2013 America (and Friends!) Gun Violence Thread No Plows Allowed!

[Ghost_Wheel22]

What sort of confiscation are you worried about - firearms or registration - and in what way would that occur?

National confiscation that would use the registry list to enforce it. California's latest gun control laws will be an interesting test of this when they take effect.

[dasva]

National confiscation that would use the registry list to enforce it. California's latest gun control laws will be an interesting test of this when they take effect.

Wait I hadn't heard about this. What's up with California's newest laws?

[Zealot]

"Nothing in this bill shall be construed as permitting the seizure of weapons for any reason." Simple as that.

Guns could still be taken for other existing reasons, but simply having one on the registry would never be grounds.

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

[archibaldcrane]

Also the second amendment still exists so

[Andalusian girls]

Wait I hadn't heard about this. What's up with California's newest laws?

Moonbeam and the state legislature did this following the San Bernadino massacre

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-p...htmlstory.html

and then voters overwhelmingly approved the new laws

https://ballotpedia.org/California_P...ine_Ban_(2016)

while i'm not elated about the prospect of sitting around in a gun shop waiting for an ancient computer to clear me every time i buy ammo fears of statewide confiscation are totally detached from reality and as Archibald points out in direct violation of an amendment that is in no danger of being amended.

[dasva]

Also the second amendment still exists so

Not in parts of California. To wit open carry is illegal in most areas. I believe exemptions exist for unincorporated areas that don't have their own laws and permits can be issued to people living out in small counties.

Concealed carry is may issue usually by local sheriff who can deny it on whim and some areas they have effectively said they just wont. Generally requires said Sherriff to make very vague assessments like if you are of good moral character or have good cause to carry... which in some areas is basically if you apply while others they basically have to prove an immediate threat to their life that they couldn't otherwise resolve like say by going to the police <.<. (ie never). Some areas basically only issue to an "in crowd" of celebrities, political elites, campaign donors and personal friends of the sheriff.

Needless to say you'd think a statewide ban on open carry in most areas combined with an effective concealed carry ban in certain areas would logically be construed as a ban on carrying at all and would be clear violation of the 2nd amendment. And in fact was brought to the 9th circuit which basically just said concealed carry isn't protected by the 2nd amendment and refused to rule in context of open carry laws though I think one of the judges did mention it in his dissent

[archibaldcrane]

It's almost as if a horribly worded amendment from 250 years ago is open to interpretation!

[Ragnus]

Concealed carry is may issue usually by local sheriff who can deny it on whim and some areas they have effectively said they just wont. Generally requires said Sherriff to make very vague assessments like if you are of good moral character or have good cause to carry

Exact same thing here in MA. Doesn't matter if your background check comes back clean, the local police chief can deny your application in it's entirety if he/she decides there's something they don't like about you.

[Zealot]

It's almost as if a horribly worded amendment from 250 years ago is open to interpretation!

Our guiding jurisprudence on the subject is "I like these parts, so the plain language used by the founders here is what it means, I don't like these parts, so the plain language doesn't mean what it seems to."

Rest in peace Scalia, the legal community's most legendary bullshit artist.

[archibaldcrane]

"I don't even see the word militia in the amendment what are you talking about?"

[dasva]

It's almost as if a horribly worded amendment from 250 years ago is open to interpretation!

The interpretation isn't really the issue. On it's own saying concealed carry isn't specifically protected by the 2nd constitution is completely fair. But that's not the issue. The issue is how in this specific case in conjunction with the open carry ban it amounts to a full ban which they blatantly chose ignore and didn't rule on... which also means it's quite likely to be pushed again

[Byrthnoth]

It's almost like individual states have the right to govern themselves.

[dasva]

It's almost like the 10th amendment exists

[Ghost_Wheel22]

Exact same thing here in MA. Doesn't matter if your background check comes back clean, the local police chief can deny your application in it's entirety if he/she decides there's something they don't like about you.

Also known as a "May Issue" state. Many states are "Shall Issue" which basically means if you can pass a 4473 you can obtain a CCL. There are a few states which are "Constitutional Carry" which don't require any permit to OC/CC as long as you can legally possess a firearm.

I've always been kinda confused why people with a CCL are supposed to be scary gun nuts looking for an excuse to kill. I mean, they're not a felon. Not a spouse beater. Not a kiddy diddler. Don't do drugs. Are legal citizens. Aren't dishonorable discharged from the military. Haven't been put in a mental ward. And all confirmed by the state. I mean, can you be as certain with your neighbors and coworkers?

[Zealot]

I only know one guy personally with a CCL; a judge who got one after a guy he put away threatened his daughters.

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

[FNH]

I've had one since I turned 21, and now it allows me to bypass NICS background checks when buying guns. WEEEEEEE!

Thanks "Shall issue" state

[Ghost_Wheel22]

Oregon doesn't let you skip a NICS with a CCL but depending on the wait time you can get pretty lucky. Last pistol I bought went through NICS before I had even finished filling out the 4473. I guess it makes up for the 6 month wait for my LGS to get one in stock.

"Nothing in this bill shall be construed as permitting the seizure of weapons for any reason." Simple as that.

Guns could still be taken for other existing reasons, but simply having one on the registry would never be grounds.

Specifically it would mean the registry information would not be usable for confiscation purposes.

Moot point for me since I lost all my guns in a tragic boating accident.

[FNH]

When they went to the computer system it became pretty instant for the most part.

[Andalusian girls]

The issue is how in this specific case in conjunction with the open carry ban it amounts to a full ban which they blatantly chose ignore and didn't rule on

as a gun-owning Californian who goes hunting and trap shooting multiple times a month let's not be too hyperbolic. being unable to carry in a public space without a permit is not in the same realm as a full ban.

[dasva]

as a gun-owning Californian who goes hunting and trap shooting multiple times a month let's not be too hyperbolic. being unable to carry in a public space without a permit is not in the same realm as a full ban.

Sorry in that snippet I forgot to add the whole in a lot of areas that I had in my main part. Yes you can bring your gun out in unincorporated areas unless they specifically have laws against it. City limits... maybe not