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 > GENERAL DISCUSSION > General gun discussions > CGN's Best Threads (Limited Posting)
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

CGN's Best Threads (Limited Posting) This forum is for storing and or easy accessing useful or important threads.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 01-02-2007, 10:40 AM
xenophobe's Avatar
xenophobe xenophobe is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor - Lifetime
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: SF Peninsula/South Bay Area
Posts: 7,071
iTrader: 13 / 100%
Default New Revelations in 2007 for California Firearms Owners! Updated 1/28/07

We have a new bullet tip mag release that allows for attachable mag off-list builds:
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...ad.php?t=46802
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...ad.php?t=45321

Detachable magazine Simonov rifles:
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...ad.php?t=45331

.50 BMG options that aren't banned by California:
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...ad.php?t=45332

Loopholes that may allow ownership of previously banned Roberti-Roos firearms:
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...ad.php?t=45333
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...ad.php?t=45779

A way to build a SB-15 exempt assault-style pistol:
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...ad.php?t=45419

A list of AR/AK series firearms that can be made into non-Assault Weapons:
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...ad.php?t=34397

A Summary of AB-2728 and what it does and does not accomplish:
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...ad.php?t=45170

Category 1 Assault Weapons modified to non-semiautomatic CA legal status
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...ad.php?t=45779

Want a SB-15 banned "unsafe" double action revolver? Diamondbacks and Cobras and Pythons, Oh My!
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...ad.php?t=45558NEW!

U-15 California Legal Stock Alternative:
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...ad.php?t=42322

New MonsterMan Grip:
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...ad.php?t=45370

Also look forward to:

Hunt v. Brown, a case that is fighting the Attorney General on the grounds that the Assault Weapons laws are a mess and can't be easily enforced.

Parker v. District of Columbia, a case that could affect 2nd Amendment rights in the whole nation.


Individually, they might just bring a yawn to some. In the larger picture, they pretty much destroy what is left of the AW laws in California which may send shock waves throughout the whole nation. Thanks to the NRA, all of our members here, and an indecisive California Department of Justice, without whom most of this would not be feasible. And, thank you for AB-2728.

I honestly believe all the hard work, debate and 'out of the box thinking' here is directly responsible for a majority of what has happened in California in 2006, and 2007 looks to be even more promising!

Last edited by xenophobe; 01-28-2007 at 7:57 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 01-02-2007, 10:52 AM
Unsub Unsub is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 21
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Thanks for this. It would be nice for every "New for 2007" thread to be posted in here, without clutter or debate (I will delete this post, or a mod can, in order to unclutter it).
__________________
"It's really their killing potential," Alison Merrilees, legal counsel for the Firearms Division of the attorney general's office, said in explaining why assault weapons were banned. "The pistol grip allows them to be sprayed randomly. You can kill lots of people without having to reload."

----------------------------
"ich bin vom bund! ich biete dir hilfe an," sagte der butzemann, "gib mir deine waffen."
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 01-02-2007, 10:53 AM
ivanimal's Avatar
ivanimal ivanimal is offline
Janitors assistant
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: East Bay
Posts: 13,787
iTrader: 176 / 100%
Blog Entries: 2
Default

Good post Xeno stuck as requested.
__________________
"I would kill for a Nobel peace prize." Steven Wright"
Board Member CGSSA Donate now!
NRA LIFE MEMBER
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 01-02-2007, 10:55 AM
xenophobe's Avatar
xenophobe xenophobe is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor - Lifetime
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: SF Peninsula/South Bay Area
Posts: 7,071
iTrader: 13 / 100%
Default

Thanks Ivan!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Unsub
Thanks for this. It would be nice for every "New for 2007" thread to be posted in here, without clutter or debate (I will delete this post, or a mod can, in order to unclutter it).
That is my intent for creating this thread. Kind of a one stop view to see what's new. I will edit it as per request, or when I see new threads that should be posted here.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 01-02-2007, 12:15 PM
guimus guimus is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 864
iTrader: 20 / 100%
Default

