Top Story Lawsuits State Laws Federal Laws Calif. Legislature Passes Assault Weapon Ban

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- On Our Site

Discuss the issue live online Friday with The Post's Joan Biskupic

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- By Rene Sanchez Washington Post Staff Writer Wednesday, July 14, 1999; Page A2

LOS ANGELES, July 13California lawmakers have approved the toughest ban in the nation on assault weapons, and this time the votes were not even close.

Ignoring a fierce campaign by the National Rifle Association, both houses of the state legislature decided by 2 to 1 margins late Monday to pass the measure, which defines assault weapons more broadly and more strictly than similar federal statutes. It would ban the manufacture, import or sale of any semiautomatic rifles or pistols that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition or can be easily concealed.

Gov. Gray Davis (D) already has pledged to sign the bill into law. It is one of many gun control measures heading to his desk that the Democratic-controlled legislature has passed in recent months. And it even drew support from some Republican lawmakers who disregarded their party's stance on the issue.

Public support for tougher gun control is growing here in the nation's largest state, especially in the aftermath of the shooting rampage this spring in Littleton, Colo. With full control of the state government for the first time in decades, California Democrats have the issue atop their agenda. And both Vice President Gore and former Sen. Bill Bradley have been calling for greater gun control in their early campaigning for the Democratic presidential nomination next year.

"This is going to send a message across the country," state Sen. Don Perata, the Democrat who sponsored the assault weapons bill, said today. "Any state that thought this couldn't be done, now we have the formula for it."

Gun control groups praised the measure and said that they hoped it would become a national model. "We are going to rid our streets of these weapons of war once and for all," said Luis Tolley, a lobbyist in California for the group Handgun Control. "We hope Congress will soon follow California's lead."

State lawmakers attempted to enact a tougher ban on assault weapons last year, but Republican Gov. Pete Wilson vetoed it before he left office. California's first attempt to limit the manufacture and sale of assault weapons 10 years ago has been mired in courts and was never strongly enforced by Republican administrations in Sacramento.

Also, after that law was passed, some gun manufacturers managed to elude its narrow provisions simply by making slight changes in the features or the names of some assault weapons. As one example, Perata cited the TEC9 assault weapon, which was used in the Columbine High School massacre. It had not been covered under California's original law because manufacturers modified the gun and renamed it the TEC-DC9.

The new law aims to close that loophole with more generic and broader definitions for assault weapons. It would ban semiautomatic rifles and pistols with the capacity to hold 10 or more rounds of ammunition. Semiautomatic rifles less than 30 inches long would be prohibited, as would all semiautomatic firearms that have detachable magazines and other parts, such as threaded barrels, second handgrips or folding stocks. Magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition could not be manufactured or sold.

Law enforcement officers in the state would be exempted from the law. State residents who already own weapons covered by the bill would have a year to register them with police.

Before the legislature's vote on Monday, NRA officials denounced the assault weapon bill as political grandstanding that would do little to deter violent crime. The NRA and some lawmakers also said that the measure could still be quickly skirted by gun manufacturers or owners.

"It's political buffoonery," said Steve Helsley, the NRA's liaison in California. "A lot of people who own firearms are hopelessly confused by this and are going to get arrested or hurt by trying to modify their guns. Voters will soon see that this is only symbolism, and they will hold the governor accountable for it."

But Davis and the state's attorney general, also a newly elected Democrat, are vowing to enforce the assault weapons ban aggressively. Next week, the governor also is likely to sign a bill the legislature recently passed that would make California the largest state to limit handgun purchases to one a month. Only three other states, among them Maryland and Virginia, have approved similar restrictions.

Michael Bustamante, a spokesman for the governor, denounced the NRA's tactics in the assault weapon debate.

"They are already telling people ways to try to get around this even before the governor signs it," Bustamante said.

Among gun owners in California, reaction to the looming assault weapon ban seemed mixed today. At a gun shop in Culver City, which is next to Los Angeles, Kalan Colon, a veteran of Operation Desert Storm, said that the state "shouldn't limit the accessories a collector can own. The accessories are what makes a gun," he said.

Under the new ban, Colon said that he would have to register the M-14 rifle he had just brought into the shop for repairs and also switch from 20-round magazines to five-round clips.

But another customer, Jack Wolf, a retired banker, said that he did not mind the tougher rules. "I think it makes sense," he said. "I don't see any need for a repeating automatic weapon, at least not in the city."

Special correspondent Cassandra Stern contributed to this report.

