Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 2/3/2006 12:50:35 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/3/2006 12:51:30 PM EDT by UberPhLuBB]
http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/forms/pdf/ar15notice.pdf

IMPORTANT NOTICE
California Department of Justice
Information Regarding the Sale/Possession of Newly Identified
AR-15/AK 47 “Series” Firearms

The Department of Justice (hereafter Athe Department@) has received numerous contacts
from the public and firearms industry personnel regarding the legality of various AR-15/AK 47
“series” style firearms that have not yet been identified as Aseries@ assault weapons by the
Department. The Department is also aware of the recent high volume of sales of these firearms.
The Department has the statutory authority to identify Aseries@ assault weapons. In 2000,
the California Supreme Court upheld that authority in Kasler v. Lockyer (2000) 23 Cal. 4th 472.
The Department updated the list of “series” weapons in 2000 (as ACategory 2@ assault weapons),
shortly after the Kasler decision.

The California Supreme Court reiterated in 2003 that Athe Attorney General has the
authority to determine that certain semiautomatic firearms are assault weapons by simply
identifying them as such in the list published by the Attorney General in the California Code of
RegulationsYtwo types of firearms defined in Penal Code (PC) section 12276 by the use of the
term series, namely the AK-47 series and the Colt AR-15 series.@ Harrott v. County of Kings
(2003) 25 Cal. 4th 1138, 1155.

Accordingly, the Department is currently in the process of identifying those firearms in
the state that are variations, with minor differences, of AR-15/AK 47 “series” weapons. Once
this process is complete, the Department will promulgate a list and file it with the Secretary of
State=s office. Concurrently, the Department will begin updating the Assault Weapon
Identification Guide which is currently available via the Department=s website at
http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/forms/index.html. Once the list of newly identified Aseries@ weapons
is filed with the Secretary of State, citizens who possess those weapons will have 90 days to
register them with the Department of Justice.

Newly identified Aseries@ weapons cannot legally have the features listed in PC
section 12276.1 when they are registered. Those features cannot legally be added after the
firearms are registered as assault weapons. The PC section 12276.1 features have been
banned since January 1, 2000, when Senate Bill 23 went into effect. The public was notified of
the prohibition on the specified features many years ago.


IMPORTANT NOTICE
Page Two

The registration period for assault weapons with those characteristics (Category 3
assault weapons) ended on December 31, 2000. Because non-“series” assault weapons with
PC section 12276.1 features may not be offered for sale, manufactured, imported, or
possessed in California, it follows that newly registered “series” weapons may not have the
features listed in PC section 12276.1, either.

The prohibition on the features listed in PC section 12276.1 is consistent with current
DOJ policy that named Aseries@ weapons are illegal, unless registered, regardless of whether they
have the PC section 12276.1 features. It is also consistent with the intent of the California state
legislature to ban assault weapons, expressed in 1991 when PC section 12276(f) was enacted.
This section is declaratory of existing law, as amended, and a
clarification of the law and the Legislature=s intent which bans the
weapons enumerated in this section, the weapons included in Section
12276.5, and any other models which are only minor variations of
those weapons with minor differences, regardless of the manufacturer
[emphasis added].

It should be noted that individuals who timely registered ACategory 1@ and ACategory 2@
assault weapons were allowed to keep or add the PC section 12276.1 features on their
firearms. Those generic features were not illegal during the registration period for Category 1
assault weapons. In August of 2000, when the Department identified the Category 2 Aseries@
weapons, it was legal to register weapons with those characteristics as Category 3 assault
weapons. Firearms with those features could no longer be registered as of January 1, 2001.
Therefore, newly identified Aseries@ (Category 4) weapons likewise cannot have those features.

Registrants of newly identified series weapons cannot legally add PC section 12276.1
features to those firearms. The Department intends to enforce this restriction through the
assault weapon registration process. Registration acknowledgment letters will include an
admonition to registrants that adding prohibited features to newly registered assault weapons will
invalidate the registration. The basis for valid registration will rest solely on the fact that the
Department identifies the receivers for these firearms as variations, with minor differences, of
already controlled AR-15/AK 47 Aseries@ weapons. All additional features of the newly
identified “series” weapons must conform with current California law.

Firearm manufacturers, wholesalers and dealers who misinform the public about the
ability to legally add prohibited features to these newly listed firearms risk criminal prosecution.
They could also face civil penalties of up to $2,500 per violation under the state=s Unfair
Practices Act (California Business & Professions Code section 17000 et seq.).
This information will be distributed to criminal justice agencies throughout the state, as
well as to firearm dealers listed on the Department’s Centralized List, via the formal Information
Bulletin process.



The California DOJ has, or will try to create a new category of assault weapon to stifle Californians who have purchased legal, stripped lowers and turned them into 10 round fixed magazine rifles. We did this and waited for the DOJ to update it's SB23 banned rifle list, which contains a list of the more popular assault weapons, as listed on the Federal ban. We waited, hoping the DOJ would update the list to add the unlisted lowers we brought into the state because once registered as category 2 assault weapons (declared by name), we could add any EBR features we want. Finally they give an update, after DOJ actors were quoted saying "Action will be taken in 2 weeks" for 3 months.

Aside from several incorrect dates given in this notice (Kasler registration date, Harrot date), the DOJ enforces the law and clearly cannot create new law. Bogus.
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 12:51:16 PM EDT
IBTDP
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 12:53:35 PM EDT
Hmm...just like the ATF writes new law all the time. And gets away with it.
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 12:56:29 PM EDT
BOHICA. You guys should be used to it. In fact you must damn well enjoy it.
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 12:56:48 PM EDT
"the Attorney General has the authority to determine that certain semiautomatic firearms are assault weapons by simply identifying them as such"

Nice... Real nice...
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 12:59:22 PM EDT
i'm afraid that this will happen in NY too if spitzer becomes governor
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 12:59:33 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/4/2006 7:23:49 PM EDT by Master_Blaster]

Originally Posted By UberPhLuBB:
......the DOJ enforces the law and clearly cannot create new law. Bogus.



They're taking a queue from the ATF, which has carte blanche to do whatever it wants (eg. interpret the law). The CA DOJ has the courts in its corner, & no one will stop them because the CA gov't holds all the power cards.
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 1:11:05 PM EDT
If nobody stands up to it, this will convince alot of people to move. I just found out my house is worth far more than I thought. I may just grab my money and move out myself. Got to wait and see what happens, because this is just a memo after all. Nothing's been done yet, but given the months of time the DOJ has been working on this (since November 2005 at least), they've clearly put alot of thought into this nonsense and are likely to move forward without changing any details.
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 1:33:43 PM EDT
It may be bogus, but some useless thugs with badges will take you in. You will be lucky if that's all that happens: if there's 5 of them to one of you, they will beat you half to death to show their power; if it's fewer than 5, they or he will shoot you while you are on the ground.
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 1:38:28 PM EDT
Why do Californians allow this kind of crap to go on????
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 1:39:05 PM EDT
Dupe.
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 1:41:13 PM EDT

Originally Posted By HorseHung:
Why do Californians allow this kind of crap to go on????



Because most of California WANTS this to go on!
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 1:45:38 PM EDT
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 1:49:38 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/3/2006 1:50:45 PM EDT by BangStick1]

Originally Posted By UberPhLuBB:
If nobody stands up to it, this will convince alot of people to move. I just found out my house is worth far more than I thought. I may just grab my money and move out myself. Got to wait and see what happens, because this is just a memo after all. Nothing's been done yet, but given the months of time the DOJ has been working on this (since November 2005 at least), they've clearly put alot of thought into this nonsense and are likely to move forward without changing any details.





Memo?!! You, sir, are in denial!!

This is a Declaration of Intent!!!



The California Supreme Court reiterated in 2003 that Athe Attorney General has the
authority to determine that certain semiautomatic firearms are assault weapons by simply
identifying them as such in the list published by the Attorney General in the California Code of
RegulationsYtwo types of firearms defined in Penal Code (PC) section 12276 by the use of the
term series, namely the AK-47 series and the Colt AR-15 series.@ Harrott v. County of Kings
(2003) 25 Cal. 4th 1138, 1155.


