California AR15, AK ban and confiscation bill SB249

[Wallabing]

News from sacramento is that this bill had new things added/amended this past week.

NRA is now keeping alert on this bill
http://www.nraila.org/legislation/st...next-week.aspx

[Patriot86]

As goes California so will the rest of the nation. If cali can successfully ban all AR type rifles from their state and then DEFEND it all the way up to the supreme court, what will stop most of the North East and Certain other states from doing the same. Why should you care what happens in California? Because it can happen in your state next. This NIMBY attitude is whats wrong with America as a whole, as long as it is not effecting someone personally they are apathetic at best.

The second amendment must be defended in every corner of every state in this fine Nation or else the antis will just keep trying asinine insane "common sense laws" until they find one that sticks in the courts.

[ripnbst]

The other thing people could do is move out of all these states that crap all over the rights of their "subjects".

When they have no tax revenue and cant figure out why you cant point and laugh.

I myself will never live in California, New York, or Illinois because of their rules and regs that show me right where I stand if I live there.

[Tom Servo]

Why should you care what happens in California? Because it can happen in your state next.

Exactly. The Mulford Act had a chilling effect on carry in several areas.

What's more, there are people working very effectively against significant odds to improve things there. Several cases involving the right to carry outside the home have been spearheaded there, and some of that litigation may inform future cases of national importance.

If everyone just moved away, how would that improve things for folks living there? The whole "just move to a free state LOL" thing is just a cop-out, and it's an insult to those who are working hard to improve things there.

[Patriot86]

^^^^ What Tom Said.

Living in Illinois I would not put it past our lovely politicians to try something like this. So my state very well could be next. I could just move away but my family has roots here. This is my home and no one should be forced to move from their home just to exercise their constitutional rights such as the right to keep and bear arms.

[armoredman]

As goes California so will the rest of the nation.

Ya know something? I'm getting tired of this old saw. Look on a map, hit San Diego with a finger. Now travel one state line to the right. Yeah, the one with the "A" in front. Since 1994 we have been steadily expanding firearms freedoms here, thanks to tireless grassroots activism,(thank you to the AZ Citizens Defense League), going from no concealed carry to Constitutional Carry in 16 years. We have had lawful open carry for over 100 years, and been next door to California the whole time. Heck California just passed a law known as the " Anti Arizona law" base on our win/loss in SCOTUS. Just from bills passed this last session we can hunt with any size magazine in a semi auto firearm, use a suppressor if we want, or go bowhunting while carrying a firearm for self defense, legally. These take effect August 3rd, BTW.
You guys ask us to stop spelling California with a "K", and stop telling you to move to a freer state, because that's defeatist, OK, no problem, but please stop repeating this - it manifestly is not true. If it was, by now ALL states would have assault weapon bans, may-issue CCW permits, and all major cities would have permits only held by the rich and famous. Alaska, Arizona, Wyoming and Montana have Constitutional Carry, and with work and luck, you will too.
As to this bill, I would say there was nothing accidental about either the language or the way it's been handled - it seems to be designed to remove firearms from civilian hands, nothing more. I wish you the best, fight long and hard.

[Patriot86]

Comparing California to Arizona is like Comparing Illinois to Indiana just because they touch, I am not talking about geographically I am talking ideologically.

Ideologically you have a lot of states in the NE and some in the mid west who would be in immediate danger of such an AR Ban.
What happens if congress , emboldened by a California AR Ban that is successfully defended in the courts pass a federal AR Ban in the next few years?
Then it sure would effect Arizona wouldn't it? Again, this whole as long as its NIMBY attitude is the problem.

If you are in Arizona, Texas, Georgia, Indiana, Wisconsin or any gun friendly state what happens in the gun-unfriendly states is bound to effect you sooner or later. We had this little thing called the federal AWB in the not to recent past that effected everyone.

