Showing posts with label legislation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label legislation. Show all posts

Tuesday, August 7, 2012

Calguns Call to Action!


Yesterday the Calguns.net forum issued a call to action for all Calgunners and California gun owners generally to resist efforts to pass SB 249 in the state legislature.

Why is this bill so important? Because it affects all owners of rifles equipped with bullet buttons, the device used to covert a CA illegal assault weapon into a CA legal semi-automatic rifle. The number of owners affected by this law number into the hundreds of thousands.

As stated in this press release by State Senator Leland Yee, the intent of SB 249 is to make the bullet button illegal:

Specifically, Yee’s bill will prohibit featured assault weapons with ammunition feeding devices that include but are not limited to magazines “that may be detached from the firearm by depressing a button on the firearm either with the finger or by use of a tool or bullet.” The bill will also direct the Attorney General’s office to develop new regulations regarding the definition of assault weapons.

The intent is clear: bullet buttons will be made illegal because Yee thinks that this is a loophole in the California Assault Weapon law, a position that the hypocritical Attorney General Kamala Harris now supports, despite her office going on the record in court filings deeming bullet button-eqquiped rifles to be legal:

In recent years, the gun industry has developed a loophole that undermines California's assault weapons law,” said Harris. “I applaud the Legislature's interest in addressing this problem, and support efforts to pass legislation needed to restore the law's original intent. The Bureau of Firearms stands ready to prepare and implement regulations that will follow this clarifying legislation.”

To stop this bill we need all California gun owners to act. Using the information and guidelines in the above linked Calguns.net article, contact your representative today to voice your opposition to SB 249.

Monday, October 10, 2011

Long Gun Open Carry - Comming to A Starbucks Near You!

Well, Governor Brown did it.  Starting January 1, 2012, it will be illegal to carry an unloaded handgun in public in California.  But as noted here, and many other places, this bill says nothing about log guns.  I think we will see more protest activities in the future, but this time people will be carrying their long guns, especially so-called assault weapons.

This may not be a wise policy.

When confronted with firearms in public, our legislature reacts by outlawing the practice of carrying guns, even unloaded guns, where the easily frightened sheeple of California can see them.  Given that most people in California think that AK-47 and AR-15 rifles are illegal to possess because of the assault weapon ban, the sight of bullet button-equipped rifle might be just a little alarming, I would expect the legislature to act to prohibit public carry of unloaded rifles as well.

They may also re-visit the CA assault weapon law in order to outlaw Off-List Lowers and the use of bullet buttons.  It would be interesting to see if such efforts would survive the inevitable court challenges.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Update 10/11/2011:

Here is one reaction from an UOC advocate, Yih-Chau Chang, press secretary of Responsible Citizens of California:
Chang added that many such advocates, including himself, carry exposed, unloaded handguns on a daily basis and will likely choose to openly carry unloaded long guns in lieu of handguns once the law takes effect in January.
I wonder what the reaction of the Legislature will be once people start carrying rifles in public.

California Gun Bills - Results Are In

Governor Brown has signed or vetoed the various firearms bills sent to him by the Legislature.  This post on Calguns has the scorecard:

  • AB809 Long Gun Registration: Signed.  Starting January 1, 2014, all long gun transfers will have to be performed using a FFL and DROS.   In effect, California now requires long gun registration.
  • SB819 Redirection of DROS Fees: Signed. Starting immediately, DROS fees are to be redirected into the DOJ budget for regulatory and enforcement activities.
  • AB144 Unloaded Open Carry Ban: Signed.  As of January 1, 2012, open carry of an unloaded handgun will be a misdemeanor.
  • SB610 LTC Reform: Signed. Starting immediately, all agencies processing applications for a License To Carry a concealed weapon must follow uniform procedures as outlined in this bill.  This is a VERY GOOD result.
  • AB427 Handgun Ammunition: Vetoed. Thank God! At least we don't have to fight the AB 962 fight again this year!
These results are not as good as I hoped, but not as bad as I feared.  The worst of the bills that have passed is long gun registration, of course, and I am sorry about AB 144.  SB819 is not really a surprise since the state is broke, and Brown will be trying to sweep any amount to money he can into operating budgets.  But two very big pieces of legislation are now law: LTC application process must be uniform, and we don't have to re-fight the ammunition fight from last year.

