Smith & Wesson Forum

Advertise With Us Search
Go Back   Smith & Wesson Forum > General Topics > 2nd Amendment Forum

Notices

2nd Amendment Forum Current 2nd Amendment Issues- READ the INSTRUCTIONS!


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 03-15-2016, 05:00 PM
robertrwalsh robertrwalsh is offline
SWCA Member
MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA  
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Peoples Republic of Calif
Posts: 4,670
Likes: 1,236
Liked 6,042 Times in 2,152 Posts
Default MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA

AB1673 passed out of the Assembly Public Safety Committee today (03-15). This bill, if passed in its current form, would declare that ANY identifiable firearm part is in fact a separate and discrete firearm in the state of California and would have to be serialized, registered and tracked as such, with payment of appropriate fees.

This means that a new hammer or trigger for your S&W revolver, or a new set of sights for your semi-auto, would be considered to be a firearm and would require a DROS, background check, fee and waiting period.

The bill passed out of committee on a strict party-line vote. There is almost, but not quite, enough Democrats in both houses of the legislature to pass bills to the governor with zero Republican support.

Last edited by robertrwalsh; 03-15-2016 at 09:09 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 03-15-2016, 05:09 PM
mbliss57's Avatar
mbliss57 mbliss57 is offline
US Veteran
MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA  
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Desert South West
Posts: 5,539
Likes: 7,356
Liked 8,688 Times in 2,312 Posts
Default

Wow. I am from Ohio a pretty (no very) gun friendly. Stories/realities like this why I am continuously buying lots of parts, sights, triggers etc and guns and ammo. I have been saying to myself for years that NY and California or always visions of our eventual future...sooner or later. I only hope I am wrong. Good luck out west.
__________________
John 1:17
NRA Life Benefactor
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #3  
Old 03-15-2016, 09:15 PM
robertrwalsh robertrwalsh is offline
SWCA Member
MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA  
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Peoples Republic of Calif
Posts: 4,670
Likes: 1,236
Liked 6,042 Times in 2,152 Posts
Default

This just happened today. The bill was ORIGINALLY worded to go after "ghost guns", those horrible and dreadful 80% finished AR-15 receivers that are (allegedly) being used to flood California with unserialized and untraceable guns. The bill was reworked (reworded) to include all firearms components. Does this have any real chance of passing as currently written? Probably not. Was it a simple wording error by an a legislator or staffer with zero technical knowledge? Maybe. Maybe not.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 03-15-2016, 10:03 PM
g8rb8 g8rb8 is offline
Member
MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA  
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Kansas
Posts: 2,566
Likes: 5,443
Liked 2,921 Times in 1,222 Posts
Default

Kudos to Watchdog for always providing professorial, even-keeled, and objective information on these topics.

On the other hand robertwalsh seems fairly certain of what he posted so I looked for myself. I could find that AB1673 was on the agenda today in California but I could not find definite "official" information the wording had changed.

I am not sure how much to trust either of the below reports but:
FPC (Firearms Policy Coalition) is reporting today:
"These changes now apply the same standards he is applying to unfinished lowers to ALL firearms components."
The San Fernando Valley NRA Members' Council is reporting today the same thing: "As it stands today, any firearm component would require serialization as a fully functional firearm under the proposed law. This includes barrels, retaining pins, springs, guide rods, washers, and fasteners."
The San Fernando Valley NRA Members' Council – Your NRA MC in the Valley
__________________
Scoundrel & Ne'er-Do-Well

Last edited by g8rb8; 03-15-2016 at 10:04 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 03-15-2016, 10:52 PM
mojave30cal's Avatar
mojave30cal mojave30cal is offline
Member
MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA  
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Southern Utah
Posts: 1,787
Likes: 4,216
Liked 2,791 Times in 895 Posts
Default

Man, if this passes, it will be time to move to a free state.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
  #6  
Old 03-15-2016, 11:05 PM
Road Rat's Avatar
Road Rat Road Rat is offline
US Veteran
MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA  
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Iowa
Posts: 2,834
Likes: 3,724
Liked 2,321 Times in 998 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mojave30cal View Post
Man, if this passes, it will be time to move to a free state.
I did that ten years ago come June.....................
Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Like Post:
  #7  
Old 03-16-2016, 03:41 AM
robertrwalsh robertrwalsh is offline
SWCA Member
MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA  
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Peoples Republic of Calif
Posts: 4,670
Likes: 1,236
Liked 6,042 Times in 2,152 Posts
Default

By the way, I got the info from the Firearms Policy Coalition website. They are not exactly unbiased but I have not found them to be handing out deliberately bogus information.

By the way there is an additional proposal of interest. AB2459, would get rid of all firearms dealers that operate out of private residences. It would also require that the dealers that are left to have recording video systems that would cover all areas of their stores where guns and ammunition are stored, displayed, physically handled, sold or transferred. This would also require the video taping of all gun sales, a local proposal which was passed in San Francisco and which drove the last gun store in SF out of business. This would cost thousands and thousands of dollars for any gun stores remaining. You can imagine what this would do to the firearms and ammunition retail business, which is exactly what the author has in mind.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 03-16-2016, 03:41 PM
mistermills357's Avatar
mistermills357 mistermills357 is offline
US Veteran
MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA  
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: St. Petersburg, FL
Posts: 181
Likes: 406
Liked 129 Times in 73 Posts
Default

Further proving that the California Legislature is a pack of fools.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 03-16-2016, 09:30 PM
DevilDog72's Avatar
DevilDog72 DevilDog72 is offline
Member
MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA  
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Mansfield, Texas
Posts: 1,528
Likes: 11,499
Liked 2,888 Times in 947 Posts
Default

This is the most insane thing I have e v e r heard of....aaarrrrrggggggggggghhhhhhhhhh!!!!!
... this is one .... uhhh ... messed up bag of horse......apples.

