Kalifornia passes 1 gun a month

rifleman

New member
Kalifornia is getting scary.


Thursday July 1 9:58 PM ET

Calif. Senate Send Gun Bill to Gov.

By NOAH ISACKSON Associated Press Writer

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) - Handgun buyers in California would be limited to one handgun
purchase per month under a bill sent to the governor on Thursday.

The bill, approved 21-13 by the Senate, is the first gun control measure to pass the Legislature
since lawmakers vowed to make gun laws tougher following an April massacre at a Littleton,
Colo., high school.

``Today, a person can walk into a store, buy countless handguns, and feed them to the black
market where they're snatched by kids, felons and gang members,'' said Assemblyman Wally
Knox, a Democrat and the bill's author.

Gov. Gray Davis has not yet taken a position on the bill, which was recently approved by the
state Assembly. Law enforcement authorities, federally licensed collectors, and security guards
would be exempt from the limit.

Opponents contend limiting handgun sales would infringe the constitutional right to bear arms
and do little to make California safer.

``This law doesn't ration guns; it rations rights. It's like saying you can have your freedom of
speech, but only once a month,'' Sen. Bill Morrow, a Republican, said.

In support of his bill, Knox cited a study by Handgun Control Inc., which said about 80 percent
of the guns seized by Southern California law enforcement officials were originally purchased
from legal gun dealers.

Last year, 40,722 handguns were sold in California in quantities ranging from two to 60.


------------------
NRA,GOA,ISRA,JPFO
 
So how do they propose to enforce this? Are we going to have a new system of registration, so they can track our purchases?
 
good point EWOK, Kalifornia seems to be the testing bed for the sheeple.

Does anyone know Gov. Gray Davis e-mail, I think he needs a few letters to read over the long weekend.

------------------
NRA,GOA,ISRA,JPFO
 
Can anyone help me understand how they even get to first base with this logic?

"'Today, a person can walk into a store, buy countless handguns, and feed them to the black market where they're snatched by kids, felons and gang members,' said Assemblyman Wally Knox, a Democrat and the bill's author."

Now, I'm not an attorney, but I am familiar with the concept of 'straw' purchases. As I recall, that is a violation of federal law. Wouldn't be surprised if it is a violation of CA law as well. I know I shouldn't be so foolish as to ask this, but if they won't use the current law to prevent exactly the scenario Knox describes, how could he possibly believe another law would change the result? Answer?: I don't really believe that he accepts his own argument.

I can only assume this is somewhat easier to prosecute. That's the only decent spin I can possibly see.

Californians should give them what they want. You should all buy one gun, each month. Then, move out of CA and leave those poor fools to their own fates.
 
Guess HCI and the Gov didn't do their home work. 80% were bought at dealers. I don't think so according to the NY Times

Gun Flow to Criminals Laid to Tiny Fraction of Dealers


Related Articles
Issue in Depth: America Under the Gun

Forum
Join a Discussion on Gun Control


By FOX BUTTERFIELD

study performed for the Federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms has found a compelling pattern of evidence demonstrating
that guns used to commit crimes move quickly from manufacturers to
juvenile offenders and older criminals through a relative handful of corrupt dealers.

The finding is particularly significant in light of the bitter gun-control debate in Congress, suggesting that many of the proposed solutions --child safety locks, for instance, or a ban on the import of high-capacity ammunition clips -- do not address the most important problem: some
dealers' repeated sales to criminals or to "straw purchasers" buying on their behalf.

The report found, for example, that a mere
389 federally licensed dealers, of 104,855
such dealers around the country, had sold
half of all guns used in crimes in 1996 and
1997 that could be traced by law enforcement to their initial sale.

It also found that more than a fifth of all
guns recovered in crimes in those two years
had been purchased from a licensed dealer less than a year earlier, and that almost half had been bought from dealers within three years.

In addition, the study concluded that 49.1 percent of guns involved in crimes that could be traced to the original dealer were used in those criminal acts within 50 miles of the sale.

Until recently, it had been widely believed that for the most part, criminals and juvenile offenders stole their guns, and that with 230 million guns in America, there was little that law enforcement could do to stanch the flow to them.

"This report shows that dealing with illegal gun trafficking is not hopeless and that there are a limited number of dirty dealers and detectable patterns of trafficking," said David Kennedy, a senior researcher at the
John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University.

The report, prepared for the firearms agency by a researcher at Northeastern University, places special emphasis on what the agency
terms "time to crime": the length of time from the first sale by a dealer to the point at which a gun is recovered in a crime. A short time to crime,which the A.T.F. defines as less than three years, is considered an
indicator of possible illegal activity by dealers or traffickers, and a time of less than a year a very strong indicator.

Therefore, the study said, it is highly significant that 49.6 percent of all guns traced by the firearms agency in 1996 and 1997 were used in crimes less than three years from their date of purchase.

A scant 110 dealers, or 0.1 percent of the total, each sold more than 50 guns with an average time to crime of less than one year.

