The Liberal Gun Club Forum

senorgrand wrote:But no one is coming for your guns.

AB 1664 by Assemblymembers Marc Levine (D-Marin County) and Phillip Ting (D-San Francisco) was introduced today to close a loophole in law that allows the gun industry to evade the assault weapons ban in California. Specifically, AB 1664 will prohibit the use of a “bullet button” or other tool that allows for easily changeable magazines on all military-style assault weapons. Guns equipped with a bullet button are functionally the same as illegal assault weapons, but they are sold legally in California. This kind of assault rifle was used in the San Bernardino mass shooting last month and a shooting at Los Angeles International Airport in 2013.

“Killing machines have no place on our streets and gun violence must not be tolerated,” said Assemblymember Levine. “This legislation closes a loophole in law that allows military-style assault rifles to be sold legally in California. We raise our children in communities, not war zones.”

“Mass shootings have become routine, almost daily occurrences across the country,” said Assemblymember Phil Ting (D-San Francisco). “This bill offers a rational solution to a common threat facing our communities. Shooters use military-style weaponry because it enables them to kill as many innocent people as fast as they can. It’s time to stop the carnage.”

“We must close the loopholes in our assault weapons ban so that guns like the ones used in San Bernardino, Newtown, and Aurora cannot be bought legally in our state,” said Assemblymember David Chiu (D-San Francisco), who is a co-author of AB 1664 and with Attorney General Kamala Harris introduced AB 1663 today, which bans bullet button guns by requiring all magazines to be permanently affixed.

...

“Since California’s first assault weapons law was passed in 1989 in the wake of the tragic Stockton school yard shooting, we have struggled to make it real in the face of the gun industry’s determination to find new ways to evade the law’s intent,” said Amanda Wilcox, Legislation & Policy Chair of the California Chapters of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. “We support the goal of AB 1664 to finally close the loopholes in a manner that will prevent the firearms industry from continuing to sell these lethal military-style weapons in our state. Curbing the ability to rapidly reload will decrease the lethality in future mass shootings and save lives.”

hoosier8 wrote:I don't think they realize that the most popular sporting rifle in history will show up in crime. Ban that and something else will replace it.

CDFingers wrote:Does this mean they want ten round internal magazines? I'm not really hearing designers popping out their French curves...

You'd think with a drought, with rain being wasted without being captured, they'd find something better to do than something that doesn't need doing.

CDFingers

(d) For purposes of this section, the following definitions shall apply:
(1) “Detachable magazine” means an ammunition feeding device that can be removed readily from the firearm without disassembly of the firearm action.
(2) “Fixed magazine” means an ammunition feeding device contained in, or permanently attached to, a firearm in such a manner that the device cannot be removed without disassembly of the firearm action.

“assault weapon” also means any of the following: (1) A semiautomatic centerfire rifle that has does not have a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept no more than 10 rounds.

pdoggeth wrote:I'm seriously enraged this morning. Yes I hope this doesn't pass. If it passes, yes I hope it gets struck down by the courts. But you know, I don't have much faith in the system (in California at least) right now. Fuck You Kamala Harris, David Chiu, Phil Ting, Rob Bonta , and Marc Levine (writers and sponsors of the bill).

The only small, small consolation I have is that if we have to register our ARs and AKs as assault weapons, can we then ditch the bullet button? I mean hell, they're assault weapons now!

shinzen wrote:I'd put it at about a 10% chance of not passing here. I suspect that break-top AR's will again become the rage here in CA. Or a real effort to design a stripper clip fed AR will be made. I sadly suspect that most of the rest of the pointless legislation will pass as well. However, I believe Jerry Brown will veto most things that are put to him for gun legislation this year, the voters on the ballot initiatives, not so much.

In 2017 with Gavin potentially in, he'll sign anything that's put in front of him.

Seriously bogus and lame. And as we've seen from the Peruta saga, unwinding it through the courts, even if it is in our favor, will take years.

joeblow9999 wrote:How long is the "capacity" issue going to take to get to SCOTUS? Under what circumstances? What is the best case to even take around this?

At its core what represents a reasonable degree of parity between the individual and the state? If we presume that the intent of the 2nd evolves, as with other amendments, not tied down be "musket" nonsense, then where will we stand in the courts eyes?

Anyone with a single shot crystal ball please chime in.

joeblow9999 wrote:How long is the "capacity" issue going to take to get to SCOTUS? Under what circumstances? What is the best case to even take around this?

At its core what represents a reasonable degree of parity between the individual and the state? If we presume that the intent of the 2nd evolves, as with other amendments, not tied down be "musket" nonsense, then where will we stand in the courts eyes?

Anyone with a single shot crystal ball please chime in.