The prohibition on the features listed in PC section 12276.1 is consistent with current
DOJ policy that named Aseries@ weapons are illegal, unless registered, regardless of whether they
have the PC section 12276.1 features. It is also consistent with the intent of the California state
legislature to ban assault weapons, expressed in 1991 when PC section 12276(f) was enacted.

Link Posted: 2/3/2006 1:51:57 PM EDT

Originally Posted By UberPhLuBB:
If nobody stands up to it, this will convince alot of people to move. I just found out my house is worth far more than I thought. I may just grab my money and move out myself. Got to wait and see what happens, because this is just a memo after all. Nothing's been done yet, but given the months of time the DOJ has been working on this (since November 2005 at least), they've clearly put alot of thought into this nonsense and are likely to move forward without changing any details.



The following is not in response to you Uber....Well, if the courts have said they have the authority to classify weapons, I guess they have the authority to until/if ever it is overturned. Yes, I agree it sucks, violates the 2nd, and is overtly unconstitutional, but like I said untill it is challenged and overturned, bad policy like this will be implemented by agencies, not the people/legislature.

The following is in response to you Uber....I know the feeling, out house was worth more than I thought. We got out on one of the life rafts, the breaches in the hull of California are just too large to fix. The ship is sinking, and will eventually be completely under.

Besides, with all the comifornians moving out of state, to great places like Colorado, politics here are starting to shift a bit leftward. For example, a measure passed by two votes, on a movement to ban smoking in all bars and restaurants, just like they did in the PROC. We need more "good" Californians moving here to counteract the fools.
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 2:12:50 PM EDT
It looks to me like the AW law in California gives the AG the authority to determine what is an assault weapon. From the letter: "The Department has the statutory authority to identify Aseries@ assault weapons".

Don't get me wrong, I hate AW bans, but the above quote leads me to believe that the AG has this authority.
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 2:22:05 PM EDT
I done bugged the f*** out!
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 2:23:08 PM EDT

Originally Posted By lu380:
It looks to me like the AW law in California gives the AG the authority to determine what is an assault weapon. From the letter: "The Department has the statutory authority to identify Aseries@ assault weapons".

Don't get me wrong, I hate AW bans, but the above quote leads me to believe that the AG has this authority.



That is correct. He has the ability to identify AR/AK series assault weapons and ban them.
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 2:29:11 PM EDT
Fuck 'em. They can pass any law they want. And the citizens can obey whatever laws they want!!
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 2:33:10 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/3/2006 2:34:42 PM EDT by Poodleshooter]

Originally Posted By fossil_fuel:
i'm afraid that this will happen in NY too if spitzer becomes governor


Yup. NY's AW ban already has the language in it to eliminate. It has a banned weapon list but also refers to "copies thereof". The list of models and "copies thereof" section is NOT dependent on the section that lists evil features, so a "copy thereof" in NY does not have to have more than 1 feature to constitute an assault weapon. All that Spitzer has to do is issue an opinion that "copies thereof"= your post ban compliant AR or your SAR-1,and they become de facto illegal until someone wins a court case. Only confusion and ignorance on this point by lawmakers,LEOs and NY gungrabbers has kept post bans legal in NY from what I can see.

I think this CA trend of "patching loopholes" in AW bans will become quite popular at the state level as the general public wonders why they still see black rifles around though they were supposedly banned.
The idea that one 30rd magazine semiautomatic is legal and one is not won't make any more sense to gungrabbers than it does to us.

Link Posted: 2/3/2006 2:46:07 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/3/2006 2:47:35 PM EDT by ShadowCompany]
For once, can't they just call them what they are -- semi-automatic rifles? They really need to get over their hang up on "assault weapons". All the good conservatives are moving out of California and are being replaced by illegal border crossers and nut jobs.
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 3:05:30 PM EDT

Originally Posted By ShadowCompany:
For once, can't they just call them what they are -- semi-automatic rifles? They really need to get over their hang up on "assault weapons". All the good conservatives are moving out of California and are being replaced by illegal border crossers and nut jobs.



