Skip to comments.A question for California gun owners
Posted on 02/13/2013 10:05:30 AM PST by LouAvul
I was living in kalifornia when they passed the AWB. I remember that if you already owned one, you were exempt. There was a rush to buy weapons that were going to be outlawed.
I've since moved out. But I remember reading that those who had the "grandfathered" rifles were later required to register their gun.
Then I read something about kalifornia confiscating some of the outlawed rifles.
ex post facto has been ruled as unconstituional.
I remember hearing in the ether that those rifles that were grandfathered and ‘registered’. I also remember ‘some’ of them were confiscated!
They did confiscate some of the ooga-booga rifles that the State had said were okay if registered. IIRC the State’s Attorney General said something to the effect that “the officials who grandfathered and approved them didn’t have the legal right to do so, effectively negating the EXPOST FACTO aspect.
I’m curious myself. I recall a FReeper mentioning that SKS rifles were confiscated some time ago.
IIRC, some like the SKS were not on the list and nothing at the time had to be done. Of course, the democrats were free to add to their precious list and they did so, leaving thousands of SKS owners suddenly in the situation of having rifles that should have been "registered" but were not.
There was some sort of CF of an "amnesty" period for registration that I think was mostly ignored. What confiscation took place I cannot recall.
That may or may not have been what you remember. Many thousands of AR and similar never did get registered or just left the state.
I knew a guy who owned an AK and when the AWB went down, he said he refused to register it. He wound up giving it to a relative in Utah. ............... he said.
Gray Davis and Lockyear (AG) got caught having a meeting with Sheriffs and Police chiefs where they were handing out lists of the suckers who registered their rifles after the “amnesty”. Looked like preparation for confiscation.
Random acts of journalism exposed this, then Davis backed out saying “we were floating a proposal, this wasn’t a plan”. Yeah right. Anyone who believes anything coming out of Sacramento now deserves whatever they get.
Kalifornia has created tens of thousands of new gun felons. One way is by outlawing what you already own. Another way is for approval to expire on a handgun that was previously approved. Gee, didn’t you get the word? Ignorance is no excuse etc..
In case someone tries to stay current on Kalifornia gun laws, the DOJ website is confusing and always out of date. Many court cases overturn the laws and the DOJ doesn’t change the info in the website. We pay high salaries to the people who do this to us.
This is correct. But, owners were given a deadline to register, which has long since passed. (1989)
Because there were so few rifles registered, the state extended the original deadline and owners were given a 1-year grace period.
The vast majority of owners continued to simply ignore the law.
Not a lot of sellers in California gun buyback program
SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — A $1.4 million state buyback program designed to take illegal assault rifles off the streets hasn’t found a lot of customers.The program has spent only about $80,000 to collect 350 SKS Sporters since January.Lawmakers gave the Department of Justice enough money to purchase 5,000 SKS Sporters from their owners. The state pays $230 for each weapon.The buyback program gives gun owners a year to destroy their modified SKS Sporter, take...
Purchase Complete Article, of 213 words http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_product=NewsLibrary&p_multi=DSNB&d_place=DSNB&p_theme=newslibrary2&p_action=search&p_maxdocs=200&p_topdoc=1&p_text_direct-0=0F364F7AA66172B8&p_field_direct-0=document_id&p_perpage=10&p_sort=YMD_date:D&s_trackval=GooglePM
WorldNewsDaily 1999 excerpt “The Roberti-Roos law effectively banned the SKS rifle with the
detachable magazine, however, it didnt ban it completely. Although gun shops couldnt sell the SKS with a detachable magazine anymore, owners of the gun could still keep them as long as they complied with a background check and had the gun registered.”
“Now, all SKS Sporters are illegal and are being bought back by the
“Gun owners in California and Connecticut have discovered that it really CAN happen here. Advertising has been strong here in San Diego recently, urging all owners of the SKS “Sporter” to turn them in for a $230 reimbursement before January 1, 2000. “If you own an SKS Sporter, you cant sell it and you cant shoot it. You MUST turn it in before January 1 or face criminal charges and confiscation” goes the ad which has been run on local radio stations.”
The debacle of people registering after the deadline was one thing I recalled. Had not heard about the blatant confiscation threat Ansel refers to here.
I could not be happier about leaving that state. I understand financial and family issues keeping conservatives stuck there, but jeezus........
ansel12 linked to a good piece explaining the issue with the sks sporters back in 1999.
This issue is about to heat up again for Californians: the legislature has bills pending that would put a lot of people in a very awkward position. It’s going to get a lot worse, real quick it seems.
Here’s the answer to the question: