California at it again: Seeks to regulate homemade guns and plastic 3D Printer guns

[SP33Demon]

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/california-bill-seeks-regulate-homemade-guns

That was the case for John Zawahri, who assembled his own military-style assault rifle and killed five people in Santa Monica in a June rampage even after he was barred from legally buying a gun in California because of mental health issues.

The bill by De Leon, a Democrat from Los Angeles, goes further than the federal government, which last month renewed for 10 years an existing ban on plastic firearms that can evade metal detectors and X-ray machines.

His bill, SB808, would allow the manufacture or assembly of homemade weapons, but require the makers to first apply to the state Department of Justice for a serial number that would be given only after the applicants undergo a background check. The number would have to be engraved on or otherwise permanently attached to the weapon within one day of its manufacture.

He plans to amend the bill to also require that the guns contain permanent pieces of metal that could be detected by X-ray machines and metal detectors, a proposal that was blocked in the federal legislation. Some plastic guns currently comply with the federal law by including a metal piece that can be removed, which potentially would allow them to be slipped through security screeners at airports, courthouses, schools and elsewhere.

The National Rifle Association did not oppose the 10-year extension of the federal plastic firearms ban. But spokeswoman Catherine Mortensen said the organization opposes any expansion of the law at either the federal or state level.

So two things here if the bill passes:
1) Register with CADOJ when buying any part of a gun.
2) Plastic guns would have to have a permanent piece of metal attached to them.

The crux of the matter is that someone mentally ill bypassed his gun ban by assembling his own. I think it can be implied that someone smart/dedicated enough to assemble his own gun is going to be smart enough to get his hands on an illegal weapon. To think that this guy wouldn't have been able to get a gun illegally is hilarious in my opinion and CA is using it as an excuse to create a state registry that will infringe on the Federal Gun Control Act (which allows citizens to create their own non-NFA firearms without registration). Even while I'm not as adverse to #2 as #1, it's quite evident that CA has almost completed its transformation into the most anti-gun, liberal, and reactive cesspool. Instead of proposing bills to improve diagnosis of the mentally ill (the crux of the problem), they will vomit knee jerk legislation against their people's guns. Despicable state.

 

[Agent11]

Would be a boon to gunsmiths I suppose.

 

[schneiderguy]

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2365081

De Leon is an idiot.

 

[Fenixgoon]

http://pics.bbzzdd.com/users/shinerburke/think_of_the_children.jpg

 

[Doppel]

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/california-bill-seeks-regulate-homemade-guns



So two things here if the bill passes:
1) Register with CADOJ when buying any part of a gun.
2) Plastic guns would have to have a permanent piece of metal attached to them.

The crux of the matter is that someone mentally ill bypassed his gun ban by assembling his own. I think it can be implied that someone smart/dedicated enough to assemble his own gun is going to be smart enough to get his hands on an illegal weapon. To think that this guy wouldn't have been able to get a gun illegally is hilarious in my opinion and CA is using it as an excuse to create a state registry that will infringe on the Federal Gun Control Act (which allows citizens to create their own non-NFA firearms without registration). Even while I'm not as adverse to #2 as #1, it's quite evident that CA has almost completed its transformation into the most anti-gun, liberal, and reactive cesspool. Instead of proposing bills to improve diagnosis of the mentally ill (the crux of the problem), they will vomit knee jerk legislation against their people's guns. Despicable state.

There are various ways to legally get the parts to make these guns, though. It's not as if the guy machined himself an assault weapon out of melted down manhole covers. As far as I know just the receiver is really monitored legally and so if you build yourself one you can then make the rest of the gun, except you can buy almost-made receivers so that finishing it is very easy and now you've got all the parts.

It's a tricky thing to control because at the end of the day guns are pretty simple objects.

 

[KB]

Yeah another feel good law that won't do anything. Anyone determined to commit mass homicide isn't going to register thier parts just before committing the crime. It is a win for the senator though as those who have no clue about guns think he is actually accomplishing something.

 

[Rakehellion]

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/california-bill-seeks-regulate-homemade-guns



So two things here if the bill passes:
1) Register with CADOJ when buying any part of a gun.
2) Plastic guns would have to have a permanent piece of metal attached to them.

The crux of the matter is that someone mentally ill bypassed his gun ban by assembling his own. I think it can be implied that someone smart/dedicated enough to assemble his own gun is going to be smart enough to get his hands on an illegal weapon. To think that this guy wouldn't have been able to get a gun illegally is hilarious in my opinion and CA is using it as an excuse to create a state registry that will infringe on the Federal Gun Control Act (which allows citizens to create their own non-NFA firearms without registration). Even while I'm not as adverse to #2 as #1, it's quite evident that CA has almost completed its transformation into the most anti-gun, liberal, and reactive cesspool. Instead of proposing bills to improve diagnosis of the mentally ill (the crux of the problem), they will vomit knee jerk legislation against their people's guns. Despicable state.

