California governor signs stringent gun bills, vetoes others

[The Legion]

SACRAMENTO, Calif. — Gov. Jerry Brown signed six stringent gun-control measures Friday that will require people to turn in high-capacity magazines and mandate background checks for ammunition sales, as California Democrats seek to strengthen gun laws that are already among the strictest in the nation.

Brown vetoed five other bills, including a requirement to report lost or stolen weapons to authorities and a limit of one gun purchase per person per month.

The Democratic governor's action is consistent with his mixed record on gun control. Some of the enacted bills duplicate provisions of a November ballot measure by Democratic Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom. Some of the vetoed measures also appear in Newsom's initiative.

"My goal in signing these bills is to enhance public safety by tightening our existing laws in a responsible and focused manner, while protecting the rights of law-abiding gun owners," Brown wrote in a one-sentence message to lawmakers.

Gun control measures have long been popular with the Democratic lawmakers who control the California Senate and Assembly. But they stepped up their push this year following the December shooting in San Bernardino by a couple who pledged allegiance to the Islamic State group.

Advocates on both sides of the gun-control debate say California has some of the nation's strictest gun laws. It is one of six states to get the highest grade from the pro-gun control Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence.

The state's move to tighten them further comes amid years of gridlock at the federal level, which spawned a tense clash in Washington last week as Democrats camped out on the floor of the U.S. House and shouted down Republicans.

The bills angered Republicans and gun-rights advocates who say Democrats are trampling on 2nd Amendment rights, creating new restrictions that won't cut off the flow of guns to people intent on using them for nefarious purposes.

"On the eve of Independence Day, independence and freedom and liberty in California has been chopped down at the knees and kicked between the legs," said Sam Paredes, executive director of the advocacy group Gun Owners of California.

Lawsuits challenging the new laws are likely once they take effect next year, Paredes said.

Brown's action will require people who own magazines that hold more than 10 rounds to give them up. It extends a 1999 law that made it illegal to buy a high-capacity magazine or to bring one into the state but allowed people who already owned them to keep them.

In an attempt to slow gun users from rapidly reloading, the governor signed a bill outlawing new weapons that have a device known as a bullet button. Gun makers developed bullet buttons to get around California's assault weapons ban, which prohibited new rifles with magazines that can be detached without the aid of tools. A bullet buttons allows a shooter to quickly dislodge the magazine using the tip of a bullet or other small tool.

People will be allowed to keep weapons they already own with bullet buttons, which are often referred to as "California compliant," but they'll be required to register them.

Brown also endorsed a bill making another attempt to regulate ammunition sales after a law passed in 2009 was struck down by a Fresno County judge who said it was too vague. The new law will require ammunition sellers to be licensed and buyers to undergo background checks. Transactions will be recorded.

He also opted to require a background check before a gun can be loaned to someone who isn't a family member.

"Strong gun laws work. ... What we're doing in California is a better job of keeping guns out of dangerous hands," said Amanda Wilcox, a spokeswoman for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, whose daughter was killed by a shooter using a high-capacity magazine.

The governor vetoed an effort to expand a six-month-old program that allows courts to temporarily restrict gun ownership rights for people suspected of being dangerous and decided against restricting all firearm purchases to one per month, a limitation that already applies to handguns.

Another bill he vetoed would have asked voters to strengthen penalties for stealing a gun, which voters will already be deciding through Newsom's initiative. The ballot measure also will ask voters to require reporting of lost and stolen firearms — an idea Brown rejected Friday and has rejected at least twice before.

"I continue to believe that responsible people report the loss or theft of a firearm and irresponsible people do not; it is not likely that this bill would change that," he wrote in a veto message.

Newsom's initiative has put a spotlight on the lieutenant governor as he campaigns for governor in 2018. He's been at loggerheads with Senate President Pro Tem Kevin de Leon, a Los Angeles Democrat who tried unsuccessfully to persuade Newsom to drop the ballot measures in favor of legislative action.

Brown's vetoes protected Newsom's initiative from becoming moot. A spokesman for Brown, Evan Westrup, said voters "will have a chance to go even further in November, if they choose."

[DWARREN123]

The question is would any of the new requirements have stopped a shooting?

Did any of the old laws stop a shooting?

[Garufa]

34 minutes ago, DWARREN123 said:

The question is would any of the new requirements have stopped a shooting?

Did any of the old laws stop a shooting?

Actually, that's not the question.

The question is when do such laws reach the rest of the country. 

[Ugly]

The real question is how much of this idiocy are we gonna tolerate?

 

I'll answer that. All of it. 

Edited July 3, 2016 by Ugly

[Wingshooter]

I keep waiting for total industries to cut off CA. Whether it's a car engine or an AR15, I wouldn't pour money into R&D just to keep up with their excessively restrictive laws. 

[Mindless-Focus]

For whatever it's worth, Falkor Defense will no longer sell anything to CA Leo, agents, or any government official. 

[Mindless-Focus]

[Chucktshoes]

So, as soon as Jerry Brown signed the law banning bullet button devices, the maker of the original Bullet Button released a new product. 

 

 

Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!

[nightrunner]

13 hours ago, Wingshooter said:

I keep waiting for total industries to cut off CA. Whether it's a car engine or an AR15, I wouldn't pour money into R&D just to keep up with their excessively restrictive laws. 

It would happen, except for the fact that their is a disproportionately large amount of money in California compared to other states. Lots of money means lots of it being spent on things like new cars and "assault weapons" and other highly regulated items. It's one thing to cut off just the government entity over there but all the citizens as well, that's a large revenue loss. 

