Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
17 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

petronius

(26,594 posts)
1. Here's the text of Sen. de Leon's bill (Calif. SB 808, 2014)
Mon Jan 20, 2014, 02:08 PM
Jan 2014
http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201320140SB808

From the summary:
Firearms: identifying information.

Existing law authorizes the Department of Justice to assign a distinguishing number or mark of identification to any firearm whenever the firearm lacks a manufacturer’s number or other mark of identification, or whenever the manufacturer’s number or other mark of identification or distinguishing number or mark assigned by the department has been destroyed or obliterated.

This bill would require a person who makes or assembles a firearm to first apply to the department for a unique serial number or other identifying mark, as provided. The bill would make a violation of these provisions a misdemeanor. By creating a new crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.


And Sen. de Leon's press release.
 

Ranchemp.

(1,991 posts)
3. Link?
Mon Jan 20, 2014, 02:20 PM
Jan 2014

Never mind, found it, I also noticed that it was locked PDQ, makes me wonder if this had been an anti-gun thread, would it have been locked?
Recent events lead me to believe that it wouldn't have been.

 

NYC_SKP

(68,644 posts)
4. Sometimes hosts think that "big news" applies if it's an article that makes guns look bad.
Mon Jan 20, 2014, 04:05 PM
Jan 2014

Two in particular will bend over backward to tie up the vote.

If, on the other hand, it's supportive of gun rights, it will not last long.

Thankfully, hosts don't stay hosts forever.

petronius

(26,594 posts)
5. Observing the GD Hosting Game triggers amusement and sympathy in equal parts, these days
Mon Jan 20, 2014, 05:03 PM
Jan 2014

Based on my assessment of the current GD process, I think that what oneshooter needed to do was first frame the 'ghost gun' discussion as Big News by providing national sources and pointing out that it affects multiple states. Then, the post that was locked would perhaps have stood as an ancillary comment referring to a primary Big News thread.

Or, just discuss it in here where people who are actually interested in real discussion on the topic know to look...

 

Lizzie Poppet

(10,164 posts)
6. At least one of the hosts in GD openly opposes the "no gun threads" rule...
Mon Jan 20, 2014, 06:14 PM
Jan 2014

...and not only won't lock them, he's actually posted them himself. Oh, and he outs alerters in public forums, too.

It's a huge fucking joke...

 

NYC_SKP

(68,644 posts)
7. Yes.
Mon Jan 20, 2014, 06:34 PM
Jan 2014

If we're thinking of the same one, they are no longer a GD host (nor am I) but manages to turn a simple thread into a two-week spectacle.

Not only have they outed alerters, they've copied and pasted parts of Host discussion threads in attempts to intimidate or shame another host.

It never works, but it sure is annoying.

 

Lizzie Poppet

(10,164 posts)
9. Glad to hear they're not a host any more.
Mon Jan 20, 2014, 07:31 PM
Jan 2014

I wrote a seriously pissed off PM to Skinner over that. Response? Crickets, of course. But it made me feel a bit better...

 

DonP

(6,185 posts)
10. On the bright side ...
Mon Jan 20, 2014, 07:41 PM
Jan 2014

Being a petty bully in an online forum is about the total extent of their gun control "success" an "activism" for the past decade or so. All in all pretty pathetic.

Not much to show for all their "sturm und drang" and personal angst over us little folks down here in the Gungeon.

In the meantime, while they hid a post or two, ... the SHOT show just finished a record week in Vegas with over 65,000 attendees, Illinois started approving it's first batch of concealed carry permits today for instructors and CCW classes are backed up here for 6 weeks or more.

All this and there still isn't a single state looking at repeal of CCW.

 

NYC_SKP

(68,644 posts)
8. "this right here has ability with a 30 caliber clip to disburse with 30 bullets within half a second
Mon Jan 20, 2014, 06:41 PM
Jan 2014


Those 30 caliber clips, they're CRAZY! And dang, 30 bullets in HALF a second? 3,600 rounds a minute!

(note, must have 120 30-caliber clips to fire off 3,600 rounds)

oneshooter

(8,614 posts)
13. Where do you get AR lowers as a casting?
Tue Jan 21, 2014, 12:07 AM
Jan 2014

All I have ever been able to find is finished lowers. And you will need a hell of a lot more machinery than a drill press to complete it. This video is 20+ min. of pure ignorance. And he was elected?

spin

(17,493 posts)
14. I've noticed a couple of times recently when a gun control advocate called ...
Tue Jan 21, 2014, 05:49 PM
Jan 2014

a magazine a "magazine clip."

It seems they are finally attempting to use proper firearm terminology but are still in the process of mastering it.

I could be wrong. Perhaps they feel "magazine clip" sounds far more scary than just a clip or a magazine. This guy even steps it up higher by saying "30 magazine clip" which I would interpret as meaning the weapon has a clip that holds 30 magazines and can fire all the rounds in the 30 magazines in one half of a second.

Assuming the clip holds 30 round magazines, that would mean the weapon could fire 900 rounds in 0.5 seconds. I can't imagine the recoil such a weapon would generate but I wouldn't want to trying firing it unless it was firmly mounted. Of course the single barrel would melt unless it was made of some super metal used by an advanced alien civilization from some distant planet.

Skeeter Barnes

(994 posts)
15. Wouldn't that gun he's holding require NFA registry anyway?
Tue Jan 21, 2014, 07:10 PM
Jan 2014

Looks like the barrel is well short of 16 inches. That's not legal in any state without the extensive background check, approval from local law enforcement and payment of a $200 tax.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Short-barreled_rifle

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Gun Control & RKBA»Cross post from GD.