@#$%^&* bogus California handgun law

[gudel]

i notice it's the people who are not from cali that are more vocal about this, how about leave it alone?

but to natedog, no biggie, just get it, $25+tax, get it done with, good for 5 years, so about $5 per year. easy test, virtually anyone can pass it. and where you at natedog?

 

[larryw]

Yes, its also sad that the "moderators" seem to be taking point in the divisive nature of this thread.

Divide and conquer. Sarah Brady would be proud.

 

[Tamara]

larryw,

Yeah, gosh, I said that California gunlaws are silly, and much worse than most of the rest of the US.

Was I wrong?

I didn't say "leave".

I didn't say "California gun owners are hosers".

I just said "Let's not pretend the situation there is okay".

Everyone's fond of saying "As California goes, so goes the rest of the nation". Well, I ain't going that way. (...and I'd be lying if I said that it doesn't disturb me just a little to see California gun owners saying "Well, these laws aren't too bad. I mean, who really needs private sales or magazines that hold more than ten rounds or AR-15s, anyway?" )

 

[gudel]

i think i got something for the original poster, i quote from cali firearms law:

It is unlawful for a person who is not a licensed firearms dealer pursuant to Penal Code section 12071, to sell, loan, or otherwise transfer a firearm to a non-licensed person unless the sale, loan, or transfer is completed through a licensed firearms dealer or law
enforcement agency. (Penal Code §§ 12071, 12072, 12082, 12084.)

exceptions:
The dealer licensing and reporting requirements do not apply to the loan of any firearm in the following instances:
Loans of a firearm for the purpose of shooting at targets on the premises of a target
facility if the firearm is kept within the premises of the target facility at all times. (Penal Code § 12078(h).)

tell that range to read that section!

 

[Airwolf]

Sorry gudel,

That section covers the dealer licensing not the HSC. It's saying that a range that rents guns doesn't need an FFL and all the state issued BS just to do that.

It's still a gray area as far as I can see since the HSC law says "loan" unless a rental is considered a loan in legal terms.

 

[461]

Ok, I took my ball and stomped off, now I'm back and we can get back to this thing.

Apologize if I got a bit too offended, I just took the response to my original comment a little hard.

That said, my original posting hit this thing on the head. My biggest problems have been because the dealers didn't understand the laws. Clearly that is what happened with this range owner. I truly feel that if you're going to be a dealer then you must take the time to know your business.

As a small business owner myself I feel an obligation to not only know my products but to know about the legalities involved. I don't want this to be taken as a bash against the dealers, but some of them are spreading misinformation and blaming it on teh state. While the state is no angel, everyone deserves the truth.

Heck, let's just go shootin'

 

[Airwolf]

461 I agree totally.

Problem is if you do a search here, on TFL or on most any firearms related site you'll find that a common thread is that a LOT of gun dealers, shop owners and salespeople not only don't know very much about guns and gun laws, but they tend to be fountains of disinformation as well.

I've seen threads where people have contacted Cal DOJ regarding firearms questions only to have the government drone on the phone read the law back to them, offering no help as to its interpretation. When the agencies that supposedly are responsible for interpreting and enforcing the laws can't (or won't) do anything but be parrots it doesn't bode well for everyone else effected by this.

One more step toward having to have a lawyer on retainer and speed dial in order to even function in the day-to-day world.

 

[Byron Quick]

Divisive? Moi?

I didn't tell anyone to leave California. I did state that I won't go there as I keep firearms in my immediate possession that are, I believe, felonies in California. I have no intention of changing my habits just to visit California. There are a number of states that I will not visit for the same reason.

Nor was the hope that y'all will one day kick out the bums in Sacremento an implication that California is not a part of the US. Rather, it was acknowledgement of the federal system we have. There is only one way that gunowners outside of California can affect California law. Electing a Congress that passes federal law that the Second Amendment means what it says and, yes, that it applies to California. I personally believe that it is more likely that y'all can do it on a state level before it will happen on a national level.

But, guys, admit it. The California legislature is a snake pit that is rapidly ruining a wonderful state

 

[Serpico]

Byron's post got me thinking..now I'm curious...how many people won't visit a state simply because you can't carry there? Does that also pertain to world travel? Would anyone miss touring a beautiful country like Italy or Greece because you can't carry a firearm?

 

[Tamara]

Serpico,

how many people won't visit a state simply because you can't carry there?

I am unaware of any place I can't carry, although I understand that there are places I may not. I also understand that there are metal detectors at airports.

I have done a fair amount of air travel in the past, but for the forseeable future, as long as air travel requires me to submit myself to a host of indignities, it looks like I won't be going anyplace I can't drive. Seeing beautiful and historic Italy and Greece is simply not worth it if the entrance fee is a cavity search.

 

[Don Gwinn]

461, I did not post that you had said anything about illegal activity. I apologize if I gave the impression that such was something you mentioned, rather than a point I brought up with no prompting from you. I was simply asking a question. You stated that as an honest man, you can get everything you want. That has to mean one of two things:

A. Honest people can get whatever guns they want in California. Clearly this is not possible through legal means, so you'd have to be buying guns illegally.

