California SB199 Passed into law

[Apex]

This seem to have slipped under the radar here

[ED-SKaR]

For gaks sake, it's a replica, by design they can't hurt anyone. Anyone pretending they are a real gun gets shot because it's AMERICA and every third person has CCW

[NonEx]

Legit dude, I like him. Good presentation.

 

Also, in my opinion if airsoft guns are missused or used for illegal purposes the people doing that should be dealt with as if it was a real one, end of story. It doesn't matter if they use real guns or airsoft. And so with that in mind this makes no sense. Also, as has been stated many times. What is to stop people with real guns from doing this and getting away with crazy *suitcase*.

[NightFury]

I willing to bet if more airsofters gave him money for his campaign he'd drop the issue. That or some paintball companies see the rising airsoft industry as a threat, so they paid him off to make some ridiculous claim to stop airsoft from overtaking paintball as the go to sport for shooting people.

[FireKnife]

Erm, straight away the issue is clear.

 

The airsofters (not the issue) have to have tape that isn't really going to be seen.

 

The non-airsofters that want to use their replicas to intimidate will just remove the tape or not even apply it anyway.

 

Wait a second, doesn't this sound exactly like something we ended up in this land of people afraid of bent bananas?

 

Moronic, nothing but moronic and so easy to ignore / avoid for those that want to do it.

 

'FireKnife'

[renegadecow]

So who's the airsofter that slept with that De Leon guy's wife again?

 

Then again, that's California, the same place that spawns dumbass lawmakers that made this happen:

Seriously folks, why do you keep voting these morons into office?

[mvirtue]

So who's the airsofter that slept with that De Leon guy's wife again?

Or which airsofter peed in his cheerios?

[FireKnife]

Then again, that's California, the same place that spawns dumbass lawmakers that made this happen:

 

Ah yes, that thing. Along with the half a stock that they made so it technically is a rifle stock and not a pistol grip.

 

Well perhaps California is doing it's best to be the non-gun toting bit of the US by any means possible? Too bad they have to possibly ruin hobbies and livelihoods along the way.....

 

'FireKnife'

[PureSilver]

I think this was pretty inevitable, to be honest; restrictions on replica firearms are a pretty logical consequence of having such unrestricted access to the real thing. There have been several recent high-profile shootings of Americans - including children - carrying what turned out to be replica firearms; Andy Lopez, a thirteen-year-old shot dead by police in California last year, will have weighed heavily on this debate. In a country where law enforcement routinely encounters real firearms, the assumption must be that the weapon you are carrying is real - and when the officers are routinely armed, that has the potential to go fatally wrong. This rather out of date Bureau of Justice study suggested that encounters between armed police officers and toy guns happen more than 200 times per year in the US, and it's rare for a year to go by without someone carrying a replica gun to get shot dead by the police. John Crawford was shot dead less than a month ago in the middle of a Walmart after another shopper called 911 and reported him menacing other shoppers with what was actually an air rifle he'd picked up off the shelf inside the store.

 

In the UK, where we're largely disarmed and gun crime is extremely rare, police aren't under the same pressure and don't react the same way; they couldn't, in fact, as they are not routinely armed.

 

Well perhaps California is doing it's best to be the non-gun toting bit of the US by any means possible?

 

The problem with California unilaterally imposing State gun controls is it is surrounded by states that don't do that. Nevada (bordering to the East) and Arizona (bordering to the South-East) both have extremely lax firearms regulations; it's estimated that half of all illegal guns in California were purchased legally in neighbouring states. If California's criminals are now forced to source their half of their guns from outside California - and are purchasing (rather than stealing) them there, we can posit that even criminals frequently prima facie obey the law when they buy their guns and that they find it much harder to do so in California. If all the states enforced California's strict regime, reducing the number of guns easily bought by criminals, that would seem logically to lead to fewer crimes committed with guns.

[planeman]

I willing to bet if more airsofters gave him money for his campaign he'd drop the issue.

 

This guy has been an anti gunner for his whole career.  Other than airsoft, he wanted us to have a background check just to buy ammo, and regulate 3d printed guns. (ghost gun which he calls them).  Although both of those bills failed  to pass, he will try again and again till it gets passed and signed

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iJmFEv6BHM0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rsRQdZLlqK8

[mvirtue]

This guy has been an anti gunner for his whole career.  Other than airsoft, he wanted us to have a background check just to buy ammo, and regulate 3d printed guns. (ghost gun which he calls them).  Although both of those bills failed  to pass, he will try again and again till it gets passed and signed

 

The California DoJ slammed him at the Ghost Gun hearing...It was amusing.

[NightFury]

Either way the issue is clear that in order for him to get elected to a higher position, he needs money. So he sets up an attack on an idea to raise money from people ignorant of the fact it doesn't do anything. Smart business wise by making voters feel self-efficacy through donation to his campaign. Logically dumb, because even if you paint an airsoft gun, the first thought in an officers mind is "defend yourself, I see a gun" not "what color is it". Heck, I've seen policemen draw their sidearms when some frat guys were playing soldier with black broom sticks.