) 1999 The Washington Post Company

Back to the top

The key here is in the second paragraph. It says(God I hope they misread it)the bill would outlaw the making, importing or sale of....any gun-pistol or rifle that is EASILY CONCELED.

That covers ALL HANDGUNS!!!!. Somebody Tell me I'm getting it wrong...PLEASE!

-- CygnusXI (noburnt@toast.net), July 14, 1999

Answers

This sounds like the relevant part: "State residents who already own weapons covered by the bill would have a year to register them with police."

Isn't something ELSE supposed to happen before a year has passed...?

-- it's 170 days (by@my.count), July 14, 1999.

I suspect that if we can stampede enough people with January failures of services caused by "terrorists" we may just get congress to consider this sort of thing nationally. Gotta stop those terrorists. After all, we wouldn't have had any problems come new years with out them. Because we fixed all the y2k problems don't you know.

Front sight. Squeeze. and keep your...

-- eyes_open (best@wishes.net), July 14, 1999.

CygnusXI,

As always the people will get screwed by the MASTER SCREWERS. I think the key problem with gun control is the following line from the article above..."We are going to rid our streets of these weapons of war once and for all," said Luis Tolley, a lobbyist in California for the group Handgun Control. "We hope..."

Since when did criminals ever care about laws that forbide criminal activity? Not ever!

Perhaps the criminals are running the CA Assembly?

-- Mark Hillyard (foster@inreach.com), July 14, 1999.

Do you think the store owners whom defended their stores during the LA riots are going to turn in their AK's? The guns were the only thing between their stores and the looting mobs. Guess what, the guns stopped them. This is one more step toward totalitarian rule. I am glad I live in Arizona!

-- Bill (y2khippo@yahoo.com), July 14, 1999.

Well well so what, how many rounds do you need ? I don't see anything wrong in this law. SKS 10 round fixed mag, do people need more than 10 rounds? If you do then have it ready to change to 20 or 30 round mag, when the time comes. Pistols ! Do you need more than 10 rounds? This law is only for law abiding citizens, the criminals will not care about any laws! So all this is is a bunch of crap.

-- Rooster (Gotitlate@wow.com), July 14, 1999.

But another customer, Jack Wolf, a retired banker, said that he did not mind the tougher rules. "I think it makes sense," he said. "I don't see any need for a repeating automatic weapon, at least not in the city."

This is why more Americans tend to support a "assault weapons" ban - the press and .gov has misled people into thinking that these are all full automatic weapons! Ummm... duh...yes, I am opposed to people having machine guns....

-- sick of (the_gun_gr@ber.s), July 14, 1999.

CygnusXI, You know, I've been giving the 'yellow gun patch' thing a bit more thought. If the NRA could get it's members to wear them, it would:
A) Let others know that we are a persecuted group.
B) Be a symbol of unity like ribbons are for anti-AIDS activists.
C) Provide and non-threating entre to a discussion on firearms with those who are unaware of what's happening.

I think I'm going to send the NRA a letter.... -TECH32-

-- TECH32 (TECH32@NOMAIL.COM), July 14, 1999.

That article was contradictory. One line talked about capacity of more than 10 rounds, another said, "It would ban semiautomatic rifles and pistols with the capacity to hold 10 or more rounds of ammunition."

If that last were true, the Ruger 10/22 just became a murderous assault weapon.

-- popgun (ruger@range.now), July 14, 1999.

Yellow patch be damned. Write letters to the editor of your news paper. Be polite and curteous and factual. The only thing we have going for us is the truth. We just need to get it out. If you are savvy enough to be reading this forum you can find reams of data on the net AND check it for accuracy. Do you think people would be fooled in to giving up this basic right if they knew about studies like Klecks or Rossi and Wright or Lott? I doubt it. But ask anyone who get's their news from TV or news papers and they will have no clue. Try this. Pick an argument put forth by the confiscationists. Write a one paragraph rebuttal that stands alone. Site studies and authers/ISBN numbers so people know they can check your work. Then when the issue comes up you can write an opening paragraph to include any recent additions, followed by the pre-written paragraph refuting the argument from the confiscationists, which is then followed by your closing paragraph. You can build up an aresenel of these letter to the editor modules so you can respond quickly to events. Anyone who can write a good letter can do this. And if you can't get an educational english grammer course on CD and brush up your skills. Let's counter and resolve this peacefully while there is still time for peaceful measures to work. The alternative is ugly indeed.

Watch six and keep your...

-- eyes_open (best@wishes.net), July 14, 1999.

