HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Politics 2014 (Forum) » California Gun Confiscati...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Sat Apr 20, 2013, 01:54 AM

California Gun Confiscation Bill Passes, Approves $24 Million To Expedite Illegal Gun Seizure


California Gun Confiscation Bill Passes, Approves $24 Million To Expedite Illegal Gun Seizure

The California state legislature passed a bill Thursday approving $24 million to expedite the confiscation of the estimated 40,000 handguns and assault weapons illegally owned by Californians.

SB 140, authored by Sen. Mark Leno (D-San Francisco), seeks to remedy the gun-confiscation backlog that has left thousands of illegal guns on the streets, including those owned by those with criminal convictions or serious mental illness.

“We are fortunate in California to have the first and only system in the nation that tracks and identifies individuals who at one time made legal purchases of firearms but are now barred from possessing them,” Leno said in a statement. “However, due to a lack of resources, only a few of these illegally possessed weapons have been confiscated, and the mountain of firearms continues to grow each day."

The measure will take $24 million from the Dealer Record of Sale (DROS) surplus funds and give it to the California Department of Justice, which is in charge of confiscating illegal guns. The DROS account holds fees that are imposed upon every transfer or sale of a firearm in California.

-snip-

Full article here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/19/california-gun-confiscation-bill_n_3117238.html


33 replies, 3665 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 33 replies Author Time Post
Reply California Gun Confiscation Bill Passes, Approves $24 Million To Expedite Illegal Gun Seizure (Original post)
Tx4obama Apr 2013 OP
Eleanors38 Apr 2013 #1
Ash_F Apr 2013 #2
ReRe Apr 2013 #3
bowens43 Apr 2013 #4
geckosfeet Apr 2013 #5
krispos42 Apr 2013 #8
geckosfeet Apr 2013 #11
CreekDog Apr 2013 #17
krispos42 Apr 2013 #20
CreekDog Apr 2013 #21
krispos42 Apr 2013 #24
CreekDog Apr 2013 #25
krispos42 Apr 2013 #33
Jeff Murdoch Apr 2013 #6
CreekDog Apr 2013 #18
BlueCaliDem Apr 2013 #29
Wounded Bear Apr 2013 #7
SunSeeker Apr 2013 #9
ellisonz Apr 2013 #10
geckosfeet Apr 2013 #12
ellisonz Apr 2013 #13
geckosfeet Apr 2013 #14
ellisonz Apr 2013 #15
baldguy Apr 2013 #16
geckosfeet Apr 2013 #19
baldguy Apr 2013 #22
geckosfeet Apr 2013 #23
baldguy Apr 2013 #26
geckosfeet Apr 2013 #27
baldguy Apr 2013 #28
geckosfeet Apr 2013 #30
baldguy Apr 2013 #31
Hippo_Tron Apr 2013 #32

Response to Tx4obama (Original post)

Sat Apr 20, 2013, 03:47 AM

1. No problem. Finally, a funded mandate. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tx4obama (Original post)

Sat Apr 20, 2013, 04:43 AM

2. DU rec.

Finally, some sanity in policy. Thank you to California from Texas.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tx4obama (Original post)

Sat Apr 20, 2013, 04:52 AM

3. There they go again...

.... California, the laboratory of democracy and justice in America. Go CA!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tx4obama (Original post)

Sat Apr 20, 2013, 06:14 AM

4. Take this nation wide....l.;

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tx4obama (Original post)

Sat Apr 20, 2013, 09:05 AM

5. Ahhh. Sanctioned confiscation of firearms based on sales records.


"We are fortunate in California to have the first and only system in the nation that tracks and identifies individuals who at one time made legal purchases of firearms but are now barred from possessing them," Leno said in a statement. "However, due to a lack of resources, only a few of these illegally possessed weapons have been confiscated, and the mountain of firearms continues to grow each day."


So,,, all we have to do is pass a law that makes a class of firearms illegal, or causes people to become ineligible to posses and we can "legally" start the confiscation.

Brilliant.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geckosfeet (Reply #5)

Sat Apr 20, 2013, 11:51 PM

8. "We will not confiscate legal firearms by people legally able to have them"

Definition of legal firearm? Arbitrary.

Currently, it's any gun that's not an "assault weapon".

Definition of "assault weapon"? Also arbitrary.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to krispos42 (Reply #8)

Sun Apr 21, 2013, 07:46 AM

11. Arbitrary and fluid over time. This is the problem.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to krispos42 (Reply #8)

Tue Apr 23, 2013, 10:00 AM

17. of course you're against this

of course.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CreekDog (Reply #17)

Tue Apr 23, 2013, 11:20 AM

20. And you're for it?

You're basically saying you're for the mandatory registration of firearms so that WHEN the laws become stiffer, particularly when the definition of banned guns expands, you can then go and collect them.

