California Sucks Again

ummm, you can shoot someone breaking into your house in Cali....

And the only gun restrictions are no full auto, no .50, and no silencers.

Not sure where you got your info Spectre. No one outside Frisco acts like people that live in Frisco. The rest of the state is ashamed of them.
 
^ Annoying lentil-eating lesbians at the same time?
 
ummm, you can shoot someone breaking into your house in Cali....

And the only gun restrictions are no full auto, no .50, and no silencers.

Not sure where you got your info Spectre. No one outside Frisco acts like people that live in Frisco. The rest of the state is ashamed of them.

No "assault weapons" and the only handguns you can buy are on the ever-shrinking "State Approved" list. Oh, and no semi-auto magazine fed shotguns. And if the state doesn't like your gun for some reason (SKS ban), they'll ban it. And, oh, yeah, Olympic marksmanship pistols are now assault weapons.

I used to live there, remember?

As for shooting them? Not so much - you'll probably get the book thrown at you. Or so the LA, CA DA has pronounced (to quote one example).
 
No "assault weapons" and the only handguns you can buy are on the ever-shrinking "State Approved" list. Oh, and no semi-auto magazine fed shotguns. And if the state doesn't like your gun for some reason (SKS ban), they'll ban it. And, oh, yeah, Olympic marksmanship pistols are now assault weapons.

I used to live there, remember?

As for shooting them? Not so much - you'll probably get the book thrown at you. Or so the LA, CA DA has pronounced (to quote one example).
You can have sporting rifles in the Cali as long as you bought them before the California "assault weapons" ban and had them registered. At the range I still see a hand full each time I go, sometimes more. You can still buy M1 and M1A(granted with only a five round mag). Being a life time member of the NRA (and proud of it) I cringe at the idea of gun registration, because in every society that has done so confiscation followed, though in many cases years later, nevertheless the citizenry was eventually disarmed, which goes against one of the main tenets of our country which is that every citizen has the right to defend ourselves, even from our own government. But the law is the law, and Kalifornia is Kalifornia. Showtime's Bullshit with Penn & Teller, had a great episode about how Gun Control is...well...bullshit.

But there is some of what you said that I don't agree with. I for one like the SKS ban, those things are for the most part poorly made pieces of shit that are horrendously inaccurate (hence no use as a sporting rifle), made with weak metal that can be shaved with the right tools and at times could have been bought for under $150 and I saw deals advertised in the paper with the purchase of the rifle came with at least a hundred rounds of ammunition. Not to mention that they can easily be converted to full auto by a relatively novice machinist with an internet connection. I know of people who used the medal from frying pans to fabricate the necessary parts, hell a malfunction can cause an SKS to slamfire. A buddy of mine who had one told me while he was at the range years ago the pin stuck, creating a open bolt situation and he inadvertently gave off a 5-6 round burst, he said the a range operator approach him but the guy wasn't mad at all and said something to the effect that '...she went auto on you...yeah...those things tend to do that from time to time.' Plus many of the earlier ones had the capacity to accept AK-47 magazines. I for one found it a little disconcerting such a rifle could be had for so cheap. The black rifles on the other hand run upwards from 600 to well over a thousand dollars, which made them out of reach of the common thug/criminal.

As for the Olympic pistols, well that is just very poor legislation on the part of the State Assembly(almost all gun control is poor legislation imho). The Assembly wanted to get ride of TEC-9s(which I agree with along with getting rid of MAC-10s), whose magazine feed is forward of the pistol grip, presumably without thinking the State Assembly figured that all guns with this layout are the same type of weapon, so the gullible and ignorant people California banned all hand guns that did not have the magazine feed in the pistol grip. To optimize weight distribution Olympics pistols use this same design feature, therefore since the legislation is so vague they too were outlawed in California. IIRC some other country out laws Olympic pistols as well, forcing their Olympic shooting team to practice outside of the country.

And what the hell do you need a magazine fed semi-auto shotgun for? Hunting you are only aloud 3 shot tube mags, with one in the chamber not matter if it is a semi or pump. 5 shot tube mags are the limit for semis in Kali but pumps you can but magazine extenders that hold up to 10 shots, which are the usual home defense shotgun. If you can't hit what ever you are shooting at with 5 shots from a Benelli or 10 shots from a Remington 870 or Mossberg 590, then you have your own separate issues.

ummm, you can shoot someone breaking into your house in Cali....

