California gov't seizes 500 legal ARs

[R.H. Lee]

As a group, when do you realize a cause is lost and cut and run? Should we (gunowners) spend all our capital and resources trying to change a system/mindset in KA that doesn't want to be changed? Supporting court cases for blantant violation of the law--sure. That's easy. But how much do we invest beyond that?

That's like saying the victim is responsible for the crime. eh, don't look now, but there is such thing as federal anti-firearms legislation, remember? It's coming to your state along with the next Democrat congress and President.

 

[crazed_ss]

So how hard is it to enforce an assault weapons ban?

Well, all that has to happen is a LEO sees you shooting a detachable mag AR-15 at the range. Things could quickly go downhill from there if it's not a legal "assault weapon"

The thing is most legal gun owners are law-abiding citizens. I'm not gonna risk 10 years in prison to own an detachable mag AR-15 rifle. Not worth it IMO. I'd rather cheap out and get a SU-16 or put myself in the poorhouse and get a M1A SOCOM. Both options are better than prison.

The FFL in this case really messed up. When it comes to gun laws, it's our responsibility to make sure we're on top of them. Even if we dont agree, we need to follow them until they can be changed through proper legal channels. If we break the law, it just gives the Antis massive firepower against us because then we cant say .. "It's the criminals who are breaking gun laws, not us!"

 

[ScottS]

That's like saying the victim is responsible for the crime. eh, don't look now, but there is such thing as federal anti-firearms legislation, remember? It's coming to your state along with the next Democrat congress and President.

I'm not sure how this is liking blaming the victim (??), but you and I seem to be in agreement here: don't deplete the warchest on battles you can't win, and instead spend it wisely on Federal elections where your influence can make a real difference. I agree.

 

[ElTacoGrande]

So how hard is it to enforce an assault weapons ban?

If someone's goal is to be in violation of the ban and not get caught, it's absolutely easy. Buy a semi-auto that's not banned. Buy a pistol grip for it. Put the pistol grip on and leave it on the closet. If law enforcement attention is anticipated, remove the pistol grip and everything is fine. If law enforcement somehow catches the rifle in the act of being an AW (AW in flagranto) then they could prosecute. But I somehow doubt that they would really want to prosecute a plain and simple AWB possession case.

The ban really achieves nothing. Does nothing to criminals who aren't allowed to touch guns anyway. Does nothing to otherwise law-abiding people who want to own something in an illegal configuration and keep it in their closet. It does prevent law-abiding people from toting one of them around in a public place, like a shooting range or a competition. That's about it.

 

[Adventurer_96]

I was reassigned to CA last summer and I can definitely see a difference in the perception of firearms between here and Utah and Arizona, which were the other states in which I'd been stationed recently. It was tolerated, if not encouraged, on a certain level in both states, but here in CA even in relatively rural Kern county the perception of gun ownership isn't really all that positive. I wonder at times if this is because even shooters have been forced to live under these crazy laws for so long that they're just willing to deal with them and never hope for more, or if it's just a general belief that what CA legislates must be right. I don't think it's the latter as most CA residents are fed up with the crazy legislation on many different fronts.

I don't necessarily believe that the "As goes CA goes the rest of the country" is the real answer. Instead, I believe it to be a factor of urbanization and population density. If you look at areas with very restrictive gun ownership, they tend to be urban plain and simple. While CA may have given us (nationwide) some gems like an AW ban, magazine limit, and waiting period, you can also see these in most other heavily urbanized states.

Take away a recreational shooting base by building up on all the land and this is what you get.

I think it may come down to the fact that the DOJ is going to hold on to the receivers as "evidence" in their pending case. If not, then you gave them a hell of an idea if they read this, Scott.

This whole "CA AR" business over the last few months has shown that there are a lot of people in CA who were interested in getting a receiver for a build of some sort - one source estimated over 5,000 receivers entering the state since the end of December over on arfcom. Is there a shooting base here still? Yes, in some areas, but go to almost any organized shoot and the vast majority of shooters are overweight middle aged white males. Is this helping to broaden the base and potentially let us work against this perception that gun ownership = Dale Gribble?

Let's hope that the DOJ's interpretation of CA law is proven to be wrong in the courts.

 

[fight4yourrights]

.gov doesn't really care that much about it's "laws"


It's "keeping these kid killers off the street" :banghead:

 

[gunsmith]

enforced?

