Rather than clutter another thread, I thought this might be of interest as it's own discussion...



Now, while I see the point that many consider the DROS a registration, there are some fine lines that I see that exist here.  The DROS is not registration, but is a fine line away from it.

Under the definition of registration, I would have to notify them every time I moved.  Under registration, they would require me to have paperwork that I had registered the gun.  Under registration, I would, in fact, have that paperwork.  I'd likely have to pay a fee for a background check every few years or so, but that's debatable.

For instance:
I have 2 registered "assault weapons".  When I move, I have a certain amount of time to notify the CA DOJ that I have moved (makes it easier for them to find my cold dead hands).  I must carry paperwork with me in regards to those guns.  Additionally, I must provide that paperwork when asked.

I also have an undisclosed amount of non-registered items, and the CA DOJ has some information in regards to the fact that I had at one point in time, acquired these weapons.  What they do not have EXPLICITLY is where I live.  Granted, they can find me with a little hard work, but I don't have to help them.  Additionally, as I don't have any paperwork that I can present them, there is no defacto requirement that I have to provide proof of the DROS on any handguns I own.  

Why the finer points of disctinction here?  It would be VERY hard for them to stick me with a charge of having an unregistered weapon, as I cannot provide proof that the gun is indeed registered, as none was ever supplied.  Their lack of a record for XYZ handgun in their system is not proof of my guilt, and the burden of proof is upon them in such an issue.  Regardless, I have kept all of the paperwork that I got my hands on regarding my guns.  I have no desire to ever be in this problematic situation.

At the same time, I do definitely recognize the fact that I am on multiple lists.  It's a fine line, but it exists.  

No where in the dictionary under the defination of registration does it say it includes notifying of an address change. Niether does it require that YOU have paper work in your posession. In CA the back ground check goes through the CA DOJ. As has been said before when you purchase a hand gun the information about that particular gun is included, not the case with a long gun. The DOJ gets that info, along with your DL number and SS number. Even if you were to move it would be exceedingly easy for them to check you last known address from those two items alone.

If you are stopped for, let's say a traffic violation, and for what ever reason the officer finds you have a hand gun in the vehicle, being legally transported. There is no burden of proof on you to prove it was legally purchased and registered. They might check the number to make sure it is not listed as stolen or has been used in a crime. But if you are transporting the handgun illegally, i.e. concealed, without a proper permit to do so, and the gun is NOT legally registered to you, you [i]can[/i] be charged with a felony. ( if it is registered to you it's still a misdemeanor, unless you fall in that category of persons known as "gang members" ) We are talking hand guns here, not an AW as those have had seperate laws written just for them. To compare the registration process of an AW with that for a handgun would be comparing apples and oranges.

Besides, Section 11106(1)(c) of the California Penal Code requires the Attorney General to maintain a "registry" of all handguns purchased or transferred in the state.

So it seems that none of the three of you have any problem whatsoever with the new bills requiring registration of all handguns?

Maintaining a registry, and forcing registration to me are two different aspects.  Currently, we don't have to "show our papers" to the 'gestapo'.  But if forced registration comes down the line, we will have one more aspect where we are treated as subjects, or worse, as criminals.  Do you not see the difference?  Maintaining a registry, or rather a list of people who have purchased handguns since 1968, is far different than requiring each and every gun owner to submit to inquiry about their legal right to own or possess a certain weapon.  

Additionally, it seems that the conversion of the misdemeanor charges to felony would be subject to the whims of the government.  Where is our due process?  Where is our ability to defend ourselves?  How can we prove that we are registered?  

I instead offer that the registration referred to by Pthfndr in the Penal Code (too lazy to look it up, but I know it exists), refers to the following items available in California:

1. Voluntary registration of firearms
2. Mandatory registration of firearms for new residents to California
3. Future registration requirements to be imposed at a later date and time

Suffice it to say, I know that I am on the government list.  I know that I will have my door knocked on at some point in time, if things go the way they seem they will.  I know that this will all be moot in the future.  But I believe that for right now, that these are two separate items, a registry (or list), and an active, intrusive, mandatory participation registration.

---
Also, the SSN is not mandatory, it is optional, and the form says so (surprisingly enough).  I've felt uncomfortable about ever giving my SSN number, and declined when I saw that it was optional.  

DROS for handguns is registration. I can access the list of handguns you own via your California Drivers License number or even your full name an date of birth. The guns are registered to YOU, not your address. so it doesnt matter if you move.

Even SB23 doesnt require change of address notification. Becuase again the guns are registered under your drivers license number, full name, & date of birth.

DROS info for long guns is not retained by CAL DOJ and even if it was it doesnt include a description of the weaopon type or serial number. Its no more specific that "Long gun".