SIGforum.com    Main Page  Hop To Forum Categories  The Lounge    Californians To Pay 18% Tax On Firearms, Ammo After Anti-Gun Lawmakers Strike
Page 1 2 3 4 
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
Californians To Pay 18% Tax On Firearms, Ammo After Anti-Gun Lawmakers Strike Login/Join 
semi-reformed sailor
Picture of MikeinNC
posted Hide Post
^^ the simpler answer is to observe the out of state cops and call the local cops on them saying there’s some shifty guys looking at little kids in a dark Oldsmobile …or the like.

Call them out.

Shall not be infringed is pretty clear to me-but what do I know



"Violence, naked force, has settled more issues in history than has any other factor.” Robert A. Heinlein

“You may beat me, but you will never win.” sigmonkey-2020

“A single round of buckshot to the torso almost always results in an immediate change of behavior.” Chris Baker
 
Posts: 11566 | Location: Temple, Texas! | Registered: October 07, 2006Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Little ray
of sunshine
Picture of jhe888
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by corsair:

Certainly thin and highly questionable, hence any good lawyer should be able to make a case should you be hit with such a charge. Keep in mind, most of those being caught, are career criminals, with a litany of other charges and history. There's also the issue of how much bandwidth is there for CA DOJ to pursue such cases, there's only so many investigators and there's bigger, more certain cases to be had.


And, here is the thing that most don't recognize as the practical reality. When the cops stop most people, even genuine criminals who know they have contraband, they are really good at getting them to give them permission to search or to make statements that are sufficiently incriminating to permit searches. The police don't often have to search over the objection of the person stopped. It takes a stone-cold Tony Soprano level gangster to tell the cops to fuck off. Most people don't have that ice in their veins, determination, and the knowledge to do it.




The fish is mute, expressionless. The fish doesn't think because the fish knows everything.
 
Posts: 53408 | Location: Texas | Registered: February 10, 2004Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Little ray
of sunshine
Picture of jhe888
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Ogie:
quote:
Originally posted by 9mmepiphany:
quote:
Originally posted by Ogie:
Nevertheless, I doubt that you can just stop cars and search them because the owner might have purchased ammunition out of state.

That isn't what were talking about.



The last big "bust" I remember...from years ago...was CA licensed vehicles at a Reno NV gun show making purchases and bringing them back over the state line. You'd have to be an idiot to not think they'd be watching gun shows or gun shops on the border between states


This isn't what we are talking about either. We are talking about draconian laws that hurt the average person, not criminals. A person going across a state line to purchase ammo for themselves shouldn't have to run the risk of being arrested. Obviously discretion should be used when making a legal purchase across state lines.


You are confusing that you don't like California gun law with what the law actually is about searches and seizures. 9mmepiphany is accurate in his descriptions.




The fish is mute, expressionless. The fish doesn't think because the fish knows everything.
 
Posts: 53408 | Location: Texas | Registered: February 10, 2004Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Thank you
Very little
Picture of HRK
posted Hide Post
quote:
And, here is the thing that most don't recognize as the practical reality. When the cops stop most people, even genuine criminals who know they have contraband, they are really good at getting them to give them permission to search or to make statements that are sufficiently incriminating to permit searches. The police don't often have to search over the objection of the person stopped. It takes a stone-cold Tony Soprano level gangster to tell the cops to fuck off. Most people don't have that ice in their veins, determination, and the knowledge to do it.


The sad part is that civilians need to know that in order to protect themselves from self incrimination by being coerced into giving there rights up by well trained law enforcement.

One LGS employee moved into law enforcement, he had stories of how the guy training him showed him how to look for cars with reasons to pull them and see if he could get the driver to allow a search. To him it was a challenge, and he used minor traffic/vehicle infractions to try and catch someone. I'm sure it's led to some arrests of people with felony warrants and such, but still, they are well trained on how to work people to get the ok..

Honestly ought to be a Miranda warning they have to give drivers on the rules on consent of searching...
 
Posts: 24650 | Location: Gunshine State | Registered: November 07, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Get Off My Lawn
Picture of oddball
posted Hide Post
I think folks are putting too much thought into this perception that LE are busting people left and right in CA, buying out of state stuff. Yes, it has happened in some obvious situations long ago, but bringing back stuff from out of state is largely unenforceable. They don't ask about mags and ammo at the border checkpoints, they're more concerned about fruits and vegetables.