A gun is a gun. They should be regulated.

And people who get their hands on illegal weapons are generally not the smartest.

 

[rudeguy]

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/california-bill-seeks-regulate-homemade-guns



So two things here if the bill passes:
1) Register with CADOJ when buying any part of a gun.
2) Plastic guns would have to have a permanent piece of metal attached to them.

The crux of the matter is that someone mentally ill bypassed his gun ban by assembling his own. I think it can be implied that someone smart/dedicated enough to assemble his own gun is going to be smart enough to get his hands on an illegal weapon. To think that this guy wouldn't have been able to get a gun illegally is hilarious in my opinion and CA is using it as an excuse to create a state registry that will infringe on the Federal Gun Control Act (which allows citizens to create their own non-NFA firearms without registration). Even while I'm not as adverse to #2 as #1, it's quite evident that CA has almost completed its transformation into the most anti-gun, liberal, and reactive cesspool. Instead of proposing bills to improve diagnosis of the mentally ill (the crux of the problem), they will vomit knee jerk legislation against their people's guns. Despicable state.

So the inspiration is a nut job who didn't register a gun that he assembled?

The law would make it illegal not to register a gun that was made, not assembled.

The law would not have stopped the nutjob.

What does this law do again?

 

[SP33Demon]

So the inspiration is a nut job who didn't register a gun that he assembled?

The law would make it illegal not to register a gun that was made, not assembled.

The law would not have stopped the nutjob.

What does this law do again?

He would have to apply/register with CADOJ before receiving the gun parts, and wouldn't have been able to get the parts is what de Leon is hoping to pass. However, this isn't required on a Federal level, it's excessive and (IMO) infringes upon our rights (GCA) to create regular (non-NFA) homemade guns without government interference. Additionally, the 2nd Amendment was written so that the people could defend themselves from a tyrannical government, if the government knows where every gun is then there is no way for the populace to defend themselves. CA, and more specifically liberal idiots like de Leon, are quick to shit all over the 2nd amendment and gun control act.

Like you said, it wouldn't have stopped the mentally ill guy. If he's smart/dedicated enough to buy parts and assemble his own gun then he's smart enough to get a firearm via another method, even if it meant flying to another state where you can buy black market guns right out of the paper like most criminals do.

 

[Moonbeam]

California suffers from the lack of input from rational conservative thinking because it has ceased to exist thanks to the brain defectives that have infected the Republican party with a death wish. Thanks again all you brain defectives.

 

[gevorg]

the rape of 2nd amendment won't be just in CA, expect it everywhere

 

[Incorruptible]

More gun control idiots at it again. Do these people ever learn that their ideas don't work.

 

[SaurusX]

Don't worry, everyone. No one wants to take your guns.

 

[Kadarin]

So the inspiration is a nut job who didn't register a gun that he assembled?

The law would make it illegal not to register a gun that was made, not assembled.

The law would not have stopped the nutjob.

What does this law do again?

It allows for the possibility that the CADOJ will simply stop handing out serial #s, thus closing this loophole.

 

[rudeguy]

It allows for the possibility that the CADOJ will simply stop handing out serial #s, thus closing this loophole.

I never knew states handed out serial numbers.

 

[Zodiark1593]

A gun is a gun. They should be regulated.

And people who get their hands on illegal weapons are generally not the smartest.

The common thugs are generally not the smartest, however, it's the one with intellect and will you need to watch out for. Being smart doesn't mean you're not a nutcase, and an intelligent psycho wanting to cause mayhem is a very deadly foe indeed no matter what laws are passed. Just sayin. 🙄

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

What does this law do again?

It does what all laws do: It provides a framework under which to punish transgressors of the law.

What do you think laws do?

Do the laws against murder stop people from murdering? No? So we shouldn't have those laws, then, right?

 

[rudeguy]

It does what all laws do: It provides a framework under which to punish transgressors of the law.

What do you think laws do?

Do the laws against murder stop people from murdering? No? So we shouldn't have those laws, then, right?

I'd be more in favor of fixing the problem.

So answer me this; if these laws don't fix the problems, why use tragedies to promote them?

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

I'd be more in favor of fixing the problem.

Ok, great! Let's do that!

How?

So answer me this; if these laws don't fix the problems, why use tragedies to promote them?

Look, this law might be a good law and it might be a bad law -- that isn't really my concern. My point was simply to illustrate that "the law wouldn't have stopped Person A, so let's not pass this law" is a bad reason to oppose the passage of a law.

 

[rudeguy]

Ok, great! Let's do that!