Eyes,

If the media were interested in unbiased reporting on the gun issue we wouldn't be in the mess we are today.

-TECH32-

-- TECH32 (TECH32@NOMAIL.COM), July 14, 1999.

Reread the 2nd paragraph above and tell me if you read what I read:

"Ignoring a fierce campaign by the National Rifle Association, both houses of the state legislature decided by 2 to 1 margins late Monday to pass the measure, which defines assault weapons more broadly and more strictly than similar federal statutes. It would ban the manufacture, import or sale of any semiautomatic rifles or pistols that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition or can be easily concealed."

The way I read it that would ban HANDGUNS also... not just semiautomatic rifles.

What do you think?

-- Linda (lwmb@psln.com), July 14, 1999.

Ugh..... why oh why did I ever buy a gun from a dealer..... oh, that's right - for my concealed carry Glock 23 (13 rounds). I am going to sit tight and simmer about this. Teaches us law abiding citizens about the rewards for doing the "right thing" and buying our guns the officially legal route. Now I wait for them to order me to turn in my high capacity magazines. This sucks.

-- Kristi (securx@succeed.net), July 14, 1999.

Linda,

That was my point in posting this "Ban guns....that can be easily concealed", yup, that definitely means ALL handguns(except maybe a 44 with a 11" barrel, ooh, they would'nt like that!). Scary Linda, I know. Just look at how many states follow CA's lead, like with the whole Nazi anti-smoking crap(not starting a smoking debate--just ilustraighting a point).

TECH32,

I love it, use the flaming liberal's own weapon against them! I'm not sure if you're half joking or not, but I never understood how a clothing accessory helped people with various diseases. Feelings over functionality, I guess.

-- CygnusXI (noburnt@toast.net), July 14, 1999.

Sorry CygnusXI - I glanced over your earlier emphasis that this would include ALL HANDGUNS.

That's okay.. it deserved re-emphasizing.

This would ban ALL HANDGUNS, as well as semiautomatics.

This would ban ALL HANDGUNS.

This would ban ALL HANDGUNS.

This would ban ALL HANDGUNS.

gottagettagungottagettagungottagettagungottagettagungottagettagungotta gettagungottagettagungottagettagungottagettagungottagettagungottagetta gungottagettagungottagettagungottagettagungottagettagungottagettagungo ttagettagun

-- Linda (lwmb@psln.com), July 14, 1999.

"Democracy is the idea that the common people should get what they want, good and hard". Most people are congenital idiots. You can't outvote them; you can't outwrite (letters) them; you can't outlobby them.

I don't know what the solution is, but participating in political action does not work. More and more people have been becoming aware of the decline of the U.S. for several GENERATIONS, and even so, the decline is ACCELERATING. Even if you could get every intelligent person (by whatever definition you make) to become active and vote, you would still be outnumbered by the idiots. GOT TO THINK OUTSIDE THE BOX, SOME WAY

-- A (A@AisA.com), July 14, 1999.

Linda and CygnusXI: You don't think, now, that YOU will get to define "easily concealable" do you? Put a r*i*f*l*e or s*h*o*t*g*u*n in a case and it's concealed, easily. This means outright ban of ALL

"Those whom tyrants would enslave, they would first disarm."

-- A (A@AisA.com), July 14, 1999.

a,,, I like your idea about "thinking out of the box." Perhaps you or someone could start a thread on that, where we could brainstorm.

Also, eyes_open, you always post so intelligently...thank you. Have you a standard letter you can post as a sample?

However, I have the sinking feeling that no matter what informed citizens do, there is an Agenda out there that is sovast, well-backed and intentional that there is little hope by these means of changing the direction this frightening erosion of our Constitutional rights is taking.

As has been conjectured on other threads, perhaps when Y2K hits hard, if our guns are not all confiscated before then, the benefit of armed citizens in maintaining order will turn the tide. (I should live so long, right?)

-- Irate Citizen (Keepourguns@home.com), July 14, 1999.

"Bout time! Call the California politicians and congratulate them! Suggest a FULL MANDATORY BAN. Let's get this thing rolling; I'm gettin' gray hair and can't wait for their gradualism.

Gunner

-- Gunner (tailgunner@hotmail.com), July 14, 1999.

Irate

I'll dig up what I have. I haven't posted this round (meaning, on this emotional wave that started with Littleton) so all the material is on my old computer disk. This will take a little work. I will not fill this forum with gun issue posts, but I'll find or take suggstions as to where it could be publicly posted. But it would be far better if instead of one of MY form letters copied over and over editors read our side of the story from thousands of people in every city around the country in their own words. Gun control has wide spread but very SHALLOW support.

