The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old May 22, 2013, 12:24 PM   #26
Tom Servo
Staff
 
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 10,229
Quote:
The only answer Is to move out of calif.
That isn't an answer at all. There are good people fighting to fix things there, and that mentality cheapens what they do.

Furthermore, packing up and leaving isn't always an option when considering things like family and career.
__________________
In the depth of winter I finally learned that there was in me an invincible summer.
--Albert Camus
Tom Servo is offline  
Old May 22, 2013, 12:28 PM   #27
Aguila Blanca
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 6,319
Quote:
Originally Posted by 51.50
Is to move out of calif. Gun laws will continue to get worse until they have the most restrictive laws in the country. It's my opinion that making "assault rifles" illegal after they were legally purchased is morally wrong. If something is legal when you do it, how can they criminalize it after the fact?
Please report to Building 73, Room 28, for reprogramming.

You obviously don't understand. They didn't criminalize the purchase of a so-called "assault weapon" after the fact. The original purchase remains legal. "All" they did was make it illegal for the purchasers to continue to possess those evil, black instruments of mass destruction. In the twisted minds of those who write such laws, the concept of "uncompensated taking" is irrelevant "if it might save just one life."

Now ... get with the program.
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old May 22, 2013, 12:29 PM   #28
sigcurious
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 25, 2011
Posts: 1,755
Quote:
it would be impossible to enforce laws against changing the firing pin without...

let's hear it...

Making the firing pin a "firearm" (same as a lower receiver) and Registration
This would apply going forward, additionally, handguns(legal ones that is) are already registered in CA. Given that the imprinted information is the same pertinent information that on the receiver no separate step would be required.

While I generally agree with the premise(of low enforcement potential), in practice it would be enforceable to a greater extent than other schemes outside of CA alone. Due to the nature of the roster, only a limited number of handguns would require it at first, and updated and re-rostered models would be easily determined by a serial check. It would take years(if not decades), before the mix of guns that need the microstamping and those that do not in the state was to a point that it would complicate enforcement.

AFAIK, there is no portion of the law that would require retroactively converting already owned firearms. The biggest issue would be those firearms brought in by new residents which if had they been purchased in CA would have required the microstamping ability. However, assuming they comply with the law and register, there would be a record of that specific firearm being exempt or whatever provision there is for new residents.
sigcurious is offline  
Old May 22, 2013, 03:36 PM   #29
NWPilgrim
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 29, 2008
Location: Oregon
Posts: 2,141
What does this mean for firearm maintenance? If a pistol was acquired that had the microstamping firing pin, what is the obligation when it wears or breaks. Does it have to be replaced with a microstamping firing pin? Does it mean you can never upgrade the firing pin to a titanium or other premium one? Does the stamping occur at all levels of firing pin strike, that is are light "target" mainsprings enough to stamp the code or does it require a very hard hit? Have any manufacturers announced any plan to sell into CA in the future?
Or does this pretty much kill the CA new pistol market?

It is amazing that we allow our legislators to pass laws about which they know nothing of the technology, issues, consequences, or efficacy. And they refuse to have open, balanced hearings to be exposed to these facts.
__________________
"The ultimate authority ... resides in the people alone. ... The advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation ... forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition."
- James Madison
NWPilgrim is offline  
Old May 22, 2013, 04:12 PM   #30
wally626
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 31, 2009
Posts: 635
It looks from the write-up linked in the OP that micro stamping is only required when a new semi-auto is added to the list of approved guns. So any gun currently on the list can be sold without micro stamping. If that is true then the only effect of this law is that no gun not already on the list is ever going to get sold in CA.
wally626 is offline  
Old May 22, 2013, 04:35 PM   #31
wally626
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 31, 2009
Posts: 635
Finally found the law. Since it is a search link I am not sure how long it will be valid.

