|
California 2nd Amend. Political Discussion & Activism Discuss gun rights activism and 2A related political topics here. All advice given is NOT legal counsel. |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#161
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Quote:
Newbie account with 4 posts defending OP. Hmmmm. Dual accounts? Calling Kes to confirm! |
#162
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
I am not taking sides in this debate (nor necessarily endorsing or disputing the view expressed in his video--God I am a lawyer), but I will defend him as a true patriot and supporter of gun rights, not to mention a bad *** with a firearm and great instructor. I recommend his courses to anyone. |
#163
|
||||
|
||||
Totally possible that there is something slightly (or deeply) wrong with him, but I find that less likely. It could just be that he doesn't want to be the only one on the cattle car.
|
#164
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
#166
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Just so everyone is clear, regulations can't create brand new punishments for breaking the law. If they say the bullet button has to remain on, there is nothing to threaten us with if it's taken off. Possession of a registered AW without a bullet button isn't mentioned in the law anywhere... |
#167
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Nobody here can predict the future, so nobody really knows what the hell is going to happen regarding gun laws here. We can speculate, but that's it. Most people didn't think Trump had a snowball's chance in hell of winning the presidency, but lo and behold. We know this it's a shiite state for many reasons, and everybody has their own way of doing what's right by them. Do what you're going to do, leave everybody else to their own decisions. Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk
__________________
"All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent." -Edmund Burke Last edited by SheepDog78; 01-05-2017 at 2:43 PM.. |
#168
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#169
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
You went from 0 to Hitler way too slowly. |
#170
|
||||
|
||||
Shouldn't there be a parody thread on this already?
|
#171
|
||||
|
||||
Another shill/troll.
__________________
C'mon man, shouldn't we ban Democracks from Cal-Guns? Or at least send them to re-education camps. |
#172
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
John Browning, thanks for the advice.
__________________
C'mon man, shouldn't we ban Democracks from Cal-Guns? Or at least send them to re-education camps. |
#173
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
#2 -- We hope so, but apparently some had trouble trying to de-register their older RAWs. #3 -- True, but they still have all the other RAW restrictions. I'm AW registering recently purchased stuff thats already registered and leaving many other things featureless. I personally think that is the way to go if you have multiple rifles. #4 -- Is not pertinent to the debate
__________________
C'mon man, shouldn't we ban Democracks from Cal-Guns? Or at least send them to re-education camps. |
#174
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Carry on. |
#175
|
||||
|
||||
I'm doing featureless. I'll put on a regular button at the same time. That's the plus for me. I'll be able to pass it on to my daughter if things stay the way they are. If I register, the gun dies with me.
That all being said, I know that every time I do something to neuter my gun, they'll do something ridiculous next year to make it even harder to own.
__________________
Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence. |
#176
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
#177
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
And how many SKS's with detachable magazines are in California today? If it walks like a duck talks like a duck.......
__________________
"You cannot invade the mainland of the United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass." -Isoroku Yamamoto, Commander-in-Chief, Imperial Japanese Navy WW2 Last edited by Intel0116; 01-05-2017 at 7:32 PM.. |
#178
|
||||
|
||||
I understanding is that they ether have to be turned over or the estate can give/sell them to someone in a state which they are allowed. The only restriction while big for a lot of people is that they can't be sold/given to someone in the state of CA.
|
#179
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
This also sets a precedent that any rifle to be confiscated while registered with the DOJ will likely be compensated. Unlike the 10+ mags or future semi-auto rifles (since u can sell it or remove it out of State). This alone will give pause for whole sale confiscation on RAW. Likely why the lawyers in DOJ probably prefer no one register. 150k RAW on the books, at just $1k a pop, that would be $150mil. Sure CA is rich State, $150mil is a drop in the bucket, but its big enough to catch voters attention. It will never pass through appropriation committee. Last edited by walmart_ar15; 01-05-2017 at 7:43 PM.. |
#180
|
||||
|
||||
That's correct. And if your kids don't live out of state your SOL. Your rifle will be confiscated and destroyed.
__________________
"You cannot invade the mainland of the United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass." -Isoroku Yamamoto, Commander-in-Chief, Imperial Japanese Navy WW2 |
#181
|
||||
|
||||
Well if that was the case as part of my will I would have it transferred to an out of state dealer and sold and the proceeds go to my family. I would never let the state have the satisfaction of chopping it up.
|
#182
|
||||
|
||||
Why wait ? You could do that now. Might as well get rid of it now so your kids never have memories of it with you and or with them and get attached to it. Get a mini 14 with the money you get, you can pass that on. Wait then that plan foils when they ban all semi auto rifles. See where this is going?
__________________
"You cannot invade the mainland of the United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass." -Isoroku Yamamoto, Commander-in-Chief, Imperial Japanese Navy WW2 Last edited by Intel0116; 01-05-2017 at 7:54 PM.. |
#183
|
||||
|
||||
Luckily I don't have nor really want any kids. As for the Mini 14 that is what I would have gotten instead if I bought an AR with the intention of going featureless. Well that and an M1A.
|
#184
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
It is also important that everyone registering to put their adult family member living under the same roof on the registery as well. In case u get run over by a bus unintentionally, ur family is not all of sudden in possession of UAW. Folks do this in free States with their NFA toys. |
#185
|
||||
|
||||
Amen brother
__________________
"You cannot invade the mainland of the United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass." -Isoroku Yamamoto, Commander-in-Chief, Imperial Japanese Navy WW2 |
#186
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
#187
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
However I have kids, and a huge amount of people that own BB Ar's do too, and it matters to us. Also many bought there rifles way before these ridiculous new regulations
__________________
"You cannot invade the mainland of the United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass." -Isoroku Yamamoto, Commander-in-Chief, Imperial Japanese Navy WW2 Last edited by Intel0116; 01-05-2017 at 8:11 PM.. |
#188
|
|||
|
|||
Yes, I believe it's correct if Trust is used to pass on ownership in CA. I seems to remember in original AW clause that a trustee/admin is exempt from procession while they dispose of the AW outside of CA.
