California Gun Rights On the Highway to Hell

gunownersca.com reports that the Democratically controlled California legislature is plowing ahead with its civilian disarmament agenda. The latest affronts to Golden State gun owners’ natural, civil and Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms passed out of the Public Safety Committee, heading for Appropriations. They are:

  • SB 47 (Yee) ASSAULT WEAPONS – Bans “Bullet Button” guns.
  • SB 374 (Steinberg) FIREARMS:  ASSAULT WEAPONS – Bans all semi-auto centerfire long guns with detachable magazines.
  • SB 396 (Hancock) FIREARMS: MAGAZINE CAPACITY – Makes all grandfathered Hi-Cap (10 rounds or more) illegal to possess.
  • SB 567 (Jackson) FIREARMS: SHOTGUNS – Revises the definition of a shotgun.
  • SB 683 (Block) FIREARMS: Requires all gun buyers to get a Firearm Safety Certificate before buying any gun.
  • SB 755 (Wolk) FIREARMS: Expands the number of crimes that are punishable by a 5 or 10 year ban on firearms ownership.

In the video above Gun Owners of California Executive Dirctor Sam Paredes takes Senator Yee to the woodshed re: his characterization of the bullet button as a “loophole.” Fat lot of good that’s going to do, either way you look at it. Will the Supreme Court ride to the rescue? If only . . . Meanwhile, the light of liberty continues to flicker on America’s west coast. As if you didn’t know.

Click here to sign the petition asking Governor Jerry Brown to veto the above legislation. Yes, it’s coming to that.

comments

  1. avatar Sam C says:

    If they pass, Alan Gura can fix it easily.

    1. avatar Matt says:

      Aside from Moore v. Madigan, what has Alan fixed lately? Hasn’t he lost most of his recent cases?

      1. avatar AFIraqVet says:

        I haven’t looked at his track record lately, but Gura has Heller precedent on his side with regard to both rifles and magazines in common use.

    2. avatar Hal says:

      Are you sure he isn’t supporting these bills like he did Manchin-Toomey for some intangible 2a gain that isn’t worth it?

  2. avatar jwm says:

    If I was single with no kids or grand kids I’d leave this place behind. That ship sailed many years ago.

    1. avatar Nine says:

      You poor, poor soul…

      1. avatar jwm says:

        Not really. Even though it’s crazy california I have a safe full of guns. As for being single and not having the kids and grandkids. It’s sad to think of a man getting to my age and being all alone.

        California could be a lot worse (of course it could be a lot better too). My biggest complaint is the lack of concealed carry. But look what’s happened in Illinois. Never thought we’d see that. The future is always brighter than the past.

        1. avatar Ropingdown says:

          Good attitude. “Hope is man’s one good god.” Sophocles

        2. avatar JW says:

          Exactly! The point at which the opposition is at their strongest means they will soon weaken. The more voices that rise up against this nonsense is what is needed to slow them. Then a few court cases to drive the stake through their undead hearts.

        3. avatar Tom RKBA says:

          There are many sheriffs who will issue a carry permit in California. Establish a residence in one and apply. There are many internet sites that will assist you with the process.

        4. avatar Pat says:

          Simple remedy for Cali….stop voting libtard (democrat). Elections have consequences.

    2. avatar William Burke says:

      I keep hearing of this “me and the kids’ feet are nailed to the floor” bit, but I have yet to actually see a reputable report.

      1. avatar jwm says:

        I have a large extended family. It’s nonsense to think of making them refugees when the constitution is supposed to extend to us all.

    3. avatar Aaron says:

      To all of those people who are saying to get out… What do you do if you’re in the military, and a U-haul equals u-jail?

      1. avatar janitor says:

        pick orders away from that place…pretty simple really. ive managed to avoid the west coast. its so easy to just stay in place, however there is money to be made with a move….i got roughly 10k on my last ditty move

        1. avatar Jeff says:

          why avoid the west coast? oregon and washington have some of the most lax gun laws in the country, and aren’t totally insane politically like CA is – though Portland and Seattle certainly try in their own little fiefdoms.

      2. avatar Totenglocke says:

        That’s why you don’t sell your soul to the devil in exchange for a paycheck. You knew perfectly well what you were getting yourself into when you enlisted.

    4. avatar Chaotic Good says:

      Better to stick it out than let them run you out of your own state and safely eliminate you from the voting population.

  3. avatar Daniel Silverman says:

    On a side note saw this from them today.
    “Yesterday, the Assembly Appropriations Committee had Five anti-gun bills on their agenda.

    SB 47 (Yee)
    SB 374 (Steinberg)
    SB 396 (Hancock)
    SB 567 (Jackson)
    SB 683 (Block)

    Only Senator Darrell Steinberg took the opportunity to present to the Committee while the other authors “waived presentation”.

    All five bills have been put in the Suspense File for final vote on August 29th.”

    1. avatar Hal says:

      “SB 374 (Steinberg) FIREARMS: ASSAULT WEAPONS – Bans all semi-auto centerfire long guns with detachable magazines.”

      But…but… the liberals told that all they want to ban were semi autos! So now bolt guns with detachable 5-10 rd mags will be banned? I don’t believe it… because that would make progressives a bunch of duplicitous f*ck holes and they I know they wouldn’t lie (sarc)!

  4. avatar William Burke says:

    Two days ago: door-to-door confiscation of legally-owned guns begins in the East Bay:

    http://www.dailypaul.com/296513/gun-confiscation-begins-in-california-video

  5. avatar Tim U says:

    Take the family with you and get out! Mass exodus

    1. avatar Model 31 says:

      +1
      Leave CA now. Bring as many with you as you can (if they’re pro Constitution -ALL of it). After the next census, CA will have less US Reps in Congress and in turn, less Electoral College votes…which means more of both for the rest.

      1. avatar jwm says:

        There’s a real world practicle solution to defang California. Until the amnesty kicks in and 10 million illegals get counted.

        Nobody wins a war by running. Ask the French.

        1. avatar Model 31 says:

          Well I suppose you can stay, get counted with the 10 million and help CA gain seats in DC. CA has two liberal senators and always will -no matter how many times pro 2A folks vote. Enough pro-2a supporters from CA (who are not represented in Congress now) move to a purple state (CO, ND, MN) your pro-gun voting efforts really start to have an impact. -I didn’t say “start to have meaning”.
          Recent Senate Elections:
          CO – 2010 Bennet (D) won by 1.7% (less than 29,000 votes out of 1.77 million)
          MN – 2008 Franken (D) won by .011% (312 votes out of 2.89 millon)
          ND – 2012 Heitkamp (D) won by .92% (2836 votes out of 321000)
          CA – 2012 Feinstein (D) won with 62.5%
          or just stay in CA.

        2. avatar Totenglocke says:

          There is no “war” in California. You lost decades ago. Gun owners in California are the equivalent of children throwing a fit about having to go to bed – nothing they do matters and it will have no impact on the outcome.

          @Model 31

          I’ve been trying to explain that many times. Apparently no one in California understands how the House of Representatives works.

        3. avatar jwm says:

          That’s a UN solution to a problem. 9 million people are having their rights violated so let’s just make them refugees. Put them on the road and have them give up their homes, jobs and communities and families. You guys need a job with the UN.

  6. avatar LongBeach says:

    My conversion to a felon is approaching rather quickly, methinks.

  7. avatar Daniel Silverman says:

    Wow spam is catching things today.
    Yesterday, the Assembly Appropriations Committee had Five anti-gun bills on their agenda.
    SB 47
    SB 374
    SB 396
    SB 567
    SB 683
    Only Senator Darrell Steinberg took the opportunity to present to the Committee while the other authors “waived presentation”.
    All five bills have been put in the Suspense File for final vote on August 29th.

    1. avatar Mark N. says:

      This. I just looked it up, but you beat me to the post. All of them are going to have trouble in appropriations, as none of them come for free. Some will cost the state millions in implementation alone, not even counting litigation costs.

      Which kinda reminds me–aren’t there supposed to be some hearings like right now on the SAFE Act?

