California Registration
- Thread starter Do-Man
- Start date
Dennis Olson
New member
I wouldn't expect AG Lockyear to pull a fast one like he tried with the late registering SKS owners.
"There's a sucker born every minute." - P.T. Barnum
"There's a sucker born every minute." - P.T. Barnum
TheBluesMan
Moderator Emeritus
What are your specific concerns, do-man?
Confusion is intentional
I was watching my local news this a.m...."Do you or does your neighbor have an assualt weapon? If so, you have 3 days to register with the State or face a $500 fine and jail time." They then went on to give the "defining characteristics" of an 'assault weapon': the news didn't say 2 or more of the stated features.....it said any of the following features....included in said features was a "detachable magazine".
Point is that the confusion is intentional....the State will get revenue, notification and control. Lockyer is a bald-faced liar with a capital L. Make no mistake, this law is not about public safety....it is about money and control, period.
Do what your conscience dictates...I have (or haven't) as the case may be.
I was watching my local news this a.m...."Do you or does your neighbor have an assualt weapon? If so, you have 3 days to register with the State or face a $500 fine and jail time." They then went on to give the "defining characteristics" of an 'assault weapon': the news didn't say 2 or more of the stated features.....it said any of the following features....included in said features was a "detachable magazine".
Point is that the confusion is intentional....the State will get revenue, notification and control. Lockyer is a bald-faced liar with a capital L. Make no mistake, this law is not about public safety....it is about money and control, period.
Do what your conscience dictates...I have (or haven't) as the case may be.
http://www0.mercurycenter.com/premium/local/docs/assault29a.htm
Published Friday, Dec. 29, 2000, in the San Jose Mercury News
Groups say gun law too
vague
FIREARM ORGANIZATIONS THREATEN
SUIT TO CHALLENGE STATE
REGISTRATION DEADLINE
New definitions of assault weapons
BY RODNEY FOO
Mercury News
As a Sunday deadline for Californians to register their
assault weapons fast approaches, gun organizations
threatened to go to court to challenge it, saying the
regulations drafted by the state attorney general are vague
and do not give gun owners enough time to comply.
From the South Bay to the East Bay, police departments
agreed Thursday there could be some confusion, saying
they'd been fielding numerous questions from gun owners
about the deadline and the law.
``This is a good example of schizophrenic legislation,'' said Oakland police Sgt. Gary
Tolleson, who supervises the weapons unit. ``It's a combination of formula and
guesswork. And quite frankly, it's so confusing I've gone to four separate classes and
have gotten four different opinions on what is legal and what is illegal.''
Attorney Chuck Michel, who represents the California Rifle and Pistol Association, the
California Sporting Goods Association and a number of firearm distributors, added:
``What needs to happen is that people need to get fair notice about how to comply with
the law, and that's not taking place.''
Michel said he plans to file a complaint next week against the state and then seek an
injunction to lift or extend the deadline.
In response, a spokesman for state Attorney General Bill Lockyer said Thursday the state
had conducted an extensive informational campaign that provided enough information
and time for owners to register their assault weapons.
The attorney general's firearms division has been traveling up and down the state
instructing law enforcement agencies, gun dealers, National Rifle Association chapters
and other state gun advocacy groups on the law, said Lockyer's spokesman, Nathan
Barankin.
The state also has been running radio and TV spots, he said.
``The only people who seem to be confused by the law in any way are those intent upon
filing a lawsuit to stop it,'' Barankin said.
So far, about 10,000 owners have sent registration forms and their $20 fee payment to the
state. A form can cover more than one assault weapon. The forms have instructions on
how to register and can be obtained from law enforcement agencies and licensed gun
dealers.
`Very small response'
Observers say the 10,000 forms represent a low turnout, which Barankin denied, saying
no one is sure how many assault weapons exist in California. However, National Rifle
Association spokesman Steve Helsley described the number as a ``very small response''
while others suggest there may be as many as 200,000 in the state.
Since 1989, legislators have reacted to mass shootings, particularly the killings at a
Stockton elementary schoolyard and at a San Francisco law office at 101 California St.,
by passing statutes outlawing the distribution of 50 makes and models of military-style
weapons.
But anti-gun groups said the law was being skirted by gun makers who were merely
making simple changes to their weapons and continuing the sale of their firearms.
After the 1999 Columbine High School shooting in Colorado, lawmakers passed a bill
that instead outlawed assault weapons based on their characteristics, not by their model or
make.
Those who don't register those types of weapons risk a $500 fine and up to three years in
state prison.
Michel and Helsley say the state's final draft of regulations -- which were not approved
and issued until Dec. 5 -- have gun owners in a bind.
They contend the regulations do not provide enough information and direction to allow
gun owners time to modify their weapons so they will not be considered assault weapons.
