Ok, let me say first that I was sick today and got WAY too much sleep, so now I am awake too late not to mention I have had a migraine for the last 4 days so all in all I am feeling a bit off from normal so I may not be of my normal mind (although I am having one of those days where I woke up in awe of my fiancee, so for you married guys/gals I am sure you know what type of mindset I am in).

Anyways, on to the topic. It's no secret that I spend a good portion of time on the net each day just reading firearm forums, laws, dealers websites, advertisements, auctions, etc. It's a passion that takes up most of my free time. However, I must say that I am not one of those people that get pissed off at our AW laws. Don't get me wrong, they are the most ****ing retard thing around, and I think we should get rid of them ASAP, but I don't get frustrated about them. I was one of the first people to get an off list lower (had them in my hands early/mid Decemeber), and I had my Russian versions when people were arguing that it was impossible, or that they were still ilelgal, etc. I do what I can when I can, but I try to not resort to name calling, or insulting by the powers that be who control us beyond their means.

There is one reason the laws don't really bother me: I LOVE Rimfires. There, I said it. I would rather own a rimfire than a .50BMG (which is why I didn't register the single shot receiver I made as a .50, because I would rather mod it to be a semi-auto 22). I was saving up to buy a Para Nitehawg to have a really carry piece to get my CCW, but instead I went and got a Sig Mosquito, and the DAY my 30 day wait is up I am going to go get a Walther P22, then the Ruger MKIII, and after that maybe even the Beretta Cheetah. I have a Ruger 10/22, working on a homebuilt one, and a CZ452 and I am still looking into buying more. My name's NeoWeird and I'm a Rimfireolic.

Also, I tend to get the "I would have thought you were older" phrase a lot. Not just by how I act, or type, but also by the things I like. In highschool I wouldn't go to parties because I thought it was just a stupid childish thing for idiots to go get drunk off their ass to pass time. I picked up cigars about two years ago, I like wine but hate hard alcohol, and I would rather own a WWII era M1 Garand and a 1911 than an AR-15 and a Beretta 92 or Glock 17. I know this is going a bit off subject, but the whole attach a rail, lazer, light, can opener, garage door opener, ambidextrous sling swivel, electronic site, etc just doesn't really cut it for me. I'm in no way a traditionalist, but the whole trend of tactically uberizing stuff just doesn't float my boat.

I know this has kind of been a mix-pot of random thoughts, but it's nearly 4am and I am bored from the lack of posting so I figure I needed to put up something to spark replies.

So am I alone? Does anyone else get impressed by a correct 1903 sniper rifle but doesn't even bother to look at the Remy 700s with twice the money dropped into them? Does anyone else prefer seeing a K98 with matching serials and swastikas intact then a new Savage with sub MOA accuracy? (Shotguns get me though, Mesa's stuff and the Benllies.....Wow.) And the real question; am I the only rimfire nut? I know at least one member who likes rimfires as much as I do, he even gets made fun of it because he likes them so much, but outside of him I rarely ever see rimfires at the shoots and I always wondered if I was alone in this.

(watch, tomorrow I will be thinking "why the hell did I post that?....")

What part of CA are you? I may be selling off my P22...

SoCal, San Bernardino area. I was actually thinking of getting my CoE application printed out and finger prints done later today, that way when my 30 day is up I can just walk in and grab the Walther, Beretta, and Ruger all at once.

Though I may be interested in a P22 if it can be done FTF.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with your tastes in guns at all, every gun owner has his/her own reasons.  This being California, they're about as diverse as they come.  

The one thing that unifies us all together is that we believe we should be able to legally own whatever we want without all these jack-assy laws getting in the way of our fun.

I myself went on a buying spree of sorts for target guns that just happen to be rimfires: a High Standard Trophy and Victor, and a Winchester 52.  The rimfire has sold more cartridges than any other simply because they're inexpensive and don't beat you to hell and gone at the end of a plinking session, not to mention they've been sold in every conceivable action: auto pistol, revolver, pump action, lever action, bolt action, crank, single shot, conversions etc.

enjoy the sickness

I dont really dwell on the fact that the laws here suck (almost across the board), but I do feel that we should be able to buy whatever I want as long as I'm not hurting anyone.  I get a huge satisfaction everytime I do something that would upset the anti-Americans.  Whether it be buying a 4x4 gas guzzling truck to haul my stuff around, or buying an off-list lower that no-one wanted me to have.  I like rimfires too, but I focus my time and money on other things usually.  

