California Moves Closer to Banning Open Carry & Registering All Long Guns

Sacramento, Ca --(Ammoland.com)- Keep the pressure the legislature on AB 1810 and AB 1934.

Both of these bills have made their way to the Senate, and the time for you to act is now! Use the CRPA website to CONTACT YOUR SENATOR TODAY and urge defeat of these bills!

AB 1810 RIFLE AND SHOTGUN REGISTRATION AB 1810 SUMMARY: Applies the same regulations relating to the reporting and retention of records for handguns to long guns, as specified. Specifically, this bill conforms reporting and record retention provisions in order that transfers and information reporting and retention requirements for handguns and firearms other than handguns are the same.

AB 1810 requires registration of rifles and shotguns in the same way handguns are now registered in California. Under current law, the information collected at the time of purchase of a rifle or shotgun (serial number, make, and model) is destroyed after the background check is completed. AB 1810 will require that the make, model, and serial number of the firearm, as well as the identifying information of the purchaser, be recorded and kept on file by the California Attorney General’s office. AB 1810 will also impose additional costs on firearms owners to maintain the registration system as well as on the state’s licensed firearms dealers and small businesses who already deal with extensive recordkeeping requirements

Assembly Member Feuer, the author of AB 1810, claims that the registration of rifles and shotguns will help law enforcement track down criminals and persons prohibited from owning firearms. This logic is flawed. Studies have shown that violent criminals steal firearms to commit crimes and of course they do not comply with current law by registering their stolen handguns.

It is already against the law to possess a stolen firearm or to possess any firearm if you are prohibited from possessing a firearm by law. And most criminals file off the serial numbers on guns used in crimes. In truth, the only persons impacted by this unnecessary proposed law are law abiding citizens.

AB 1934 OPEN-CARRY BAN (Unloaded Handguns) AB 1934 SUMMARY: Makes it a misdemeanor for any person to carry an exposed an unloaded handgun outside a vehicle on his or her person while in any public place or on any public street in an incorporated city. Among other things this bill makes it a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment in the county jail not to exceed six months, by a fine not to exceed $1,000, or by both a fine and imprisonment when any person carries an exposed and unloaded handgun outside a vehicle on his or her person while in any public place or on any public street in an incorporated city, or in any public place or on any public street in a prohibited area of an unincorporated territory.

AB 1934 deletes provisions of current law that allow a firearm to be carried openly in a belt holster. If this bill passes, the open carrying of an unloaded handgun will be illegal with few exceptions. For example, licensed hunters, fishermen, and campers that historically have carried a handgun in a belt holster would be prohibited from carrying a firearm in any prohibited area of an unincorporated area. This would include forest service roads, trails, and campgrounds.

The problem with AB 1934 is that it does not provide a way for the average person to carry a firearm for self-protection or other legitimate purposes. The direction of this bill is contrary to common sense and the approach taken by most other states. For example, Arizona just passed a law allowing for concealed carry without a concealed carry license.

THANK YOU FOR SPEAKING OUT AND HELPING TO PRESERVE YOUR RIGHTS! The California Rifle and Pistol Association “CRPA,” founded in 1875, is dedicated to defending the rights of law-abiding citizens to responsibly use firearms for self-defense and the defense of their loved ones, for sport, and for all other legal activities. CRPA is the official state association of the National Rifle Association. A California non-profit association, CRPA is independently directed by its own Board of Directors. CRPA’s members include law enforcement officers, prosecutors, professionals, firearm experts, the general public, and loving parents. CRPA has always worked to reduce the criminal misuse of firearms and firearms accidents, while actively promoting and organizing the competitive shooting sports and Olympic training programs in California. We are proud to say that many CRPA competitors are among the best in the world.

From Julia Gorin, from the Jewish World Review.
quote:
________________________________________
The anti-gun male
http://www.jewishworldreview.com – Let’s be honest. He’s scared of the thing. That’s understandable—so am I. But as a girl I have the luxury of being able to admit it. I don’t have to masquerade squeamishness as grand principle-in the interest of mankind, no less.

A man does. He has to say things like “One Taniqua Hall is one too many,” as a New York radio talk show host did in referring to the 9-year old New York girl who was accidentally shot last year by her 12-year old cousin playing with his uncle’s gun. But the truth is he desperately needs Taniqua Hall, just like he needs as many Columbines and Santees as can be mustered, until they spell an end to the Second Amendment. And not for the benefit of the masses, but for the benefit of his self-esteem.

He often accuses men with guns of “compensating for something.” The truth is quite the reverse. After all, how is he supposed to feel knowing there are men out there who aren’t intimidated by the big bad inanimate villain? How is he to feel in the face of adolescent boys who have used the family gun effectively in defending the family from an armed intruder? So if he can’t touch a gun, he doesn’t want other men to be able to either. And to achieve his ends, he’ll use the only weapon he knows how to manipulate: the law.

Of course, sexual and psychological insecurities don’t account for ALL men against guns. Certainly there must be some whose motives are pure, who perhaps do care so much as to tirelessly look for policy solutions to teenage void and aggressiveness, and to parent and teacher negligence. But for a potentially large underlying contributor, psycho-sexual inadequacy has gone unexplored and unacknowledged. It’s one thing to not be comfortable with a firearm and therefore opt to not keep or bear one. But it’s another to impose the same handicap onto others.

People are suspicious of what they do not know-and not only does this man not know how to use a gun, he doesn’t know the men who do, or the number of people who have successfully used one to defend themselves from injury or death. But he is better left in the dark; his life is hard enough knowing there are men out there who don’t sit cross-legged. That they’re able to handle a firearm instead of being handled by it would be too much to bear.

Such a man is also best kept huddled in urban centers, where he feels safer than he might if thrown out on his own into a rural setting, in an isolated house on a quiet street where he would feel naked and helpless. Lacking the confidence that would permit him to be sequestered in sparseness, and lacking a gun, he finds comfort in the cloister of crowds.

The very ownership of a gun for defense of home and family implies some assertiveness and a certain self-reliance. But if our man kept a gun in the house, and an intruder broke in and started attacking his wife in front of him, he wouldn’t be able to later say, “He had a knife—there was nothing I could do!” Passively watching in horror while already trying to make peace with the violent act, scheduling a therapy session and forgiving the perpetrator before the attack is even finished wouldn’t be the option it otherwise is.
No. Better to emasculate all men. Because let’s face it: He’s a lover, not a fighter. And he doesn’t want to get shot in case he has an affair with your wife.

Of course, it wouldn’t be completely honest not to admit that owning a firearm carries with it some risk to unintended targets. That’s the tradeoff with a gun: The right to defend one’s life and way of life isn’t without peril to oneself. And the last thing this man wants to do is risk his life-if even to save it. For he is guided by a dread fear for his life, and has more confidence in almost anyone else’s ability to protect him than his own, preferring to place himself at the mercy of the villain or in the sporadically competent hands of authorities (his line of defense consisting of locks, alarm systems, reasoning with the attacker, calling the police or, should fighting back occur to him, thrashing a heavy vase).
In short, he is a man begging for subjugation. He longs for its promise of equality in helplessness. Because only when that strange, independent alpha breed of male is helpless along with him will he feel adequate. Indeed, his freedom lies in this other man’s containment.

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.