The way the courts rule in fights over gun laws effect us all.
If you are a gun owner you need to stand up and be concerned for the rights of gun owners everywhere, not just in your back yard.

[Tom Servo]

If you are in Arizona, Texas, Georgia, Indiana, Wisconsin or any gun friendly state what happens in the gun-unfriendly states is bound to effect you sooner or later.

Which is all the more reason to get active, or at least donate to the organizations that are fighting back in places like California.

If we'd said, "fine, leave DC to their gun ban," would we have had a groundbreaking Supreme Court decision in our favor in 2008?

[Spats McGee]

On the issue of "as goes California so will the rest of the nation," there's more to it than the question of what kinds of statutory law are enacted. Several years ago, I went to a Continuing Legal Education seminar on §1983 (civil rights) litigation. One of the speakers there was Erwin Chemerinsky, a noted constitutional scholar. He made the comment that, in the civil rights context, where the Ninth Circuit has gone, the rest of the country has followed. Now, I haven't done exhaustive research on this issue, but in the §1983 arena, Chemerinsky is one of the "smartest guys in the room." I have no reason to doubt his claim.

IMHO, it is to our benefit not to encourage gun owners to move out of California (or the other, more restrictive states). We don't need gun owners leaving those jurisdictions. We need them voting in those jurisdictions, and we need to support them in their struggles.

[HarrySchell]

Within CA, only the most "liberal" bastions are fighting to avoid issuing CCW's. Some counties are literally shall issue, to include Sacramento, and others are doing their best to get there within the limits of the "may issue" law. The legislature is overwhelmingly Democrat and "liberal" beyond redemption, so we can insane proposals like having the state appoint additional "parents" for a child if it finds the actual parents lacking, and laws like this one.

As Charlton Heston said in the first Planet of the Apes movie. "....it's a madhouse, I tell you!..."

Chermenski is well-known in con law circles, and very leftist in orientation. IIRC, he disagrees with Larry Tribe et. al. that 2A is an individual right. Tribe is reputed to be the most experienced con law prof in the US, and the bulk of scholars agree on the individual rights interpretation. Erwin struggles sadly on with the same collective rights stuff so long debunked.

[Spats McGee]

HarrySchell, you may be absolutely right about Chemerinsky's politics. I have to admit that I have not looked at any of his RKBA articles, or even if he has any.

[jmortimer]

"HarrySchell, you may be absolutely right..."
No he is right. if you don't live here, you really have no clue how futile letters and phone calls are. Better than nothing I suppose, but not much. The fact that SCOTUS issued a good decision arising from foolish D.C and Chicago legislation is of little comfort. No one can say what SCOTUS will do and the court is split in half so one more justice for Ginsberg, Sotomayor, Bryer, and Kagan means Heller et al are gone. So I'll place my hope in the fantastic laws passed by the so-called "red states" as opposed to hoping that more foolish laws from California will provide SCOTUS an opportunity to "do the right thing."

[Crosshair]

As goes California so will the rest of the nation.

More like, As North Dakota goes, so will the rest of the nation.

[Tom Servo]

Within CA, only the most "liberal" bastions are fighting to avoid issuing CCW's.

Ah, but why and who are they fighting?

[jmortimer]

Map of shall issue counties from California Concealed Carry Website. There is a move in the state legislature to prevent these counties from issuing CCWs.
http://www.californiaconcealedcarry....untiesmap.html

[HarrySchell]

Tom,
In the case of Los Angeles City PD, they deny citizens applications and try to talk them out of trying to apply. Four years ago LAPD lost in court for this activity and was told to fix it, so people could apply. They have continued their practices and been sued again as of last year. The court ordered LAPD to produced copies of applications for evaluations.

I live in a similarly inclined city, where a letter has to be sent to the Chief stating "good cause", insurance status, and other information before I will be issued an application. Los Angeles County Sheriffs, under Lee Baca, similarly discourage and avoid issuing CCW's unless you have an "in" with the political class or can help Baca with campaign funding or other favors.

