California's state Senate Democrats roll out big gun control package (Considering to Confiscate)

Mercury News ^ | Updated: 02/08/2013 10:47:40 AM PST | Josh Richman

[Red Steel]

All semi-automatic rifles with detachable magazines would be banned, all guns would be registered and no ammunition could be bought without a special permit in California under a sweeping list of bills rolled out Thursday by state Senate Democrats.

The 10-bill package constitutes the single largest gun control push in decades in the Golden State, which already boasts some of the nation's strictest gun laws. It joins equally controversial proposals from Assembly Democrats that would regulate and tax ammunition sales and consider taking the state's 166,000 registered assault weapons from their owners.

This first unified California plan comes less than a month after New York adopted its own sweeping package of new gun controls and President Barack Obama announced a package of executive actions, all in the wake of December's Connecticut schoolhouse massacre. Even as this plan emerged Thursday, House Democrats' gun violence task force was announcing 15 "policy principles," including protecting Second Amendment rights but also instituting universal background checks and reinstating a federal assault weapons ban.

"We respect the Second Amendment right of law-abiding citizens to have guns for hunting, for sport,

-snip-

proliferation of guns designed to be fired and reloaded rapidly," he said. "We can save lives by getting guns and ammunition out of the hands of the wrong people. We can save lives if every gun owner knows how to safely handle those guns. And if we can save lives, we must act to do so."

Gene Hoffman of Redwood City, co-founder and chairman of the Calguns Foundation gun rights group, countered that "almost every item in the proposal is wildly unconstitutional."

[yorkiemom]

But, since you’ve ruled out Texas, well... guess it’s North Dakota, then. That or the other ‘growth center’ - go to DC and work for the government.

These are not the only states with jobs available. But thanks for the idea. You forgot to mention wefare, food stamps, and Obamacare as Plan C.

Maybe you didn't mean the government/DC thing as derogatory - but as a conservative, I took it that way. Same as when I tried teaching - full of liberals full of themselves. And very little teaching going on in our education system these days, in any state. Although CA is worse than most, being invaded and all. Old 'redneck' states that were made fun of are miles ahead of us. But I digress....

[My Favorite Headache]

Correct!!!!!!

[Secret Agent Man]

they’d save more lives banning cars.

if they were genuinely serious about saving lives, that is.

they’d be dragged out of office and tarred and feathered and probably sent to Jesus, but if lives are saved,.....

[Secret Agent Man]

it’sbeen bad’in california a long time already. so many gun dealers don’t even bother shipping there it’s not even funny.

[Spktyr]

Not being snotty at all, though you seem to be.

Texas, North Dakota and (ugh) DC are the only places generating a surplus of openings in all fields. Yes, there are other jobs in other states but it’ll be a crapshoot for finding anything (as you implied by your earlier comment about having searched for a while).

Texas will be installing more natural gas power plants over the next five years than the next twenty states combined. This would seem to mean that this is where you would want to look for a job in that field, as opposed to places that are not expanding at all.

Sometimes you have to do something you don’t want for a principle that’s more important. It’s why I pulled the eject handle on CA back in 95.

[yorkiemom]

Not being snotty at all, though you seem to be.

I apologize then. It's hard to tell intent over the internet. But moving to DC and working in the liberal mecca? No way! But thanks for the suggestion.

Texas, North Dakota and (ugh) DC are the only places generating a surplus of openings in all fields. Yes, there are other jobs in other states but it’ll be a crapshoot for finding anything (as you implied by your earlier comment about having searched for a while)

There ARE a lot of power plant jobs in TX when I search. I've just been ignoring them. But there are still a lot everywhere else too - we're just particular about place, salary, and job position. No point taking a lesser job. At the management level, there are less opportunities than as an operator. Other states, while not building plants, are still replacing retiring workers. But true - there are more opportunities in a healthy economy.

Texas will be installing more natural gas power plants over the next five years than the next twenty states combined. This would seem to mean that this is where you would want to look for a job in that field, as opposed to places that are not expanding at all.

Unless Obama manages to bankrupt the coal industry ;) After the Japan tsunami, those coal plants won't be replaced with nuclear ones.

Sometimes you have to do something you don’t want for a principle that’s more important. It’s why I pulled the eject handle on CA back in 95.

True. And I admire people that do that. And we'll do it eventually. But it's hard to give up a great job for a lesser one when he only needs 4-5 more years of the good paying job. Of course, if the country implodes by then, we'll have wished we moved ;) He does have 2 applications out there and we'll see what comes of those.

Actually, just 2 weeks ago he expanded his 'acceptable' range and Arkansas and the area of Texas near it (would that be NE of Houston?) were added. While very hot and humid when I took a cross-country trip last year, it was just gorgeous. If we have to to suffer weather-wise, I want green - having been a desert rat for too long. My desires are to die 1) hearing English spoken 2) in a pretty place and 3) among conservatives.

[444Flyer]

The map below represents those who voted for/against Prop 34 (vote on ending the death penalty) last November. (Orange against. Blue for.) I'd make a guess that those orange area's are strong 2nd Amendment. The gun grabbers are kicking a hornet's nest. If Villar/AKA Hollywood-type made up name 'Villaraigosa' and his ilk follow through with this, a the very least the makers (tax base) will continue to pour out of CA in droves as they have been for years. The Commie wannabes will have a hard time when the majority population are takers. No getting around reality then. The Libs will learn you can't squeeze $$$ out of a turnip.

"...the vote on ending the death penalty. Blue are those counties where Proposition 34 received a majority. It lost statewide 53-47."

http://www.laobserved.com/archive/2012/11/californias_divide_on_oba.php

[Spktyr]

While you’re looking around, keep this in mind: In Texas and many other Southern states, a $50,000 job will get you the same buying power, take home pay after taxes and standard of living as a $100-150,000 job in California.

