CA Gov Brown vetoes a pile of anti-gun bills today

S

speedrrracer

New member
http://gov.ca.gov/news.php?id=18265 (second half of page has the vetoed bills)

Included was the biggie...SB374, which would have pretty much ended semi-auto centerfire rifles in CA.

Thanks to everyone who helped encourage these vetoes from Gov Brown. I believe the vetoing of this many anti-gun bills in one sitting is a CA record. I don't represent this to be a complete list:

AB 169 by Assemblymember Roger Dickinson (D-Sacramento) – Unsafe handguns. A veto message can be found here.
• AB 180 by Assemblymember Rob Bonta (D-Alameda) – Registration and licensing of firearms: City of Oakland. A veto message can be found here.

• SB 299 by Senator Mark DeSaulnier (D-Concord) – Firearms: lost or stolen: reports. A veto message can be found here.
• SB 374 by Senator Darrell Steinberg (D-Sacramento) – Firearms: assault weapons. A veto message can be found here.

• SB 567 by Senator Hannah-Beth Jackson (D-Santa Barbara) – Firearms: shotguns. A veto message can be found here.

• SB 755 by Senator Lois Wolk (D-Davis) – Firearms: prohibited persons. A veto message can be found here.
 
Unfortunately, he did sign some as well. However, given expectations (most thought he would veto no more than one bill, maaaaaaybe 2), things are about as good as can be expected for the California.

• SB 683 by Senator Marty Block (D-San Diego) – Firearms: firearm safety certificate.
• SB 363 by Senator Roderick D. Wright (D-Los Angeles) – Firearms: criminal storage: unsafe handguns: fees.
• SB 127 by Senator Ted Gaines (R-Rocklin) – Firearms: mentally disordered persons.
• AB 1131 by Assemblymember Nancy Skinner (D-Berkeley) – Firearms.
• AB 711 by Assemblymember Anthony Rendon (D-Lakewood) – Hunting: nonlead ammunition. A signing message can be found here.
• AB 500 by Assemblymember Tom Ammiano (D-San Francisco) – Firearms.
• AB 538 by Assemblymember Richard Pan (D-Sacramento) – Firearms.
• AB 539 by Assemblymember Richard Pan (D-Sacramento) – Firearm possession: prohibitions: transfer to licensed dealer.
• AB 48 by Assemblymember Nancy Skinner (D-Berkeley) – Firearms: large-capacity magazines.
• AB 170 by Assemblymember Steven Bradford (D-Gardena) – Assault weapons and .50 BMG rifles.
• AB 231 by Assemblymember Philip Y. Ting (D-San Francisco) – Firearms: criminal storage.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Several states have banned lead shot, and hunting continues there.
After growing up across town fron a lead acid battery smelter and reading about well above average developmental problems in the nearby neighborhood kids, I'm not sure that's a terrible idea to ban, reduce or restrict it.
 
I can see lead shot, quail hunters will blast 100 rounds in a morning hunt and the majority of the shot doesn't stay in the animal so it gets scattered throughout the environment.
When I go out hunting I bring 5 rounds, just in case I see a 16pt buck after I take my 12 pointer ;)
 
Brown doesn't seem to think so, and full implementation is a long way away (2019). Further, there are ready alternatives to lead for hunting ammo, and posts on other fora state that it is cost competitive. Further, the ban applies only to hunting, not otherwise. Patch and ball muzzleloaders may have issues, but handgun hunters have plenty of copper solids to choose from. SASS will be unaffected, as will your favorite flavor of SD ammo.
 
Where does it say that lead inside a copper jacket will be okay?

And thinking of 2019 as a "long way off" is playing right into their hands.
 
Where does it say that lead inside a copper jacket will be okay?
Click to expand...
It doesn't, so it's safe to assume all ammunition containing lead is verboten.

And thinking of 2019 as a "long way off" is playing right into their hands.
Click to expand...
Absolutely. The ballistic fingerprinting regulation was passed in 2007, but it was only recently implemented. Many folks are blaming Governor Brown when it was actually Gov. Schwarzenegger who signed it.

When the lead ban goes into effect, voters will blame whoever is unfortunate enough to occupy the office then.
 
I personally want to thank all who helped us during this fight either with donations or sending a letter. Thank you for supporting us.


-Cisco
 
There's a difference between "shot" and bullets and what the intention is for each. With shot, you don't care about rapid expansion, you worry more about density to carry energy to a target (eg. game birds). With a bullet, you want to maintain energy for longer shots, however, you also want rapid expansion to increase the tissue damage and kill the target more efficiently. Lead is great for both shot and bullets in those regards.

It's easier to substitute a hard material with good density for shot, such as bismuth. Again, you are not worried about the ability of an individual pellet to expand rapidly once it hits its target. You mostly want penetration into vital areas by a number of those pellets. With a bullet, you have one projectile, instead of many. It needs to do more work at the target than a single pellet in a group of pellets. Thus, if you go with the "we ban lead shot, why not lead bullets" argument, you are handing the anti gun folks an ace in their hand as they push for more "infringements" on our right to keep and bear arms, which includes for hunting purposes, but is not limited to hunting and sporting purposes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top