Omg, worst news ever!!! :(
09-24-2009, 11:02 PM
#166
VIP Member
iTrader: (12)
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: CAL - California
Posts: 1,642
Car Info: AWD & RWD JDM
police are used to protect and serve the LAW - the law does NOT equal people - police stop crimes not to protect victims, but to arrest perpetrators that have violated the law
09-24-2009, 11:39 PM
#167
banned
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Code 3 2 Code 7
Posts: 702
Car Info: Honda RVT RC51
Police did nothing while looters robbed and burned most of mid city and Koreatown to the ground. Where were they "to serve and protect" the citizens?
09-24-2009, 11:46 PM
#168
VIP Member
iTrader: (12)
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: CAL - California
Posts: 1,642
Car Info: AWD & RWD JDM
OMG - I just thought to mention this too! I lived through this period, since I lived in the heart of Koreatown at that time. A perfect example of why citizens NEED to be armed.
10-06-2009, 07:08 PM
#169
http://ltdammo.com/
.380 defensive ammo, .45 ACP target and defensive, .45 colt target,
defensive, and rifle, Lake City 5.56, and Lake City M855 IN STOCK
.380 defensive ammo, .45 ACP target and defensive, .45 colt target,
defensive, and rifle, Lake City 5.56, and Lake City M855 IN STOCK
10-11-2009, 11:41 PM
#171
UPDATE:
The governor has until 12am to veto this piece of crap.
As of 11:40pm, SB585 (the Cow Palace Gun Show bill) has been vetoed - no word yet in AB962.....
Check here for the list of vetoed bills.
http://gov.ca.gov/pdf/press/2009bills/
________
Vaporizers
The governor has until 12am to veto this piece of crap.
As of 11:40pm, SB585 (the Cow Palace Gun Show bill) has been vetoed - no word yet in AB962.....
Check here for the list of vetoed bills.
http://gov.ca.gov/pdf/press/2009bills/
________
Vaporizers
Last edited by kyoung05; 03-30-2011 at 10:38 AM.
10-12-2009, 09:35 AM
#173
Well, game over. The Governor has signed AB962.
http://gov.ca.gov/pdf/press/2009bills/
________
MAGIC FLIGHT REVIEWS
http://gov.ca.gov/pdf/press/2009bills/
To the Members of the California State Assembly:
I am signing Assembly Bill 962.
This measure would require vendors of handgun ammunition to keep a log of information on handgun ammunition sales, store ammunition in a safe and secure manner, and require the face-to-face transfer of ammunition sales.
Although I have previously vetoed legislation similar to this measure, local governments have demonstrated that requiring ammunition vendors to keep records on ammunition sales improves public safety. These records have allowed law enforcement to arrest and prosecute persons who have no business possessing firearms and ammunition: gang members, violent parolees, second and third strikers, and even people previously serving time in state prison for murder. Utilized properly, this type of information is invaluable for keeping communities safe and preventing dangerous felons from committing crimes with firearms.
Moreover, this type of recordkeeping is no more intrusive for law abiding citizens than similar laws governing pawnshops or the sale of cold medicine. Unfortunately, even the most successful local program is flawed; without a statewide law, felons can easily skirt the record keeping requirements of one city by visiting another. Assembly Bill 962 will fix this problem by mandating that all ammunition vendors in the state keep records on ammunition sales.
As Governor, I have sought the appropriate balance between public safety and the right to keep and bear arms. I have signed important public safety measures to regulate the sale and transfer of .50 caliber rifles, instituted the California Firearms License Check program, and promoted the use of microstamping technology in handguns. I have also vetoed many pieces of legislation that sought to place unreasonable restrictions and burdens on firearms dealers and ammunition vendors. Assembly Bill 962 reasonably regulates access to ammunition and improves public safety without placing undue burdens on consumers.
For these reasons, I am pleased to sign this bill.
Sincerely,
Arnold Schwarzenegger
I am signing Assembly Bill 962.
This measure would require vendors of handgun ammunition to keep a log of information on handgun ammunition sales, store ammunition in a safe and secure manner, and require the face-to-face transfer of ammunition sales.
Although I have previously vetoed legislation similar to this measure, local governments have demonstrated that requiring ammunition vendors to keep records on ammunition sales improves public safety. These records have allowed law enforcement to arrest and prosecute persons who have no business possessing firearms and ammunition: gang members, violent parolees, second and third strikers, and even people previously serving time in state prison for murder. Utilized properly, this type of information is invaluable for keeping communities safe and preventing dangerous felons from committing crimes with firearms.
