What's new
caguns.net

Welcome to CAguns.net!
Join our growing community where you can ask questions or browse our classifieds section.

Sign up for a free account today and unlock full access! Once registered, you can participate, connect, and take advantage of exclusive features unavailable to guests.

Advanced features are available only to registered members, join today!

  • If someone asks for a deposit for something, please use the report button.
Rost Martin R1MC comes to Califnoria
Resource icon

A nice graphic history of CA gun laws

Overview Reviews (1) Discussion
Note that the 'Getting Specific' feature, lower on that same page, has a number of inaccuracies. For example, in the "What's banned?" block, it lists guns not on the Roster.
 
Quite a few things missing and not quite right. For instance, BFSC started 1994, and the next iteration HSC wasn't administered by "local law enforcement".

ETA
Re: The laws enacted in 1923, this link (upper left corner) is an editorial about how it was modeled after Kansas law to "forestall the flood of fanatical legislation" to deprive people of their 2A rights. There's more on Arthur Capper but I'll have to dig it up again.
 
Last edited:
Contrast with my out of date page http://web.archive.org/web/20191018...p?title=Time_Line_of_California_Firearms_Laws

Sadly, there have been additions to the corpus of ridiculous laws since 2015, most notably 2016's Proposition 63 - the wiki page is a 'good enough' summary, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_California_Proposition_63. That was my 'I cannot stay in CA' moment. Moved to Oregon in 2019.

The Ballotpedia page is similar, with somewhat better lawsuit coverage, I think - https://ballotpedia.org/California_...Large-Capacity_Ammunition_Magazine_Ban_(2016)

Being text-oriented, as are wikis, it would never have occurred to me to attempt such a picture. I do think the context of the criminal occurrences stimulating the Legislature is a useful addition.
 
Plenty_Pack_556 said:
Its missing 50bmg ban from Junior.
Click to expand...

The CalMatters infographic isn't up to their usual standards.
Ignoring the non-neutral phrasing like "gun show loophole", it's just not accurate. In spite of the claim, in 1991, not all firearms sales were required to go through an FFL because the antique language was still part of the code, which allowed 50+ year old firearms to be PPT'd without dros/ffl.
 
Librarian said:
Contrast with my out of date page http://web.archive.org/web/20191018...p?title=Time_Line_of_California_Firearms_Laws

Sadly, there have been additions to the corpus of ridiculous laws since 2015, most notably 2016's Proposition 63 - the wiki page is a 'good enough' summary, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_California_Proposition_63. That was my 'I cannot stay in CA' moment. Moved to Oregon in 2019.

The Ballotpedia page is similar, with somewhat better lawsuit coverage, I think - https://ballotpedia.org/California_...Large-Capacity_Ammunition_Magazine_Ban_(2016)

Being text-oriented, as are wikis, it would never have occurred to me to attempt such a picture. I do think the context of the criminal occurrences stimulating the Legislature is a useful addition.
Click to expand...
I would comment on this, as well as the "Cal Matters" page you shared. However, not sure if this would fall under political commentary here in this new forum? Nonetheless, I appreciate these types of information threads, and hope to see more here.
 
Nice graphic Info to dive into. I live in CA since 1995 and picked up Firearms in 2008.
One can never learn enough.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom