Previous Post
Next Post

California Senator Darrell Steinberg (courtesy

TTAG’s Armed Intelligentsia have addressed this question before, underneath the dozens of posts chronicling the endless stream of fresh outrages against Golden State gun owners’ natural, civil and Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms. The death of Supreme Court Jusice Antonin Scalia puts the “California problem” into high relief; a Supreme Court decision or five trashing the State’s infringement on left coast firearms freedom was the most likely defense against Golden State gun control. So…what now? What if anything can be done to prevent California from going [further] full retard? (Yes, I said it. Desperate times call for desperate nouns.)

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. It’s very simple, We have all the gun loving people in California move to Texas, and/or Florida.Then we let the Gun haters have the state of California And implicate all their laws and legislation And then we do a test over 10 years and see if their crime level has diminished or increased. And we all know how that was going to turn out. It’ll be more violent on the streets of California after they remove all the law abiding gun owners Then in Afghanistan Or Mogadishu.

    • The problem with saying to hell with Commiefornia is that a bad 9th circuit decision can now go nationwide with a SCOTUS decision.

      • If all the pro gun people leave, that state loses a ton of power in regards to electoral college votes, tax revenues, and other ways I can’t come up with off the top of my head. “Stand and Fight” or starve it to death?

        • Stand and fight….. The reason there are challenges to California law is due to people staying and fighting. Moon Beam Brown has shot down recent gun laws come to his desk because people are standing fighting. Gavin Newsance has to resort to ballot measures because people are staying and fighting…. They dont care about the opinions of Texans, but they do care about the votes of Californians.

      • Hate to say it, but even the SCOTUS upholding a gun control law from California doesn’t affect me. It would take said SCOTUS decision and THEN either Arkansas or US Legislature passing a gun law. So the point still stands that if one values their gun liberties they should probably move from California.

        • Despite our f’d up laws, California has the largest population and economy in the US….. And, even though we are 1 state out of 50, we make 1 of every 10 firearm purchases in the US…. California is very important to YOUR gun laws/rights. We’ve already spread our poison to Colorado and Nevada amongst others… You can run but California will find you.

  2. Buy all the guns. Bring your friends, your family, everybody buy and train and buy and train.
    Also, DO NOT COMPLY.
    Happy trails!

    • Voting does nothing in California. You can keep telling yourself your votes count. But they dont. Vote on amendment to the state constitution and thr state supreme court says its a violation of the state constitution after it passes. I left 15 years ago in search of freedom and liberty.

      • It’s a civil rights issue. And just like in the south during the civil rights movement the federal .gov needs to deploy troops and Marshals into CA to restore civil rights.

        With a majority in the senate and the house and with Cruz or Trump in the White House we POTG can twist enough arms to make this second civil rights deployment a reality.

        Gun control will never be broken in the US until it’s broken in CA.

        • +1….. Except for the troops and marshalls…. The answer to big government gone bad is NOT more government…. What California NEEDS are more POTGs, not fewer.

        • Why shouldn’t the federal government force the state government to follow the constitution, if need be?

          If you are breaking the law, and refuse to cease doing so. cops or bailiffs will come and arrest you – effectively, use force to make you comply. If the state breaks the law, why shouldn’t they be made to comply, by force if necessary? That’s what law ultimately means: something that has force backing it. If the federal government is unable or unwilling to use force to make states follow the law, then it’s not really a law, just a “recommendation”.

        • Last i checked Obama is still running the executive (enforcement) branch of government…… Are you really arguing for Obama’s federal enforcers to come in to your state and lay down the law? Thats fine by me as long as your state isnt california.

  3. I’ll never set foot in California. I have enough problems with all the liberal retards in Seattle that are ruining Washington.

      • An issue, to be sure.

        Allow illegals facing deportation to choose 3 years working on building said wall and then grant citizenship if they take the deal.

        Irregardless of the details, a wall can be built, we all know this. The issue is not the doing of the thing, but the will to do it in the first place.

        • Reject the phrase “secure the border” from GOP candidates and support ones that say. build the wall.

          Citizen heard the secure the border for the last 30 years. Last year 640k illegals applied and received driver licenses. On track for higher amount this year. Every illegal employed takes a high schoolers job.

        • Ha! Anyone who thinks a 2000 mile border can be made impervious is delusional; much small borders have failed. Look to the Berlin Wall for a prime example, and extrapolate its costs and porosity for a reality check. The only question is how much you want to spend for the next small percentage leakage reduction, and when that money comes from my taxes, it is theft. Put your money where your mouth is: buy up border land on your own and patrol it for trespassers on your own. Surely you can find enough compatriots to assist you financially and physically.

        • @Mk10108: studies have consistently shown that immigrants, illegal or legal, are a net positive: every immigrant is not just a wannabe worker, they are also a consumer. And immigrants have always been the adventurous innovators of any society, leaving the old country to those who didn’t have the gumption to find a better opportunity.

          Especially when they are illegal and have phony SSN and aren’t eligible for all the benefits they pay into, immigrants go out of their way to avoid any risky behavior. Studies bear this out. (Please don’t quote anecdotes unless you have enough to become actual data.)

          There is something really sad about a country of immigrants trying to stop further immigration. Don’t give any crap about illegality; it wasn’t illegal for your ancestors to come here, what gives them the right to change the rules after they got theirs?

          Like Californians moving to Colorado because they hate what they asked for, and then they try to do the same thing all over again.

          Pathetic logic.

        • “Felix says:
          February 16, 2016 at 13:47

          There is something really sad about a country of immigrants trying to stop further immigration. Don’t give any crap about illegality; it wasn’t illegal for your ancestors to come here, what gives them the right to change the rules after they got theirs?”

          OMG, not one of these now? The people who came here have in the past done so legally, in the open, and came here to assimilate because they wanted to take part in the great society that freedom, liberty and a government of the people have created.

          Illegal immigrants are nothing but criminals pissing in our faces at our laws, taking our jobs, sending the money back to their homeland. They are leeches on society, draining the money from the taxpaying citizen to fund their welfare, foodstamps and on and on it goes.

          Not to mention the ones who end up driving drunk with no license nor insurance and end up causing accidents that kill citizens who are paying for their very food and clothing.

          Illegal immigration is but one facet of the socialist attack on our great civil society and if it is not stopped the US will end up looking just like Mexico, where you cannot get a firearm to protect yourself and the state is run by cartels of mad drug gang criminals, you have to bribe a police officer who stops you for a simple traffic ticket and the water makes you sick.

          Lovely idea.

          Build the damn wall, and yes, Mexico can take California back for all I care.