I would love to have a little microphone in the CA DOJ firearms division office this morning as everyone is getting back to work and reading what all those crazy calgunners have been up to over the weekend...
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 01-02-2007, 1:17 PM
xenophobe's Avatar
xenophobe xenophobe is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor - Lifetime
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: SF Peninsula/South Bay Area
Posts: 7,071
iTrader: 13 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TacticalTim
Does this mean my Yugo 56/44 or whatever the hell it's called I got from Turner's can now legally have a detach mag system on it?
Yes. The link is in the first post of this thread, in case you missed it.
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...ad.php?t=45331
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 01-02-2007, 1:17 PM
383green's Avatar
383green 383green is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Riverside, CA
Posts: 4,320
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by guimus
I would love to have a little microphone in the CA DOJ firearms division office this morning as everyone is getting back to work and reading what all those crazy calgunners have been up to over the weekend...
First outrage, then denial, then desperate scrambling, and then (hopefully) some involuntary career changes.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 01-02-2007, 1:17 PM
Stanze's Avatar
Stanze Stanze is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Diego
Posts: 2,905
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Good post, but no mention of DAs now have the option of charging a so-called AW violation as a infraction beginning 1/1/07.
__________________
Constitutionally, officials cannot license or register a fundamental right.

"It is the first responsibility of every citizen to question authority." - Benjamin Franklin


Quote:
"Lifetime warranty and excellent customer service don't mean a thing when your gun fails during a zombie attack." -Stanze
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 01-02-2007, 1:28 PM
xenophobe's Avatar
xenophobe xenophobe is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor - Lifetime
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: SF Peninsula/South Bay Area
Posts: 7,071
iTrader: 13 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stanze
Good post, but no mention of DAs now have the option of charging a so-called AW violation as a infraction beginning 1/1/07.
If and when someone makes an in-depth analysis of exactly what AB2728 does, I'll add it to the post. If there is already a thread that does this, post or PM me the link.

From what I've seen so far, this hasn't been done recently.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 01-02-2007, 3:01 PM
hoffmang's Avatar
hoffmang hoffmang is offline
No, I am not a Moderator!
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Peninsula, Bay Area
Posts: 18,492
iTrader: 14 / 100%
Default

My post here does an ok job of summarizing AB-2728:
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...ad.php?t=45170

-Gene
__________________
Gene Hoffman
Chairman, The Calguns Foundation

DONATE NOW
to support the rights of California gun owners. Follow @CalgunsFdn on Twitter.
Opinions posted in this account are my own and not the approved position of any organization.
I read PMs. But, if you need a response, include an email address or email me directly!


"The problem with being a gun rights supporter is that the left hates guns and the right hates rights." -Anon
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 01-02-2007, 6:33 PM
Builder's Avatar
Builder Builder is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: San Fernando Valley
Posts: 566
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

To All,
Please help me edit this letter. Thanks.

Dear "Out of State FFL or Distributor",
In 2006, gun owners in California were able to win back some freedoms which have gone into effect on January 1st, 2007. Here's the generalized synopsis: http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...ad.php?t=45423
Over 50,000 AR-15 receivers have legally entered the state within the last year. AR-15 and AK-47 firearms are legal in CA as long as they don't have any prohibited features and have a detachable magazine OR they have prohibited features and have a Fixed 10 round magazine. We don't get both (prohibited features and detachable magazine). Since our assault weapon laws are written for centerfire firearms, they do not apply to rimfire. Rimfires can have detachable magazines AND evil features. There are still named assault weapons so the manufacturer and model must be on the banned list to be illegal. If it isn't listed, then it is legal, or as we call them, Off-List Lowers or Off-List Receivers. Any off-list firearm must still follow the rules of evil features with a 10 round fixed magazine OR no evil features and detachable magazine. As an example, the AK-47 simply needs to have the pistol grip and flash hider removed for it to be legal in CA, assuming of course that it isn't a named banned manufacturer. Since the list was created in 1989, most of the new AK manufacturers are not on the banned list. None of the Romanian AK's are listed; they just can't have any evil features and the detachable magazine, to be imported legally. Simply removing the evil features meets the letter of the law. The list of banned (illegal) assault weapons is listed at: http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/dwcl/12275...1b121ac95b0045 under section 12276.
The evil features are listed in section 12276.1(a).
Section 12276.5 has been removed by the new law AB2728 which went into effect on 1/1/2007.
One final note, the way that the assault weapons law is written, it only applies to persons WITHIN THE STATE who are legally responsible, not persons outside of the state. As written, "12280. (a)(1) Any person who, within this state, manufactures or causes to be manufactured, distributes, transports, or imports into the state, keeps for sale, or offers or exposes for sale, or who gives or lends any assault weapon........."
Check with your firearms attorney and you'll see that this is true. This means that you and your company aren't responsible for mistakes in violating California law. It is only us residents who are responsible.
Thanks very much,
Builder
__________________
Big boy's toys; turning hydrocarbons into noise!
Liberals & children have a similar reaction of interpreting limits as confinement rather than safety.
It's a fine line between naive, ignorant, stupid, & idiot.
Tomorrow - the greatest labor saving device of today.
"Rapid adoption of large-scale societal change is a bad idea." - Howard Johnson
Life Member

