California: Hearing on “The Safety for All Act of 2016” Ballot Initiative Scheduled for Tuesday, May 3

remote.axd

(The following is reprinted from nraila.org with permission.)

The Assembly and Senate Public Safety Committee is scheduled to hold an informational hearing tomorrow, Tuesday May 3, at 9:30am in hearing room 4203, on Lt. Governor Gavin Newsom’s gun control initiative, “The Safety for All Act of 2016.”  A vote will not be taken at this hearing however members are encourage to contact members of the committee with their opposition to the initiative and similar legislation that is currently moving through the Legislature.  Assembly Public Safety Committee contact information can be found here and the Senate Public Safety Committee contact information can be found here or you can click the take action button below . . .

The NRA is joined by a growing number of diverse organizations that have publicly come out in opposition to Newsom’s gun control imitative. These groups include: the California State Sheriffs’ Association, the Association of Deputy District Attorneys, Congress of Racial Equality, Women Against Gun Control, and the San Francisco Veteran Police Officers Association, just to name a few.  These are all reputable organizations opposing this misguided initiative that recognize “The Safety for All Act of 2016” will do nothing to criminals, nothing to stop gun crimes and will only harm the law-abiding citizens of California.

According to the official language submitted to the Attorney General, Newsom’s intiative includes a laundry list of proposals that restrict, complicate and increase the cost of exercising your Second Amendment rights. Notable provisions include:

House-to-House Confiscation of Private Property – Millions of legal magazines will need to be sold out-of-state, taken out-of-state, or seized by law enforcement.  Many legal firearms are designed around magazines that can hold more than 10 rounds, making them effectively useless for self-defense, competitive shooting, and hunting.  This backdoor gun ban is not just on future sales, but forces you to surrender your existing private property to law enforcement.

Restricting Legal Ammunition Vendors – Thousands of ammunition retailers will be prohibited from selling ammunition in California.  Vendors will be required to pay additional fees to have their employees authorized as a seller of ammunition.  Out-of-state ammunition vendors will be prohibited from directly selling ammunition into California.  Because of its ineffectiveness, in 1986, the director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms supported repeal of a similar federal ammunition record-keeping requirement: “The Bureau and the [Treasury] Department have recognized that current recordkeeping requirements for ammunition have no substantial law enforcement value.”  These ammunition restrictions will severely curtail the exercise of constitutionally protected conduct while providing no law enforcement value.

Leaving the Range With Ammunition – By criminalizing the private sale or transfer of ammunition, it will be a crime to share ammunition with a friend or family member to finish up a hunting trip or day at the range. The initiative would even prohibit leaving the range with any unused ammunition purchased at the range.

Costly Fees & Long Waits Just to Acquire Lawful Ammunition – This latest attempt to reduce the exercise of Second Amendment rights includes yet another excessive fee under the guise of more background checks.  Newsom wants you to pay another $50 fee and wait 30 days for authorization to purchase ammunition.  Law-abiding gun owners who have already gone through the burdensome firearm safety certificate procedures would not be exempt from the new ammunition authorization requirement.  The authorization would be added on top of California’s already complicated regime of firearm and ammunition regulations.

Lost and Stolen Reporting – This requirement would turn law-abiding citizens into criminals should they fail to report lost or stolen firearms to police within a limited amount of time after they “should have known” the firearm was missing.  Governor Brown has already vetoed similar legislation twice because it would do nothing to improve public safety in California.

Defeating Newsom’s gun control initiative will be a fight through November and it’s imperative that you help educate your family, friends and other Californians. Newsom is operating under the guise of “safety” to mislead citizens into somehow thinking restricting and creating new crimes against law-abiding citizens will curb criminal activity. The truth is, this initiative creates new crimes for the law-abiding while ignoring the acts of criminals.  Don’t let Newsom’s propaganda fool you because he has never met a gun control measure he doesn’t like including pushing for a complete handgun ban while serving as the Mayor of San Francisco.

comments

  1. avatar jwm says:

    Hearings? Right. Nothing short of an armed federal force restoring our civil rights is going to change the outcome of this rigged hearing.

    1. avatar Anonymous says:

      You’re out of California right? What are you going to do about this?

      1. avatar jwm says:

        I live in CA. I do what I can.

