18+ Content Warning

By clicking Enter, you confirm you are 18 years of age or older and agree to comply with all applicable local, state, and federal laws.

Notice: Any content or member activity - including anything you may buy, sell, transfer, or discuss - must comply with current and upcoming laws.

Members are encouraged to stay informed: California Firearm Laws: 2026 Outlook & 2025 Recap . Responsibility for compliance rests solely with the individual member.

caguns.net

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

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

A note on why more of the site now requires an account: automated scrapers and AI systems have been crawling our forums and classifieds at a scale. Requiring sign-in for those sections is the most effective tool we have. It takes a minute to register, it's free, and it keeps what happens here between actual members.

New to California gun ownership or trying to keep up with the changing laws? Check out our sister site CA2A.com — free courses, plain-English legal updates, and step-by-step guides built for California owners.

Advanced features are available only to registered members. Register today!

  • 📢 Classifieds Update — Effective Monday, September 21

    Starting Monday, the free Classifieds ad limit will be lowered from 3 to 2 active ads.

    Verified accounts will keep their limit of 3. All other account limits stay the same.

    Existing ads are not affected and will remain up until they expire.

    Want to keep 3 listings and add features like removing comments and emojis? Upgrade/Verify your account

    More information here

Hate gun roster, hmm how about tire roster?

But some people really like a nanny state government to provide them never ending rules to force on people who annoy them.

It’s the HOA Karen style of government..
 
The supposed 'deregulation' of the California market in the 2000's was a HUGE give-away to the investor owned utilities. They were able to divest themselves of billions of dollars worth of money losing power plants and focus on guaranteed returns from being middle-men and transporters. It never was deregulation, simply a gift to investors that continues today with our governor's attempt to shift fire costs from lack of powerline maintenance from the utility owners to rate payers.
look up whom is paying for these data centers
 
Do you see the condescension and arrogance in this? The absolute nanny state mindset?

Europe is well ahead of the US in that mindset, and I wouldn’t be surprised if the EU implodes on itself in the next decade. We’re a couple decades behind them, and I truly want us to get off the path to all powerful overlord type governments. Because centralized power, while it might satisfy some of the government/regulator class (and their worshippers..) for a while, always finds a way to disaster. Central planners make mistakes, and millions of people pay the price.

Switching topic: Regulators are not legislators. Didn’t the USSC recently clarify that in a Chevron Deference decision?
Hence why the agency had to follow the authority granted in the bill and didn't create legislation. You can call it arrogant all day but that doesn't take away from the general lack of understanding that the average person has about the legislative process even though it's been explained over and over and over. I would say it's arrogant to dismiss consumer protections as "nanny state" when you don't seem to understand why they exist in the first place or the myriad examples of how they help.
 
Yup, regulators are not legislators, and don’t get to override legislation.

The problem in California is that the legislature seems to like cutting the un elected regulation class loose to do their dirty work.

See below, from AI:

Chevron deference was a legal rule that required federal courts to accept a government agency's reasonable interpretation of an ambiguous law passed by Congress. Established by the Supreme Court in 1984, the U.S. Supreme Court officially overturned the doctrine on June 28, 2024, in the case Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6]

The Old Two-Step Test
    • Step One: Courts checked if Congress spoke clearly on the exact issue. If the intent was clear, that was the final rule.
    • Step Two: If the law was unclear or silent, courts deferred to the agency's interpretation as long as it was reasonable or permissible. [1, 2, 3]

Why It Existed
    • Agency Expertise: Supporters argued that specialized government agencies understand complex technical and scientific topics better than generalist judges.
    • Policy Consistency: It gave executive branch agencies the flexibility to run programs and adapt rules over time. [1, 2]


Why It Was Overturned
    • Judicial Duty: Critics argued it violated the Administrative Procedure Act by stripping courts of their independent power to say what the law means. [1]
    • Separation of Powers: The Supreme Court ruled that judges—not unelected agency officials—must resolve legal ambiguities in federal statutes independently
If you have to use AI you have no business commenting because you don't understand the topic
 
Fair enough but what if they are right and it does actually save Californians a billion dollars a year in fuel costs? I don't actually see the downside and I think people are pretty naive to think the free market cares about their interests. I would go so far as to say if this kind of thing annoys you ( not you specifically but anyone) why would you live in California where overwhelmingly people vote for things like this to exist and have for a long time. Even our Republican governors have.
But what if they’re not right? And the citizens lose the ability to choose what’s best for them, because it’s been banned by incompetent government regulators?

Given a choice between more government intervention and less government intervention, I’ll always choose less.
 
If you have to use AI you have no business commenting because you don't understand the topic
So avoid the topic because you don’t like the source? I’ll take that as an admission that I’m correct, and that I was honest about my research.

I’m dropping out of this one, everyone is in their corners and the discussion is going nowhere.

Enjoy!
 
That’s the beauty of their system. Allowing unelected committees to form policy allows elected officials to escape blame. They can go back to their town halls with a straight face and say “I didn’t vote for this”. Policy gained with zero accountability.
 
We already have assault weapons ban, assault catalytic converter ban now here comes assault tire ban!!
 
when you don't seem to understand why they exist in the first place or the myriad examples of how they help.
comical. we know, you just do not accept our responses and just keep pretending it is not occurring. please stop these shenanigans. it seems like you are not here for an actual discussion but for a got you moment. am i wrong?
 
Last edited:
You guys are choosing to live here though, it seems very stressful
No, i’m back to take care of dying family. This is not where I want to live, die, work, exist. But i’m not a 💩 head and family needing help comes over my desires. Personally if this entire 💩 hole burnt to the ground or fell into the sea I would be happier. You can watch the stupid spread if you live anywhere else and a bunch of CA people start moving there.
 
No, i’m back to take care of dying family. This is not where I want to live, die, work, exist. But i’m not a 💩 head and family needing help comes over my desires. Personally if this entire 💩 hole burnt to the ground or fell into the sea I would be happier. You can watch the stupid spread if you live anywhere else and a bunch of CA people start moving there.
So basically you are a sociopath
 
you are not here for an actual discussion but for a got you moment huh?
I took him off my ignore list to see if he was less annoying. He’s not and just went back on it. I’m not here to argue with randoms on the internet. It’s shocking how much you can filter this place to not deal with trolls.
 
If people like you want to be taken seriously then they should propose an alternative for paying for roads. If not a fuel tax then a tax on what? Where do you think the money comes from?
You don't understand how our state government works here. Gas taxes no longer feed the highway fund. They go straight into the general fund to be spent on non- highway programs.

That was changed years ago. If gas taxes went only to the highway fund we would have the best roads in the USA with all that money.

Instead we spend highway funds on illegal alien Medicare and our huge homeless industrial complex.
 
Back
Top Bottom