And the only gun restrictions are no full auto, no .50, and no silencers.

Not sure where you got your info Spectre. No one outside Frisco acts like people that live in Frisco. The rest of the state is ashamed of them.
Add laser sight to that list, they are legal to own and have on you rifle or handgun for sport shooting, but illegal to use for self-defense because god for bid you actually hit the person who is intending to do you or your possessions harm.

BTW no one from the Bay Area call it Frisco, its either San Fran (which is hardly used at all) or simple the City, at least that is how it is for us Peninsula raised folk. Honestly though, you travel out side the Bay Area or the coastal counties in So-Cal and you might as well be in Kansas, but the Greater Bay Area and Greater Los Angeles Area including San Diego do dominate the political climate in the state because that is where most of the people live, some 23 million of the 36 million people live in these metropolitan area, while the others live in the central coast, which is ranching territory and central valley, which is farm land, and the folk way up north might as well be apart of Oregon, or a separate state altogether(which some in the area have wanted for years; its a pipe dream though).
 
Last edited:
You say you are a gun enthusiast, but it seems that if you don't "see the point" of certain arms you are against them, just like gun control nuts. yay for hypocrisy.

also, the bay area is known as "the gay bay" by people who don't live there, suck it.
 
For the people that have actually lived in both California and Texas who feel Texas is better, why is it better and/or why is California worse? Also what parts did you live in and how long?

I'm a Californian (well not currently but raised there) and all this hate on CA has me wondering, why? The only people I've ever met that thought Texas was great are well...Texans or those who've spent a lot of time there.

I know we got some asinine smog and gun control laws (personally I don't care for guns, but I have no problem with those who do ;) ), and traffic sucks but otherwise I fail to see the suckiness of the place, especially after living in Colorado and Missouri.

I know I'm going to catch flack for this one but... California didn't vote for Dubya. :p
 
Last edited:
You say you are a gun enthusiast, but it seems that if you don't "see the point" of certain arms you are against them, just like gun control nuts. yay for hypocrisy.
Correction: gun control nuts want the citizenry completely disarmed, I do not.

And where did you get that "see the point" quote from?

Maybe I am a little hypocritical, but I just see a difference between a hard to conceal sporting rifle that has a length of 40 inches compared to a easily concealable high capacity pistol with the length of 12 inches, whose sole use is to kill people, they are inaccurate and only effective when used at a high rate of fire, they are neither sporting guns or defensive weapons.

Sporting rifles can be used in various target competition throughout the country and this state as well as for hunting. When used for hunting they are restricted as are any other rifle bolt or semi at a 5 rd magazine capacity.

Also "Assault weapons" only total something like 3% of all gun crimes and of those "assault pistols" or high capacity pistols are use the most. This fact combined with the 101 California shootings, where the shooter concealed a pair of TEC-9s and went on a shooting spree in the upper floors, enabled the gun control nuts to lump long rifles into the ban. As horrible as this sounds if that guy had a just used pistols sporting rifles would still for sale here.

Granted statistically their use in gun crimes is very small, but for me it is the one bad apple theory, these guns give all others a bad name, they have no legitimate use, so why give the other side any more cannon fodder, pardon the pun? If you want these type of guns then treat them like owners of NFA weapons who go through the lengthy and some what costly BATFE process required to own such guns, I am fine with that.

zenkidori said:
also, the bay area is known as "the gay bay" by people who don't live there, suck it.
That explains a lot about you and the people you are associated with.
 
Last edited:
For the people that have actually lived in both California and Texas who feel Texas is better, why is it better and/or why is California worse? Also what parts did you live in and how long?

I'm a Californian (well not currently but raised there) and all this hate on CA has me wondering, why? The only people I've ever met that thought Texas was great are well...Texans or those who've spent a lot of time there.

I know we got some asinine smog and gun control laws (personally I don't care for guns, but I have no problem with those who do ;) ), and traffic sucks but otherwise I fail to see the suckiness of the place, especially after living in Colorado and Missouri.

I know I'm going to catch flack for this one but... California didn't vote for Dubya. :p

CA,TX,NY,FL = America.
 
Maybe I am a little hypocritical, but I just see a difference between a hard to conceal sporting rifle that has a length of 40 inches compared to a easily concealable high capacity pistol with the length of 12 inches, whose sole use is to kill people, they are inaccurate and only effective when used at a high rate of fire, they are neither sporting guns or defensive weapons.