Saturday, September 17, 2011

600 bills, $12,000,000 and a part-time Legislature


In this article, which I was reading because it mentioned AB 144, the Open Carry ban, one finds this little factoid:
Many aren't worth the paper their glowing news releases were printed on — and certainly not worth the $20,000 legislative cost, on average, that each bill ate up in processing. “
So, let's do the math, shall we? 600 bills means that our frivolous legislature has wasted most of the $12,000,000 that has been spent on the pile of steaming BS that it sent to the Governor's desk.
This seems to be a pretty powerful justification for switching to a part-time legislature.  It seems to work for a lot of other states.
When will we, the citizens, learn that we get the government we deserve?

Tuesday, February 22, 2011

National CCW Reciprocity Bill - H.R. 822

Another attempt a national reciprocity for CCW licenses has emerged in the House.  Thanks to No Lawyers - Only Guns and Money, you can read the bill text here.

What does this mean for California? You can read this discussion thread on Calguns to find out.

I think that this is potentially huge, if it passes and can get signed.  Can you imagine how Mayor Bloomberg or Mayor Daley would react to tourists from Texas and Arizona being able to carry concealed in those cities? It may also put pressure on California legislators to convert California to a shall issue CCW system when it becomes evident that people are carrying in this state in large numbers.

And the wrongful arrest lawsuits that will enrich so many lawyers!

I cannot imagine President Obama would sign such a bill, and I am not sure that a 2/3 vote exists in the Senate to over ride a veto.  The House is much easier.

Stay tuned to this one.  It is going to be big.

Tuesday, April 20, 2010

DC Voting Rights Bill Abandoned in the House

The Washington Examiner reported in this story that the House has abandoned legislation that would have given Washington D.C. a voting member in the House of Representatives, and the House leadership blamed the National Rifle Association, whose gun-rights amendment to the bill was unacceptable to anti-gun rights House members.

Leaving aside the questionable Constitutionality of this bill, the rationale of the anti-gun faction is typical of the traditional objections that they raise.  My own favorite anti-gun Senator, Diane Feinstein, had this to say:

 "I believe the District will become much less safe, and the opportunity for criminals, mentally unstable persons and juveniles to purchase weapons will increase dramatically,"
"increase dramatically" as opposed to the situation in Washington D.C. now where criminals have no real trouble finding access to guns, guns that are illegal for them to possess, and that are illegal for others to provide to the criminals?

The same old tired arguments and are increasingly being shown to be untrue by liberalized gun carry laws in other states.  With the passage of "constitutional carry", allowing citizens to carry concealed weapons without permits, in Arizona, there is an opportunity for an experiment.  Will gun violence increase, decrease, or stay the same in Phoenix, a large metropolitan area like Washington D.C.?  I offer this prediction:  gun violence will either decrease or stay at the same level.  Society does not have to fear the law-abiding because these people are not inclined to commit crimes, with or without guns.

Gun Control: An idea based on the assumption that people not inclined to follow laws prohibiting armed robbery, assault, murder, rape, kidnapping, and other violent crimes, will follow the laws regulating the possession and transfer of guns.

Tuesday, April 13, 2010

Jim Beall Replies - Letter from Cris Forsyth

Here is the reply I received from Cris Forsyth, Chief of Staff for Assemblyman Jim Beall:


Hi Mr. Miller.

I am in conversation with the Assembly Member concerning this legislation.

He said he had concerns with bill, spoke with the NRA lobbyist, and requested more information on the legislation.

I'll let you know soon his disposition to the bill.

Sorry for the delayed response.

