• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

California AB 1934, 1810 and 2358 is dead!

Wc

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2010
Messages
329
Location
, ,
AB 1934 only "passed temporarily" and it didn't made it out of the Assembly after midnight. This bill restrict the carrying of firearms on public and private lands used by the public for outdoor recreation purposes and restrict sportsmen from openly carrying firearms while visiting and camping on public lands even where it is legal for them to recreationally shoot the same firearms.

AB 1810 is dead. This bill provides that firearms reporting and record retention requirements that currently apply only to handguns also apply to long guns.

AB 2358 is dead too. This bill (1) requires that copies of handgun ammunition sales records be transmitted to the county sheriff or chief of police if required by local law, (2) prohibits, except as specified, vendors providing ammunition sales information to any third party without the written consent of the purchaser or transferee, and require that records of ammunition sales, as specified, that are no longer required to be maintained shall be destroyed in a manner that protects the privacy of the purchaser or transferee who is the subject of the record, (3) provides that law enforcement officials authorized to inspect ammunition sales records may copy those records for investigatory or enforcement purposes, (4) requires vendors to provide written notice to the local police chief or county sheriff of the vendor's intent to conduct business in the jurisdiction, and obtain any regulatory or business license required by the jurisdiction for ammunition sellers, and (5) provides that handgun ammunition may be purchased over the Internet or through other means of remote ordering if a handgun ammunition vendor, as defined, in California initially receives the ammunition and processes the transfer in compliance with specified requirements.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/01/AR2010090100612.html
 
Last edited:

Michigander

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2007
Messages
4,818
Location
Mulligan's Valley
Disappointing, if you ask me. If they had passed it, Alan Gura, if not someone or a group of similar lawyers would have probably launched a fish in a barrel lawsuit within 2 weeks. California was about to put constitution reinstatement into overdrive, which I suspect would have put gun rights at least back to pre black panther hatred days in the state with one or two cases.

It will still of course be highly possible to sue over other atrocities, but it will be harder now.
 
Last edited:

aadvark

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2009
Messages
1,597
Location
, ,
California's Constitutional lacks a Right to Keep and Bear Arms Clause, which is a direct Violation of The Second Amendment of The United States Constitution.
The next thing California needs to work on is making its Concealed Carry Permits 'shall-issue' in nature.
 

Daylen

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2010
Messages
2,223
Location
America
California's Constitutional lacks a Right to Keep and Bear Arms Clause, which is a direct Violation of The Second Amendment of The United States Constitution.
The next thing California needs to work on is making its Concealed Carry Permits 'shall-issue' in nature.

States are not required to have the bill of rights in their constitution. Until the 14th came along states could infringe upon individual rights as much as they pleased. We were not supposed to be a nation; we were supposed to be a federation. I can understand your confusion though since progressives have been misleading people for 100+ years.
 
Top