“Better to write for
yourself and have no public, than to write for the public and have no self.”- Cyril Connolly (1903 - 1974)
California's Unconstitutional Weapons Ban
By de Andréa
‘THE
BOTTOM LINE’
Posted January 7, 2018
Is the hate America
despotic State Legislature and Judicial system of California headed toward a
Chicago style tyranny? Chicago’s virtual gun ban creating a fictitious GUN FREE ZONE has the highest rate of gun homicide
in the nation because of it, and making it the poster child for the dangers of GUN FREE ZONEs.
A lawsuit has been filed by several gun rights
proponents against The Communist State of California concerning its new Anti-American
unconstitutional regulations of semi-automatic rifles, which they erroneously,
ignorantly and viciously call "assault
rifles."
Note: I was
assaulted with a single shot rock once. Does that mean that rocks are assault
weapons and therefore should be outlawed?
Or are only semi-automatic rocks classified as assault rocks?
According to the California State Supreme Court, unless a
specific right is listed in Article 1
Section 1 of the California Constitution, then you poor slobs that live in
California HAVE NO RIGHTS except these, “…enjoying and
defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and
pursuing and obtaining safety, happiness, and privacy”.
The Courts opinion
of Article 1 Section 1- “No mention is made
in it of a right to bear arms."
To the hair splitting California Supreme Court I say:
There is no mention of how one is to exercise one’s right to “defend life.” You
couldn’t legally use a rock because it is not specifically mentioned in the
state constitution! And by the same
token it doesn’t specifically mention how one is to acquire, possess and
protect property and how one is to obtain safety or happiness or privacy. So in effect Californian’s have no rights to exercise
because according to the state supreme Court the manner in which one exercises
his/her rights must be specifically mentioned in the constitution, otherwise
one is not legal to exercise any rights at all.
Now’ you might understand why I call California a
Communist State…It certainly isn’t free, even though Article 1 Section 1 begins
with: “All people are by nature free…”
Free to do what? It doesn’t specify, so therefore according to the California
state Supreme Court - all people are not free.
At the end of November, several guns rights proponents
and organizations filed
a complaint against the oppressive State of California for
openly and blatantly violating the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitutions
and for making criminal that is constitutionally lawful.
Four gun owners: George Holt, Irvin Hoff, Michael Louie,
and Rick Russel, along with four gun rights groups: the Firearms Policy
Coalition, Firearms Policy Foundation, The Calguns Foundation, and Second
Amendment Foundation filed a complaint on November 30, 2017.
“By making and enforcing unlawful rules, and
going around the rules to do it, the DOJ is putting tens if not hundreds of
thousands of law-abiding people at risk of serious criminal liability,” said
the plaintiffs’ attorney, George M. Lee, in a statement. “This case seeks to
make the DOJ follow the same laws they impose on others and protect law-abiding
gun owners in the process.”
That complaint was joined
by a National Guard soldier, Sgt. Craig Stevens, on December 29, 2017.
Between a “Rock
and a Hard Place”
Sgt. Stevens, who owns a homemade rifle that now
requires a serial number under the new illegal law in California, is serving
his country overseas, but in the eyes of California, he is a criminal because
though he attempted to deal with the serial number issue before he was
deployed, California told him they were not issuing serial numbers at that
time. So whether or not one is able to comply with the law is at the
convenience of the state’.
Among the attacks by California against their citizens
is a labeling of any gun that has a "bullet button" as an
"assault weapon." Personally I don’t think that anyone has ever been
assaulted by a button, a bullet type or not. But then I guess it would depend
on how large and heavy the button was.
Now, for a better understanding of what a bullet button
actually is, and for those not up on their buttons, GunsInTheNews.com
reported in January 2017:
In 1989, California banned so-called
“assault rifles.” The list of characteristics they used to define what
qualified as a banned “assault weapon” is too complex, ignorant, and confusing to
wade into here, but one key feature verboten by the law was the
ability to accept a detachable magazine.
Creative manufacturers found ways to
both comply with the laws and preserve as much functionality as possible in
firearms, and one of these was the so-called “bullet button.” A “bullet button”
replaces the standard push-button magazine release used on all semi-auto
firearms, with a fixed lug containing a small button which is too small to be
pressed by a finger, but operable if pressed with spire-point bullet of a
loaded cartridge. Since the law stipulated that detachable magazines were
banned unless their removal required tools, and since the California DOJ
defined a loaded cartridge in this case as a “tool,” the so-called “bullet
button” allowed users to lawfully detach and replace magazines, so long as they
obeyed California’s 10-round-capacity magazine limit and myriad other ignorant
and ridiculous restrictions.
But alas, last year, in a case of
legislative “Whack-A-Mole,” for safety reasons that absolutely no one
understands, California banned firearms containing the “bullet button”
modification unless owners register them with the state by Dec. 31, 2017.
(Buyer beware, however: California has a history of promising, “You can
keep your gun if you register it”—and then turning around, expanding
its bans, and using those registration lists to dispossess owners of guns.)
Worse, the regulations that the DOJ
snuck in to implement this law on the eve of the New Year would drop the hammer
on California gun owners with a wide variety of new restrictions.
Included within the DOJ’s list of regulations are over
40 new definitions; requirements that gun owners provide extensive and
excessive personal information with their registrations, along with four clear
digital photos of their guns; requirements for serializing firearms built from
so-called “80 percent receivers”; expansion of the banned “assault weapon”
definition to include “bullet-button”-equipped shotguns; restrictions on removing
the “bullet button” after the firearm is registered as an “assault weapon”; and
more.