|
#189
|
||||
|
||||
Ah ok. I get your point. Yes that is a good idea. I will need to update my own will to included the disposition of my now current BBRAW's. Have that money given to any currently living family otherwise to a Pro 2A foundation in CA. Maybe include a picture of the RAW, the check to the org, and my middle finger superimposed into the photo and send it to the CADOJ.
|
#190
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Quote:
ˌad ˈhämənəm/ adverb & adjective 1. (of an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining. I'll leave the personal attacks alone and discount the tasteless holocaust references as anger felt in the moment. If you feel threatened by some of the arguments made in this thread then I would think more about your positions, and how the anger is a reaction to not being able to maintain a cogent position. Maybe I am the wrong ambassador on the subject, but I have tried to keep any personal insults out of my posts. It's a tough time and the confusion sown by the legislators and the DOJ is extremely frustrating. |
#191
|
||||
|
||||
I'd like to add my theory of what happens in the next few years. If you go to Atlantic firearms or any of the other big retail outlets and check their CA inventory they have basically moved to selling featureless rifles, or more specifically adding grip raps and muzzle brakes to their rifles. If you go to your local gun shop your going to see that's what available right now.
I firmly believe the purpose of all anti-gun legislation is to destroy the juicy CA market for so called AW. I have estimated that market o be in the 250 million to 300 million dollar range PER YEAR, based on a simple metric of DROS applications. That equates to 50-100 million dollars in profit for the gun industry directly related to the selling of AW in the CA market. The advance of SB 880 and AB 1135 will most certainly put a dent in the market since people are going to be less interested in buying a neutered rifle for obvious reasons. That might be a 25% to 50% reduction in the market, but that's just my estimate. Later this year we will be able to better estimate what the numbers are. My question is what do you think the anti-gun movement will do when their strategists see that there is still a large market and income coming from said "featureless" rifles? My guess is that they are going to turn to the legislators to close another "loophole", as in their eyes what we consider a featureless rifle is just another bullet button loophole. That's the easiest, most low lying fruit- they have the entire system in place to simply add something to the feature list or re-define what a pistol grip means. |
#192
|
||||
|
||||
No, has not happened in 15 years. You might be thinking about the assault weapons permit, which is a business / dealer permit that requires periodic inspections.
|
#193
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
#195
|
|||
|
|||
F them featureless. They will be irate to see ar pattern rifles for sale in 2017 they might over reach. my prediction is that a salt weapon bans will be tossed out by SCOTUS with magazine capacity bans upheld. Would beat the current state of affairs. Count your blessings and worry less about the a***** in Sac. Be grateful the nasty woman lost. Go shooting teach someone to shoot.
|
#196
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Last edited by glockmen17; 01-06-2017 at 1:41 AM.. |
#198
|
|||
|
|||
Featurless is civil disobedience
Quote:
If, as you say (and I don't disagree) SACF ban is coming, then even registering your BBAW isn't going to stop that. If a SACH ban is coming, why give in to compliance with a stupid law that bans, essentially, one feature. Non-compliance will force them to actually ban SACF rifles and may get more CA gun owners riled up. Probably won't, but more likely than the small number of BBAW registered owners will. (5) We all know we're in the DOJ database(s) already. Why help them create yet another database? Compliance helps the State create yet another database as well as ceating more jobs for the bureaucracy, which only expands government sill further requiring a need to create more jobs. Even if you purchased prior to 2014 you're in the system. CA can get access to Federal databases. The government never deletes anything even when it's supposed to - unless something nefarious is going on. The argument that registration leads to confiscation, while now being made about BBAWs now, RAWs in the past and featureless in the future has also been made about every other category of firearm. I’ve seen discussions of how the eventual ban on .50BMG weapons started with registration and turned into an outright ban. The objective is to provide the State with a good idea of how many of these rifles are out there because if they can split off small groups and ban their firearms piecemeal, they will. The .50BMG ban happened because a tiny, tiny number of people had them and most gun owners didn’t see that as a threat. RAWs happened because a tiny number of people at the time had EBRs and most gun owners didn’t care because it didn’t affect them. The BBAW ban is going to happen because a small portion of CA gun owners have these rifles while most don’t see it affecting them. Everyone who registers confirms to the State how small that population of BBAW owners is and encourages them to try harder. A full on SACF rifle ban/registration would probably hit enough people to make them wake up. (7) Everyone who registers and complies further encourages the State to do more. “Hey, if these guys were willing to comply what else can we do?” Civil disobedience (because featureless rifles are not actually defined in the law) demonstrates that the law is ridiculous and unenforceable. By complying you agree that the law may not be ridiculous and could be enforceable. It doesn’t create strength in numbers. There aren’t enough of you to scare the State. It just confirms there are, maybe 200K people who they can safely ignore. (8) Your math assumes you buy everything and ignores how many people are willing to DIY things. It also assumes that the only cost to comply is monetary. Compliance is sticking your head in the ground and hoping. Civil disobedience is saying that you aren't going to comply with stupid laws. |
#199
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Why are you so completely invested in ensuring everyone complies and registers? . |
#200
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
HA!!!! I KNEW IT!!! Anyone with that many AK's HAS to be a real commie! . |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|