View Full Version : CA begins gun confiscation for misdemeanors
Not really unbelievable, for some reason I'm just not shocked.
Delete if already posted, I looked but couldn't find it.
http://www.infowars.com/gun-confiscation-begins-in-california/
You do understand that posting links to Infowars lowers your IQ and can make you go blind?
You do understand that posting links to Infowars lowers your IQ and can make you go blind?
But will it grow hair on my palms?
But will it grow hair on my palms?
Hard to tell. My palms are already so hairy that I can't tell when new growth occurs.
Infowars or not, if this is happening you can expect some unnecessary shootouts coming soon.
A more legitimate source if you can say that NPR isn't biased.
http://www.npr.org/2013/08/20/213546439/one-by-one-california-agents-track-down-illegally-owned-guns
Go to 5 minutes in. I think they are missing some people in their confiscation...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rkJdLm_SWJ4
This tactic stinks of gestapo! Misdemeanors? Got to be kidding. What do they do in gun friendly states when one gets a felony and owns guns? I doubt they do a raid on your home. I've haven't known any gun owners who committed a felony to hear what the procedure was.
A more legitimate source if you can say that NPR isn't biased.
http://www.npr.org/2013/08/20/213546439/one-by-one-california-agents-track-down-illegally-owned-guns
Kali' dropping $24 million to hire more of these agents, huh? Gee, I dunno....perhaps a state with as much red budget ink as Kali could spend (or even better, NOT spend it!) on something more worthwhile.
Also, that bit about a 10 year weapons prohibition for being in a fight is utter bullshit. It's only *supposed* to be for a FELONY.....of course we've had the Lautenberg Law on the books for years now.
thopkins22
08-28-13, 12:17
The misdemeanors it appears they're talking about are the same ones that we are all asked about on the 4473. Domestic violence, restraining orders, and so forth.
I could be wrong, but it doesn't appear that they're digging up public intoxication tickets etc....
The misdemeanors it appears they're talking about are the same ones that we are all asked about on the 4473. Domestic violence, restraining orders, and so forth.
Did you miss the part about a fight triggering an automatic 10 year suspension of weapons possession. It didn't say battery, just a fight, i.e. a fistfight at a bar or such.
thopkins22
08-28-13, 12:30
Did you miss the part about a fight triggering an automatic 10 year suspension of weapons possession. It didn't say battery, just a fight, i.e. a fistfight at a bar or such.
I did miss that.
You do understand that posting links to Infowars lowers your IQ and can make you go blind?
Here you go...
http://www.npr.org/2013/08/20/213546439/one-by-one-california-agents-track-down-illegally-owned-guns
ETA: Late again...
Keep it classy Kali, keep it classy.
Uhhh....
Beginning In 2007, California officials began collecting names from court records, medical facilities and lists of known or wanted criminals, then cross-referenced them against the federal instant criminal background check system for gun-buyers. The list is updated every day.
This tactic stinks of gestapo! Misdemeanors? Got to be kidding. What do they do in gun friendly states when one gets a felony and owns guns? I doubt they do a raid on your home. I've haven't known any gun owners who committed a felony to hear what the procedure was.
Read closer, misdemeanors that prohibit firearm ownership specifically, not any misdemeanor.
Uhhh....
You expected they wouldn't use NICS?
You expected they wouldn't use NICS?
Sounds eerily similar to the SAFE Act... but people thought it wouldn't be abused in such a manner.
Morons...
Cincinnatus
08-28-13, 15:04
I read somewhere yesterday--trying to find a link, can't remember where I saw it, but it was NOT infowars--that these misdemeanors DO include things like not paying Toll bills and other things, and that one man had been told by the police that his car had been hit by a driver and once he was outside his house to look, they cuffed him and ransacked his house for weapons.
Nevermind, the place I read this was not infowars, but they had simply reprinted what Infowars had said
A fistfight is "battery". California has two distinct crimes. When people say "assault and battery" they are different.
CA penal code 240- An assault is an unlawful attempt, coupled with a present ability, to commit a violent injury on the person of another.
CA Penal code 242- A battery is any willful and unlawful use of force or violence upon the person of another.
The issue that concerns me is this- Michel's main problem is that the state doesn't tell people they're prohibited from owning a firearm, he says. "For example, you can get in a fight, and plead guilty to being in a fight, and wind up having a statutory prohibition on possessing firearms get triggered for a 10-year period. But the courts haven't told them that."
Did you miss the part about a fight triggering an automatic 10 year suspension of weapons possession. It didn't say battery, just a fight, i.e. a fistfight at a bar or such.
California can't use NICS. They don't have it. All purchases are done on a 4473 and they are conducted at the state level using California databases along with a 10 day wait or "cool off".
You expected they wouldn't use NICS?
Sorry for the infowars link, I had been forwarded another link from a second amendment site and kept following it, got to the video and had to roll out so that's what got posted. Every site had essentially the same story.
I expect this (gun confiscation and my IQ getting lower) to happen across the rest of the US within my lifetime. It's the pussification of America coming full circle. Those with balls must be neutered.
Did you miss the part about a fight triggering an automatic 10 year suspension of weapons possession. It didn't say battery, just a fight, i.e. a fistfight at a bar or such.
Perhaps he was dumbing it down for the reporter who probably would not have understood what he was saying if he used the correct CA Penal Code Terminology.
Or maybe he did use it, and the reporter just changed it to "fight", since he did not know that legal terminology meant.
Almost any story on guns has incorrect "facts" in it.
Read closer, misdemeanors that prohibit firearm ownership specifically, not any misdemeanor.