B. You don't consider an AR15, an SKS, the "wrong" handgun or full-cap mags to be something an "honest man" would want.

I was simply asking which one. If neither is true, then please explain what is.


Perhaps I'm not as patient as I should be. I live in Illinois, and I'm just about fed up with being told not to worry by the antigun side (because the upcoming ban won't affect my hunting shotgun) and that the sky is falling by the other side (but ONLY because they claim hunting shotguns would be banned--not because I'll be a felon for having an AR-15 in the cabinet.)

Frankly, I don't think it's any more divisive for me to say that California's laws suck and do affect "honest men" than it is for you to say that California's laws suck but they don't affect "honest men." If one side of the argument can be advanced, surely so can the other?

 

[larryw]

CA's handgun laws are awful (not my choice in words, but I'd hate to have THR's Grandma pop a gasket). I'm the first to admit that. And there are many of us who are working on it.

Perhaps, like Don I lack the patience I need. But then, I'm sick and tired of frequent quotes like, "I won't be setting a foot in California. Until y'all free your state, you're welcome to its 'benefits.'"

I've spent time in most states in this nation. I have yet to find one that offers my family the same quality of life and economic opportunity. Gun laws can be changed, and a shift in power is underway. (Its fun watching the Liberals destroy their power base, I can only shake my head at their stupidity.)

Unless you can walk into your gun store and buy a weapon without having to fill in a federal form "like a couple that wants to get married" or pick up an M-60 at Wal-Mart, you also are having your Second Amendment rights violated. Lemme guess, you don't want a new Ma Deuce? Does the level of the violation matter? Can one be only slightly oppressed? Or less dead?

CA's recent administration has been terrible, but lest we need to be reminded of the origin of Gore and Daly and Carter, we're not alone there (Feinstein, Boxer, Peolsi, etc... ). All are a perfect example of why this nation is a republic and not a democracy. And I keep reminding myself of Ronald Reagan's home state.

I suddenly have the urge to send some lead down range. After that, I'm going to full my gun-o-the-month quota with a new SW360 (Tamara, I'm part of the 30,000, and I vote). Nice living in a place where I can do that at my pleasure.

Apologies if I ruffled any feathers, but my sentiment remains.

Larry

 

[krept]

I grew up in SoCal and was al local at Oceanside and Camp Pendleton beaches for the 10 years or so that I was into surfing/bodyboarding (got to compete - NSSA and CSA, got my name in some mags). The beaches are good (especially places like Lower Trestles, Salt Creek, Seaside Reef, etc.) but they aren't that great. Of course as you know if you are into surfing... the better the peak, the bigger the crowd and the bigger the crowd the more aggressive the vibe and more of a hassle catching a good (not great) wave becomes.

If you are talking about the women, many many college campuses have great hotties that are far more approachable and much less superficial than the gals that spend hours on the sand. I never went to the beach with the intention of laying on the sand anyhow.

I also got to visit Julian and Palomar Mountain and the mountain (Kaye Springs?) on Pendleton that has native heards of buffalo. Got to stay in the dorms at SDSU, helped throw undergrounds in San Diego and met many interesting people and saw a lot of cool secret places along the way.

I moved about 6 years ago to Arizona to be with my fiancee. I still miss the beach. My mother and sister live in SoCal and I visit them every year and have seen how everything has changed. And how the population has expanded and expanded and expanded. How the housing market and prices in general have gone through the roof.

Guns are just things, just tools. But RIGHTS... like the right to defend your home instead of running away from it... the right to CCW, open carry, etc. etc. ARE important to me. I didn't move from CA to get away from these issues, but I will probably not move back because of them.

I absolutely know the pleasures that California has to offer and I can honestly say... nice place to visit... but I'm not too sure I'd want to live there again.

Other people's opinions don't really matter as long as you are happy with what you have and the way things are going. I have found that I can be happy in pretty much any climate weather-wise as long as I don't feel my rights are being stepped on.

cheers... sorry if my ramble was too off topic

 

[hops]

If one 'strictly' interpets the screwball law then yes, you can't rent or loan a hand gun to another party. I actually joked about it to my best friend that when I visted the PRK and went shooting with him, borrowing his .357 mag to shoot.

I lived / grew up (from my teens) in the PRK for 20 years. PRK's hot blondes are so overated. Most of them are phoney's anyway. Gimme a blue-eyed brunette with brains any day (was married to one once). I do miss the PRK's landscape, but housing is not afforable. To move back from where I'm now would require at least a 55 pct salary increase to afford the same house in somewhat the same location. Never mind the guns I'd have to sell.

 

[Al Thompson]

Not to forget that any place that won't let me sell a firearm with out going through a dealer bugs me greatly.

