“Better to write for yourself and have no public, than to write for the public and have no self.”- Cyril Connolly (1903 - 1974)
California's Unconstitutional Weapons Ban
By de Andréa
‘THE BOTTOM LINE’
Posted January 7, 2018
Is the hate America despotic State Legislature and Judicial system of California headed toward a Chicago style tyranny? Chicago’s virtual gun ban creating a fictitious GUN FREE ZONE has the highest rate of gun homicide in the nation because of it, and making it the poster child for the dangers of GUN FREE ZONEs.
A lawsuit has been filed by several gun rights proponents against The Communist State of California concerning its new Anti-American unconstitutional regulations of semi-automatic rifles, which they erroneously, ignorantly and viciously call "assault rifles."
Note: I was assaulted with a single shot rock once. Does that mean that rocks are assault weapons and therefore should be outlawed? Or are only semi-automatic rocks classified as assault rocks?
According to the California State Supreme Court, unless a specific right is listed in Article 1 Section 1 of the California Constitution, then you poor slobs that live in California HAVE NO RIGHTS except these, “…enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining safety, happiness, and privacy”.
The Courts opinion of Article 1 Section 1- “No mention is made in it of a right to bear arms."
To the hair splitting California Supreme Court I say: There is no mention of how one is to exercise one’s right to “defend life.” You couldn’t legally use a rock because it is not specifically mentioned in the state constitution! And by the same token it doesn’t specifically mention how one is to acquire, possess and protect property and how one is to obtain safety or happiness or privacy. So in effect Californian’s have no rights to exercise because according to the state supreme Court the manner in which one exercises his/her rights must be specifically mentioned in the constitution, otherwise one is not legal to exercise any rights at all.
Now’ you might understand why I call California a Communist State…It certainly isn’t free, even though Article 1 Section 1 begins with: “All people are by nature free…” Free to do what? It doesn’t specify, so therefore according to the California state Supreme Court - all people are not free.
At the end of November, several guns rights proponents and organizations filed a complaint against the oppressive State of California for openly and blatantly violating the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitutions and for making criminal that is constitutionally lawful.
Four gun owners: George Holt, Irvin Hoff, Michael Louie, and Rick Russel, along with four gun rights groups: the Firearms Policy Coalition, Firearms Policy Foundation, The Calguns Foundation, and Second Amendment Foundation filed a complaint on November 30, 2017.
“By making and enforcing unlawful rules, and going around the rules to do it, the DOJ is putting tens if not hundreds of thousands of law-abiding people at risk of serious criminal liability,” said the plaintiffs’ attorney, George M. Lee, in a statement. “This case seeks to make the DOJ follow the same laws they impose on others and protect law-abiding gun owners in the process.”
That complaint was joined by a National Guard soldier, Sgt. Craig Stevens, on December 29, 2017.
Between a “Rock and a Hard Place”
Sgt. Stevens, who owns a homemade rifle that now requires a serial number under the new illegal law in California, is serving his country overseas, but in the eyes of California, he is a criminal because though he attempted to deal with the serial number issue before he was deployed, California told him they were not issuing serial numbers at that time. So whether or not one is able to comply with the law is at the convenience of the state’.
Among the attacks by California against their citizens is a labeling of any gun that has a "bullet button" as an "assault weapon." Personally I don’t think that anyone has ever been assaulted by a button, a bullet type or not. But then I guess it would depend on how large and heavy the button was.
Now, for a better understanding of what a bullet button actually is, and for those not up on their buttons, GunsInTheNews.com reported in January 2017:
In 1989, California banned so-called “assault rifles.” The list of characteristics they used to define what qualified as a banned “assault weapon” is too complex, ignorant, and confusing to wade into here, but one key feature verboten by the law was the ability to accept a detachable magazine.
Creative manufacturers found ways to both comply with the laws and preserve as much functionality as possible in firearms, and one of these was the so-called “bullet button.” A “bullet button” replaces the standard push-button magazine release used on all semi-auto firearms, with a fixed lug containing a small button which is too small to be pressed by a finger, but operable if pressed with spire-point bullet of a loaded cartridge. Since the law stipulated that detachable magazines were banned unless their removal required tools, and since the California DOJ defined a loaded cartridge in this case as a “tool,” the so-called “bullet button” allowed users to lawfully detach and replace magazines, so long as they obeyed California’s 10-round-capacity magazine limit and myriad other ignorant and ridiculous restrictions.
But alas, last year, in a case of legislative “Whack-A-Mole,” for safety reasons that absolutely no one understands, California banned firearms containing the “bullet button” modification unless owners register them with the state by Dec. 31, 2017. (Buyer beware, however: California has a history of promising, “You can keep your gun if you register it”—and then turning around, expanding its bans, and using those registration lists to dispossess owners of guns.)
Worse, the regulations that the DOJ snuck in to implement this law on the eve of the New Year would drop the hammer on California gun owners with a wide variety of new restrictions.
Included within the DOJ’s list of regulations are over 40 new definitions; requirements that gun owners provide extensive and excessive personal information with their registrations, along with four clear digital photos of their guns; requirements for serializing firearms built from so-called “80 percent receivers”; expansion of the banned “assault weapon” definition to include “bullet-button”-equipped shotguns; restrictions on removing the “bullet button” after the firearm is registered as an “assault weapon”; and more.
So, they say that the bullet button actually slows down the process of changing magazines, which it doesn’t. They said the same thing about small capacity magazines (watch) which can be changed in less than a second, and it does not make a semi-automatic rifle an "assault rifle." On the contrary, it makes it aggravating. We have law makers that not only don’t know the law, but they no nothing at all about what they are making laws about. Instead of curbing crime, they are creating criminals.
The Attorney General's website has an ominous clock counting down the days to comply with the tyrannical beast and states:
Pursuant to Assembly Bill 1135 (Stats. 2016, ch. 40) and Senate Bill 880 (Stats. 2016, ch. 48) effective January 1, 2017, the definition of assault weapon is revised.
These bills require that any person who, from January 1, 2001, to December 31, 2016, inclusive, lawfully possessed an assault weapon that does not have a fixed magazine, as defined in Penal Code section 30515, including those weapons with an ammunition feeding device that can be readily removed from the firearm with the use of a tool, shall register the firearm before January 1, 2018, but not before the effective date of the regulations adopted by the DOJ.
UPDATE AS OF Jan 04 2018 16:28:16 GMT-0500 (Eastern Standard Time)
The ability to register an Assault Weapon pursuant to Assembly Bill 1135 and Senate Bill 880, is now available. Additionally, pursuant to Assembly Bill 103 (Stats. 2017. Ch. 17), the assault weapon registration deadline has been extended through June 30, 2018. They won’t tell you this, but it’s because of all the law suites.
The California Department of Justice, Attorney General Xavier Becerra, Chief of the Department of Justice Bureau of Firearms Stephen J. Lindley, Director of the Office of Administrative Law Debra Cornez, and California State Controller Betty T. Yee are named as defendants in the complaint.
“The California Department of Justice has grossly exceeded their authority and is illegally imposing its will on thousands of California gun owners,” said Raymond DiGuiseppe, a former California deputy attorney general who is representing the plaintiffs along with other attorneys. “Their regulations and actions undermine the rule of law and put potentially hundreds of thousands of people at risk for serious criminal liability.”
Again, the Second Amendment could not be clearer. What part of "shall not be infringed" do these people not understand?
“The government agencies responsible for enforcing the law must also follow the law,” said Second Amendment Foundation founder Alan Gottlieb. “This case is an important step in protecting law-abiding gun owners from an out-of-control regulatory state.”
California has a long and distinguished history of illegal legislation designed to keep minorities disarmed. The Golden State is the only state in recent years to (mostly) ban the open carry of firearms and is ranked 47th by G&A with another A- by the Brady (Bunch) Center.
California’s constitution is one of only six states that do not specifically mention the right to keep and bear arms.
From the California State Constitution we have the following
This fundamental right located in Article 1, Section 1 of the California State Constitution, which provides:
“All people are by nature free and independent and have inalienable rights. Among these are enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining safety, happiness, and privacy."
Every facet of that paragraph has now been violated by the following words of the California Supreme Court Judges in the following quote: "If plaintiffs are implying that a right to bear arms is one of the rights recognized in the California Constitutions declaration of rights, they are simply wrong. No mention is made in it of a right to bear arms."
I guess the Judges must have missed the part, when referring to rights that says: “Among these are…” Meaning that these mentioned are not the only rights
But then what can one expect from hate-America Communists…
Some Factual Information: Do you know the truth about people killed by guns in the U.S.? Probably not if you get your news from the Communist News Network. So get ready now, I am going to shock you, so if you have a bad heart don’t read this, or look these up.
last year' 1000 people were killed with guns in the city of Chicago alone. Chicago is a city that has a virtual gun ban. In other words a GUN FREE CITY, ‘no guns in Chicago’. You can’t even buy a gun in Chicago. OK, now hang on to your GUN FREE ZONE SIGN because…first, on average, there are approximately 12000 people killed by guns in the entire country per year. And that includes people killed in self-defense and legitimately by police.
Now! As I said if you have a weak heart for sure don’t read this…From 2011 to 2016 that’s five years my friend in the entire state of Vermont 420 people died of gun shots...Total. That’s an average of 84 people per year for 5 years in the entire state, compared to the city of Chicago’s 1000 last year alone. Why is’ that, you should ask? Answer: because the state of Vermont doesn’t have any gun laws. None, Zero zilch, nada, zip. You can carry a loaded gun down main street Vermont, and people do. So the crazies steer clear of Vermont. It not only makes sense, but as you can see, if you clicked on the hyperlinks - I didn’t make this up.
So please continue to support these anti American Communists in California if you want California to turn into a giant Chicago where most people are afraid to leave their home and the rest are afraid to be in their home.
At least buy yourself a bullet proof suit…
Thanks for listening my friend. Now go do the right thing, pray and fight for truth and freedom. If you would like to write me direct with a question or a comment you can contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org
- de Andréa
Please pass on this article to everyone on your email list. It may be the only chance for your friends to hear the truth.
The Fine Print
Copyright © 2005 by Bottom Line Publishing, All Rights Reserved - Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.
Disclaimer - The writer of this blog is not responsible for the language or advertisements used in links to referenced articles as source materials.