POLL: Should California Ban the 'Bullet Button?'

The bullet button gets around the state law banning semi-automatic guns and those with removable magazines. Should the button, too, be banned? Take our poll and tell us in the comments.

Earlier this week, California Senator Leland Yee (D-San Francisco/San Mateo) was given the Vanguard Award for "Elected Official of the Year" for his work in social justice.

We also reported that one of the biggest efforts Yee is working on currently is a Senate bill to ban the "bullet button" for semi-automatic rifles in California.

That certainly got people talking.

In California, an "assault weapon" is defined as a semi-automatic rifle with both a pistol grip and a detachable magazine, among other features.

A "bullet button" is designed to replace a normal magazine release button with a recessed button that can only be accessed through the use of a tool—such as the tip of a bullet.

The California Department of Justice (CA DOJ) declared that semi-automatic rifles utilizing a bullet button are considered to be "fixed magazine" rifles, and therefore legal under the state's assault weapon ban.

This was most recently reaffirmed in April of 2011 in the case of Haynie vs. Pleasanton, wherin the CA DOJ said that the arrest of an individual with such a rifle was without cause, as such a rifle is legal.

See the full text of 'Haynie vs. Pleasanton' in the PDF attached to this article.

Yee disagrees. Though the bullet button slows down a person's ability to change magazines, Yee argues that it should still be banned for safety reasons, calling assault weapons and bullet buttons "public nuisances."

People all over the state - and across the country - feel passionately about the issue of bans on assault weapons and bullet buttons.

Many say such a ban is useless; that people who want to kill will find a way, and that whether or not bullet buttons and semi-automatic assault weapons are banned won't make a difference. Therefore, the ban would only punish law-abiding citizens who use guns and bullet buttons safely.

Others say, tragedies like the Aurora, Colo. movie theater shooting - which Yee has been using as a reason to push the bill even harder lately - are proof that more gun control is needed in this country.

Patch wants to know - what do you think? 

Let's continue the conversation. Please vote in our poll below, and feel free to share your thoughts and explain your vote in the comments section below.

