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 > California 2nd Amend. Political Discussion & Activism
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

California 2nd Amend. Political Discussion & Activism Discuss gun rights activism and 2A related political topics here. All advice given is NOT legal counsel.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old 09-29-2021, 6:52 PM
BAJ475's Avatar
BAJ475 BAJ475 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Kootenai County Idaho (Hayden)
Posts: 2,550
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tsmithson View Post
...

I am telling you that Christians in America will not bow the knee to evil leaders and their corrupt laws.
Good to know I will have backup.
Quote:
The wicked will be destroyed like they always are.
If they are always destroyed, how come there so many of them running around?
Quote:
God and his children will always win.
But aren't the evil ones also his children?
Quote:
News flash-God allows the wicked to be captured and put in bondage.
Why would anyone want to capture them and put them in bondage? They would still exist and might escape. I am thinking that public hog feedings would be a greater deterrent.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 09-29-2021, 7:15 PM
BAJ475's Avatar
BAJ475 BAJ475 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Kootenai County Idaho (Hayden)
Posts: 2,550
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scratch705 View Post
so now every gun owner is CA is known to the people at UC Davis that wants to do research on gun violence and any other groups that UC Davis grants permission to?

Guess I better setup some traps then around the outside of the house.
Not just those in CA but also those who have moved to free states. Instead of traps you need night vision and IR detectors and sights. They talk about stopping gun violence but ignore that gun violence is good when its the good guys blasting the bad guys.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 09-29-2021, 8:16 PM
lastinline lastinline is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 1,450
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BAJ475 View Post
When I posted about Henry Bowman, my wife said no one would understand. Looks like I am not the only one who has read John Ross' novel. The passages I enjoyed the most was the history teacher in the Warsaw Ghetto describing the American Revolution and what makes us different, at least those of us who call ourselves gun people. And, of course, there is the final passages where the President recalls Irwin Mann saying that he had to go feed his hogs. Makes me wonder if I should try and register the phrase "Beto Bacon" before someone else does.
Your wife has misinterpreted some of the Calguns members; now she gets it. Excellent.
My favorite part of the novel was when the old gunsmith dropped the federal Ninja crew after they went “hoods down, and deployed”. It was indeed a good read, and is something that if occurred in real life, would be celebrated.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 09-29-2021, 8:22 PM
galaxius's Avatar
galaxius galaxius is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 436
iTrader: 14 / 100%
Default

Correct me if I'm wrong, but this means that all DROS data will be available to non-profits, even those set up with nefarious intent? Could this mean that some crazy antigun group may leak the database and endanger the lives of millions of Californians? Another question, does this data also include current addresses? What about the folks who haven't purchased a firearm in years and moved from their original address? This would mean that the data is not only incorrect but will also affect potential non gun owners who moved into domiciles that were previously inhabited by a gun owner no? What a can of ****in worms this would open up....I bet criminal gangs are frothing at the mouth for this information...
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 09-29-2021, 9:18 PM
ar15barrels's Avatar
ar15barrels ar15barrels is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Van Nuys
Posts: 51,720
iTrader: 111 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BAJ475 View Post
When I posted about Henry Bowman, my wife said no one would understand. Looks like I am not the only one who has read John Ross' novel. The passages I enjoyed the most was the history teacher in the Warsaw Ghetto describing the American Revolution and what makes us different, at least those of us who call ourselves gun people. And, of course, there is the final passages where the President recalls Irwin Mann saying that he had to go feed his hogs. Makes me wonder if I should try and register the phrase "Beto Bacon" before someone else does.
My copy of UC is signed by the author.
Bought it from him at Knob Creek many moons ago.
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 09-29-2021, 10:17 PM
ja308 ja308 is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 11,802
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ar15barrels View Post
My copy of UC is signed by the author.
Bought it from him at Knob Creek many moons ago.

When I met him at KC, Carnahan, "had just flown his plane into the ground" JR commented " I immediately called the Missouri State police and told them where I was when it happened "


My BFF GF laughed at the part when Flanagan OD ed on the toilet.

