Thursday, May 2, 2013

California Governor signs bill to Confiscate Legal Firearms

Governor Jerry Brown announced Wednesday that he has signed legislation expanding the ability of state law enforcement agents to seize firearms from nearly 20,000 Californians.

How do they know exactly how many? Because these are legally obtained firearms that are to be confiscated!

They collectively own more than 39,000 handguns and 1,670 assault weapons but are prohibited from owning firearms because they have been convicted of crimes, ruled mentally unstable, or are subject to domestic violence restraining orders.

The bill authorizes $24 Million for the state Department of Justice's Armed and Prohibited Persons program.

The money will go to hire more agents to confiscate the weapons and reduce the backlog over the next three years.

The program, which is unique to California, cross-checks five databases to find people who bought weapons they are no longer legally allowed to own.

In other words, even if you have had your grandpa's .22 rifle since you were 10 years old, if you are now 60 years of age and have seen a doctor for any sort of anxiety problems or even marital counseling both considered mental health problems, or if you have broken one of the states thousands of laws, your 2nd Amendment Rights as an American citizen are void.

OK, sure I would like to see illegal guns off the streets. But friends, all the state is doing is going after "soft" targets who have bought their guns, or have had them passed down to them, legally. 

Fact is, 90% of the killings, the murders with firearms, in the state of California are done with illegally obtained weapons.

Go after them? Hell no! They don't want to go after those who are really committing the crime, instead they look successful by going after people who have gotten their guns legally.

The bill called SB140 by a Democrat State Senator Mark Leno, out of San Francisco, authorizes the funds to hire more agents to confiscate the weapons but it doesn't do a damn thing to stop the killings in places like Stockton and Oakland where guns are expensive but can be had on the black market.

And how about East L.A.? From what I have been told lately, the L.A. police doesn't even what to patrol in East L.A. because the gangs rule the streets and are armed to the teeth with weapons that are not even available for purchase by citizens in the United States.

I can't help but wonder if Leno or Attorney General Kamala Harris, who said "California is leading the nation in a common-sense effort to protect public safety," actually believe that their confiscating legally obtained guns will stop the killings from those using illegal guns.

I'm not recommending anyone do this, but I wouldn't be surprised if many of those people now considered unqualified to own guns will report their guns stolen soon?

And by the way, a friend of mine who was once part of a domestic violence call from a busy body neighbor, told me that he can't own a gun in California because of that call. He's a policeman who got into a heated argument with his better half and the police were called.

His department was notified of the call and he went through some sort of counseling program. He asked me if these new confiscation laws will pertain to policemen and women who are on the job right now?

So what if a policeman goes in to see a shrink after a shooting incident, does he fall under the law as having received mental health treatment?
And if so, are Democrats Mark Leno and Kamala Harris making it compulsory for those police officers to surrender their duty weapons?

Will this bill result in a loss of police officers on departments? How many officers throughout the state of California have had domestic violence problems or mental health treatment for stress and other work related conditions?

Police-perpetrated domestic violence in California is no small matter. After all, they are people like everyone else. But the question should be asked, how many of those 39,000 handguns and 1,670 assault weapons belong to police officers?

Besides what effect this will have on infringing on our gun rights, California Bill SB 140 takes millions of unconstitutionally-collected Dealer Record of Sales (DROS) funds and uses it to to compensate for the failure of more than 500 local law enforcement agencies for not enforcing existing gun laws.

It expands the California Department of Justice, and pays for raids and confiscation of weapons from those whom the State deems to be prohibited based on unreliable data from an untrustworthy list.

SB 140 has no guidelines to verify the accuracy of the Armed Prohibited Persons File before DOJ raids your homes.

DOJ trained, at taxpayers’ expense, thousands of California peace officers on how to use the armed prohibited person database over the past several years, which yielded little to no enforcement activity.

The DOJ expansion comes on the heels of the successful passage of SB 819 (Leno – 2012) which allowed the DOJ to use unconstitutionally-collected excess DROS funds for undefined enforcement activity. Now we know what the money was for.

And by the way, SB 140 requires the California states DOJ to create reports that liberal politicians would use to advance their anti-gun agenda.    It's true! It really does that while not set limits on how DOJ may use the re-appropriated funds.

Is California ready to go down that road? Are the liberals in charge of this state ready to see people hide their guns or report them stolen, disarm police officers, turn law abiding Californians into criminals overnight?

I don't think Governor Brown and the rest of the Liberals in charge of California's capital give a damn one bit who they effect with their horseshit laws - positive or negative - it's all just more political theater.

The state of California, like the Federal government, has lost the war on illegal drugs, so now they want to take on legally obtained guns.

Good luck! Let's see how many citizens are dumb enough to comply with the state taking their grandpa's .22 rifle or a handgun bought before the law said they couldn't? I have a feeling, not many!

1 comment:

  1. More like "Have No Gun, Will Travel". Haha.


Thank you for your comment.