I have broken so many CA guns laws when I used to live there, pretty much all of my gun friends did, the laws are so numerous, so stupidly ridiculous and many largely unenforceable. It is estimated most CA gun owners did not register their ARs and AKs with the govt. when mandated. Even before Freedom Week, many owned standard cap magazines. Etc. The laws are so numerous, that one can bet most CA gun owners are breaking some sort of law. Same in NY, NJ, Washington, etc.



"I’m not going to read Time Magazine, I’m not going to read Newsweek, I’m not going to read any of these magazines; I mean, because they have too much to lose by printing the truth"- Bob Dylan, 1965
 
Posts: 17565 | Location: Texas | Registered: May 13, 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
goodheart
Picture of sjtill
posted Hide Post
I assume every serious gun owner in California is a felon many times over. Except me, of course.


_________________________
“Remember, remember the fifth of November!"
 
Posts: 18615 | Location: One hop from Paradise | Registered: July 27, 2004Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Low Speed, High Drag
Picture of navyshooter
posted Hide Post
I am SOOOOOOOOO glad I moved out of CA


California Undercover Agents Staking Out Nevada Gun Shows

Undercover California law enforcement agents are prowling gun shows in Nevada, watching for attendees with California license plates on their cars. This article from the LA Times emphasizes that they’re looking for buyers bringing “assault weapons” and “high capacity” magazines back home.

However, now that ammunition is subject to a background check in the Golden State, you can bet that they’re stopping those buyers, too. And while not mentioned in the article, does anyone think they’re not also staking out gun stores near the border as well?

The black Isuzu with California plates headed west on Interstate 80 into the Sierra Nevada, eventually crossing the Nevada state line. That’s when the California Highway Patrol pulled Vincent Huey over. Inside the vehicle, state Justice Department agents found 18 high-capacity magazines, some capable of holding 30 rounds, according to court records. …

“DOJ continues to investigate information provided regarding the unlawful importation of illegal firearms into California,” including with undercover investigations, the Justice Department said in a statement.

[Former chief of the California Justice Department’s Bureau of Firearms Steve] Lindley said he attended this year’s Reno [gun] show as an observer for Brady United. Up to half of the cars in the parking lot, he said, had California plates, adding that undercover law enforcement was also on hand.

“We cannot comment, even to confirm or deny, potential or ongoing investigations or operations,” said a statement from [Attorney General Xavier] Becerra’s office.

Scott Tarbell, the organizer of the Reno event, said he welcomed the presence of California Justice Department agents and wasn’t concerned about them scaring away potential customers.

“We invite them, but they come at their own leisure and they don’t announce anything,” Tarbell said of the agents. “The only ones they’d scare away are the ones that got no good on their mind.”




"Blessed is he who when facing his own demise, thinks only of his front sight.”

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem

Montani Semper Liberi
 
Posts: 10384 | Location: Santa Rosa County | Registered: March 06, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Casuistic Thinker and Daoist
Picture of 9mmepiphany
posted Hide Post
^^^ that article is from 24 years ago




No, Daoism isn't a religion



 
Posts: 14288 | Location: northern california | Registered: February 07, 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Among the litany of bills Newsom recently signed, is SB2, it's essentially thumbing the nose of Bruen and designating just about everywhere a 'sensitive location', thus CCL holders are restricted from carrying anywhere and everywhere. Predictably there's pushback surprisingly from LE, which historically in CA have muted their public comments.



THE "BAN CONCEALED CARRY EVERYWHERE" BILL
quote:
SB 2 of 2023 is California's promised "make guns illegal everywhere" reaction bill to the Bruen Supreme Court decision. It is highly unconstitutional and blatantly violates Bruen, Heller, and McDonald. It is the sore-loser Democratic legislators engaging in tyrannical and childish politics because they don't like the Supreme Court's decision. The bill totally ignores the Supreme Court's ruling on "sensitive places."

The bill almost certainly will rapidly be subject to an injunction that will place most, if not all of it, on hold. Until the injunction is lifted (assuming that it isn’t deemed unconstitutional by the courts), old California laws apply. The bill is blatantly unconstitutional under Bruen and again, barring republic-destroying political shenanigans in the federal court system, it will be invalidated taking its wild gun free zone restrictions with it forever.

