Assembly panel backs gun bills in response to San Bernardino shooting
A legislative panel on Tuesday approved three gun control bills introduced in response to last year’s mass shooting by terrorists in San Bernardino that left 14 people dead.

The measures approved by the Assembly Public Safety Committee include a ban on assault weapons equipped with “bullet buttons,” recessed buttons that, when pressed with a sharp object, allow swift replacement of ammunition magazines.

One of the guns used in the Dec. 2 massacre at the Inland Regional Center had a “bullet button.”

Assault weapons with detachable magazines have been illegal for years in California, but the “bullet button” is not covered by that law, said Assemblyman Marc Levine (D-San Rafael), who authored the bill that would close the loophole.

“These lethal weapons are killing machines that do not belong in our communities,” Levine told the panel.

The measure was opposed by Ed Worley, a lobbyist for the National Rifle Assn.

“The 2nd Amendment is still viable, and this statute is going to violate the 2nd Amendment,” Worley told the panel, predicting the proposal would result in a spike in gun sales.

The measure was approved on a 5-2 vote. Assemblyman Tom Lackey (R-Palmdale) opposed the measure, arguing that gun control laws “don’t have any meaningful impact on criminal behavior.”

To give Gov. Jerry Brown a choice, the committee approved a second bill that would accomplish the same thing by saying that any rifle with detachable magazines are assault rifles banned from sale in the state. Those already owning such guns would have to register them with the state. The bill requires rifles to have fixed magazines that accept no more than ten rounds.

Worley said many Californians already own guns with detachable magazines that would have to be registered with the state if the bill is approved.

“You are going to have tens of millions of people in California who are going to be criminalized,” Worley said, noting Gov. Brown vetoed a similar bill last year.

A third bill approved Tuesday would prohibit people from buying more than one long gun, or rifle, within any 30-day period. One California man bought 177 long guns on one day, officials said.

The panel agreed to delay action for two weeks on a bill that would expand the definition of firearm to include unfinished frames that can be quickly converted to a functioning gun. Those “ghost guns” can be built without traceable serial numbers. Committee members said some definitions in the bill need to be refined.

Strange, I could swear Calif. required "A Salt" rifles to be registered by law decades ago.  I know I sold my Colt HBAR to a buddy rather than register or hide it.  Sometime in the 80's I think?

Now you have to register all over again?  I do know the majority never got registered the first time.  Likely to be the same this time.

Strange, I could swear Calif. required "A Salt" rifles to be registered by law decades ago.  I know I sold my Colt HBAR to a buddy rather than register or hide it.  Sometime in the 80's I think?

Now you have to register all over again?  I do know the majority never got registered the first time.  Likely to be the same this time.

I believe Bullet button weapons were exempt, now they wont be

One of the guns used in the Dec. 2 massacre at the Inland Regional Center had a “bullet button.”

My understanding is that one of the rifles used had been converted from "bullet button" to the standard finger depressed magazine release button (i.e. it was already illegal), and the "bullet button" gun was legal and "as purchased in California".

Assault weapons with detachable magazines have been illegal for years in California, but the “bullet button” is not covered by that law, said Assemblyman Marc Levine (D-San Rafael), who authored the bill that would close the loophole.

The "bullet button" is not a loophole. The law was specifically written so that a magazine could not be released using fingers, but would require some kind of tool. One of the tools that works is the pointed tip of a bullet. Why do these people have to lie about everything?

Worley said many Californians already own guns with detachable magazines that would have to be registered with the state if the bill is approved.
“You are going to have tens of millions of people in California who are going to be criminalized,” Worley said, noting Gov. Brown vetoed a similar bill last year.

That's either a misstatement or a misquote, or a gross exaggeration. California's population is 39 million (with roughly 30 million 18 years of age or over who could qualify to legally own a rifle). Two-thirds ("tens of millions" would be a minimum of 20 million) those people (2/3 of the adults over 18) have a rifle with a detachable magazine? I don't think so. Several estimates put the firearm ownership rate at 21% for California, that would be 6.2 million people over 18, and I doubt that every single on of them has a detachable magazine rifle. So the law would ONLY create maybe three million criminals out of law-abiding citizens. That seems reasonable, for California. Authorities there could round up that many rifles using registration data and a small tax increase for funding. Maybe Bloomberg would even consider paying for the confiscations. 

California is F'd up to begin with.  Worse than HAWAII with their stupid laws.  That is why I haven't set foot in that state since 2012 and refuse to go here.  To think at one time California was my favorite state to visit.  My new favorite is NV, especially since my daughter and grandkids are at Nellis and NV allows me to legally carry a conceal firearm.