Brian

Honestly, I am really not into AR15s that much either. I bought my off-list lowers primarily to stick a finger in the eye of the AG/DoJ, and secondarily to take advantage of this apparently once in a lifetime opportunity. I had a really cool CAR15 back in the '80s but when Roberti-Roos came along I ignored it until it was too late. Too many people knew I had it so I sent it out of state. It wasn't worth going to prison or losing everything I had. After that I sort of gave up on the idea of ever having another one, so I didn't keep up with all the latest stuff. I'm mostly into handguns now. I have a bunch of rifles & shotguns in my safe and they never (or almost never) get used.

I love EBR .22lr's. I first started internet gunboards on the old Rockin'Rimfire's, back when there was a message board, then onto Rimfire Central.
In fact, when I first started at ARFcom (in '00) it was because I was looking for AR parts to put on my .22lr copies.
But,then I found out about Kaliban legal ARs, and then FALs, and then AKs,.........


- and I also decided against registering a receiver as a .50, just not interested.

We got a lot of antburners out there who'd rather live in some podunk town in Minnesota than here in CA.


Sure, I can't
- own an AR-15
- buy certain handguns whose mfrs didnt' want to pay the ransom fee to get on the list.
- buy standard capacity magazines over 10 rounds.
- easily get a CCW
- afford a house.


Does that bother me? Of course.


BUT:

- I don't need to shovel my way out the front door during the winter.
- I can go surfing in the morning and snowboarding in the afternoon.
- I can get decent Chinese food.
- I can get a job (I'm an engineer, and work in high-tech)

Quoted: We got a lot of antburners out there who'd rather live in some podunk town in Minnesota than here in CA. Sure, I can't - own an AR-15 - buy certain handguns whose mfrs didnt' want to pay the ransom fee to get on the list. - buy standard capacity magazines over 10 rounds. - easily get a CCW - afford a house. Does that bother me? Of course. BUT: - I don't need to shovel my way out the front door during the winter. - I can go surfing in the morning and snowboarding in the afternoon. - I can get decent Chinese food. - I can get a job (I'm an engineer, and work in high-tech)

....so you're saying you don't like rimfires?....

i totally agree. unlike many people i know, i dont allow my life and where i live to be dictated by my ability to own certain types of weapons. i am happy with what weapons i have and there are far more things in life than just owning weapons. if some schmuck that enjoys everything we have here in CA wants to leave and live in an igloo so that he can shoot his AK or .50 in some other state, i say "bring a friend"

For me, it's less about the guns than it is about the dipshits in office who wishes to dictate every minutae of our lives through legislation, just so they can justify their parasitic lifestyles on the public payroll, let alone the oxygen they waste.

I can live quite happily with the gun collection I already have, but that is really not the point.

I usually get pretty steamed up thinking about how unfairly Californians are treated with respect to most of the other states. But then you think about Great Britain or some other countries where their restrictions make CA look like nothing then you gotta appreciate the fact that despite the restrictions, we still have a lot of freedom.

...and we can send 10 rounds from a 10/22 downrange in 2 seconds

I can understand the current AW regs not effecting a person who's primary interest is in other firearms, but it should absolutely bother everybody who lives here.

here is why,

The legislation isn't designed to greatly effect those who already own "assault weapons" and had them before the ban.    It is designed to effect people who were not of legal age, or not even born yet, when the regulation went into effect.

Basically, in coming years, anytime somebody who appears to be a certain age is seen with an "assault weapon" it will bring into question the legal standing of that person who posseses the rifle.

Think about it, if you weren't 18 years or older when the legislation went into effect in 2000, how can you legally own an AR15?     It will become even more obvious 10 years down the road when somebody 18 years old is holding something questionable.