Cris
___________________________
CRIS FORSYTH
Chief of Staff

THE HONORABLE JIM BEALL JR.
California State Assembly
State Capitol, Room 5016
Sacramento, CA 95814

916.319.2490 Phone
916.319.2124 Fax
www.assembly.ca.gov/beall
"Progress does not roll in on the wheels of inevitability, but through constant struggle," Martin Luther King Jr.
"Hey, Hey, Hey, are you ready for the day.  Put on your shield and sword.  Are you ready for the games?" Pink
 I have not yet heard back from Mr. Forsyth concerning his disposition on this bill, but today, April 13th, the Public Safety Committee met and voted on this bill.  The members voted as follows:

- Chair Assemblyman Tom Ammiano - AYE
- Vice-Chair Assemblyman Curt Hagman - NO
- Assemblyman Jim Beall, Jr. - NOT VOTING
- Assemblyman Danny Gilmore - NO
- Assemblyman Jerry Hill - AYE
- Assemblyman Anthony Portantino - AYE
- Assemblymember Nancy Skinner - AYE
 So, the bill has passed, but Mr. Beall did not vote on it for some reason, perhaps he was absent.  In any case, this bill advances one more step in the process of becoming the latest useless crime prevention law.

Friday, April 9, 2010

Constitutional Carry Goes to Governor in Arizona

As reported in this story, and by Of Arms and the Law,  the Arizona legislature has approved a law allowing citizens to carry concealed weapons without a permit.  The bill no goes to the Governor for signature or veto.  The Governor is expected to sign the bill.

I find this to be especially ironic because it is happening as the California legislature begins consideration of AB 1934, a bill that would effectively eliminate the open carry of any handgun in public places in the state.  Open carry of loaded handguns has been illegal for many years in California, while open carry of loaded handguns has been legal for many years.

Can two states that share border be further apart on an issue?  I can just imagine how California anti-gun residents would wail and quake with fear if the same legislation ever came before out Governor.  Arnold would probably veto it.

Thursday, April 8, 2010

AB 1810 - Proposed Long gun Registration for California

And the hits just keep rolling in from the Legislature!

Assembly member Mike Feuer has amended AB 1810, formerly covering vandalism, to institute the requirement that all long gun transfers be treated the same as handgun transfers are treated now, effectively creating a long gun registration scheme in California.

Among the effects of this bill:
  • Private parties would have to use an FFL to transfer long guns.
  • New residents moving into the state would have to register their long guns within 60 days.
  • Existing firearms owned by current residents would NOT have to be registered.
This bill is proposed at a time when Canada is debating the issue of ending their long gun registry as being too expensive and ineffectual at fighting violent crime.  I fail to see how long gun registration in California will be any more effective.

Prediction: this bill will probably pass.  As we have seen this year with AB 962, a good way for a legislator to make points with the anti-gun electorate in California is to heap on another gun control law.

AB 1934 - Legislature Reacts to Unloaded Open Carry Events

Who knew this wasn't going to happen?

Assembly member Lori Saldana amended the text of AB 1934 with the intent of outlawing the open carry of unloaded handguns on public places.  It does this by changing the trext of PC 12025 (f), which reads:


   (f) Firearms carried openly in belt holsters are not concealed
within the meaning of this section.  
So, the way this works is that handguns carried in belt holsters are classified as concealed weapons, requiring a nearly impossible to obtain CCW permit from the state.   Since most of the UOC events that have caused so much anxiety among non-gun owners have taken place in incorporated areas of cities, this proposed change effectively ends that practice.

In addition, a new section, 12037, is added defining the punishments one is liable to for committing the newly defined crime of carrying an unloaded handgun, as well as a long list of exceptions that allow many ordinary handgun activities, such as range sessions and handling guns in gun shops.

Note that this bill should not effect the carrying of concealed or loaded guns while engaged in hunting  or fishing because that activity is an exception to the concealed weapon laws.

This bill is currently in the Assembly Committee on Public Safety, with no hearing date set.