The idea is suppose to be about tracking down people that use guns in crimes (which doesn't happen), and to prevent criminals from buying guns from dealers or private individuals (which can be done without registration). But you're apparently looking forward to the point when an AWB or a handgun ban kicks in and you can start gathering up the guns.



If you keep proving RW conspiracy nuts true, then they stop being conspiracy nuts. Truth?



Once you have a list of firearms and their owners, it becomes very easy to start doing stuff.

For example, banning things based on caliber.

"Today, the Illinois Legislature voted to ban all rifles that shoot .223 Remington/5.56x45mm ammunition. The Governor announce his intention to sign the bill and use the gun registry to insure that owners of such guns have sold them to a licensed dealer by the time the bill takes effect next month."

Do you really think that, once such a list is compiled, it won't be used? Do you really think there won't be extensive creep?

That of all the thousands of politicians in the country, who are replaced on a regular, periodic basis, won't at some point in the near future, do something like this? And once it is done, do you think it will ever be undone?

Jeez, just look at the post-9/11 political environment!


The argument is about abuse of power. Obama still claims the same extraordinary executive powers that Bush did, but he chooses to not use some of them. Does that make it okay?

Everybody on DU I thought was on the side of "no executive should have this power, even if our current guy will use them only for goodness and rightness and apple pie.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to krispos42 (Reply #20)

Tue Apr 23, 2013, 11:26 AM

21. it all comes out...you believe all the RW conspiracy theories related to guns

your post is false on what the California law would do.

and then you launch into something about Illinois, oh, what law did Illinois pass in the California legislature?

peddle that crap at FR. nobody's buying here, except for one group.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CreekDog (Reply #21)

Tue Apr 23, 2013, 08:53 PM

24. "Obama's waiting until after the election to go after guns!"

cried the paranoid lunatics. But even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

And I know I'm right lb this one.. I'm about 10 months behind in listening took my Sam Seder and Rachel Maddow podcasts, and they are in the middle of.mocking all those people that are saying that. This was during the "Fast and Furious" crap.

I think Bush proved quite handily the dangers of putting that kind of power in place... it WILL get used. If not now, after the next mass shooting or the next terrorist attack or whatever. Neither you nor I know who will be in elected office in 5 or ten or twenty years.

Gun registration is not about solving crimes. It never had been and it never will be. It's about knowing who to go after when the laws change or when a person or group of people can't own a gun anymore.

Like people on the terrorist watch list. you know, OWS activists and anti-whaling protestors and tree huggers and anybody named "Mohammad".


Look, the murder rate dropped in half starting in 1990 because 20 years prior to the we got liberal ideas passed. We took lead it off the gasoline, and thus out of the air that children and pregnant women breathed. We legalized abortion and birth control so that women could give birth at their convenience. And s generation later we had kids whose minds wetter not damaged by lead beginning adults, whose parents had waited until they're were able to properly raise s child before having them. And the crime rate dropped while at the same time making things better fur every body.

So, if we can get out liberal ideas on the economy and health care and prison reform and taxes and wealth equality and higher education in place, not only will the current crime rate drop, but everybody will have a vastly improved life on all levels.

But it's not going to happen by attacking hardware, and it certainly don't happen in the fucking Republicans are running things, now is it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to krispos42 (Reply #24)

Tue Apr 23, 2013, 09:01 PM

25. The 1st half of your post is gun-trolling --saying a California law is "obama going after your guns"

and saying that the statement, a right wing meme, is like a broken clock, meaning right twice per day.

you don't even know what you're talking about, you're so irrational and even right wing on this issue that:

1) you can't even keep track of the thing you are criticizing (a potential state law in California becomes a screen against Obama, accusing him of coming to take our guns)

2) you can't even talk about the California law without lying about its contents

you're losing your grip on this issue. completely. on guns, your words are as good as the worst NRA/Right wing lies about our president, our party and our gun legislation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CreekDog (Reply #25)

Wed Apr 24, 2013, 07:04 AM

33. I was talking about a new federal assault-weapons ban

Which California Senator Dianne Feinstein has been proposing annually for quite a while now, I believe, but became a serious topic of discussion with presidential backing about 6 weeks after he was elected. Which is what the right had been predicting for quite some time now. So...

And what guns are legal for sale and ownership in California (above and beyond federal laws) is routinely and arbitrarily redefined.

If what is legal changes and California moves to mandate gun owners divest themselves from now-illegal firearms, then my statement stands the test:

"We will not confiscate legal firearms by people legally able to have them".


What's an "assault weapon"? Depends on which state you live in, and which time period you're asking about. Connecticut's definition just expanded. Guns that were legal are no longer legal; that's what a "ban" means. Same thing with California and I think a few other states.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tx4obama (Original post)

Sat Apr 20, 2013, 09:37 AM

6. If you read the comments,

you will finally find where all the freepers went.

Mostly, "they can't have my precious!"

