California Democrats Propose Strictest Gun Regulations In The Nation

[Seawytch]

California lawmakers are likely thinking they can pass any law they like, constitutional or not.

Their experience violating federal law with medical marijuana has mostly been successful. If they can ignore the federal government on one law, it is more than likely the thinking that they can violate any federal law.

How'd that work out for Washington, DC?

Let it work its way through to the SCOTUS. That's our system and it works pretty well.

 

[OODA_Loop]

So, I won't be able to buy one of these, but I can keep the one I have, right?

I may want one in the future or my soon to be of age son my want to by one of his own.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

By Zack Beauchamp

Thursday afternoon, a group of California Senate Democrats rolled out a legislative package that would create what would likely be the tightest gun regulation system in the nation, ranging from sweeping prohibitions on semi-automatic rifles to restrictions on guns in the home. The proposal consists of ten points:

1. Ban all semi-automatic rifles that accept detachable magazines.

2. Ban possession of high-capacity magazines.

3. Ban “bullet button” conversion kits.

4. Bans shotgun-rifle combinations.

5. Universal registration of all guns.

6. Background checks on ammunition.

7. Regulating gun loans.

8. Prevent prohibited individuals from living in homes with guns.

9. Cracking down on people who can’t own guns legally but do anyway.

10. Required safety training for handgun owners.

DETAILS: California Democrats Propose Strictest Gun Regulations In The Nation | ThinkProgress

Which came first gun confiscation or gun registration?

 

[slackjawed]

California lawmakers are likely thinking they can pass any law they like, constitutional or not.

Their experience violating federal law with medical marijuana has mostly been successful. If they can ignore the federal government on one law, it is more than likely the thinking that they can violate any federal law.

How'd that work out for Washington, DC?

Let it work its way through to the SCOTUS. That's our system and it works pretty well.

I agree, that is our system. However the SCOTUS decides will be accepted. Got a link to any pending case before the SCOTUS on this issue?


ya, didn't think so.......

 

[Seawytch]

So, I won't be able to buy one of these, but I can keep the one I have, right?

I may want one in the future or my soon to be of age son my want to by one of his own.

Then you'll have to do it in another state if this legislation passes. I'll let you come shoot mine if you're in CA. I've got my own range.

 

[Seawytch]

California lawmakers are likely thinking they can pass any law they like, constitutional or not.

Their experience violating federal law with medical marijuana has mostly been successful. If they can ignore the federal government on one law, it is more than likely the thinking that they can violate any federal law.

How'd that work out for Washington, DC?

Let it work its way through to the SCOTUS. That's our system and it works pretty well.

I agree, that is our system. However the SCOTUS decides will be accepted. Got a link to any pending case before the SCOTUS on this issue?


ya, didn't think so.......

Um...it's not Minority Report SCOTUS. The legislation has to pass and be challenged first. Doesn't anyone watch Schoolhouse Rock anymore?

 

[OODA_Loop]

So, I won't be able to buy one of these, but I can keep the one I have, right?

I may want one in the future or my soon to be of age son my want to by one of his own.

Then you'll have to do it in another state if this legislation passes. I'll let you come shoot mine if you're in CA. I've got my own range.

Not Constitutional see: Incorportation of Heller to the states in McDonald v Chicago. Semi-auto rilfes are in common use.

 

[Papawx3]

So, I won't be able to buy one of these,

but I can keep the one I have, right?

And I can't buy one of these:

But then again, I already have one, so why would I need another?

 

[Harry Dresden]

why is it everything California does is hilarious

i am still laughing about this stupid plastic Grocery bag ban that they are trying to spread State wide.....the people who put it together said that THESE bags are filling up the landfills.....are they serious?.....have they ever been to a land fill?....those bags are NOT the bags filling them up.....Trash bags are....yet no call for a ban on those.....i wonder why?....

 

[slackjawed]

How'd that work out for Washington, DC?

Let it work its way through to the SCOTUS. That's our system and it works pretty well.

I agree, that is our system. However the SCOTUS decides will be accepted. Got a link to any pending case before the SCOTUS on this issue?


ya, didn't think so.......

Um...it's not Minority Report SCOTUS. The legislation has to pass and be challenged first. Doesn't anyone watch Schoolhouse Rock anymore?

California has passed a medical marijuana law, it has been challenged. Thus far the SCOTUS has not accepted any case regarding this. Why? My guess is lack of merit.

Don't get me wrong, I love to smoke a bud. I would love to see it legal. I only bring it up to point out that when a state, or a group of people are enabled to violate one federal law, they will then assume and feel free to violate others.

The right way to go about any of this is to change the law in some honest way, not a backdoor method under the guise of compassion, and not electing so-called leaders to send to DC to tell the rest of us that "we must pass the law to see what's in it".

My point is quite simple, when a state is allowed to break one federal law they will push and push to break more.