      1. avatar Toasty says:

        Yes. On the 12th Before a GOP appointed judge. There’s also even more hope now since at the Federalist society meeting Justice Scalia alluded heavily that the next court case on the 2A will be on the scope of the 2A, that is what we can keep and bear. He is very angry at the lower courts misinterpreting Heller as only being about self defense in the home and ignoring the need for the ability to resist tyranny. The amount of revenge legislation coming out of the slave states after that law gets struck down is going to be immense. The knee jerk will be incredible since they’ll finally realize their goal of a gun free America is dead. SAFE Act will be the next case. I think it might win at the district level then get upheld by Obama judges in the appeals court, then struck down by SCOTUS. That’s the same path McDonald took. Hopefully this case moves as fast as McDonald did too.

  8. avatar CarlosT says:

    You know, Alaska, Washington, and Oregon are on the West Coast as well. We have our own fights, but we’re well ahead of California and working to keep it that way.

  9. avatar Pascal says:

    Why even pretend that they have discussions/arguments about these bills. Just pass them and be done with it. At least it will be more honest.

    This is BS you get when you have single party government.

    I don’t know if there are enough people in CA to oppose these people. Many of these bills will end up in court which is what they want because it will take a lot of time and a lot of money.

    1. avatar jwm says:

      According to info presented here on TTAG there are 9 million gun owners in California. If they can corral us all it’s a major victory for the grabbers and a major set back for the rest of the country.

      1. avatar Totenglocke says:

        And if those 9 million moved to states that are on the fence about guns, they could turn them solidly pro-gun. You’re already well aware that you have no impact on gun laws in California.

        Yes, I know, you’ll whine that “But muh keeds r hurr!”, that’s why they make these things called phones, cars, planes, etc. This isn’t the 1800’s and it’s rather easy to visit someone in another part of the country. Refusing to move to a state where the Constitution is respected because of friends / family living in your current state is like constantly complaining about horrible work conditions yet refusing to change jobs because you like your current coworkers.

        1. avatar JohnJ says:

          That’s just asinine.

        2. avatar jwm says:

          I have no answer for you , Tote, except that i understand why you’re single and have no children. It must be great in Toteland.

        3. avatar Justice06rr says:

          JWM, enlighten us why you can’t move your own children out of state with you to AZ, NV, etc?

          Of course its not always easy, but If there’s a will, there’s a way. We welcome you to other free states.

          On a side note, From internet research shows CA adult population as 28million in 2010. 9million gun owners are out-gunned (pun intented) when it comes to voting.

        4. avatar jwm says:

          Justice, my wife and I have 7 kids, all adults. We have 6 grandkids. Her parents are here. This whole concept of uprooting your family because you don’t like some of the laws where you live is ridiculous.

          Throw in jobs, houses and in-laws and you see it’s not quite so simple.

  10. avatar pwrserge says:

    Never have I felt a stronger urge to choke a sanctimonious prick than that testimony from Lee.

    1. avatar Jeff says:

      Although I can sympathize with you, what’s interesting to me is how the person’s perception changes the argument.

      I believe that Mr. Lee does in fact believe that people are bypassing the law via a loophole. Looking at things from his point of view, the intent of the 1989 law was a attempt to eliminate firearms with a detachable magazine and one or more characteristic feature. In effect, to ban all ‘assault’ weapons.

      What happened was that people made devices that followed the letter of the law from a technical standpoint, but not in spirit. For example, now you can pick up a ‘bullet button’ enabled firearm that is used almost as quickly as without one. So the concept of needing a tool as that will slow someone down from being able to change magazines has been nullified.

      Now if you look at the argument from the other side of the fence, the bullet button is a hindrance, but not really too big of a issue as the work-arounds work pretty well. Their perception is that they are indeed using a tool to release the magazine.

      Personally, I am amazed at how easily people dismiss the facts presented. I can somewhat understand the reason California implemented the 1989 ban (it was another school shooting, by the way). Now, as it was then, the laws don’t seem to actually achieve much outside of giving folks a false sense of security. In this particular video (as in a lot of similar situations), I wish the pro-2a speaker was a bit better of a orator who didn’t seem like they just ramble on… He had some good points, but I don’t think they were presented well.

      1. avatar John L. says:

        Law is supposed to be about facts. Not feelings.

        If the CA legislature passed a law that was written poorly enough so as to generate a loophole, well, that’s the fault of the CA legislature.