 

Personally, if just 2-3 companies, including an industry giant, did it for a particular industry, I think it would catch on. Until some sort of government regulation forced them to make it Cali compliant in order to sell in the rest of the country.

 

We are screwed either way.

[vontar]

Da F#@K is this

 

So we hear, we are not coming for you guns.  But they are making it a crime to go to bed on June 30th, 2017 and wake up a criminal due to the stroke of a pen.

Senate Bill 1446, authored by Sen. Loni Hancock, D-Berkeley, restricts possession of ammunition magazines that hold more than 10 rounds.

subsequent offense, for a person to possess any large-capacity magazine, regardless of the date the magazine was acquired. The bill would require a person in lawful possession of a large-capacity magazine prior to July 1, 2017, to dispose of the magazine, as provided.

A person who, prior to July 1, 2017, legally possesses a large-capacity magazine shall dispose of that magazine by any of the following means:
(1) Remove the large-capacity magazine from the state.
(2) Prior to July 1, 2017, sell the large-capacity magazine to a licensed firearms dealer.
(3) Destroy the large-capacity magazine.
(4) Surrender the large-capacity magazine to a law enforcement agency for destruction.
(d) For purposes of this section, “manufacturing” includes both fabricating a magazine and assembling a magazine from a combination of parts, including, but not limited to, the body, spring, follower, and floor plate or end plate, to be a fully functioning large-capacity magazine.
(e) The provisions of this section are cumulative and shall not be construed as restricting the application of any other law. However, an act or omission punishable in different ways by different provisions of this code shall not be punished under more than one provision.

Edited July 5, 2016 by vontar

[shotgunshooter]

To those poor bastards out in California I hope they remember that "Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God."

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

[E4 No More]

I don't feel sorry for them one bit! They elected these idiots. If they have another San Bernadino I'm going to have some strong mixed emotions about it. I won't know to laugh or cry!

[Ugly]

Yeah, it won't come here. Stand by. It's only a matter of time till someone else strokes their pen. 

[nightrunner]

2 hours ago, Ugly said:

It's only a matter of time till someone else strokes their pen. 

Is that what those young whippersnappers call it now? Times are a changin...

[Oh Shoot]

4 hours ago, shotgunshooter said:

To those poor bastards out in California I hope they remember that "Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God."

Well, we'll see if the rest of us poor bastards behave any differently -- because federal gun law will be much the same the next time the Dems get the Triumvirate in DC. And at some point they will, ya know.

- OS

Edited July 6, 2016 by Oh Shoot

[300winmag]

California has unfortunately regulated itself to death and it's not just guns but everything.

[DaveTN]

So all (except those owned by owners willing to take the risk) 11+ round magazines in CA are going to be on the net for sale?

[nightrunner]

1 hour ago, DaveTN said:

So all (except those owned by owners willing to take the risk) 11+ round magazines in CA are going to be on the net for sale?

I believe they are to be destroyed.

[crossfire]

9 minutes ago, nightrunner said:

I believe they are to be destroyed.

I read it as you can sell it, just as long as it's out of the state before July 1, 2017.

 

A person who, prior to July 1, 2017, legally possesses a large-capacity magazine shall dispose of that magazine by any of the following means:
(1) Remove the large-capacity magazine from the state.
(2) Prior to July 1, 2017, sell the large-capacity magazine to a licensed firearms dealer.
(3) Destroy the large-capacity magazine.
(4) Surrender the large-capacity magazine to a law enforcement agency for destruction

Edited July 6, 2016 by crossfire

[Caster]

Civil Unrest

 

Coming soon to a city near you.

[DaveTN]

I wonder if they will be allowed to use the Hillary defense; “Yes, I did it, but I’m a good person that didn’t know and I won’t do it anymore.” I bet if she is elected she wouldn’t recommend an unknowing person that got caught up in this get the break she got. I bet most California prosecutors won’t either.

[tnhawk]

On ‎7‎/‎5‎/‎2016 at 3:13 PM, vontar said:

Da F#@K is this

 

So we hear, we are not coming for you guns.  But they are making it a crime to go to bed on June 30th, 2017 and wake up a criminal due to the stroke of a pen.

Senate Bill 1446, authored by Sen. Loni Hancock, D-Berkeley, restricts possession of ammunition magazines that hold more than 10 rounds.

subsequent offense, for a person to possess any large-capacity magazine, regardless of the date the magazine was acquired. The bill would require a person in lawful possession of a large-capacity magazine prior to July 1, 2017, to dispose of the magazine, as provided.

A person who, prior to July 1, 2017, legally possesses a large-capacity magazine shall dispose of that magazine by any of the following means:
(1) Remove the large-capacity magazine from the state.
(2) Prior to July 1, 2017, sell the large-capacity magazine to a licensed firearms dealer.
(3) Destroy the large-capacity magazine.
(4) Surrender the large-capacity magazine to a law enforcement agency for destruction.
(d) For purposes of this section, “manufacturing” includes both fabricating a magazine and assembling a magazine from a combination of parts, including, but not limited to, the body, spring, follower, and floor plate or end plate, to be a fully functioning large-capacity magazine.
(e) The provisions of this section are cumulative and shall not be construed as restricting the application of any other law. However, an act or omission punishable in different ways by different provisions of this code shall not be punished under more than one provision.

(5) Leave the State of California

[TrickyNicky]

4 hours ago, tnhawk said:

(5) Leave the State of California

I did and haven't looked back yet, things like this just validate that decision for me. 

 

There re is a lot about Ca to love, but the stupid is just so rampant it hurts.