Schoolhouse rock? I must say that appears to be where the state assembly members in California got their education on government......

 

[Seawytch]

I may want one in the future or my soon to be of age son my want to by one of his own.

Then you'll have to do it in another state if this legislation passes. I'll let you come shoot mine if you're in CA. I've got my own range.

Not Constitutional see: Incorportation of Heller to the states in McDonald v Chicago. Semi-auto rilfes are in common use.

It will have to be ruled on once the legislation passes...if it does.

 

[Seawytch]

I agree, that is our system. However the SCOTUS decides will be accepted. Got a link to any pending case before the SCOTUS on this issue?


ya, didn't think so.......

Um...it's not Minority Report SCOTUS. The legislation has to pass and be challenged first. Doesn't anyone watch Schoolhouse Rock anymore?

California has passed a medical marijuana law, it has been challenged. Thus far the SCOTUS has not accepted any case regarding this. Why? My guess is lack of merit.

Don't get me wrong, I love to smoke a bud. I would love to see it legal. I only bring it up to point out that when a state, or a group of people are enabled to violate one federal law, they will then assume and feel free to violate others.

The right way to go about any of this is to change the law in some honest way, not a backdoor method under the guise of compassion, and not electing so-called leaders to send to DC to tell the rest of us that "we must pass the law to see what's in it".

My point is quite simple, when a state is allowed to break one federal law they will push and push to break more.

Schoolhouse rock? I must say that appears to be where the state assembly members in California got their education on government......

Lack of merit and political will for MJ. That would not be the case for this.

 

[OODA_Loop]

What is the release / recidivism rate for violent offenders in California ?

Bet it is up there.

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

States are free to enact their own gun-control laws - so long as they meet the minimum federal standards.

Ain't states' rights and the Tenth Amendment great. The Tenthers should be elated.

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."​

Why, when California also has "sanctuary cities" that harbor illegals from I.C.E. and can't even abide by current minimum Federal immigration laws?

 

[The Rabbi]

The Left is into "states rights" when it means giving the finger to the rest of the country, or even their own voters, as CA's experience with gay marriage shows. They're not so much about it when states disagree with the liberal agenda.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

States' rights in U.S. politics refers to political powers reserved for the U.S. state governments rather than the federal government according to the Tenth Amendment.

States' rights - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So you agree Roe v Wade should be overturned, right Spamahontas?

 

[RoadVirus]

By Zack Beauchamp

Thursday afternoon, a group of California Senate Democrats rolled out a legislative package that would create what would likely be the tightest gun regulation system in the nation, ranging from sweeping prohibitions on semi-automatic rifles to restrictions on guns in the home. The proposal consists of ten points:

1. Ban all semi-automatic rifles that accept detachable magazines.

2. Ban possession of high-capacity magazines.

3. Ban “bullet button” conversion kits.

4. Bans shotgun-rifle combinations.

5. Universal registration of all guns.

6. Background checks on ammunition.

7. Regulating gun loans.

8. Prevent prohibited individuals from living in homes with guns.

9. Cracking down on people who can’t own guns legally but do anyway.

10. Required safety training for handgun owners.

DETAILS: California Democrats Propose Strictest Gun Regulations In The Nation | ThinkProgress

Wow

These California Dumbos must feel very secure in their jobs if they think they can get away with proposing such radical anti-gun laws.

 

[Spoonman]

when will this insanity ever end? and how far will we alow them to continue to trample our rights

 

[Spoonman]

By Zack Beauchamp

Thursday afternoon, a group of California Senate Democrats rolled out a legislative package that would create what would likely be the tightest gun regulation system in the nation, ranging from sweeping prohibitions on semi-automatic rifles to restrictions on guns in the home. The proposal consists of ten points:

1. Ban all semi-automatic rifles that accept detachable magazines.

2. Ban possession of high-capacity magazines.

3. Ban “bullet button” conversion kits.

4. Bans shotgun-rifle combinations.

5. Universal registration of all guns.

6. Background checks on ammunition.

7. Regulating gun loans.

8. Prevent prohibited individuals from living in homes with guns.

9. Cracking down on people who can’t own guns legally but do anyway.

10. Required safety training for handgun owners.

DETAILS: California Democrats Propose Strictest Gun Regulations In The Nation | ThinkProgress

Wow

These California Dumbos must feel very secure in their jobs if they think they can get away with proposing such radical anti-gun laws.

unfortuantely they do. they know partisan liberals will vote for them no matter what they propose. califonia and NY are heavily democratic states

 

[UKRider]

States' rights in U.S. politics refers to political powers reserved for the U.S. state governments rather than the federal government according to the Tenth Amendment.

States' rights - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

California is a good testing ground. I'm interested in the longer term statistics when they occur. Still, they're simply in the proposal stages and there'll be a wait until any legislation gets passed and enforced.

Then it will take years for the statistics to be usable. These are interesting times we live in though I suppose they all were.