[mvirtue]

In the end it is just a bit of "theater/smoke and mirrors" that does no actual good, but might make joe citizen feel "safer". It's sleazy.

[Imperator]

Not that bad.
Back in 2007, I think, we (Portugal) went from your average orange tip, to the following:





Practical result? I'd say around 60 to 70% of the players simply don't follow the law, whereas before, with the orange/yellow tip, almost everyone complied...

[Horsem4n]

The biggest problem with useless feel good legislation is that its made by carrier politicians. Carrier politicians have nothing better to do than put their agenda into bills year after year until the opposition has a lapse in attention and it gets passed.

Allong with this , that govonor also signed into law a bill that will allow family members (even extended family members) to ask their local government to take guns away from their family members for any reason. Which then gives them the authority to cofiscate the accused's guns without any legal defense.

[FireKnife]

What's a 'carrier politician'? Is that like a carrier pigeon?

 

This guy has been an anti gunner for his whole career.  Other than airsoft, he wanted us to have a background check just to buy ammo, and regulate 3d printed guns. (ghost gun which he calls them).  Although both of those bills failed  to pass, he will try again and again till it gets passed and signed

 

Sorry, I tried to watch and care but he looks so stupid in the first place. I bet he was bullied at school by big burly blokes that are now in jobs, have families and all own an AR and a safe full of pistols and he is just getting in a *Ubar*-flap about it all, trying to take everyone down with him.

 

That or a gun stole his baby, I don't know. It all just sounds like BS to me.

 

'FireKnife'

[Horsem4n]

Sorry, I failed english classes and my phone wont tell me how to spell career.

[FireKnife]

Sorry, I failed english classes and my phone wont tell me how to spell career.

 

That's ok, didn't mean to pick but the idea of a carrier politican made me laugh.

 

Still this bill sounds about as idiotic as the VCR-A. At least with the VCR-A we have a loophole defence against it and it affects the whole country equally rather than the equivalent of it affecting just Cornwall or something.

 

I don't get how a country can be so divided about it all though. But then saying that the US seems to be run as 50 little countries with a unified singular over-ruling government. Imagine we had that in the UK? Madness.

 

'FireKnife'

[rvlyssup]

Seriously folks, why do you keep voting these morons into office?

^^This is Commiefornia. Look up liberal retard in the dictionary and you see a picture of our state.

[PureSilver]

Still this bill sounds about as idiotic as the VCR-A.

Hold up - the VCRA is much better than than SB199. The underlying reason people don't like the VCRA isn't that they think it's disproportionate, or discriminatory, or anything of any real substance - the reason they don't like it is it stops them from buying RIFs. Just because a law stops people from doing what they want doesn't mean it's "idiotic". Many of those people - especially children, who are usually complain the loudest - are eminently not the sort of people you would like to own RIFs; stopping them from buying guns until they are an adult and can demonstrate a reason for doing so is a sensible goal. Almost all the 'problems' with the VCRA are only a problem if you want to buy a RIF but don't actually skirmish - the follow-on question being, of course, if you don't skirmish, why should you be permitted to purchase a RIF? Most of the rest of the 'problems' aren't the fault of the legislator - they're the fault of retailers and sites who demand UKARA, charge for membership, or otherwise extort money that is not demanded by legislation. The VCRA is a pretty average piece of legislation; relatively well-written, but quite complex and not exhaustive. Such is the nature of statute.

 

The "I don't like rules that stop me doing things I want to do" reasoning is, in my opinion, precisely why many people don't like gun legislation in general - not because they feel that everyone should have unrestricted access to guns, but because they personally want unrestricted access to guns. They haven't considered that loosening legislation to the point that would allow them to do whatever it is they want to do would necessarily entail allowing guanopsychotic Mad Uncle Tommy, who sees magical spiders and is a 9/11 'truther', to buy exactly the same thing. Or, worse, they have considered that and secretly considers themselves so proficient with their guns that they reckon they'd beat the local lunatic in a shoot-out...

 

The truth is that guns are dangerous and dangerous people should not have access to guns. The right to bear arms is not inalienable, and arguing that it may be necessary to confiscate guns from victims of America's Third World mental health system before they go postal does not make you a "liberal retard". The day Americans can have a sensible discussion about gun control will be a happy day for them most of all, but judging by liberal use of the phrases "gun grabbers", "liberal retards", and "NWO" on most gun forums that day is a long way away.

 

[T]he US seems to be run as 50 little countries with a unified singular over-ruling government. Imagine we had that in the UK? Madness.

 

I see you voted 'Yes'?

[FireKnife]

I see you voted 'Yes'?