Sean Penn, with his anger management and drug use issues, was issued a CCW.

In 2011, LA County had 220 permits issued for about 9M people. Fresno had 2500+ for less that 1M in population. Now, are people really so untrustworthy in LA, or less exposed to crime? Really?

This result is not an accident or the equal and objective application of law.

[Tom Servo]

I was being a bit glib, Harry. My point was, those who would abrogate 2nd Amendment rights are having to fight to do so now. The Calguns foundation is kicking tail and taking names. Several counties have loosened up their regulations on issuance of permits in order to avoid costly litigation.

Things are bleak there, yes, but all is not lost. Let's not forget that some pretty influential 2A litigation (Nordyke, Peruta) has come out of California lately.

[HarrySchell]

Good point, Tom, and you are right, the regressives are under some pressure when they have had things their own way for too long. All indeed is not lost, particularly with Woollard. CA's may issue law is a replica of MD's, and is clearly being used as a rationing device.

The problem we do have is a one party legislature, perhaps even more eager than ever to pass every law possible in the face of the pressure as the rest of the country goes the other way.

[Tom Servo]

Harry, your ear is a bit closer to the ground than mine. What's the story with Governor Brown?

We had a ruling in Richards v. Prieto that claimed it was reasonable to restrict the issuance of carry permits so long as unloaded open carry remained an alternative. Then came AB 144, which banned even that, thus throwing the core ruling of that decision into jeopardy and opening the door to further lawsuits.

Brown signed it anyway and made a weird statement about how "apparently antagonistic measures can be melded together in a higher unity.” He simultaneously signed another bill which eased some of the restrictions on the issuance process.

He seems to be a bit unpredictable on gun rights, but not 100% hostile. Has he made any statements about SB249?

[aarondhgraham]

If everyone just moved away, how would that improve things for folks living there?
The whole "just move to a free state LOL" thing is just a cop-out,
and it's an insult to those who are working hard to improve things there.

Tom, I have to disagree with you here,,,
It is most definitely not a cop-out,,,
It's a personal life decision.

It's only an insult because you choose to take it as such.

I left California in 1996 after 21 years in the state,,,
That decision was based on several factors,,,
But the lead factor was gun related,,,
I smelled oppression in the air.

I moved to the gun-friendly state of Oklahoma,,,
Specifically to get out from under California's anti-gun climate.

Should I have taken the noble route and stayed to fight the good fight?

Heck no!,,,
Why should I have?

If everyone just moved away,
how would that improve things for folks living there?

There is no moral imperative for any person to stay in a place under laws they find oppressive or distasteful,,,
You may take personal offense at those of us who have voted with our feet,,,
But please do not opine that we are lesser individuals for doing so.

One of the main benefits of having separate states,,,
Is so a citizen can choose to live where like-minded people abound.

If a person finds the Law of the Land to be onerous he only has two choices,,,

• Fight to change the laws (and wait hoping for change),,,
• Move to a more suitable place (no waiting).

Neither has any virtue over the other,,,
Neither option is a "cop out".

It's been 16 years since I left California,,,
California's status has not even approached what I obtained by three days of driving.

Stay and fight if that is your choice,,,
I preferred the immediate gratification of my lifestyle desire.

Aarond

.

[ScottRiqui]

I would never fault anyone in the least if they decided to leave for a more gun-friendly climate.

But if you're talking to someone who is spending his time, money and effort trying to improve the circumstances where he lives, I can see how it would be insulting to tell him to "just leave instead".

[Tom Servo]

Stay and fight if that is your choice,,,
I preferred the immediate gratification of my lifestyle desire.

Aaron, I can fully understand that, and everyone's entitled to their choice.

My disagreement is with the one-size-fits-all advice of "move out of _____" as the only option.

[armoredman]

Comparing California to Arizona is like Comparing Illinois to Indiana just because they touch, I am not talking about geographically I am talking ideologically.