        • Felix; studies show, 100% of the time, exactly what the purchaser of the study wanted it to show. Meanwhile, New pilots need someplace to learn how to shoot the A-10’s gun, this is ready made. Make sure the tanks are a few miles back from the river, new guys do miss from time to time. Practicing coordination between the tanks, the artillery, and the aircraft would provide invaluable experience, and if it saves only one American life it will have been worthwhile. Only problem I see is figuring how to build a fence that won’t be gone after a week or two, it may not be considered sporting to keep requiring Mexico to replace it.

          I gotta ask, though, are you saying that hundreds of thousands got past the Berlin Wall every year? Because I don’t remember that, I remember an escape being very, very rare. If 20-30 Mexicans make it every year, I guess we’ll have to handle that somehow.

        • @Mr. .308 — How can you even define legal in terms of ancestors and immigration? The first ones were thieves, and only turned themselves into a “legitimate” government 170 years later, still without permission form the still-existing natives. And like I said, there’s something really sad about people moving to a place because the old one stank, then changing the rules so no one else can do the same. And for what it’s worth, governments have made all sorts of things legal and illegal, with no regard for natural law and natural rights — slavery, genocide, you name it, you can find some government which made it legal. If that’s the camp you throw your lot in with, to slake your thirst for legality, you are welcome to it.

        • @LarryinTX — I said extrapolate from the Berlin Wall. Length 100 miles, so multiply by 20. Or take the Berlin-only length, 25 miles, and multiply by 80. Take your pick.

          5000 people crossed over 28 years; 178 per year. That’s either 3600 or 14,000. That might seem small enough for you, but this was in an urban area, not out in remote deserts. Do you really think you can replicate the urban Berlin Wall on that grand a scale in deserts? You must not understand scaling.

          There were 300 watchtowers. Assuming two guards per tower, 4 shifts, that’s 2400 guards. Add supervisors, payroll clerks, and all the usual overhead, and you’ll double it, 5000 employees. Scale it by 20 or 80, your pick, 100,000 or 400,000 employees, and tell me how cheap that’s going to be, especially in remote desert areas.

          Oh you say, you don’t need that much of a wall, not so many watchtowers. But any sections without that density will be found and targeted. You want to cut immigration back to Berlin Wall levels, you need a Berlin Wall 20 or 80 times as long.

          I don’t think any of you wall builders have any concept of how expensive something like that is. It just can’t be done for any reasonable cost.. For all the lies scattered around about criminals coming over to suck up welfare, any 2000 mile wall will be more expensive to build and to maintain, not to mention sucking up a whole lot of manpower ready to shoot on sight. Do you really think that will do the economy any good?

        • “Felix says:
          February 16, 2016 at 16:22

          @Mr. .308 — How can you even define legal in terms of ancestors and immigration?”

          Because we won and it’s our laws you are advocating be broken.

          Build the fucking wall.

          Lock up illegals and those that hire them.

        • Felix says: February 16, 2016 at 13:47

          “studies have consistently shown that immigrants, illegal or legal, are a net positive”.

          Right, just like in Europe. I’d hate to see what you think a negative would be.

        • >> The people who came here have in the past done so legally, in the open

          Well, yes. That’s because it was actually possible to do so for most. There was no such thing as an entry visa in the 19th century, or even early 20th.

          In fact, back when the country was founded, the way to get citizenship was to come and reside (no restrictions on that whatsoever) in the country for a few years, then apply.

          By the way, the first anti-immigration laws that US had enacted specifically banned people by race – first Chinese, then all non-whites.

          >> and came here to assimilate because they wanted to take part in the great society that freedom, liberty and a government of the people have created.

          I don’t think that was the case for the vast majority of immigrants. They came where they could live and work in peace, especially those coming from places with oppressive governments (most everywhere) or rampant poverty (China); most of them weren’t literate enough to appreciate the abstract notions expressed in the US Constitution.

      • a wall is absolutely unnecessary. If you hire an illegal, that is a million dollar fine. per illegal. second offense, forfeit your business. enforced rigorously. also, no American citizenship, no DL, no welfare benefits, no getting married, no renting apartments, no nothing. A lot cheaper than a wall and It actually works.

        • This is very true, I have an easier idea.

          Put the CEOs of corporations who hire illegals in real pound me in the ass prison. If even one or two of these people were truly punished where it really hurts the hiring of illegals would stop within days. And yes, they would self deport.

          Large hotel chains have such CEOs that I can think of off the top of my head.

          That said, a wall would not hurt.

        • Reasonable assumptions and good ideas, we should enact all of them. But they won’t even slow down criminals or drug imports, we need a wall.

      • walls do in fact work…ask Israel.
        best solution is walls in some strategic sections, but needed everywhere. implement more tech fencing/sensors, more drone patrols in other sections, more border patrol units and allowing for national guard / civil patrol rotations to beef up patrol as needed. A sovereign country needs to be able to know, and control, who is entering their country – more so now than ever in our history. The porous nature and abuse of our southern border is just not acceptable and could be our downfall, especially as population continues to explode in Mexico and South America, and Muslim terrorists have declared they seek to enter our country and destroy us.

  4. Send financial support to the California gun rights organizations.

    Make sure to vote so that hopefully a GOP candidate can get elected president and turn the Court back

    Continue to educate the public as much as able about the nonsense and arbitrariness that is the term “assault weapons”

    Stay vigilant with regards to your state’s politics to keep the California stuff in California

    • We are in trouble here in Florida. Lots of newly transplanted New York Liberals. They are seriously brain dead. Saw an old bat driving a benz with a “Feel the Bern” sticker. We are soo doomed.

      • And I know lots of pro-gun, right of center people from NY/NJ/MA that have moved to FL…don’t be painting all those north of the M-D line as automatic libs…we might be outnumbered, but at least 30-40% never vote “D”…lots more are coming to your state that only “Habla Espanol” and are given welfare, food stamps etc. Unlike rich Yankees that keep your economy going…they “Have no Dinero…got no money to pay for sh*t” I’ve seen all the dead-beats hanging out at the malls there, with their signs, begging for money, dog food, etc…they’re all your home-grown crackers…not Yankee retirees/escapees. If it weren’t for tourism and retirees, your state would make AL& MS look like Shangri-La.

    • He wasn’t feigning disapproval. He absolutely disapproved of legal gun sales cutting into his market share and profit margain.

    • Secession for any state, much less the PRK, is not realistic.
      Running just concentrates their power. It does not diminish it.

      • Well, I don’t see that the current population of gun owners are even slowing down anti-gun legislation in CA.

        Their votes would be better served boosting the states that are still holding the line.