Prediction: This bill will very likely pass, further narrowing the ability of law abiding citizens to exercise their 2nd Amendment rights.  Thanks a lot Open Carry Movement

Tuesday, March 16, 2010

First Hint of UOC Prohibition Legislation

Who didn't know this was coming?  California State Assemblywoman Lori Saldana has announced that she is considering drafting legislation that will limit or prohibit unloaded open carry of firearms in California.  The text of the bill is not yet available, but it is expected that it will appear as AB 1934, a bill which until now has proposed a minor changes to firearms law.  I will keep an eye on this issue and make another post when the bill text is available.

So, it would seem that the Open Carry movement has provoked a reaction.  But is this the reaction that they hoped to produce?

Sunday, November 15, 2009

H.R. 3962 - Refuse to Buy Insurance, You Might Go To Jail

The recently passed health care reform bill, H.R. 3962, requires everyone to enroll in a "qualified" plan. The mechanism to enforce this provision is a tax penalty, which is defined in Section 501 of the bill:

(a) Tax Imposed- In the case of any individual who does not meet the requirements of subsection (d) at any time during the taxable year, there is hereby imposed a tax equal to 2.5 percent of the excess of--
      `(1) the taxpayer's modified adjusted gross income for the taxable year, over
      `(2) the amount of gross income specified in section 6012(a)(1) with respect to the taxpayer.
    There are no direct criminal penalties contained in H.R. 3962, but the effect of imposing a new tax brings both criminal and civil penalties into play via the Internal Revenue Code, also known as Title 26 of the United States Code. These criminal and civil penalties, and how they might affect an individual are explained in this posting of the Ways & Means Republicans website, and in this letter from Joint Committee on Taxation provided to the Ways and Means Committee.

    The sections cited in these letters are sections of Title 26, the Internal Revenue Code, and they may be verified at this website of the Cornell University Law School.

    So, the jail time may be applied if a person refuses to buy insurance, making themselves subject to the tax, and then refuses to pay the tax. In every case, passage of H.R. 3962 increases costs for every American by at least 2.5 percent of their taxable income, and perhaps by as much as five years of their life.

    Saturday, November 14, 2009

    Universal Health Care Possible - But There Will Be Losers

    Last week my local PBS station aired a fascinating program comparing different countries health care systems. The program, Sick Around The World, can be viewed online, and I highly recommend that anyone reading this post to watch the program before proceeding.

    I came away with two conclusions:

    First, universal health care that is affordable is indeed possible, but to implement it there will be two economic losers: doctors and and insurance companies.

    Second, the health care bill that recently passed in the House of Representatives, H.R. 3962, will NOT reduce costs, and is in fact a monstrosity that will cost Americans a lost of money without providing better or more affordable care.

    Here is why my claim is true: the economic losers in many countries are doctors, insurance companies, and pharmaceutical companies.

    It seems simple, even cliche, to say this, but if medical costs are to be reduced, then someone must make less money. In many countries around the world, the two entities making less are doctors and insurance companies.

    It seems a little strange to learn that insurance companies in several of the countries visited by the show host are non-profit corporations, but that is indeed the case. Governments dictate how campanies insure individuals, and they dictate the premiums that they can charge. REmoving the profit reduces the cost of care to the individual.

    Doctors are almost always limited by the government to certain rates that they can charge for procedures, and no doctor can charge more. But since the government is the single payer, the amount of paperwork and administration is mush reduced as compared to a United States practice, saving enormous amounts of money. Further, malpractice tort law has been reformed in every case, reducing the malpractice insurance premiums for doctors must pay, further reducing costs.

    Finally, every single one of the countries presented in the program use government bargaining power to negotiate with pharmaceutical companies bulk pricing on everything from drugs to MRI equipment, reducing costs even further.

    All of these measures, and others, reduce the cost of health care, but the losers are doctors, insurance companies, and pharmaceutical companies.

    This program exposes H.R. 3962 as the farce that it is: all of the economic losers, doctors, insurance companies, and pharmaceutical companies, have made their deals with Congress and the Obama Administration to avoid the necessary concessions that would have to be made to accomplish real health care reform.