        But *shrug* CA does tend to legislate on feelings not facts. For instance, the ban on hollow point rounds in San Francisco. Because, you know, it’s better to have ammo that’s more likely to go through the target, walls, etc. and hit innocent bystanders than have a scary-sounding bullet. Seriously. This as explained to me by the nice folks at High Bridge Arms when I stopped by one day and wanted to get some practice ammo.

        The thing that really gets me is the willful ignorance involved. I’m glad to live out of state now. (I’m one of those folks whose job specialty basically can find me work in New York, Illinois, NM and the California Bay Area. I’m glad the opening came up.)

      2. avatar pwrserge says:

        The only point that should matter is “shall not be infringed”. Yee (stupid autocorrect fixed his name earlier) should be hung for treason and insurrection as a reminder to others.

  11. avatar CA.Ben says:

    Oh there are so many more bills than that. Check out the full list:

    https://www.firearmspolicy.org/the-issues/california/2013-2014/

  12. avatar Blue says:

    I think the Devil is driving the train and it is running out of rails!

  13. avatar CA.Ben says:

    “If you want to violate the law, go ahead and violate the law”
    -Yee

    So I take that as permission?

    1. avatar jwm says:

      slow joe told us to shoot into the air and thru doors.

    2. avatar Denny says:

      Would seen so and Granted by a currently serving lawmaker, of from and within the state of Kommiefornia.. Cut loose brother.

  14. avatar Patriot says:

    Why doesn’t Kalifornia just go full retard already and get it over with… Oh wait, they did.

  15. avatar Jay In Florida says:

    You know Im so sick of the BS going on in Kalifornia these days.
    Its become one of those if you don’t like what we are doing LEAVE>>>>>>…
    I would if I lived there.
    Why fight with the fruitcakes anymore???
    They want to get killed by the underlings…….lettem for heavens sake.
    Take yourself your families and get the heck out of Dodge already.

  16. avatar Zack says:

    So what dose it reclassify a shotgun as?

    1. avatar DrVino says:

      NFA item

      1. avatar Zack says:

        Really?!?! Christ, talk about full retarded

      2. avatar Russ Bixby says:

        So they didn’t somehow change the definition of a shotgun, but rather reclassified it?

        You have got to be fu¢king kidding.

        Are you just trying to rouse the rabble? It’s hard to see how a Калифорния law could influence the National Firearms Act.

      3. avatar Russ Bixby says:

        SB567 In fact alters the definition of a shotgun to include rifled barrels and those not intended for shoulder fire, making certain weapons which were considered AOW by Калифорния now ordinary shotguns.

        I Ido not see this as a problem.

        It also moves the registration process for revolving magazine shotguns from the state to theta the local level, without reimbursement to the locals, but does not change requirements or fees imposed upon the owners of the weapons.

        I do not see how this s a problem.

        So… Certain weapons are freed of red tape, and the state government is trying to pinch pennies at the expense of local institutions.

        The first s a win, and the other has no effect on gun owners,

        What’s the beef with this one?

        1. avatar ThayneT says:

          Exactly. I wish pro-2A people would stop being just as ready with the FUD as the gun-control advocates.

          Get the facts people.

      4. avatar ThayneT says:

        Not really.
        …“shotgun” means a weapon designed or redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder and designed or redesigned and made or remade to use the energy of the explosive in a fixed shotgun shell to fire through a smooth bore or rifled bore either a number of projectiles (ball shot) or a single projectile for each pull of the trigger. Except as used in sections 16530 and 16640, and as used in Section 17180, only as that Section applies to Sections 16530 and 16640, this definition does not include handguns.

        (b) (1) Any person who, from January 1, 2001, to December 31, 2013, inclusive, lawfully acquired a shotgun with a revolving cylinder, as defined in Sections 17190 and 30515 and who, after January 1, 2014, lawfully possesses that firearm, shall register the firearm before July 1, 2015, with the department pursuant to those procedures that the department may establish by regulation pursuant to paragraph (4).

  17. avatar Frank Masotti says:

    Will the police abide by the law as well? Opps that’s right the police and other government agencies are above the laws.

  18. avatar Resident CT says:

    I just wanted to point out that Sen. Leland Yee is the person that was proposing legislation to regulate 3D printers, with background checks, registration and serial numbers, on 3D printers.