        1. avatar Accur81 says:

          @Anon,

          Personally, I donate to FPC, CalGuns, NRA, NRA-ILA, write letters to congress, call congress critters, help people with pro-gun research,help people buy, build and shoot, wear pro-gun clothes, and post a shite ton of pro-gun articles like TTAG on social media.

          What do you do?

        2. avatar some dude says:

          @accur81 Ahhh humblebragging time. For when you really start to feel how much better a person you are than everyone else.

  2. avatar JasonM says:

    I just read that the CA sheriffs, police, and prosecutors oppose this. Also many democrats in the legislature, and even potentially governor Brown oppose it. They think it will create mandates on law enforcement that will get in the way of their current activities.

    1. avatar Cliff H says:

      Which is exactly why Newsom wants this as a ballot initiative where he can propagandize the low-information voters to pass ridiculous legislation that even hard-core Liberal Democrats are opposed to.

      The man has a fascist agenda and will stop at nothing to prevent Californians from exercising their Second Amendment protected right to keep and bear arms.

      1. avatar onespeedbiker says:

        As with most politicians, Newsom could care less about public safety, he simply thinks he can ride California’s anti-gun sentiments to the Governors desk. If this fails, Newsom will likely fail in his bid for Governor. Hopefully the citizenry will follow the advice of the state’s law enforcement agencies and county DA’s that this is a bad law and is unenforceable due to it’s complexity and the cost to taxpayers.

  3. avatar Geoff PR says:

    Cali residents, start practicing placing your head between your knees and kissing your…

  4. avatar Vitsaus says:

    Any day now the NRA will cancel a banquet and show up with a team of crack lawyers to fight for our rights before this spreads to more states.

    1. avatar PPGMD says:

      You do realize that the banquets are put on by a separate division of the NRA.

      The banquets are put on by the Friends of the NRA. Lawsuits are done by the NRA Civil Rights Defense Fund. Lobbying is done by the NRA Institute for Legislative Action. Political ads and donations are done by the NRA Political Victory Funds. In addition to NRA proper each of these are confirmed to be there own corporation. I am sure there are more divisions and corporation, but these are just the ones I know.

      There is little overlapping between the different corporation often due to legal requirements. For examples the 501c3 side of the NRA can not share funds with the political sides of the NRA.

      In addition to the above the NRA often works through affiliates or subsidiaries at the state level. As you often need someone local on the ground to run things day to day in those state capitols.

      1. avatar Next Pres picks the Supreme Court says:

        ^^^THIS.
        I’m so sick of ignorant, entitled gun owners whining about their single most powerful advocate.
        Don’t like how the NRA is defending your rights? THEN GET OFF YOUR ASS AND DEFEND THEM YOURSELF!

    2. avatar Westward Ho says:

      Look up the name Joseph Silvoso, i.e., the speaker today who spoke on behalf of the Coalition for Civil Liberties in opposition. Guess what he is and who he represents.

      You shouldn’t presume the NRA isn’t doing anything just because their crack lawyers don’t run it by you first.

  5. avatar Andrew Lias says:

    Kangaroo Congress here is hoping the best for you lost souls behind enemy lines.

  6. avatar IYearn4nARnCali says:

    I have voiced my opposition to gun control legislation countless times to my representatives, Fienstein, Boxer, and Costa; they are all Democrats, staunch anti-2A demoncrats.

    My opinions, beliefs, view, concerns, wishes, and admonitions, all fall on unhearing ears. None of my representatives are interested in the perpetual loss of my 2nd amendment right, or my natural right to defend my life and the lives of my family.

    I will of course email, letter write, and call my representatives, but all my efforts are useless. When I have wanted to vote for another candidate, they always stay in office anyway which proves my votes are also useless.

    I envy you free men and women in the other states of our great nation.

    1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      So, vote in the Democrat primaries to eject incumbents.

      1. avatar Accur81 says:

        I’ve thought of doing that, but I’m still only willing to vote once. So my vote is still irrelevant.