No, they're waiting on the "semi auto" designation. First, call anything other than a traditional rifle an "assault" rifle; the next step will be "military" which will be fun in itself; then "semi-auto" (whcih they cleverly will call automatics, which will work because it already is the vernacular; then self-loader, the proper term; then will come the repeaters - obviously just as bad as a self loader (finally waking up the Fudds, too late). It's a progression, already thought out even more thoroughly and in more detail than I have.

By the way, when they use the military designation, I wonder if that will apply to all former military calibers.
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 3:07:41 PM EDT

Originally Posted By The_Sgt_Rock:
Fuck 'em. They can pass any law they want. And the citizens can obey whatever laws they want!!



LOL,
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 3:13:05 PM EDT
Does the California legislature have the right to delegate its powers (which were given to it by the people of california) to others?

Did the people of california elect the Attorney General to legislate?

If this was the Federal government, the answer would be no and no. Separation of powers doctrine and all that.
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 3:13:51 PM EDT
They learned from the best, ie the ATF.
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 5:22:10 PM EDT
Well, Mr. Lockyear, we'll see you in court.

It's a matter of time and nothing more before their legal theory is challenged in court. Their theory is that the features are already banned and may not be added. The opposing theory is that as soon as a weapon becomes an "assault weapon", you can add features because it's already an assault weapon.

No matter the legislature's "intent", what matters is the actual law and a DOJ gone rampantly beyond their authority.

This will only be resolved in court.

I wonder which poor schmuck will be the test case?????????????
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 5:24:31 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Mike_Mills:
Well, Mr. Lockyear, we'll see you in court.

It's a matter of time and nothing more before their legal theory is challenged in court. Their theory is that the features are already banned and may not be added. The opposing theory is that as soon as a weapon becomes an "assault weapon", you can add features because it's already an assault weapon.

No matter the legislature's "intent", what matters is the actual law and a DOJ gone rampantly beyond their authority.

This will only be resolved in court.

I wonder which poor schmuck will be the test case?????????????



well considering that hardly any of the assault weapons were registered and only a couple people have got nailed for simply owning one, i doubt that a poor schmuck will ever get arrested for simply owning a assault weapon.
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 5:35:41 PM EDT
I foresee a bunch of stripped lowers appearing on EE in the near future.

What, you thought you were going to get a fair shake from the government and they'd let you keep your guns?



You guys crack me up. The right to bear arms does not exist in California. Read the AG's words:


It should be noted that individuals who timely registered ACategory 1@ and ACategory 2@
assault weapons were allowed to keep or add the PC section 12276.1 features on their
firearms.



The right to bear arms does not exist in California. You own guns only with the government's permission.
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 5:47:51 PM EDT
It seems some of you guys are a bit behind the times. Since this all went down a few years back the AG has always reserved the right to add guns to the list. Here is the real issue at hand:

You buy your stripped lower. AG/DoJ lists it as an AW. You have 90 days to register your "assault weapon".
BUT, under the features law SB23 you still can't add a pistol grip, etc because you would be creating a banned AW under SB23.

So, what they are actually saying is that they will let you buy your stripped receivers, legally register them, but if you actually build the gun they'll get you under SB23!

Damn that's confusing. I hope it makes sense.
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 5:51:42 PM EDT

Originally Posted By motown_steve:
I foresee a bunch of stripped lowers appearing on EE in the near future.

What, you thought you were going to get a fair shake from the government and they'd let you keep your guns?



You guys crack me up. The right to bear arms does not exist in California. Read the AG's words:


It should be noted that individuals who timely registered ACategory 1@ and ACategory 2@
assault weapons were allowed to keep or add the PC section 12276.1 features on their
firearms.



The right to bear arms does not exist in California. You own guns only with the government's permission.



I wouldn't laugh too hard. Things that happen in California shouldn't be happening in OUR COUNTRY.

If this is ok for Ca, it may be coming to a state near you.
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 9:52:29 PM EDT
Someone clear this up for me: Why would anyone want a fixed magazine AR that you have to hinge open to load?



Originally Posted By rjroberts:

Originally Posted By ShadowCompany:
For once, can't they just call them what they are -- semi-automatic rifles? They really need to get over their hang up on "assault weapons". All the good conservatives are moving out of California and are being replaced by illegal border crossers and nut jobs.



