Screen-Shot-2014-01-16-at-9.52.52-AM

“What it basically means is that we have a shrinking number of guns we are allowed to sell in California. There is nothing that makes these guns anymore dangerous to their users or in a defensive situation. It really comes down to will the manufacturers put down the money to have their firearms approved for sale in California.” – Steven Rubert in Stricter state gun laws start January 1st [at fox5sandiego.com]

Recommended For You

71 Responses to Quote of the Day: Generally Speaking, No Edition

  1. “It really comes down to will the manufacturers put down the money to have their firearms approved for sale in California.”

    Translation: design in features mandated by the state, and submit models for testing along with the money and ammo to do so.” Still true, but now with the mirostamping mandate, it’s gotten to the point where manufacturers are just saying no.

    • And that was the entire intention of this “gun safety” legislation – reduce the numbers of guns that are legal to sell in the state until there are none. “Hey, we don’t ban guns – it’s not our fault that the greedy manufacturers aren’t willing to provide Californians with “safe” guns that meet our insane standards.”

    • This is a short sided comment. Least from the article.
      1. An off the record quote from a GLOCK executive at SHOT SHOW, “California can go F$%^ themselves”.
      2. It isn’t just the magazine safety, load indicator, and of course the financial extortion which California is running. We also have the micro stamping law, which none of the manufacturers will be providing. That has been stated on record in Amicus Brief fillings by multiple manufacturers.
      3. Lastly, we have the Peña v. Cid Case. This is a direct challenge to the safe handgun roster. If this falls our way, the roster goes bye bye. Yes I fully expect AG Harris to appeal to the highest court, 9th circuit court of appeals.
      For a listing of current open cases in California you can go here:
      michellawyers.com/second-amendment-litigation-case-tracker/

      It is important to note, that the mag safety, load indicator, micro stamping, DOJ testing, etc are all bound to the roster. It all goes away minus the 10 round limit. So this is a big case. The numbers are pretty clear here. It clearly shows that the laws passed make it impossible for Californians to exercise their right to purchase a common use firearm.

      District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller has a plethora of information to review. I think there is a good chance we could get a summary judgement in the case. I really don’t know how blatant it could be here. Just watching the DOJ listings of firearms in CA, the drop off list is 50+ pages long, and minus a few renewals which don’t require changes, there a no new additions.

      • I can certainly understand that Glock executive’s feelings vis-a-vis California. Gen3 production line has to be kept open to service the California market, rather than completely going to Gen4 production. It’s like the diesel truck manufacturers who must produce a separate engine setup due to MA, CA, NY regulations. Detracts from most efficient production of the company’s product, if they don’t have to produce superfluously modified iterations, why would they?

        That being said, I’m hopeful that Pena v. Cid will result in a summary judgment and the foolishness that is the roster will be overturned. Peruta was a welcome change from the usual judiciary slap in the face of California gun owners. Here’s to a new year of restored rights!

      • +1. Great summary Dan.

        As others have said, the Roster is simply rule by Executive fiat, illegal and unconstitutional.

        In a state like California, with a supermajority of Democrats running the state congress and Governor, the only alternative is the lawx and CalGuns Foundation and Second Amendment Foundatio teamed to challenge this and pay for the top suhelf local (Don Kilmer) and national legal talent (Gura) to win.

        The legal delays are maddening, and many suspect the state of dragging things out, but the point is we are winning on this one, and in the nations largest circuit of appeals, the 9th.

        Talk the talk, but remember what walks the walk, and if you want to make a difference, support the entities leveraging your rights by wins in court, CGF, SAF, and NRA in others like Peruta.

        Which by the way has a bunch of very interesting filings and amici briefs speaking to. CA AG appeal to be allowed to intervene, and the scret judge sua sponte asking for the case to be reheard en banc.

        http://michellawyers.com/guncasetracker/perutavsandiego/

        Read the Firearms Policy Coalition amici, note co -amici of Pink Pistols, Liberal Gun Owners, etc.

      • “An off the record quote from a GLOCK executive at SHOT SHOW, ‘California can go F$%^ themselves’”.

        The cynic in me suspects that that executive will be more than happy to supply Glocks to the California LEO market, though.

        This kind of garbage would end tomorrow if manufacturers simply refused to sell anything to government agencies/employees that the plebes aren’t allowed to own.

