TexasCHLforum.com

Each firearm sold, transferred, or manufactured in California must be accompanied with a firearm safety device approved by the Department of Justice and identified as appropriate for that firearm. The Department of Justice is required to compile and publish a listing of all of the safety devices that have been determined to meet the department’s standards. A list of these devices is available on the Department of Justice Bureau of Firearms website at http://www.ag.ca.gov/firearms/fsdcertlist.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;. (Penal Code § 12088.1.)

The term “long-gun safe” is distinct from “gun safe” and “firearms safety device.” A “long-gun safe” means a locking container designed to fully contain and secure a rifle or a shotgun. A “long-gun safe” must have a locking system consisting of either a mechanical combination lock or an electronic combination lock that has at least 1,000 possible unique combinations consisting of a minimum of three numbers, letters, or symbols per combination, and that is not listed on the Department of Justice Roster of Firearm Safety Devices. (PC § 12087.6).

No person shall keep for commercial sale, commercially sell, or distribute as part of an organized firearm safety program, any firearms safety device (other than a long-gun safe) that is not listed on the Department of Justice roster of approved firearms safety devices. Any sale of a long gun safe must be accompanied by a specified warning label. (Penal Code § 12088.1.)

The Department of Justice Roster of Firearm Safety Devices may be accessed on the Department California Firearms
of Justice website at http://www.ag.ca.gov/firearms/fsdcertlist.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.

Firearm sales and transfers are exempt from the requirement to provide a firearm safety device if either of the following is true:

- The purchaser demonstrates proof that he or she owns a gun safe that meets the standards set forth in Department of Justice regulations adopted under Penal Code section 12088.2 by signing an affidavit to that effect.

- The purchaser presents an approved safety device for the firearm being purchased and provides to the firearms dealer an original receipt showing the purchase took place no more than 30 days prior to picking up the firearm.

- The purchaser presents a receipt for a Department of Justice-approved lock box and signs an affidavit (provided by the firearms dealer) that describes the make and model of the lock box and that the lock box will accommodate the firearm being purchased.

K.Mooneyham wrote:I'm already ticked off enough to have to constantly show "papers please". I'm not in favor of any more giant bureaucratic government schemes that will require untold billions more dollars of non-existent taxpayer money to build, implement and enforce. Once upon a time, before I was born I concede, you could buy a firearm by mail order and have it shipped to your house...somehow we still ended up with a prosperous nation. In fact, its only since they started really shoving all this bureaucracy on Americans that it seems things have really gone downhill...imagine that.

AEA wrote:I don't like the idea of linking Driver's License to anything that has to do with CHL, 2nd Amendment or any other RIGHTS of the Constitution.

One is a Constitutional RIGHT, the other is a State Issued Document.

You have no Constitutional RIGHT to a Driver's License.

See my point? Let's not start to lump two very different things together.....we have enough troubles already!

K.Mooneyham wrote:The solution is to quit mollycoddling the REAL bad-guys. I mean the ones who purposely use violence, whether with a firearm or not, for fun or profit. I don't do those things to others and I don't expect them to be done to me. Infringing on MY freedoms (or the freedoms of that vast majority of firearms owners who don't commit violent crimes) is NOT going to do one tiny little thing to make this a safer nation, not in the least. I just wish we had more than a few politicians in this country who had the guts to say that; most of them don't. They want to make, or buy into, these so-called "common sense" laws that ain't got a lick of common sense in them.

AEA wrote:You do not need a DL to prove identity. A State issued ID is available and acceptable by FFL's.

But, yes, I have a DL. But I want nothing to do with a DL having anything to do with my 2nd Amendment Constitutional RIGHT.

You start something like this and you hand the Dems more options to attack us. Several times already I have heard Drivers License and CHL or CWP or whatever mentioned on the Media and no one calls them out on the BIG DIFFERENCE of the two.

K.Mooneyham wrote:I'm already ticked off enough to have to constantly show "papers please". I'm not in favor of any more giant bureaucratic government schemes that will require untold billions more dollars of non-existent taxpayer money to build, implement and enforce. Once upon a time, before I was born I concede, you could buy a firearm by mail order and have it shipped to your house...somehow we still ended up with a prosperous nation. In fact, its only since they started really shoving all this bureaucracy on Americans that it seems things have really gone downhill...imagine that.

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

How a politician stands on the Second Amendment tells you how he or she views you as an individual… as a trustworthy and productive citizen, or as part of an unruly crowd that needs to be lorded over, controlled, supervised, and taken care of.