 

Haha, no I am not that stupid . But my point was more if we had every county in the UK being responsible for itself rather than just England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland and then allowed them to have one banning airsoft while the next had all RIFs sold all the time etc.

 

As for the VCR-A it is idiotic. While you have a good point within the confines of the UK the VCR-A does little to nothing in regards to stop gun violence and mis-use of replicas. There are no police crackdowns on market stalls selling IF and RIF springers and I have yet to hear of a penalty handed down when some idiot sprays a gun back to black and tries to rob someone with it. While it may appear to some that it is 'making a difference' usually those completely outside the aspects of life that it affects like those hobbies and jobs that require a defence, it really doesn't and is just restricting those that were never the problem cause in the first place.

 

I can see the point in restricting guns in some form or another as yes you don't want to make them available to just about anyone but some laws seem to just target the wrong groups or affect the people that never would have been the issue at all. Criminals will always be criminals and simply restricting something in a legal sense makes no difference to them, not when there are still readily open and available channels for them to change that.

 

But hey this is airsoft, we play with replica guns and live in a country that has many with an instilled fear in firearms that can border on the irrational and we will always be considered part of the issue when people are out looking for someone to blame where guns of all sorts are involved.

 

'FireKnife'

[TheFull9]

Do you not like guns Puresilver?

[Skarclaw]

Hold up - the VCRA is much better than than SB199. The underlying reason people don't like the VCRA isn't that they think it's disproportionate, or discriminatory, or anything of any real substance - the reason they don't like it is it stops them from buying RIFs. Just because a law stops people from doing what they want doesn't mean it's "idiotic". Many of those people - especially children, who are usually complain the loudest - are eminently not the sort of people you would like to own RIFs; stopping them from buying guns until they are an adult and can demonstrate a reason for doing so is a sensible goal. Almost all the 'problems' with the VCRA are only a problem if you want to buy a RIF but don't actually skirmish - the follow-on question being, of course, if you don't skirmish, why should you be permitted to purchase a RIF? Most of the rest of the 'problems' aren't the fault of the legislator - they're the fault of retailers and sites who demand UKARA, charge for membership, or otherwise extort money that is not demanded by legislation. The VCRA is a pretty average piece of legislation; relatively well-written, but quite complex and not exhaustive. Such is the nature of statute.

 

The "I don't like rules that stop me doing things I want to do" reasoning is, in my opinion, precisely why many people don't like gun legislation in general - not because they feel that everyone should have unrestricted access to guns, but because they personally want unrestricted access to guns. They haven't considered that loosening legislation to the point that would allow them to do whatever it is they want to do would necessarily entail allowing guanopsychotic Mad Uncle Tommy, who sees magical spiders and is a 9/11 'truther', to buy exactly the same thing. Or, worse, they have considered that and secretly considers themselves so proficient with their guns that they reckon they'd beat the local lunatic in a shoot-out...

 

The truth is that guns are dangerous and dangerous people should not have access to guns. The right to bear arms is not inalienable, and arguing that it may be necessary to confiscate guns from victims of America's Third World mental health system before they go postal does not make you a "liberal retard". The day Americans can have a sensible discussion about gun control will be a happy day for them most of all, but judging by liberal use of the phrases "gun grabbers", "liberal retards", and "NWO" on most gun forums that day is a long way away.

 

 

I see you voted 'Yes'?

 

The relevant part of the VCRA is as far as I'm concerned, an idiotic law. It was drafted  up by the worst offerings of the new labour political class - the loathsome Diane Abbot and Hazel Blears in the midst of Operation Trident and concerns about gang gun crime.

 

There is nothing to suggest that RIFs were a problem (if I recall correctly, the main argument against them was not the usual "a policeman could mistake it" but rather that they could be converted to fire real rounds. There's very little information out there anyway regarding RIFs involvement in crime before and after the passing of the VCRA.

 

An idiotic law, in my mind is one that restricts individual liberty without benefiting wider society. Drug prohibition is the obvious example - but long story short the relevant bits of the VCRA have done next to nothing in terms of public safety and has made it harder - not impossible (although it came damn close) for people like me to pursue my hobby/rampant consumerism. Anecdotally speaking, the cheap RIFS and IFs which were the clear target are still for sale. 

 

Its true that most of the difficulties are caused by retailers, etc - but that is directly related to the laws in question. I'd wager that you could scrap the bit about RIFs and IFs  and the world would keep on turning exactly as it does now. 

[Algy]

I doubt that this legislation, much like the VCRA, will do much to reduce crime or accidental shootings of toy-gun wielding teenage boys. But then I suspect that legislators know this and are interested only in giving the outward appearance of protecting the community from evil guns.

I'm sure that this legislation will be a very useful feather in the political cap of whomever came up wih it, but there its uses end.

[Katotaka]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Please forgive if I've shown any forms of ignorance, I couldn't resist......