        • The gun infringements of states like California and the smarmy states in the Northeast won’t slow down. All of the guns that are made illegal won’t disappear either, but those gun owners will have to hide them.

          Of course, if a liberal activist justice is appointed to the Supreme Court, or if Hillary or Bernie wins the White House, you should expect the entire country’s gun laws to look like California, only worse. Run if you want, but if this next election doesn’t go our way, there won’t be anywhere left to hide.

      • In a winner-takes-all system, concentration does, in fact, diminish power.

        It doesn’t matter if a state is 70% blue or 90% blue, it will send the same number of electors and senators.

  5. Gun manufacturers need to stop selling product and providing services to the law enforcement in these state until they take a stand against this tyranny.

    • I so wish this were implemented. Hell if necessary, cease importation of ANY and ALL firearms into the state, for sale to public or private hands. After all, the More Equal pigs on the farm out there get a discount. Even if you stopped selling directly they could just mandate that every current and future officer just procure their own under private sale. We desperately need the industry’s support and backing in this, and we need to support the industry player(s) that are bold enough to do this, as well as shun the ones that don’t.

      • +1000 We POTG need to organize, let EVERY Firearm Manufacturer know that we are serious, and REALLY, SERIOUSLY BOYCOTT those who continue to sell to LEOs in CA…It worked with S&W when they sold out to Clinton and Smart guns when NJ Dems pulled their “only Smart Guns for sale nonsense… why not Ruger, FN, Beretta, SIG, Taurus, etc. I’ll be first in line to boycott their products…anybody else out there with me?

        • +1… I won’t spend ANY money with CA businesses… No way I let even a single dollar of mine indirectly make it into the CA state tax coffers. Same thing with NY businesses; F#$% ’em. Unfortunately, I do spend a little $$ on MA stuff; but that’s because I like YHM’s shit! Ha!

  6. Pray for the big one? It’s not the whole state that’s going to fall into the Pacific Ocean, just everything west of the San Andreas (aka where all the liberals live).

    Just a side point on the death of Scalia. I keep hearing that this could change the balance of the court for a generation. However, I’d just like to point out that Darth Vader Ginsberg is 82, Anthony Kennedy is 79 and Stephen Breyer is 77. Even if the Republicans cave and let BO appoint a new justice, if for the next 8 years the White House is occupied by a Republican not named theDonald, the court could look much more conservative in the near future. (This doesn’t mean I’m OK with the Republicans caving, again, to BO though.)

    • Indeed, and this makes the presidential election a must win event for the Democrats.

      Expect them to pull out all the stops, and these people do not play fair.

      • It’s not just the president, the senate’s just as important as the president when it comes to selecting justices.

        • The Senate is even more important than the Pres in selecting Supreme Court justices. The pres can nominate, but it goes nowhere unless the Senate approves.

          If they’re determined enough and make it clear that they won’t compromise just to get along, they can force the president to nominate someone he would never have considered otherwise — a palatable moderate, for instance, instead of one of Barry O’s SJW friends. Or they could just freeze the lame-duck president out completely by refusing to vote on anyone he does nominate.

          It’s been done before, but it takes time, and it’s painful. Mitch “the Turtle” McConnell and his cronies probably don’t have the guts for it. Back in the 1800s, there were a couple of occasions when a Supreme Court seat went vacant for years while the Senate and the president fought over nominees.

      • “Expect them to pull out all the stops, and these people do not play fair.”

        I have heard it said that they even use the power of the incumbency to direct the power and wealth of the government itself into reinforcing their lies about their objectives and accomplishments! I’m sure that’s an exaggeration.

        • Well at least they’d never use the IRS to persecute their political adversaries.

          Or not.

  7. Nuke it from orbit, it’s the only way to be sure.

    But seriously, the only thing to do with a populace that is eager to relinquish their own rights is go with the SAF strategy and hope like hell the next president gets to replace a slew of scotus judges with young, pro liberty types.

    • Contrary to popular belief, “The Big One” will not cause Southern Cal to “fall” into the Pacific. Tectonic plates are not moving in that direction. The Pacific plate is pushing up against the North American plate. At best, that sh!thole we know as L.A. will only fold over on itself. And then we (in the north end) will be stuck with the pooper-scoopers.
      In the meantime, some of us will continue to fight against the tyranny.

    • The number of people here who express the desire to see a cataclysmic event that will cause hundreds of thousands, possibly millions, of deaths, and massive infrastructure damage and the associated economic collapse, all over difference in political beliefs, is astounding.

  8. In that context, “retard” is an adjective, not a noun. California or California’s lawmakers or citizens are the subject. Retard describes them. Retard can be a noun had you said “California lawmakers are retards”.

  9. That’s like asking what to do about an infection, once it’s already become gangrenous.

    I, once, was of the mindset that we should let Cali go to be completely overrun, while reinforcing around it. But now, I’m not sure that’s the best move.

    There is a case before the SCOTUS (Freidrichs v Cali Teacher’s Assoc.). currently, about unions and the first Amendment. Specifically, the mandatory dues (upwards of $1000 per year, per teacher) imposed on Cali teachers, 60% which cannot be opted out of, and which will enviably go back the D’s in Cali politics. So, the argument is that requiring all teacher’s to pay dues, which are backing politically candidates they may or may not do support is unconstitutional.

    Why is this important, you ask? Well, there is a LOT of Teacher’s Union money backing historical anti- gun (D’s) in politics. If union dues are ruled to be unconstitutional, the Republican teacher (some 30-40% from the estimates I’ve seen) can opt out of unions, all together, and their dues will, obviously, go with them.

    This could be a huge blow to the midsection for the D’s in Cali, and the union huge largely back them. And if the NRA, and local/state pro-gun organizations, would use that opportunity to attack the D’s in the Cali political establishment, then it could help turn the tide.

    If you want to control the politician, you have to control the money backing them.

    • I tried to correct a few grammatical errors and autocorrect issues in there, but my phone is act weird and won’t let me. I’m sure people get the point.

    • My phone is act weird sometimes, too. 🙂 But seriously, good thoughts here.

      Cutting the unions’ abilities to suck money out of unwilling participants would be a big step in regards to the First Amendment freedom of speech and association and would free up money that could help support better candidates.

      There are probably a lot of pro-freedom court rulings and legal changes that could be made that have nothing directly to do with Second Amendment rights, but would nonetheless have a huge positive effect.

  10. There are really only two ways this can go:

    1) The gay-marriage route. A Supreme Court decision gets rendered which simply ends the debate, enforcing the law of the land throughout the land. Now, this would be a tad different, in that the 2A is actually part of the Constitution, whereas the gay marriage ruling was pretty much plucked from thin air — but the fact that the gay marriage thing happened, should give hope that an actual amendment to the Constitution might also be recognized. But it will take declarative action to make it happen, not the weasel-wording of Heller. It needs definitive wording, like the gay marriage ruling.

    Barring that, we go to option 2: Secession. Face it — the polarization of the country is at its worst ever, and is growing worse. There will come a time when folks will need to take a stand — by moving. Give up on California and New York. Retreat to the Free States, and then cut the ties. The Balkanization of the US seems pretty much inevitable at this point, and if it happens, you want to be on the right side of the borders.

    Do we have to split up? Unfortunately, probably. There was a precedent in history at one point, let me see if I can recall the quote — it went something like this:

    “When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.”

    Split into two — the Coasts, and the “Flyover” (the newly-independent Republic of Texas). The other states can choose who to join, if anyone — I would assume Oklahoma and the rest of the Gulf states will go with Texas. Those who value liberty can choose to live in the new Republic, and those who want welfare will go to the Coasts. Everyone gets what they want.

    Oh, and how to preserve the new Republic from the cancer of liberalism? A new First Amendment to the Republic’s Consititution — “It is prohibited to establish any form of government welfare or entitlement programs.” Period. That right there will ensure that no liberal-minded citizen will stay.

    • “whereas the gay marriage ruling was pretty much plucked from thin air”

      Huh, so I just imagined the 14th Amendment? I wonder what other parts of the Constitution I imagined…

        • Too late to edit, so I’m restating it:

          ” I wonder what other parts of the Constitution I imagined…”
          I’m sure the “Constitutional right” to an abortion would be one…

          Look, there’s a Constitutional right to bear arms. There isn’t a “Constitutional right” to marry (gay or straight, for that matter). And there certainly isn’t a Constitutional right to an abortion.

        • There is a right to due process of law under the 14th Amendment, and since marriage is a CIVIL right granted by the STATES by license, both as to the parties who wish to marry and the person who performs the marriage ceremony, the right must be available to all without discrimination. Don’t confuse marriage in the United States with some religious rite; religious rites are purely optional.

        • Marriage has limits. If not, a man could marry his mother It’s not discrimination to adhere to the original definition of marriage. The Constitution has nothing to do with it.

    • >> “It is prohibited to establish any form of government welfare or entitlement programs.” Period.

      So, no VA or equivalent?

      Also, given the sheer number of Republican voters (even Tea Party “small government conservatives”) who start to whine the moment anyone starts talking about dismantling Medicare, I doubt you’ll find all that many people wishing to join your glorious Republic.

      Well, or they will just join without reading the fine print, and then when they find out they’re SOL, vote in an amendment to repeal this anyway.

  11. What if anything can be done to prevent California from going [further] full retard?

    We already know that talking, demonstrations, voting, juries, and the courts are utterly and totally impotent to repeal/nullify civilian disarmament in California. And nothing has changed such that we would expect such continued efforts to produce different results … only idiots/fools continue to try the same actions and expect different results.

    My solution:
    Pro-gun people exercise their First Amendment right — specifically “to petition government for a redress of grievances” — to maximum effect.

    That means 500,000 gun owners in California (about 1 in 20 gun owners) choose a week to contact their politicians via phone call, e-mail, and Registered Mail. Split evenly/randomly, those politicians will receive about 100,000 phone calls, e-mails, and Registered letters each day of that week. That works out to 12,500 calls, e-mails, and letters per hour assuming an 8 hour work day.

    Now imagine if a similar number of people from other states decide to do the same thing at the same time so that California politicians understand how much business and tourism dollars they are losing from out-of-state people.

    • Phone calls and letters? These things are not just routinely ignored, they are ignored as policy.

      If you are not a big money donor, you really have no voice whatsoever.

      We are way past the phone calls and letters phase.

      • So very true. If you get a response at all, the best you can hope for is that they will tell you what a wonderful thing gun control is, and otherwise they will ignore your comments. Pro-gun legislators are just talking to the air. For example, last session the Legislature passed a law banning CCW on school campuses (without the permission of the school administrator)–even though there has not been even a single incident of a CCW licensee committing a gun crime. It simply did not matter that there was no evidence of any risk presented by the CCW community.

      • Mr. 308,

        I think you are failing to appreciate the magnitude of such a petition effort and how it will impact a politician. The California State Government Assembly and Senate has a total of 120 politicians. Let’s say that 90 of those politicians oppose our right to keep and bear arms. Those 90 politicians will receive a combined 100,000 Registered Mail letters, e-mails, and phone calls every day for a week. Thus each politician will be receiving about 1,100 phone calls, Registered Mail letters, and e-mails each day.

        Now, give your imagination a little space to picture how a single politician’s staff is going to handle that volume of petitions every day for a week. Picture how they are going to sign for 1,100 letters, while fielding 1,100 phone calls, and while trying to respond to 1,100 e-mails. More importantly, picture how a single politician’s staff is going to attempt to find and respond to the “more important” inquiries from their big important donors buried in those 1,100 phone calls, letters, and e-mails.

        Now imagine if 1 out of 10 firearms owners in California participated and doubled the number of petitions per day. Imagine if another 100,000 people from other states petitioned those California politicians and tripled the number of petitions to 3,300 petitions per day per politician. Finally, imagine if this went on for a month.

        • ” Thus each politician will be receiving about 1,100 phone calls, Registered Mail letters, and e-mails each day.

          Now, give your imagination a little space to picture how a single politician’s staff is going to handle that volume of petitions every day for a week. Picture how they are going to sign for 1,100 letters, while fielding 1,100 phone calls, and while trying to respond to 1,100 e-mails.”

          Look I admire your enthusiasim. These people do not care one teeny tiny little bit what you think and what you write. They will just hire staff – on our dime – to deal with it and if it gets to be too much to throw it in the trash. That’s what they think of you, unless you are a donor.

          Letters and phone calls mean jack and squat.

          People need to start getting out in the streets, that is when they will start to pay attention.

          But go ahead and write your letters.

        • Mr. 308,

          I am fully aware that those politicians don’t care about us nor what we convey to them via phone calls, e-mails, and registered mail. I am fully aware that those politicians will not respond to any of those contacts. And I am fully aware that those politicians will not change their votes simply because of our reasoning that we have conveyed to them about our unalienable right to keep and bear arms.

          The value of a massive response is the pain that it causes in their political office. While it sounds like a trivial matter to flush the barrage of queries, it isn’t. While it sounds like a trivial matter to hire more staff to help flush all the queries, it isn’t. Remember, they cannot simply flush all queries. Mixed in with those queries are contacts from “important” people. When that response makes their political life miserable and painful, when that response causes them to miss important queries from important people, that is when they will have real motivation to change their votes.

          Think about how your office would deal with an extra 3,300 queries per day via phone, e-mail, and registered mail … on top of all the normal queries. Think of how many orders your office would miss, lose, or respond to after deadlines. That is what a politician would be facing.

        • “The value of a massive response is the pain that it causes in their political office. … Remember, they cannot simply flush all queries. Mixed in with those queries are contacts from “important” people”

          I sincerely doubt this to be the case, anyone deemed important enough to need to see and respond to emails about an issue will be given an alternate email address that the general public does not know.

          I meant what I said, I do admire your ‘get it done’ attitude, and such a campaign would do some level of good. I just think it won’t be much. But don’t let me stop you.

    • I think secession is the answer, and that a lot of folk here are thinking about it wrong. What we need to do, as a nation, is to secede from CA. Being fair, we should leave a note explaining what they have to accomplish before we return.

  12. California is a tough one…. I enjoyed the decade I lived there, but the economy did not support my lifestyle so I moved to the other end of the country.

    If the PotG flee California that makes for a quick fix, but doesn’t solve the problem. There is still the infection that will grow and spread. As the state declines by whatever measure you choose to use the residents will leave and bring the very problems they are fleeing with them. The Guns are Icky crowd will wind up in Arizona and go absolutely batty when they see people carrying them around openly, something’s gotta be done we gotta make a law or something.

    Those types say ‘there aughta be a law or something’ crowd say that and no one challenges them so they think they are correct and then suddenly there’s a new law or something.

    I suggest a different line of attack. We need to send PotG TO California. Send people who understand firearms and support individual rights need to go TO California to combat the ‘we gotta make a new law’ pearl-clutching idiots. When those people say ‘there aughta be a law or something’ get told loudly and authoritatively to sit down and shut up then they will say it less and if it said less it will be thunk less and you get the idea.

    Just a thought.

    • Sounds along the lines of the Free State project. Where liberty-minded folks are supposed to concentrate in one state and thus be able to make a real difference. They chose New Hampshire. Same state that just overwhelmingly, massively voted for a socialist.

      Which is to say — good luck with that. You’d need such massive numbers to even begin to make a dent, I don’t know how it’s even possible. I think it’s more practical to retreat, retrench, fortify the borders, and let the cancer burn itself out.

      • >> Same state that just overwhelmingly, massively voted for a socialist.

        Er… you do know that primaries and caucus are voted on by party members or affiliated, right?

        That NH Democrats overwhelmingly supported Sanders over Hillary says nothing about who the people of NH support in general.

    • I routinely send pictures of my guns and news stories about anti-gun hysteria (like the comic facing 10 years for an airsoft gun in NJ) to friends of mine in places like CA, Chicago, MD and NJ. Along with a bit of “neener neener” to remind them that I’m allowed to do things (and I do them) here in AZ that are practically illegal to think about where they live. And invitations to come visit me and experience Freedom.

      People tend to accept the environments in which they find themselves, and won’t question the absence of freedoms or rights they’ve never experienced or felt they needed. But, throw a little carefully aimed neener their way, and suddenly they don’t want to be left out.

    • Better off sending them to smaller states that are not as hard over. California has a HUGE population and is not even close to balanced politically on Second Amendment issues. You would have to drain several smaller states entirely of gun owners to even start to make a difference. Ain’t gonna happen. Better off moving the few million gun owners out of CA and changing Oregon, WA, CO and maybe even a few Northeastern states more pro-gun. That’s the kind of numbers you’d be looking at. Let’s say that out of CA’s 36 or so million people, 1 out of 6 is pro-gun (that’s probably low, but…) . That would be SIX MILLION that could move somewhere else. Oregon doesn’t even have but a couple million population or so, and they’re about half and half statewide. Washington is similar, CO is similar. You might need half of the pro-gun population of CA to take all 3. You could do all 3 of those with 2 million to the point where they would be almost invulnerable to anti-gun laws. The Free State Project was not a terrible idea, just hard to find jobs to take everyone,

      • Chuck,

        You bring up an excellent strategy. And it would not even take 6 million pro gun rights people from California to shore up Washington, Oregon, and Colorado. You would only have to add about 500,000 people to each of those states to make them solidly pro gun rights. That means, sticking with your original number of 6 million people and using my number of adding 500,000 people to other states, the remaining 4.5 million pro gun rights people who leave California could shore up another 9 states!

        That’s right. Something like 6 million pro gun rights people leaving California could create a solid pro gun rights majority in 12 less populous states! Not only would that guarantee future rights in those less populous states, it would also likely mean that we could pass a new United States Constitutional Amendment to bolster the Second Amendment. That new Amendment could force Constitutional carry nationwide, eliminate all licensing requirements (for concealed and open carry), repeal NFA 1934 and Gun Control Act of 1968, specify penalties for local government agents who infringe on the right, and require strict scrutiny AND data for any restrictions.

        The real beauty of this approach: moving pro gun rights people out of California, to create solid majorities in 12 other states, to enable passage of a rock solid Constitutional Amendment, would finally eliminate all the unconstitutional laws in California and take them out of the hands of the California State Supreme Court and out of the hands of the 9th Circus (Circuit) Federal Court of Appeals.

        • Out of curiosity, I once stuffed US states with their population into Excel, and computed how many people it would take to pass a constitutional amendment if small states gang up.

          Turns out that you actually need less than 25% of total national population, assuming they’re clustered in the right states (basically the smallest ones). And I was computing this based on every state going entirely one way or another; in reality, since you only need a simple majority in the state legislature to ratify, it only requires 50%+1 in those small states, so the actual figure is even less.

          Libertarians have pulled it off in NH. Mind you, that was just 25k, and not all of them have actually moved (and we’ll see how many will move now that the total pledge count is reached). But because they’re very politically active, they’re already making quite a difference.

          I wouldn’t want to participate such a scheme, as I expect the politics of the affected states would take a sharp conservative turn in general, with a lot of things I would find disagreeable (abortion and same-sex marriage bans etc). But if people are willing to do it, more power to them.

  13. The big quake doesn’t sound all that bad right now. It could point out necessary times to bee tooled up and it would temporarily take gun control off of the agenda. But then again thinking about it my house is like a mile from the fault line:) maybe the big one is not the answer.

    • What kind of a Patriot are you, if you’re not even willing to sacrifice your life for the Republic? Remember what the Tree of Liberty must be watered with from time to time?

  14. “You see here ladies and gentleman. Bottom gun good, top gun bad”

    and Leeland Yee is in the background thinking to himself “thank god these people keep pushing this BS, I need to corner the whole market”

  15. I live here. The coast is literally heaven on earth.

    Let the statist rats eat shit. Non-compliance on out. The humans will win.

    • “The coast is literally heaven on earth.”

      It is beautiful. However, I figured heaven on Earth would have more drinkable water.

    • “I live here. The coast is literally heaven on earth”

      I suspect you are travel challenged, I consider many places in the US the equal or better of the coast, and when you start exploring the world, it’s not close. Nice, yes, be-all to end-all, not so much.

  16. The answer to California is easy…leave. Crazy laws (2nd amendment in particular), costly, far too crowded, fresh water shortage. Did it myself 5 years ago…nice to be out of the state and back in the Republic.

    • Far too over crowded? The Federal government “owns” 45% of the land in CA and this is unaccesible to we the people. Maybe the strips of land where they allow the serfs to live on in CA are crowded, but over crowded is not an accurate statement.

  17. I had my 12th grade Civics students take one if those quizzes that tell you what presidential candidate you are most likely. A good number for Republicans. “But I’m a Democrat ” no, you vote Democrat but your ideology is Republican. And that, class, us why California is screwed up.

    • Excellent point. A lot of people don’t know what they are voting for when they vote (D). Maybe that goes both ways; I don’t know. But the point is that there is a far less voting on substance than I care for (assuming there’s substance at all, of course).

      I know one lady that voted for Gore. She is a STAUNCH conservative, and quite ‘vocal’ at times about her beliefs on political matters. Gore. I just couldn’t believe it.

      And, another dude…Southern D by ‘tradition’ and hates the Republican Party…hardcore conservative, rails left and right against all things “Progressive.” Vocal on these points to the point of obnoxiousness.

      It’s a weird world. People are strange.

  18. I liked the idea of splitting the state up. Makes sense since it’s pretty literally six or seven states. Eventually the more crappy elements will tear themselves apart, though. It’s the fate of all such downward spirals. I just hope it doesn’t take the rest of the country with it. Though judging by the current track it’s not likely.

    I don’t mean to sound so fatalistic. Maybe more concerted efforts to reach out to the voters? Correct misconceptions? Most people will believe whatever garbage they are fed from the TV, if you show them the truth lots will start to change. Though obviously some people are just too entrenched in their politio-socio trappings.

    • It is an interesting idea, but it will never happen. For one thing, some of those ministates (like Northern California north of Sacramento) cannot survive economically, ever since the logging industry was basically shut down. Second, secession requires the approval of the State of California (which the Democrats will never allow, and they have 60% of the votes) and the US Federal Government (which cannot agree on anything, but wouldn’t allow it anyway since it would add a bunch of new senators that would shit the balance of power).

  19. Left Kalifornia a year ago for the Texas coast. KA is not heaven, but an overpriced, liberal cesspool with nightmare traffic, obnoxious people, and government that caters to illegals and celebrities. It is lost. Build the wall at the Colorado River. With a gun behind every cactus from Tucson north.

  20. There’s never an earthquake or tsunami around when you need one. Get Kalifornia to adjust it’s priorities, hopefully without loss of life.

  21. The answer is 9 million gun owners vote in block. Install rebuplicans. Duplicate Sacramento County procedure on CCW issue. Support Sheriff Jones bid to replace Ami Bera for Representative. Vote our every county sheriff who does not issue CCW’s.

    • Gun owners will never vote as a block so long as they are numerous. Too much difference on all the other stuff, and for most gun owners, guns are not actually a priority. At least not to the extent of justifying single-issue voting on this.

      You can “fix” this by shoving the rest of the Republican agenda onto the group, but all it really does is pushes the disagreeable out. So you’ll have your monolithic block, but it will be that much smaller.

      Which is sort of what’s happening with GOP on the national stage, actually. It’s consolidating its support in “solid red” states, at the expense of losing its grip on swing states because moderates get pushed out. That strategy will result in the permanent loss of presidency and Senate really soon, and House will follow eventually.

  22. Good to see the gun community is finally taking note on CA attacks on individual freedoms, unfortunately it’s taking the death of SCOTUS justice, but better late than never. Last year CA crossed the rubicon when it transferred parental rights over children’s health care to a private industry/government partnership. I suspect we will see how meaningless our remaining rights are as we abdicate our rights to make medical decisions to the government/pharmaceutical industry.

  23. Let me tell you, its sucks to be a gun guy in CA. Only about 5% of the available hardware is available here (or so says my local range/gun shop owner). Still, I like it here and would rather try to change it than leave.

    The rest of you beware: that which starts here in CA often spreads to the rest of the country. So you can say “just leave” or “they deserve it” all you want, but our liberal nonsense is likely to be coming to a state near you. What was that expression- first they came for the Californians, but I was not Californian, so I was quiet.

    Did you know that Amazon will not ship a clear plastic Airsoft pistol to CA due to a new law against “realistic looking” gun toys? Clear plastic. With an orange tip. Seriously. Because no 2A for toys. If there was ever any doubt that they wanted to take your guns, this is it.

    • raised in So Cal. Left 15 years ago because i prefer my votes to count. I loved california, but the communism was so pervasive there I needed to find freedom and liberty elsewhere as it was only getting worse. And boy did it get worse. Cannot imagine going back.

      My solution is to mimic Ronnie Barrett. Do not do business there. If it has a california tag on it, its not for me. I buy Florida OJ and mexican avocados. Which is sad because those farmers are the ones out matched by the city dwelling conmunist.

  24. RockOnHellChild made this observation:

    “That’s like asking what to do about an infection, once it’s already become gangrenous.”


    If enough Patriots with a terminal disease decided to make the families of those who voted to deny Californians their RTKABA directly and personally responsible for their actions, perhaps they will be less inclined to vote the way they did.

    And a ‘Go Fund Me’ account could be set up for the Patriot’s families…

    • >> If enough Patriots with a terminal disease decided to make the families of those who voted to deny Californians their RTKABA directly and personally responsible for their actions

      That would be a very effective way of getting NRA and other pro-gun orgs designated as terrorist organizations for real, with wide popular support. Maybe even wide enough to actually repeal the Second.

  25. Let California go. No matter if things go liberal or conservative The Golden State will run out of dough. When your broke you have no freedom.

  26. Unless your answer is “run away and nuke it from orbit” the only hope for the North East and California is the SCOTUS becoming more activist in throwing out things like the gun violence restraining order, soon to be ammo tax, etc. Now that it seems like we will get another anti on the SCOTUS making most of the decisions 6-3 I think nuke it from orbit is becoming increasingly popular.