    Doctors have lobbied long and hard to avoid a reduction in the Medicare payment schedule that has for years been touted as necessary to avoid unsustainable Medicare costs. There is not reason to suppose that payments to doctors will be limited under any new health care plan.

    Insurance companies have eagerly come on board to support the plan because there is an individual mandate that every person in the United States must enroll in a "qualified plan". resulting in millions of new premium-paying customers for the insurance companies.

    The United States government under the "leadership" of President George W. Bush, abandoned any attempt to negotiate volume purchasing discounts with pharmaceutical companies, and there is no indication that such negotiations will be authorized by H.R. 3962.

    And we finally come to another large winner in the health care debate, to which almost every Congress member (Democratic AND Republican) is beholden: trial lawyers. They have successfully prevented any kind of tort reform, meaning that malpractice trial awards will continue to be astronomical, resulting in very high malpractice insurance premiums, which further squeeze doctors.

    H.R. 3962 is not a reform of the health care "system". It is a massive new entitlement program, one that is going to make the middle class pay for the coverage of the poor, under penalty of fine and imprisonment. It is an entitlement program that will NOT reduce the cost of medical care, which will continue to increase faster than inflation, causing the entire issue to be revisited in a few years when people realize that they have been duped. It is an entitlement program that will be impossible to repeal if it is once implemented, throwing and economic anvil to taxpayers drowning in a sea of increased costs.

    The final two indicators of how much this bill stinks can be found in two facts: first, the Congress has exempted itself from being covered under this plan, and second, the effective date of this law is 2013, the year after President Obama will presumably be safely elected to his second term in office.

    I guess that "SOME ANIMALS ARE MORE EQUAL THAN OTHERS ".

    Sunday, October 18, 2009

    Amendment to Repeal AB 962.

    As reported by the California Rifle and Pistol Association:

    AB 962 becomes effective on February 1, 2011. But not if Assemblyman Curt Hagman has his way. He has amended his bill, AB 373, to repeal AB 962 before the effective date.

    AB 373 is a bill designed to clarify handgun possession during certain legal activities. This bill went nowhere during the first year of the legislative session, and so it will need all of our support if it to pass in the next year of the session.

    Please read the information at the CRPA link above, and then act to help repeal AB 962. It may be a narrow chance at this point, but it is a chance.

    Also, please thank Assemblyman Hagman for his support: assemblymember.hagman@assembly.ca.gov

    Bottom Line:

    I think that this has no chance of succeeding. Why would the legislature support the repeal of a law that it just passed, and that the Governor just signed?

    We must come up with impacts of AB 962 that were unintended, but that are harmful for lawful gun owners. Arguments that were put forward previously for opposing AB 962 will not work a second time around. We mustcome up with something new. See the CRPA page for details.

    Sunday, October 11, 2009

    The Future Of Health Care - Coming to You Soon!

    The experiences of Massachusetts residents and their state's reformed health care system is a cautionary one for the rest of America. Read here about how "reform" might work for all of us in the future: fines for non-compliant plans, after the Guv'ment changes the rules.

    It's apparent that state health-care policies can change at the whim of politicians in Boston, and we might not be able to adjust to the new rules. The way we figure it, if we sign up for a state-subsidized plan we will be at the mercy of the state.

    This is exactly why so many people are suspicious of the Democratic proposals for health care "reform" currently making the rounds in Congress. And you better believe that it will be the middle class that takes it in the pocketbook to pay for the "reform". Politicians, like Willie Sutton, can be depended on to "go where the money is".

    Oh yes, this is change we can believe in!

    Wednesday, October 7, 2009

    AB 962: Sign or Veto - We'll Know By Sunday

    Governor Schwarzenegger has hundreds of bills on this desk for his signature or his veto, and he has signed only three, according to this article in SFGate.

    It turns out that, in another standoff with the legislature, the Governor is threatening a mass veto of hundreds of bills if he does not get his way in negotiations over the state's water system.

    While I would like AB 962, SB 585, and SB 41 to not become law, based on their lack of merit, I will take what I can get if they are swept up the the Governor's fit of pique.

