1. Attention: We have put together a thread with tips and a tutorial video to help with using the new software. Please take a moment to check out the thread here: Trapshooters.com Tutorial & Help Video.
    Dismiss Notice

Calif. Gun Roundup Program - Too Many Flaws

Discussion in 'Off Topic Threads' started by SBray, May 3, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. SBray

    SBray Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    798
    Well, Governor Brown signed SB 140, another waste of taxpayers money! How California is in such a financial mess is quite obvious. Spending millions of dollars to fund a program to take the guns away from the bad guys and mentally ill persons sounds like a good idea. But where did they get the excess money from, gun registrations! These fees are far to costly for the gun owners. It is another way for government to take money and spend it foolishly.

    They could take care of the problem on a local agency level by having uniform officers be tasked to make visits on their local violators.

    Once, or shall I say, whenever they complete this task, what are all those officers going to be doing? Are they going to find other tasks to do in order to justify their existence?

    Steve
     
  2. wireguy

    wireguy TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    3,715
    "The attorney general's Bureau of Firearms simply compares the names of registered owners of firearms against records in its other databases." But no, the government doesn't want to create a stored central database like the one California already has. No, really.

    "As former attorney general and overseer of the Armed Prohibited Persons System program, Gov. Jerry Brown should have insisted on substance – but by signing SB 140, he opted for symbolism instead." I'm shocked, simply shocked I tell you.
     
  3. SBray

    SBray Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    798
    It is amazing how they say that the transfer information they collect now is not stored for any length of time and the person to person transfers at gun shows will be the same. hmmm

    I know that the day-to-day contacts uniformed patrol and detectives have are considerable when dealing with felons and mentally ill persons, so I would think they could have been collecting all their guns. It concerns me that they will form another law enforcement group that will be out collecting guns from those groups of people. I believe that most people feel we should make ever effort to keep guns out of felons and persons that are mentally unstable. As I mentioned before, what is that same group of officers going to do when they run out of the "knock and talk" contacts. Will they think, we better go out and roust other people to justify our existence?

    Steve
     
  4. jagrdawger

    jagrdawger TS Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Messages:
    291
    There was a story in the news a few weeks ago setting the stage for this law about how they do this already. The teams that do it are full up SWAT teams in full battle rattle.

    It is interesting that they arrest the guns and take them off to be executed, but leave the felons and dangerously unstable person walking the neighborhood. Of course without their illegal arms we know they can't hurt anyone.

    I bet the program runs short of funding in 6 months when they confiscate the funds for other pet projects. Then they will want to tack on more fees to gun owners to pay for it. Kind of like they do by shifting education funds to other areas then pushing through tax hikes for more school funding.
     
  5. RobertT

    RobertT Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2006
    Messages:
    1,356
    This is pure and simple legalized thievery. Crunch the numbers and 24 million amounts to about 6 hundred dollars per gun they want to confiscate. The politicians can't decide who is going to enforce the law because they all want to serve their special interests with the moneys.

    Not only that but this is yet another bill that they don't want us to read and find out what's in it. I have a feeling millions will be spent on litigation along with the millions diverted from firearm background checks to pad political special interests. One needs to ask the question, how does the State determine who is in illegal possession of a gun? Certainly failure to pass a background check resulted in denial of an intended purchase didn't it?

    Robert
     
  6. SBray

    SBray Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    798
    "It is interesting that the arrest the guns and take them off to be executed, but leave the felons and dangerously unstable person walking the neighborhood. Of course without their illegal arms we know they can't hurt anyone."

    Yes, if they are an convicted felon, they should be headed to jail, or back to prison if they are on parole.

    Steve
     
  7. ou.3200

    ou.3200 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,493
    "The attorney general's Bureau of Firearms simply compares the names of registered owners of firearms against records in its other databases. If someone is identified as possibly being in illegal possession of a firearm, law enforcement might schedule a "visit."

    This in itself is flaw enough. If you have ever had any experience in running one database against another you know it is fraught with peril of false matches. If they are running out there AT NIGHT WITH 9 AGENT TEAMS as they state for raids on the homes of those who happen to match a name in a criminal database it is a matter of time until there will be horror stories to report. God help gun owners named Smith or Jones in this fiasco. This needs judicial review to confirm identity before any such contact with gun owners and if there are to be no prosecutions of felons in possession of guns there should be no contact.
     
  8. Brian in Oregon

    Brian in Oregon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    25,251
    Location:
    Deplorable Bitter Clinger in Liberal La La Land
    Another flaw is the owners are not being compensated for their property.

    The government's view on this is that the owners "voluntarily" gave their firearms to the police. Thus by "giving" away their firearms no compensation is due. The firearms are not being sold - they're being destroyed, so there is no sale for compensation.

    Firearms are being taken from legal owners. The feds hold the attitude that as long as a prohibited spouse has no access to the firearms (like being locked in a safe), then the law-abiding spouse can own them. But not in California. They penalize the law-abiding spouse.

    And no due process. These seizures are not being done with a warrant. That's why the police have to "ask" permission to gain entry. Of course, it helps to have some intimidation to coerce people into "doing the right thing" by showing up with a heavily armed SWAT team. Few people are going to press their rights under that kind of coercion.