I don't know about SoCal but in NorCal the ban is ignored, at just about every range you see sport utility rifles afaik you don't need to carry proof of registration. mass civil disobedience in NorCal.
besides you can but a ruger ranch rifle and a nifty pistol grip stock and your breaking any law until you attach it....

 

[ScottS]

I think it may come down to the fact that the DOJ is going to hold on to the receivers as "evidence" in their pending case. If not, then you gave them a hell of an idea if they read this, Scott.

Oh, yeah, Pete, the DOJ has to read my THR response to get their ideas for confiscation.

BTW, I still don't think the AWB or mag limit "came East" from KA. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but in those states that kept AWB's after the national one sunsetted, withthe exception of some "named bad weapons," aren't they in essence mirrors of the '94 AWB, and not KA's? (i.e. no registration of AW's, pre-bans allowed, 2 evil features vice 1, etc?) And, help me out here: where else do they have a 10-day waiting period for all weapons?

Interesting observation on the "mindset" behind enemy lines. I lived in KA back before the 89 AWB, back before "Purdy," back when B&B Guns was the storefront for BumbleBee guns wholesaler, and you could buy anything you wanted and leave the same day. Sigh...

 

[ElTacoGrande]

DoJ reading the forum here

Oh, yeah, Pete, the DOJ has to read my THR response to get their ideas for confiscation.

I'm pretty sure the DoJ does read these boards. I'm guessing that may be how they found out about the AR-15 group buy that is the subject of this thread.

Anyone from the DoJ reading this, why aren't you out solving unsolved murders, or doing something to make California safer, instead of wasting time listening to us complain about firearms technical laws that we all know have nothing to do with crime or safety or even real justice?

 

[Merkin.Muffley]

While it is convenient to blame the NRA here, California has several large state organizations and plenty of gun owners to fund state groups. At the end of the day the problem is that most Californians either want that legislation or don't care enough to fight it. Until that problem is addressed, gun owners will continue to be the red-headed stepchild in California.

Yes, but the NRA is the 800 lb gorilla in this fight. I firmly believe they view California as nothing more than a cash cow for their fund raising efforts.

 

[ScottS]

I'm pretty sure the DoJ does read these boards. I'm guessing that may be how they found out about the AR-15 group buy that is the subject of this thread.

Calguns.net, I'll bet. I was amazed at the amount and detail of the information on the "group buy" there.

 

[SIGarmed]

When you're not doing anything illegal there is no reason to hide. The site is also helpfull in keeping people up on current events.

Calguns.net, I'll bet. I was amazed at the amount and detail of the information on the "group buy" there.

 

[ScottS]

When you're not doing anything illegal there is no reason to hide. The site is also helpfull in keeping people up on current events.

Dude, I didn't say they were doing anything illegal. We were just speculating on where the DOJ would get the most info.

 

[ElTacoGrande]

When you're not doing anything illegal there is no reason to hide. The site is also helpfull in keeping people up on current events.

Yeah, I'm just saying they read these forums. I don't see anything illegal or gray-area ever being discussed here or on calguns. I see mostly news, complaining (which I participate in myself), strategizing, motivating each other, etc.

But I'm sure the DoJ reads this stuff and decides who they are going to harass, etc. In fact Jim March talked about incidents where a sheriff's office denied a CCW permit in CA based on something posted in one of these forums, etc. Definitely this stuff is being read by various "authorities". Fine, we're not talking about anything illegal (including gray areas or code words), but in areas where they can harass or discriminate, such as CCW issuance, handling of FFLs, and any other discretionary areas, we do need to be careful to not give details and not bring their attention. Whenever someone starts a thread like "How do I get my CA CCW" Jim immediately posts in all-caps "do not say which county you are applying to, or this posting could jeopordize that." So obviously this forum is being read by a lot of different "lurkers" and it does have real-world effects. Hence I'm not using my real name or giving my real exact location.

 

[WvaBill]

We have more gun owners than any other state (I assume).

In that case, how can I affect the laws in CA when I have no vote?

I remember when the special muzzle-loading season for deer was starting in the section of the US. Hunters in some states endured some, to me, onerous laws: specific firing mechanisms, ball ammo only, and so on. Instead of debating this, we accepted what our individual states offered instead of fighting about whether in-line muzzle loaders or Minie balls were "pure enough."