Locally, police departments and gun dealers are fielding questions every day from
bewildered gun owners.
Many callers seem to believe they registered the assault weapons when they purchased
them -- which is not true, said Sgt. Larry Weir of San Jose police's firearms detail.
``A lot of people are under a misapprehension,'' he said.
Weir said he's even had to answer questions from a state Department of Justice agent
who wasn't sure if a weapon he owned needed to be registered.
Others are also confused by two other assault weapon deadlines that were imposed by the
state.
In 1989, a law named specific weapons that had to be registered by March 31, 1992.
California residents registered 67,000 assault weapons under that law.
In August, the California Supreme Court upheld the state's right to register variations on
the AK and AR-15 assault weapons named in the 1989 law. Owners of those weapons
have until Jan. 23 to register those guns.
At Kerley's Hunting and Fishing Outfitters in Cupertino, clerk Casey Torres said the
registrations ``are going out as fast as we can get them.''
Answering questions
The store has had to field numerous questions from gun owners wondering if their
weapons must be registered, he said.
At the Traders in San Leandro, one of the largest gun dealers in Northern California,
owner Tony Cucchiara said he was fielding the same questions, too. ``There are a number
of guns that are questionable, and people are panicking.''
At the same time, said Tolleson of the Oakland police, the law has become so confusing
that it may drive law-abiding citizens underground and make them avoid registration
altogether.
Mercury News Staff Writer Sandra Gonzales and the Associated Press contributed to
this report. Contact Rodney Foo at rfoo@sjmercury.com or (408) 920-5258.
Published Friday, Dec. 29, 2000, in the San Jose Mercury News
Groups say gun law too
vague
FIREARM ORGANIZATIONS THREATEN
SUIT TO CHALLENGE STATE
REGISTRATION DEADLINE
New definitions of assault weapons
BY RODNEY FOO
Mercury News
As a Sunday deadline for Californians to register their
assault weapons fast approaches, gun organizations
threatened to go to court to challenge it, saying the
regulations drafted by the state attorney general are vague
and do not give gun owners enough time to comply.
From the South Bay to the East Bay, police departments
agreed Thursday there could be some confusion, saying
they'd been fielding numerous questions from gun owners
about the deadline and the law.
``This is a good example of schizophrenic legislation,'' said Oakland police Sgt. Gary
Tolleson, who supervises the weapons unit. ``It's a combination of formula and
guesswork. And quite frankly, it's so confusing I've gone to four separate classes and
have gotten four different opinions on what is legal and what is illegal.''
Attorney Chuck Michel, who represents the California Rifle and Pistol Association, the
California Sporting Goods Association and a number of firearm distributors, added:
``What needs to happen is that people need to get fair notice about how to comply with
the law, and that's not taking place.''
Michel said he plans to file a complaint next week against the state and then seek an
injunction to lift or extend the deadline.
In response, a spokesman for state Attorney General Bill Lockyer said Thursday the state
had conducted an extensive informational campaign that provided enough information
and time for owners to register their assault weapons.
The attorney general's firearms division has been traveling up and down the state
instructing law enforcement agencies, gun dealers, National Rifle Association chapters
and other state gun advocacy groups on the law, said Lockyer's spokesman, Nathan
Barankin.
The state also has been running radio and TV spots, he said.
``The only people who seem to be confused by the law in any way are those intent upon
filing a lawsuit to stop it,'' Barankin said.
So far, about 10,000 owners have sent registration forms and their $20 fee payment to the
state. A form can cover more than one assault weapon. The forms have instructions on
how to register and can be obtained from law enforcement agencies and licensed gun
dealers.
`Very small response'
Observers say the 10,000 forms represent a low turnout, which Barankin denied, saying
no one is sure how many assault weapons exist in California. However, National Rifle
Association spokesman Steve Helsley described the number as a ``very small response''
while others suggest there may be as many as 200,000 in the state.
Since 1989, legislators have reacted to mass shootings, particularly the killings at a
Stockton elementary schoolyard and at a San Francisco law office at 101 California St.,
by passing statutes outlawing the distribution of 50 makes and models of military-style
weapons.
But anti-gun groups said the law was being skirted by gun makers who were merely
making simple changes to their weapons and continuing the sale of their firearms.
After the 1999 Columbine High School shooting in Colorado, lawmakers passed a bill
that instead outlawed assault weapons based on their characteristics, not by their model or
make.
Those who don't register those types of weapons risk a $500 fine and up to three years in
state prison.
Michel and Helsley say the state's final draft of regulations -- which were not approved
and issued until Dec. 5 -- have gun owners in a bind.
They contend the regulations do not provide enough information and direction to allow
gun owners time to modify their weapons so they will not be considered assault weapons.