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/wa...ction=retrieve

The new section from 2007 is below:

Quote:
(7) Commencing January 1, 2010, for all semiautomatic pistols that
are not already listed on the roster pursuant to Section 12131, it
is not designed and equipped with a microscopic array of characters
that identify the make, model, and serial number of the pistol,
etched or otherwise imprinted in two or more places on the interior
surface or internal working parts of the pistol, and that are
transferred by imprinting on each cartridge case when the firearm is
fired, provided that the Department of Justice certifies that the
technology used to create the imprint is available to more than one
manufacturer unencumbered by any patent restrictions. The Attorney
General may also approve a method of equal or greater reliability and
effectiveness in identifying the specific serial number of a firearm
from spent cartridge casings discharged by that firearm than that
which is set forth in this paragraph, to be thereafter required as
otherwise set forth by this paragraph where the Attorney General
certifies that this new method is also unencumbered by any patent
restrictions. Approval by the Attorney General shall include notice
of that fact via regulations adopted by the Attorney General for
purposes of implementing that method for purposes of this paragraph.
The microscopic array of characters required by this section shall
not be considered the name of the maker, model, manufacturer's
number, or other mark of identification, including any distinguishing
number or mark assigned by the Department of Justice, within the
meaning of Sections 12090 and 12094.
So it looks like only new pistols (perhaps from Jan 1, 2010 and not yesterday) being added to the list need the marking ability and it is specifically not considered a gun serial number, so defacement laws should not apply. I would hope that no gun manufacture ever sells a gun in CA meeting these requirements.
wally626 is offline  
Old May 22, 2013, 04:39 PM   #32
sigcurious
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 25, 2011
Posts: 1,755
The law was written but not in effect, the patent for the technology was kept out of reach by the good folks over at Calguns. It is unclear at this point why they've proceeded with putting it into effect. It is possible that alternate technologies have made the same process available that are not under the original patent.
sigcurious is offline  
Old May 22, 2013, 04:46 PM   #33
Spats McGee
Staff
 
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 5,039
If I'm not mistaken (though I may well be), someone (the Calguns Foundation?) tried to pay the fees on the patent to keep the technology patented so that it couldn't be further developed, but the payment was refused because Calguns didn't own the patent. Thus, the patent expired and the genie's out of the bottle now.

If I'm wrong, someone please correct me.
__________________
A gunfight is not the time to learn new skills.

If you ever have a real need for more than a couple of magazines, your problem is not a shortage of magazines. It's a shortage of people on your side of the argument. -- Art Eatman
Spats McGee is offline  
Old May 22, 2013, 04:52 PM   #34
sigcurious
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 25, 2011
Posts: 1,755
AFAIK, the patent was extended(By CGF), and there were no issues at the time of the extension. Hopefully Librarian stops back by, he can probably clarify and or expand on the situation. A cursory search didn't show any indications that the patent renewal was rejected.
sigcurious is offline  
Old May 22, 2013, 06:06 PM   #35
Librarian
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 4, 2007
Location: Concord, CA
Posts: 137
Stable links, and a discussion of the Roster, is at the wiki -- http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/The_Safe_Handgun_List

A long discussion of the patent issues is at Calguns here. Not my area; I think SamsDX may be a patent lawyer.
__________________
See the CALGUNS FOUNDATION Wiki for discussion of California firearms law.

The FAQ page is here.
Librarian is offline  
Old May 22, 2013, 06:51 PM   #36
maestro pistolero
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 16, 2007
Posts: 2,079
Once the courts allowed some infringement, then infringement will only be limited by the imagination of the infringers. The amendment is the only one with is own standard of review written right in to it.

Even a new, more strongly worded amendment wouldn't survive the willful abrogation we have today. Unless there is a series of rulings from SCOTUS broad enough to eviscerate a significant number of overreaching, obvious attempts to suppress the right, I fear it will be in permanent decline.

The fact is that legislatures, especially state legislatures, can pass new laws at 50 times the rate that the courts can smack them down.
maestro pistolero is offline  
Old June 2, 2013, 08:08 PM   #37
Silver00LT
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 6, 2013
Location: Alabama
Posts: 286
Not going to create a thread as some of the article is speaking of the micro stamping.

But I am shocked...well not really, but California passed a $50 permit fee just to purchase ammunition now? Wow.

Here is the article.

In the article is also states several SB that have been approved.
__________________
My YouTube MOLON LABE
Training pays off...so keep active with your firearm. It could save your life one day.
Silver00LT is offline  
Old June 2, 2013, 08:36 PM   #38
rc
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 28, 2001
Location: CA
Posts: 609
I think what we have here are schemes by lobbyists to make money. They represent special interest groups who have developed a technology without demand and filed a pattent. Then they lobby a politician to write a law to force adoption of the technology by all gun makers like firing pin imprints which are not a permanent feature of a gun. All of a sudden a worthless patent is worth a lot of money. I personally feel a smart gun is actually a more dangerous gun. Anything electronic is likely to wear out, break or fail due to loss of power over time. If the technology really was a good idea the military and police agencies would be all over it to arm their people. Police can buy pretty much any gun they like off list while the rest of us are prohibited from having equal rights. Why is this a good idea if the guns they are buying off list were not "safe" to have?
rc is offline  
Old June 2, 2013, 09:34 PM   #39
SoCal326
Junior Member
 