        1. avatar Arkansas kur says:

          I live in a free state, so I don’t have the legislative problems Californians have. However, accur81 and all your California brethren, can vote twice. even 3 or 4 times. Take people shooting. As often as possible. I’m sure you probably already do, but encourage your like minded yet not quite as enthusiastic friends to do the same. Your voice will never be heard as long as your opinion is a minority opinion. There’s not much you can do, but converting people by taking them shooting works, if only on a small scale. We should each be a firearms missionary. It worked well enough to spread religion around the world, it may eventually work well enough for Californians to be able to buy a standard AR. Stay strong and fight the good fight. It’s important to us southerners that California doesn’t go too far into the gun control nexus. Having your state disarmed may plant ideas into the heads of politicians that may one day crop up in my area

    2. avatar Warewolf says:

      I feel your pain, and I warn that it’s not just California. Your neighbors to the north are in a similar situation. We have attempted to boot out Prozanski a few times without success. I write all my local reps and just get back a bunch of “thanks for your concern, but I disagree”… They don’t want to have the conversation because they might learn something about the people they represent. Now folks are going after one of our most notable Sheriffs in the state because he’s spoken realistically.

      We have a governor that wasn’t voted into office, which uses “emergency” to bypass the legal system on any legislation that is likely to be apposed when presented. She has a track record of pissing off people and going against the advising of the people she serves, most recent her decisions on the minimum wage situation. Check out her Wiki page for more…

      It’s not just California…

      1. avatar Robert says:

        How Gov Brown got into office was completely legal and is probably the same procedure in the other 49 states. Heck even the federal government has a similar system. Being upset about the bills she signs into law is completely reasonable. Being upset about how she became governor is not.

        1. avatar zroll says:

          Here and Kitzhaber should be sharing a prison cell.

    3. avatar JohnnyL says:

      I have also voiced my opposition as well and I am glad to see others such as yourself willing to join the fight. I will also continue to email and write and more importantly donate to 2nd amendment causes as well. Some say it is a lost cause but the more of us the better and it is working.

      For example, today at the hearing Newsom didn’t even have the courage to show up and defend his purposed policies. And when the cameras are on, when he’s expected to present his arguments, he can’t even take the elevator up four floors that tells you something. So please Join and Support the NRA, Firearms Policy Coalition (www.firearmspolicy.org) and Coalition for Civil Liberties (www.stoptheammograb.com) They will keep you informed and guide us to defeating this crazy types of legislation.

      I do think we can defeat this but we have to get our voices heard…

  7. avatar Jack says:

    Is there any hope left for California?

    1. avatar Geoff PR says:

      Yes.

      North Korea could nuke San Fran…

      1. avatar Old Ben turning in grave says:

        They’d have to take out LA, too. At the very least.

        1. avatar Timmy! says:

          And I’m ok with that.

        2. avatar LarryinTX says:

          That is just stupid. It would be FAR better for almost everybody concerned to simply sell CA to China. Bingo, no more guns, protesters are gone missing, everything is just ducky.

      2. avatar Andrew says:

        Wow, hoping N. Korean nuking SF. that’s a lot of ill will direct towards 7 million plus people of the Bay Area. Same goes to the two other misanthropists in this thread hoping death and destruction upon other Americans in LA. When calamity hits your family and home, think of how casually you wished it upon others. karma is a fast acting bitch.

        1. avatar Geoff PR says:

          ” When calamity hits your family and home, think of how casually you wished it upon others. karma is a fast acting bitch.”

          Spare me your sanctimony.

          I’ve lived trough tornadoes in southwest Oklahoma (Tornado Ally) that killed multiple people and left that community without power for nearly a week and here in Florida in 2004, in *one* five-week period my home was hit by 3 separate hurricanes.

          Here’s me now wishing a tornado on *your* pious ass… 🙂

  8. avatar Frank Masotti says:

    Well the communists and Hitler lovers are on the move in the communist state of California. This would effectively ban ALL semi autos, including all pistols, ar’s, pump shotguns, (maybe not). Looks like the inmates will be running the prison (all of California) very soon.

    1. avatar jwm says:

      Soon?

    2. avatar Mark N. says:

      Not. California has had a ten round mag limit for decades. And a handgun roster that only allows in handguns with ten rounds or less capacity, among its less objectionable qualities.

  9. avatar Old Ben turning in grave says:

    If they pass this, there will be (continued) massive non-compliance on owned equipment. The ammo sales restrictions…that would be tougher.

    The “Safety for all act.” Just when you think they’ve topped themselves for Orwellian names for bills…

    Anyway, let’s hear some more about how nobody wants to take our guns.

