Skip to comments.
California Senate Passes Ballistics Identification Bill to Help Police Solve Gun Crimes - AB-352
U.S. Newswire on Yahoo ^
| 8/24/06
| U.S. Newswire
Posted on 08/24/2006 8:08:18 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-92 next last
To: NormsRevenge
Aw heck, they're just trying to get one-up on NJ's "Smart Gun" law. /sarc
61
posted on
08/25/2006 7:01:39 AM PDT
by
paulcissa
(Only YOU can prevent liberalism.)
To: Joe Brower
"As we here all know, this scheme is so obviously unworkable and actually crosses the line into the absurd." The more absurd it is, the better the moonbats in California like it.
62
posted on
08/25/2006 7:01:51 AM PDT
by
blackie
(Be Well~Be Armed~Be Safe~Molon Labe!)
To: Spktyr
silly poster, police are always exempt from such gun crime laws.
63
posted on
08/25/2006 7:03:16 AM PDT
by
longtermmemmory
(VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
To: goldstategop
And this technology, first employed in Maryland - has not helped to resolve a single crime. Not exactly. Maryland had ballistic 'fingerprinting' where they required a spent case from every handgun sold in Maryland. Supposedly all the fired cases would be entered into a database for matching with future crime brass.
That technology was shown to be deficient and has mostly been dropped. This is the next step, where instead of relying on the various random markings generated by firing a gun, a specific marker is used to stamp the brass.
Still a huge joke. They will have to ban all revolvers at the same time, and most handgun makers will forego the CA market rather than submit to the changes. Another back door gun ban.
64
posted on
08/25/2006 7:07:50 AM PDT
by
TC Rider
(The United States Constitution © 1791. All Rights Reserved.)
To: Joe Brower
However, when viewed in the light of what it's true purpose is, i.e.: the slow strangulation of firearms ownership by the law-abiding, it all makes perfect sense.
Your correct, death by a thousand cuts. Eventually the only ones with guns will be bad guys and then guns will be really bad.
65
posted on
08/25/2006 7:10:01 AM PDT
by
mr_hammer
(They have eyes, but do not see . . .)
To: Nathan Zachary
No they won't. They will use guns made before 2008. Besides its a California law, gun makers won't bother making auto loading handguns guns just for California. After 2008 if this law stands, you'll have to buy used autoloading handguns.Either that or ALL handguns will be manufactured to California specs (same as automobiles are now), then we will all have those imprinted firing pins in our new weapons. It's cheaper to tool up to run everything one way, than to have a separate manufacturing models. It'll make it easier for other states to pass the same restrictions, seeing as the system will already be in place.
Bought a new gun lately? There are only a few states that mandate selling fired casings with new pistols, but every manufacturer sells them that way in every store in the country. This is truly a slippery slope scenario, and we need to fight it for all it's worth.
66
posted on
08/25/2006 7:11:35 AM PDT
by
P8riot
("You can get more with a kind word and a gun than you can with a kind word alone." - Al Capone)
To: Lawgvr1955
So the red states will pass a federal law which says you can not prohibit the ownership of guns without this absudity.
There has to be a federal pre-emption here somewhere.
I think it is just california politicians who are afraid of voters.
67
posted on
08/25/2006 7:15:56 AM PDT
by
longtermmemmory
(VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
To: TC Rider
or they will just stop making the product which is what Calif socialists want.
The current guns skyrocket in price, manufacturers stop making them.
federal prohibition without federal prohibition. Second amendment repealed by California alone.
68
posted on
08/25/2006 7:21:06 AM PDT
by
longtermmemmory
(VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
To: absalom01
"They know perfectly well that this law will not do any of the things that they claim. The goal is to disarm the law-abiding citizen, one increment at a time."
Things like this are why I left California. In 1973. You are perfectly right. They know it won't do what they said it will, and they don't care because they want to disarm the citizens of their state. And they apparently don't care that it will only work on the law-abiding, and of those, only on citizens who can't afford to move elsewhere.
69
posted on
08/25/2006 7:24:37 AM PDT
by
Old Student
(We have a name for the people who think indiscriminate killing is fine. They're called "The Bad Guys)
To: Old Student
You may have left california, but california is comming to you by fiat of law.