Last edited by ditrina; 03-19-2016 at 09:41 PM.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #10  
Old 03-21-2016, 04:44 PM
Retired Chief Retired Chief is offline
US Veteran
MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA  
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Central Illinois
Posts: 120
Likes: 20
Liked 319 Times in 82 Posts
Default

While I realize that politicians normally don't care about any laws that they, personally, did not pass, it seems that the proposal from California would violate the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution as an unreasonable interference with interstate commerce. They could, however, probably pass a bill that would require firearm manufacturers in California to serial # all these parts. Lets see . . . just how many firearm manufacturers have factories in California?
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 03-22-2016, 01:01 AM
Toblerra Toblerra is offline
Member
MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA  
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 224
Likes: 88
Liked 147 Times in 71 Posts
Default

I live in Cali and although I do not doubt that these assaults on my second ammendment rights will stop any time soon here, I doubt that most of the crazy bills like this one will become law any time soon. Why? Because they are not enforceable. Also, they will be struck down by the Supreme Court if they infringe upon the right to own a firearm too much. Yes they can restrict a lot maybe more than they already have but ultimately there is a line that cannot be crossed thanks to the second ammendment.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 03-27-2016, 06:00 PM
finesse_r finesse_r is offline
Member
MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA  
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Northeast Texas
Posts: 3,707
Likes: 6,257
Liked 6,354 Times in 2,185 Posts
Talking

What is needed is a federal law that makes conceal carry legal in all states and in Washington D. C. and that requires every state to respect the concealed carry license issued by all other states. The law should require every state to issue a license to any one that meets a minimum level of course work and proficiency demonstration. In addition the law would make clear that no state has the right to make semi-automatic weapons illegal. That any state found in violation of thes laws would loose all federal funding.

If we had a real conservative congress this is the type of legislation that would be going through to become law and put a stop to the California, Chicago, and NYC gun phobia that is denying US citizens their rights.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #13  
Old 06-18-2016, 04:57 PM
HOUSTON RICK HOUSTON RICK is offline
Member
MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA  
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: HOUSTON, TEXAS
Posts: 10,183
Likes: 7,175
Liked 14,373 Times in 5,411 Posts
Default

What took them so long? How much is the waiting period there for a box of snap-caps? If you want to own your guns in peace, you will eventually need to leave the People's Republic.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 06-18-2016, 05:32 PM
Kevin J.'s Avatar
Kevin J. Kevin J. is online now
US Veteran
MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA  
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 1,927
Likes: 2,646
Liked 4,934 Times in 1,448 Posts
Default

If this passes there will be no gun manufacturers sending guns into California. SW nor any other gun manufacturer will retool to stamp numbers on all the parts and set up admin needed to support such a data base of serial numbers. Wonder what the cops will carry? I would assume their weapons would require the same as any gun in the state.

Last edited by Kevin J.; 06-18-2016 at 11:05 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 06-19-2016, 11:28 PM
darmtn1917 darmtn1917 is offline
Member
MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA  
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Tollhouse,CA
Posts: 389
Likes: 627
Liked 247 Times in 124 Posts
Default

"Wonder what the cops will carry? I would assume their weapons would require the same as any gun in the state. "
Nope - LEO almost always get exceptions from the gun laws in CA.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 06-19-2016, 11:52 PM
DWalt's Avatar
DWalt DWalt is offline
Member
MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA MORE INSTANTIY IN CALIFORNIA  
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: South Texas & San Antonio
Posts: 33,628
Likes: 241
Liked 29,139 Times in 14,090 Posts
Default

Does anyone remember the plans being floated over 10 years ago about essentially serializing every round of ammunition and every bullet? Also putting tracer tags in smokeless powder? I wouldn't be surprised in the least to see that scheme pop up again, as it is much simpler to enforce than banning guns. The impossibility of doing that kind of serialization would not even be considered, and it would force all ammunition and bullet manufacturers out of business overnight. And that's what it's all about.

" ...and there is a line that cannot be crossed thanks to the second amendment."
Have you ever heard of the Supreme Court of the United States? And who could be sitting on it in the not too distant future? Sometimes those guys can be pretty good at crossing lines.

Last edited by DWalt; 06-20-2016 at 09:51 AM.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
Reply


Posting Rules
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Hello from California stevek7603 New Members Introduction 15 10-27-2012 11:28 PM
Hi from California Platinum M107 New Members Introduction 12 06-05-2012 07:29 PM
Hi from California kent11202 New Members Introduction 11 04-02-2012 07:30 PM
Any legal issues with driving a rifle from California to Oregon? California LEO’s op crofoot629 Firearms & Knives: Other Brands & General Gun Topics 13 04-01-2012 12:31 PM
New From California divercal New Members Introduction 7 01-06-2012 01:41 PM

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3
smith-wessonforum.com tested by Norton Internet Security smith-wessonforum.com tested by McAfee Internet Security

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:26 PM.


Smith-WessonForum.com is not affiliated with Smith & Wesson Holding Corporation (NASDAQ Global Select: SWHC)