Pistol World Forums banner
1 - 20 of 21 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
431 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Has anybody else heard about this? I just learned of it today when I got my new American Rifleman.

You can read more at www.sanfranban.com but I thought I would post the Proposition. This is incredible. Any bets on how the good people of SF vote on this in November?

Text of Proposition H

Ordinance Text and Description

Proposition H

Be it ordained by the People of the City and County of San Francisco:

Section 1. Findings

The people of the City and County of San Francisco hereby find and declare:

Handgun violence is a serious problem in San Francisco. According to a San Francisco Department of Public Health report published in 2002, 176 handgun incidents in San Francisco affected 213 victims in 1999, the last year for which data is available. Only 26.8% of firearms were recovered. Of all firearms used to cause injury or death, 67% were handguns.

San Franciscans have a right to live in a safe and secure City. The presence of handguns poses a significant threat to the safety of San Franciscans.

It is not the intent of the people of the City and County of San Francisco to affect any resident of other jurisdictions with regard to handgun possession, including those who may temporarily be within the boundaries of the City and County.

Article XI of the California Constitution provides Charter created counties with the "home rule" power. This power allows counties to enact laws that exclusively apply to residents within their borders, even when such a law conflicts with state law or when state law is silent. San Francisco adopted its most recent comprehensive Charter revision in 1996.

Since it is not the intent of the people of the City and County of San Francisco to impose an undue burden on inter-county commerce and transit, the provisions of Section 3 apply exclusively to residents of the City and County of San Francisco.

Section 2. Ban on Sale, Manufacture, Transfer or Distribution of Firearms in the City and County of San Francisco

Within the limits of the City and County of San Francisco, the sale, distribution, transfer and manufacture of all firearms and ammunition shall be prohibited.

Section 3. Limiting Handgun Possession in the City and County of San Francisco

Within the limits of the City and County of San Francisco, no resident of the City and County of San Francisco shall possess any handgun unless required for professional purposes, as enumerated herein. Specifically, any City, state or federal employee carrying out the functions of his or her government employment, including but not limited to peace officers as defined by California Penal Code Section 830 et.seq. and animal control officers may possess a handgun. Active members of the United States armed forces or the National Guard and security guards, regularly employed and compensated by a person engaged in any lawful business, while actually employed and engaged in protecting and preserving property or life within the scope of his or her employment, may also possess handguns.

Within 90 days from the effective date of this section, any resident of the City and County of San Francisco may surrender his or her handgun at any district station of the San Francisco Police Department, or to the San Francisco Sheriff's Department without penalty under this section.

Section 4. Effective Date This ordinance shall become effective January 1, 2006.

Section 5. Penalties

Within 90 days of the effective date of this section, the Board of Supervisors shall enact penalties for violations of this ordinance. The Mayor, after consultation with the District Attorney, Sheriff and Chief of Police shall, within 30 days from the effective date, provide recommendations about penalties to the Board.

Section 6. State Law

Nothing in this ordinance is designed to duplicate or conflict with California state law. Accordingly, any person currently denied the privilege of possessing a handgun under state law shall not be covered by this ordinance, but shall be covered by the California state law which denies that privilege. Nothing in this ordinance shall be construed to create or require any local license or registration for any firearm, or create an additional class of citizens who must seek licensing or registration.

Section 7. Severability

If any provision of this ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstances is held invalid or unconstitutional, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect other provisions or applications or this ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid or unconstitutional provision or application. To this end, the provisions of this ordinance shall be deemed severable.

Section 8. Amendment

By a two-thirds vote and upon making findings, the Board of Supervisors may amend this ordinance in the furtherance of reducing handgun violence.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
129 Posts
Just another reason I will never move back to California, let alone S.F.

It is really sad that these people think that if you keep law abiding citizens from owning guns, that they will be safer :roll:

A criminal has no respect for any law, therefore will keep their handguns.


Mike.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
88 Posts
md_beatt said:
Just another reason I will never move back to California, let alone S.F.

It is really sad that these people think that if you keep law abiding citizens from owning guns, that they will be safer :roll:

A criminal has no respect for any law, therefore will keep their handguns.


Mike.
Mike,

So true, it amazes folks think criminals are going to abide by the law. No...they BREAK the law. Incredible!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
23 Posts
Apparently, some Ca. politicians were talking to some of our Ma. polititcians about how to give criminals an edge when they try to rob or kill us.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
39 Posts
Mother F***er, It's a shame. Gun control has always amazed me. For me it was like roller coasters. I never liked em when I was little because I had never ridden one. Then one day on a date, of course I couldn't back out and be a wussy, I rode one and have loved them every since.
I wish people would go out and take gun safety classes, learn about guns, and experience them - before bashing them.
It's so frustrating, but lets just be thankful for the firearm's sake that we got Bush instead of Kerry this term...

Ciao
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
161 Posts
Ok I read this like 5 times and hesitated to post every time till now.

What is more unconstitutional?

Gun Bans; or

dening the right to a society to establish its own laws?


Well I don't really care about this. I would just move.


I have faith that this will not be enacted and if not FU-- those ****---.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
178 Posts
Beautiful city with terrible politicians... Can they do that on a municipal level?
Well, at least I don’t have to worry about it ever happening in Texas.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
161 Posts
El Padrino said:
Beautiful city with terrible politicians... Can they do that on a municipal level?
Well, at least I don’t have to worry about it ever happening in Texas.
Sure can if it is put up to a vote.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
178 Posts
I'm not familiar with the California Constitution but if it has any clause similiar the the 2nd Amendment it will be overthrown at the state level.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
944 Posts
The sad part is that the media is probably pushing really hard for people to vote yes and many will likely do so without thinking twice. I wouldn't be suprised if it passed in SF. Feinstein would be proud. B***H.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
585 Posts
Can they do that on a municipal level?
It depends on the CA Constitution. It was tried years ago in LA and failed. If the wording of CA's Constitution is as liberal as its citizens... they are doomed - just like New York City residents. :roll:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
178 Posts
I just scanned an article about this subject. The ban is for pistols only, which would make it easier pass without snagging on constitution issues.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
86 Posts
:shock: Boy, I'd really hate to see that pass, most of the bad things for gun owners seem to start in Californa, and then move to some of the more liberal eastern states! It must be time for another donation to the NRA ILA! :roll:
Scott
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
944 Posts
There may be some good news if it is passed though. There will be an exodus of really affordable handguns from SF to the rest of the country. Get your checkbooks ready gentlemen!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
129 Posts
Fuelburns2 said:
There may be some good news if it is passed though. There will be an exodus of really affordable handguns from SF to the rest of the country. Get your checkbooks ready gentlemen!
Maybe not, i seem to remember reading that if this passed that the city would set up turn in center where you would be able to turn in your handgun to the city.

and if that happens then most of the handgun would probally end up on the bottom of the pacific ocean :(


Mike.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
944 Posts
I thought the citizens would have a 90 day period to sell or otherwise dispose of their handguns before they were liable for illegal posession. Most people will not surrender their guns to the gov't when they have the option to make some money. Unless I read it wrong they will have, and most will take, that opportunity to mitigate the loss.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
152 Posts
i say who cares bout san fran cuz everyone there is gay so if they have guns there they will probly only use the gun barrels to sodomize eachother :roll:

thank God i live in the central valley far away from those type of ppl :wink:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
38 Posts
Maser said:
i say who cares bout san fran cuz everyone there is gay so if they have guns there they will probly only use the gun barrels to sodomize eachother :roll:

thank God i live in the central valley far away from those type of ppl :wink:
Were you born this abrasive or did you have to work at it?
 
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
Top