Last edited by ja308; 10-04-2021 at 4:43 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 09-30-2021, 3:12 PM
curtisfong's Avatar
curtisfong curtisfong is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 6,408
iTrader: 11 / 100%
Default

Wintemute is a grifter.
__________________
The Rifle on the Wall

"“[S]cientific proof” of both gun-rights and gun-control theories “is very hard to get”; therefore, requiring “some substantial scientific proof to show that a [firearm] law will indeed substantially reduce crime and injury” is tantamount to applying strict scrutiny to, and almost certainly will lead to invalidation of, the law." - Kamala Harris

Lawyers and their Stockholm Syndrome
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 09-30-2021, 4:18 PM
tsmithson tsmithson is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 1,411
iTrader: 9 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BAJ475 View Post
Good to know I will have backup.

If they are always destroyed, how come there so many of them running around?

But aren't the evil ones also his children?
Why would anyone want to capture them and put them in bondage? They would still exist and might escape. I am thinking that public hog feedings would be a greater deterrent.
The Church Of Jesus Christ Of Latter Day Saints is well versed in dealing with unjust persecution and violence from the United States Government. They fled to the Rocky Mountains and will be there when Christ returns.

They could call up a standing army of 100,000+ in just a couple hours if they needed to. They are well armed and will probably help save this country if we are ever invaded during a war.

When the wicked become ripe in iniquity they are destroyed by famine, war or pestilence and many are taken into bondage. Study your Old Testament for the pattern.

God will separate his sheep from the goats.
There would be no free agency if God punished the wicked instantly.
The inverse is true also.
There would be no free agency if God rewarded the righteous instantly.

The war between Freedom and bondage started in Heaven and continues here on earth. This war will continue until Gods work is done and Christ casts Satan and his followers into outer darkness.

Last edited by tsmithson; 09-30-2021 at 4:39 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 09-30-2021, 4:59 PM
chefdude's Avatar
chefdude chefdude is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: La Quinta, CA
Posts: 1,233
iTrader: 26 / 100%
Default

info will be sold to China then Leaked to the press and anti gun people. my question is how can the government take your private info and give it to an outside entity without your consent? I would hope that there are some tech savy pro 2A folks that will DOX every politician, news paper editor, judge , UCD Professor, and Dean of students, so we can perform our own study....
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 09-30-2021, 5:02 PM
chefdude's Avatar
chefdude chefdude is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: La Quinta, CA
Posts: 1,233
iTrader: 26 / 100%
Default

the red flag law enforcers will be knocking soon
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 09-30-2021, 6:54 PM
lastinline lastinline is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 1,450
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chefdude View Post
info will be sold to China then Leaked to the press and anti gun people. my question is how can the government take your private info and give it to an outside entity without your consent? I would hope that there are some tech savy pro 2A folks that will DOX every politician, news paper editor, judge , UCD Professor, and Dean of students, so we can perform our own study....
How can they do it? Likely with a few key strokes.
What is needed is a computer virus that migrates to every single gun owner database in the world, and makes mush out of all of it.
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 09-30-2021, 8:26 PM
chris's Avatar
chris chris is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: In Texas for now
Posts: 19,067
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by curtisfong View Post
Wintemute is a grifter.
He's loving this. He's gonna leak our information to anyone who wants it.
__________________
http://govnews.ca.gov/gov39mail/mail.php

Thank your neighbor and fellow gun owners for passing Prop 63. For that gun control is a winning legislative agenda.
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.
NRA Life Member.
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 10-03-2021, 9:41 PM
Foothills Foothills is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 235
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

The Supreme Court recently decided against California in another privacy case citing their history of ineffective privacy controls. I would say the odds are better than average if someone want's to litigate this. They should cite the Supreme Court precedent and narrowly tailor the relief sought to prohibit the inclusion of any personally identifiable information.