        • I’d love to see that happen, but it’s too much money for the big boys, you only see small companies do it.

      • I think that the probability that Judge Mueller invalidates the entire roster is slim to none, but the probability of invalidating the microstamping requirement is fairly substantial, since the technology to implement it is nonexistent, contrary to the conclusion of our anti-gun AG Harris. (The current tech will stamp a primer–for a while at least–but the law requires that the casing be stamped in two locations.) The original purpose of the roster was to impose drop safety requirements–meaning sear blocks and the like. Gradually this wa extended to include the LCI, then the mag disconnect, and finally the external safety, all of which were intended to prevent the (exceedingly) small number of “accidental” discharges by people who “didn’t know the gun was loaded”–i.e., to protect us from our own stupidity and failure to abide the 4 rules. All of us have read stories of idiots who pulled the mag out and believed that the gun was now unloaded, and ended up kiling someone.
        The microstamping rule is a whole ‘nother ball of wax. Its alleged purpose is to help solve crimes–just like the cartridge banks maintained by a couple of states (NY and Maryland I believe) under the theory that these measures will enable the police to trace crime guns. (And which is why it is limited to revolvers–outside of the impossibility of a solution to the engineering dilemma, revolvers do not conveniently leave casings at crime scenes.) It has nothing to do with safety, and given the millions of handguns in private hands in the state right now, the probability that it will do anything other than reduce the number of new pistols available for sale is essentially nil.

  2. There is nothing that makes these guns any safer to their users or more effective in a defensive situation. The real truth.

    • Mr. Rubert manages a gun shop. He’s not a politician. So yea, telling the truth shouldn’t be an issue.

      • Governor MoonBeam and his flock have successfully “solved” their cash problem. With the Prop system, they have successfully passed more income and other taxes to expand the redistribution of wealth from those that have, er… had, some cash to those that want it. Perfect! The CA budget crisis solved!

        Oh, wait. What happens when those folks move to Texas, Florida, etc? Stay tuned…. Crisis redux coming soon to a news program near you.

        • “What happens when those folks move to Texas, Florida, etc?”

          They try to wreck those places, too. I can’t for the life of me understand the mentality of leaving someplace and then trying to make the new place just like the one you just left. There’s no shortage of people in Texas now who moved here from California, and drone on and on about how California is better…

          I know that’s not what you were (rhetorically) asking, I just had to vent a little. 😉

    • Exactly!

      Other discussions do not matter. This is about the ability to control the sale of ALL guns. Over a period of time this type of law can only lead to the slow strangulation of gun sales. First comes new sales, then used and private sales…and finally they will demand all lawful firearm owners to turn them in or face imprisonment.

      Liberals will still have their licensed bodyguards and exempt themselves from the law. They are not stupid. Have an agenda and above all have patience….kinda like cancer…

  3. It really comes down to will the manufacturers to throw money in a black hole to have their firearms attempt to meet the ridiculous requirements which will never have approval for sale in California.” The real truth.

    • The other question is how many “unsafe” handguns* are California law enforcement officers carrying? (answer: darned near all of them)

      * The law legally classifies all handguns that are not on the roster as Unsafe Handguns (capitalization included). Why are police carrying unsafe guns?

      I cringe every time I hear a politician or news reporter repeating the talking point about the new law forbidding the sale of unsafe handguns, usually with a comment about how until now, people have been able to use a loophole to convert “unsafe” handguns to single-shot and back to get around the roster.

      Meanwhile, there are likely hundreds of thousands of pistols that were “not unsafe” (yes, that’s the actual wording of the roster) when sold, that have since expired from the roster and are legally deemed unsafe. Since they’re all registered, it would not be too much of a stretch to imagine the state confiscating all the “unsafe” handguns, or passing laws further restricting their use.

      Slowly,the water in the pot inches closer to the boiling point.

      • Well cops can have unsafe handguns because the have ‘training’.

        And yes, we are all lobsters.

        • reitred officer after serving my community for 35 years. 20+ years as a Police Firearms Instructor. I assure you firearms are not unsafe, people are. Monies should not be waisted on trying to ban firearms, they should be spent wisely teaching the proper use of them. You know as well as I that criminals will forever have them. Why punish the law abiding ones. You know the ones you serve.