    What do I think will happen? The parties in the water negotiations will reach a compromise agreement, and the Governor will sign all three bills. While Schwarzenegger is a member of the Republican Party, that is not the same as saying he is a conservative, which may be said of the Republican Party entirely.

    California hates guns, and would like to see them disappear. Get ready to fork over a thumb print for higher priced ammunition.

    Sunday, June 7, 2009

    AB 962 - Passed by Assembly, Heads to Senate

    Well, people, we have one more chance to stop this thing. That's right, AB 962 has was approved by the Assembly this week by a vote of 42 to 31, and now goes to the Senate for a vote there. I am sorry to say that my Assembly Member, Jim Beall, voted in favor of this thing.

    So, to reiterate, AB 962 proposes regulations on the purchase of handgun ammunition. All sales of ammunition greater than 50 rounds must take place in a face-to-face transaction, and the amount of ammunition purchased, and the identity of the purchaser (thumbprint, name, address and telephone number, driver's license number, date of birth) must be recorded.

    This means that the purchase of ammunition through the internet will no longer be legal, and will probably stop.

    Do you buy ammunition through the internet? I know that I do, because it is usually cheaper than purchases at gun shops. There are also decreasing numbers of gun shops that I can purchase ammunition from in my area. This law will also undoubtedly make ammunition more expensive.

    Contact your state senator to log your opposition to this bill.

    Wednesday, June 3, 2009

    AB 962 - Passed Out of Assembly Appropriations Committee

    AB 962, a bill that would regulate handgun ammunition purchases in the state, and prohibit sales of handgun ammunition over the Internet, has passed an Assembly Appropriations Committee vote and advances to the Assembly floor.

    This bill would certainly accomplish two things. First, ammunition will become more expensive and vendors are forced to be licensed and keep additional records in the course of their business. Second, sales of ammunition over the Internet would be prohibited in California. The net effect will be to make ammunition more scarce for law abiding shooters, without doing much to deter crime.

    Now is the time to contact your Assembly member to urge their opposition to this bill. Find your state Assembly member as this web site, and voice your opposition.

    SB 585 - Bill To Ban Cow Palace Gun Shows Passes Out Senate Appropriations Commitee

    Senate Bill 585 has passed a vote in the Senate Appropriations Committee, and advances now to the Senate floor for a full vote. The time has not come for action by every citizen of California who supports gun rights: contact your state Senator to oppose this bill.

    You can find out how to contact your Senator here.

    Friday, May 8, 2009

    AB 962 - Not a New Idea

    AB 962, the handgun ammunition licensing and control bill now in the Assembly Appropriations Committee is not a new idea: this has been tried before at a variety of governmental levels.

    It actually used to be Federal law to record handgun ammunition purchases. The Firearms Owners Protection Act, Appendix I, established that requirement, but it was later repealed in 1986 when the BATF testified before Congress that the law was useless for fighting crime.

    The city of Pasadena, California, passed an ordinance in February, 1995, requiring handgun ammunition purchases be recorded by ammunition vendors to much praise and acclaim. But this law too was quietly repealed on August 18, 1997, after massive amounts of paper records were generated without any use to police.

    California handgun owners shoot millions of rounds of handgun ammunition every year. Go into any indoor shooting range on any given day, and it is not unusual to see a couple thousand spent cartridge cases littering the floor. AB 962 would require recording of every handgun ammunition purchase, generate mountains of paper, 99.99% of which will be useless because most will be purchased by legal shooters, and expended by the person that bought the ammunition.

    Besides, does any one think that criminals will not find a way to get ammunition if they really want it? Guns and ammunition are already illegal for felons to possess, and guns cannot be sold to felons, but they find ways of getting them. They will find ways to get ammunition as well.

    I can only see two reasons why people would think this bill is a good idea: first, they think that criminals would be cut off from ammunition if this bill passes, and, second, they think that placing one more hoop for legal gun owners to jump through, with the intent of eradicating gun ownership by sheer exhaustion, is a good idea.

    Neither of these make AB 962 a good law.