Calif Gun Rights=bill SB 249

[brian90744]

FYI=


Warning: SB 249 is California's Worst Gun Confiscation Threat in 20 Years!
Posted on August 3, 2012


Contact your state Legislator TODAY!

Senator Leland Yee of San Francisco now trying to ban and confiscate more so-called "assault weapons."

Originally, Senate Bill 249 was a quiet agriculture bill that passed in the California Senate back in May. With sneaky back-door tactics, Senator Yee turned the bill into a gun ban monster.

SB 249, as amended, would make a small but profound change to the definition of what constitutes a detachable magazine for a semiautomatic firearm. By doing so, hundreds of thousands of semi-automatic rifles, which were legally sold in California over the last decade, would become illegal on July 1, 2013.

The existing definition of detachable magazine was used by Governor Brown's administration for the four years he served as Attorney General.

Senator Yee's bill has no provisions to allow permitting, licensing or reimbursement for the loss of valuable property. Worse yet, the bill doesn't require a public notice program to advise owners of this change in state law.

Thousands of owners could be arrested for inadvertent violations. If you own an affected firearm, your only choices would be to destroy it, surrender it to a law enforcement agency, sell it out of state or have it confiscated at the time of your arrest! Which option would you prefer?

Call AND E-mail your state legislators TODAY and urge them to OPPOSE SB 249

Contact information for your state Senator can be found here.

Contact information for your state Assembly Member can be found here.

Also, contact Governor Jerry Brown and urge him to tell the state Legislature that he stands by the existing definition of detachable magazine,just as he did when he was Attorney General.

Governor Brown can be reached at 916-445-2841 and by e-mail at: http://gov.ca.gov/m_contact.php

Please forward this alert to your family, friends and fellow gun owners across California and urge them to do the same.

California is going to need EVERYONE to help fend off this attack!

[HillbillyfromAL]

My suggestion get out before they close the roads to keep you in. Your opinion doesn't really matter there and you know it.

[ReconH3]

That's why I moved out of that State with no hope.


"Ex Umbris Venimus"

Sent from my iPhone

[haven]

Ownership of an "assault weapon" is already banned in most cases by California law. The text of the amendment deals with kits that modify weapons with fixed magazine into ones with removable magazine. The way I read it, the weapon would not necessarily be confiscated, but the kit could be required to be removed.

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/11-12/...d_asm_v96.html

[IdaSHO]

My suggestion get out before they close the roads to keep you in. Your opinion doesn't really matter there and you know it.

Not only does your opinion not matter, states like CA are overwriting the Constitution as they see fit.

[FellowTraveler]

Have said it countless times and probably will say it many times more, the move to military police state tactics in America has been ongoing since 1945 with so-called law enforcement armed with implements of war the very implements a militia would have as a deterrent to any would be tyrant.

Tyrants "the predator class" do as they do mostly because of silent consent however these days the silence comes from the ongoing pacification by "law enforcement military occupational force tactics of judge, jury & executioner with the fear of instant death and resulting oppression of the private American citizens aka; citizens of the several states of the union".

As for the constitution only two (2) options exists now "restore the republic or the break up of the union of the several states with government by contract only" either way it will be a massive undertaking not for the meek and timid.

Freedom & Liberty is reserved for those who dare! (a. colesanti 1995)

[cnynrat]

Ownership of an "assault weapon" is already banned in most cases by California law. The text of the amendment deals with kits that modify weapons with fixed magazine into ones with removable magazine. The way I read it, the weapon would not necessarily be confiscated, but the kit could be required to be removed.

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/11-12/...d_asm_v96.html

As a resident of this state, I follow this stuff closely. Haven, you are correct that this was the original intent of the bill. Unfortunately, the bill is going to change (again) into a form that, if signed, will make felons of hundreds of thousands of law-abiding citizens at the stroke of a pen.

