california ammo law

[skeet]

As far as your smart ass comment about the OBGYN not actually delivering a baby, there is an agreement with all OBGYN's practicing at the hospital that they will take turns being the "house" OBGYN and covering each other's asses, so my OBGYN gets to bill for that. $4,800 is still ridiculous and I am not at all happy about how it went down. If I post about how my wife's OBGYN was late and the reason for it, I will be here all night.

Fabs that wasn't meant to be amart assed comment...Seriously you are the attorney. I think it is wrong that you or the ins co should have to pay for services NOT rendered by a doctor.. Some way some how that is just wrong

As far as medical costs part of the rise in medical costs is because of government regulation and meddling and of course..everybody wanting to sue docs for possible mistakes. If the doc was incompetent i understand...but too many people justwant to cash in. Part of the cost of the OB docs is insurance costs arising from too many lawsuits. When my daughter was born the doctors charge was 400 dollars. Hospital charge was 700 bucks.

Please don't run for office...You seem to like too much regulation..I'd have to send Vinnie...from Philly..to visit you.

[shooterjon]

Well I must agree with SKEET- after living in California and being told 25 yrs ago that the anti guns would take our guns away 1 LAW AT A TIME-it sure seem to be coming true.California laws do make a difference around the country just look at the emission laws and the way the rest of the country will be forced into abiding with California emission standards,and it just starts there.
We currently have laws that fit the crimes,we don't need more laws to justify a situation IE driving while talking on the phone,ITS CALLED INATTENTIVE DRIVING.And the list goes on and on and on.
I am with the NRA on 99.9% of the legislation of GUN AND NO AMMO LAWS -- IT'S NOT NEEDED!
Stand up for your rights get in their face LET YOUR VOICE BE HEARD--Vote only for those supporting gun rights -THATS MY WAY OF LIFE-A former Nazifornia resident.I have gone as far as not purchasing items from ANTI GUN companies,I will spend my money with pro gun company's.I got the list from the NRA web site last year and use it as mush as I can.
Just me beleven in me!

[fabsroman]

That's alright, my son Luca, will be all grown up by the time I decide to run for dictator of this country.

Malpractice insurance costs are pretty high for OBGYN's. That I will admit, but malpractice insurance and the cost associated with it isn't really increasing at the rate that medical costs in general are increasing. So, that really isn't the problem. If malpractice insurance costs increase at a rate slower than inflation, then that really isn't the problem that is causing medical costs in total to increase quicker than inflation.

Now, you are one for less regulation, correct. Well, about 12 years ago Maryland passed a law capping the recovery for pain & suffering in any tort case. Back then it was $350,000. Now, I believe it is $500,000. Are you for this regulation or against it. Based upon what you wrote, I would guess you are for it. Me, I'm against it. A jury should be able to award any amount it sees fit, without the General Assembly putting a cap on it to keep auto, homeowner, and medical malpractice insurance premiums lower for the society in general. So, a select few get screwed so the majority of people can have their auto insurance bill be $100 cheaper every year.

So, are you for regulating when a plaintiff can bring a medical malpractice case? If so, you are in favor of MORE regulation. In Court cases there is something called Summary Judgment. If the case has no merit after all the discovery is done, and there is no dispute of material fact that a jury needs to decide, a Judge can throw that case out on Summary Judgment before it ever gets to trial in front of a jury. It happens. I was in on a $10 million auto accident case where it happened. Luckily, I was defending the insurance company and the case got thrown out.

We conservatives say we are not in favor of more regulation, but how about the law passed in Maryland wherein people (i.e., anti hunters) cannot interfere with a lawful hunt on public property? Are you in favor of that regulation? I bet you are, as am I. We just pick and choose the ones that suit us.

How about the seat belt law that reduces medical costs for society in general. Is it more important to reduce those costs to society in general and help save lives, or should people have the freedom to drive without wearing a seatbelt? How about speed limit? Should people be allowed to drive any speed they want. Then you and I would have to worry about the morons that have nothing to lose driving way too fast to get to their next crack deal. Again, regulation is fine when it suits us.

How about the regulation of drugs. Should we regulate those, or should they just be legalized? Should people have the will to choose drugs if they want, without any legal ramifications. The current drug laws are definitely hindering free choice.

The only reason gun regulation can even be shot down, no pun intended, is because of the 2nd Amendment.

Society is a bunch of regulations, starting with the criminal code.

[huntingvet]

The worst part about this CA ammo law is it will restrict my ability on types of ammo. I understand that companies outside the state cannot ship ammo into CA for private purchases. So I will be limited to whatever the local stores have in stock. I won't be able to purchase unique ammo from Cabela's for example.