How?


Look, this law might be a good law and it might be a bad law -- that isn't really my concern. My point was simply to illustrate that "the law wouldn't have stopped Person A, so let's not pass this law" is a bad reason to oppose the passage of a law.

Gotcha. My point was to point out how despicable it is to use innocent people's deaths as a political tool.

As far as how: arm the population. Have every good guy carry a gun. Let's see how the bad guys do then.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

As far as how: arm the population. Have every good guy carry a gun. Let's see how the bad guys do then.

I don't understand how this is a "solution." Perhaps it would be a good idea to clearly state what the problem is, in this case.

My general impression is that your so-called "solution" presents a very naive understanding of people, that they might be so easily segregated between "good guys" and "bad guys." It seems to me that every guy could be a good guy right up until he's not. You want to be certain that guy has a gun?

 

[Kadarin]

I never knew states handed out serial numbers.

Well, if you have to apply to the state DOJ to get the serial # (because it's certainly not a federal requirement at this point), the state could simply ignore your request.

 

[rudeguy]

I don't understand how this is a "solution." Perhaps it would be a good idea to clearly state what the problem is, in this case.

My general impression is that your so-called "solution" presents a very naive understanding of people, that they might be so easily segregated between "good guys" and "bad guys." It seems to me that every guy could be a good guy right up until he's not. You want to be certain that guy has a gun?

Yes.

Lets say you are in a shopping mall with 500 other people. Do you really think a bad guy is going to come in with a shotgun and start shooting? No. He knows that the chances are almost 100% that he will get killed before he fires one shot. Same with schools, churches, movie theaters. All the places these crazies like to go. Do you think a bad guy is going to try to rob someone he knows has a gun? No.

As far as your example, that risk already exists and has been shown to be very minimal. Every single person has a breaking point.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

Yes.

Lets say you are in a shopping mall with 500 other people. Do you really think a bad guy is going to come in with a shotgun and start shooting? No. He knows that the chances are almost 100% that he will get killed before he fires one shot.

That doesn't seem realistic. Even if a person knew everyone had a gun, I'm fairly confident he could take some trivial precautions to get plenty of shots off. Are we also assuming everyone in the mall is a perfect marksman?

Same with schools, churches, movie theaters.

Yes I'm sure a classroom full of armed 1st graders is a foolproof idea.

All the places these crazies like to go. Do you think a bad guy is going to try to rob someone he knows has a gun? No.

On what basis do you suppose that these "bad guys" act rationally at all times?

As far as your example, that risk already exists and has been shown to be very minimal.

Show me.

Every single person has a breaking point.

And you think it's a good idea to make sure every person hasa gun when that happens?

 

[rudeguy]

That doesn't seem realistic. Even if a person knew everyone had a gun, I'm fairly confident he could take some trivial precautions to get plenty of shots off.

And what trivial precaution would that be? I'm very curious. We are talking real world here. What precaution could the bad guy take?

Are we also assuming everyone in the mall is a perfect marksman?

Nope. You don't need to be a perfect marksman to hit a man at 7 yards.

Yes I'm sure a classroom full of armed 1st graders is a foolproof idea.

Nice hyperbole. However if every teacher and admin were armed, school shooters would not have the success they currently do. Sandy Hook would have ended before a single innocent person was harmed. This is a much better plan than Obama and his cronies pitched and tried to force through. Their plan would not have saved a single life, yet they still used Sandy Hook as a reason for it.

On what basis do you suppose that these "bad guys" act rationally at all times?

I don't recall saying that. They irrational acts are what call for irregular solutions.

Show me.

ok
http://gunwatch.blogspot.com/2013/10/concealed-carry-permit-holders-are-one.html
http://www.beaufortobserver.net/Art...holders-commit-less-than-1-of-the-crimes.html
http://hhshootingsports.com/WireShots/archives/2225
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/josh-sugarmann/keeping-track-of-killings_b_360572.html
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/20...-statistics-to-promote-anti-gun-agenda-again/

And you think it's a good idea to make sure every person hasa gun when that happens?

At that point they turn into a bad guy and the good guys handle it. Right now, libtards want us to rely on the police when that happens. I don't know if you happen to know this, but people get murdered every single day before the police can come to help them. Most don't even get a chance to dial 911.


No once again, please explain to me how it is ok for libtards to use the names of innocent people who have been killed to push an agenda that would not have saved a single one of those people? This article is a great example. So was Obama and the libtard's push for gun control after Sandy Hook. Remember when Joe Biden went around saying to buy a shotgun? Well maybe the mall shooter listened to Joe. Because he damn sure had a shotgun.

How is it right to stand on the graves of innocent people to push an agenda that has less chance of saving a life than if we did the exact opposite of that agenda?