Worse, as current owners of registered guns die off, there is no ability for those guns to be transferred to survivors unless the original owner had enough foresight to do a joint registration.

10-15 years down the road, the numbers of legally owned assault weapons in the state will deminish.   20-25 years down the road, it will be even lower.


The thought of such laws should absolutely bother you.     They might not effect you because you are making a conscious decision to focus on other guns, I'm fine with that but the ideology of the AW ban I absolutely have problem with.


A law that absolutely effects me is this damned handgun safety approval bill.    I am a collector of S&W N-frame revolvers, none of the guns I own have been made in the past 20 years or if they have the current S&W revisions make them unattractive to me.

Finding an old discontinued N-frame here in California, at a reasonable price, is damned difficult due to the artificial supply cap put on the market.     N-frame prices are often times several hundred dollars lower in other parts of the country than they are here because people here recognize the artificial supply cap on the market.

Pisses me off to no end.    NOW THAT is a law that both directly effects me and bothers me.

I think this is a good thread.  It's funny because up until recently I was one of those guys that was going to move out of state just so I can buy AKs, ARs, UZIs, FALs and Title II weapons.  Thankfully I'm realizing that it's not necessarily that important for me to own all those toys (although it would be nice ).  But they're just material objects.  Maybe I've just become less materialistic lately, I don't know, but I'd rather stay here in Cali where I like it.  And all my friends and family are here!  To me, the toys don't warrant a reason to leave them.

On the other hand, I do obviously resent the fact that by law, we are not even ALLOWED to own said items.  I don't think anyone is arguing the absurdity and unconstitutional nature of the AW laws.  

I am a California Peace Officer and I cannot stand the stupid, assinine CA AW laws.  They make no sense and are almost impossible to enforce without carrying a binder with you to identify what is illegal and what is legal.  It bothers me that honest, law-abiding citizens are prevented from owning rifles and using them for legal purposes.

I KNOW that criminals are not deterred one bit by AW laws.  It is absolute, utter bullshit of the first order that AW laws reduce crime or reduce the amount of danger to me or the public.

Some of you have brought up a good point, and I feel I may have poorly worded what I was trying to say.

California laws, in period, are unjust and ridiculous. They serve no purpose other than to ADD to crime and to waste our money, not only on the stupid morons who make the laws, but also on the enforcement and lack of revinue it causes. When I say the AW laws don't bother me, I don't mean I can look the other way and they can make the AW laws as strict as they want because it won't bother me. What I mean is at their current level I am not infuriated or even irritated enough to the point where I would run from the state to shoot a big bore rifle. Don't get me wrong, I am as patriotic as the next guy (maybe even more); but I don't get infuriated to the point where I am willing to break the law or go to a crappier park of the country to live. One of the major reasons for that is the lack of rimfire laws, which are basically unregulated in California, which since I love rimfires makes me a happy camper. I have always loved the AR family, especially the CAR, but even in a free state I would probably have more fun with guns that we can still legally own here than with guns that people buy out of state. I guess my point is people blow up and exaggerate how 'great' owning these firearms are, and it clouds the people's mind here and they go bonkers because their pistol can't have threads on the barrel, so instead they would sacrifice $30k a year, the good weather, all the great sites, the great food, etc just to get threads on their pistol barrel; and to me it is as stupid as the laws themselves.

I know I am still coming off as bad as the hunters who "don't use assault weapons so they laws don't bother them" type of guys, but I really am not. As said, firearms are a passion of mine, and as I am sure most of you know, I LOVE to design and think up ideas to obey the laws in a way that thye don't like. I was making a California legal AR back when Vulcan first came out with theirs. I am right there to do what I can, when I can to legally preserve my God given right to own firearms. I believe both the country and state governments are in need of drastic reform because everything is upside down, and we are slowly turning into exactly what our fore fathers left England for. I guess another reason I don't get upset about them so much is because I am already passionate about our rights, even on levels that most people aren't. I can understand a law that tries to protect innocent people, even if it is flawed, but there are laws that were made just to abuse power and most of us go everyday without even thinking about them. Do you realize that buckling your belt effects NO ONE other than yourself, yet we have allowed someone to tell us that it is against the law to not drive with one on. They already control us from the standpoint that they know what is better for us than we do. Can anyone honestly give me a good reason for that law, or did some corrupt politician get bought out by the seat belt manufacturers to increase sales? To me that is a bigger unjust than firearms laws, because even if it's not as big of a deal, it should be because the principles are the same: What right does anyone have to tell me what to do?