Sporting rifles can be used in various target competition throughout the country and this state as well as for hunting. When used for hunting they are restricted as are any other rifle bolt or semi at a 5 rd magazine capacity.

Also "Assault weapons" only total something like 3% of all gun crimes and of those "assault pistols" or high capacity pistols are use the most. This fact combined with the 101 California shootings, where the shooter concealed a pair of TEC-9s and went on a shooting spree in the upper floors, enabled the gun control nuts to lump long rifles into the ban. As horrible as this sounds if that guy had a just used pistols sporting rifles would still for sale here.

So many problems with this that it's not even funny.

1. The Second Amendment is not primarily about hunting. It is primarily about the right of the individual to protect themselves from public or private lawlessness and tyranny and enemies foreign and domestic. Reread the Federalist Papers as well as the writings of Adams, Jefferson, and Franklin.

2. "easily concealable high capacity pistol with the length of 12 inches, whose sole use is to kill people, they are inaccurate and only effective when used at a high rate of fire" - sorry, those aren't 'easily concealable'. Or at least no more than, say, a sawed off shotgun, which is even more easily concealed.

This is an OA-93 pistol, essentially a cut-down AR-15 type:

oa93ri_1.jpg


I used to own one. I could easily hit what I was shooting at out to 50 meters with this "high capacity pistol" - one shot at a time. What you're not liking is the classic (and infamous Tec-9, and you're confusing a lot of larger pistols with that pile of crap. More on this in a bit.

You do realize that your definition also includes this Olympic-use marksman pistol, right? California's did too!

cm162.jpg


Kind of hard to say that that's not sporting use.


4. Not all states or localities restrict magazine capacity when hunting. Many do not. When hunting "varmint", most localities have no restriction on magazine capacity. Likewise, there are some states that only have magazine capacity restrictions on higher caliber firearms.

5. I don't know where you got the "Assault pistols are the most often used assault weapon" bit, but it's totally untrue. For starters, the TEC-9 was never favored by criminals because they're unreliable and inaccurate piles of junk. Most of the things the press calls "assault weapon" attacks were carried out by normal semiautomatic weapons, and usually not even those that possess the "evil features" as prescribed by the Brady Bill. Those crimes that actually are carried out with fully-automatic weapons are actually usually submachineguns stolen from the police or *real* full-auto assault rifles smuggled in from other countries. Most gangsters never used those "assault pistols" and went back to simple handguns. It should also be mentioned that IIRC, in the 101 California incident, the TEC-DC9s weren't the major instrument of killing. He killed 8 people and wounded six more. Most of those people killed died because when his TECs jammed (like they always do, which is why nobody in their right mind used them), he drew his .45 pistol and was actually able to shoot people with it.

See: http://www.saf.org/LawReviews/KobayashiAndOlson.htm

"The claims in 101 California Street stem from the deaths and injuries caused by gunman Gian Luigi Ferri on July 1, 1993. On that date at 2:56 p.m., Ferri entered the offices of the law firm of Pettit & Martin on the 34th floor of 101 California Street, San Francisco, California, carrying a Chinese-made . 45 caliber self-loading pistol and two 9mm TEC-DC9 self-loading pistols made by Navegar, Inc.[13] In four minutes, Ferri discharged some fifty rounds of ammunition from the three firearms and shot fourteen persons on the 34th, 33rd, and 32nd floors of the building.[14] Because his TEC-DC9s jammed early in the incident, most of the wounds resulted from Ferri's use of the ordinary .45 pistol. Eight of the gunshot victims died from blood loss, compounded by the police delay in allowing paramedics access to the injured. At 3:07 p.m., Ferri killed himself in the stairwell between the 29th and 30th floors.[15]"

The .45 semiauto did most of the killing and wounding, the TECs didn't. The TEC-DC9 is difficult to conceal. The TEC-DC9 is a very unreliable POS.

Bottom line, the antigun people used 101 Cali as an excuse to ban many guns that were not at all at fault.
 
Last edited:
And where did you get that "see the point" quote from?
you say the SKS ban isn't bad because it's a poorly made gun and you don't see the point as it can't be used for hunting or whatever, that's pretty lame. Also, what's with this, "well if you bought it before the ban you're fine" crap? So I was too young to buy a gun that's now banned I don't get to exercise my right to bear arms as much as someone older than me? PUH-lease. :rolleyes:

and you seem to think that if you can't use a gun for hunting there's no point? how about, it's in the fucking constitution, or how about sport shooting? like, for fun? god forbid someone has fun with a weapon without killing something. :rolleyes:

also, banning assault rifles for law abiding citizens kinda misses the main point of the second amendment.