    Nor is the government sending out notices that the guns may be unlawfully owned and instructing them to sell them to a gun shop, where they could at least recoup some of their property value. This is all about seizing the guns and destroying them.

    I call this a prime example of the police state in action.

    And for our anti-gun liberal morons here, I am NOT against seizing firearms from convicted felons and those properly adjudicated (by a court of law) as being mentally incompetent. My issue is people have rights and those rights are not being respected by the government.
     
  9. W.R.Buchanan

    W.R.Buchanan Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2009
    Messages:
    913
    Location:
    Ojai CA
    I saw this and just laughed! First, it will never be implemented in any great amount. Tehy won't have the stones to go after the real bad guys.

    And Second, the first time they confiscate the wrong persons guns the law will be shot down.

    Stop and frisk wouldn't have cost them anything to implement, and would be 100 times more effective at getting the guns away from gang members etc.

    If they start going thru the neighborhoods that actually are trouble spots or controlled by Mexican Drug Cartels they will meet with armed resistance.

    When that happens the enforcement side of this law will go away since nobody will actually have the cajones to actually fight to take those guns away. You really need battlehardened Seal Types to do that kind of work. Local LE is really not that good no matter what they say. I shoot against too many of them and beat them routinely and believe me ,,,I'm not that good!

    I can't wait to see one of their Armored Personnel Carriers get popped by an RPG on national TV! The Ventura County Sherrifs actually picked up 3 real live RPG's in Oxnard a few weeks ago, so this is a very real possibility. If that happens and they don't come down with brute force on the offending cesspool then you will know that this was all BS!

    Oh, I forgot! ,,, "the Revolution will not be televised!"

    I think he bit off more than he will be able to chew, or suck on,,, as the case may be.

    Probably made some of his buddies all warm and fuzzy by signing it. He's so proactive!

    Randy
     
  10. jagrdawger

    jagrdawger TS Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Messages:
    291
    For those who do not think this will be implemented, you are wrong. It already is implemented. This bill is to formally designate funds to increase this program to a full time operation with officers dedicated just to it from its current status of doing it in addition to their regular police duties.

    Again, they are confiscating the guns, but not necessarily taking in the felon. It shows the mentality of the gun being the criminal not the person.
     
  11. Catpower

    Catpower Molon Labe TS Supporters

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    10,253
    Location:
    In the Cabana
    The reason they take the guns and not the felon is because the libs know they can rehabilitate that felon but don't know which end of a gun the projectile comes out of

    They are flaming idiots, but it makes them feel good
     
  12. Brian in Oregon

    Brian in Oregon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    25,251
    Location:
    Deplorable Bitter Clinger in Liberal La La Land
    Just like the anti's bragging about all the NICS denials. But the number of people actually being charged with attempting to purchase a firearm unlawfully is only in the double digits. The problem is these criminals are not being stopped from buying a gun. They'll simply find another way to get one and have proven they don't care about the laws.
     
  13. W.R.Buchanan

    W.R.Buchanan Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2009
    Messages:
    913
    Location:
    Ojai CA
    Jagrdawger: It may be implemented but it will never gain any significant momentum.

    They will make some pickups just to show evreyone on TV they are doing their job, but no arrestes will be made and as soon as someone askes "where's the felons you didn't arrest" it will all get swept under the rug.

    Been here for a long time, seen Brown before and now. He never really accomplishes anything significant. He just kind of keeps things going in whatever direction they were going before he took over. Just steadily pushing to the left.

    All you have to do to verify this is look at Oakland. He was Mayor there for 8 years before he took over as AG. He did nothing in Oakland and he did nothing as AG!

    He's got way more attention on keeping the teachers union happy.

    I'd actually be impressed if this law accomplished something and they removed a significant number guns from criminals,IE Mexicans, and nutcase's hands.

    However I know this will not happen to the degree they would have you believe simply becasue they are Democrats and completely incapible of addressing the correct target.

    Nothing they do ever works, and the EVIDENCE of that is EVERYWHERE TO SEE!!!!

    I could go on with examples but it just wastes space and time. Anyone with a shread of objective ability already knows what I'm talking about.

    Randy
     
  14. CharlieAMA

    CharlieAMA TS Supporters TS Supporters

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    12,628
    Location:
    God's Country
    It seems funny to me that, in California, and in Washington D.C., that gun control is a higher priority than - debt, no budget, unemployment, immigration, our standing in the world, and so on. I think D.C. stands for dumbass controlled.
     
  15. SBray

    SBray Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    798
    "Just like the anti's bragging about all the NICS denials. But the number of people actually being charged with attempting to purchase a firearm unlawfully is only in the double digits. The problem is these criminals are not being stopped from buying a gun. They'll simply find another way to get one and have proven they don't care about the laws."

    Brian,

    You are correct!

    In California, DOJ sends out notifications to local agencies when a felon attempts to purchase a gun from a business and the transaction was terminated because the felon did not pass the background check. In a perfect world, the violator's parole officer should be notified (and perhaps they do) for violating the person's parole, not sending the information to a local agency that doesn't, or won't file a VOP. The end results, nothing happens and the violator keeps looking for a gun!

    Steve
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.