Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
he hearing's end, the committee had voted along party lines to approve bills that would add all semi-automatic rifles that accept detachable magazines to the state's list of banned assault weapons; ban owning any magazine that holds more than 10 rounds, including existing ones; ban bullet buttons that allow fast swapping of rifle magazines; require long-gun buyers to pass a written safety test; and add more crimes to the list of those that would bar someone from carrying a firearm
not all semi auto matic weapons, simply those with detachable clips and magazines. So your hunting rifle is fine. No one is talking about confiscation of guns.
Stupid gun rights sites posting bs again.
I don't agree with the law, but I don't live in California, and I'll let the supreme court decide whats constitutional
Banning assault rifles is not against the Constitution. Banning all guns, including all handguns, revolvers, pistols, etc. would be.
actually, it is against the Constitution and the 2nd Amendment. show me where in the 2nd amendment it says anything about governments ability to make law against any of the peoples right to keep and bear arms?
he hearing's end, the committee had voted along party lines to approve bills that would add all semi-automatic rifles that accept detachable magazines to the state's list of banned assault weapons; ban owning any magazine that holds more than 10 rounds, including existing ones; ban bullet buttons that allow fast swapping of rifle magazines; require long-gun buyers to pass a written safety test; and add more crimes to the list of those that would bar someone from carrying a firearm
not all semi auto matic weapons, simply those with detachable clips and magazines. So your hunting rifle is fine. No one is talking about confiscation of guns.
Stupid gun rights sites posting bs again.
I don't agree with the law, but I don't live in California, and I'll let the supreme court decide whats constitutional
My hunting rifles have detachable mags so yes, this would affect me.
he hearing's end, the committee had voted along party lines to approve bills that would add all semi-automatic rifles that accept detachable magazines to the state's list of banned assault weapons; ban owning any magazine that holds more than 10 rounds, including existing ones; ban bullet buttons that allow fast swapping of rifle magazines; require long-gun buyers to pass a written safety test; and add more crimes to the list of those that would bar someone from carrying a firearm
not all semi auto matic weapons, simply those with detachable clips and magazines. So your hunting rifle is fine. No one is talking about confiscation of guns.
Stupid gun rights sites posting bs again.
I don't agree with the law, but I don't live in California, and I'll let the supreme court decide whats constitutional
How many semi autos, including "hunting" rifles do NOT take a detachable magazine? I'm not a hunter, I'm a competition shooter, and since when is the 2A about hunting? I don't live in CA either, but I travel there, with firearms, for events. So, their laws concern me.
Again, a little actual knowledge of the real issues at hand here, would go a long way. But, only if you expect to be taken seriously.
The first state that actually passes a loony tunes law like that, will be the first state to see a 80% decrease in population.
They will all move to another state.
Not a chance. This is happening in California, remember, if Moonbeam signs the bill. A majority of the population will wear flowers in their hair, hug some trees, bring out the drum circles, toke it up and dance the full moon away in celebration. What population losses may occur will be more than made up for by armed members of the criminal elements from other states moving in for easy pickings.
he hearing's end, the committee had voted along party lines to approve bills that would add all semi-automatic rifles that accept detachable magazines to the state's list of banned assault weapons; ban owning any magazine that holds more than 10 rounds, including existing ones; ban bullet buttons that allow fast swapping of rifle magazines; require long-gun buyers to pass a written safety test; and add more crimes to the list of those that would bar someone from carrying a firearm
Thanks for link. Not being in California, I did not know what a "bullet button" is. I am reasonably informed on gun stuff and had never heard of a "bullet button." It appears that this is a magazine release button that can't be operated with a fingertip. Instead you have to press the tip of a cartridge against it to operate it. Why would anyone do this? Apparently this change renders the rifle as no longer using detachable mags under the law, even though in reality it does.
It goes to show how abjectly moronic these gun ban folks are. Now they say they want to ban the 'bullet buttons.' People will just go to top loading via stripper clips. I recall reading an account by a guy who carried an M-14 in Vietnam. Instead of carrying lots of mags, they just packed 2 or 3 mags, and did most reloading with stripper clips. Evidently they did not consider the detachability of the mag to be an overwhelming advantage. They had the option, but didn't even usually use it.
Thanks for link. Not being in California, I did not know what a "bullet button" is. I am reasonably informed on gun stuff and had never heard of a "bullet button." It appears that this is a magazine release button that can't be operated with a fingertip. Instead you have to press the tip of a cartridge against it to operate it. Why would anyone do this? Apparently this change renders the rifle as no longer using detachable mags under the law, even though in reality it does.
It goes to show how abjectly moronic these gun ban folks are. Now they say they want to ban the 'bullet buttons.' People will just go to top loading via stripper clips. I recall reading an account by a guy who carried an M-14 in Vietnam. Instead of carrying lots of mags, they just packed 2 or 3 mags, and did most reloading with stripper clips. Evidently they did not consider the detachability of the mag to be an overwhelming advantage. They had the option, but didn't even usually use it.
There is already a product to bypass the dumb BB ban. What a joke.
There is already a product to bypass the dumb BB ban. What a joke.
I have often wondered why they want to pass these bans that are so obviously ineffective.
One effect that such a ban might have is to induce annoyed gun owners, especially younger folks, to move out of the state. These are of course people who tend to vote Republican, so that would strengthen Democrat's iron grip on the state. That's a round about explanation, but it makes more sense than the stated explanation, that they are doing this to try to reduce violence and improve safety.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