Reading comprehension is not a strong suit there.
HuffPo should hand out free tinfoil hats when you visit the site, just to fit in with all the CT wackos.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jeff Murdoch (Reply #6)

Tue Apr 23, 2013, 10:00 AM

18. the freepers? look at the host of the Gungeon here? went the same place.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CreekDog (Reply #18)

Tue Apr 23, 2013, 09:38 PM

29. Yep.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tx4obama (Original post)

Sat Apr 20, 2013, 12:12 PM

7. K & R for sanity...

Sorry, but having literally hundreds of millions of firearms out there is just insane. If this makes even a small dent in the firearms possessed illegally by dangerous people, it's a good thing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tx4obama (Original post)

Sun Apr 21, 2013, 01:47 AM

9. Just doing what the NRA said to do--enforce existing law..

But as the NRA well knows, the ability to enforce gun laws is rarely funded. This CA example is the exception, not the rule.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tx4obama (Original post)

Sun Apr 21, 2013, 03:49 AM

10. When the nation has gun laws like those in California, this country will be a safer place. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellisonz (Reply #10)

Sun Apr 21, 2013, 07:48 AM

12. Yes. We all see how safe LA and San Diego are compared to Burlington Vt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geckosfeet (Reply #12)

Sun Apr 21, 2013, 02:07 PM

13. Bahahhahahaha

That's some desperate logic. For starters, LA and San Diego are massive metropolitan complexes, Burlington, VT is not. Moreover, to many other metropolitan complexes LA and San Diego have substantially lower gun homicide and gun violence rates.

So keep making that incorrect, desperate gunner logic and yes I could post the maps and stats but you've seen them before so I'd just be wasting my time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellisonz (Reply #13)

Sun Apr 21, 2013, 03:43 PM

14. Oh. I hadn't noticed. And what exactly does population density have to do with crime rates?

Please enlighten me.

There is an apparent correlation?

Oh.

You mean gun crime rates are not strictly proportional to gun laws?

Oh.

You mean there is also apparent correlation to region, culture, economics and education?

Oh.

I am glad you find it amusing. In fact it is very serious. And if gun grabbers continue to try and impose ignorant and uninformed regulation nothing is ever going to get done.

BTW - I'd say you have already wasted your time. Yours and lot of other peoples.






Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geckosfeet (Reply #14)

Sun Apr 21, 2013, 04:01 PM

15. "I'd say you have already wasted your time. Yours and lot of other peoples."

Which is why you're responded to my post?

I'm sorry, but sociologically speaking, your argument is laughable at best.

Enlighten Yourself, Good Day.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geckosfeet (Reply #12)

Tue Apr 23, 2013, 09:21 AM

16. The pop density of LA is 8 times higher than Burlington.

LA also has 3 times the unemployment rate, and 4 times the poverty rate. Give Burlington VT 1.5 million people with a similar economic profile as LA, and let's see how "safe" it is. (And I won't even go into the differences in demographic diversity between the two cities.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #16)

Tue Apr 23, 2013, 10:18 AM

19. Point. Gun laws are not the solution.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geckosfeet (Reply #19)

Tue Apr 23, 2013, 01:27 PM

22. Guns exponentially exasperate the problems of urban violence that EVERY city has.

Just as population density and poverty do. By ignoring the dangers lax gun laws pose, you condemn thousands of people (tens of thousands, actually) to death needlessly.

What is not a solution is the situation we have now: gun laws which are promoted & proposed by the pro-death gun lobby and which are designed to fail. We need gun laws which the pro-death gun lobby hates, which they'll kill themselves trying to defeat - and which will make the rest of us sane people safe.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #22)

Tue Apr 23, 2013, 03:09 PM

23. I am afaid I heartilly disagree.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geckosfeet (Reply #23)

Tue Apr 23, 2013, 09:01 PM

26. Well, stupid is as stupid does.

As in disagreeing with self-evident truths.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #26)

Tue Apr 23, 2013, 09:24 PM

27. And self righteous bigots who try to shove their ideology in other peoples

faces contrary to legal and constitutional precedent usually fail.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geckosfeet (Reply #27)

Tue Apr 23, 2013, 09:36 PM

28. If anyone is shoving anything, it's the gun worshipers who oppose universal backgrounds checks,

oppose national gun registration, and oppose a new assault weapons ban - forcing communities to deal with a epidemic of murders caused by dangerous & unnecessary firearms. Self-righteous bigots indeed - who have no consideration or compassion for their fellow citizens - including children - that their ideology allows & requires to die.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #28)

Tue Apr 23, 2013, 09:39 PM

30. That is just patently false and demonizing.

Please get a hold of yourself and calm the fuck down.

Have a nice life.

On edit: ignoring

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geckosfeet (Reply #30)

Tue Apr 23, 2013, 09:49 PM

31. This from someone who blatantly characterizes advocates of gun control as "bigots"

and deludes themselves into believing that gun owners are an oppressed minority?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geckosfeet (Reply #12)

Wed Apr 24, 2013, 12:30 AM

32. California has roughly the same number of gun deaths per 100,000 people as Vermont

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread