|
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 |
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
CA Compliance Rate...
Howdy,
With CA style gun laws trying to get enacted nationwide I'm curious if there are any reports on surmised compliance with CA's law about AR and >10rnd mags. More interested in official numbers if any. CA can be secretive about numbers based on other hot button issues they refuse to disclose numbers on. EVERYONE I know in CA that has any such firearms has done nothing aside not taking to the range. Heck since there is ongoing litigation WHY would you surrender $100's of magazines or other components? I know you can work around AR's by simply disassembling them so there would be no number on those... Trying to get a bearing on what the reactions would be nation wide. Thanks! Hayduke! |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
$100's ??? That's laughable. Let's put this in a perspective everyone can understand. The state of CA performed 1.6M background checks in 2020. That's ~438 a day, every day for a year. What do you think the average cost of a firearm might be? $700? $1000? Let's go with $750 shall we? 1.6M * $750 = $1,200,000,000 At an average of 8% sales tax, this state took in $96M This doesn't account for private sales (non-reported sales tax) or the sales of firearm parts or ammunition. If you think the gun owners of CA are going to give up as you said $100's of legally owned anything, you're not seeing the big picture. |
#4
|
||||
|
||||
I meant $100's in magazines.
Which could be several $1000 but not $1000's of magazine for average gun owner. Much of everything else remained "legal" if disassembled etc... but you can't legally make a 30 round Magpul Gen2 legal... I don't think there's a kit to glue a block in to reduce capacity...but maybe.... I was just thinking this about the tax dollars and the impending recession due to C19. States like CA are going to desperately need more cash and to lop off such a cash cow doesn't fit the true model of the left.... Last edited by Hayduke; 03-12-2021 at 9:26 AM.. |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
So... not hurting for money. In truth, the "magazine windfall" doesn't represent much in the grand scale of budget calculus. None of the actual Penal Code does. Everything in that space, from a political perspective, is a publicity stunt designed to garner attention and therefore votes. As long as the electoral base in CA "believes" in gun control, politicians will keep creating more of it. As you've said, the most important event in the "large capacity magazine" realm in CA is the Duncan case, which we won, then won on appeal, and has been appealed again to an En Banc session of the 9th Circuit (where we have only about a 15% chance of winning). That's the magazine story, everything else is props and scenery. Right now the law allowing confiscation and ticketing for magazines is enjoined (cannot be enforced) due to the Duncan case, so questions about compliance are effectively meaningless. If one examines the AW registration compliance, one might get a better idea of what would happen in a nationwide scenario of similar character; one could also look at Canada, where a national registry was tried and it failed for multiple reasons, only one of which was very low compliance. TL;DR: compliance would/will be/is VERY LOW; somewhere in the mid-high teens as a percentage.
__________________
Get the hell off the beach. Get up and get moving. Follow Me! --Aubrey Newman, Col, 24th INF; at the Battle of Leyte Certainty of death... small chance of success... what are we waiting for? --Gimli, son of Gloin; on attacking the vast army of Mordor Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death! --Patrick Henry; Virginia, 1775 |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
$100 in AR15 magazines is around 5. How many magazines do you think the average gun owner owns where the capacity is over 10 rounds? |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
I remember going to gun shows in 1994 and venders were getting about $100 each for Glock magazines and they were sold out after a couple hours.
|
#8
|
||||
|
||||
One 15¢ rivet in the right location turns any magpul into a 10 rounder. There are several companies that sell these into CA today.
__________________
"Never! Jesus Christ, what dont you understand about never?" -Sen. Joe Manchin on eliminating the filibuster |
#9
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
--------------------- "There is no "best." If there was, everyone here would own that one, and no other." - DSB |
#10
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
At that rate, even the relatively small dros fees add up quickly! Cheers, Digger1 |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
The more onerous the law the lower the rate of compliance. It's axiomatic.
__________________
California Native Lifelong Gun Owner NRA Member CRPA Member ....."He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance." Declaration of Independence, 1776 |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Most ÄW's"were banned 30 years ago in CA and they have NOT come back. Other than legally registered AW's from decades ago, how many other "ïllegal"weapons do we see? Not too many. I think the vast majority comply and more importantly FFLS importers and businesses COMPLY. How often to you hear full auto gunfire out on the street? Never. Why - FA's were banned in 1934 for the most part. Sure, you see a few float to the surface in raids etc. but not like before. I grew up in the great 80's when EVERYONE had Mac 10's or Uzi's. Every gang was doing drive bys with AK47's and AR-15's. Every night on the news were stories of gun caches like you'd see on Miami Vice. Not anymore. Sure, we see the odd 80%er or AR style rifle, but not like before. Yes, laws DO work. They just time time to matriculate through the culture. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
That part was held to be unconstitutional. The part about registering ARs was upheld. All reported compliance rates are no better than estimates in any state, since there is an unknown number of such weapons in circulation. California DROS did not require an identification of a rifle transfer as a semiauto rifle until 2000, I think, so the true number, not including ghost guns, is just an estimate. As to registration as "assault weapons," I imagine that there are tens of thousands of people who were blissfully unaware of the law, and others who converted their rifles to a "nonassault weapon" configuration to avoid registration. Thus, the number of unregistered "assault weapons" is anybody's guess.
