or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Social Life, Food & Drink, Travel › Guns? (do you carry?) revived
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Guns? (do you carry?) revived - Page 10

post #136 of 200
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SartorialSheepdog
Hard to beat a P7M8.

Interesting perspective VKK, I doubt many people can relate as it's somewhat rare to have both experiences.

And at the risk of sounding like a troll, I have to admit the first post sounds sort of fishy.

You got me, all my my previous posts were just to set up this scam.
post #137 of 200
Drizz--I do apologize for my post's antagonistic nature, I do respect your stellar reputation on here and by no means intended to create an argument.

Maybe its my own ignorance, but I have heard of very few people with such firearms, let alone Californians with significantly stricter firearm laws than the majority of the US. That is all.

SS
post #138 of 200
My plan all along has been to hit 2k posts and them come out of the closet as an Ayn Rand loving neocon.
post #139 of 200
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SartorialSheepdog
Drizz--I do apologize for my post's antagonistic nature, I do respect your stellar reputation on here and by no means intended to create an argument.

Maybe its my own ignorance, but I have heard of very few people with such firearms, let alone Californians with significantly stricter firearm laws than the majority of the US. That is all.

SS

California only has stricter carry laws. The federal regulations about firearms are the same nationwide, and handguns require 3 day waiting period while rifles are available immediately. I have collected a decent amount of guns but I'm sure there are alot of people in California and elsewhere that have collected far more.
post #140 of 200
I wish that was all. Definitely stricter carry laws as well as laws pertaining to "assault weapons." Namely, the Roberti-Roos Assault Weapons Control Act as well as the latest .50 BMG ban make owning military style rifles very difficult in California.
post #141 of 200
Many of us poor Californians bought guns before all these idiotic laws. Many owned firearms that are now completely illegal to buy or sell. It doesn't mean no one can own such guns.
post #142 of 200
You are completely right Mute...........so long as the "prohibited" firearm was owned prior to, I believe, June of 1989.

The catch is the California gun laws (which I too agree are idiotic) preclude individuals from buying/owning specific firearms after 1989, and as such it is either very tricky or illegal to own firearms only in production after 1989 in California. That's why the original post caught my eye.
post #143 of 200
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SartorialSheepdog
I wish that was all. Definitely stricter carry laws as well as laws pertaining to "assault weapons." Namely, the Roberti-Roos Assault Weapons Control Act as well as the latest .50 BMG ban make owning military style rifles very difficult in California.
It depends. There are a number of manufacturers that make "assault" style weapons that are made specifically for California customers, of which I have several. There are several other alternatives as well, and I would note that not all of my personal weapons are held in this state. I would agree that owning assault weapons in this state is somewhat more difficult than in some other states, but most of those restrictions have to do with carry, at least IMO.
post #144 of 200
I hear you, though I do implore you to look at the California DOJ Firearms Division Page, as I would hate to see a fellow gun enthusiast fall victim to California's plethora of gun restrictions on ownership.

Notably, the USP compact tacticals, HK91 (great rifle by the way), and bobcat could cause issue for you.
post #145 of 200
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SartorialSheepdog
I hear you, though I do implore you to look at the California DOJ Firearms Division Page, as I would hate to see a fellow gun enthusiast fall victim to California's plethora of gun restrictions on ownership.

Notably, the USP compact tacticals, HK91 (great rifle by the way), and bobcat could cause issue for you.

As far as I know, the CTs are on the approved list as I bought them here in California.
post #146 of 200
Quote:
Originally Posted by drizzt3117
It depends. There are a number of manufacturers that make "assault" style weapons that are made specifically for California customers, of which I have several. There are several other alternatives as well, and I would note that not all of my personal weapons are held in this state. I would agree that owning assault weapons in this state is somewhat more difficult than in some other states, but most of those restrictions have to do with carry, at least IMO.

Possibly a foolish question, but why would one want to own an assault rifle? Yes, it'd be incredibly cool to light up a firing range with one but still, what real purpose would such a gun serve for one's use? And I'm no gun control hound (tho i do support it)
post #147 of 200
The compact USPs I believe are on the approved list. The Compact Tacticals are most likely not (though I am not 100% positive), as they have a threaded barrel and thus would be considered an "assault weapon" by California. If you "got rid of" or bought the Compact Tacticals without the threaded barrels you should be fine by California law.
post #148 of 200
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SartorialSheepdog
The compact USPs I believe are on the approved list. The Compact Tacticals are most likely not (though I am not 100% positive), as they have a threaded barrel and thus would be considered an "assault weapon" by California. If you "got rid of" or bought the Compact Tacticals without the threaded barrels you should be fine by California law.

Yeah mine have plain barrels. Silencers would be cool though
post #149 of 200
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jodum5
Possibly a foolish question, but why would one want to own an assault rifle? Yes, it'd be incredibly cool to light up a firing range with one but still, what real purpose would such a gun serve for one's use? And I'm no gun control hound (tho i do support it)
Prepending "assault" to a certain class of rifles is one of the more clever things the anti-gun lobby has done. The designation is arbitrary and technically applies only to selective fire rifles which haven't been legal in the US since the early 1900s.
post #150 of 200
Yeah, I knew I should've said something about it. Owning a real assault rifle in America is incredibly difficult and borders on virtually impossible. This has been the case in the 1934 National Firearms Act (note proximity to the end of prohibition and all those prohibition agents and their budgets in need of work). New assault rifles have been illegal for import since 1986, I believe. The legal term assault weapon, in complete contrast to what it actually means, has more to do with the shape of the stock and whether or not you can mount a bayonet. You know, if you ever want to do bayonet muggings.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Social Life, Food & Drink, Travel › Guns? (do you carry?) revived