Last edited by Builder; 01-02-2007 at 6:46 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 01-02-2007, 6:40 PM
grammaton76's Avatar
grammaton76 grammaton76 is offline
Super Moderator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 9,537
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Builder
To All,
Please help me edit this letter. Thanks.

Dear "Out of State FFL or Distributor",
In 2006, gun owners in California were able to win back some freedoms which have gone into effect on January 1st, 2007. Here's the generalized symopsis:
"Synopsis", not "symopsis". I wouldn't point this out, but you did ask for help editting.

I would also replace the word "evil" with "prohibited" when talking about evil features. While it's common in CA jargon, "evil" would sound to an out-of-stater kind of crackpot-ish.
__________________
Primary author of gunwiki.net - 'like' it on Facebook at http://www.facebook.com/#!/pages/Gunwiki/242578512591 to see whenever new content gets added!
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 01-02-2007, 6:48 PM
Builder's Avatar
Builder Builder is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: San Fernando Valley
Posts: 566
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Thank you grammaton! Your changes have been added!
Yeah, 6172, breaking them up looks better.
__________________
Big boy's toys; turning hydrocarbons into noise!
Liberals & children have a similar reaction of interpreting limits as confinement rather than safety.
It's a fine line between naive, ignorant, stupid, & idiot.
Tomorrow - the greatest labor saving device of today.
"Rapid adoption of large-scale societal change is a bad idea." - Howard Johnson
Life Member

Last edited by Builder; 01-02-2007 at 7:15 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 01-02-2007, 7:09 PM
6172crew's Avatar
6172crew 6172crew is offline
Super Moderator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Concord CA
Posts: 6,271
iTrader: 12 / 100%
Default

To All,
Please help me edit this letter. Thanks.

Dear "Out of State FFL or Distributor",

In 2006, gun owners in California were able to win back some freedoms which have gone into effect on January 1st, 2007. Here's the generalized synopsis: http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...ad.php?t=45423

Over 50,000 AR-15 receivers have legally entered the state within the last year. AR-15 and AK-47 firearms are legal in CA as long as they don't have any prohibited features and have a detachable magazine OR they have prohibited features and have a Fixed 10 round magazine. We don't get both (prohibited features and detachable magazine). Since our assault weapon laws are written for centerfire firearms, they do not apply to rimfire, rimfires can have detachable magazines AND evil features.

There are still named assault weapons so the manufacturer and model must be on the banned list to be illegal. If it isn't listed, then it is legal, or as we call them, Off-List Lowers or Off-List Receivers. Any off-list firearm must still follow the rules of evil features with a 10 round fixed magazine OR no evil features and detachable magazine. As an example, the AK-47 simply needs to have the pistol grip and flash hider removed for it to be legal in CA, assuming of course that it isn't a named banned manufacturer.

Since the list was created in 1989, most of the new AK manufacturers are not on the banned list. None of the Romanian AK's are listed; they just can't have any evil features and the detachable magazine, to be imported legally. Simply removing the evil features meets the letter of the law. The list of banned (illegal) assault weapons is listed at: http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/dwcl/12275...121ac95b00 45 under section 12276.
The evil features are listed in section 12276.1(a).
Section 12276.5 has been removed by the new law AB2728 which went into effect on 1/1/2007.