And cite the New York example as proof that neither New York nor California can promise privacy with effectiveness.

Note that a key part of the Supreme Court case was the way jurisdictions used personally identifiable information to let people harass and retaliate against those whose information was leaked. In this case I would add the risk of burglary if the information is leaked.

Not to mention women who purchased firearms due to domestic violence issues who are required to have their address on the DROS form. This could result in the addresses of domestic violence victims being released to first a wide audience, then leaked to the Internet.



https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/su...ies/ar-AALFA4K

SCOTUSBLOG Page: https://www.scotusblog.com/case-file...ion-v-becerra/

This law is going to create another Rebecca Schaeffer case. Celebrities who purchased guns will also have their information released.

https://people.com/crime/rebecca-sch...y-her-stalker/

Last edited by Foothills; 10-03-2021 at 9:54 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 10-04-2021, 8:38 AM
ja308 ja308 is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 11,802
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tsmithson View Post
The Church Of Jesus Christ Of Latter Day Saints is well versed in dealing with unjust persecution and violence from the United States Government. They fled to the Rocky Mountains and will be there when Christ returns.

They could call up a standing army of 100,000+ in just a couple hours if they needed to. They are well armed and will probably help save this country if we are ever invaded during a war.

When the wicked become ripe in iniquity they are destroyed by famine, war or pestilence and many are taken into bondage. Study your Old Testament for the pattern.

God will separate his sheep from the goats.
There would be no free agency if God punished the wicked instantly.
The inverse is true also.
There would be no free agency if God rewarded the righteous instantly.

The war between Freedom and bondage started in Heaven and continues here on earth. This war will continue until Gods work is done and Christ casts Satan and his followers into outer darkness.
I am personally aware of some churches being led by Pastors who identify as the Black Robed Regiment.
Personally I favor a peaceful legal separation of Red State/Blue States where we are not affected by the lunacy of those trying to conquer our nation.
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 10-04-2021, 9:02 AM
BAJ475's Avatar
BAJ475 BAJ475 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Kootenai County Idaho (Hayden)
Posts: 2,550
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chris View Post
He's loving this. He's gonna leak our information to anyone who wants it.
I wonder how much he will love it if someone sent him a copy of UC with a note that he will not know what will hit him until it is too late?
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 10-04-2021, 9:11 AM
BAJ475's Avatar
BAJ475 BAJ475 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Kootenai County Idaho (Hayden)
Posts: 2,550
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tsmithson View Post
The Church Of Jesus Christ Of Latter Day Saints is well versed in dealing with unjust persecution and violence from the United States Government. They fled to the Rocky Mountains and will be there when Christ returns.

They could call up a standing army of 100,000+ in just a couple hours if they needed to. They are well armed and will probably help save this country if we are ever invaded during a war. ...
From what I have read about the history of Idaho, they helped save us from Democrat rule and gave us a super majority.
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 10-04-2021, 9:38 AM
BAJ475's Avatar
BAJ475 BAJ475 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Kootenai County Idaho (Hayden)
Posts: 2,550
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Foothills View Post
The Supreme Court recently decided against California in another privacy case citing their history of ineffective privacy controls. I would say the odds are better than average if someone want's to litigate this. They should cite the Supreme Court precedent and narrowly tailor the relief sought to prohibit the inclusion of any personally identifiable information.

And cite the New York example as proof that neither New York nor California can promise privacy with effectiveness.

Note that a key part of the Supreme Court case was the way jurisdictions used personally identifiable information to let people harass and retaliate against those whose information was leaked. In this case I would add the risk of burglary if the information is leaked.

Not to mention women who purchased firearms due to domestic violence issues who are required to have their address on the DROS form. This could result in the addresses of domestic violence victims being released to first a wide audience, then leaked to the Internet.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/su...ies/ar-AALFA4K

SCOTUSBLOG Page: https://www.scotusblog.com/case-file...ion-v-becerra/

This law is going to create another Rebecca Schaeffer case. Celebrities who purchased guns will also have their information released.

https://people.com/crime/rebecca-sch...y-her-stalker/
SkyHawk made the same suggestion. Just waiting for someone to contract me as a non California resident whose private and irrelevant information they intend to share.
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 10-04-2021, 9:51 AM
BAJ475's Avatar
BAJ475 BAJ475 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Kootenai County Idaho (Hayden)
Posts: 2,550
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ja308 View Post
I am personally aware of some churches being led by Pastors who identify as the Black Robed Regiment.
Personally I favor a peaceful legal separation of Red State/Blue States where we are not affected by the lunacy of those trying to conquer our nation.
I would prefer a separation based on Red vs Blue Counties. Otherwise, you would be condemning lots of conservatives to suffer under Dem rule and those in Red Counties in CA know what that is like. But to be safe, a county would have to have a minimum of 61% conservative voters to be a Red County.
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 10-04-2021, 8:29 PM
Harry Ono Harry Ono is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Posts: 855
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tarmy View Post
Maybe these studies will include a glossary to define what the hell “gun violence” is…cause I am still unclear on how an inanimate object is capable of violence.
A way to cover up gangsters of color and drug wars in urban areas. So how does Gun Violence translate to the Suburbs ? Clearly not similar at all.
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 10-04-2021, 8:48 PM
Harry Ono Harry Ono is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Posts: 855
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Foothills View Post

This law is going to create another Rebecca Schaeffer case. Celebrities who purchased guns will also have their information released.
As a result of Schaeffer case, the law on the books below was enacted. I think you can throw alot of dirt on the perpetrators if they "annoy" you or put you or your family in danger. Be sure to get their contact information and file charges based on California Penal Code below. Best thing to do is put anyone doing research on the defense and out of business.

Penal Code - PEN
PART 1. OF CRIMES AND PUNISHMENTS [25 - 680.4] ( Part 1 enacted 1872. )

TITLE 15. MISCELLANEOUS CRIMES [626 - 653.75] ( Title 15 enacted 1872. )


CHAPTER 2. Of Other and Miscellaneous Offenses [639 - 653.2] ( Chapter 2 enacted 1872. )


646.9.

(a) Any person who willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows or willfully and maliciously harasses another person and who makes a credible threat with the intent to place that person in reasonable fear for his or her safety, or the safety of his or her immediate family is guilty of the crime of stalking, punishable by imprisonment in a county jail for not more than one year, or by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by both that fine and imprisonment, or by imprisonment in the state prison.

(b) Any person who violates subdivision (a) when there is a temporary restraining order, injunction, or any other court order in effect prohibiting the behavior described in subdivision (a) against the same party, shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for two, three, or four years.

(c) (1) Every person who, after having been convicted of a felony under Section 273.5, 273.6, or 422, commits a violation of subdivision (a) shall be punished by imprisonment in a county jail for not more than one year, or by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by both that fine and imprisonment, or by imprisonment in the state prison for two, three, or five years.

(2) Every person who, after having been convicted of a felony under subdivision (a), commits a violation of this section shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for two, three, or five years.

(d) In addition to the penalties provided in this section, the sentencing court may order a person convicted of a felony under this section to register as a sex offender pursuant to Section 290.006.

(e) For the purposes of this section, “harasses” means engages in a knowing and willful course of conduct directed at a specific person that seriously alarms, annoys, torments, or terrorizes the person, and that serves no legitimate purpose.


(f) For the purposes of this section, “course of conduct” means two or more acts occurring over a period of time, however short, evidencing a continuity of purpose. Constitutionally protected activity is not included within the meaning of “course of conduct.”

