Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 8/23/2004 9:11:20 AM EST
OK - I'm behind on the 'times' here. What's up with the ban? It ain't 13 Sept yet...

I fully expected the ban to be reinstated to placate the anti-gun pukes who call themselves 'moderate republicans'. Now everyone seems sure it'll go away.

Optomism or is there something else going on I am unaware of? Has it already been 'voted down' or something?

I think I'd have heard of that....
Link Posted: 8/23/2004 9:51:12 AM EST
AGNTSA.

Do a search over on the general forum and I think you will find all you could ever want to know about the ban.
Link Posted: 8/23/2004 9:52:50 AM EST
The Liberals tried to bring it up but the Republicans managed to keep it from the floor. At this point there is no time for a new bill to get to the floor so there is very little chance of a new law or an amendment to our current one. It is very likley that this issue is not done so yu will see many threads where people are looking at ways to get their rifles converted to a configuration they want....

Just be smart!!!

The Liberal anti-gun crowd is going to have learned from the rather huge mistakes they made in the wording in the past ban so WHENthe law comes up again you can bet your ASS that a new bill will be much worce than what we have now. Take CA laws as an example and we can all see how much worse things can be! I hope that we are all involved enough to prevent this from this new bill from becoming a new law but if the Democrats get a majority we are all screwed!

Hell, this is why I have so many of the things I do! The current ban is an inconvienience but a new ban based on the CA law would downright hurt anybody that wasn't smart enough to buy while you can!

Link Posted: 8/23/2004 1:05:42 PM EST
QB- are you suggesting that any new legislation- even that copying PRK's- would grandfather existing rifles in?

I though Kalifornia prohibits even older- pre '94 rifles- but I could be wrong
Link Posted: 8/23/2004 1:35:57 PM EST
Redfish,

But of course, we would all dispose of the rifles if THAT were the case.
Link Posted: 8/23/2004 1:38:08 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/23/2004 1:39:24 PM EST by uglygun]
Ca. defined an AW ban by one feature not two or more.

A post 94 "non-AW" AR15 under federal law still manages to be considered a Ca assault weapon by the Ca. AW ban because it is more strict paying attention to only one feature beyond the high capacity detachable magazine.

All of the Californians that registered their post94 AR15s(or AK clones, or FALs, whatever) already have what is considered to be an "assault weapon" as far as the Ca DOJ is concerned, once the Federal nuisance sunsets the people of Ca. can add features to their post94 guns as it won't change the status of the gun that is already considered an AW and registered as such.


However the guns that don't fall into the definition of a Ca. assault weapon cannot have features added, such as the Springfield M1A or Ruger Mini 14 where they can scoot under the law if they get down to just a detachable magazine and no other features.


The AB23 1999 law is the one that is most stringent, the 89 R/R ban was the one where they tried to ban guns by name and was foiled almost over night as firearms makers simply renamed their guns.
Link Posted: 8/23/2004 2:20:30 PM EST
was Kali's ban for prebans also? Fucking confiscation!!??

WTF- That would be worse than..............well worse than anything I could even think of saying

Where's that big Quake we have all dreamed of making that state an island all it's own?

Kidding Kali ARFCOMER's
Link Posted: 8/23/2004 2:39:16 PM EST
I just saw that putz Schumer on TV grandstanding in front of a NYC K-Mart to demand these outlets be responsible and not sell AWs come September.

I don't recall K-mart or Walmart selling any AWs, especially in NYC.

It's going to get interesting before the elections..........
Link Posted: 8/23/2004 2:57:31 PM EST
The Ca. ban does not permit a person to build, buy, or transfer firearms that would fit into "pre or post" federal configuration, a post94 as well as a pre94 configured AR15 both fit into the description of what Ca. considers to be an "assault weapon" because their definitions are more strict.


Under federal law the AR15 was able to be reconfigured into a post-94 compliant configuration to slip by and not be considered an "assault weapon", reason being the criteria were "2 features or more" beyond the high cap detachable magazine.

Ca saw how it failed and re-worded their law so that a single feature beyond the high capacity detachable magazine was enough. That was strict enough so that an FAL, HK clone, or any semiauto with a high capacity detachable magazine and a pistol grip would not pass muster.

Hell, the Springfield M1A barely makes it because Springfield opted to remove the flash suppressor and install a muzzle brake instead. Hence the M1A gets by because it has zero evil features beyond the ability to accept a high cap detachable mag. Same goes for Mini-14/Mini-30s.

The Ca. ban allowed people to register what they already owned but they cannot transfer them to any other Ca resident, cannot will them to a relative, and in general if you want to get rid of one you either relinquish it to a local police dept or you sell it out of state.
Top Top