[skeet]

Originally Posted by huntingvet

The worst part about this CA ammo law is it will restrict my ability on types of ammo. I understand that companies outside the state cannot ship ammo into CA for private purchases. So I will be limited to whatever the local stores have in stock. I won't be able to purchase unique ammo from Cabela's for example.

You are corect. It restricts where and When you can buy. It won't stop you from driving out of state though..yet.

Fabs..don't belabor the point of regulation. I understand we have to have some regulation. I think the state should stay out of people's private lives and their guaranteed rights. As Isaid..Stupid laws are just that..Stupid. If the Peta people want to come out to my farm on the shore and harrass me while hunting..or any of the other places I happen to be able to hunt..they are welcome to come...but they will be dealt with at the scene. Not threatening just stating. I think that the state legislature mas passed some absolutely ridiculous laws and so do you. I think the legislature should stay OUT of the court room. Wht I have stated and will again is that I think the governments we have try to regulate too many things. You can't regulate every facet of people's lives. Don't go with the stupid seat belt laws..You say they are for safety..and that is just more liberal BS..like saying it's for the children. It ain't about SAFETY...It's about the MONEY. So if people choose not to wear their seatbelts in the Obama care future..they can just deny service to the dummies...wouldn't you say?? It's all about money power and control Fabs. You must get it I'd say. You aren't stupid. If you believe otherwise then you have surely been snowed. When they set up the seat belt laws in Md I happened to spend some time in Annapolis and with the then Speaker of the House. Behind closed doors it was about the control and the future money from tickets. Sure seat belts help to save some lives..but so do slower speed limits(to a larger degree than belts) and Helmets for MC riders are a joke for life saving at any speed. As I have said before..you are too young to remember driving Regulations as they were before criminalizing the driving laws. That was about control and money like many other laws we have on the book. Now as far a Luca..I might have to call Vinnie soon..just in case you might decide to run.. He might take that decision out of your hands. Heck you gotta ease up man..the way you are going you'll have a heart attack before 45. Fabs... a piece of advice..if you ever want a farm somewhere..don't wait more years..go someplace else NOW and buy a place..You can always practice law anywhere. Maybe not as much money in it as there...but money ain't everything. One day you'll realize that..I hope it ain't too late. Believe it or not that was one of the reasons I did not become an attorney. That is however another story for a time when we can sit down together and have a small snort aftr shooting another round or two of clays of some type. When I come back to Md again. You WILL take the time out of your busy schedule Vinny says so!!

BTW my personal physician is from North Carolina and he came here to be a doctor because he wanted a life other than work. He is a friend(unless he tells me stuff I don't wanna hear) and he said he makes about 2/3 of what he made back east.. But he works where he wants pretty much when he wants and he can just step outside and relax for a bit looking at the mountains without a bunch of people getting nasty and hounding him. He said it was the best decision he ever made. We shoot together every now and then. Only thing he misses...other than a clay bird or so... is the quail hunting he had back east. But I do try to make up for that with pheasant hunting on my place or some of the other farms I am able to hunt...just for asking BTW. Nope Fabs...although you won't believe it..money ain't everything.. Just $.02 from someone who considers you a friend

[fabsroman]

Moving ain't that easy. My entire family (i.e., mother, father, brothers, sisters) are in Maryland, and all but one lives in Montgomery County. My sister moved to Annapolis after she got married because her husband and most of his family is there.

As far as the control thing is concerned, I don't think it has anything to do with "control" just for the sake of controlling us. Yes, every law passed is a form of control over society. However, I find it hard to believe that somebody in government would pass laws that affect their children, grandchildren, etc., just because they want the government to be able to control them in the future.

Regarding MC helmets, my brother was in a wreck at 100+ mph on his bike. He said that if it wasn't for his helmet he would have been dead because he could hear it scraping on the asphalt the entire time he was sliding. He was actually sliding on the ground so fast that he caught up to and hit a Nissan Xterra that was doing 45 mph in front of him. After hitting the Nissan, he said he started tumbling ass over head and could feel the helmet smacking on the asphalt. Of course, he wasn't wearing leather and he had a ton of road rash on him, with one spot on his knee down to the bone. His leather, steel toe, work boots were completely torn up, but his feet were fine. He did suffer a hair line fracture on his tibia or fibula though. At the end of the day, I believe helmets save lives. In this instance, it probably saved my brother's life and I am pretty sure the only reason he wears it is because it is the law. Heck, I would argue that bicycle helmets save lives. I know plenty of people that have been in bike wrecks that have completely smashed their helmets and not sustained any injury to their head. They work.

We can sit here and debate government and control all day long. All I know is that if there was no government, we would be running around shooting each other over the stupidest things. It is bad enough that it still happens even though there are controlling laws against it. Sames goes for the 40,000+ vehicular deaths every year.