One final note, the way that the assault weapons law is written, it only applies to persons WITHIN THE STATE who are legally responsible, not persons outside of the state. As written, "12280. (a)(1) Any person who, within this state, manufactures or causes to be manufactured, distributes, transports, or imports into the state, keeps for sale, or offers or exposes for sale, or who gives or lends any assault weapon........."

Please check with your firearms attorney and you'll see that this is true. This means that you and your company aren't responsible for mistakes in violating California law. It is only us residents who are responsible.


Thanks very much,
Builder


I just broke it up alittle which makes it easier fo me to read, not sure if you want that done or not. If this is cluttering up this post I can remove them and we can start a new one...just let me know.
__________________

HMM-161 Westpac 1994
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 01-02-2007, 10:32 PM
midnitereaper's Avatar
midnitereaper midnitereaper is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 279
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by xenophobe
Hunt v. Brown, a case that is fighting the Attorney General on the grounds that the Assault Weapons laws are a mess and can't be easily enforced.

Parker v. District of Columbia, a case that could affect 2nd Amendment rights in the whole nation.
Any links to more information on these cases?
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 01-03-2007, 12:01 PM
Scarecrow Repair's Avatar
Scarecrow Repair Scarecrow Repair is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Internet Tough Guy(tm), them thar hills
Posts: 2,426
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by midnitereaper
Any links to more information on these cases?
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/search.php
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 01-03-2007, 11:45 PM
Jarhead4's Avatar
Jarhead4 Jarhead4 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 217
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by xenophobe

Hunt v. Brown, a case that is fighting the Attorney General on the grounds that the Assault Weapons laws are a mess and can't be easily enforced.

Parker v. District of Columbia, a case that could affect 2nd Amendment rights in the whole nation.
I can't wait for these two to be settled!!!
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 01-04-2007, 5:47 AM
Ford8N's Avatar
Ford8N Ford8N is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Northern Rhovanion
Posts: 5,176
iTrader: 17 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by garand1945
See suggestion in blue.

Great work!
The Colt SP1 is not on the list.

It says: (5) Colt AR-15 series

I think the recent court ruling struck the "series" stuff.

The Roberti/Roos list has some problems now. It should be an interesting year.

And now the DOJ can't add anymore weapons to the 'list".

Last edited by Ford8N; 01-04-2007 at 5:52 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 01-05-2007, 1:27 PM
DIG's Avatar
DIG DIG is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: CA -> TX
Posts: 922
iTrader: 63 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 383green
First outrage, then denial, then desperate scrambling, and then (hopefully) some involuntary career changes.
I think that is what everyone (and myself included) is hoping for but sadly, not reality. Despite the numerous victories for CA gun owners in 2006, the battle goes on. Unfortunately, the baby-steps we make to get our God-given rights back, may not be enough. The wheels of the machine are turning and we will never have the upper-hand but we must keep motivated to press on.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 01-06-2007, 11:12 AM
xenophobe's Avatar
xenophobe xenophobe is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor - Lifetime
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: SF Peninsula/South Bay Area
Posts: 7,071
iTrader: 13 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DIG
The wheels of the machine are turning and we will never have the upper-hand but we must keep motivated to press on.
That is the whole point of this particular thread, not to show what we have accomplished, but where we go from Jan 1, 2007 and on...

All I have to do is look at the first post, and all the information that it is host to and I get a good feeling. It's been over half a decade since I've felt like this in California. Things are looking brighter.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 01-06-2007, 11:29 AM
Rich S.J. Rich S.J. is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default CA to ban em all?

So I hear word on the street is our new AG is making plans and has written a rough draft of a bill to declare any semi auto rifle with a detachable magazine, an "assult weapon" and therefore illegal as banned.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 01-06-2007, 11:40 AM
hoffmang's Avatar
hoffmang hoffmang is offline
No, I am not a Moderator!
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Peninsula, Bay Area
Posts: 18,492
iTrader: 14 / 100%
Default

That rumor is composed of facts that don't actually lead to the result it implies.

Lockyer's staff did try to introduce a new Rulemaking to stem the tide of AR and AK style rifles. That Rulemaking is likely to fail due to internal inconsistencies. Also, I suggest you read the summary I wrote on AB-2728 at the top of this thread. This was legislation that Lockyer's team begged to pass.

Brown has stated both "no new laws" and "focus on real criminals."

I think that bodes well for us.

-Gene
__________________
Gene Hoffman
Chairman, The Calguns Foundation

DONATE NOW
to support the rights of California gun owners. Follow @CalgunsFdn on Twitter.
Opinions posted in this account are my own and not the approved position of any organization.
I read PMs. But, if you need a response, include an email address or email me directly!


"The problem with being a gun rights supporter is that the left hates guns and the right hates rights." -Anon
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 01-06-2007, 12:48 PM
bwiese's Avatar
bwiese bwiese is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Jose
Posts: 26,862
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich S.J.
So I hear word on the street is our new AG is making plans and has written a rough draft of a bill to declare any semi auto rifle with a detachable magazine, an "assult weapon" and therefore illegal as banned.
That rumor is more likely due to gunshop legend, self-magnified over time, than any DOJ activity. Someone read the last proposed rulemaking and thought it applied to every semiauto rifle.

Some gun folks just can't read.
__________________

Bill Wiese
San Jose, CA

CGF Board Member / NRA Benefactor Life Member / CRPA life member

No postings of mine here, unless otherwise specifically noted, are
to be construed as formal or informal positions of the Calguns.Net
ownership, The Calguns Foundation, Inc. ("CGF"), the NRA, or my
employer. No posts of mine on Calguns are to be construed as
legal advice, which can only be given by a lawyer.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 01-08-2007, 10:02 AM
luvtolean's Avatar
luvtolean luvtolean is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Idaho
Posts: 2,064
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

And some are desparate to prove they were right that Brown would "ruin" us.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 01-08-2007, 11:58 AM
jnojr's Avatar
jnojr jnojr is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 7,999
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich S.J.
So I hear word on the street is our new AG is making plans and has written a rough draft of a bill to declare any semi auto rifle with a detachable magazine, an "assult weapon" and therefore illegal as banned.
Even if this is currently a rumor, it's also nearly inevitably the way they're going to go. The Socialists cannot and will not accept a dismantling of the creaky gun-control machine they've built in California. Other states look to CA and say "Hmmm, they have an 'assault weapon' ban, we can too!" If CA were to reverse position and let these laws become unenforceable, that could lead to a shock wave of damage to gun control across the nation, and that just will not be permitted.

I'm going to get myself an M1A sooner rather than later, and hopefully an M1 Carbine. I have some magazines stashed away somewhere for them. They might not be banned this year, but I wouldn't count on having a whole lot of time. I made the mistake of being lulled into complacency once... never again.
__________________


San Diego FFLs | San Diego ranges
I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it. --Thomas Jefferson
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 02-05-2007, 3:19 PM
chris's Avatar
chris chris is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: In Texas for now
Posts: 17,621
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

keep us updated. we here at calguns will do it for those who are too busy to help out.
__________________
http://govnews.ca.gov/gov39mail/mail.php

Quote:
Public Safety Chairman Reggie Jones Sawyer, D-Los Angeles said, “This is California; we don’t pay too much attention to the Constitution,”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z6Dj8tdSC1A
contact the governor
https://govnews.ca.gov/gov39mail/mail.php
In Memory of Spc Torres May 5th 2006 al-Hillah, Iraq. I will miss you my friend.
When Hell is full the dead will walk the Earth. (Dawn of the Dead)
NRA Life Member.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 02-08-2007, 7:46 PM
ajl2121 ajl2121 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 325
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Out of curiousity...Where in CA do you reside xenophobe? Most places in CA must be hard to live in for someone who is scared of different races.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 02-08-2007, 9:52 PM
royta royta is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Morgan County, Utah
Posts: 168
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ajl2121
Out of curiousity...Where in CA do you reside xenophobe? Most places in CA must be hard to live in for someone who is scared of different races.
Are you back on the marijuana? There's more than one meaning to xenophobe.