That explains a lot about you and the people you are associated with.
go ahead and explain this. try and call me a homophobe, I dare you.:lol:

thedguy said:
I know we got some asinine smog and gun control laws (personally I don't care for guns, but I have no problem with those who do [User Posted Image] ), and traffic sucks but otherwise I fail to see the suckiness of the place, especially after living in Colorado and Missouri.
Some of the reasons I dislike CA:
  • shitty politicians
  • shitty laws
  • shitty people
  • high priced
  • same wages
  • mojados
  • pollution
  • traffic
  • crime
  • actors making policy
  • no seasons

and shit like this:
http://robots.engadget.com/2006/06/20/l-a-county-testing-unmanned-surveillance-drones/

I mostly dislike socal, I don't have much of a problem with norcal, as it may as well be oregon, except you still have the shitty statewide politics. I can visit CA every now and then, but after a week it gets old and I could never see myself moving there of my own free will.

also, where in CO did you live that you like CA better? Pueblo? Western slope?
 
California is just too liberal for me. and i live in it. I am an airsofter and we are really disliked in California. Paintballers on the other hand are ok. BULL. just cause it looks like real guns. WTF
 
You're all preaching to the choir on this issue.

As for the Olympic pistols, well that is just very poor legislation on the part of the State Assembly(almost all gun control is poor legislation imho). The Assembly wanted to get ride of TEC-9s(which I agree with along with getting rid of MAC-10s), whose magazine feed is forward of the pistol grip, presumably without thinking the State Assembly figured that all guns with this layout are the same type of weapon, so the gullible and ignorant people California banned all hand guns that did not have the magazine feed in the pistol grip. To optimize weight distribution Olympics pistols use this same design feature, therefore since the legislation is so vague they too were outlawed in California.

Spectre said:
You do realize that your definition also includes this Olympic-use marksman pistol, right? California's did too!
Noooo...you don't say :rolleyes:

See this is the problem, you latched on to one thing I wrote and not comprehending the rest. In the first paragraph of my first post in this thread I mentioned are agreed with the basics of your first point.

Gun control and gun ownership have on thing in common, both have become integrated into our society, to deny this reality is foolish. No one side will ever win the day, therefor there must be an equilibrium.

You need to fight the battles that you can win. A gun such as a M1A or AR10/15/carbines and the like you can justified because they multiple uses, they full fill multiple niches, high capacity pistols do not, so why try to protect these red herrings when they put a bad light on all other guns?

Bottom line, the antigun people used 101 Cali as an excuse to ban many guns that were not at all at fault.
That is precisely my point. As I wrote "...As horrible as this sounds if that guy had a just used pistols sporting rifles would still for sale here." Regardless if the TEC-9s jammed, fact of the matter is he was able to conceal the TEC-9s and walk into that law firm with them, those were the guns the gun control lobby and media focused on, if he had walked in there with 4 M1911s the national assault weapons ban would have never been an issue, probably a mandatory metal detectors in office buildings would be instituted in its place(imagine the windfall that would have been for the security industry), instead one bad apple ruined the bushel.

I also mention the price difference between say a SKS and AR as a barrier to use the AR in a criminal fashion, they are too valuable and too traceable, as such ARs aren't used in crime but they get thrown in the same lot as SKSs, the same with the TEC-9 and the OA-93. And honestly I don't understand why you bring up the OA-93 pistol, as you put it is "essentially a cut-down AR-15 type," what use is a gun that fires a .223/5.56mm in that small of a package. You can honestly say you that you can defend yourself free hand from fifty meters away against a tyrannical enemies that is probably armed with semi/auto long rifles? How much energy does that round lose with such a small barrel. Granted it is a great CQB gun, but a carbine can be as effective, as for target shooting there are other guns that can fill that role and be less polarizing to the rest of the population.

