User Panel
Posted: 4/25/2017 1:24:08 PM EDT
This is worthy of National news, certainly it is worthy of posting on the State Hometown Forum.
Lawsuit Filed Against California's Assault Weapons Control Act The Complaint "Desiring to acquire, possess, use, and/or transfer these constitutionally protected firearms for lawful purposes including self-defense, but justifiably fearing prosecution if they do, Plaintiffs respectfully request this Court: (1) declare that California Penal Code sections 30510(a), 30515(a)(1)(A-C), 30515(a)(1)(E-F), 30515(a)(3), 30520, 30600, 30605, 30925, and 30945, along with California Code of Regulations, title 11, section 5499 (“11 C.C.R. 5499”), infringe Plaintiffs’ constitutional rights; and (2) permanently enjoin Defendants from enforcing each of those sections to the extent they prevent law-abiding Californians, like Plaintiffs, from acquiring, possessing, using or transferring constitutionally protected arms." |
|
The NRA waited until the Supreme Court was stacked for the Constitution.
|
|
It's time. What is going on in this State is nothing short of unconstitutional.
If I had my way, I'd ask the presiding judge for an immediate injunction against the enforcement of these laws because of the timing. The issue is constitutionality. The laws' near-term implementation will render moot a lot of the protections eventually affirmed, By then, all the magazines will have been destroyed, rifles will have been modified or moved out of State,... etc. The timing will cause a LOT of punitive damage to gun owners ($1B is my guess). If it is eventually decided in our favor, it will cost another $1B to return to where we were. That is wrong in and of itself. It's like being released from prison after serving the sentence for something you never did. It's like the family being notified the verdict was overturned after the accused has been executed. It may happen all the time in the legal system but here we have fore-knowledge, we know ahead of time. Honestly, these laws are the last straw, in a long chain of straws, for me. If they are not overturned, I'll it will clinch the decision to leave California and I'll be taking my assets with me. |
|
Not holding my breath, all of a sudden the NRA wants to help us?
And when CA thumbs it's nose at the federal government again, who's gonna make them comply? Trump? Yeah, good luck with that. You might want to start packing now, that way you're ready to go. |
|
Quoted:
Not holding my breath, all of a sudden the NRA wants to help us? And when CA thumbs it's nose at the federal government again, who's gonna make them comply? Trump? Yeah, good luck with that. You might want to start packing now, that way you're ready to go. View Quote |
|
Actually, with the handwriting that's already on the wall, we are looking for a place to which we can retire. We're not packed (yet) but we are getting ready to go. We're already mentally set to leave. We feel like we are being pushed out.
|
|
Don't get me wrong, I feel your pain and plan on retiring to another state. But for the time being I'm stuck here like most others.
I just can't stand it when these asshats show up to the party after people are already leaving. I can only imagine how many people and businesses have left CA because of their left wing BS. |
|
Quoted:
Don't get me wrong, I feel your pain and plan on retiring to another state. But for the time being I'm stuck here like most others. I just can't stand it when these asshats show up to the party after people are already leaving. I can only imagine how many people and businesses have left CA because of their left wing BS. View Quote I have a report on that exact issue. It's stored on my computer,... somewhere. |
|
To add to that, it's mostly the good people that are leaving and we're left with all the shit that's just here for the handouts! And more and more come here for that reason. Thank you democrats and liberals for screwing up CA.
At what time are they going to stop and think about who's going to pay for all these cling ons? The middle class... not likely as they'll all be gone soon enough. Let's see if all the illegals and people on SSI or some other income pay for the nanny state's unlimited pile of crap. Maybe more people can get their dope smoking card and that will pay for everything? This state is going down the shitter at an exponential rate and the dems have no one to blame but themselves and the liberals. Oh wait, they'll blame Trump like all the other clueless democrats are doing. That way they don't have to come up with any kind of plan to unfuck CA. |
|
Quoted:
To add to that, it's mostly the good people that are leaving and we're left with all the shit that's just here for the handouts! And more and more come here for that reason. Thank you democrats and liberals for screwing up CA. View Quote The other disturbing fact is that businesses (small and large) are leaving in droves, too. Automotive and aerospace are slowly, quietly relocating elsewhere. I've been through this before, in the north-east. Even as a kid, I noticed my neighbors were selling their houses and relocating out of State - some for employment; others to retire; their kids choose an out-of-State college; all are going elsewhere. It became known as "white flight". It devastated the inner cities (New York, Detroit, ...) and to this day they have not recovered. If the trend continues too long, California will soon be the Detroit of the west. |
|
If you find the link, please post it as I'm sure plenty of us would like to read it.
|
|
I'm torn honestly. I love California but I need a bit more space, and it gets too same hot here. A nice place out of state would be nice, but it's not going to be anytime soon.
|
|
You honestly don't think the 9th circuit is going to overturn a single law do you? And you're not challenging mag limits? Why? They fall under Heller too. Best we can hope for is they grant cert to Kolbe.
|
|
Quoted:
You honestly don't think the 9th circuit is going to overturn a single law do you? And you're not challenging mag limits? Why? They fall under Heller too. Best we can hope for is they grant cert to Kolbe. View Quote Furthermore, I think their hope is for the Ninth to not back it up, forcing it into the Supreme, and getting a constitutional win that the state can't simply rework to comply but not actually change anything - a la the 10 day wait. |
|
|
|
|
I have been working my way through the process of bringing my rifles into compliance with the upcoming laws. After looking things over, I am favoring the featureless approach. What is PISSING ME OFF is the magazine restrictions. I have many magazines that are/were grandfathered in. Now, oops, they changed their mind. I have to destroy them.
Is an injunction against implementation part of the plans for these law suits? We really need that to prevent the fundamental harm from these unconstitutional "laws". If there's no injunction, we have to destroy our high cap magazines by July 1st. |
|
Is disassembly an option?
If not, I will remove them from the state before I destroy or turn them in. |
|
My relatives in other states have graciously volunteered to hold on to my mags for me
I'm going to have to try to swap my S&W 59 with my son to get my Beretta back. That at least I can get 10 round magazines for. |
|
I have some magazines that are irreplaceable if they are destroyed - the firearm and magazines are long since out of production, the company's out of business and there's no residual stock or aftermarket magazines available. As far as I can tell, despite several determined searches starting as far back as 1999, there are none available and it's unlikely there will ever be.
Do I have to render the firearm inoperable by destroying the magazines? Do I destroy the value and collectability of the firearm by permanently modifying the magazines? These issues are why we need an injunction/stay right now! |
|
I have two storage places in AZ with the option to store anything else with guys I know there.
If anyone comes down to needing a place to store your mags, PM me and we can work something out. Can't say I can store everyones mags but I can help out some that have no options. |
|
|
Quoted:
I have two storage places in AZ with the option to store anything else with guys I know there. If anyone comes down to needing a place to store your mags, PM me and we can work something out. Can't say I can store everyones mags but I can help out some that have no options. View Quote I believe what I am going to do is sell the pistol out of State and buy a CA-compliant replacement. There goes $0.5k - $1.0k I had not planned to spend. Replacement 10 round magazines to feed the AR's (3 required to replace a single 30 rounder), plus magazine couplers, that's hundreds more. This is economic and political warfare, pure and simple. |
|
Quoted:
As I understand it, given the law's vagueness, kits are not okay but parts are fine. Just create bags for each type of part, like a bag for floor plates View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes |
|
about time!
Hoping it goes faster than the Handgun Roster lawsuit has |
|
Quoted:
I have some magazines that are irreplaceable if they are destroyed - the firearm and magazines are long since out of production, the company's out of business and there's no residual stock or aftermarket magazines available. As far as I can tell, despite several determined searches starting as far back as 1999, there are none available and it's unlikely there will ever be. Do I have to render the firearm inoperable by destroying the magazines? Do I destroy the value and collectability of the firearm by permanently modifying the magazines? These issues are why we need an injunction/stay right now! View Quote I didn't check into it anymore simply because I don't have any guns that fit that particular criteria. |
|
Quoted:
... they were briefing on what would be done about competitions with the mag rules. Who is "they"? It was brought up that guns that never had ten round magazines available could keep their standard capacity ones. Who brought it up? In what way would bringing something up counteract the legislation and policy-making? It has been a while since I read the text of the magazine law but I do not remember any such provision. In fact, the new legislation seems to close the prior "grandfathering" of all magazine holding more than ten rounds. I could be wrong, I hope I am. However, I think I understand it correctly. Damn! Only a few days left until the deadline. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted: ... they were briefing on what would be done about competitions with the mag rules. Who is "they"? It was brought up that guns that never had ten round magazines available could keep their standard capacity ones. Who brought it up? In what way would bringing something up counteract the legislation and policy-making? It has been a while since I read the text of the magazine law but I do not remember any such provision. In fact, the new legislation seems to close the prior "grandfathering" of all magazine holding more than ten rounds. I could be wrong, I hope I am. However, I think I understand it correctly. Damn! Only a few days left until the deadline. View Quote Like I said, I didn't follow up because it doesn't effect me. When I saw your post it reminded me of the statement the guy, who is a cop or retired cop, made. I probably should have just ignored your post and went about my business. |
|
But that's the problem. Aside from a blizzard of send more money, send it now, send more money e-mails, we aren't getting anything in the way of status updates from the organizations directly involved in Sacramento or in litigation.
It seems far more likely that the mindset in Sacramento is, "Screw those guys. If it's that rare, they can give it to a museum." They aren't looking for reasons to slack off, they'd rather get rid of all of them. OTOH, those are the kinds of impacts that can be used in litigation. Me, I don't have more than a handful of mags that need to be resolved. Other folks have a lot and it won't be easy. I think the legislation is all kinds of screwed up and making the items really permanently limited causes a problem. They didn't have any intention of allowing some sort of temporary approach. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted: ... they were briefing on what would be done about competitions with the mag rules. Who is "they"? It was brought up that guns that never had ten round magazines available could keep their standard capacity ones. Who brought it up? In what way would bringing something up counteract the legislation and policy-making? It has been a while since I read the text of the magazine law but I do not remember any such provision. In fact, the new legislation seems to close the prior "grandfathering" of all magazine holding more than ten rounds. I could be wrong, I hope I am. However, I think I understand it correctly. Damn! Only a few days left until the deadline. View Quote The court hearing for the preliminary injunction against enforcing the ban was either yesterday or today. Obviously there will be a ruling before July 1. |
|
The problem with their logic, and perhaps yours, is that NOTHING is permanent. There is nothing you can do that I cannot undo.
