California Wants to Tax ALL the Guns You Own

This is a Fourth and Fifth Amendment violation
Click to expand...

Just how do you figure that??

Right now, its not the law, its a bill. It would BE a bad law if passed, but in CA that doesn't seem to matter much. Bad gun laws in CA go to court, get stayed, unstayed, stayed, unstayed and CA gets to enforce them until the matter is finally resolved in court, something which can take years.

That has been the pattern in recent years, I doubt this one will be different, IF it becomes CA law.
 
44 AMP said:
Just how do you figure that??



Right now, its not the law, its a bill. It would BE a bad law if passed, but in CA that doesn't seem to matter much. Bad gun laws in CA go to court, get stayed, unstayed, stayed, unstayed and CA gets to enforce them until the matter is finally resolved in court, something which can take years.



That has been the pattern in recent years, I doubt this one will be different, IF it becomes CA law.
Click to expand...
The people who worked together and conspired to draft this legislation should be arrested.

760a1b6765ba406526bcd83a3920dc90.jpg
 
rc said:
California Wants to Tax ALL the Guns You Own
Yesterday our freedom friend at CopperJacket TV reported a new scheme by California legislators in senate bill 1160 to require yearly registration for all guns with $1000 fines for each instance of noncompliance.
Click to expand...
Where's the tax?

What this article describes is clearly not a tax, it would be a penalty for failing to comply with a proposed requirement to register al firearms. That's not a tax. A fine for speeding is not a tax on driving ...

Also, it's not clear to me from the language that the fine would apply separately to every firearm not registered. A court could interpret it that way but, on its face, I don't see that it clearly says that.
 
The fine is not a tax. However, the fee might be considered one.

The proposal includes mention of a fee (amount not specified) , and what that money might be used for, aside from paying for the registration system.

they call it a fee, but how is being required to pay YEARLY to own what you already own NOT a tax, in effect, if not in actual name??

The people who worked together and conspired to draft this legislation should be arrested.
Click to expand...

Arrested? on what grounds? I think there is something in the laws that exempt legislators from legal action over what they propose or even what they pass. While you or I might happily send them to the wall, the best we an legally do is send them packing, the next time they are up for election.

Start a recall petition, if the law allows for it. Even in CA, I think you could get enough signatures for that.
 
Anybody ever read, "The Gulag Archipelago" by Aleksandr Isayevich Solzhenitsyn?

In the books, he constantly harps that there was never enough guards or police to run the camps.

That is the most frightening thing about Authoritarian Tyranny. It is not some legislature or uniformed thug with the face of Devil that enacts daily mechanisms of oppression.

It is the imprisoned wretches that run the day to day grind and keep the system afloat.
 
They phrase I've told various people who foam at the mouth over proposed gun laws over the years and scream "UNCONSTITUTIONAL!!!" is this: "everything is constitutional until the courts say otherwise." Personally, I believe that when the 2nd Amendment is applied through the "text, history, and tradition" standard set forth in Bruen that the vast majority of gun laws should be found unconstitutional, but until the courts say otherwise, they are presumed to be constitutional. While I certainly agree that the politicians who propose these sorts of laws should most certainly be voted out of office, and I could even see an argument that they should be expelled from their legislative bodies for violating their oaths of office, I can't quite get to arresting, charging, and jailing them. Criminal penalties for politicians who propose or pass "unconstitutional" laws is a slippery slope as what is or is not "unconstitutional" was, is, and will continue to be an issue for which there is no consensus. Going down that road will lead to the party in the majority arresting, charging, and jailing their opposition every time the balance of power shifts and that is a very direct route to becoming a banana republic.

That being said, if there is a fee or tax attached to complying with this proposed law, I think you might have a strong case to argue that it should be held unconstitutional because you are taxing one's ability to exercise their constitutionally guaranteed right. SCOTUS has already ruled that poll taxes, which were often very small especially by the time they were struck down, are unconstitutional because one's constitutionally-guaranteed rights cannot be taxed (though voting at least in a presidential election is not a constitutionally-guaranteed right but that's an issue in and of itself). As Justice Thomas so clearly pointed out in Bruen, "the Second Amendment is not a second-class right" so I fail to see how taxing one's ability to simply posses a firearm could be constitutional when poll taxes are not.
 
Last edited:
Going down that road will lead to the party in the majority arresting, charging, and jailing their opposition every time the balance of power shifts and that is a very direct route to becoming a banana republic.
Click to expand...

If the party in power is effective enough in arresting and jailing their opposition, there won't be a shift in the balance of power, short of a successful armed uprising forcing them out of power. We have names for those kinds of regimes, one of those names is dictatorship.

Today language is frequently compressed into "sound bites" and simple phrases to describe complex issues, and many people jump straight to the extremes in their rhetoric, but none of that changes the fact that the law, as passed, IS the LAW, we must obey until/unless a court rules it is not.

And the courts take these things one step at a time, and invalidation of one specific law only affects THAT specific law, and other laws doing essentially the same thing may be in full force until they fail to pass judicial review.
 
And for even more "amusement", recall that felons would be exempt from this requirement because that would constitute a violation of the 5th Amendment re: self-incrimination.
 
Another wacko bill has been introduced requiring you to report your guns to the insurance company to get insurance and they will give your info to the state. They want you to be required to tell where you keep your guns and how they are stored.
 
Seems like the only thing missing from a "safe work environment for ciminals" is a law requiring you to tell the state when you are and are not home.

If the state has the data, criminals can GET IT. OF course, stealing the data would be a crime...but something being a crime doesn't seem to stop criminals, or even slow them down, much.

Wait till the next version of "safe storage" laws where the law will require you to give the state the combination to your safe, or a duplicate set of keys,....:rolleyes:

and don't forget those annual, semiannual, or even monthly "safety inspections" that you will be required to pay for (and take time off work to be home for, etc.)

OR perhaps they'll just break into your house, and your safe, when you're not home, do their checks, and leave, stomping your kitten to death on their way out....leaving everything in a pile on the floor with a note "passed inspection",,,,this time... :eek:

perhaps agents of the CA govt won't do that. They're not the Feds, after all :rolleyes:

(intentional sarcasm)
 
I could totally see California try to do English/Australian style random inspections to make sure your secured guns are secure even when you are home.
 
Don't forget the California governor's office is filled by Nancy Pelosi's Nephew. The political incest is pretty serious in California politics.
 
Don't forget that this subforum is not for discussing who is in politics or who they are related to. What politicians say and do, as it relates to the law and our civil rights is allowed.

Discussing other things about those people is not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top