California Gun Control Law Press Conference - Gun Confiscation, Se
A national model for mental health care? Prop.
The new law would outlaw all semiautomatic weapons, criminalize anyone who has more than 500 rounds of ammo, and require a permit to buy ammunition in the future. California, which already has some of the strictest gun control laws in the country, is also looking at a proposal which would call for the immediate confiscation of 166,000 registered modern sporting rifles. This is why people are against Registration!
Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento, unveiled the gun control package in a news conference Thursday at the state Capitol.
The package includes:
Banning the possession — not just manufacture and sale — of magazines holding more than 10 rounds.
Making possession of hollow point bullets and similar “assault bullets” a felony.
Requiring anyone wishing to buy ammunition to first get a permit by passing a background check.
Requiring the registration and reporting of all ammo purchases. Limits the number of rounds anyone can have at one time to 500 rounds.
Requiring all gun owners will have to be licensed like drivers, and will be forced to carry gun liability insurance.
Banning any gun that has a detachable magazine, and requires a 100% prohibition of all fixed magazines greater than 10 rounds.
Making all previous grandfathered magazines become illegal, and it will become a felony if you keep one.
Prohibiting anyone barred from owning a weapon from living in a home where weapons are kept
Expanding the list of crimes that would bar a person from gun possession.
Letting the state Justice Department use money from the state’s Dealer’s Record of Sale system to eliminate the backlog of people identified as no longer allowed to own guns but not yet investigated and contacted by law enforcement. MORE
How Will They Confiscate Your Guns?
by John A. Sutter
For decades I have heard gun owners claim that the government would never be able to confiscate our firearms because the government would lose too many men. The implication being, of course, that gun owners would actively resist confiscation, even to the point of shooting back. But I believe this thinking is outdated and doesn’t align very well with reality. But before you tell me how big your honor guard in Hell will be when that day comes, let’s think about how the government could really do it.
Suppose, for the sake of argument, the government bans all civilian possession of firearms at the end of this month. Congress passes a total ban and the President cuts his own re-election throat by signing it. Gun owners get some grace period to turn them in, even beyond the deadline, without being charged with a crime. If we use Australia and Britain as examples there will still be a significant number of firearms that are not turned in. Some estimates put the Australian turn-in at less than 25% and the British faired only about 28%. But Australians and the British have long been used to obeying almost every gun control law. Not so the Americans. When laws are passed that we don’t like, we bite. We scratch. We vote. So here we sit after the guns have been collected and the amnesties have run out. Now what? Send out the personnel carriers, swat and shock troops to seize the guns from those militia “terrorists” who refused to turn them in? Don’t be silly.
The government has lots of records about you. If you purchased a firearm since 1968, chances are that they have some record of it somewhere. Most likely, it will take quite some time for them to compile all the serial numbers of “surrendered” guns (surrendered essentially at gunpoint) and cross off the ones you turned in. It’ll take more time for them to attempt to “clean up” their data. Say, about two years, maybe three. Add to that the hordes of people keypunching in hundreds of thousands of sales and registration records from hundreds of gun stores forced out of business. At some point the government decides they have something approaching a “good” database of unaccounted-for guns.