Locally, police departments and gun dealers are fielding questions every day from
bewildered gun owners.
Many callers seem to believe they registered the assault weapons when they purchased
them -- which is not true, said Sgt. Larry Weir of San Jose police's firearms detail.
``A lot of people are under a misapprehension,'' he said.
Weir said he's even had to answer questions from a state Department of Justice agent
who wasn't sure if a weapon he owned needed to be registered.
Others are also confused by two other assault weapon deadlines that were imposed by the
state.
In 1989, a law named specific weapons that had to be registered by March 31, 1992.
California residents registered 67,000 assault weapons under that law.
In August, the California Supreme Court upheld the state's right to register variations on
the AK and AR-15 assault weapons named in the 1989 law. Owners of those weapons
have until Jan. 23 to register those guns.
At Kerley's Hunting and Fishing Outfitters in Cupertino, clerk Casey Torres said the
registrations ``are going out as fast as we can get them.''
Answering questions
The store has had to field numerous questions from gun owners wondering if their
weapons must be registered, he said.
At the Traders in San Leandro, one of the largest gun dealers in Northern California,
owner Tony Cucchiara said he was fielding the same questions, too. ``There are a number
of guns that are questionable, and people are panicking.''
At the same time, said Tolleson of the Oakland police, the law has become so confusing
that it may drive law-abiding citizens underground and make them avoid registration
altogether.
Mercury News Staff Writer Sandra Gonzales and the Associated Press contributed to
this report. Contact Rodney Foo at rfoo@sjmercury.com or (408) 920-5258.
I can't believe what I'm reading here...you guys are actually going to register firearms! It's sorta ironic though because those who do will probaly be the fist to be rounded up to be exterminated,like the over 56 million other people in the 20 century, that registered or turned in or had weapons confiscated from them ! It's mind-boggling the 2nd Amendment doe'snt say registration is needed to bear arms. All arms are protected by the 2nd amendment. No American can be legally compelled to register any firearm of common design or function. If there is no meaning to the 2nd Amendment,there is no reason toinfer meaning to the rest of the bill of Rights. Refusing to register affirms the right to own a militia firearmIfyou believe you have the right to keep arms in order to defend yourself your home your family and this country,and if you believe that right is protected by the natural law of the Bill of Rightsthen you cannot turn in or register any firearm whatsoever. Registration equals betrayal of yourself,your family,your ancestors, your country and your Constitution. PERIOD. OUT!
Travis McGee
New member
Are you guys serious? You are going to register your so-called "assault rifles" after what happened with the SKS's in Kali? Why don't you just haul them down to the smelter or chuck them in the ocean? When it comes time that the state demands you jump through hoops to keep your rifle (for the time being), just think about England, Australia and Canada. When the state wants you to register them, it is time to move that category of arms into the "militia weapon" category. Zero it, oil it, and cache it for a rainy day.
Jeff Thomas
New member
The more onerous these CA laws become ...
... the more likely the situation will grow to resemble the War on Some Drugs.
At some point in the, unfortunately, not too distant future, we'll see people thrown in prison and fined, and at some point we'll see people hurt and perhaps killed over these idiotic laws. The gun bigots won't give a dam*. But honest people and CA LEO's should be disgusted by this turn of events.
Regards from, still free, AZ
... the more likely the situation will grow to resemble the War on Some Drugs.
At some point in the, unfortunately, not too distant future, we'll see people thrown in prison and fined, and at some point we'll see people hurt and perhaps killed over these idiotic laws. The gun bigots won't give a dam*. But honest people and CA LEO's should be disgusted by this turn of events.
Regards from, still free, AZ
Yup, the lemmings are lining up....
This should be an interesting game. The State has stacked the deck in its favor, and the sheeple and lemmings, obviously more than willing to trade a little Liberty for the illusion of safety, have swallowed the bait hook, line, and sinker. Apparently unable to recall anything that happened more than 90 days before, the sheeple and lemmings have begun to comply with the state demand to register any firearms with certain cosmetic features, despite the fact that these types of firearms have been used in less than 1 percent of crimes.
Of course, the state assurances that these newly registered weapons will not be confiscated are dubious at best. Those of us from other states remember well the registration and then confiscation the state pulled just recently. The sheeple and lemmings, however, have apparently decided that this kind of thing will never happen again. One by one, though, we are sure to see them, like a line of cattle, walking calmly into the slaughterhouse, all the while singing along with that popular Million Moron March tune, "If it will save one child" and the spirit-lifting jingle from HCI called "To keep guns out of the hands of criminals".
Bolstered by the promise of safer streets and more government handouts, the sheeple and lemmings are eagerly following the new regulations.