Thanks Kos, I only watched the video...:eek:
California can't use NICS. They don't have it. All purchases are done on a 4473 and they are conducted at the state level using California databases along with a 10 day wait or "cool off".
Every state uses 4473s. The difference seems to be CA actually has across the board firearm registration.
I am well aware of that. I was pointing out that CA does not use NICS. They use 4473's and that is the de facto way that California creates a database of gun owners coupled with the fact that all handgun sales must go through dealers and long guns will also be registered as well starting in January.
Every state uses 4473s. The difference seems to be CA actually has across the board firearm registration.
I am well aware of that. I was pointing out that CA does not use NICS. They use 4473's and that is the de facto way that California creates a database of gun owners coupled with the fact that all handgun sales must go through dealers and long guns will also be registered as well starting in January.
Gotcha. I think we are mostly on the same page, only I was using NICS in a generic sense of the word. Similarly FL doesn't use NICS, we pay FDLE a fee to call NICS on our behalf, but most people still call it a NICS check.
I am well aware of that. I was pointing out that CA does not use NICS. They use 4473's and that is the de facto way that California creates a database of gun owners coupled with the fact that all handgun sales must go through dealers and long guns will also be registered as well starting in January.
CA does have a complete second form for the DROS. When you make a purchase you fill out the 4473 and the dealer completes the Dealer Record of Sale (DROS). The dealer record of sale can now be done online and printed out. The buyer signs it and provides a thumbprint.
The DROS initially kept a database for handguns and CA assault weapons. Starting in January, all new long gun purchases will also be added.
As far as what databases they actually check, I have no idea.
A fistfight is "battery". California has two distinct crimes. When people say "assault and battery" they are different.
CA penal code 240- An assault is an unlawful attempt, coupled with a present ability, to commit a violent injury on the person of another.
CA Penal code 242- A battery is any willful and unlawful use of force or violence upon the person of another.
The issue that concerns me is this- Michel's main problem is that the state doesn't tell people they're prohibited from owning a firearm, he says. "For example, you can get in a fight, and plead guilty to being in a fight, and wind up having a statutory prohibition on possessing firearms get triggered for a 10-year period. But the courts haven't told them that."
Must be in Kali and other select states. In most states a fistfight---as long as there is no curb-stomping or such---is a misdemeanor.
Hey, make everything a felony and before you know it no one can own guns!
Sorry for the infowars link, I had been forwarded another link from a second amendment site and kept following it, got to the video and had to roll out so that's what got posted. Every site had essentially the same story.
I expect this (gun confiscation and my IQ getting lower) to happen across the rest of the US within my lifetime. It's the pussification of America coming full circle. Those with balls must be neutered.
Don't worry about it - we will survive. In terms of your IQ having the dwindles from the experience, I have it from a friend of a friend's Uncle's cousin who is an esteemed neurologist that chatting on M4C replaces the lost IQ points. However, there is no cure for the hairy palms that came from whatever other extracurricular activities that may occupy your time.
As far as I know, both crimes are still misdemeanors.
Must be in Kali and other select states. In most states a fistfight---as long as there is no curb-stomping or such---is a misdemeanor.
Hey, make everything a felony and before you know it no one can own guns!
Nightvisionary
08-29-13, 03:08
You do understand that posting links to Infowars lowers your IQ and can make you go blind?
I guess we will have to wait until the story shows up on the NBC nightly news before we can confirm it's veracity.
I guess we will have to wait until the story shows up on the NBC nightly news before we can confirm it's veracity.
NBC has a better track record than Infowars which is actually worse than the Enquirer. Alex Jones is a truther nut job who fabricates conspiracies to entertain the retards who are incapable of independent thought. Is he correct sometimes? Sure, but so is MSNBC.
BTW, there are more than 2 places to get your news. In fact, I find that 50% of my information on society's happenings comes from GD.
California can't use NICS. They don't have it. All purchases are done on a 4473 and they are conducted at the state level using California databases along with a 10 day wait or "cool off".
I think it goes beyond the state level. I heard of a case involving some people in CA who were being tried federally for conspiracy on a 4473 form (Potential straw purchase). CA DOJ was involved, but so were the ATF. So CA's system/4473 must be linked to the feds somehow it seems?
SomeOtherGuy
08-29-13, 09:29
Hey, make everything a felony and before you know it no one can own guns!
That's precisely the plan of many gun-banners, and it's been creeping in for at least 20 years now.
I am always skeptical when I hear a politician arguing to make something a felony.
That's precisely the plan of many gun-banners, and it's been creeping in for at least 20 years now.
I am always skeptical when I hear a politician arguing to make something a felony.
Or you can pass the Lautenberg Law (DV) which is still a misdemeanor but prohibits gun ownership. Sure, there are wife beaters who should be pummeled publicly but we all know how baseless accusations can lead to a DV charge (not to mention a case I read about where a guy smashed his wife's computer and got a DV charge....didn't even touch the bitch!).
One has nothing to do with the other. There are so many details missing from the story we have no idea how it unfolded. Maybe the dealer called the California DOJ? Maybe he called the BATFE and they contacted CA DOJ?
I think it goes beyond the state level. I heard of a case involving some people in CA who were being tried federally for conspiracy on a 4473 form (Potential straw purchase). CA DOJ was involved, but so were the ATF. So CA's system/4473 must be linked to the feds somehow it seems?
One has nothing to do with the other. There are so many details missing from the story we have no idea how it unfolded. Maybe the dealer called the California DOJ? Maybe he called the BATFE and they contacted CA DOJ?
I know exactly how it unfolded but don't wish to spill it all out here. The feds were involved & not by accident. It was because of the 4473 form.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.