  19. avatar aweds says:

    In all seriousness, how can those possibly stand up to court challenges? I get their strategy: ban/ restrict everything until a court tells you “no”, but I don’t understand how any of these would pass a Supreme Court test.

    1. avatar Toasty says:

      They’re throwing shit against the wall to see what sticks. This and all the other crap passed post Newtown is all just being thrown at the courts to see what they’ll let them get away with. I mean the state of NY’s official legal position on the 2A they’re taking before the court is “We can ban every single firearm except one and as long as we allow you to have some kind of firearm to defend yourself with in the home than the 2A is not infringed.” I’m not making that up, read the NY AG’s brief and try not to puke. They’ll go to the SCOTUS and get struck down then we get to deal with them trying to make everything as expensive as possible and THAT is gonna be an awful time.

    2. avatar Chris says:

      The CA plan of attack on gun control is to throw as much legislation out there as they can, regardless of how it will stick. Since there are nowhere near enough votes to slow them down, they can get anything through without any speed bumps. Then they let the Calguns Foundation/et al fight it in the courts and spend their money and time battling these things which take much longer to fight and overturn (assuming they federals will even hear them) than they do to create. They are still fighting the gun roster from how many years ago?

    3. avatar Ropingdown says:

      I think it is quite good, in a way, that states have rushed to pass a variety of extreme laws. SCOTUS needs conflicting statutes, cases, circuits, before it can clarify Heller. It seems better to have the matter advance quickly, for obvious reasons.

  20. avatar DrVino says:

    Also, starting in January, we will have to register ALL long gun purchases. Retail and P2P.

    I am stocking up on pitchforks and torches. Anybody got any rope? Charles Bronson’s always got rope.

    1. avatar Chaotic Good says:

      Yeah, but they always end up using it.

    2. avatar Dave's not here man... says:

      +100 for the Boondock Saints reference 🙂

  21. avatar DrVino says:

    We recently ran a citizen action campaign where people went into their legislator’s local offices. These bastards refute Heller’s individual rights ruling.

  22. avatar janitor says:

    i got free(er)people problems…..ill have to order some of my AR parts vs buy at a local store….gosh virginia sucks.

  23. avatar Chris says:

    This is one of the contributing factors to me leaving that state. I was born and raised there, as was my wife. But the taxes and the infringements are just getting to be too much. I can appreciate JWM’s desire to stay. As as been pointed out, there are a lot of guns/gun owners there. The problem is, and this hastened our departure, that as of 1/1/14, all of those guns will be registered or illegal. CA is a one party rule and that party does not think people need guns or their own money.

    1. avatar jwm says:

      It’s not as much my desire to stay as my desire not to split my family. Not all of us can relocate so easily. It’s heartbreaking to only see your grandkids once or twice a year. No, I’ll have to ride it out here, regardless.

      1. avatar Dirk Diggler says:

        and if you want to consign any of your firearms to the free state of Missouri, let me know . . . . I have a good home for them, new a/c units and furnaces, wet bar, and kids who know how to clean guns, too.

    2. avatar ThayneT says:

      Registration of long guns only applies to those purchased after 1/1/14. It is not retroactive.

      Stock up now.

  24. avatar CyborgCowboy says:

    And this is why I can’t wait to move to Georgia.

    1. avatar jmama says:

      Come on down! I left cali in 96 – best thing I ever did. They couldn’t pay me to come back. Remember, it’s not just guns. Can’t say “mommy” or “daddy” in schools, taxing you and giving it to illegals, wasting money on the high-speed turd, letting criminals out of prison early, killing the central valley by cutting off the water, etc. Your tax dollars are funding this behaviour. Leave and let them wallow in their own filth.

      1. avatar Russ Bixby says:

        What is meant by “can’t say mommy or daddy in schools?”

        1. avatar Spunkmeister says:

          http://archive.redstate.com/blogs/bob_frazier/2007/oct/15/mom_and_dad_banned_in_california_schools

          “”Mom and Dad” as well as “husband and wife” have been banned from California schools under a bill signed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who with his signature also ordered public schools to allow boys to use girls restrooms and locker rooms, and vice versa, if they choose.”