You did not vote for California politicians, you did not support any california programs, but they are going to change you life whether you like it or not.
They don't care about isolated people in the boondocks of flyover country, they only care about those in the blue zones.
70
posted on
08/25/2006 7:59:48 AM PDT
by
longtermmemmory
(VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
To: KoRn
this will increase the regulation about firing pins making the PINS so expesive as to make your gun useless.
This is about regulation based outlawing.
This is an effort to de-facto repeal the second amendment.
An EXTREME taking in the constitutional sense of the word.
71
posted on
08/25/2006 8:06:26 AM PDT
by
longtermmemmory
(VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
To: Joe Brower
Key phrase
With the support of forty-one police chiefs from around the state
Once again for those who haven't been listening, the police are not on the side of individual rights. They're just like any other government bureaucrats when taken en mass. They want helpless sheep to fleece.
72
posted on
08/25/2006 8:09:39 AM PDT
by
from occupied ga
(Your most dangerous enemy is your own government)
To: NormsRevenge
Paul Helmke was recently voted out as Mayor of Fort Wayne, Indiana. He was a loser looking for something to do and he came up with this. I went to high school with the pr*ck. He was an elitist "sosh" type even then. May his jaws lock up...SSZ
73
posted on
08/25/2006 8:11:31 AM PDT
by
szweig
To: from occupied ga
Once again for those who haven't been listening, the police are not on the side of individual rights. They're just like any other government bureaucrats when taken en mass. They want helpless sheep to fleece. Key distinction
Once again for those who haven't been listening, the politically appointed police chiefs are not on the side of individual rights. They're just like any other government bureaucrats when taken en mass. They want helpless sheep to fleece.
74
posted on
08/25/2006 8:20:56 AM PDT
by
TC Rider
(The United States Constitution © 1791. All Rights Reserved.)
To: NormsRevenge
Maybe it's just me, but what the hell is a bullet casing? When did we let someone with no firearms experience switch the terminology from brass or case?
75
posted on
08/25/2006 8:50:24 AM PDT
by
wysiwyg
(What parts of "right of the people" and "shall not be infringed" do you not understand?)
To: TC Rider
Politicians prefer unarmed peasants
76
posted on
08/25/2006 8:52:20 AM PDT
by
TYVets
(God so loved the world he didn't send a committee)
To: TC Rider
the politically appointed police chiefs are not on the side of individual rightsYou can think that if you want, and I'm sure there are individual police who are pro rights, but the majority of them aren't going to refuse the order to confiscate guns when it comes. Look at New orleans. It wasn't the politically appointed chiefs who were committing armed robbery of law abiding citizens and depriving them of their consitiutional right.
77
posted on
08/25/2006 8:52:48 AM PDT
by
from occupied ga
(Your most dangerous enemy is your own government)
To: Spktyr
Only 41 Police Chiefs in a state that is half the size of the west coast indicates what a bogus bill this is.
The fact that it is being pushed by a Republican indicates once again, we must remain vigilant and never take for granted the support of one political party.
The ONLY thing this MIGHT do is identify the legal owner. The legal owner is not necessarily the culprit. Further, criminals in Kalipornia will just be more tidy about leaving casings lying around after a crime.
More dumb feel-good legislation by a pack of liberal activist organizations who would probably be right out there demonstrating against the execution of killers who use firearms to commit a crime.
Once again Kalipornia indicates that the tail of San Francisco and Hollyweird wags the dog.
Count on the Gubernator to sign this.
78
posted on
08/25/2006 9:11:40 AM PDT
by
ZULU
(Non nobis, non nobis, Domine, sed nomini tuo da gloriam. God, guts, and guns made America great.)
To: NormsRevenge
79
posted on
08/25/2006 9:48:55 AM PDT
by
hattend
(Anytime you see a union building, think of it as a branch office of the Democratic Party. - Rush)
80
posted on
08/25/2006 9:58:31 AM PDT
by
Badray
(While defending the land called America, we must also be sure to preserve the Idea called America.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-92 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson