More Genius from California
Firearms: assault weapon conversion kits.
Existing law, with certain exceptions, prohibits the possession of an assault weapon, as defined, and makes violations subject to criminal penalties.
This bill would, commencing July 1, 2013, and with certain exceptions, prohibit any person from importing, making, selling, loaning, transferring, or possessing any conversion kit, as defined, designed solely and exclusively to convert certain firearms with a fixed magazine into firearms with the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and other features making the firearm an assault weapon and would make violations subject to criminal penalties. By creating new crimes, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.
Existing law makes possession of an assault weapon a public nuisance, authorizes the Attorney General, district attorney, or city attorney to bring a civil action to enjoin possession of the weapon, authorizes imposition of a civil fine, and, with certain exceptions, requires disposition of the weapon by sale at public auction or by destruction.
This bill would, commencing July 1, 2013, make possession of a conversion kit a public nuisance, would authorize a civil action to enjoin possession of a conversion kit, would authorize imposition of a civil fine, and, with certain exceptions, would, similarly, require disposition of the conversion kit.
Existing law authorizes a person to arrange in advance to relinquish an assault weapon to a police or sheriffs department.
This bill would authorize a person to arrange in advance to relinquish a conversion kit to a police or sheriffs department.
The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.
This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
The key word here is "LAW" indicating that "LAW" abiding citizens need to adhere to this "LAW" But what about all the automatic weapon toting scumbags that do not care about that "LAW" or any other "LAW"? If there is only ONE assh*le out there with an automatic weapon, and as long as the police have a right to obtain as use them as well, then I certainly want the same opportunity, as a "LAW" abiding citizen, to arm myself accordingly. If there becomes a widening gap in what YOU (the citizen) is allowed to have, and what THEY (government) is allowed to have, you have the makings of what happened in Germany in 1933. Look it up.
You don't have to travel across the ocean to see a messed up system, just look north.
In Canada, we have always had greater restrictions on firearms then the US, but our current 'Laws' have taken the firearms out of the hands of the law abiding citizen and put them in the hands of the scumbags. For those that 'were' legal gun owners, many became criminals on the day the new legislation took effect as it was so poorly written.
I will stop my rant before I get going. ;)
IMO, the US is still saveable. Don't let your lawmakers turn your 'rights' into 'broken laws'. The criminals don't give a hoot what the laws are, so the laws are for the most part very ineffective. Laws are only as effective as the enforcement/judicial system, and right now both Canada and the US seem to have a fundamental problem with the latter of the 2. We are enforcing, but the system is letting them go on technicalities.
Again.....I better end this before this becomes a rant from a 'raging lunatic'. :crazy:
I am still trying to figure out what an "assault" rifle is. So far, none of my rifles have ever assaulted anyone. Guess they are all broken. :4-dontknow:
When I registered my last revolver, I had to bring it to the police station for inspection, etc. (BTW - This process can take up to 3 weeks.....during which time you are NOT in possession of your firearm.) When I got there, I was asked to present my weapon, and I indicated I didn't have one. After a merri-go-round of discussion I responded "Are you asking for my 'gun'". The cops says "Yes, I'm asking you for your weapon". I laughed and suggested that he ask for the right thing as I was getting very confused. I explained that I had a gun, but I did NOT have a weapon. He did not see the difference so I asked him if he had ever seen someone use a kitchen knife as a weapon to which he said yes. I asked him if all kitchen knives are 'weapons' as a result of this experience to which he said 'no'.
My point. The handgun I walked in with is NOT a weapon in my hand. It is a .44" 850fps paper hole punch. LOL
Yah.....semantics! What can I say, our gun laws suck big time.....for the wrong reasons. I can't make the difference, but if I can get 1 cop to think different, that is one less vote in the wrong direction. :4-dontknow:
|All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:11 PM.|
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
= Copyright RamForumZ.com a Gigathreads.com Network Site =Ad Management by RedTyger