Back to the topic, even though now I have totally killed my train of thought...Ahh yes, the handgun laws. Complete and moronic bullshit. I wasn't thinking about this one when I made the topic, probably because I don't buy many handguns (still a youngin'), but I should have. This is flawed logic and we all know it. In all honesty, I believe this could have been a flawed idea focused on the wrong arena of firearms. This SHOULD have been aimed at AWs. Yes you heard me right. What SHOULD have happened was the laws should have focused on AWs instead of handguns. There should be a law that states that any firearm that meets a certain criteria (like the one already set up), needs to be examined to make sure it's not a machine gun, etc and that once you buy one you need to register it. Our AW laws would not bother anyone if we were given the ability to own them but register them. I've said it before, I don't think anyone would mind having to pay $200 (like the federal tax stamp for NFA, suppressors, etc) to register an AW if they were still allowed to buy them now. That is the extent that firearm regulation SHOULD be, and if it were that way, it would be FAR easier to enforce the law and it would make millions, probably more like billions, of dollars in revenue each year for the state.

I've kind of gone off track and I had another point to make but I forgot it, so once I remember it or find something else to say, I'll be sure to post it.

Posted by vojta:
I am a California Peace Officer and I cannot stand the stupid, assinine CA AW laws. They make no sense and are almost impossible to enforce without carrying a binder with you to identify what is illegal and what is legal. It bothers me that honest, law-abiding citizens are prevented from owning rifles and using them for legal purposes.

I KNOW that criminals are not deterred one bit by AW laws. It is absolute, utter bullshit of the first order that AW laws reduce crime or reduce the amount of danger to me or the public

Amen to that Not lots of LEO would admit to that but yet we all know that true !
Keep safe

as for you Neowierd your wierd here on the board and maybe your thoughts and likes or dislikes are different then the rest of ours but that's the wonderfull thing about this country you can do that and nobody can tell you different. "O" I'll see you on the next sht

The M14/M1A is one of those rifles that I have wanted since I was a kid. I just never had the 'chedda' to get one, and it's hard to bring myself to pay $1.5k on a rifle I know I will sink another $1k into for mods and accessories like good glass, etc. I could also leave it stock, but that niche has already been filled by it's big brothers. I saw someone who made a custom ACOG mount for their M1A that allowed the use of their irons still, it was damned nice and I have wanted to try it ever since. I need to pull myself away from that mentalitiy; I tend to lean towards 'sniper' setups for my rifles and I need to stop that and teach myself good shooting technique. That's wehre these new boys come in (just got them about  2 weeks ago and I have been itching at the finger to get them out).



ETA: Oh yeah, the middle one is a first year production Winchest (one of the last from the CMP. I got mine the 14, as of the 19th they are sold out) and it came out of the box that way. I have not touched it outside of cycling it to make sure it works, and since CMP checks for headspace and what not I know it's safe to shoot. It litterally came out of the bow ready to have an enbloc and ammo put in it.

No I don't feel the same as you.  Yes the laws bother me.  

I'd chill out on the over the rimfire thing,  people might think you're limp wristed.

Anyone that thinks liking rimfires means you're limp wristed...well I'll let Harry from Harry and the Hendersons do my talking:


Just kidding. Seriously though, I never bought into the fascination that bigger and faster is better. Just about every single caliber has been issued by the military at one point or another, so each one has it's own niche, even if some are larger than others. I just don't see the fascination with firearms being HUGE to the scale that they become impractical. Like a .50AE Desert Ealge. Even the .357 Mag version is a handful, and what benefits do you get for bumping up to a .50AE out of a handgun? Not much.