Mark Mathews August 04, 2012 at 07:55 PM
Criminals will never, EVER give a fig about the legality of their actions, so WHY do you want to limit the rights of law abiding citizens to own firearms of this type?
Neven August 04, 2012 at 09:04 PM
Why does one need a firearm of THIS type? Can't you defend yourself with all the other firearms that ARE legal?
Mark Mathews August 04, 2012 at 11:34 PM
Who gave YOU the power to decide what type of firearm I arm myself with? Why are you scared of my freedom of choice? Or is it YOUR lack of control over me?
Neven August 05, 2012 at 01:57 AM
Hardly,. Just answer the question. Once again ... Why does one need a firearm of THIS type? Can't you defend yourself with all the other firearms that ARE legal?
Mark Mathews August 05, 2012 at 02:11 AM
Because I have a God given RIGHT to defend myself with a firearm, as well as a Second Amendment RIGHT to keep and bear arms. I am armed to defend myself and family against ANY threat short of needing the United States Army. Gang bangers have these weapons too, you know. Would you FEEEEEEEL better if I had instead, ten shotguns, or five other high powered rifles? So, riddle me YOUR answer to MY questions: Why ARE you scared of my freedome of choice? Or is it YOUR lack of control over me?
Neven August 05, 2012 at 02:20 AM
No one said you have a right to bear ILLEGAL arms. And so, not scared of you or your arsenal. But I think your neighbors have a right to know that you evidently have an arsenal at home that could wipe out the neighborhood.
Neven August 05, 2012 at 02:27 AM
And by the way, you don't have a GOD GIVEN right, you have a CONSTITUTIONAL right. If you prefer to live in Syria ... THEN, you have a god given right. Otherwise, we in the U.S. expect you to uphold the constitutional right to bear arms .. and that does NOT include semi-automatic weapons.
John Sebastian August 05, 2012 at 03:13 AM
As a liberal, I would have to agree that more laws to control these types of firearms isn't the solution. What we need is effective laws that place mandatory safety training of these weapons. I have more fear of walking down a gang infested neighborhood than knowjng my neighbor has an assault weapon and is properly trained to use it correctly.
Scott Yeager August 05, 2012 at 04:49 AM
There is no "god" given right to anything.
Mark Mathews August 05, 2012 at 05:29 AM
"Neven," all my firearms ARE legal, and I do NOT have an "arsenal." What a twit! YOU are now the one coming off as a paranoid schizophrenic, which I presume you most likely ARE.
Mark Mathews August 05, 2012 at 05:30 AM
No, God HAS given me the right to defend myself. Y
Mark Mathews August 05, 2012 at 05:49 AM
John, I agree that one who purchases any type of firearm SHOULD get themselves trained on their use; everyone I know has and continue to do so on a regular basis. I would be the one coming to your aid with my own firearm, should I know you need help in that area, if I knew you and you were a neighbor. Glad you mentioned gangs - it is THEY and organized crime who are doing the vast majority of killing on a daily basis, NOT me, NOT my family, and NOT the other members of my National Rifle Association. It has been decades since predominantly democrat politicians have begun creating bills and passing laws restricting EVERYONES access to and use of firearms, all because of those same gang and organized crime vermin, and I for one am tired of being lumped into the same boat. THIS is one of the reasons I joined the NRA, to push back against those who are blind to the fact that ours is a violent world, and I refuse to be a victim, nor my family. I am also a well trained Navy veteran who has been to nations where the government does not allow their subjects (see the difference?) to defend themselves with firearms. I will NOT allow my country to become such an East Germany. THAT is why I am now on this board, to spread sanity. I hope at least ONE anti-gun person will listen, and take some learning from these and future posts. Test that famous liberal tolerance, to put it another way.
Unfiltered Steve Simoneau August 05, 2012 at 06:05 AM
Due to the militarizing of our Nation's police forces they are now required to be trained in the use of assault rifles, and many carry semi-automatic assault rifles in their vehicles. I agree with your question of "why?", but also question why a miltary trained, fully educated, police officer with expert marksman skills requires the use of a semi-automatic assault rifle. You'd think that with all that training and skill a standard firearm would be sufficient.
Ernie Stoddard August 05, 2012 at 09:39 AM
When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have the guns. Outlaws don't care about laws, they will use what ever means they can use, to get their hands on any kind of gun, legal or illegal.
Mark Mathews August 07, 2012 at 11:25 PM
Steve, your question would best be answered by posing it to the Napa Chief of Police, Napa County Sheriff, and any of their rank and file law enforcement officials. As to my own opinion, I understand it originated in the fact that there are criminals in all of our communities with firepower that has advanced over the years. So long as they are not misused, I have little concern for our law enforcement organizations having them to battle the criminal elements that we all know have them. An analogy, if you will: back in the day, before firearms MADE all men equal (think about that statement for a moment), what did the “police” force of the day use? Swords, Pikes, Spears and Crossbows perhaps? Your same question could have been asked then; why DOES the Kings men need all that weaponry? (Hint – to control HIS population?) As for the cliché of “Assault Weapon,” keep this in mind; until World War II came about, there was NO “World War I” by that name; it was generally know as “The Great War,’ or “The War to End All Wars.” Likewise, the term “Assault Weapon” was coined by pointy headed politicians to create a ground swell of emotional reaction to their mere existence. It has obviously worked, to this poster.
Mark Mathews August 07, 2012 at 11:26 PM
Ernie, the saying "when guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have the guns” is a proven truism in big cities run by democrats. However there are many, many otherwise good and right thinking people of this nation that have been lulled and conned; nay duped into thinking that ALL we firearm owners are bad, just because we own firearms, regardless of our need, lack of criminal record, past military experience, nor legal Constitutional approval. I truly believe that what we have is a concerted effort to control the population in the traditional socialist (Soviet/East German/Chinese/North Korean/Cuban) way; by first disarming that population, so they are less of a threat to a progressive power movement of control over our lives; you can then force the people (sheep/peasants/subjects) around according to your politically-correct fascist designs (Read Karl Marx for the details, or Barak Hussein Obama’s Communist Mentor, Comrade Frank Marshal Davis for details).
chuck2251 August 18, 2012 at 04:24 PM
when we need to defend ourselves against our government ,we do not want to be like those in the middle east ,with no practical way to defend our selves..the un will not be there to help..
chuck2251 August 18, 2012 at 04:25 PM
i am not..you can be my neighbor..
chuck2251 August 18, 2012 at 04:27 PM
what part of the 2nd amendment mentions the semi automatic?/
chuck2251 August 18, 2012 at 04:30 PM
these criminals did not abide by the law,, http://www.dailynews.com/news/ci_16164852
chuck2251 August 18, 2012 at 04:32 PM
leland is a politically correct lib that thinks murdering - raping juveniles should not get a life sentence,
Mark Mathews August 18, 2012 at 05:44 PM
Iceland can live with the knowledge that they are allowing subhuman criminals extra breathing time, complete with room, board, doctors, libraries... all the creature comforts and more, than their victims will ever receive in any monetary compensation for the savage attacks by these now safely coddled inmates. Liberals... "pitui!"
Mark Mathews August 18, 2012 at 05:49 PM
Chuck, if those same liberal minded folks read as far into the First Amendment as they do our Second Amendment, then those same intolerant ttypes would have instituted debate squashing speech control by now, and... and... Oh... Wait a minute; they already HAVE given us the debase scourge of Politically Correct Speech, havent they? Hmmm... No, no mention of semi automatics in the second amendment, and that in itself is irrelevant to its meaning.
chuck2251 August 24, 2012 at 06:06 PM
Steve IN SOME CASES EVEN THE COPS ARE OUT GUNNED.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f1agr5ik81I
Ash Leigh August 24, 2012 at 07:54 PM
Amen. I also agree with Marks first comment. Why limit the rights to us law abiding citizens. Please tell me more about how criminals follow the law...
Ash Leigh August 24, 2012 at 07:59 PM
Why do people drive around those huge hummers, or have their own private jets? Why do they NEED those types of transportation? It's not about a need, but a right to be able to.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something