- Messages
- 100
- Reactions
- 28
I posted this picture earlier, I guess you missed it :
This is what got open carry banned in California some 30+ years ago. Recent open carry legislation was purely symbolic
since it only affected unloaded carry of handguns, which was impractical for defensive purposes.
Now is California the only state that bans open carry ? No, it's not. It's not even something that only "socialists" like
to do.
Does this mean nothing can't be done, and nothing will be done in CA to improve ? Absolutely not. States nationwide are still shaping their policies towards permissive carry. And if not through legislature, then through the court system.
Yes, Barrett won't sell whole 3 (three) M82's to CA government. Not sure why it has become an ultimate test of freedom for you, but
you are still not getting the point. If you don't know what's broken, you can't fix it.
Now I assume that was sarcasm, but why ? Nobody said CA doesn't restrict firearms. Your misrepresentation of the facts and important details was what spawned this conversation. Once again - if you don't know what's broken, you can't fix it.
Kentucky, let me point out the information in your original post that is wrong, and perhaps you'll see how information like this creates "hype," not "support."
The red text is factually incorrect:
Every "fact" in your post related to California's gun laws was false. The persuasiveness of your point, (that California's restrictive gun laws are bad,) is reliant on those facts being correct. No one here disagrees with your premise, but your method of expressing it is not helpfully addressing it.
Open Carry of long guns is not banned in CA - it only applies to hand guns. Which is, again, absurd. If you would like the CA Penial Code pertaining to that, I will be happy to provide it for you. Bringing other States into a discussion about CA is just about as relevant as bringing Somalia into a discussion about CA.
I posted, the CA PC, for you. For some reason, you refuse to accept it and want to twist things around to win what you call an, "Argument."
It is easy to understand - it is written in English after all. I have even refered you to subsections to cut out the leg work for you.
If you had ever spent your money on Barrett rifles, you would understand they are not exactly cheap. Barrett refusing to do business with all LEO agencies in CA is significant. A single entity, LAPD SWAT for example does not just purchase one or two rifles. In addition to rifles, the agencies require support. Parts, armorer training etc. Barrett effectively held CA LEO agencies to their own law, which they were not happy about.