Also, I know it's old, cliche, redundant, yadda yadda; but anyone who thinks the .22 is a crappy kid's caliber:
www.ruger1022.com/docs/israeli_sniper.htm

There are things I like about CA laws, and things I don't. Latter exceeds former by a wide margin

First, that handgun function test when you buy your handgun is somewhat of an evil necessity. If you are too stupid to safely use your handgun, you need a nice slap on the back of your head. It is really sad that some people think they can just buy the gun, and that would be it. They don't think about taking NRA courses, but just want to get a gun for whatever reason.

Second, HSC test is also an evil necessity. If you are too stupid to fail the test, maybe you shouldn't touch a firearm to begin with. The questions are somewhat of common sense, and you can study from a handbook before hand. I wish renewal doesn't cost for those who retake it, as long as they pass.

With the two mentioned above, it weeds out those who should not touch a gun because they are freaking stupid. (Although certain rifles can still be baught.) It also helps that it prevents some wannabes from owning a gun just for the cool-ness factor. These people should not be allowed to own a gun since they think it is cool. They need to know that firearm ownership comes with responsibility.

What I don't like about CA laws
Handgun roster:
For god sakes, if a gun is deemed safe, it should stay on the list unless there is a significant alteration of the approved handgun. As long as it's the same gun that was tested, it should remain on the list unless some manufacturing process is changed so the functionality of the gun is affected.

Magazine disconnect/loaded chamber indicator
This is one of the things antis took advantage of. I understand that by having another device, it might reduce one more problem of kids touching the gun. Even though the law is that the gun owner has to have the handgun in a safe or with a lock, sometimes it can be forgotten, and having another safety net is not bad.

When I was little, I knew that you can take magazines out of a semi-auto handgun. But I did not know that if there is a round in the chamber, it is still not safe. By having a magzine disconnect, it might save a child's life. However, this requires significant modification of gun's internal mechanism, and that is not going to happen for all the models.  So this is something that needs to be addressed.

One suggestion is that everytime a manufacturer gets one with magazine disconnect approved, they can also have one without magazine disconnect approved too. This will still put burden on manufacturers, but at least it addresses the issue and allows for future models to come in.

However, loaded chamber indicator is not going to work. For someone to know the significance of a loaded chamber indicator, they have to be taught on the significance of one. That little orange thing sticking out will not register in one's brain as loaded indicator to a general population.

No regards for those who are proficient.
I can trust a lot of shooters I know because they are safety conscious and is proficient. There is no reason to deny them in purchasing some "evil weapon". What CA needs to do is make a system where if someone wants to get a class 3 firearm, then they should be able to demonstrate that they are trustworthy upstanding citizen. As many knows, it's the person, not the gun. So CA should make a system so that if someone wants to purchase a class 3, then they need to show that the person is an avid shooter, and is a good standing citizen. Such example would be belonging to a range, and participating in shooting events regularly. You are more likely to be a safety person and not a psycho wack job if you do those.

The law should be made so that it does not affect those who place responsibility on high level. These people can do no harm to society, and they deserve the firearm of their choice. At the same time, we do not want to see some knucklehead owning a gun just because it's a manly thing to do, or just because it is cool. Those people tend to disregard safety, and gives rest of us a bad name.

Quoted: Do you realize that buckling your belt effects NO ONE other than yourself, yet we have allowed someone to tell us that it is against the law to not drive with one on. They already control us from the standpoint that they know what is better for us than we do.

You hit the problem right on the head. Liberal thinking idealists think that they know what's best for all of us. If THEY don't like something, then none of should have it. Whether it is a firearm, SUV, or smoking, THEY know what's best for us. This is the reason that I do not like California laws and yes, they do bother me. But I am practical and there are a lot of other things that I enjoy that keep me here in California, like family. I also delight in the fact that if I want to move out of state someday, the way that property values are rising in CA, I will be able to sell out and move somewhere else and buy a house with a lot more land surrounding it with my initial investment on my house.

Like Paul has said, instead of dwelling on how the laws attempt to limit my freedom, I focus on working around/within the problem. I have registered AW's but the state regulates where I can take them. So I purchased a Ruger Mini14, Kel-Tec SU-16, SA M1A. My first purchased weapon was a Remington 870 that I purchased on my 18th birthday and I still own that one. That was a long time ago (think my screen name has my year of birth in it) and I feel well defended in my ability to protect myself and my family. But I, nor others should be made to jump through hoops to own whatever it is that they want as long as it not something that is inherently against the public good to do so. And no I don't mean that just because some nutball shoots an AK at a school yard and kills kids, that AW are inherently bad. Just the opposite. There are simply bad people out there and I am more afraid for my 5 year old that a bad person will try to hurt him in any way, than I am from a law abiding citizen owning an AW or non approved handgun to protect his family. I don't like Liberals who feel it's their right to decide for me what is inherently bad for me. I don't smoke but you will never hear me trying to deny someone else the right to do it if that is what they want, unless they are rude about me not wanting to smoke in an area where I cannot move away from them. Their desire to smoke and my desire not to can co-exist without a government body dictating to us by making a law. My 5 year old is no safer from being killed by some nutball while in kindergarten now that there is a law banning AW for the common people. A bad person could still hurt him if they desired. The law just makes someone feel good about being able to ban an inanimate object that without the nutball behind the trigger is just sitting in a closet somewhere.

Oh by the way. I like rimfires as well as centerfires. The pistol I shoot the most a Beretta model 76 which is long out of production. It is the most accurate pistol I own. At $9 for a brick of 500 rounds, it is very inexpensive to shoot several hundred rounds in a half to one hour session at the range. This is a great way to work on trigger contol as well. I even purchased an Advantage Arms conversion kit for one of my Glocks because I like to shoot rimfires as well as centerfires. It's also a great way to introduce my son to shooting as well.

Quoted: First, that handgun function test when you buy your handgun is somewhat of an evil necessity. If you are too stupid to safely use your handgun, you need a nice slap on the back of your head. It is really sad that some people think they can just buy the gun, and that would be it. Second, HSC test is also an evil necessity. If you are too stupid to fail the test, maybe you shouldn't touch a firearm to begin with. .

While we're at it then, we should make everyone take a test and get certified to pump their own gas. I can't tell you how much time I spend wasted, waiting for some idiot who can't seem to figure it out.

They bother me.  I'm a left-coast native but realitively new to California... I'm only here for the easy-ish money.

I'm not an AR superfan but I wouldn't mind owning one or at least have the option to.  Ironically, I wasn't all that interested in them untill I couldn't have them per the AW ban.  But now the ban is lifted, I'll admit I'm not a happy camper about having moved to one of the few places where I can't own what other Americans can.  IMO, the NFA act is ample control.   Personally, I wouldn't care if my neighbor had a stinger missile as long as they are lawful and have it was registered as a DD or whatever.

Aren't .22s on the antis shitlist?  I thought I read something about trying to get a big tax on rimfire ammo.

ETA: IMO, hands-down, the best part of living in LaLaLand is the grades they make restuants stick in the windows

Most of my firearms are C&Rs.  I like old military rifles because if you have one you've got a firearm, a club, and (if so equipped) a sword.

The AW laws are stupid and largely unenforceable.  They're not enough to get me to leave the state.  I have a lot of other things in my life that are more important.

I am going to register my AR-50.  I got it partly for the same reasons I bought AR-15s when I could - To give the lefties in Excremento the finger, and because I could.

All gun laws in the state of California worry me, that is all!!!   And yes your alone in my eyes.  

Whether or not you collect ARs or AKs or whatever, the problem with the assault weapon laws is they are gun bans, based on entirely arbitray criteria selected for their ability to alarm the uneducated into supporting the legislation.

In the last 20 years the gun grabbers have wised up and they no longer say they want to ban all guns (since they know a complete gun ban would be unpopular).  Instead, they invent these classes of guns to ban, "assault weapons," "Saturday night specials," "50 BMGs," any handgun not certified by the state, etc.  It's a de facto incremental gun ban, and that's the problem.

Of course, I'm radical enough to insist the 1934 NFA was an inexcusable gun ban.