No, they're waiting on the "semi auto" designation. First, call anything other than a traditional rifle an "assault" rifle; the next step will be "military" which will be fun in itself; then "semi-auto" (whcih they cleverly will call automatics, which will work because it already is the vernacular; then self-loader, the proper term; then will come the repeaters - obviously just as bad as a self loader (finally waking up the Fudds, too late). It's a progression, already thought out even more thoroughly and in more detail than I have.

By the way, when they use the military designation, I wonder if that will apply to all former military calibers.



They're not waiting for shit here! The newest bucket of bile from the assembly designates PUMP ACTION rifles with detachable mags as AWs if they have evil features!
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 10:04:27 PM EDT

Originally Posted By JCKnife:
BOHICA. You guys should be used to it. In fact you must damn well enjoy it.



Actually NO I do not enjoy it but some of us that want to leave CANT. I cannot for reasons I dont want to get into on a public forum. I am trying my hardest to fight by voting and donating my money and time to whatever cause i can get involved in. I am fighting the good fight here.

Unfortunately this state IS going down the tubes and the liberals are at the helm. If I had my choice i would have been out of here a year ago.
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 10:06:58 PM EDT

Originally Posted By JBear:
It seems some of you guys are a bit behind the times. Since this all went down a few years back the AG has always reserved the right to add guns to the list. Here is the real issue at hand:

You buy your stripped lower. AG/DoJ lists it as an AW. You have 90 days to register your "assault weapon".
BUT, under the features law SB23 you still can't add a pistol grip, etc because you would be creating a banned AW under SB23.

So, what they are actually saying is that they will let you buy your stripped receivers, legally register them, but if you actually build the gun they'll get you under SB23!

Damn that's confusing. I hope it makes sense.



But as of now FAB-10 type lowers with fixed magazines are not "assault weapons" and do not need to be registered.

So why do the new lowers have to be registered as assault rifles if they must be assembled with a fixed magazine?

They are declaring it to legally be an assault rifle then saying it cannot be made into an assault rifle...
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 10:19:07 PM EDT

Originally Posted By AyeGuy:
They are declaring it to legally be an assault rifle then saying it cannot be made into an assault rifle...



I see you get it.

If ANYONE is taken to court over this I hereby pledge to send money to their defense fund. This is wrong but it will take a court visit to put the proper smack-down on the AG.
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 10:19:48 PM EDT
I'm not getting into this. Alot of you out of staters can be real assholes.
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 10:25:45 PM EDT
Kali sucks. Too bad we can't give it to Canada.
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 10:30:09 PM EDT
All I got to say is good luck you CA guys. Keep pushing and *eventually* you will win one. Has the NRA or GOA said anything about this? Grassroots campaign?
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 10:31:06 PM EDT

Originally Posted By leelaw:
I'm not getting into this. Alot of you out of staters can be real assholes.



Yes, like Redcap

fucking out of state assholes

they are next, lets see how the little asswipes piss themselves when the government comes for them
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 3:12:47 AM EDT
I wonder what the Kalifornian government will say to me when they need a skilled tradesman to come prop up their shit-hole-run-over-by-illegals after all the good, decent people are gone? How could they possibly people are going to fill the voids created by the flight of people from SoCal? You guys should see the Seattle area-the place is getting seriously overpopulated, and it's transplanted Californians that are responsible for it.

Dave
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 4:31:09 AM EDT
Is that the faint strains of the Horst Wessel song I hear in the background...???


Fucking assholes. What a load it must be to live in that messed up state now. I remember when it was a great place to live...now???
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 4:42:47 AM EDT

Originally Posted By leelaw:
I'm not getting into this. Alot of you out of staters can be real assholes.



+1
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 5:12:30 AM EDT
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 5:36:11 AM EDT

Originally Posted By DrFrige:

Originally Posted By JCKnife:
BOHICA. You guys should be used to it. In fact you must damn well enjoy it.



Actually NO I do not enjoy it but some of us that want to leave CANT. I cannot for reasons I dont want to get into on a public forum. I am trying my hardest to fight by voting and donating my money and time to whatever cause i can get involved in. I am fighting the good fight here.

Unfortunately this state IS going down the tubes and the liberals are at the helm. If I had my choice i would have been out of here a year ago.