  4. It’s oddly helpful that New York and California are so helpful in demonstrating that all the people who have been trying to tell us that gun safety, gun control laws, anti-crime schemes are really backdoor bureaucrat gun bans were simply telling the truth.

  5. I believe you would have to break the laws of physics to institute microstampling the way California wants it instituted.

    So no more “safe” guns for California.

    • If it does become possible, all they have to do is implement a requirement for an infallible friend-or-foe recognition system. In the name of safety, of course.

  6. Their linear extrapolation at the end is a case of number fudging to suit an agenda. They curve fit an exponential equation to their “Roster Removal” chart, including 2 points that are clearly outliers from the last 12 years. I would say you can only fit a linear equation to that data.

    Assuming an actual trend, you will see around 85 removals per year in 2015, but an increasing number regardless. The reality is probably worse, because the trend is easily affected by political and financial stresses that change from year to year. This is what makes extrapolation so difficult, and subject to manipulation.

  7. California’s requirement of bureaucratic approval seems like one of the most blatantly unconstitutional laws on the books, especially in light of the “weapons in common use” references in the Heller decision.

    This should be near the top of the list of potential lawsuits for Alan Gura and SAF.

    • Maryland has the same problem. You’ve got a handgun roster board that can make essentially arbitrary decisions about what’s safe or not. We’re lucky only that they tend to approve anything with a trigger guard, even if it otherwise looks like a scary “assault pistol”. Downside, it can take literally months for a handgun to get approved, since they meet on a “meh, whenever” basis, and you have to wait 45 days after approval for it to become official.

  8. One thing about this article bugs me, the fact that it is based on the assumption that California somehow cares about gun store owners and their economic well being. He lists S&W and Ruger pulling out as a bad thing, and any sane person would realize that having two highly profitable businesses deciding to no longer engage in commerce in your state is a bad thing indeed, but the duly elected criminals in Sacramento are in all likelihood chalking this up to a success, a purging of evil from their “Great” State. Even if the people don’t see it it that way, what exactly are they going to do about it? their legislators are so embedded they could care less. I have several very good friends who live in Cali, strong conservatives at that, and their response is that elections are just a charade so that the Democrats can claim legitimacy in their victories, but they make enough money to still live comfortably after they get pickpocketed by the state income taxes so they stay and enjoy the brilliant weather.

    • “…that elections are just a charade so that the Democrats can claim legitimacy in their victories,..”

      The elections are not a charade. California demographics have changed to such an extend is that this what the California electorate wants. The election results are legitimate. This is true in states like New York, Massachusetts, Illinois and Maryland.

      What is lost in the Eric Garner case is that the high cigarette taxes are widely popular in New York City. What we take as an infringement is not seen that way by a significant majority of the voters in these states.

      • We are not a democracy. We are a republic. If something infringes upon the rights of the individual, the mob cannot impose it upon the individual. If the electorate of a state voted to make a certain religion mandatory, would you defend it by saying that it is legitimate? I’m sure you wouldn’t (nor would any sane individual).

    • A slave won’t acknowledge or will happily accept that he is a slave, if you make his cage comfortable enough. Principled persons are a rare breed these days, and this will ultimately be the downfall of our republic.

        • I am not referring to any subset of government, but the concept of government as a whole. The more I understand governments and their various renditions, the more I move toward being an anarchist. The flawed notion that a small group of imperfect people can be trusted to govern the equally imperfect people that “cannot govern themselves” is asinine. You being of the LE flavor will find this almost unfathomable, in my opinion, if your comment history has any bearing.

        • Correction, for my comment I was thinking about the statement by some of the founders that our nation was designed to be governed by moral men. Once that core principle is gone, well, you are seeing the results now.

      • There is a huge gap between public opinion on issues important to people and the laws imposed by the so-called representatives of the people on the majority who are subject to their laws.

        The popularity of the Congress hovers too ridiculously close to single digits to be called a democracy.

        The state is anarchic in the sense that it operates with impunity to law and does what it wants to do with little concern for the majority outside of its own legislative body (except for hot button issues in election season).

        Anarchists resist the laws of government. The government acts contrary its own laws as stated in the Constitution. Therefore the government is anarchist.