    [content ex-Californian]

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      There will promptly be ammo stores right at the state line, drive out and buy a few thousand rounds of each caliber you need, and drive home. How is that catastrophic? I mean, I live in Austin, the state line is a long ways off, but I could make the trip once or twice a year, and I could pick up 20 or 30 lbs worth for the neighbors while I’m at it.

      1. avatar Cliff H says:

        The ProgLibs in Cali will love this. They’ll have to put tax stamps on each box of ammo like they do on cigarettes and then set up a huge government enforcement bureaucracy to monitor black market sales of ammo which will be severely punished and further fill their overcrowded prisons with non-violent offenders and giver them the opportunity to early-release actual criminals back to the streets which results in greater law-enforcement action and more need for government controls, etc. etc.

        Just wait and see if this referendum passes and is not stopped in the Federal courts on Constitutional grounds. The enforcement organization and penalties for violations will be phenomenal.

      2. avatar DrewN says:

        Well, naturally you can’t import ammo. They will probably do random or maybe electronic checks at the fruit checkpoints.

        1. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Oh, I’m pretty sure that will not pass legal muster. Perfectly legal product and the state is going to confiscate it?

        2. avatar DrewN says:

          And charge you with a felony I believe.

  10. avatar gs650g says:

    This should be called the safety for criminals,illegal aliens, and politicians act.

  11. avatar Chris T from KY says:

    It always seems it is the threatened loss of good satisfying homosexual sex or heterosexual sex that motivates people in California.
    They will boycott north Carolina because men who want to wear dresses and use a ladies rest room are prevented from doing so.
    But the state of California will deny it’s citizens the civil right to self defense and the firearms they need.
    I hope the other states like Kentucky, Georgia, Mississippi and others boycott California for their violation of the civil rights of its citizens.

    1. avatar Greg says:

      I beg other states to do this. Please, by God, we need your help and support.

  12. avatar Smith says:

    One day, California will discover it has effectively banned any person without connections from having guns legally. Crime will either not be affected, though it will probably go up, and they will be left wondering what the hell is going on. Hopefully, not a lot of people will have to die for it.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Actually, that has me pretty worried. As we have already seen, all crime will then be blamed on guns brought across the border from AZ or whatever, otherwise the gun-free CA would clearly be paradise, so AZ must now be forced to ban guns, too. I mean, we just had a stupid jackass unqualified Attorney General try to put that crap over on the country, you know damn well it would be coming, probably already in the works.

  13. avatar Ralph says:

    By his own admission, Gavin Newsom has severe dyslexia. Which explains why he’s such a hitshead. Oops, I meant sashelo. Dammit, I mean cripk. Ah, fckuit.

    1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      You, sir, win the Intertubez for the month!

  14. avatar Mark N. says:

    The truth is good enough, this proposition is sooo bad. So the propaganda in this release is unnecessary. First, it must be understood that this heaqring was just a press opportunity for the Public Safety Committee. The Legislature has no power over the initiative; it is a ballot measure that has qualified for the November ballot.
    this is the part that chapped my hide:
    “Costly Fees & Long Waits Just to Acquire Lawful Ammunition – This latest attempt to reduce the exercise of Second Amendment rights includes yet another excessive fee under the guise of more background checks. Newsom wants you to pay another $50 fee and wait 30 days for authorization to purchase ammunition. Law-abiding gun owners who have already gone through the burdensome firearm safety certificate procedures would not be exempt from the new ammunition authorization requirement. The authorization would be added on top of California’s already complicated regime of firearm and ammunition regulations.”

    First, the Firearms Safety Certificate is not particularly “burdensome.” It is a $25, 20 question multiple choice test that even an idiot can pass after reading the booklet. For years California has had a Handgun Safety Certificate, required for the purchase of handguns, which has been superseded by the FSC, which applies to all guns. Since millions of us have(had) HSCs, and many have gotten FSCs (needed to purchase rifles or shotguns) I don’t see any great difficulty complying with this part of the law. It is just money, that’s all. The worst part of it is that the FSC is only good for five years and must be renewed.

    Second, I don’t know where this “30 day wait” nonsense comes from. Yes, the ammo permit is $50 and requires a California background check (which in and of itself is senseless since you have to pass a background check to buy a gun. Unless you are a criminal.) Background checks for the purchase of a gun only take ten days, and one would assume that it would take no longer for the BGC for the issuance of an ammo license. And if the initiative is passed we will have a year to apply for the license, since the law does not go into effect until January 1, 2018. Further, there is a second background check at the time of purchase, but that is an instant check NICS check (yes, still ridiculous).

    The REAL problem of this proposal is two fold, the first being that it is little more than political posturing to pump up Loathesome’s bona fides prior to the next Gubernatorial election when he will be running for Governor. Which was the whole point of today’s hearing: there is now a battle royale between the legislature and Newsome as to who should be crafting these laws, that the Legislature wants, if it can, to scuttle the proposition.

    The second major problem with this proposal is that it will create a massive new bureacracy to handle all of the paperwork for the (tens/hundreds/millions) of millions of rounds sold here every year, and that system will be paid for by dealers through fees they have to pay, and buyers, who will be paying out $500,000,000 in a new tax to fund creation of the system, plus the ongoing expense that will likely significantly increase the cost of ammo. (Which of course is the real purpose of the law–to make it unfeasible for us to engage in shooting sports or to practice.)

    1. avatar schernobyl says:

      A right delay is a right denied. Just because it has been doesn’t me it should have ever been. The shackles always begin lightly.

    2. avatar Accur81 says:

      You sound a bit like a good little drone, “justifying” the need for an HSC or a FSC. In theory those aren’t the worst gun control measures, but they were just the beginning. And we gun owners got nothing in return.

      At a minimum, I’d say we should have shall-issue concealed carry in return. What we’re seeing here is a rather large step in incremental gun control. This is a win/win for anti-gunners. If we fight, it “proves” we are violent. If we don’t fight, we allow more gun control.

      So I see the same solution our Founding Fathers had. I peacefully oppose these measures until that is no longer an option. I hope Trump wins and appoints pro-2A judges. If Bernie or Hrod wins, then things aren’t going to go well.

      Either way, I’m sticking up on guns and ammo like I started under the Hope and Change campaign in 2007.

      1. avatar LarryinTX says:

        Once you have jumped through all those hoops, “shall issue” would be silly, you should have constitutional carry. There would be next to zero guns in the whole state, right? And probably only 2 or 3 bullets for each of them, since we all know how effective laws like this are. So worrying about licensing would not be beneficial to anyone any more.

    3. avatar Cliff H says:

      “First, the Firearms Safety Certificate is not particularly “burdensome.” It is a $25, 20 question multiple choice test that even an idiot can pass after reading the booklet. For years California has had a Handgun Safety Certificate, required for the purchase of handguns, which has been superseded by the FSC, which applies to all guns. Since millions of us have(had) HSCs, and many have gotten FSCs (needed to purchase rifles or shotguns) I don’t see any great difficulty complying with this part of the law. It is just money, that’s all. The worst part of it is that the FSC is only good for five years and must be renewed.”

      Mark, you have been in California too long. What portion of “…the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” are you having trouble understanding? Every single one of the things mentioned in that paragraph are infringements on the RKBA since they require paying a fee to exercise a right (poll tax), and government permission slips to even purchase a firearm which are distributed at the whim of whichever politician is in power.

      If you concede that the government has the authority to create, maintain and enforce a set of requirements and fees for the exercise of your natural, civil and Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms, how will you prevent that government from enacting requirements that make the exercise of that right prohibitive?

      You are familiar with the parable of the camel’s nose?

  15. avatar barnbwt says:

    “The Assembly and Senate Public Safety Committee is scheduled to hold an informational hearing tomorrow, Tuesday May 3, at 9:30am in hearing room 4203, on Lt. Governor Gavin Newsom’s gun control initiative”
    Hey, it’s a story about that guy our “pro-gun” presidential nominee gave money to, again! Way to stay in the Newsom, buddy!

    “The Safety for All Act of 2016.”
    Wow. This is literally the stupidest name for any piece of legislation I have ever heard of. The only stupider name is, simply, “Ass.” California is beyond all redemption, its complicit denizens mere ranks of thoughtless animals unable to see past their noses. Most of America, too, apparently.

  16. avatar uncommon_sense says:

    “The Safety for All Act of 2016 will do nothing to criminals, nothing to stop gun crimes and will only harm the law-abiding citizens of California.”

    That is a feature, not a bug!

  17. avatar BobS says:

    Here’s an update from the hearing, including video of the good guys’ testimonies:
    http://crpa.org/update-safety-hearing/

    1. avatar PavePusher says:

      Video doesn’t start until approx. 4:23.

  18. avatar PavePusher says:

    Ammo vendors just across the AZ, NV and OR borders start making stock-up plans…..

    1. avatar barnbwt says:

      Good luck with that, everyone’s already panic-buying now that The Donald will be in charge of safe-guarding our RKBA for the foreseeable future…

  19. avatar Stoopid1 says:

    How is it that Newsom is still alive?

    Holy sheet, civil war can start in Cali

    1. avatar zroll says:

      He may be a treasonous piece of excrement but he hasn’t topped Hitlery. And she’s been thriving for decades on dead Americans, stolen public funds, and foreign blood money.

      1. avatar Stoopid1 says:

        Yea, so they both need to be shot… multiple times.

  20. avatar Martin Gomez says:

    Stop calling it “gun control.” We already have gun control laws that 99% of Americans of Americans obey, but criminals don’t. Don’t let the liberal and communist gun banners define the terms. Call it what it is: gunfiscation. Call them what they are: gunfiscators.

    I have spoken.

  21. avatar wright says:

    Is tarring and feathering still an option?

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      I think it was banned by EPA.

    2. avatar Cliff H says:

      Tar is apparently a pollutant. I suggest we modernize the practice with the substitution of Gorilla Glue.

      1. As long as we place a Prop 65 warning placard on the person to be tarred and feathered and on the container the tar will be dispensed from and on the entrances and exits to the premises where the tarring and feathering will take place then you can still use tar and feathers in Kommiefornia. We’re not complete savages.

        Wanna see the absolute insanity of Kommiefornia? Read about how Prop 65 works (useful links below) and then remember that this was not legislation. It was a ballot initiative. By going around the legislature and directly to the voters the supporters of Prop 65 got their way and cost the state enormously while providing exactly nothing useful to anyone, ever. The only people that got anything from Prop 65 were lawyers suing everyone they could find. Kommiefornia operates as close to anarchy as any civilized society ever has and it’s run entirely by lawyers and activist interests. The only answer is to burn it down, to the ground.
        http://www.health-report.co.uk/psoriasis_cancer_warnings.html
        http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dailys/00/Sep00/091100/c000004.pdf

        1. avatar LarryinTX says:

          I am not so good at reading, I guess. Did that article claim that coal tar causes cancer because the people voted that it did? No actual research, just pass a proposition and *Bingo*, it causes cancer?

  22. avatar Chris T from KY says:

    http://www.fresnobee.com/opinion/readers-opinion/article70333992.html

    “Gavin Newsom is a good man”

    There is a problem with Homosexual and heterosexual California gun owners and California in general. To believe a person is good who was always anti- civil rights for guns but lets you get married, just shows how warped the thinking is in California.

    If you place getting married over keeping your gun civil rights then no one can help you. California is full of pro gay marriage leaders who are also anti civil right for guns. Now you have to live with the consequences for what you have voted for.
    Homosexuals put a woman in jail because she would not sign their marriage certificate. But every gay person in Kentucky can own machine guns if they can pay for them. And there is no waiting period to buy as many guns as you want at one time.

    I will be asking my governor to boycott california,

    1. avatar B Realio says:

      Actually, Californians voted against gay marriage but was overturned in the courts. When you have activist judges ruling against the will of the people we have a major issue with our system and how 9 judges can have more say than the 56% of the voters in the state. Something isn’t right about that.

      1. avatar Chris T from KY says:

        I know they voted against gay marriage. I was speaking about the known pro gay anti gun civil rights politicians they knowingly voted for.
        Tom Ammiano Is the homosexual white man responsible for stalking victims being forced to wait ten days or more to get a gun.
        I wonder how women have been raped because of this disgusting man?
        I know homosexuals cheer him by the tens of thousands at gay pride parades.

  23. avatar LarryinTX says:

    I would consider this whole thread a lie, except you cannot make this shit up.

  24. avatar Kyle says:

    its california, it’ll pass. We’re in a big ol fat hurry to be the first state in the union to figure out a way to legally break the 2nd amendment.

    Now that Scalia is gone, odds are pretty good we’ll find a way.

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