Moreover, this type of recordkeeping is no more intrusive for law abiding citizens than similar laws governing pawnshops or the sale of cold medicine. Unfortunately, even the most successful local program is flawed; without a statewide law, felons can easily skirt the record keeping requirements of one city by visiting another. Assembly Bill 962 will fix this problem by mandating that all ammunition vendors in the state keep records on ammunition sales.
As Governor, I have sought the appropriate balance between public safety and the right to keep and bear arms. I have signed important public safety measures to regulate the sale and transfer of .50 caliber rifles, instituted the California Firearms License Check program, and promoted the use of microstamping technology in handguns. I have also vetoed many pieces of legislation that sought to place unreasonable restrictions and burdens on firearms dealers and ammunition vendors. Assembly Bill 962 reasonably regulates access to ammunition and improves public safety without placing undue burdens on consumers.
For these reasons, I am pleased to sign this bill.
Sincerely,
Arnold Schwarzenegger
MAGIC FLIGHT REVIEWS
Last edited by kyoung05; 03-30-2011 at 10:38 AM.
10-12-2009, 09:57 AM
#174
VIP Member
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Stockholm
Posts: 7,441
Car Info: 2018 Golf R Variant
I would like to truly understand how every man, woman and child being armed and capable would make any speck of a difference against the automated weapons and nuke-proof control centers that us taxpayers have funded in the form of military for the government to control.
I do not think that this missing concept makes me less American or less of a patriot. In fact, I personally feel that my own understanding of America and my country's history is quite lacking, so I read up EVERY DAY on some aspect of our nation's history and what has made it come to be. I do not feel that because I have questions that cannot seem to be answered I should move to China or France, or that I am not a Patriot or somehow not deserving the free air as much as those that claim to know the truth.
The more I come to feel that I understand the more this question burns in me, and makes me raise an eyebrow at the folks calling other folks all the names here in this thread. The "you agree or you are a [insert Overbear's bagging here]" crowd is less convincing with every repeat of the insults.
It's also interesting to note the progression of the discussion from points misunderstood back and forth (a product of an argument in print) to a semantic grammar/spelling attack and more insults. I have never once experienced an intelligent person trying to get a point across telling someone they are too dumb to understand or moving to name calling and insults if the other party does not submit to agreement. Food for thought right there.
So.. Obviously the government having more control is not a good thing. I would be surprised if people were arguing FOR more government control especially in areas so volatile as weapons. I still do not see how, even if we all had our own defensible bunker and adequate weapons/supplies, it would make any difference if our government decided (for some reason) to destroy that which pays it's bills. This is not to say that I have thrown my hands up and have given up, I am ASKING FOR AN ANSWER. As I feel I have been for many years. It is not an unreasonable question. It is also very worthy of consideration however I know it must be the cryptonite of the weapons owner and gun fan. Otherwise it would be easy to answer.
If the whole "I have these to protect myself from my Gov't" thing were moot then... You would have to simply be a gun fan or something, not that there's anything wrong with that, but it would be a tough nut to crack I am sure. The "I have these guns for a reason you will never understand because you are a [insert Overbear's bagging here]" is probably a comfortable and easy defense at this point - because it works on most people and protects you from the questions I have in my mind. I'll admit it's not fun to have these questions, comments and concerns.
Another thing about the continual comparison of guns to other in-animate objects... Seriously. This sounds SO STUPID especially repeated so many times now. In the case of the kid shooting his little sister that is simply, solely and OBVIOUSLY a problem with the parents and their in-ability to care for their children and secure their (loaded) weapons. I think this is pretty darn easy to understand.
What is also very easy to understand is, if that kid had found the keys to a car, it would have been considerably harder for him to kill his little sister with it, and the potential would have been there for a bystander to notice. There is no button on a car that makes it instantly run someone over. Is this really an argument? Does this really need to be explained?
A knife would also have been another item, but again, and obviously, it would have been much harder for him to kill his little sister with the knife than with the gun. He could have done it, just like he could with a yard dart, blender, large taco, chainsaw, block of cheddar, or any number of other things. A gun is the only one I can think of where a kid could innocently play with it and pretty easily kill someone. So to someone who is ignorant to the fact that this is COMPLETELY CONTROLLABLE and totally the fault of the parents, they see the gun as an in-animate object that is potentially dangerous when not controlled. If people continue to show that they are not able to control their weapons (as shown in the case linked in this thread) then there are those that will think control needs to be established. Yes, this is a point of view that is painful and against what our founding fathers would have wanted for us, but is it hard to understand? Doesn't seem that way to me.