In that vein, to change the attitudes of CA non-gunowners, it will take effort on the grassroots in the state. No one wants an 800 lb gorilla coming in to tell them what to think, vote, or do. We seem to get the government we collectively deserve.

 

[crazed_ss]

I think education of the masses might help us here.

I dont know how many people I've talked to who think the CA "Assault Weapons" ban keeps people from owning full auto AK's. They think the AW ban has to do with full auto rifle that they see in movies.

After explaining the restrictions placed on automatic weapons and the difference between semi-auto and full auto fire, they begin to see things clearly..

When I point out to them that semi-auto rifles like M1A's and SU-16's are perfectly legal, they instantly change their tone and say .. "Wow, that is a stupid law.. so that one, the AR-15, is illegal because of the grip? .. that doesnt make much sense."

 

[R.H. Lee]

I firmly believe they view California as nothing more than a cash cow for their fund raising efforts.

I wonder how much of the NRA's total revenue comes out of California? Whatever it is, it doesn't seem like we're getting much bang for the buck.

 

[ElTacoGrande]

I wonder how much of the NRA's total revenue comes out of California? Whatever it is, it doesn't seem like we're getting much bang for the buck.

Exactly. I know a lot of CA gun owners want to support the NRA but feel let down by them. They have no presence here. I would join and support them if I saw them doing something useful in my state.

We do have alternatives: CalGuns or whatever, which does some stuff, and Gun Onwers of CA, which also does some stuff but seems to be more ideological and less pragmatic than the NRA.

If the NRA can go over to Brazil and help them, they should be doing more for us here in CA.

 

[Jim Diver]

If the NRA won't help PRK members in fixing the state's const, they sure as hell will not help 500 people get lowers....

:banghead:

 

[No_Brakes23]

Agree. The only people who believe this are people in KA trying to rationalize what's happening to their state.

Clearly, it's a tough call, but I'm not sure how much of my NRA dues I want spent on saving what is clearly a lost cause (KA). I'd rather use the war chest to fight on the National level, and on the state level in battles we can win. Pumping NRA money into KA to somehow make the citizens "see the light" and repeal AWB legislation already on the books is pouring money into a black hole, IMO. With limited resources, you have to decide at some point where you get the most BANG for your buck (pun intended).

As long as this attitude prevails, the NRA ain't gettin a dime from me, even after I leave Cali.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Yes, but the NRA is the 800 lb gorilla in this fight. I firmly believe they view California as nothing more than a cash cow for their fund raising efforts.

It isn't like the NRA has just abandoned California. They have been fighting in California for years, and getting their teeth kicked in for years as well.

I think gun owners in California have every right not to support the NRA if it isn't performing for them; but I really don't look at the NRA as a state-level organization. Here in Texas, I support TSRA to protect my rights at the state capitol and send money to the NRA to protect my rights at the national level.

I think that regardless of whether the NRA is or is not helping, California first has to strengthen its grassroots state-level groups. In California, you aren't just fighting a legislative battle, you are fighting a cultural battle against people who want to remove firearms from the culture entirely. Educating your neighbors and friends on guns is the only way Californians are going to change this trend.

 

[crazed_ss]

In California, you aren't just fighting a legislative battle, you are fighting a cultural battle against people who want to remove firearms from the culture entirely. Educating your neighbors and friends on guns is the only way Californians are going to change this trend

Exactly!

Regardless of how powerful the NRA lawyers are, they will not be able to help us here if the majority of the populace supports ridiculous gun laws like the Assault Weapons ban or the San Francisco Handgun ban. More effort needs to be invested in educating Californians

 

[WvaBill]

Exactly!

Regardless of how powerful the NRA lawyers are, they will not be able to help us here if the majority of the populace supports ridiculous gun laws like the Assault Weapons ban or the San Francisco Handgun ban. More effort needs to be invested in educating Californians

Speaking of the SF Ban, who is the petitioner in the hearing to be held on the 15th?

 

[CentralTexas]

When you're not doing anything illegal there is no reason to hide.QUOTE]

1- Opens you up to Governmental abuse, see "first post" thread starter
2- Then you wouldn't mind all your calls, mail and home being searched by me or local police "just for fun"?

CT

 

[crazed_ss]

Speaking of the SF Ban, who is the petitioner in the hearing to be held on the 15th?

I havent really been following the case. I know the city and NRA worked out a "deal" to delay enforcement.