http://www.bartleby.com/61/47/X0004700.html

http://education.yahoo.com/reference...ntry/xenophobe

http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/netdict?xenophobe

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenophobe

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenophobia - pay particular attention to this one.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenophobe_(video_game)

http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/war.../xenophobe.htm
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 02-08-2007, 11:39 PM
xenophobe's Avatar
xenophobe xenophobe is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor - Lifetime
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: SF Peninsula/South Bay Area
Posts: 7,071
iTrader: 13 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ajl2121
Out of curiousity...Where in CA do you reside xenophobe? Most places in CA must be hard to live in for someone who is scared of different races.
It's a screen name. Not to be confused with reality or any deeper meaning than a name to equate to my posts. Nothing more...

Coincidentally, I am a hardline conservative who believes our borders should be shut, our military and foreign aide should be removed, and trade embargoes be placed against any products made internationally, as well as closing all but the most simple diplomatic communications between the rest of the world, and protect our borders with the same fervor we have had in policing the world as a whole. After this has been completed, the threat of military force against any nation who owes us money (most namely Europe, Asia and South America) and consider all our debts to other nations, including the UN to be null and void.

I figure there would be a decade or two of recession, depression or just plain havoc. Afterwards, we can again be a self-sufficient country, much like we were before the 50's.... a Capitalistic, industrial nation which exports products, but refuses or severely limits imports...

Of course, I just picked the nickname "xenophobe" because it was cool and different and because I'm registered on a dozen or two message boards under the same user name and just want to keep things consistent.

And, what do you mean where do I live? It's clearly written in my profile here, you can see it if you look under my name, "xenophobe", and the little avatar picture. It's there. Really. It is.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 02-09-2007, 11:55 AM
ajl2121 ajl2121 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 325
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

No worries man!
I'm not hating on you or anything...BUT you do bring up an interesting topic relating to politics and law...The US is currently the biggest debtor nation in the world...Quite opposite from the earlier half of the 20th century when we were the largest creditor nation (largely due to WWII and the Marshall plan to aid the allied nations). So, if all debts were to be paid, we would owe much more than we are owed. I, too, agree that illegal immigration is a rampant problem that must be curtailed. However, one must realize that the US government undeniably possesses the resources to do so, but would be economically unfavorable. As for being a nation in autarky, that would be diametrically opposed to your goal of capitalism. The best example of a state that is the closest resemblance of complete autarky is N. Korea. One can hardly say that they are capitalist. The standard of living that Americans enjoy are greatly at the expense of other nations. For us to sever ties with trading partners, military alliances, foreing relations, etc. would be devastating. A country that only exports without importing (or ideally strives for net exports) was a common economic theory that has been disproved. Imagine how much oil would cost for consumers of the US w/o imports?
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 02-09-2007, 12:24 PM
Fjold Fjold is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Near Bakersfield
Posts: 20,601
iTrader: 26 / 100%
Default

I'm xenophobic.

I don't trust any of those green aliens from outer space (as opposed to green aliens from inner space)
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 02-09-2007, 1:20 PM
hoffmang's Avatar
hoffmang hoffmang is offline
No, I am not a Moderator!
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Peninsula, Bay Area
Posts: 18,492
iTrader: 14 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ajl2121
No worries man!
I'm not hating on you or anything...BUT you do bring up an interesting topic relating to politics and law...The US is currently the biggest debtor nation in the world...
That is a misleading statement to the point of being wrong. The US is not the largest nation with a government debt as a percentage of GDP. Also, the majority of the US government debt is owned by US citizens or the Government itself. Just because our economy is HUGE doesn't mean we have some debt problem. People whose incomes are $1M a year can afford mortgages of $1M dollars in a way that people who make $100K a year can not.

Also, foreign capital flows into the US from outside. It goes to buy Stocks and non Government bonds and that's why it isn't counted when you're talking about Federal Government debt.

http://www.optimist123.com/optimist/...art_of_wh.html

-Gene
__________________
Gene Hoffman
Chairman, The Calguns Foundation

DONATE NOW
to support the rights of California gun owners. Follow @CalgunsFdn on Twitter.
Opinions posted in this account are my own and not the approved position of any organization.
I read PMs. But, if you need a response, include an email address or email me directly!


"The problem with being a gun rights supporter is that the left hates guns and the right hates rights." -Anon
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 02-09-2007, 1:30 PM
bwiese's Avatar
bwiese bwiese is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Jose
Posts: 26,862
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hoffmang
That is a misleading statement to the point of being wrong. The US is not the largest nation with a government debt as a percentage of GDP. Also, the majority of the US government debt is owned by US citizens or the Government itself. Just because our economy is HUGE doesn't mean we have some debt problem. People whose incomes are $1M a year can afford mortgages of $1M dollars in a way that people who make $100K a year can not.

Also, foreign capital flows into the US from outside. It goes to buy Stocks and non Government bonds and that's why it isn't counted when you're talking about Federal Government debt.

http://www.optimist123.com/optimist/...art_of_wh.html
Yep, and I think a lot of the metrics used to measure our economy, etc. are insufficient and don't cover all the bases. The purported 'savings rate' we measure doesn't even cover 401(k), employee stock plans (ESOPs), deferred compensation, pensions which have an insurance component (TIAA/CREF stuff), etc. - all huge portions of the economy. It basically measures passbook savings which is really a glorified checking account and that most people roll into their checking.

Yep, and the US exports two of the most valuable 'products'/commodities in the world: the US dollar, and access to the US customer base.
__________________

Bill Wiese
San Jose, CA

CGF Board Member / NRA Benefactor Life Member / CRPA life member

No postings of mine here, unless otherwise specifically noted, are
to be construed as formal or informal positions of the Calguns.Net
ownership, The Calguns Foundation, Inc. ("CGF"), the NRA, or my
employer. No posts of mine on Calguns are to be construed as
legal advice, which can only be given by a lawyer.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 02-09-2007, 1:34 PM
DrjonesUSA's Avatar
DrjonesUSA DrjonesUSA is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,689
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Thumbs up

Quote:
Originally Posted by xenophobe
Coincidentally, I am a hardline conservative who believes our borders should be shut, our military and foreign aide should be removed, and trade embargoes be placed against any products made internationally, as well as closing all but the most simple diplomatic communications between the rest of the world, and protect our borders with the same fervor we have had in policing the world as a whole. After this has been completed, the threat of military force against any nation who owes us money (most namely Europe, Asia and South America) and consider all our debts to other nations, including the UN to be null and void.

I figure there would be a decade or two of recession, depression or just plain havoc. Afterwards, we can again be a self-sufficient country, much like we were before the 50's.... a Capitalistic, industrial nation which exports products, but refuses or severely limits imports...

Ah, a man after my own heart!!
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 02-09-2007, 1:52 PM
ajl2121 ajl2121 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 325
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

See, being the largest debtor nation does not imply any negative connotations. Conversly, it signifies economic strength and the financial leverage that our country posseses. For example, why would the US Treasury Bill be used to calculate the risk free rate of return if investors had the slightest doubt that the US gov. could not repay those bills. My original point was that globalization is a reality, and if a country wants to raise per capita GDP (thus increase living standards) they must follow the bandwagon.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 02-09-2007, 7:08 PM
xenophobe's Avatar
xenophobe xenophobe is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor - Lifetime
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: SF Peninsula/South Bay Area
Posts: 7,071
iTrader: 13 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ajl2121
A country that only exports without importing (or ideally strives for net exports) was a common economic theory that has been disproved. Imagine how much oil would cost for consumers of the US w/o imports?
I would say that all you need to do is look at China. They would not be where they are today without MFN or relaxed trade regulations... If we levied all goods made in China by 100%, they would suffer severe economic depression. And of course, we would face shortages in almost every facet of industry.

