunition sales and bans the internet/mail order purchase of all ammunition.
 
Senate Bill 108, introduced by Senator Yee, requires a person who is 18 years of age or older, who owns, leases, rents, or is other legal occupant of a residence to store a firearm that he or she owns or has lawful possession of locked in a container or otherwise be disassembled each time the person leaves his or her property.
 
Senate Bill 140, introduced state Senators Leno and Steinberg, authorizes the California Department of Justice (DOJ) to raid existing Dealers' Record of Sales (DROS) funding to eliminate the 19,000 backlog of individuals on the APPS.


__________________

Winter eats heat the way darkness swallows light. The terrors of failed power and frozen stems are stymied with fire, smoke and white ash.

Cedarville, Mi



Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 730
Date:
Permalink  
 

Feinstein has done lost her mind. 

  .....the best course of action is to remove all weapons from law enforcement and private citizens so no one else gets hurt,” said a Senate communications intern. “When the gunman realizes that nobody else is armed, he will lay down his weapons and turn himself in…. that’s just human nature.”

One of the lead anti gun polaticians in Ca said  ".....disarmament was a good idea, except for public officials...."

Linky link

People joke about stocking up on tinfoil.  Satatements like these make me wonder.



__________________

Winter eats heat the way darkness swallows light. The terrors of failed power and frozen stems are stymied with fire, smoke and white ash.

Cedarville, Mi



Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 730
Date:
Permalink  
 

http://armsandthelaw.com/archives/Hardy%20testimony%20Judiciary%20final%202d.pdf



-- Edited by lightfoot on Saturday 2nd of March 2013 06:34:02 PM

__________________

Winter eats heat the way darkness swallows light. The terrors of failed power and frozen stems are stymied with fire, smoke and white ash.

Cedarville, Mi

Page 1 of 1  sorted by
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.



Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse
Powered by ActiveBoard