Gunner

It won't be long now. It looks like the box your thinking out of has a spring and follower. *grin* The logical conclusion to this sequence of events will not be pretty. Just remember to always treat others as you would like to be treated. And try to understand that some of our "enemies" are people that have been decieved. Go easy where the situation allows.

Everone else, it looks like it's time to get in to the spirit of 1776.

Watch six and keep your...

-- eyes_open (best@wishes.net), July 14, 1999.

CygnusXI,

I love it, use the flaming liberal's own weapon against them! I'm not sure if you're half joking or not, but I never understood how a clothing accessory helped people with various diseases. Feelings over functionality, I guess.

Not joking at all and co-opting your opponents strategies has worked wonders for Clinton hasn't it? I think it's time for the NRA to remind America that guns are NOT the problem. They lobby, but that's about it (I don't count Eddie Eagle as a general public education campaign). Every day Handgun control Inc runs ads on TV about how evil guns are, but we see nothing on TV from the NRA.

A few million NRA members wearing yellow-guns, showing solidarity, would get covered in the media in a much different light than just another advertising campaign would. If PEOPLE got involved there would be no way the press could say it's propoganda from an evil lobbying group (which is how the NRA is currently portrayed). The yellow-gun would be immediately recognizable as a reference to the nazi-era treatment of Jews, and give normal people like you and me a chance to explain what's happening to those around us without coming across as 'pro-gun' rhetoric.

A letter to the NRA is in the works...
-TECH32-

-- TECH32 (TECH32@NOMAIL.COM), July 14, 1999.

Don't forget the Y2K catchword substitute: Terrorism

Report: US open to nuke/bio terror

Wednesday, 14 July 1999 20:17 (GMT), (UPI Spotlight)

WASHINGTON, July 14 (UPI) - A report just released by a congressional commission calls for a coordinated approach to protect the nation against nuclear, biological and chemical attack by terrorists.

The report, called "Combating Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction, " urges President Clinton to appoint a national director to bring together federal efforts to prevent and respond to such attacks.
------------------------------------------------------------
If you piece together all of today's breaking news, you will see a pattern emerging. Looks like a coordinated campaign.

xxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxx

-- Ashton & Leska in Cascadia (allaha@earthlink.net), July 14, 1999.

eyes_open:

Yes, many have been deceived. They are idiots, and if I can, I'll never cut them an inch of slack. You have to realize that they are either congenitally stupid or they are willfully ignorant.

Either way, they are my enemies.

Stupidity is incurable and there is no reason why I or anyone should cater to it. But I can have a little sympathy in some cases for the droolers. But that doesn't give them a claim on my life or one iota of my freedom.

Ignorance is curable, if the patient is willing. Each member of the entire American population has, at one time or another, been exposed to common sense and the ideals of liberty. However, that they have chosen to ignore that, and to have LET THEMSELVES be deceived makes them utterly contemptible

-- A (A@AisA.com), July 14, 1999.

bold off

-- A (A@AisA.com), July 14, 1999.

A

I ask that you reconsider. When ever before in human history has the capability to spread a lie from boarder to boarder of a nation existed as it does now in electronic media? If all is as it appears and there is one central agent governing editorial content of news and entertainment how can anyone fail to realize that many good people will be deceived? Consider also that we have just reached a point where the distractions of just running a household can keep a person too engaged to watch current events closely. Add to that the range of issues from the economy and all it's facets to budget debates and you will find people preforming "current event triage". No, this doesn't give anyone the right to take away your God given and Constitutionally guarunteed rights. And they will likely have to be fought for again. But consider, if you were not interested in firearms for sporting purposes, what would you yourself know of the issues? How many people who don't take an interest in them follow this issue? Consider these things one last time. Resolve not to become as low as those who threaten America's freedom today. Be merciful when the opportunity presents itself. The victors must be at least as good as our founding fathers to get back what we have lost.

Yours in these dark times

-- eyes_open (best@wishes.net), July 14, 1999.

Ahhhhh, yes. THE SPIRIT OF 1776..........that's where we're headed friends. Where's my kilt? I hope I didn't leave it in the Oval Office, when I changed back into my pizza delivery uniform!

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), July 15, 1999.

I wonder how long until my mossberg 590 is labeled as an "assault weapon"because it's black and has a barrel shroud

-- zoobie (zoobiezoob@yahoo.com), July 15, 1999.