Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 8/24/2001 7:27:37 PM EDT
[url]http://kfwb.com/news/local/l082416.html[/url] Legislators Amend Gun Licensing Bill, Seek Police Support (AP) 8.24.01, 4:35p -- Authors of a handgun licensing bill have removed a provision requiring prospective owners to fire the weapon during training, in an attempt to gain support from police and Gov. Gray Davis. California would have been the first state to require a demonstration of actual gun proficiency before permitting a purchase, under the original bills passed separately by lawmakers in both chambers. Even with the amendments, the pending bills still would require buyers to demonstrate safe handling of the weapons without firing a live bullet. The bills are awaiting committee action next week before proceeding to final votes. But Davis signaled he would veto any gun licensing measure unless law enforcement officials urge its signing. Sen. Jack Scott, D-Altadena, and Assemblyman Kevin Shelley, D-San Francisco, are amending their identical bills in hopes of drawing support from the California State Sheriffs' Association and the Peace Officers Research Association of California, which represents 160 local rank-and-file police organizations. The sheriff's association could reconsider its opposition at its executive board meeting Sept. 6 and 7, said executive director Joan Phillipe. A peace officers association representative did not return repeated telephone messages from The Associated Press. Calls to the National Rifle Association's California chapter also were not returned. Attorney General Bill Lockyer, the California Police Chiefs Association and California Organization of Police and Sheriffs support the measure. Individual sheriff's and police departments have come down on both sides of the issue. Deleting the requirement that gun buyers fire the weapon removes some opponents' objection that firing ranges are scarce in some rural areas. However, some law enforcement groups also oppose the legislation on the grounds it would take officers away from other duties. Gun buyers would have to supply a thumbprint for identification and pay a fee for background and proficiency tests under the measure. The law would take effect in 2003 and does not affect current handgun owners. While signing one gun bill last month, Davis signaled his reluctance to sign others until law enforcement can evaluate laws passed two years ago. Those include a ban on assault weapons, unsafe handguns, purchases of more than one handgun each month, and firearm sales by state agencies; restrictions on gun shows; and a requirement that guns be protected with childproof locks. Two other bills that would make firearm manufacturers liable for misuse of their weapons are also scheduled for hearings next week. © 2001 Infinity Broadcasting Corp. All Rights Reserved.
Link Posted: 8/24/2001 7:33:43 PM EDT
California would have been the first state to require a demonstration of actual gun proficiency before permitting a purchase, under the original bills passed separately by lawmakers in both chambers. Even with the amendments, the pending bills still would require buyers to demonstrate safe handling of the weapons without firing a live bullet.
View Quote
I believe this is another gun grabbing Kali lie. Texas requires a demonstration of proficiency before issuing a license. [url]http://www.packing.org/state/texas/[/url]
Link Posted: 8/24/2001 7:51:35 PM EDT
Larry- this is for a liscence to purchase, not a liscence to carry. Carry in California is sketchy at best, depending upon where you live. Here in the Bay Area, no friggen way. I'm hopping they pass this. One more excuse to buy every handgun I want before 2003. I think I need to get started now cause of the one a month thing. [;)]
Link Posted: 8/24/2001 11:04:15 PM EDT
BTT, to important to be on page #3 sgtar15
Link Posted: 8/25/2001 1:23:30 AM EDT
Originally Posted By warlord: Attorney General Bill Lockyer, the California Police Chiefs Association and California Organization of Police and Sheriffs support the measure. Individual sheriff's and police departments have come down on both sides of the issue.
View Quote
If law enforcement is backing the bill, it must be a good thing. I urge all kalifornians to write letters to your representatives in support of these important gun owner protection legislations.
Link Posted: 8/25/2001 1:35:41 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Imbroglio: If law enforcement is backing the bill, it must be a good thing. I urge all kalifornians to write letters to your representatives in support of these important gun owner protection legislations.
View Quote
Makes sense to me![rolleyes] BTW--what the heck are you doing up so late at night? Don't you know how dangerous Stockton is during the nighttime??[whacko] sgtar15
Link Posted: 8/25/2001 8:11:56 AM EDT
The significance of this bill is the right to bear arms, is this a right, or a priviledge which can be limited. If there is support amoung law enforcement. Rmemember at some point, these people could become civilians again and all of the rules and regulation apply.
Link Posted: 8/25/2001 8:15:38 AM EDT
Link Posted: 8/25/2001 8:51:35 AM EDT
Too many of us Cali gunners are sitting our collective hands and butts, and wondering what the NRA/GOC(Gun Owners of Calif)/CRPA(Calif. Rifle & Pistol) etc is doing about it, and discussing with fellow members on this this is really a $hitty law. A few years ago, I attended a rallye of Calif gun owners and ten people showed up. Very few gunners actively campaign against an anti-gunner or for a pro-gun candidate. It is a lot of work, this is the eqivalent of political hand-to-hand combat, mano-au-mano. The result is that the democrats have very little to fear. So that is how we gunner got into this pickle that we are in now. Sorry for the long rant, but its the truth.
Top Top