          “The bills include SB777, which bans anything in public schools that could be interpreted as “negative” toward homosexuality, bisexuality and other “alternative lifestyle choices.” There are no similar protections for students with traditional or conservative lifestyles and beliefs, however.”

          “Now on a banned list will be any text, reference or teaching aid that portrays marriage as only between a man and woman, materials that say people are born male or female (and not in between), sources that fail to include a variety of transsexual, bisexual and homosexual historical figures, and sex education materials that fail to offer the option of sex changes.”

        2. avatar Spunkmeister says:

          http://archive.redstate.com/blogs/bob_frazier/2007/oct/15/mom_and_dad_banned_in_california_schools

          “”Mom and Dad” as well as “husband and wife” have been banned from California schools under a bill signed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who with his signature also ordered public schools to allow boys to use girls restrooms and locker rooms, and vice versa, if they choose.”

          “The bills include SB777, which bans anything in public schools that could be interpreted as “negative” toward homosexuality, bisexuality and other “alternative lifestyle choices.” There are no similar protections for students with traditional or conservative lifestyles and beliefs, however.”

        3. avatar Russ Bixby says:

          Crike.

          When left Dukemejian (or however it’s spelled) was Governor.

          Wow. Just, wow.

          Of course, unfettered access to the girls’ locker room would have its up side…

    2. avatar Herb says:

      Come to South Carolina. There is no one city in SC so big that its politics dominate the rest of the state, as with Chicago, NYC, Philadelphia, Atlanta, Baltimore, Seattle, Minneapolis-St. Paul, etc.

      We’re just a bunch of gun crazy rednecks. Ask any liberal.

  25. avatar Matt in SD says:

    In six weeks I’ll be back in Maine for good. Due in part to the ridiculous political climate in California. Tax, spend, and regulate…that’s all they do.

    1. avatar BDub says:

      I was under the impression that’s what every government did.

  26. avatar Mntneer says:

    3 years in Los Angeles was enough for me to realize it wasn’t a place I wanted to live, get married and raise a family in.

    I feel for those supporters of the Constitution that are stuck living there, as I don’t ever see the political winds of change occurring in that state and common sense ever returning to the capital.

  27. avatar 9th Legless Reptile says:

    You can run, but you can’t hide. If this stuff stands in CA, it will be coming to so-called “free states” soon enough, Feinstien and Waxman are already mounting new attacks on the Federal level, and do you think Bloomberg and Co are going to stop dropping big $ in the states?. If NRA had people in these state capitols handing out influence $, it would be all over the flippin’ news with outrage, yet Bloomberg is doing it with no complaints. To let California slide into further tyranny because you are only thinking about yourself is short-sighted, selfish and spineless, not to mention by such actions you are actively helping the anti-liberty forces as a DeFacto “Gun-Grabber”/”Gun-Owner Oppressor” yourself. Don’t claim to wrap yourself in the Gadsen when you are actually putting on your red star beret and stomp to the beat of the Socialist tyrants in $1000.00 suits…

    1. avatar Ardent says:

      We of the free states here the same argument all the time, if it goes over in Cali and New York it’s coming soon to a state near you. The thing is that its just not true. People from free states tend to want to keep them that way. You go to Mississippi and tell them that their girl is gonna have to start showing after gym with a both and see where that goes. Florida doesn’t even have a state income tax. Most states laws regarding guns make California look like a totalitarian dictatorship and you’ll just never get someone from say Kansas to understand why anyone would live that way.

      It truth is really pretty simple, avoiding stupid people, places and things is always going to be good advice. It just turns out you sometimes have to apply it on a larger scale. I’d call both California and New York stupid places full of stupid people doing stupid things and wont go near them. If my home state, Ohio decided to ban common rifles or restrict ammunition I’d be out of here in a flash. I’ll let my presence money and ballot go to work somewhere they can do some good (like Ohio) rather than spitting at the forest fire that is everything vile and despotic about California politics.

  28. avatar Cubby123 says:

    These lawmakers need to go to jail for treason against our Constitution and Bill of Rights and the 2nd Amendment .The 2nd Amendment Foundation needs to Sue the State of California as they did Illinois ,Wask DC, and San Francisco..

    1. avatar Tom RKBA says:

      That is not going to happen unless some people in California make it happen.