 

[461]

Don Gwinn-

Please don't get me wrong, I never meant for someone to think that I felt honest men didn't need AR's or SKS's. I've just not had the desire for one. The way I meant it was that I haven't been turned down for anything I've wanted because I'm clean. I've had some friends who have been turned down due to past "indiscretions"

I firmly believe that any small arms no matter the rate of fire or quantity in the mag should be attainable by any citizen of this country for any purpose they see fit so long as I have the right to also defend myself as I see fit.

 

[Serpico]

"I firmly believe that any small arms no matter the rate of fire or quantity in the mag should be attainable by any citizen of this country for any purpose they see fit so long as I have the right to also defend myself as I see fit."

Any citizen? Are you saying that anyone should be able to buy whatever they want because you can defend yourself? What about those people who can't?

As long as our society continues to get crazier and more violent, we will see increased regulations.....if people started running each other down on the street with their cars, you'd eventually see a 2 week waiting period for a Pontiac also.....

I'm for gun rights, but when rights get abused, they do get taken away....I learned that in kindegarten.....

 

[Tamara]

Serpico,

I'm for gun rights, but when rights get abused, they do get taken away....I learned that in kindegarten.....

'Splain to me, please, why somebody else abusing their rights should result in my rights being denied?

(PS: I gradjumicated from kindergarten some time ago; I expect to play by grownup rules now... )

 

[Serpico]

I'm not for the gungrabbers....just explaining that restictions come based on actions...most states with lax gun laws don't need them...so those of you who live in them are lucky...if Arizona had the kindof gun violence we have in CA, I doubt they would hand out CCW permits for 90 bucks and a 3 hour class..ironic that the states you really need a gun in are the toughest to get them in...I can carry a handgun in CA but my rights are being abused by not being able to own a 30 round AR which I would love to have for some serious plinking...but how do you safeguard a populace against those that don't find shooting cans enough? If we could identify the wackos before hand like in Minority Report we might be okay, but in the mean time. what do we do with disgruntled worlers who decide to shoot up their office or some sicko with his sights on a school yard? Sadly, as gun owners we are seen as a group and therefore, anyone who uses a gun is in our club...whether for good or bad...

 

[Fair 'n Square]

IMHO, the REASON Arizona doesn't have the problems California has is because their rights aren't as curtailed. I mean, Phoenix isn't what you would call a little village. Yet the Arizona legislature doesn't see fit to perform gun-ectomies on their populace.

 

[hondo68]

Rights can not be "taken away", only infringed by illegitimate so called "laws" and governments.

The word "small" does NOT precede "arms" in the Second Amendment. The Constitution does GRANT congress the power to restrict the military's arms. However, "the RIGHT of THE PEOPLE to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED".

 

[railroader]

Serpico, I have one question. I see that you are posting from Los Angeles. How is it that you are able to carry? I am also from southern california and from everything I have heard obtaining a permit in Los Angeles is impossible. Mark

 

[Serpico]

you are correct, but I am a reserve deputy sheriff...

 

[krept]

• And speaking of quality of life, a new comparative report on crime ought to give Phoenix leaders the willies.

Sperling's Best Places uses FBI uniform crime statistics to compare cities. San Diego is a useful sister city for Phoenix, being of similar size and (until recently) having a similarly narrow economic base of tourism and real estate.

Phoenix suffered 750 violent crimes per 100,000 population. San Diego showed 566, closer to the national average. In terms of property crimes, Phoenix had 6,746 and San Diego, 3,096. Phoenix also had three times as many murders.

This was from the Arizona Republic's 3/20/03 edition and is a good example of citizen on citizen violence.

A police officer in Phoenix is more likely to get attacked by a suspect than in any other of the nation's 10 largest cities, and also is more likely to shoot and kill.


From 1996 to 2000, Phoenix police killed an average of 3.33 people per 1,000 officers, making them more than 2 1/2 times as likely to use deadly force than officers in bigger cities like Los Angeles and New York, according an Arizona Republic analysis.

In the same period, an annual average of 32 out of every 100 officers were assaulted. Nearly 800 Phoenix officers were assaulted last year. Police shot one in six people who confronted them with guns, knives or other dangerous weapons.

source here This is a good example of gangbanger-type violence against LEOs.

Again, these studies may be flawed statistically and LA may be a lot worse... but... this is clearly enough fodder for motivated individuals in Arizona to use to take our rights away (or more correctly infringe upon them as stated above). The difference is that the State recognizes and supports our RKBA, something I believe California wants to restrict.

 

[dvnv]

Serpico:

Do you really believe the gun laws in CA prevent the kind of crime you are talking about?

I don't see how taking a 10 minute test before buying a handgun has much positive effect. I also don't see the point of the "drop test"...IMO, all it does is make it next to impossible to purchase some of those really good old S&Ws, Colts, High Standards, etc...

If I were around some "wacko" who started shooting people, I would be praying that someone nearby was carrying and could put a quick end to it. Not too likely in CA, specially in the county I live in, but I would still be hoping for it...dvnv