That, unfortunately for you is a valid point - that you haven't the absolute free choice. I'm fortunate in that I do. I'm retired. My wife was enamored with CA, and wanted to move there. I fought it tooth and nail, not just guns.. We aren't there.

SOme guys have to understand - the younger ones won't - that one can be trapped by a job, particularly in the current environment. Can one give up a job where one has worked 17 years, at a decent wage, and move to Floriduh for crap wages? See, I'll pick on the state where I live, though I wouldn't live here if I had to work. People can also be held someplace by family responsibilities.

Bottom line is that not everyone in CA is a jerk, though the majority clearly are. That must hurt all the more for people who are decent and of the type that made CA a great place years ago (maybe that's how a lot of decent people got stuck there - they got started when it was good, then got trapped when the hippies took over).

My thory on groups, assholes, and my own bigotry. I've finally come to this conclusion and realize that it may take some of the slower of us (such as muself) 50 years to realize it. (I turned 59 on the 1st.) In every group there will be a large number of decent people and a small group of assholes (using as a term to collect a variety of negatives). If the asshole group is large enough, though not a majority or even approaching 25%-30% (10% can work as a number), I will regard the whole group as a negative. I am sorry for the decent people affected, but if they are awake, they should know what I mean; if not, they are facilitators and fall into my negative view. If such people make someplace bad to live, I will , again, regard them all as assholes. It is not worth the little time I have left to try to sort them out. Even if I were young again, I wouldn't put up with them, because why should my life be made a mess because of them - again, a small number can do it. I simply avoid them. This is for states, as well as ethnic groups. In New York City, where I grew up, there is a street in the Borough of the Bronx which is called "Grand Concourse." I remember when it was called that for a reason. It is now a drug mess. A percentage of an ethnic group moved in and made it (and most of the Bronx) a mess. Was that the majority of that group? I think not. Did , however, that sub-set's actions ruin it? Absolutely yes, unless one wants to charge that the NYC Dept. of Sanitation delivered and dumped garbage from the other boroughs there. Solution for me? Avoid, and run when I see that type because I know what follows. Am I going to get on a podium with swastikas and scream? No, that's stupid. I will simply avoid.
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 8:26:52 AM EDT

Originally Posted By soowah:
All I got to say is good luck you CA guys. Keep pushing and *eventually* you will win one. Has the NRA or GOA said anything about this? Grassroots campaign?



When I met Wayne LaPierre I asked him up front "Why isnt the NRA doing anything to help us here in CA?" He said "Oh we have something big in the works on the legislative level and its gonna be real big"

Yeah... right Wayne... that was 2 years ago and I havent seen SHIT!
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 8:27:59 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Redcap:
Kali sucks. Too bad we can't give it to Canada.



Washington is closer.
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 8:36:35 AM EDT

Originally Posted By JCKnife:
BOHICA. You guys should be used to it. In fact you must damn well enjoy it.



I enjoy CCW, my 100Rnd Beta Mag and my 33Rnd Glock 18 mags.

Do you enjoy your race riots and local firearms bans?
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 8:48:13 AM EDT
California, the only state in the union where you can take it in the rear in regards to insurance, home prices, gun laws and in your personal life as well.

I am glad I left.

Max
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 9:12:06 AM EDT
What gets me is most of you guys could move to a "free" state and earn HALF of the wage you make in Commie land, and still enjoy a higher standard of living because taxes are lower and the liberal fucktard housing bubble won't be problem.

Link Posted: 2/4/2006 9:14:23 AM EDT
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 9:18:00 AM EDT

Originally Posted By GonzoAR15-1:
What gets me is most of you guys could move to a "free" state and earn HALF of the wage you make in Commie land, and still enjoy a higher standard of living because taxes are lower and the liberal fucktard housing bubble won't be problem.




But then again I love how some feel it is easy to just get up and move... some of us just cant... we CANT. I would have moved out of here a year ago if I could... had the chance but due to circumstances we are unable.
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 9:23:43 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/4/2006 9:24:04 AM EDT by jpman7]

Originally Posted By UberPhLuBB:
I just found out my house is worth far more than I thought.

MOVE
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top