Zenkidori- you really need to read everything I wrote, I am no fan of the Roberti-Roos Act we have in california, but someone mention that you can't own a sporting rifle in california, that is simple not true, new purchases that is a different story, but I never said I approve of it. I also repeatedly mention the use of sporting rifles in target shooting and competitions.

zenkidori said:
Also, what's with this, "well if you bought it before the ban you're fine" crap? So I was too young to buy a gun that's now banned I don't get to exercise my right to bear arms as much as someone older than me?
I never said it was fair, I was just refuting what someone else wrote about our states laws. Also only certain classification of guns were banned you can still own guns in California and purchase new ones, your wide sweeping comments that you can't exercise your right to bear arms is the kind of blanket statements that is not only untrue, but they only hurt our cause not help it.

zenkidori said:
also, banning assault rifles for law abiding citizens kinda misses the main point of the second amendment.
I never advocated this.

zenkidori said:
go ahead and explain this. try and call me a homophobe, I dare you. :lol:
Actually I was going for ignorant since around 6 million people live there, but it's interesting that you are the one who brings up homophobia...
 
Some of the reasons I dislike CA:
  • shitty politicians
  • shitty laws
  • shitty people
  • high priced
  • same wages
  • mojados
  • pollution
  • traffic
  • crime
  • actors making policy
  • no seasons

and shit like this:
http://robots.engadget.com/2006/06/20/l-a-county-testing-unmanned-surveillance-drones/

I mostly dislike socal, I don't have much of a problem with norcal, as it may as well be oregon, except you still have the shitty statewide politics. I can visit CA every now and then, but after a week it gets old and I could never see myself moving there of my own free will.

also, where in CO did you live that you like CA better? Pueblo? Western slope?

I get the impression you haven't actually lived in CA?

I lived in Denver/Aurora on and off through the 90s and visit on occasion now. The lack of seasons is the greatest thing about the So cal IMO. I hate winter, to damn cold, I hate summers because it's to hot (and here in missouri it's humid as well), I lived close enough we got ocean current so a 90 degree day in summer was 'a heat wave". I went 8 years wearing only shorts and a t-shirt when I was a kid... that record would have been longer had my brother not gotten married :p

Much of my problem with Denver/CO is definitely the people, and hopefully things have changed, but the way they treated me when I was a kid... well I wasn't to surprised when Columbine happened, I never seen so many people so ready to get in a fight over trivial bull shit. It all left a bad taste in my mouth about the place.
 
Last edited:
I get the impression you haven't actually lived in CA?

I lived in Denver/Aurora on and off through the 90s and visit on occasion now. The lack of seasons is the greatest thing about the So cal IMO. I hate winter, to damn cold, I hate summers because it's to hot (and here in missouri it's humid as well), I lived close enough we got ocean current so a 90 degree day in summer was 'a heat wave". I went 8 years wearing only shorts and a t-shirt when I was a kid... that record would have been longer had my brother not gotten married :p

Much of my problem with Denver/CO is definitely the people, and hopefully things have changed, but the way they treated me when I was a kid... well I wasn't to surprised when Columbine happened, I never seen so many people so ready to get in a fight over trivial bull shit. It all left a bad taste in my mouth about the place.
are you editing your post like 5 times? cause I swear i've written a reply and each time I preview your post is different?
Zenkidori, Made In The USA; If you want to debate gun control laws, take it to the gun control circle jerk and let us continue on about how california sucks.
this isn't a gun control debate really, it's about CAs shitty policies, and that does pertain to this thread.
 
The food (variety/flavor) in California is far better than anything outside Chicago . I've come to the conclusion those between the colorado and mississippi rivers hate anything with flavor. God I'd kill for an In-n-out 3x3 or a decent taco.

Not a big BBQ ribs and roast corn guy huh? :lol: I could live on BBQ. I haven't spent much time over in St. Louis, but you can find just about anything you want in KC. You might pay out the ass for it sometimes, but it's out there. Down in Westport at one intersection there's 2 Irish pubs/restaurants, a Jewish cafe, a Greek place, then a block down there's the Corner Cafe, with the best damned pancakes you'll ever have lol.

As for California, I've never been there. Sounds nice enough, the whole warm weather year round thing sounds appealing. Other than the stupid legislation and higher cost of living I think I'd enjoy myself there. I really like Colorado, I've been there several times now and I always love it. Well at least Colorado Springs, I wasn't too impressed with Denver but I'd much rather live there than Dallas. Oh god does Dallas suck balls :p. And I thought Kansans didn't know how to drive on the interstate. Couple that with the fact that it's actually hotter than Missouri in the summer and when it's actually cold enough to drop some snow/ice people have no idea what the hell to do ... well I want no part of it.
 
Top