Some background may be worthwhile. Through a long and tortured series of mis-steps by the CA legislature and various court cases, Californians have ended up with a complex set of regulations governing semi-automatic rifles built in a miltary pattern (I won't call them assault rifles because they are not, but we're talking about semi-automatic versions of AR-15s, AK47s etc.). To make a long story short, we can own them, but they must be configured such that the magazine can not be removed without the use of a tool. The code specifically identifies a bullet as an allowable tool. Some clever guys came up with the idea of modifying the magazine release so the button was recessed in a small hole such that a finger would not be able to depress the button, but a small tool, such as the tip of a .223 round, would be able to activate the button. These devices are known as "bullet buttons." Through a long back and forth dance with the CA DOJ we have arrived at an understanding that bullet button configured rifles are legal, but that as soon as you attach a "tool" to the rifle you have constructed an illegal firearm.

Along comes a guy who is too clever for his own good. He makes a device called a "mag magnet" which is a small magnet in a plastic shroud that fits over a bullet botton and turns the rifle into configuration where you can easily drop the mag without the use of any other tool. It's quite clear that attaching a mag magnet to a rifle with one or more of the prohibited characteristics for semi-automatic rifles is a felony. Those in the know in the CA gun community speak with these people in an effort to try to get them the cease and desist, but they persist anyway.

Eventually, a San Fran TV station runs a "news piece" on the mag magnet, which is viewed by Sen. Yee. He decides he must save us from ourselves, so he "guts and amends" an innocuous agriculture bill and turns it into a bill that initially attempts to make so-called conversion kits illegal. He initially claims he is only trying to outlaw such devices as the mag magnet that can be used to convert a "fixed magazine" rifle into a rifle where the magazine can be removed. Strange, isn't it, that the use of the mag magnet is already clearly illegal under our current code. Why the need for a new law?

Well, many folks point out the fact that his initial attempt at writing this bill is hopelessly vague, redundant with current law, and a number of other flaws. Then we have the shooting in Aurora. This fires up Sen. Yee and he has made it clear that he plans to amend the bill once again to make it illegal to own any centerfire semi-automatic rifle with one or more of the disqualifying features (collapsible stock, pistol grip, flash hider, etc.) if the magazine is removable with the press of a button even if a tool is required to press the button. We expect these amendments to the bill to be made this week.

The most reliable estimates are that there are hundreds of thousands of bullet button equipped rifles in CA. I've seen some estimates as high as 500,000. All these rifles would become illegal should this bill pass and be signed into law. There are no provisions to compensate owners of these rifles. There are no provisions to notify owners of the retroactive change to the law.

I am not optimistic that we can stop this in the CA legislature, but I'd encourage those that want to voice your opposition to this bill to visit www.StopSB249.org where you will find a number of tools to help with contacting the right folks. I think there are a couple of Constitutional issues with the bill, on both 2nd amendment of 5th amendment grounds, so if passed I suspect we'll end up prevailing in the courts in the long run. I believe Gov. Brown is smart enough to recognize those issues and there is a small chance he may veto the bill as a result.

[BIGdaddy]

Wow, that's hard to imagine. Do they expect those hundreds of thousands of Bullet buttoned AR owners to simply give up their rifles?


I'd say a veto from Brown, or a 30-day registration of rifles that would then become registered assault weapons would be more likely...

But, stranger things have happened in this state..haha!

[HillbillyfromAL]

The rule was wrong not to mention ignorant in the first place. You think they wouldn't expect everyone to turn their rifles over? Good luck to you guys that live there, you're gonna need it

[BIGdaddy]

The rule was wrong not to mention ignorant in the first place. You think they wouldn't expect everyone to turn their rifles over? Good luck to you guys that live there, you're gonna need it

From the knucklehead penning this bill, yes, I would expect it. But from lawmakers in general..historically speaking: "No". Previous bans on allowed those wishing to keep their soon to be banned items a short window of time during which they could register. (or, to their surprise...seek to possess these items if they didn't own them already. haha)