(g) For the purposes of this section, “credible threat” means a verbal or written threat, including that performed through the use of an electronic communication device, or a threat implied by a pattern of conduct or a combination of verbal, written, or electronically communicated statements and conduct, made with the intent to place the person that is the target of the threat in reasonable fear for his or her safety or the safety of his or her family, and made with the apparent ability to carry out the threat so as to cause the person who is the target of the threat to reasonably fear for his or her safety or the safety of his or her family. It is not necessary to prove that the defendant had the intent to actually carry out the threat. The present incarceration of a person making the threat shall not be a bar to prosecution under this section. Constitutionally protected activity is not included within the meaning of “credible threat.”
Reply With Quote
  #61  
Old 10-05-2021, 6:43 AM
ja308 ja308 is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 11,802
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Ono View Post
As a result of Schaeffer case, the law on the books below was enacted. I think you can throw alot of dirt on the perpetrators if they "annoy" you or put you or your family in danger. Be sure to get their contact information and file charges based on California Penal Code below. Best thing to do is put anyone doing research on the defense and out of business.

Penal Code - PEN
PART 1. OF CRIMES AND PUNISHMENTS [25 - 680.4] ( Part 1 enacted 1872. )

TITLE 15. MISCELLANEOUS CRIMES [626 - 653.75] ( Title 15 enacted 1872. )


CHAPTER 2. Of Other and Miscellaneous Offenses [639 - 653.2] ( Chapter 2 enacted 1872. )


646.9.

(a) Any person who willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows or willfully and maliciously harasses another person and who makes a credible threat with the intent to place that person in reasonable fear for his or her safety, or the safety of his or her immediate family is guilty of the crime of stalking, punishable by imprisonment in a county jail for not more than one year, or by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by both that fine and imprisonment, or by imprisonment in the state prison.

(b) Any person who violates subdivision (a) when there is a temporary restraining order, injunction, or any other court order in effect prohibiting the behavior described in subdivision (a) against the same party, shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for two, three, or four years.

(c) (1) Every person who, after having been convicted of a felony under Section 273.5, 273.6, or 422, commits a violation of subdivision (a) shall be punished by imprisonment in a county jail for not more than one year, or by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by both that fine and imprisonment, or by imprisonment in the state prison for two, three, or five years.

(2) Every person who, after having been convicted of a felony under subdivision (a), commits a violation of this section shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for two, three, or five years.

(d) In addition to the penalties provided in this section, the sentencing court may order a person convicted of a felony under this section to register as a sex offender pursuant to Section 290.006.

(e) For the purposes of this section, “harasses” means engages in a knowing and willful course of conduct directed at a specific person that seriously alarms, annoys, torments, or terrorizes the person, and that serves no legitimate purpose.


(f) For the purposes of this section, “course of conduct” means two or more acts occurring over a period of time, however short, evidencing a continuity of purpose. Constitutionally protected activity is not included within the meaning of “course of conduct.”

(g) For the purposes of this section, “credible threat” means a verbal or written threat, including that performed through the use of an electronic communication device, or a threat implied by a pattern of conduct or a combination of verbal, written, or electronically communicated statements and conduct, made with the intent to place the person that is the target of the threat in reasonable fear for his or her safety or the safety of his or her family, and made with the apparent ability to carry out the threat so as to cause the person who is the target of the threat to reasonably fear for his or her safety or the safety of his or her family. It is not necessary to prove that the defendant had the intent to actually carry out the threat. The present incarceration of a person making the threat shall not be a bar to prosecution under this section. Constitutionally protected activity is not included within the meaning of “credible threat.”
I am not sure I understand how this will work, considering the state government is a partner in this dumb scheme ?
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 10-05-2021, 8:06 AM
cz74 cz74 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2020
Posts: 230
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Penal code means nothing right now. Even if stalkers get arrested, they will be released, charges dropped, bailed out by unknown entities. Just look at Seattle and Portland with Antifa thugs burning, causing bodily injury but they all free.
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 4:58 AM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, 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 2002-2021, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.
All opinions, statements and remarks made by Calguns.net on this web site and elsewhere are solely attributable to Calguns.net.



Seams2SewBySusy

Tactical Pants Tactical Boots Military Boots 5.11 Tactical