California begins gun confiscation

[Vile Shadow]

I am confused, so now we are ok with felons having guns?

Apparently. Because you know gun laws never seem to make life tougher for criminals. Only for us.

 

[HarCo2ANewb]

Apparently. Because you know gun laws never seem to make life tougher for criminals. Only for us.

For all the shit we have to deal with, at least this has a good concept. After all, how many times have we said LAW ABIDING GUNOWNERS in the last 18 months

 

[Inigoes]

I am confused, so now we are ok with felons having guns?

Why not?

Felons can vote in MD.

 

[101combatvet]

Let the politicians pay out of their pockets to go after those criminals.... it's not our fault it's theirs.

 

[aquaman]

I am confused, so now we are ok with felons having guns?

If you see a psychologist (who happens to be an anti and reports you for whatever reason) at a metal health facility in CA your gun rights are gone. If you voluntarily stay for ONE day it automatically invalidated your right to own firearms. yes, its that bad

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...-medication-adjustment-has-guns-confiscated/#


related but in CT
http://www.activistpost.com/2013/04/navy-veteran-has-guns-confiscated.html

 

[HarCo2ANewb]

Let the politicians pay out of their pockets to go after those criminals.... it's not our fault it's theirs.

So don't make the politicians pay for police because I don't break the law? May I remind you that these are people who followed the rules to buy the gun and then preceded to become ineligible thru felonies, violent crimes or domestic abuse.

So we don't need more laws, we need to enforce the ones we have, until you actually start to enforce them, then stop.

 

[101combatvet]

So don't make the politicians pay for police because I don't break the law? May I remind you that these are people who followed the rules to buy the gun and then preceded to become ineligible thru felonies, violent crimes or domestic abuse.

So we don't need more laws, we need to enforce the ones we have, until you actually start to enforce them, then stop.

That's right... but the cost of going after those criminals shouldn't be paid for through an add on tax/fee paid for by a law abiding citizen/gunpwner.

 

[Joseph87']

I am confused, so now we are ok with felons having guns?

Some aren't even fellons cause of anything domestic, violent, mental or off the wall. Cali legalized pot but if you have the card your subject to turn in your firearms if you gave the wrong reason to get the card. People I'd rather shoot with a guy who smoked a joint instead of the guy taking pain pills for an injury. I do see your point and no felons shouldn't have them but if a state makes you a criminal for a off the wall reason would you want to turn your guns in? Your point is valid to an extent until you see that you'll be paying taxes to disarm us all so your going to paying to lose, not cool

 

[HarCo2ANewb]

That's right... but the cost of going after those criminals shouldn't be paid for through an add on tax/fee paid for by a law abiding citizen/gunpwner.

It isn't a new fee, they are using the money already collected at time of purchase, a $25 fee for a Dealer Record of Sale.

 

[danb]

I am confused, so now we are ok with felons having guns?

The first problem that you have is that databases can be erroneous. The information in this database is not even enough for law enforcement to get a warrant. If its not enough to get a warrant, it should certainly not be enough to confiscate guns.

The second problem you have is that the real violent people - gang members in Oakland and LA, are always one step ahead. Using "community guns," hiding them outside their homes, and not cooperating (you can say no to the search, they don't have a warrant).

There are other problems, but overall the 20,000 people they confiscate guns from are most likely to be sitting at home watching tv when the police arrive. I wonder why they are not out spending the money serving 20,000 arrest warrants and/or tracking down gang members? I'd bet 98% of the people they are confiscating guns from - people who cooperate - are not the real violent people in the first place. I'd bet dinner at your favorite steakhouse that there is no dent in homicide or violent crime in CA. But it certainly feels good to pretend to be doing something.

 

[vector03]

So....what happens to all the guns they confiscate? Couldn't that fund future recovery efforts?

 

[SKS1956]

For all the shit we have to deal with, at least this has a good concept. After all, how many times have we said LAW ABIDING GUNOWNERS in the last 18 months

What you'll have to be concerned with is how they will define "crimes" and "mental illness".

 

[blindnoodle]

It isn't a new fee, they are using the money already collected at time of purchase, a $25 fee for a Dealer Record of Sale.

Where did that money go before? And how is the program that money previously paid for now being funded?

You seem to balance a checkbook like a politician. If you open your eyes, you'll see that accounting doesn't work.

 

[101combatvet]

It isn't a new fee, they are using the money already collected at time of purchase, a $25 fee for a Dealer Record of Sale.

That makes it right? So how many more fees are you okay with?

 

[101combatvet]

So....what happens to all the guns they confiscate? Couldn't that fund future recovery efforts?

You're joking right? Those guns will go into the smelter.

 

[MauiWowie]

I am confused, so now we are ok with felons having guns?

I agree....
I'm ok with taking guns from bad guys

 

[MDFF2008]

This one isn't a straight good or bad.

I have HUGE issues with taking guns from someone who sees outpatient mental health for minor issues.

But if they are a criminal, take their guns and make examples of them.

 

[esqappellate]

Governor Brown just signed into law; funding to the tune of $24 Million dollars to confiscate guns from 20,000 gun owners who purchased guns legally but are now no longer legally able to posses guns.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/political/la-me-pc-gun-bill-20130501,0,7674608.story

What am I missing here. The story says:
Gov. Jerry Brown on Wednesday signed legislation aimed at taking handguns and assault rifles away from 20,000 Californians who acquired them legally but have since been disqualified from ownership because of a criminal conviction or serious mental illness.

This has been federal law under 18 usc 922 for decades. It is a matter of state law (including Maryland) for years. Every legal challenge to the federal felon in possession statutes has failed. I have no problem with taking guns away from felons. Doing so was endorsed in Heller.

 

[Robert]

This, I believe, is almost the same way the Nazi's disarmed the people.

Today 'Leaders' are creating an environment where there are so many 'laws' being created that have penalties that disapprove people. I'm all for violent offenders loosing their rights, but I don't think it's about that.

 

[MDFF2008]

So what's the message we are sending? We need to do something about violence, but let's not take guns away from criminals? Let's not do anything at all?

This thread should be deleted, it's an anti-2a person's dream. Pro-gun people getting upset when guns are taken from criminals.