Join Date: January 10, 2013
Posts: 12
Sad Day for California

Quote:
Originally Posted by Silver00LT View Post
. . . but California passed a $50 permit fee just to purchase ammunition now? Wow.
That bill passed the senate. It still needs to get passed the assembly and then be signed by the governed before it becomes law.
SoCal326 is offline  
Old June 2, 2013, 11:50 PM   #40
SHE3PDOG
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 27, 2013
Posts: 979
Well, if those laws end up passing before I'm back in Pendleton, I won't be able to get a few guns on my wish list. I hate that I have to live there for another couple years, but hopefully I'll be able to purchase ammo online. I think the part that upsets me the most is the ammo tax. I see absolutely no logic behind it that would leave me to believe it is aimed at illegal gun owners. I can't wait to get out of the state, but I'll keep fighting the good fight once I get back.
__________________
Semper Fi

Marine, NRA member, SAF Defender's Club member, and constitutionally protected keeper and bearer of firearms
SHE3PDOG is offline  
Old June 3, 2013, 11:08 AM   #41
HarrySchell
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 30, 2007
Location: South CA
Posts: 549
I think the ban on semi-autos with detachable magazines fails (clearly) the "common use" definition under Heller.

Somebody will have to sue if it gets past Brown, but he should be made aware that even clever Kamala Harris will be unable to defend it, which wastes taxpayer money. I plan to send him a note to that effect.
__________________
Loyalty to petrified opinions never yet broke a chain or freed a human soul in this world — and never will.
— Mark Twain
HarrySchell is offline  
Old June 3, 2013, 03:22 PM   #42
Dr Big Bird PhD
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 26, 2012
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 778
Quote:
Somebody will have to sue if it gets past Brown, but he should be made aware that even clever Kamala Harris will be unable to defend it, which wastes taxpayer money. I plan to send him a note to that effect.
The judicial system often decides these things along party lines unfortunately.
__________________
I told the new me,
"Meet me at the bus station and hold a sign that reads: 'Today is the first day of the rest of your life.'"
But the old me met me with a sign that read: "Welcome back."
Who you are is not a function of where you are. -Off Minor
Dr Big Bird PhD is offline  
Old June 4, 2013, 05:23 AM   #43
Justice06RR
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 21, 2010
Location: Central FL
Posts: 1,261
Quote:
That isn't an answer at all. There are good people fighting to fix things there, and that mentality cheapens what they do.

Furthermore, packing up and leaving isn't always an option when considering things like family and career.
Would you say that voting out those government officials would be a better solution?

AFAIK most of them are Democrats/Anti-gun politicians in CA. And most residents are voting for them; how else would the same Anti-gun politicians keep getting elected?
Justice06RR is offline  
Old June 4, 2013, 10:21 AM   #44
armoredman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 22, 2007
Location: Arizona
Posts: 3,752
Quote:
The only answer
Is to move out of calif. Gun laws will continue to get worse until they have the most restrictive laws in the country. It's my opinion that making "assault rifles" illegal after they were legally purchased is morally wrong. If something is legal when you do it, how can they criminalize it after the fact?
Calguns and CalNRA have been fighting all along, and everything moves backwards, more restrictions, not less. Only hope is winning in courts to overturn UC laws. Good luck.
If you want to move, AZ is right next door, but I will say this - if you move to AZ from a restrictive state, welcome, but do NOT come in here trying to change our laws, we like it the way it is. We get enough people from both coasts who want AZ to become pale parodies of the states they fled, gets old, fast.
If you do come in, I'll be happy to point of the good ranges.
Oh, as for "morally wrong", yes, I agree, from the mores and customs I grew up with and instilled into my by my parents, but you're talking about "ends justifies the means" people, and their end is a completely disarmed population, with only police, military and street thugs to be armed.

Edit to add, do not stop fighting in Cali, didn't mean give up, but I don't see any evidence that anyone is winning anything in Cali - even Nordyke was reversed.
__________________
http://czfirearms.us/ same original CZForum, new location.

Last edited by armoredman; June 4, 2013 at 10:28 AM.
armoredman is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:55 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.12366 seconds with 9 queries