[yorkiemom]

While you’re looking around, keep this in mind: In Texas and many other Southern states, a $50,000 job will get you the same buying power, take home pay after taxes and standard of living as a $100-150,000 job in California.

I'm sorry, but I have to correct you on that. I've lived in both states. I don't know where you get your data and feel free to provide it. Here's mine: Unless one live's in one of the huge population areas along the coast, house prices are comparable to Texas. At least now - that prices have dropped here and remained stable there over the last 7 years. And our property taxes are capped at 1% - we paid over 3% in Corpus, rising every year. All in all, we paid more in taxes in Texas than in California (because of the confiscatory property taxes). Add hurricane insurance and we paid more to live in Texas, while making substantially less. The myth about states without income tax is just that - they more than make up for it in property taxes. I was sadly shocked when we moved there! At least, TX and FL are that way. NV and Alaska don't, so those are tax-friendly states.

I've looked at KY extensively and I buy what you're saying there;) The property taxes are reasonable and the state income tax is about 2/3rds of what CA's is. I'm more than willing to take a lesser standard of living for the right area, don't get me wrong. It's not all about money! Thinking about Oklahoma, because they've been solidly conservative in most past elections and have managed to pass a solid anti-illegal bill that hasn't been bashed in the courts. And an anti-Sharia law bill as well. Have no idea how they get away with it while other states get reamed. Still hot, tornados and the insurance from that to deal with, but I like their politics enough to deal with it all.

Thanks for the idea. There are some nice, inexpensive states out there - but don't have the jobs to go with it either;) I think that Texas booming also means politicians have their hands out too. Sad to say. Any power plants planned in the pretty area going towards the Arkansas border, that you know of?

[Fred Hayek]

Maybe it’s time for all the makers to leave California. Let the weight of the remaining takers cause it to slide into the ocean.

[Spktyr]

My source was doing the research on moving my parents out here.

1. I begin to see one of your problems. You lived in Corpus. I don’t, I live in Dallas. My parents were thinking about Austin. In neither place do you need to pay for hurricane insurance.
2. The parents’ house in CA is a small place, but it’d sell for about $750K. A nice place here in the Dallas or Austin area of comparable quality, neighborhood and size? $150-200K, and it would be on a larger lot.
3. The property tax would be higher - but all the other state taxes would be lower or non-existent. We ran the numbers for them and they would save almost $100K per year in taxes, “fees” and ‘service charges’ alone. Case in point - registering their cars cost over $1000 per every two years. Texas would charge them $172 every year.
4. Medical care in Texas costs less and is of higher quality. This was not a trivial concern at the time (mom had cancer) and both of them were not getting any younger. How much cheaper was it? Well, it was cheaper for her to get on a plane, fly to Texas, stay in a good hotel, get treatment at M.D. Anderson and fly back to CA when done than it was to get the same treatment at any SoCal cancer center. This means you get to keep more of your money.
5. Home insurance rates are cheaper here for the same coverage. Mom’s jaw hit the floor when she was running her own numbers.
6. CA pays $1-2 more per gallon of fuel as opposed to Texas. If you drive a lot, that adds up in a hurry.

It just goes on and on and on from there. If you’re a renter the disparity in buying power is even worse.

[yorkiemom]

I know the hurricane insurance is location dependent - I was just giving you our particular details.

Your folks obviously came from one of the high priced areas I was talking about. All costs are higher there but the majority of the state is not like that. Prices in Texas are pretty consistent so perhaps you are not used to that. Sounds like their area also gouged them on gasoline, since the difference is less than 50 cents a gallon typically.

I did notice medical care was cheaper but since we had insurance that did not translate into any savings for us. But that’s a good point for retirement. I hadn’t put that aspect in my retirement calculations. Vehicle fees too, are cheaper in most other states. Car insurance would be too, if we stay rural. That’s more a function of population density.

I think it depends on what you are comparing where is cheaper to live. Using a high priced area (no matter what state) to Texas, where all of it has comparable house prices will always net that Texas is cheaper. Our house here, 3000 sq feet and new, would cost more in Corpus now, than it is costing here. We spent about the same ($250K) for a 2200 square foot house 10 years ago in Corpus. And all the associated costs go up as the house price goes up.
And it also depends on one’s circumstances. Not everyone is in the same category. If someone had a high income, of course being in a lower or non-existence state tax area would be beneficial. For retirement, since we will have substantially less income and want a nicer house, a high property tax state with no income tax would cost more money than the reverse.

I guess I forgot to say in the beginning I was looking for a state to move to with a job, but to also stay there through retirement. Since we could control our taxable income at that point - and would anyway to stay under the higher federal brackets, we wouldn’t be paying a lot of state income tax no matter where we lived.

In your parent’s case, sounds like they have a large income and a small-ish house - then Texas is perfect for them.

Hope your mom is doing well.

Seems only NV (so far in my research) is beneficial for all scenarios. No state tax, property taxes capped at 1%, and house prices are now reasonable and I don’t know of any weather that could affect home insurance.

[yorkiemom]

I forgot to add that Texas’ property tax exemption for livestock is a great thing.

We want acreage, lots of it. As well as some goats for making cheese. So that would be a plus.

See - I’m being reaonable, just factual. (You don’t seem to be hearing anything I say though.)

I primarily want to be able to go outside year round and enjoy my chickens and goats. And not feel like I am in a foreign country. I’ve spent enough time in one (Mexifornia). I went on an 8500 mile driving trip this summer and saw a lot of gorgeous places - and most of them seemed like being back in the US! It was so refreshing.