It’s kind of fun now, seeing how much he is willing to do instead of simply saying “Yes, a person can buy a handgun in CA if he/she abides by CA penal codes sections 26800-26915”
I want the cheapest one they sell at This gun store
I’m not familiar with what that may be. So do you want to buy one of those two handguns I listed?
No, I don’t want those handguns. What, you shilling for those companies or something?
Dude, you’re going off-script. You’re supposed to pick one of the two offered so that Bone can come back with, “You can’t have either one because both of them are BANNED!!”
Then you don’t actually want to buy a handgun? Based on your declaration in post #104 that a sentence saying “guns” is equivalent to a sentence saying “all guns” - the fact that you don’t want to buy those handguns is the same as saying that you don’t want to buy a handgun. See how silly that is? When I say a lawmaker wants to ban guns - that doesn’t mean all guns. It literally means banning guns. If the desired message was to pertain to all guns, then I would say a lawmaker wants to ban all guns. The “all” changes the meaning of the sentence, contrary to what Czar or Yog would say.
Language in firearm law is extremely precise and gun owners need to be aware of the nuances involved. A mistake in this space can easily be construed as a felony violation so it’s best to be circumspect. So when Yog says in post #82 that Obama never tried to ban guns, that’s obviously false. He has tried to ban guns. What he hasn’t done is try to ban all guns. When this error is pointed out, it would be, as Czar notes, more honest, to simply accept the correction rather than try and twist the meaning or lack of meaning of English words.
And no, I’m not shilling for those companies. Those happen to be two handguns that are illegal for an FFL to sell. Because they are banned. These are two particularly egregious examples because for the first, it was previously legal to sell but due to administrative hurdles not any change to the gun itself, it is now considered “unsafe”. The 2nd happens to be a fairly common model Glock that is legal to sell, if it is the right handed version. The ambidextrous mag release version is considered unsafe. A person who was born without an arm below the right elbow sought to buy this ambidextrous version of an otherwise legal to sell handgun and is unable to…because it is banned.
And to clarify - those are old model firearms. CA literally prohibits the sale of all new model semi auto handguns from FFLs. The response is typically that that is acceptable because older or other model handguns are available. This rationale is defeated in Heller. So when people say there is no way there will be a gun ban, I say we have one right now. It’s not a total ban, yes. But it is a ban. If the initial statement was that there was no way there would be a total gun ban, I’d say that’s a reasonable prediction, with the caveat that less than 10 years ago there were total gun bans.
Still no answer huh? That’s what I thought.
Called it. 
So did I.
OMG! I shoulda figured this out!
I like the part where he leads with
right after you link to the specific available handgun you’re interested in, as if you had picked one of the two he had clumsily hand-picked to trap you with.
And now I’m the bad guy because I won’t answer any more questions because he won’t tell me when the questions will stop.
Well, good thing I said “those” 2 handguns and not just “guns” or “all guns” Your comparison is incorrect. If I said “I don’t want to buy handguns” that means “I don’t want to buy ANY handguns.” But I DIDN’T say that.
I don’t care if every possible make, model, attachment, magazine size, or whatever is available for sale. A lot of different types of guns ARE for sale. A LOT! Who cares if some aren’t? My grocery store doesn’t have every type of apple for sale, so the store has OMG BANNED APPLES?
Again, I don’t care if every available make and model of gun is available. There are enough to ensure that if a person is able to, they have numerous choices of which gun to buy. If you want to get worked up because CA doesn’t sell a “Phased plasma rifle in the 40-watt range” while they DO sell one in the 20-watt range, then more power to you.
And can you point out where in Heller it says that California MUST sell every type of handgun made by any manufacturer ever or your Constitutional right to bear arms is infringed?
This is coming from you who thinks if you don’t want to banning guns is the same as banning all guns. When you’re willing to add or take away meaning of the words either used or not used, you can pretty much change statements however you want. Like I said, predictable.
So when you say this:
Are you saying that Yog’s statement in post #82 was not honest? Less honest? It’s hard to tell with your use of words in non-standard ways.
Why don’t you mail me a questionnaire with all your questions, then sit by your mailbox and wait for my response.
Do you find this post more helpful?
Less helpful?
Not helpful at all?
Which is the rejoinder I predicted. In any case, you objected if there were only one available. So where is the line and who determines when it’s been crossed? What is “enough”?
Do you realize that CA requires that a non-existent technology be included with every new semi-auto firearm sold by FFLs? That’s what we’re talking about here. Something that doesn’t exist - but it’s required.
It doesn’t - and that’s not what I said.
I find it to be consistent with the level of help derived from all of your posts.
Thank you. I do try to rise to the level of the people I am conversing with.
I was drunk when I objected to that, so I’m not sure that I still agree 
In any event, too bad there wasn’t some sort of process or procedure for a state to decide things such as “how many different types of guns need to be available to not infringe on the 2nd Amendment”
I don’t care. There are enough OTHER types of guns to purchase.
Do I care whether or not you can bear arms as is your right? Yes, of course. And you can become a resident of CA and purchase a handgun. (which was my original question. Funny, getting you to admit that I could purchase a handgun was actually harder than the process to ACTUALLY BUY a handgun in CA) Do I care if you can’t purchase the exact one that you want? Nope, I don’t.
Do you apply the same rationale to books? No new books - only the old ones are okay. That would be okay?
Great, then you can join the cause since the majority of people who live in CA cannot bear arms as is our right.
It was your question, that was not analogous to mine. You were asking about a non-specific handgun. My statement was that all new model semi-auto pistols are banned from sale by FFLs. The fact that if you meet certain criteria you can buy a handgun that is outside of those parameters is irrelevant to the truth of my statement.
There is still a chicken over there looking unsatisfied by your performance. Just keep fucking it.
Come on. How can you not get a warning for that?
Oh, you can’t avoid it. Warning. Don’t ever do it again.