The study, by Glenn L. Pierce, co-director of the Center for Criminal Justice Policy Research at Northeastern, provides the most detailed examination to date of the conclusion that a tiny number of dealers are
responsible for a disproportionate number of guns used by criminals.
That conclusion was suggested in an earlier A.T.F. report and in a report issued this spring by Senator Charles E. Schumer, a New York Democrat who has been among the nation's leading advocates of gun control.

Yesterday Schumer and six co-sponsors introduced in the Senate a bill
that would crack down on any dealer to whom at least 25 guns used in crimes were traced in any one-year period. The legislation would allow the firearms agency to conduct an unlimited number of inspections of such dealers' records -- the current limit is one a year -- and would make it easier for the agency to suspend their licenses, a process that is now extremely difficult. In addition, the bill would prohibit all straw purchases.

Some of the study's most compelling data involved the time to crime of certain kinds of guns. In California, for example, inexpensive, rapid-firing Lorcin 9-millimeter pistols recovered in crimes in 1996-97 were found to have been sold by dealers an average of only 170 days beforehand. Similarly, Lorcin 9-millimeters had an average time to crime of only 202 days in Mississippi, 318 days in North Carolina and 331 days in West
Virginia.

Another "fad" gun, popular with criminals and juvenile offenders, is the Hi Point .380. In Georgia, it showed up in crimes an average of 215 days after being sold by a dealer. The average in Indiana was 226 days, and in
Illinois 309 days.

"This information shows it is just not a tenable argument for these manufacturers to say they are not aware of what happens to their guns," said Dr. Garen Wintemute, director of the Violence Prevention Research
Program at the University of California at Davis.

Firearms manufacturers have repeatedly said they do not know what happens in the use of their guns, and cannot be held accountable for it, because they sell only to wholesalers, who in turn sell to retail dealers.

The manufacturers also contend that even after a crime is committed with one of their guns and they are reached by an A.T.F. official performing a trace through use of the weapon's serial number, they have no way to know what has happened because the firearms agency does not tell them of any crime.

A senior agency official said this argument was not credible. "Every single gun recovered by law enforcement that we trace is a crime gun," the official said. "The manufacturers do not question our agents whether these are crime guns."

The report's finding that 49.1 percent of all crime guns that can be traced to a dealer were used by the criminal within 50 miles of the sale comes as a surprise to specialists. Earlier findings showed that many guns used by criminals in big East Coast cities with strict gun-control laws, like New York, Washington and Boston, were originally purchased in Southern states with lax gun laws, like Florida, Georgia and North Carolina.

The report concludes that this pattern of long-distance trafficking indeed exists, saying a quarter of all guns traced as a result of criminal acts end up more than 500 miles from the original dealer.

But, the report says, there is really a dual pattern of gun trafficking, with an even greater number of guns sold to criminals or straw purchasers by local dealers near the criminals' homes.

The report also provides the first information comparing the role of pawnbrokers who hold Federal firearms licenses with that of regular dealers. Crime guns were traced to only 13 percent of regular dealers in 1996-97, the report found, but were traced to 35 percent of pawnbrokers.

What is unclear is whether the dealers with large numbers of crime guns traced to them are simply stores with a large volume of sales, or whether they instead are simply inclined to be involved in illegal activity. The report also does not distinguish between sales made by dealers in stores and at gun shows.
 
Jeff...

This will be supply side enforcement. Thus, they don't have to track anyone down for straw purchases. And it appears easy to enforce:
Say you bought a gun last week and go to buy another today. They run you thru NICS and they see you bought one last week....red flag, bar the sale and now tag you with a misdemenor/felony....you'll either get a visit from the cops or a nice letter from AG Lockyer; and likely you will be ineligible to own guns henceforth. They'll have a list of all your registered guns and make you get rid of them (next year probably trash your house searching for them for confiscation).
Net result: "illegal buy" averted and one less gunowner.

------------------
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes"
 
I haven't printed it out and really gone through it; it doesn't seem to be based solely on NICS. All firearms transactions (with the sole exception of parent/child) in CA go through NICS, but this law seems to target only handguns that are actually bought from dealers. In other words, it looks like I could buy from out-of-state, have the firearms transfered to a friendly FFL holder, and legally buy more than one handgun a month. I'm still against it, of course, since it's just another brick in the wall.

I am curious as to why the governor hasn't announced his support for it. Maybe there are some influential collectors who have access to him?
 
Gun rationing?

Shucks...Guess I disband my platoon of Vietnam era GI and VC reenactors now.

"Attention. Stand Down. Sorry guys, turn in your jungle fatigues, brain buckets, straw hats and tire sandals. We'd better stop payment on those semi-auto M60 too. And repaint the whirlybird to its original the traffic reporter colors."

What's fifty plus fun loving historians suppose to do now that I can't supply them with all those semi ARs and AKs? Sorry guys, dust off the pilums and polish the gladii cuz we're back to being Roman Legionnaires and barbarians. This time I want to be Arminius.

Are we sleeping safer tonight in Ka?

------------------
Vigilantibus et non dormientibus jura subveniunt
 
Back
Top