Until Jan. 1, 2024 (depending on injunctions), state law only prohibits possession of legally concealed firearms in certain locations (actual practice and the nebulous or a sheriff's/chief's restrictions notwithstanding). For instance, bars are not technically "gun free zones" in California, though a licensee may lose their LTC if found carrying in one. This bill would apply the force of law to many places that sheriff's/chief's place off-limits and add new places. The bill is so broad it basically prohibits concealed carry except on public streets and sidewalks or private property where the owner specifically allows it, never mind "no gun" signs. The list includes:
- All public buildings and permitted public events
- All areas under control of an airport authority (public airports)
- Public transportation and certain private transportation
- Bars and restaurants
- Daycares and childcare facilities
- Playgrounds and parks
- State parks and land under the control of Dept. of Fish and Wildlife
- Gaming establishments
- Stadiums, libraries, amusement parks, and museums
- Churches and houses of worship
- Banks and their parking lots
- All private commercial property without specific permission of the property owner
 
Posts: 15180 | Location: Wine Country | Registered: September 20, 2000Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Go Vols!
Picture of Oz_Shadow
posted Hide Post
I remember when Tennessee had a tax on ammunition. I’m not sure if it was ever challenged since it was 10 cents.
 
Posts: 17944 | Location: SE Michigan | Registered: February 10, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
His diet consists of black
coffee, and sarcasm.
Picture of egregore
posted Hide Post
quote:
I remember when Tennessee had a tax on ammunition.
It does. (Or did. No ammo I have bought in the last year or two has the little green stamp on it.) However, it actually goes - or went - to something, i.e., wildlife management.
 
Posts: 29037 | Location: Johnson City, TN | Registered: April 28, 2012Reply With QuoteReport This Post
my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Ogie:
quote:
Originally posted by jhe888:
quote:
Originally posted by Ogie:

By the way, what right would California law enforcement have in stopping you and searching your vehicle when you crossed the line back into California?


I am not saying I support this, but there would probably be probable cause if they observed you coming out of a gun show with a box and driving back into California. Probable cause doesn't mean they have to have proof that you are committing a crime.


But wait....If you put a box of ammo in the trunk of your car and you were stopped in California and asked to open your trunk, couldn't you just tell them to pound sand? Tell them to get a warrant. That sounds like a 4th Amendment violation.


Probable cause doesn’t require proof. Please read Illinois v gates

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/462/213/

Warrants aren’t required to search an operable vehicle. There are about a thousand cases supporting this, but Carroll v us and United States v brinegar are some fun oldie but goodies from the prohibition era and post prohibition liquor smuggling.

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/267/132/

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/338/160/


*****************************
"I don't own the night, I only operate a small franchise" - Author unknown
 
Posts: 2467 | Location: Texas | Registered: September 27, 2004Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Low Speed, High Drag
Picture of navyshooter
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by 9mmepiphany:
^^^ that article is from 24 years ago


By Dan Zimmerman -October 26, 2019




"Blessed is he who when facing his own demise, thinks only of his front sight.”

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem

Montani Semper Liberi
 
Posts: 10384 | Location: Santa Rosa County | Registered: March 06, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Thank you
Very little
Picture of HRK
posted Hide Post
Even if you have ammo in your car coming back, as long as it doesn't have any marking that it was bought in NV, they'd have to prove you didn't have it when you left and went to NV.

You could have been going for a range day in NV and taken your guns and own ammo for all they know and you're on the way home...

When you read about CA legislatures defiance of SCOTUS rulings and Newsom signing it, that should scare the living heck out of anyone in a free state if this guy ends up on the D ballot, ever.
 
Posts: 24650 | Location: Gunshine State | Registered: November 07, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by corsair:
Among the litany of bills Newsom recently signed, is SB2, it's essentially thumbing the nose of Bruen and designating just about everywhere a 'sensitive location', thus CCL holders are restricted from carrying anywhere and everywhere. Predictably there's pushback surprisingly from LE, which historically in CA have muted their public comments.



THE "BAN CONCEALED CARRY EVERYWHERE" BILL
quote:
SB 2 of 2023 is California's promised "make guns illegal everywhere" reaction bill to the Bruen Supreme Court decision. It is highly unconstitutional and blatantly violates Bruen, Heller, and McDonald. It is the sore-loser Democratic legislators engaging in tyrannical and childish politics because they don't like the Supreme Court's decision. The bill totally ignores the Supreme Court's ruling on "sensitive places."