    2. avatar Hannibal says:

      Uh, it’s not treason, it’s legislating. That’s the job of the legislature. The job of the Supreme Court is to determine whether something is constitutional or not. Now, one can argue that it’s foolish to pass bills that cannot pass muster with the USSC, but they keep getting elected, so I guess it’s not that dumb.

  29. avatar Accur81 says:

    Calling Senators, Congressmen, writing emails, etc. It’s clear that many of our legislators don’t give two sh!ts about freedom. I’ll be staying and fighting with jwm, and things are going to get interesting. With as all the ARs in CA, I don’t see how it is feasible to ban bullet buttons. As it stands, most people are making a good faith effort to obey CA’s dumba$$ gun laws. That may change if these get passed. CA gun owners are already pretty pissed off, I’m not sure how this crap would work. Civil disobedience may not be far off.

    Then again, this state is controlled by liberal progressive morons. Who knows what they’ll cook up next? I know this: I’m not giving up my guns and I’m not going to forcing good people to give up theirs.

    1. avatar Tom RKBA says:

      “CA gun owners are already pretty pissed off, I’m not sure how this crap would work. Civil disobedience may not be far off.”

      I doubt that. If they have put up with Cali laws this long, they will put up with just about anything. Cali has engaged in registration and confiscation in the past and are doing so today with the new initiative. The legislature would have to skip a few steps in order to enrage enough guns owners that something happens. Instead, they will continue to crank up the heat so the frog does not jump out.

  30. avatar Not So 1337 says:

    All Californians really need to do is buy a lot of speakers, some cd/mp3 players, and a bunch of death metal albums, and crank the volume. Hippies HATE death metal, eventually they’ll all move off.

    1. avatar 16V says:

      I’ll do it, but only if I get a Tonka radio-controlled bulldozer. And batteries for it.

  31. avatar Capybara says:

    The reality is that this state is intent on turning law abiding citizens into felons. Once you are convicted of a felon, you lose your 2A rights for life.

    Most gun owners are going to be ignorant of these new unconstitutional laws and will eventually get stung for something.

    People in free states don’t realize that California’s gun laws are not a California problem, they are a national problem that is spreading like a disease to free states. All gun owners should have banded together a decade ago to stop this problem, now they are going to eventually regret thinking, “that’s a California problem.”

  32. avatar JohnJ says:

    All of you people with the “just get up and leave” mentality. It must be nice to have the option of picking up and moving whenever and wherever you want without having to worry about having a job.

    Talk about sanctimonious.

    1. avatar GS650G says:

      Nothing sanctimonious about it, it’s your life and there are no border fences (yet) between states. This isn’t a surprise turn of events, it’s been 20 years in the making. Sure it’s a bitch moving but every day you stay tells them you’re A-OK with the plan. Better brush up on your Spanish and learn how to live on 40% of your pay after taxes.
      Beyond the 2a issue california has plenty of other reasons to leave and leave now. The rest of us are only hoping we don’t get tagged with the bailout.

      I’ve lived in several states and even more different countries. I guess I never felt sorry enough for myself to sit there and take it from them.

  33. avatar GS650G says:

    Too bad CA, they fill the legislature and own everything. If you live there and don’t like it move, just don’t move to CO where they are setting up shop to take over another state.
    And if you do move to a red state don’t vote for liberals, democrats, progressives or anyone else who promises free shit and then turns around and makes you less free.

    1. avatar DonS says:

      Actually, I’d like it if a lot of frustrated conservatives came to CO from CA. Here, their votes would actually have an impact – might let us take back the state.

  34. avatar Crpl Agarn says:

    This is really sickening. I live in CA.
    Why is it that the people making the laws are never forced to address the question “how will this reduce crime, again?”
    Because Criminals have such a rich history of obeying laws… WHAT???

    You know what? We should make it ILLEGAL to murder people, steal stuff, and rape. That should lower gun crime, right? Just make it illegal…
    This is disgusting.

  35. avatar mina says:

    Listening to gun grabbers talk always makes the hair on the back of my neck stand up.

  36. avatar michael says:

    I was at the hearing on the 13th. Here is my open letter to Gov Jerry Brown http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4s6CzAGtLek

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email