Yup, their lining up to commit suicide. But hey! That's probably good news for us folks that actually believe in Freedom, who hold Liberty as the most precious of human Rights second only to Life. After all, what with the murder rate up 27%, and the rise sure to come from the victim disarmament that the sheeple and lemmings are linging up to take part in, that means less population in Kalifornia. In another ten years, they'll lose a few seats in Congress. Meanwhile, the freedom lovers stuck in that pit of Democracy can come to Nevada, Idaho, or other pro-gun states, and give us more seats.
I guess some people don't have any problem being...well, being sheeple and lemmings.
This should be an interesting game. The State has stacked the deck in its favor, and the sheeple and lemmings, obviously more than willing to trade a little Liberty for the illusion of safety, have swallowed the bait hook, line, and sinker. Apparently unable to recall anything that happened more than 90 days before, the sheeple and lemmings have begun to comply with the state demand to register any firearms with certain cosmetic features, despite the fact that these types of firearms have been used in less than 1 percent of crimes.
Of course, the state assurances that these newly registered weapons will not be confiscated are dubious at best. Those of us from other states remember well the registration and then confiscation the state pulled just recently. The sheeple and lemmings, however, have apparently decided that this kind of thing will never happen again. One by one, though, we are sure to see them, like a line of cattle, walking calmly into the slaughterhouse, all the while singing along with that popular Million Moron March tune, "If it will save one child" and the spirit-lifting jingle from HCI called "To keep guns out of the hands of criminals".
Bolstered by the promise of safer streets and more government handouts, the sheeple and lemmings are eagerly following the new regulations.
Yup, their lining up to commit suicide. But hey! That's probably good news for us folks that actually believe in Freedom, who hold Liberty as the most precious of human Rights second only to Life. After all, what with the murder rate up 27%, and the rise sure to come from the victim disarmament that the sheeple and lemmings are linging up to take part in, that means less population in Kalifornia. In another ten years, they'll lose a few seats in Congress. Meanwhile, the freedom lovers stuck in that pit of Democracy can come to Nevada, Idaho, or other pro-gun states, and give us more seats.
I guess some people don't have any problem being...well, being sheeple and lemmings.
I disagree with all who say Ca gun owners are lemmings or otherwise giving up their freedoms. You will excuse me, but in 1989 they passed an 'assualt weapons' registration and got 67,000 firearms registered. Wow. Out of twenty plus million people, a third of whom own firearms (based on national average - your state may be higher or lower), they got 67,000 weapons registered. That would be less than the 10% the state says they registered. Probably along the lines of 5% or less. So now, they want to register handguns. Does anyone here think they will get more than 10 - 15% compliance with that law also? And where are all those nasty guns that WEREN'T registered by 1992? Still in the closets, on the shelves and in the safes of legitimate gun owners. Who are all patiently biding their time, against the day that the State of California is actually STUPID enough to try a door to door search for firearms. Folks, all they are doing is adding up laws that normal, decent law abiding citizens can be harrassed with, their property confiscated and these honest people put in jail. Once that begins, all bets are off!!
And how much longer do you think it's going to be before the CA state gubmit advocates random door to door searches? You've probably already got random checkpoints for driver's licenses, drugs, etc for cars as a legality test. I'm going to laugh my arse off when anything with an optical sight gets added to the no-no list in California. You know, Georgia's not that bad, even in August.
Yes, Kali is weird.
Governor Gray-Out Davis is blaming electricity "de-regulation" with the rolling brown outs when what they did was not de-regulation but merely regulated the industry in a different way.
Nowhere does Gov Gray-Out mention that while Kali's population has doubled, they have not permitted a single power generating plant to be built (for environmental reasons), while at the same time forcing many of the power plants to run off of natural gas (for environmental reasons, again) and thus subjecting those plants to the changing market price of that fuel.
The law of unintended consequences bites hard. Too bad the media is painting it as a "not enough government" problem when, in fact, it was too much government which caused Kalifornia to have not enough power.
Arizona's population grew 40% of the last decade. You don't see us with rolling brown-outs. Of course, we have the Palo Verde nuke plant next to Phx.
Rick
Governor Gray-Out Davis is blaming electricity "de-regulation" with the rolling brown outs when what they did was not de-regulation but merely regulated the industry in a different way.
Nowhere does Gov Gray-Out mention that while Kali's population has doubled, they have not permitted a single power generating plant to be built (for environmental reasons), while at the same time forcing many of the power plants to run off of natural gas (for environmental reasons, again) and thus subjecting those plants to the changing market price of that fuel.
The law of unintended consequences bites hard. Too bad the media is painting it as a "not enough government" problem when, in fact, it was too much government which caused Kalifornia to have not enough power.
Arizona's population grew 40% of the last decade. You don't see us with rolling brown-outs. Of course, we have the Palo Verde nuke plant next to Phx.
Rick