The comparing of a gun to a car or any other in-animate object does not lend any credibility, whatsoever, to the argument unless you are speaking to an equally ignorant and naive audience.
I do not think that this missing concept makes me less American or less of a patriot. In fact, I personally feel that my own understanding of America and my country's history is quite lacking, so I read up EVERY DAY on some aspect of our nation's history and what has made it come to be. I do not feel that because I have questions that cannot seem to be answered I should move to China or France, or that I am not a Patriot or somehow not deserving the free air as much as those that claim to know the truth.
The more I come to feel that I understand the more this question burns in me, and makes me raise an eyebrow at the folks calling other folks all the names here in this thread. The "you agree or you are a [insert Overbear's bagging here]" crowd is less convincing with every repeat of the insults.
It's also interesting to note the progression of the discussion from points misunderstood back and forth (a product of an argument in print) to a semantic grammar/spelling attack and more insults. I have never once experienced an intelligent person trying to get a point across telling someone they are too dumb to understand or moving to name calling and insults if the other party does not submit to agreement. Food for thought right there.
So.. Obviously the government having more control is not a good thing. I would be surprised if people were arguing FOR more government control especially in areas so volatile as weapons. I still do not see how, even if we all had our own defensible bunker and adequate weapons/supplies, it would make any difference if our government decided (for some reason) to destroy that which pays it's bills. This is not to say that I have thrown my hands up and have given up, I am ASKING FOR AN ANSWER. As I feel I have been for many years. It is not an unreasonable question. It is also very worthy of consideration however I know it must be the cryptonite of the weapons owner and gun fan. Otherwise it would be easy to answer.
If the whole "I have these to protect myself from my Gov't" thing were moot then... You would have to simply be a gun fan or something, not that there's anything wrong with that, but it would be a tough nut to crack I am sure. The "I have these guns for a reason you will never understand because you are a [insert Overbear's bagging here]" is probably a comfortable and easy defense at this point - because it works on most people and protects you from the questions I have in my mind. I'll admit it's not fun to have these questions, comments and concerns.
Another thing about the continual comparison of guns to other in-animate objects... Seriously. This sounds SO STUPID especially repeated so many times now. In the case of the kid shooting his little sister that is simply, solely and OBVIOUSLY a problem with the parents and their in-ability to care for their children and secure their (loaded) weapons. I think this is pretty darn easy to understand.
What is also very easy to understand is, if that kid had found the keys to a car, it would have been considerably harder for him to kill his little sister with it, and the potential would have been there for a bystander to notice. There is no button on a car that makes it instantly run someone over. Is this really an argument? Does this really need to be explained?
A knife would also have been another item, but again, and obviously, it would have been much harder for him to kill his little sister with the knife than with the gun. He could have done it, just like he could with a yard dart, blender, large taco, chainsaw, block of cheddar, or any number of other things. A gun is the only one I can think of where a kid could innocently play with it and pretty easily kill someone. So to someone who is ignorant to the fact that this is COMPLETELY CONTROLLABLE and totally the fault of the parents, they see the gun as an in-animate object that is potentially dangerous when not controlled. If people continue to show that they are not able to control their weapons (as shown in the case linked in this thread) then there are those that will think control needs to be established. Yes, this is a point of view that is painful and against what our founding fathers would have wanted for us, but is it hard to understand? Doesn't seem that way to me.
The comparing of a gun to a car or any other in-animate object does not lend any credibility, whatsoever, to the argument unless you are speaking to an equally ignorant and naive audience.
****.
10-12-2009, 10:14 AM
#179
Well, if AB962 has the effect that many of us fear it will have, this may be all that they need. There is a severe ammo shortage here in CA (well, at least in the Bay Area). Not only is it extremely difficult to find, but expensive as hell when you do (supply/demand, obviously). The only somewhat-readily-available source of ammo for many of us has been internet sales (and even then, many online vendors are out of most of the popular handgun calibers, i.e. 9mm, 45acp, .357 magnum, etc). So, without internet sales, we'll be back to having to scrounge up what we can from brick and mortar stores. The problem is, with these heightened requirements, vendors will have to raise their prices because it costs them more to comply with those requirements, or, they'll simply choose not to carry handgun ammunition because it is too burdensome. Without ammo, we'll be effectively disarmed (with respect to handguns, for now at least). All the while, criminals will continue to steal, import, buy or otherwise secure ammo in illegal ways (they are criminals, after all) and we'll actually be LESS safe than before. 
________
Zx14 vs hayabusa
________
Zx14 vs hayabusa
Last edited by kyoung05; 03-30-2011 at 10:39 AM.