The bill almost certainly will rapidly be subject to an injunction that will place most, if not all of it, on hold. Until the injunction is lifted (assuming that it isn’t deemed unconstitutional by the courts), old California laws apply. The bill is blatantly unconstitutional under Bruen and again, barring republic-destroying political shenanigans in the federal court system, it will be invalidated taking its wild gun free zone restrictions with it forever.

Until Jan. 1, 2024 (depending on injunctions), state law only prohibits possession of legally concealed firearms in certain locations (actual practice and the nebulous or a sheriff's/chief's restrictions notwithstanding). For instance, bars are not technically "gun free zones" in California, though a licensee may lose their LTC if found carrying in one. This bill would apply the force of law to many places that sheriff's/chief's place off-limits and add new places. The bill is so broad it basically prohibits concealed carry except on public streets and sidewalks or private property where the owner specifically allows it, never mind "no gun" signs. The list includes:
- All public buildings and permitted public events
- All areas under control of an airport authority (public airports)
- Public transportation and certain private transportation
- Bars and restaurants
- Daycares and childcare facilities
- Playgrounds and parks
- State parks and land under the control of Dept. of Fish and Wildlife
- Gaming establishments
- Stadiums, libraries, amusement parks, and museums
- Churches and houses of worship
- Banks and their parking lots
- All private commercial property without specific permission of the property owner


Corsair, thanks for posting the video of the Fresno County sheriff. I agree with him completely that new CCW regs does absolutely nothing to prevent gun crimes committed by....get this....criminals, gang bangers, prohibited people, etc. It only penalizes law-abiding CCW holders and dissuades new CCW from applying.

For those of you unfamiliar with CA's CCW process, it's controlled primarily by each county sheriff who have to follow state guidelines. I'll use my county as an example (Placer County).

For new CCW permits, it costs about $400 between the 8 hour course, range qualification (super easy), and background check. Renewal is every two years at close to $200, which includes a 4 hour course, range qualification, and background check.

It's can be cost-prohibitive. If you let your permit lapse, you've got to start all over again. It's ridiculous. And my county is one of the easier counties. Many counties require (and this new senate bill would require it) 16 hours initial training.

My hunch is that Newsom and AG Rob Bonta's plan is to discourage and dissuade new CCW applications and renewals.

So, if you encounter a CA CCW permit holder, at least congratulate them on jumping through the hoops to stick it to the governor and pansies at the state capital.


P229
 
Posts: 3975 | Location: Sacramento, CA | Registered: November 21, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Thank you
Very little
Picture of HRK
posted Hide Post
quote:
For new CCW permits, it costs about $400 between the 8 hour course, range qualification (super easy), and background check. Renewal is every two years at close to $200, which includes a 4 hour course, range qualification, and background check.


Basically making it unaffordable for lower income families/individuals to have a carry permit.

CA doesn't care about crime, it's no bail DA's along with $1000 limit on felony charges for theft are proof.

Its about projecting power and defeating one of the stallwarts of conservative backing, the NRA/Gun Owners group(s).
 
Posts: 24650 | Location: Gunshine State | Registered: November 07, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Russ59:
My hunch is that Newsom and AG Rob Bonta's plan is to discourage and dissuade new CCW applications and renewals.

There's no doubt that the new requirements are a vehicle to make acquiring a CCL onerous and difficult; Bruen invalidated their previous attempts at cause. In their mind there's no discrimination between responsible-citizen or, criminal; one-less gun or, box of ammunition out of private hands is a victory in their mind.

One obstacle that anti-2A counties have made is requiring a psyche evaluation by their physicians, where appointments can be many, many months out. I understanding the cost of a permit from San Francisco Co is $500+.
 
Posts: 15180 | Location: Wine Country | Registered: September 20, 2000Reply With QuoteReport This Post
  Powered by Social Strata Page 1 2 3 4  
 

SIGforum.com    Main Page  Hop To Forum Categories  The Lounge    Californians To Pay 18% Tax On Firearms, Ammo After Anti-Gun Lawmakers Strike

© SIGforum 2024