|
#16
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Compliance is dismally low. But the people who made the law knew that was what would happen. They registration system they built couldn't even handle the fractional volume of registrations, so there is no way it had any chance of surviving the entire list of these firearms in circulation... and I don't believe that the people running the show didn't know that. On the other hand, if they didn't, that tells you that you don't have much to worry about because it means they're monumentally stupid.
__________________
Get the hell off the beach. Get up and get moving. Follow Me! --Aubrey Newman, Col, 24th INF; at the Battle of Leyte Certainty of death... small chance of success... what are we waiting for? --Gimli, son of Gloin; on attacking the vast army of Mordor Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death! --Patrick Henry; Virginia, 1775 |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
AW ban / registration laws............
Law abiding gun owners, rumored registration rate, is greater than 10%. Criminal gun owners, rumored registration rate, is less than .001%.
__________________
* NRA Life Member since 1978 CRPA Life Member since 1978 |
#18
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
DOJ noted less than 10% of AW's were registered in the last 2 formal registration periods. Most folks say 5-8% but who knows. I forgot to register, but I am aware that registration lists turn into kiss it g'by lists.
__________________
True wealth is time. Time to enjoy life. Life's journey is not to arrive safely in a well preserved body, but rather to slide in sideways, totally worn out, shouting "holy schit...what a ride"!! Heaven goes by favor. If it went by merit, you would stay out and your dog would go in. Mark Twain A man's soul can be judged by the way he treats his dog. Charles Doran |
#20
|
||||
|
||||
Compliance rates for other states will be much lower. Maybe you'll get 2 registered in Texas.
__________________
RKBA Clock: Free Vespuchia! |
#21
|
||||
|
||||
And Robert Francis "Beto" O'Rourke will be the one registering his two AR-15s for the attention and considering he's a felon and not allowed to own firearms I hope the state of Texas arrests him and points out that some guy who said AR-15s are bad owned two of them.
|
#22
|
||||
|
||||
I remember WAY back when CA enacted its original ban/registration for AWs, i.e. Roberti Roos, before anyone had heard of OLL or featureless, etc, the compliance rate for that mandatory registration was very low, I think I saw 10% of what they were expecting.
I can't find numbers right now.
__________________
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
#23
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
ARCHIVED Calguns Foundation Wiki here: http://web.archive.org/web/201908310...itle=Main_Page "The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane."Ann Althouse: “Begin with the hypothesis that what they did is what they wanted to do. If they postured that they wanted to do something else, regard that as a con. Work from there. The world will make much more sense.” Not a lawyer, just Some Guy On The Interwebs. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
10% "compliance" was the number. The other 90% misplaced their firearms and couldn't find them. Then they had those inane commercials, "Ya's register ya's truck don't ya's?", "Son!, it's not worth it!". I'm still shaking from fear.
|
#25
|
||||
|
||||
Calculating a compliance rate is impossible. For AWs there are multiple ways to comply with the law besides registration; featureless, fixed magazine, disassembly. The same for magazines where people are likely to do their own conversions. There simply is no data to estimate compliance rates. CA doesn’t even know how many ARs or magazines are owned in CA beyond an order of magnitude estimate.
__________________
Quote:
|
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Take out the centerfire Bolt Carrier, set it aside under lock and key, put in a CMMG 22lr conversion Bolt Carrier, get a Black Dog 10rnd 22lr mag. DONE.
If the green weenie hits the propeller, switcharoo the Bolt Carriers and the mags, light 'em up and smoke 'em. IF you had the foresight to put the evil horrible nasty Standard capacity mag away in a unseen place. But alas, all of the .300 Blackout rigs and other calibers take a bit for effort. Psalm 1 Last edited by Garand Hunter; 03-16-2021 at 11:33 AM.. Reason: sentence structure |
#27
|
||||
|
||||
It’s really sad how this administration think they can turn this great nation similar to China, so they can reign forever. Total disregard for the Constitution and Amendments clearly shows these are the tyrants the 2A is all about.
__________________
The wise man said just find your place In the eye of the storm Seek the roses along the way Just beware of the thorns... K. Meine |
#28
|
||||
|
||||
As has been indicated, it is virtually impossible to ascertain a 'true' compliance rate with the firearms themselves and such 'magazines,' particularly given the lack of 'paperwork' involved in their attainment would be even more 'impossible.' With that said, as the others have already alluded to, the estimated compliance rate insofar as firearms might provide a rough (very rough) guideline.
In July of 2018, The Washington Free Beacon reported... Gun Group: Only 3 Percent of Californians With Assault Weapons Registered Them After Latest Gun Law Quote:
Nationwide? The same issues present themselves. From July 2016... Massive noncompliance with SAFE Act Quote:
Quote:
Last edited by TrappedinCalifornia; 04-21-2021 at 8:33 AM.. |
#29
|
||||
|
||||
The above discussion is thorough, but needs to acknowledge the difference between compliance and registration without intermixing the terms. While registration rates are very low, I believe that the compliance rate is very high. Converting a potential featured AW to either fixed magazine or featureless is compliance with the law. I’m sure sales figures of the latest generation of fixed magazine and featureless devices would support a very high compliance rate.
Magazines, on the other hand...waiting for the legal process to conclude.
__________________
Quote:
|
#30
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Quote:
The ONLY method of compliance (in this State and, presumably, in others) which allows one the ability to legally retain possession of a so-called "assault weapon" is registration. Otherwise, all you have is a rifle and, in some cases, not even a semi-automatic one; whether that be via disassembly or conversion to single shot or 'bolt action.' In short, while part of our argument against so-called "assault weapon" bans is that such rifles are no different than many others in function, just appearance, if we now begin referring to certain firearms as "assault weapons" which do not meet the definition as codified by law, isn't that 'poking the bear' in terms of virtually inviting them to add them to the list of so defined "assault weapons?" After all... "If gun owners think of them as 'assault weapons,' then, perhaps..." Admittedly, part of this comes down to how one thinks about so-called "assault weapons." It's part of the legerdemain that the anti-civil rights forces have employed and why I use "so-called" in conjunction with "assault weapons." For me, however, it's not about the language so much as it is about a caveat; an indication that there's more to what's going on than a tangible, fixed definition of a specific weapon type. If we were to accept the premise of "military-like" or "military-style" or "used by the military" or "weapons of war," then virtually EVERY firearm type would or could be classified as a so-called "assault weapon" in that the military has used and virtually every type of firearm (and 'arm') has been utilized in "war." If we push the premise that what is being legislated as so-called "assault weapons" is a gradual expansion from actual "military issued" to virtually every firearm, I would think that helps our cause. Thus, if we argue that what they propose banning is simply a type of firearm commonly used for lawful purposes, that such common use includes (but is not limited to) self-defense, that it is not unusual and dangerous (a conjunctive test as held by Alito in his concurring opinion in Caetano*), and that, functionally, it is little or no different than myriad other firearms, I suspect we'd be far better off, legally and PR wise, than arguing... We have so-called "assault weapons," even if some of them are 'featureless' (they don't appear to be "military-style") or fixed magazine (which for a great many is unacceptable, for various reasons) or is simply disassembled (but could be 'reassembled' in a matter of seconds). Remember, Biden has posited the idea that so-called "assault weapons" be designated NFA items; with registration and all that entails being the only legal way to retain them as such. In California, that would effectively mean no one could be in legal compliance while still retaining possession of a so-called "assault weapon" or in possession of such parts that one could be assembled. Thus, it would become a 'battle' to get the permissible parts designated as substantively different; i.e., for all practical purposes, it would no longer be about assembling a "machine gun" and would, instead, be about assembling a semi-automatic firearm. ____________ * As Justice Alito wrote in a concurring opinion to Caetano, one which Justice Thomas joined... Quote:
|
#31
|
|||
|
|||
Oh, I forgot, there is one other group that creates terms just to show spite and that are diesel truck owners. Who invented the term "coal roll". Hint, it wasn't anyone seeking to ban diesel engines, it was some diesel truck driver.
So stick the chest out, take the defiant position and keep using terms that degrade cast shadow on gun ownership. How has that been working out for us in Ca?
__________________
Let Go of the Status Quo! Don't worry, it will never pass...How in the hell did that pass? Think past your gun, it's the last resort, the first is your brain. Defense is a losing proposition when time is on the side of the opponent. In the history of humanity, no defense has ever won against an enemy with time on their side. |
#32
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
And your last sentence reveals an amazing lack of understanding of demographics. The idea that the current antigun climate in California is a product of gun owners saying things like "evil features" instead of the democrat supermajority is astounding.
__________________
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
#33
|
||||
|
||||
well from some local officers that I know, about 98%+ of the firearms taken in crime scenes from criminals are illegal... that includes "AW's", stolen firearms with serials scratched off, p80s etc... As for compliance of actual "law abiding citizens", or those who intend only to defend life with their arms... when I go to the range, I'm not seeing too many complying with the ridiculous AWB and I applaud that tbh.
__________________
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|