San Francisco gun ban - Page 3

Otis · November 10th, 2005, 12:54 PM

This whole thing is really getting to me, especially since I live and work 10 miles from San Francisco. I'm just waiting for it to trickle down to the neighboring countys. Time to move. California sucks for gun owners. I'm boycotting SF.

rachilders · November 10th, 2005, 04:58 PM

What, if anything, is the official policy towards those who already have guns? Is there a buy back program, are gun owners going to find places to store their gun outside the city (a good oportunity to start a new business... gun storage facility), are the police going to do a record search to find out who owns gun then do home raids and searches to look for them? Are registered gun owners going to be forced to show proof they DON'T own a gun now? What about gun shop owners (are there any left in SF?), sporting goods stores and other firearms related businesses and their employees, are they going to be compensated for the elimination of their livelyhoods? What a slippery slope!!

I do find it interesting that the proposal passed, though the news media and the police were against it and even the mayor doubted it would work. We as gun owners should take a hard look at this and consider it a lesson learned. Voter turnout was only 39% and the law passed by a narrow margin. I'm sure there are thousands of gun owners in SF and if they all had voted against it, the proposal would have lost by a handy margin. We cannot depend on others to watch out for our freedoms when they are threatened and as gun owners, we must cover our own collective butts when out 2A rights come under attack.

HotGuns · November 11th, 2005, 11:13 PM

I've been told that the state of California does have a preemption law that states that a city cannot enact a law that is stricter than that of the state.

Since firearms are still legal in California, the city of San Francisco cannot enact a law that bans private ownership of handguns.Therefore, the newly passed law is considered null and void as it is an illegal law.

Many states have this law, my own being one of them. Sometimes the powers that be in the big citys forget that they are part of a bigger world and it is for this reason exactly that such preeemption laws came into existence.

P95Carry · November 11th, 2005, 11:21 PM

I think that law is all that has stopped Philadelphia thus far tho - by all accounts they are trying hard to ''tighten up''!!

Deke45 · November 12th, 2005, 03:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HotGuns

I've been told that the state of California does have a preemption law that states that a city cannot enact a law that is stricter than that of the state.

Since firearms are still legal in California, the city of San Francisco cannot enact a law that bans private ownership of handguns.Therefore, the newly passed law is considered null and void as it is an illegal law.

Many states have this law, my own being one of them. Sometimes the powers that be in the big citys forget that they are part of a bigger world and it is for this reason exactly that such preeemption laws came into existence.

You said it brother. Denver had a fit when preemption law passed here and spoiled there little "home-rule" party. They fought it in court and for the most part lost. I suspect San Frans self-rightous crap will end up in a higher court also.

Oh, and as mentioned in a previous post above, the new law by no means includes the hollier-than-thou "special people"...remember the hypocrite Rosie O'donnell and her gun-totin' bodyguard!!

November 10th, 2005, 04:58 PM	#22
rachilders Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Longview, TX Posts: 696	What, if anything, is the official policy towards those who already have guns? Is there a buy back program, are gun owners going to find places to store their gun outside the city (a good oportunity to start a new business... gun storage facility), are the police going to do a record search to find out who owns gun then do home raids and searches to look for them? Are registered gun owners going to be forced to show proof they DON'T own a gun now? What about gun shop owners (are there any left in SF?), sporting goods stores and other firearms related businesses and their employees, are they going to be compensated for the elimination of their livelyhoods? What a slippery slope!! I do find it interesting that the proposal passed, though the news media and the police were against it and even the mayor doubted it would work. We as gun owners should take a hard look at this and consider it a lesson learned. Voter turnout was only 39% and the law passed by a narrow margin. I'm sure there are thousands of gun owners in SF and if they all had voted against it, the proposal would have lost by a handy margin. We cannot depend on others to watch out for our freedoms when they are threatened and as gun owners, we must cover our own collective butts when out 2A rights come under attack. __________________ "... Americans. We're homesteaders, we want a safe home, to keep the money we make, and shoot bad guys." -- Denny Crane Last edited by rachilders; November 10th, 2005 at 06:31 PM. Reason: edit

November 11th, 2005, 11:21 PM	#24
P95Carry Assistant Administrator Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: South West PA Posts: 25,366	I think that law is all that has stopped Philadelphia thus far tho - by all accounts they are trying hard to ''tighten up''!! __________________ Chris - P95 NRA Certified Instructor & NRA Life Member. "To own a gun and assume that you are armed is like owning a piano and assuming that you are a musician!." If a BG dies as the result of pointing a gun at me, then he has merely succumbed to an occupational hazard of being a thug

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

November 10th, 2005, 12:54 PM	#21
Otis Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: California Posts: 106	This whole thing is really getting to me, especially since I live and work 10 miles from San Francisco. I'm just waiting for it to trickle down to the neighboring countys. Time to move. California sucks for gun owners. I'm boycotting SF.

November 11th, 2005, 11:13 PM	#23
HotGuns Moderator Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Arkansas Posts: 4,926	I've been told that the state of California does have a preemption law that states that a city cannot enact a law that is stricter than that of the state. Since firearms are still legal in California, the city of San Francisco cannot enact a law that bans private ownership of handguns.Therefore, the newly passed law is considered null and void as it is an illegal law. Many states have this law, my own being one of them. Sometimes the powers that be in the big citys forget that they are part of a bigger world and it is for this reason exactly that such preeemption laws came into existence.