outerlimits Posted November 9, 2005 Share Posted November 9, 2005 the fine residents of san francisco voted yesterday to ban handgun possession within the city. all handguns must be "surrendered" to the local cops. in addition, the proposition also bans the sale and purchase of any firearm and ammunition in the city as well. glad i don't live there-hate the place in point of fact...but just another reason to leave this state. won't be long for me-4 more years! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iweiny Posted November 9, 2005 Share Posted November 9, 2005 Anybody know any good jobs in Arizona? Ira Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rubberneck Posted November 9, 2005 Share Posted November 9, 2005 That's ok my state just elected a clown who thinks no one should be allowed to own a gun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norbs007 Posted November 9, 2005 Share Posted November 9, 2005 Outer, this actually what I have in mind all day yesterday. Checked the results this morning and felt like a bomb just dropped on me. Can't believe it actually won, even though the SF Police Officers Association campaigned against it because retired and off-duty officers will be prohibited to keep a handgun as well. The ban also prohibits manufacturing of ammunition, don't know if it affects reloading of rifle ammo too . What scares me know is that other cities might follow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3quartertime Posted November 9, 2005 Share Posted November 9, 2005 Imagine how upset the bad guys are gonna be when they find out they have to turn in their gats!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BritinUSA Posted November 9, 2005 Share Posted November 9, 2005 Don't panic yet, it's being challenged already. NRA and Second Amendment Foundation are announcing court challenges. SF has done this twice before and lost in the courts. Still a good time to move away from California, the whole state is in a mess Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiG Lady Posted November 10, 2005 Share Posted November 10, 2005 Watch the population in SFO drop like a rock... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ErikW Posted November 10, 2005 Share Posted November 10, 2005 Ever hear of state law preemption? CA has it regarding guns, rendering local laws such as this null and void. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Boudrie Posted November 10, 2005 Share Posted November 10, 2005 SF has attempted to get around the pre-emption by writing the new ban very narrowly - persons who do not live in SF can posess (but not carry) hadnguns while traveling in SF, even without the protection of FOPA86. Remember, it only takes one judge with a personal agenda and even the most bogus law is treated as valid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
outerlimits Posted November 10, 2005 Author Share Posted November 10, 2005 SF has attempted to get around the pre-emption by writing the new ban very narrowly - persons who do not live in SF can posess (but not carry) hadnguns while traveling in SF, even without the protection of FOPA86. Remember, it only takes one judge with a personal agenda and even the most bogus law is treated as valid. add to that jerry brown is running for attorney general in '06. outta be some interesting interpretations if that happens... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Posted November 10, 2005 Share Posted November 10, 2005 The idiocy here is getting out of hand! Twice before it's been tried and failed, let's hope that thrice is NOT charmed for this stupidity! I knew I moved outa' my birthplace and family hometown for a darned good reason, I just thought it was about property values at the time ;-) BTW, I hafta' travel through SF to get to my local shooting club and I still have to "Visit" San Francisco when I work (See Rob's Post). I will just hafta' be a bit more carefull about hard casing and locking my gats when I leave the house with them now. I sure don't wanna be the poster child here ;-( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Religious Shooter Posted November 10, 2005 Share Posted November 10, 2005 Man that sucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigbadaboom Posted November 10, 2005 Share Posted November 10, 2005 I hope this is the straw that breaks the back of the SCOTUS and finally forces them to make a decision regarding the 2nd amendment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scooter Posted November 10, 2005 Share Posted November 10, 2005 Screw trying to defeat the ban whether is legal or not. I'm going to be doing some writing to gun and ammo manufactures to support the ban of handguns in San Francisco. I think all manufactures should stop any sales immediately beginning for SFPD. Since no one has guns, cops don't need them either. It's amazing how the city I live in only 70 miles from SF has a ban on nuclear weapons, it's a $500 fine if you are caught transporting nuclear weapons, yet they don't have a ban on guns yet. If anyone got any hook ups for a mechanical engineering job out in Arizona, let me know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warpspeed Posted November 10, 2005 Share Posted November 10, 2005 I hope this is the straw that breaks the back of the SCOTUS and finally forces them to make a decision regarding the 2nd amendment. I was think the same thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Religious Shooter Posted November 10, 2005 Share Posted November 10, 2005 They also banned army recruiters from school campuses. I guess navy recruiters are OK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Posted November 10, 2005 Share Posted November 10, 2005 They also banned army recruiters from school campuses. I guess navy recruiters are OK. The Village People didn't have no drill sergeant. Can you say, YMCA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carlos Posted November 10, 2005 Share Posted November 10, 2005 (edited) SF should be renamed the city of lunacy. I seem to remember that Diane Fienstein won a small piece of pork-barrel for her state by getting the Navy to donate a decomissioned WWII Navy war ship (USS Iowa) that was supposed to be docked at Fisherman's Wharf as a tourist attraction. SF's city council, in its infinite wisdom, torpedoed the whole plan. Their justification? The city of San Francisco is against the illegal war in Iraq, the city council opposes the military in general over the Clinton era "don't ask, don't tell" policy on homosexuality, and the council is generally against offensive military weapons- including nuclear weapons which the ship might have once carried. Therefore, they were not interested in having this historical ship associated with their city in any way - even if it benefitted the city. Fienstein was flabbergasted. I located these links: http://www.seacoastonline.com/news/08212005/world/58962.htm http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2005/08/21...3_208_20_05.txt The beliefs of the people running the city really are that radically outside of mainstream understanding. Edited November 10, 2005 by Carlos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carinab Posted November 10, 2005 Share Posted November 10, 2005 add to that jerry brown is running for attorney general in '06. outta be some interesting interpretations if that happens... Wow, is he still alive (and still dating Linda Ronstadt)? He's gotta be close to 70 yrs old. He was govenor when I was in high school... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidball Posted November 10, 2005 Share Posted November 10, 2005 I hope this is the straw that breaks the back of the SCOTUS and finally forces them to make a decision regarding the 2nd amendment. Be careful what you wish for . . . it is unclear how the Court would rule on the Second Amendment at this time . . . our chances are BETTER with Roberts and Alito (we think/hope), but SCOTUS is notorious for surprises . . . the recent Kelo decision is a glaring example. We would hope for decisions that support an individual right, but who knows? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AustinMike Posted November 11, 2005 Share Posted November 11, 2005 Glad I live in Texas! So, the ban actually calls for the confiscation of the handguns you already own, right? Who's ready to handover a $4000 Open blaster? Completely ridiculous. I'd be packing up and leaving the city. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiG Lady Posted November 11, 2005 Share Posted November 11, 2005 This whole issue in SFO is completely revolting. Totally. Gah!!!! Yeh, Jerry Brown (and Linda Ronstadt) just won't go away. God knows how old they are...!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hey QuicksDraw! Posted November 11, 2005 Share Posted November 11, 2005 It's all very sad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vlad Posted November 11, 2005 Share Posted November 11, 2005 Actually there is a bit of good news in this. During the lead up to this EVERYONE and they pink dog came out against the ban, including the SF police association, and all the liberal SF papers. It brought the issue to the public eye and ( shortly after Katrina) the public happened to want guns around. Lott has an analisys of this at NRO http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/lott200511091053.asp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulm540 Posted November 12, 2005 Share Posted November 12, 2005 Well, hopefully crime in my area will decrease as all the criminals are going to move to S.F. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now