        So if you can’t beat them democratically (and you can’t), why not be anarchist against the anarchists? (Except for the fact that they own the legal system, the penal system, and the vast superiority in fire power.)

  9. One thing not covered is the specific exemption for single action revolvers. Yup, the Colt SAA, which is notorious for discharging when dropped on the hammer, is SPECIFICALLY exempt from the testing requirements. Guns for sale to state agencies are also exempt from testing.
    Truly the most disgusting bit of lawmaking ever by our elected officials.

    • CA “Safe Gun” laws have nothing to do with safety. It is all about gun control. Interestingly, person to person transfers are exempt from the “Safe Gun List”. A real clue. Person to person transfers do require a federal background check, FFL transfer, CA registration, and 10 day waiting period. There is no limit on number of purchase of used handguns like there is on new handguns (limit 1 per 30 days).

      • Incorrect. Roster requirements cannot be imposed on guns that have already been sold, only on new guns; doing so would constitute a “taking.” Moreover, the exemption for used guns only applies to FTF transactions, which for all practical purposes means guns that have previously been legally sold in or imported into this state.

    • If the cops’ guns weren’t exempt, they wouldn’t have any guns to shoot innocent bystanders, blacks who “resist arrest”, and children playing with dangerous sticks.

    • While it is true that the Colt SAA (and the clones and the Rugers as well) are exempt, it is because of the age of the design. They were grandfathered in. Moreover, revolvers are generally exempt from Roster requirements because of the physical impossibility of installing the safety features required of pistols, such as an external safety, the LCI, or the magazine disconnect, and most definitely not microstamping.

  10. The thing that irks me is that since no new guns get on the list that means that guns that have been redesigned to be safer than an older (California) approved model illustrates the stupidity behind the law. If safety was truly the issue wouldn’t ya want an updated safer model on the list?

    • The major stumbling block is the microstamping rule with which no manufacturer can comply. Other than that, the State is more than happy for manufacturers to sell safer handguns that comply with the other requirements of the law (LCI, external safety, drop safety and mag disconnect), requirements for which manufacturers have the technology (should they chose to do so. Glock is a notable exception.)

    • Silicon Valley isn’t the problem. LA, SF, and Oakland are the big problems. With cash from the Marin County elite.
      Those areas are all fairly hilly and would not flood easily.

  11. Random CA police department: Hello, Manufacturer. We need replacement/repair parts for firearm XYZ.

    Manufacturer: I’m sorry, but in your state that is an unsafe firearm. We can’t in good conscience sell you parts for that firearm. Have a good day.

    Random CA police department: …

    • Oh if only Glock, Sig and the others would pull a Ronnie Barrett. That was particularly endearing when he told LAPD, sorry, if non-LEOs can’t own my rifles, I’m not fixing yours. And sent it back.

  12. What is really going to happen is that the black market in gun sales will flourish and the people in Calif. will lock and load with full auto weapons bought out some entrepreneur’s car. If the state thought there was a problem before wait’ll this happens. The folks will refuse to be defenseless, they will get what they believe they need to protect themselves. 😛

    • Doubtful. For one, FA guns are hideously expensive–and registered. Second, most gun owners are law-abiding and will not purchase or possess illegal weapons. People buying guns out of someone’s trunk generally fall into the criminal class, a class unaffected by the current and new gun laws. Third, at least for now, the market for revolvers is unaffected. Finally, anything C&R or FTF is fair game, with the only restriction on pistols being mag capacity.

      • The more bad laws California passes, the more Californians will disregard them. I lived there from 99 to 08. Never did get around to registering the pistols I brought there from Illinois.

        Californians who need guns will simply go to Oregon or Nevada and purchase them legally, and just not mention to the authorities when they bring them back in state. I can guarantee that there are millions of unregistered guns in California not owned by the criminal element.

  13. The only person who can successfully implement all the “safety requirements” of states like CA and NJ is Dr. Who. The rest of us are bound by the laws of physics and he need to make an honest living.

  14. Calguns and the Second Amendment Foundation has a lawsuit challenging the roster. Every Californian should support the challenge. Clearly the roster (as well as a number a CA laws) is ridiculous. There are police departments patrolling the streets with “unsafe” handguns. Clearly the roster is about control and supplication to the state.