Welds are reversed by grinding. Epoxy is reversed by heat. Rivets are reversed by drilling. Solder/braze is reversed by heat. Then there are issues such as a ten round magazine in 458 SOCOM holds 30 rounds of 223. There is NOTHING that's permanent. It is impossible to comply. Doesn't anyone do an engineering review of legislation which directly addresses technical issues. |
|
The state isn't going to do anything that will allow them to have a loophole to screw you over.
Or allow us a way out of their B.S. because any level of technical engineering will show that their way of thinking goes against everything you and I or anyone else can think of! CA politicians would rather you're a felon so that you can't own a firearm. Or vote, not that it matters as we've been overrun by liberals and democrats and voting them out would take a civil war in the state! |
|
Quoted:
The state isn't going to do anything that will allow them to have a loophole to screw you over. Or allow us a way out of their B.S. because any level of technical engineering will show that their way of thinking goes against everything you and I or anyone else can think of! CA politicians would rather you're a felon so that you can't own a firearm. Or vote, not that it matters as we've been overrun by liberals and democrats and voting them out would take a civil war in the state! View Quote |
|
|
Quoted:
How do you see things shaping up over the next 4 years? View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes |
|
SCOTUS is not stacked in our favour, yet. Kennedy or one of the full-blown Leftists on the court need to be replaced by someone solid at minimum. Two would provide a better margin for safety. Three would ensure that Alito and Roberts could not water things down at all, as they aren't as solid as Thomas is, Scalia was, or as Gorsuch seems to be. But for a lot of things one would be enough.
|
|
Quoted:
Not holding my breath, all of a sudden the NRA wants to help us? And when CA thumbs it's nose at the federal government again, who's gonna make them comply? Trump? Yeah, good luck with that. You might want to start packing now, that way you're ready to go. View Quote CA has been resisting Trump to such a degree that they are setting themselves up for major pushback. |
|
Quoted:
The state isn't going to do anything that will allow them to have a loophole to screw you over. Or allow us a way out of their B.S. because any level of technical engineering will show that their way of thinking goes against everything you and I or anyone else can think of! CA politicians would rather you're a felon so that you can't own a firearm. Or vote, not that it matters as we've been overrun by liberals and democrats and voting them out would take a civil war in the state! View Quote They want more "prohibiting misdemeanors" and non violent misdemeanors that would put you in jail for a day over what it takes to make you federally prohibited. Still get the votes, get rid of the guns. Ideally, they just want us out of here. They want our tax money but otherwise we are a (shrinking) speedbump on the way to their little socialist utopia. |
|
Quoted:
This is worthy of National news, certainly it is worthy of posting on the State Hometown Forum. Lawsuit Filed Against California's Assault Weapons Control Act The Complaint "Desiring to acquire, possess, use, and/or transfer these constitutionally protected firearms for lawful purposes including self-defense, but justifiably fearing prosecution if they do, Plaintiffs respectfully request this Court: (1) declare that California Penal Code sections 30510(a), 30515(a)(1)(A-C), 30515(a)(1)(E-F), 30515(a)(3), 30520, 30600, 30605, 30925, and 30945, along with California Code of Regulations, title 11, section 5499 (“11 C.C.R. 5499”), infringe Plaintiffs’ constitutional rights; and (2) permanently enjoin Defendants from enforcing each of those sections to the extent they prevent law-abiding Californians, like Plaintiffs, from acquiring, possessing, using or transferring constitutionally protected arms." View Quote i HOPE WE PREVAIL!!! Impala |
|
Quoted:
They don't want gun owners to be felons. Might get some leftists, minorities etc caught up in the process and lose their votes. They want more "prohibiting misdemeanors" and non violent misdemeanors that would put you in jail for a day over what it takes to make you federally prohibited. Still get the votes, get rid of the guns. Ideally, they just want us out of here. They want our tax money but otherwise we are a (shrinking) speedbump on the way to their little socialist utopia. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
The state isn't going to do anything that will allow them to have a loophole to screw you over. Or allow us a way out of their B.S. because any level of technical engineering will show that their way of thinking goes against everything you and I or anyone else can think of! CA politicians would rather you're a felon so that you can't own a firearm. Or vote, not that it matters as we've been overrun by liberals and democrats and voting them out would take a civil war in the state! They want more "prohibiting misdemeanors" and non violent misdemeanors that would put you in jail for a day over what it takes to make you federally prohibited. Still get the votes, get rid of the guns. Ideally, they just want us out of here. They want our tax money but otherwise we are a (shrinking) speedbump on the way to their little socialist utopia. |
|
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.