Bang / Guns
See other Bang / Guns Articles
Title: Calif. lawmakers seek toughest gun laws in nation (Gun registration, ammo checks)
Source:
CBS News
URL Source: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162 ... k-toughest-gun-laws-in-nation/
Published: Feb 8, 2013
Author: CBS/AP/Antonio Villaraigosa
Post Date: 2013-02-08 11:42:57 by Hondo68
Keywords: None
Views: 7884
Comments: 17
SACRAMENTO, Calif. | Weeks after New York enacted the nation's toughest gun laws, California lawmakers said Thursday they want their state to do even more in response to recent mass shootings, particularly the Connecticut school massacre. Democrats who control the state Legislature revealed 10 proposals that they said would make California the most restrictive state for possessing firearms. They were joined at a Capitol news conference by San Francisco Mayor Ed Lee and Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, along with several police chiefs. "California has always been a leader on the issue of gun safety," Villaraigosa said. "New York has stepped up and stepped forward. California needs to answer the call." Among the measures is one that would outlaw the future sale of semi-automatic rifles with detachable magazines. The restriction would prevent quick reloading by requiring bullets to be loaded one at a time. Lawmakers also want to make some prohibitions apply to current gun owners, not just to people who buy weapons in the future. Like New York, California also would require background checks for buying ammunition and would add to the list of prohibited weapons. Those buying ammunition would have to pay a fee and undergo an initial background check by the state Department of Justice, similar to what is required now before buyers can purchase a weapon. Subsequent background checks would be done instantly by an ammunition seller checking the Justice Department's records. The legislation also would ban possession of magazines holding more than 10 bullets, even by those who now own them legally. All weapons would have to be registered. Sam Paredes, executive director of Gun Owners of California, promised that gun proponents will fight the measures in court if they become law. "It strikes me as if these folks are playing some sort of game of one-upsmanship with New York at the expense of law-abiding citizens, and that's just unconscionable," he said about lawmakers. Republicans say the Democrats are exploiting the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary to push their own agendas, reports CBS Sacramento station KOVR-TV. "The laws they are (proposing) would have made no difference in the Connecticut shooting whatsoever," Sen. Dan Logue said. He added that lawmakers need to focus on other issues that lead to violence. "We've got the issue of PlayStations, where there is violent games," Logue said. "I mean, what about Hollywood and what they are putting out?" Three bills have been introduced, with others to come before this month's deadline for submitting legislation. The measures are the most stringent to date among numerous proposals introduced this year to strengthen California's firearm regulations. Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg said he is confident Democrats can use their majorities in the Assembly and Senate to send the measures to Democratic Gov. Jerry Brown this year. Brown has declined to comment on weapons legislation before it reaches him. Steinberg said the measures are designed to close numerous loopholes that gun manufacturers have exploited to get around California's existing restrictions. Those measures had been the strongest in the nation until Gov. Andrew Cuomo signed New York's new law last month. Other proposed measures in California would ban so-called "bullet buttons" that can be used to quickly detach and reload magazines in semi-automatic rifles, and update the legal definition of shotguns to prohibit a new version that can rapidly fire shotgun shells and .45-caliber ammunition. The state also would restrict the lending of guns to keep weapons from felons, mentally ill people and others who are prohibited from ownership.
Poster Comment: Yo, Vivalaraza and Moonbeam, register this! 
Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, left, glances over to pair of semi-automatic rifles as he discusses his support for proposed gun control legislation at news conference in Sacramento, Calif., Feb. 7, 2013. AP 
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 10.
#2. To: hondo68 (#0)
Nothing will be said or done about what Hollywood or the computer industry is pushing until after the Bill of Rights are destroyed and the government has all the power. The instant that happens the government will tell the entertainment industry and the computer industry what they can and can not sell or produce,and it's off to the prison camps for anybody that tries to produce something not officially approved. The mayor of LA just wants things here like they are back at home in Mexico. The army doesn't exist to fight wars,they exist to protect the wealthy and the politically protected,and the line is so blurry between the police,the military,and paramilitary bodyguards that nobody even knows where it is.
Damn. Which is also why the LAPD feels entitled to fire on innocent civilians while chasing someone who killed one of their own.
They not only fired upon them but they hit the two women. What a mess.
That's how we know they were shooting at somebody else. Or would have been,if they had been bold enough to raise their heads up high enough to see where they were shooting.
How about gun control against cops? Would you at least support that? :-)
There are no replies to Comment # 10. End Trace Mode for Comment # 10.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestLogue said. "I mean, what about Hollywood and what they are putting out?"
#3. To: sneakypete (#2)
The mayor of LA just wants things here like they are back at home in Mexico. The army doesn't exist to fight wars,they exist to protect the wealthy and the politically protected,and the line is so blurry between the police,the military,and paramilitary bodyguards that nobody even knows where it is.
#4. To: mininggold (#3)
#6. To: Fred Mertz (#4)
They not only fired upon them but they hit the two women.
#10. To: sneakypete (#6)
That's how we know they were shooting at somebody else. Or would have been,if they had been bold enough to raise their heads up high enough to see where they were shooting.
Replies to Comment # 10.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]