    The graphic above was probably taken from this Calguns page:

    https://www.calgunsfoundation.org/roster/

    If everyone on TTAG gave $10 to support the cause, it would certainly help abolish the idiotic handgun roster. And if a roster gets shot down in CA it is less likely to show up in other states.

  15. They aren’t anti-criminal laws. They are anti-gun owner laws. The state of California doesn’t welcome you, your culture, and your firearms and would like all you weirdo gun owners to pack your sh!t and leave. That is all these laws are really about. You and your kind.

    • Maryland is the same way which is why I shed no tear and actually started laughing hysterically when crossing the Potomac heading south.

      They can keep that state. It is a lost cause. Even if by miracle the gun laws were overturned which they won’t be it still would not be enough to drag me back. The culture there is intolerant of freedom or liberty and worships the state in its entirety.

  16. Why does California sound like it’s becoming the city from the movie Demolition Man. Everyone walked around in LA LA land kinda like Californians do today and think they are perfectly safe because everything dangerous is banned or locked away. They keep taking away peoples rights, just like the movie stars that are against the 2nd amendment but cried 1st amendment when that jerk Seth Rogen’s movie was threatened. You can’t pick and choose amendments that suit you. It’s all the constitution or none.

    • Because urban California is that kind of society. The mega city in the south of the state (broken up only by Camp Pendleton, thank goodness) and the San Francisco-Sacredtomato corridor are populated by some of the most removed from reality folks that I’ve ever met. As long as they get their new smartphones to bury their heads in, new couture clothing and the money to hit the newest hot spots, they remain in the bubble of ignorance. They think that the government is a beneficial entity and that the Constitution (aside from the 1st amendment) isn’t worth knowing. If something’s not to their taste, it’s put on the ballot as a proposition and their foolishness is codified into law.

      • Not quiite true, Perplexed.

        Orange County north of Pendleton, is solidly Repub, and the Sheriff there began issuing CCW permits, after Peruta decision in Feb.

        San Diego County has long been conservative on average, with some Dem pockets that are also higher crime areas, along the border, near San Diego the City, and a couple others.

        San Diego County sheriffs and street cops are 99% in favor of CCW by law abiding citizens, as they know when seconds count, they are only minutes away, per long time contacts in those forces.

        So the corruption of the political process is really by the Democrat elites, in Sacramento, at the bidding of those who end up as the most senior, in the most solidly liberal or progtarded districts. Thats how the sixth largest economy of the world is ruled by nitwits and cons like Senator “Gunrunner” Yee, and “Ghost gunner” De Leon.

        Eventually the pendulum will swing, but we have a LOT more pain before it becomes obvious to the LIVs who need to know just how badly they have been screwed, by their Masters of The Liberal Plantation.

        I see a lot of people quietly making backup plans to move out of state after retirement, if they havent moved already, and these are the middle class tax payers who pay 70% of revenues. Eventually even the most well organized top down socialist regimes fail, but history shows it takes time – 70 years for the USSR, for example.

        So in the meantime, its bottomup support on issues important to citizens via Propositions to end run Sacramento, and fight the illegal laws, in the courts.

        History is already judging the corruption of truth that is Progressivism v2.0, at the US national level, thanks to the example set by the Community Organnizer inChief, and voters repudiation of Democrats corruption in the US Senate. But California is a weird mix of welfare dependents and clueless young progtard idealists, with rich elite Dark Enlightenment Silicon Valley elites who laugh at them all, so its going to take longer, imfo, for the failure cycle to have an impact, like Detroit has, for example, proving economic realities, or Ferguson, recently proving the social lies of progtard tactics politically.

        • Good synopsis. There are pockets of red all throughout the state. As always, liberal progs in cities out vote any semblance of intelligence.

          I’m an Independent and I’m looking forward to leaving.

        • I stand corrected on the tarring and feathering of Southern California as a whole, mea culpa. Orange County’s been solid red territory since before I was born, and the large population of military and military retirees in San Diego County keep it pretty red as well. By the by, what is your opinion of Sheriff Gore?

        • @PubliusS,

          Solid synopsis there. I would add that the ballot process is underused by the people and overused by the unions, corporations and monied elite. And to the average voter, it’s asking a lot to understand who’s really behind most ballot initiatives and what they actually mean.

          With Washington’s I-594 in mind, it’s the ballot initiative process that scares me most of all.

Leave a Reply

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