  27. It’s simple we have to take back the courts. The death of Scalia makes this all the more harder, but not impossible. The 9th Circuit is very much Dem controlled. It would require taking control of the presidency for several terms to reverse the problems in the 9th. That said, taking back SCOTUS would best accomplish what we need to done, ie invalidating most of CA’s gun laws on 2nd Amendment grounds.
    That said, all we have to do is keep Obama from filling the vacancy during the rest of his term, elect a Republican president who is pro 2nd amendment, and then just hope that one of the old lefty judges goes to meet Scalia during that Republican’s term. Its tall order, and the odds are against us, but not impossible. If any of this does not happen, well than keep your powder dry. CA gun laws will be the least of your problems. A ruling from SCOTUS on guns with liberal majority would be a defacto repeal of the 2nd Amendment as we know it.

  28. A warning to the rest of Free America from someone in CA behind the lines. When an In-n-Out Burger opens near you, be afraid, Very afraid. It means Californians with Progressive values are on your doorstep

    • Funny; that’s pretty much the exact thought I had when Panera opened up here fairly recently. And then a Starbucks.

      Rural Eastern NC should not have these places. There simply should not be a ‘market’ for them here.

  29. Stop printing California ballot initiatives in Spanish, and require proof of citizenship for voting.

    Don’t misunderstand — I like Mexicans. A lot. But they shouldn’t run California until they can run Jalisco or Guadalajara.

  30. Push an new constitutional amendment: No state shall have more that 7.5% of the electoral college votes (cut CA down to 40 from the current 55). This would force CA to give up federal power, split up, or succeed.

    I think 2/3rd of congress and 3/4’s of states might vote for this.

    • Votes are allocated per the census, which includes illegal Mexicans. So, if citizens leave California but Mexicans move in illegally, every liberal non-felon’s vote becomes worth more.

      So right now there are probably ten people commanding all of California’s electoral college votes…

    • You know, this is actually an interesting idea. Disbalance between small and large states is a problem in general (and I say this as a liberal). This would be one way to fix that.

      I’m not sure that the results will be what you desire, though. If applied to some large conservative states – notably, Texas – it would produce some “blue” electors for the electoral college where currently it is solid red. And more blue congressional districts, because if Austin and Houston will be in a state of their own and are no longer redistricted at will by the rest of the state, you can be sure they’ll undo all the gerrymandering that currently significantly reduces their representation by pairing them with larger (and hence dominant) rural areas.

      One catch though. The state cannot just split itself. It requires Congressional approval, and you can be sure that either party will block any split that would harm it – so effectively all meaningful splits would be blocked.

  31. IT has long been recognized that gun owners have no power in the Legislature, due to an overwhelming voting majority of Democrats who all line up behind every new gun control measure or ban they can come up with. There are only two options–direct initiative voting (where measures are put to a popular vote) which is hugely expensive and fraught with risk, or the courts. As to the courts, the California Supreme court has long been against gun rights, leaving only the Ninth Circuit court of Appeals (whose judges are not all from California) or the U.S. Supreme Court. Unfortunately, the Ninth is dominated by liberals, and after the Seventh Circuit voted in the Highland Park case that “feels” are a sufficient basis to ban “assault rifles,” the chance of a successful case here is exceedingly remote. SCOTUS hasn’t taken a case since McDonald. With the passing of Scalia, it is even less likely to do so, unless a liberal justice who will vote to limit Heller to a RTKBA only in the home is confirmed to the bench.

    Pretty much all is lost, except for the fight on the microstamping law, since there is no evidence that the current technology complies with the dictates of the statute. Between misrepresentation and the stupidity of the general electorate, I expect Newsome’s initiative petition will make onto the ballot and will pass, unless 10 million gun owners get out and vote en masse against it. At least one “bullet button” ban will pass the legislature, and we can only hope that Governor Brown will veto it–but that will be but a temporary reprieve,m as the next governor is likely to be anti-gun Bloomie Blowhard Newsome, who will sign anything and every thing put in front of him.

    • It still boggles my mind–even knowing that the average intelligence in the PRK is room temperature expressed in Celsius–that that washed-up has-been Governor Moonbeam actually got elected out of retirement.

      However, he does actually seem to randomly veto anti-gun bills. No rhyme or reason to which ones. Maybe he tosses a coin. That’s better than just automatically jumping to sign every bill with orgasmic joy like many there would do.

      • The “moonbeam” moniker was due to his early adoption of space exploration and desire to establish a colony on the Moon. Before he was governor, he was the Attorney General, and filed an amicus in either Heller or McDonald in favor of the plaintiffs (don’t recall which). Moreover, he has with little fanfare and almost no controversy managed to balance the California budget and even pay off billions in past debts. Although I agree that he has been inconsistent on gun rights (e.g. by signing the CCW gun ban on school campuses), he has been a much better governor than the next one in line. For example, he vetoed a bill two years in a row that would have enacted the ammo licensing requirements now proposed as a ballot initiative by Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsome (the heir apparent when Brown terms out).

  32. What to do about Cali? LEAVE. If you live there pack up and move, and the savor the feeling of 30 round PMAGs shipped to your front door. This goes for every ban state, and I’m not asking you to do anything I didn’t do first(now living in North Carolina).

    White-flight will eventually drain Sacramento of it’s taxable citizenry but that still won’t be enough, the state will limp on like Detroit. Long term the only thing that fixes California is breaking it up into no less than three, but preferably more, pieces. And all of this only happens after a civil war or some sort of military coup where the leftists are at least stripped of their ability to participate in government, if not outright rounded up and sent to camps. I’m not at all kidding, California has no other chance, and it’s a preview of the rest of the country.

  33. I had the opportunity to go to a PRK gun range (indoor) not too long ago. The good news is there was quite a wait to get a lane. It does seem like there are a lot of POTG there, very beleaguered, but still a significant number.

  34. No quirky quips from me today. Keep fighting. The 2nd was established in part to fight tyranny:SEE> California…

  35. The Republican Party has zero influence on anything in California. If they keep dicking around we will allow the Dems to control enough of the state legislature to get a two thirds majority. They have their eyes on repealing Proposition 13 which severely limits how much property tax they can collect on the home you own. Once they repeal that we are done. Millions will own homes that they can’t afford to pay taxes on and will be aquired by whom. The State?

  36. What to do about Kalifornia? Ever see one of those zombie movies where the hero gets bitten and to prevent it spreading he cuts off his own hand?

    Yep. Like that.

  37. So…what now? What if anything can be done to prevent California from going [further] full retard?
    Put it up for sale. Maybe sell it to ISIS? Yeah, that would a real synergy of cultures.

  38. I’ve lived in CA since 1957. Endured it turning from a gun-neutral/friendly State to a Gun Haters Paradise. It was a Conservative State when we first moved here, but took a hard left turn in the 1970’s and has gotten worse decade by decade since.
    All things considered, California is lost to America and particularly to pro- Second Amendment support.

    There are many gun owners, and when you go into the local gun stores they are normally busy to packed with people buying guns and ammunition. Gun ranges are very busy all the time and gun clubs maxed-out with Memberships. But the Legislature remains firmly controlled by gun-hating Liberals and Governor Brown (a gun owner himself) signs most of what the Legislature sends him that is anti-gun.

    I think California is lost to POTG and it looks to get a lot worse in the next year with new laws proposed in the Legislature and headed for the Proposition ballot in November. I would advise that no one who loves their shooting sports move here. Besides Real Estate is insanely expensive compared to what most of you in other States could sell your normal single family home for. Also a huge influx of people from a certain Asian giant are coming here with vast amounts of cash and routinely outbid domestic buyers. But interestingly enough a lot of those same people are found at the shooting ranges in ever increasing numbers over the past few years.

    California’s 55 EC votes comprise 20% of the 270 needed to Elect the President. It is the 8th largest economy in the World. It has a population of 38.8 million. It is solidly Liberal (Blue). it is and will remain a force to be reckoned with. I don’t know what can be done, but It is exporting Liberal Ideas throughout America and is very dangerous.

  39. Only thing I can think of is that Republican lead governments surrounding California to tell it to F***OFF when they will continue their agitprop talking points accusing them of having “weak” gun laws creating an iron river that funnels guns into California.

    Idiots like Newsom, Harris, Fienstein, Boxer, etc… were put in office by uninterested voters who think the state and by extension, they the voter, can legislate away crimes and criminals, which we all know is pure insane juice.

    For people stuck here for a bit longer, we can only cast a vote to the fire, since the left in major urban centers and the capitol hold the state hostage with their self-perpetuating BS.

  40. Same thing we’ve been doing out here for the last 20 years. ignoring the law at our own peril. The jails are so hopelessly overloaded out here that there is almost nothing they can do if we choose not to comply. Getting caught with an illegal gun is BIG problems, but when they offer you ‘alternative punishment’ and you say “no your Honor, I’ll go with the punishment proscribed” they are kind of screwed.

    Its a horrible situation, but this is the golden state, where only the power elite get to have rights. The rest of the serfs just have to cheat and hope not to get caught.

  41. Kick San Francisco out of the nation. LA will fall in line shortly after witnessing SF become the next Venezuela in the span of a week.

  42. I think the analogies between government overreach into privacy are similar to overreach into 2A rights. Unchecked expansion of gov power/oversight under the pretense of protection/security/safety. And, more than anything, I think gun neutral or even anti-gun people in California can identify with the “right” side.

    Did you hear about Apple’s issue against the FBI/USG? Replace “privacy” with “gun rights” and it reads almost exactly the same:

    … Guess what D.Feinstein’s position is on this topic?

  43. Please help. Long time CCRKB, 2AF, CalGuns supporter. Independent voter, stuck in a wash of anti gun morons.

    I work here. I grew up here. I make great money here. Yet in the short while I’ve been a gun owner, I’ve had to evade/avoid becoming a felon due to the rapidly changing landscape.

    10/30s are ok. My pre-bans are ok too.
    10/30s are not ok.
    Parts for 30s are not ok.
    Oh hey look at that, pre-bans. No bueno, got to get rid of them.
    I’m flush with 10 round magpuls now, wondering how in the hell this is happening?

    It seems like no matter how much money donated to CalGuns, 2AF, NRA, or the CCRKBA, and the like, California is almost ALWAYS on the “We’ll get to that soon” list.

    We have new laws that prevent the sale of non-micro-stamping guns. Thank Harris for this. The damn tech doesn’t even exist, and never mind the fact that it can easily be circumvented with a simple(as it stands today) firing pin swap. It’s a ban.

    We have the “Safety roster” where a brown plastic gun and a black plastic gun, made by the same manufacturer, the only difference being the color of the injection molded plastic, is different. Yet the manufacturers (Glock in this instance) is required to fork over a large sum of money for every gun color, regardless

    I’m out of shit. I have zero ideas as to what to do. I’ve run gun groups on I’ve taken virgins to the rnage, and had exhausting debates with friends and family.

    I’m worried if I give up, I’ll wake up a felon, due to some new law having changed the landscape (yet again).

    • I feel for ya, I’m stuck here for the next year and a half then I’m leaving for good, I know that this is a difficult decision that involves more than just your interests but your family’s as well, but in my opinion it is for the best.

      I am tired of trying my best to keep uninformed and unconcerned people up to date on new anti-gun legislation, after a very short time, most of these people end up with glazed eyes whilst I try to educate them on a single unalienable human right and how it’s diminishing/removal is important to not only them but their families too.

      I just want to be free, to live in a state that cares about my FREEDOM and not my servitude, cares more about leaving me alone than picking its way into my life, and I will be free no matter what. So, off I will F*** to a free state that accepts my interest in steel and polymer and drum magazines and building my own god dam weapon with my own god dam hands.

      For me, to be free means not living another moment in California, and not voting Democrat, libertarian for me; maybe then I can be as the founding fathers intended me to be.

    • You’re in a state where the majority of citizens are anti-gun, and politicians and laws reflect that. It’s that simple. No amount of donations to anyone will change that, unless you have enough money tobribe lobby the majority of the legislature. And you don’t. And anyone who does is not interested.

  44. I am no constitutional scholar, but I would think
    it comes down to this.

    The 2nd Amendment and the 14th Amendment.
    The 2nd Amendment is a BAN on the Federal government to create any
    RESTRICTIONS of the people’s general right to keep and bear arms.

    The 14th Amendment sets up mandatory Incorporation of the Bill of Rights on to the States.
    If your state recognizes the 14th Amendment, then it has no choice but to observe and obey the
    2nd Amendment as well.
    So any state hat violates “the people’s” right to keep and bear arms is also violating the US constitution.

    If any state chooses not to observe and obey the US constitution, then
    federal government can reserve the right to withhold any federal funding to that state.

  45. What to do about California? 1) Line up the militia along the Arizona and Nevada border. 2) Have all California gun owners camp along the line with the militia. 3) Allow the Muslims to impose shariah law for 1 month. 4) After the month is completed, militia moves in and retakes the state. 5) Reintroduce the Constitution.

    If all goes well, we can do the same thing on the east coast.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here