Me too, and the numbers just don’t add up. If that silly one liner was right, again, the nation would look a LOT different than it does today.

Again, this whole as long as its NIMBY attitude is the problem.

NIMBY is “Not In My Backyard”, which addresses where something is GOING to be located, not where it IS. What you’re thinking of is “out of sight, out of mind”. That is another old saying which isn't true for you or for me, and I AM active, member of AZCDL and Life Member of the NRA. MY elected officials know me by name, and one pro RKBA Congressman has actually called ME twice. Setting up a local meet with him and the rest of the people in this little flyover town, me in the middle with his office and local reps.

If we'd said, "fine, leave DC to their gun ban," would we have had a groundbreaking Supreme Court decision in our favor in 2008?

I, for one, have never said that anywhere. I said the old saying about California leading the nation is dead wrong; I never said, “bury our heads and hope it goes away”! I’ve been politically active for decades on a national scale, thank you, and continue to urge others to do the same.

where the Ninth Circuit has gone, the rest of the country has followed.

Check something – the Ninth is also the single most overturned Circuit Court. Second check -if the Ninth's decisions were so overwhelming, AZ would look a lot different, as many people forget we are also under the jurisdiction of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Let's not forget that some pretty influential 2A litigation (Nordyke, Peruta) has come out of California lately.

14 YEARS for Nordyke to be settled; that was a long wait. Let’s hope they can get it done a wee bit faster next time. It is a reasonably good decision, and I applaud it, sir. If they hadn't weaseled the first time, it would have been over quite a while ago, and with an even better decision.

But if you're talking to someone who is spending his time, money and effort trying to improve the circumstances where he lives, I can see how it would be insulting to tell him to "just leave instead".

There is what I said – I’ll not tell you to move out to a free state if you’ll quit telling people that California leads the nation, because the proof IS in the pudding – they do not. I wish you the best, and wish I could help, (no finances right now to speak of), but if you want to stay and fight in restrictive states like California, New Jersey, Hawaii, Illinois, Washington D.C., and the like, then go for it. If you don't, and wish to vote with your feet, (as one California legislator urged all gun owners to leave California years ago), then I would offer up Arizona as a good spot to choose.
I hope that offers more clarity in what I tried to say originally?

[HarrySchell]

Tom,
So far as I know, Brown has said nothing about SB249. He has been very busy promoting his tax increase initiative and high-speed rail (the Browndoggle).

He has admitted to owning a couple of firearms, and he supposedly disbanded a group of firebrands within CA DOJ when he was AG. These guys would follow people to gun shows in neighboring states, follow them back and do a traffic stop right after they crossed into CA, hoping to find contraband magazines or something else.

The current AG is very enthused about disarming citizens, having been the DA in San Francisco and a prime mover of the city's sanctuary policy to keep illegals from being deported, regardless of what they did criminally in CA. I suspect she would find SB249 tasty.

IIRC, Brown was supportive of Heller and the individual right in the brief he filed as AG.

Not everything in CA is nuts. While we have no castle-doctrine, the presumption of the law is that someone breaking into your abode, which could be a hotel room, is there to harm you. You have no duty to retreat and may use deadly force without much criminal exposure.

You will face a civil suit for wrongful death even if acquitted on a criminal charge, which is a bone to feed the lawyer community and transfer wealth to families of criminals.

Brown has too little political capital, I think, to take a hard line with the nutcases in the Legislature on firearms. He made a mild proposal early this year to reform public employee pension rules, which sank immediately from sight without response by the leaders of his own party, both of whom are ex-union employees.

I don't expect much, if any, sanity from Brown. He has even quit trying to paint himself as a maverick and free-thinker, which he rarely was, anyway. He bleats about sharp spending cuts but actual general fund expenditures on his budget are increasing 7%. Another hack pol fretting about his legacy and keeping Democrats in power. I hope lives long enough to see his pension from CA dry up for lack of funds.