May 22, 2013, 12:24 PM | #26 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 13,057
|
Quote:
Furthermore, packing up and leaving isn't always an option when considering things like family and career.
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change. --Randall Munroe |
|
May 22, 2013, 12:28 PM | #27 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,436
|
Quote:
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. |
|
May 22, 2013, 12:29 PM | #28 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 25, 2011
Posts: 1,755
|
Quote:
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. |
|
May 22, 2013, 03:36 PM | #29 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 29, 2008
Location: Oregon
Posts: 2,340
|
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
|
May 22, 2013, 04:12 PM | #30 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 31, 2009
Posts: 642
|
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.
|
May 22, 2013, 04:35 PM | #31 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 31, 2009
Posts: 642
|
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:
|
|
May 22, 2013, 04:39 PM | #32 |
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.
|
May 22, 2013, 04:46 PM | #33 |
Staff
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 8,819
|
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.
__________________
I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some. |
May 22, 2013, 04:52 PM | #34 |
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.
|
May 22, 2013, 06:06 PM | #35 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 4, 2007
Location: Concord, CA
Posts: 193
|
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.
__________________
|
May 22, 2013, 06:51 PM | #36 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 16, 2007
Posts: 2,153
|
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. |
June 2, 2013, 08:08 PM | #37 |
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. |
June 2, 2013, 08:36 PM | #38 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 28, 2001
Location: CA
Posts: 1,744
|
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?
|
June 2, 2013, 09:34 PM | #39 |
Junior Member
Join Date: January 10, 2013
Posts: 12
|
Sad Day for California
|
June 2, 2013, 11:50 PM | #40 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 27, 2013
Posts: 988
|
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 |
June 3, 2013, 11:08 AM | #41 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 30, 2007
Location: South CA
Posts: 566
|
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 |
June 3, 2013, 03:22 PM | #42 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 26, 2012
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 779
|
Quote:
__________________
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 |
|
June 4, 2013, 05:23 AM | #43 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 21, 2010
Location: Central FL
Posts: 1,360
|
Quote:
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? |
|
June 4, 2013, 10:21 AM | #44 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 22, 2007
Location: Arizona
Posts: 5,295
|
Quote:
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. Last edited by armoredman; June 4, 2013 at 10:28 AM. |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|