All the post WW2 love and appreciation has put us where we are today, IMO.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 02-10-2007, 4:28 PM
babydoll babydoll is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: suisun
Posts: 11
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Not to sound stupid or anything but on DOJ's website there is a link to 2007 Dangeroous Weapons Control Law, how does that play into this. Specifically section 12276.1.?
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 02-10-2007, 5:05 PM
C.G.'s Avatar
C.G. C.G. is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Central Coast
Posts: 6,826
iTrader: 19 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by babydoll
Not to sound stupid or anything but on DOJ's website there is a link to 2007 Dangeroous Weapons Control Law, how does that play into this. Specifically section 12276.1.?
Not bad for a tenth post and I do mean that in a good way.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 02-10-2007, 9:30 PM
Wonderer Wonderer is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 49
iTrader: 12 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 6172crew
To All,
Please help me edit this letter. Thanks.

Dear "Out of State FFL or Distributor",

In 2006, gun owners in California were able to win back some freedoms which have gone into effect on January 1st, 2007. Here's the generalized synopsis: http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...ad.php?t=45423

Over 50,000 AR-15 receivers have legally entered the state within the last year. AR-15 and AK-47 firearms are legal in CA as long as they don't have any prohibited features and have a detachable magazine OR they have prohibited features and have a Fixed 10 round magazine. We don't get both (prohibited features and detachable magazine). Since our assault weapon laws are written for centerfire firearms, they do not apply to rimfire, rimfires can have detachable magazines AND evil features.

There are still named assault weapons so the manufacturer and model must be on the banned list to be illegal. If it isn't listed, then it is legal, or as we call them, Off-List Lowers or Off-List Receivers. Any off-list firearm must still follow the rules of evil features with a 10 round fixed magazine OR no evil features and detachable magazine. As an example, the AK-47 simply needs to have the pistol grip and flash hider removed for it to be legal in CA, assuming of course that it isn't a named banned manufacturer.

Since the list was created in 1989, most of the new AK manufacturers are not on the banned list. None of the Romanian AK's are listed; they just can't have any evil features and the detachable magazine, to be imported legally. Simply removing the evil features meets the letter of the law. The list of banned (illegal) assault weapons is listed at: http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/dwcl/12275...121ac95b00 45 under section 12276.
The evil features are listed in section 12276.1(a).
Section 12276.5 has been removed by the new law AB2728 which went into effect on 1/1/2007.

One final note, the way that the assault weapons law is written, it only applies to persons WITHIN THE STATE who are legally responsible, not persons outside of the state. As written, "12280. (a)(1) Any person who, within this state, manufactures or causes to be manufactured, distributes, transports, or imports into the state, keeps for sale, or offers or exposes for sale, or who gives or lends any assault weapon........."

Please check with your firearms attorney and you'll see that this is true. This means that you and your company aren't responsible for mistakes in violating California law. It is only us residents who are responsible.


Thanks very much,
Builder


Builder,

One quick question and a suggestion.

Is the reference number of "over 50,000 AR-15 receivers" a generalization or is there a source for this number?

You might consider including in your letter a mention that there are products now available that Californians can install on their semi-auto rifles that modify a removable magazine system into a fixed magazine system. As a noob to the OLL scene I found this to be new information and very meaningful in the scheme of things. Actually, it would be great if out of state manufacturers just started installing these devices as an option, before shipping their products into the state, no?

Kind Regards,
Noob.

Last edited by Wonderer; 02-10-2007 at 10:37 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 02-10-2007, 10:32 PM
hoffmang's Avatar
hoffmang hoffmang is offline
No, I am not a Moderator!
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Peninsula, Bay Area
Posts: 18,492
iTrader: 14 / 100%
Default

Wonderer:

The ballpark number of OLL's is based on a variety of group buys. I personally think 50K is high, but 25K+ is probably real.

babydoll,
12276.1 is really the only thing that matters these days. If you look around you will find a whole lot of analysis of the options remaining to comply with 12276.1 which is also known as SB-23.

-Gene
__________________
Gene Hoffman
Chairman, The Calguns Foundation

DONATE NOW
to support the rights of California gun owners. Follow @CalgunsFdn on Twitter.
Opinions posted in this account are my own and not the approved position of any organization.
I read PMs. But, if you need a response, include an email address or email me directly!


"The problem with being a gun rights supporter is that the left hates guns and the right hates rights." -Anon
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 10:07 AM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, 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 2002-2016, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.