So, they say that the bullet button actually slows down
the process of changing magazines, which it doesn’t. They said the same thing about small capacity magazines (watch) which can be changed in less
than a second, and it does not make a semi-automatic rifle an "assault
rifle." On the contrary, it makes it aggravating. We have law makers that not only don’t know
the law, but they no nothing at all about what they are making laws about.
Instead of curbing crime, they are creating criminals.
The Attorney
General's website has an ominous clock counting down the days to comply
with the tyrannical beast and states:
Pursuant to Assembly Bill 1135
(Stats. 2016, ch. 40) and Senate Bill 880 (Stats. 2016, ch. 48) effective
January 1, 2017, the definition of assault weapon is revised.
These bills require that any person
who, from January 1, 2001, to December 31, 2016, inclusive, lawfully possessed
an assault weapon that does not have a fixed magazine, as defined in Penal Code
section 30515, including those weapons with an ammunition feeding device that
can be readily removed from the firearm with the use of a tool, shall register
the firearm before January 1, 2018, but not before the effective date of the
regulations adopted by the DOJ.
UPDATE AS OF Jan 04 2018 16:28:16 GMT-0500 (Eastern
Standard Time)
The ability to register an Assault Weapon pursuant to
Assembly Bill 1135 and Senate Bill 880, is now available. Additionally,
pursuant to Assembly Bill 103 (Stats. 2017. Ch. 17), the assault weapon
registration deadline has been extended through June 30, 2018. They won’t tell you this, but it’s
because of all the law suites.
The California Department of Justice, Attorney General
Xavier Becerra, Chief of the Department of Justice Bureau of Firearms Stephen
J. Lindley, Director of the Office of Administrative Law Debra Cornez, and
California State Controller Betty T. Yee are named as defendants in the
complaint.
“The California Department of Justice has
grossly exceeded their authority and is illegally imposing its will on
thousands of California gun owners,” said Raymond DiGuiseppe, a former
California deputy attorney general who is representing the plaintiffs along
with other attorneys. “Their regulations and actions undermine the rule of law
and put potentially hundreds of thousands of people at
risk for serious criminal liability.”
Again, the Second Amendment could not be clearer. What
part of "shall not be infringed" do these people not understand?
“The government agencies responsible for
enforcing the law must also follow the law,” said Second Amendment Foundation
founder Alan Gottlieb. “This case is an important step in protecting
law-abiding gun owners from an out-of-control regulatory state.”
California
has a long and distinguished history of illegal legislation designed to keep minorities disarmed. The Golden State is the only
state in recent years to (mostly) ban the open carry of firearms and is ranked
47th by G&A with another A- by the Brady (Bunch) Center.
California’s
constitution is one of only six states that do not specifically mention the
right to keep and bear arms.
From
the California State Constitution we have the following
This
fundamental right located in Article 1, Section 1 of the California State Constitution,
which provides:
“All people are by nature free and independent and have
inalienable rights. Among these are enjoying and
defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and
pursuing and obtaining safety, happiness, and privacy."
Every
facet of that paragraph has now been violated by the following words of the California Supreme Court Judges in the
following quote: "If plaintiffs are implying that a right to bear
arms is one of the rights recognized in the California Constitutions
declaration of rights, they are simply wrong. No
mention is made in it of a right to bear arms."
I guess the Judges must have missed the part, when
referring to rights that says: “Among these are…”
Meaning that these mentioned are not the only rights
But then what can
one expect from hate-America Communists…
Some Factual Information: Do you know the truth about people killed by guns in the
U.S.? Probably not if you get your news from the Communist News Network. So get
ready now, I am going to shock you, so if you have a bad heart don’t read this,
or look these up.
last year' 1000 people were killed with guns in the city of Chicago alone. Chicago is a city that has a virtual gun ban. In other
words a GUN FREE CITY, ‘no guns in Chicago’. You can’t even buy a gun in
Chicago. OK, now hang on to your GUN FREE ZONE
SIGN because…first, on average, there are
approximately 12000 people killed by guns in the entire country per year. And that
includes people killed in self-defense and legitimately by police.
Now! As I said if you have a weak heart for sure don’t
read this…From 2011 to 2016 that’s five years my friend in the entire state of
Vermont 420 people died of gun shots...Total. That’s an average of 84 people per year for 5 years in the entire state, compared to the city of Chicago’s
1000 last year alone. Why is’ that, you should ask? Answer: because the state of Vermont doesn’t
have any gun laws. None, Zero zilch, nada, zip. You can carry a loaded gun down
main street Vermont, and people do. So the crazies steer clear of Vermont. It
not only makes sense, but as you can see, if you clicked on the hyperlinks - I didn’t make this up.
So please continue to support these anti American
Communists in California if you want California to turn into a giant Chicago
where most people are afraid to leave their home and the rest are afraid to be
in their home.
At least buy yourself a bullet proof suit…
Thanks for listening my friend. Now go do the right thing, pray and fight for truth and freedom. If you would like to write me direct with a question or a comment you can contact me at writedeandrae@hotmail.com
-
de Andréa
Please
pass on this article to everyone on your email list. It may be the only chance for your friends to
hear the truth.
The Fine
Print
Copyright © 2005 by Bottom Line Publishing, All Rights
Reserved - Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted,
provided full credit is given.
Disclaimer - The writer of this blog is not responsible
for the language or advertisements used in links to referenced articles as
source materials.
No comments:
Post a Comment