Calguns.net  

Home My iTrader Join the NRA Donate to CGSSA Sponsors CGN Google Search
CA Semiauto Ban(AW)ID Flowchart CA Handgun Ban ID Flowchart CA Shotgun Ban ID Flowchart
Go Back   Calguns.net > POLITICS, LITIGATION AND ACTIVISM > 2nd Amend. Litigation Updates & Legal Discussion
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

2nd Amend. Litigation Updates & Legal Discussion Discuss California 2A related litigation and legal topics here. All advice given is NOT legal counsel.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #3241  
Old 06-28-2019, 3:48 PM
TruOil TruOil is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 639
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sousuke View Post
On the flip side, however, there is now absolutely no reason why an existing gunowner should have to pay the larger DROS fee for a gun purchase. They've basically set the system up so that first time buyers pay 19 and after that you pay a buck. There is zero defense for charging 19 now and skipping the waiting period.
Mmm, I don't think so sports fans. Just because you passed a background check today doesn't mean that you will pass one tomorrow. The State completes the same in-depth review for every purchase, and the cost to do so doesn't diminish just because you have had one in the past. I for example buy less than one gun a year, and it might be several years between purchases. The DOJ has no idea what I've been up to in the intervals between purchases, and for all it knows, I might have been a very naughty boy...
Reply With Quote
  #3242  
Old 06-28-2019, 4:23 PM
Sousuke Sousuke is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 1,965
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TruOil View Post
Mmm, I don't think so sports fans. Just because you passed a background check today doesn't mean that you will pass one tomorrow. The State completes the same in-depth review for every purchase, and the cost to do so doesn't diminish just because you have had one in the past. I for example buy less than one gun a year, and it might be several years between purchases. The DOJ has no idea what I've been up to in the intervals between purchases, and for all it knows, I might have been a very naughty boy...
But you'd be on the APPS if you were naughty no?
__________________
WTB: Chronograph
WTB: T Series Hi Power
WTB: Bisley Revolver (Uberti type)
WTB: Pietta 45lc conversion cylinder
Reply With Quote
  #3243  
Old 06-28-2019, 4:42 PM
Librarian's Avatar
Librarian Librarian is offline
Administrator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Concord
Posts: 38,692
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Blog Entries: 6
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TruOil View Post
you have not bought a handgun since 2000
Just a nit: that would be 1991, when handgun purchases were forced into CA FFLs.
__________________
No one will really understand politics until they understand that politicians are not trying to solve our problems. They are trying to solve their own problems - of which getting elected and re-elected are number one and number two. Whatever is number three is far behind.
- Thomas Sowell
I've been saying that for years ...

There is no value at all complaining or analyzing or reading tea leaves to decide what these bills really mean or actually do; any bill with a chance to pass will be bad for gun owners.

The details only count after the Governor signs the bills.


Gregg Easterbrook’s “Law of Doomsaying”: Predict catastrophe no later than ten years hence but no sooner than five years away — soon enough to terrify people but distant enough that they will not remember that you were wrong.


Not a lawyer, just Some Guy On The Interwebs.


Reply With Quote
  #3244  
Old 06-28-2019, 4:42 PM
broadside's Avatar
broadside broadside is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 679
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TruOil View Post
Mmm, I don't think so sports fans. Just because you passed a background check today doesn't mean that you will pass one tomorrow. The State completes the same in-depth review for every purchase, and the cost to do so doesn't diminish just because you have had one in the past. I for example buy less than one gun a year, and it might be several years between purchases. The DOJ has no idea what I've been up to in the intervals between purchases, and for all it knows, I might have been a very naughty boy...
I think what he is saying is that the ammo background check for $1 is doing the same thing as a firearm purchase so why is it $19 for each firearm check when obviously $1 is sufficient one you have something in AFS
Reply With Quote
  #3245  
Old 06-28-2019, 5:18 PM
kemasa's Avatar
kemasa kemasa is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Ventura County, CA
Posts: 10,161
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TruOil View Post
Mmm, I don't think so sports fans. Just because you passed a background check today doesn't mean that you will pass one tomorrow. The State completes the same in-depth review for every purchase, and the cost to do so doesn't diminish just because you have had one in the past. I for example buy less than one gun a year, and it might be several years between purchases. The DOJ has no idea what I've been up to in the intervals between purchases, and for all it knows, I might have been a very naughty boy...
If you have a COE, then you shouldn't have to have a background check nor a higher fee for a firearm. The same with an AFS record, which if they detect a criminal violation AND you have an AFS record, they should come have a chat with you to make sure that you don't have a firearm. Just as your have a drivers license, if you get pulled over, it is checked to see if it was revoked, the same would be true for the COE.

The NICS check is FREE. When a cop pulls you over, they do a check on your for FREE. It is a database search. As the DROS fund shows, it doesn't cost them $19, so it should be reduced.
__________________
Kemasa.
FFL Transfer/Special Order Dealer since 1993.
Net-FFL list maintainer.

Never try to teach a pig to sing. You waste your time and you annoy the pig. - Robert A. Heinlein
Reply With Quote
  #3246  
Old 06-28-2019, 8:42 PM
Sputnik's Avatar
Sputnik Sputnik is offline
Shiny
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: East Bay
Posts: 1,532
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by broadside View Post
I think what he is saying is that the ammo background check for $1 is doing the same thing as a firearm purchase so why is it $19 for each firearm check when obviously $1 is sufficient one you have something in AFS
Quote:
Originally Posted by kemasa View Post
If you have a COE, then you shouldn't have to have a background check nor a higher fee for a firearm. The same with an AFS record, which if they detect a criminal violation AND you have an AFS record, they should come have a chat with you to make sure that you don't have a firearm. Just as your have a drivers license, if you get pulled over, it is checked to see if it was revoked, the same would be true for the COE.

The NICS check is FREE. When a cop pulls you over, they do a check on your for FREE. It is a database search. As the DROS fund shows, it doesn't cost them $19, so it should be reduced.
This all makes perfect sense to me. If you're already in the system (AFS) or you have a COE then the very same one dollar verification should be all we have to go through and these ammo law regulations seem to back that up somewhat. Of course it also sounds very similar to what was argued in court a while ago and I think that failed to go our way (as usual).
Just because it makes sense doesn't mean thats what will be done. Far from it, in fact.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 1:05 PM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Proudly hosted by GeoVario the Premier 2A host.
Calguns.net, the 'Calguns' name and all associated variants and logos are ® Trademark and © Copyright 2002-2018, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.
Calguns.net and The Calguns Foundation have no affiliation and are in no way related to each other.
All opinions, statements and remarks made by Calguns.net on this web site and elsewhere are solely attributable to Calguns.net.