Thread: More Evidence That Strict Gun Laws in Kalifornia Do Not Work

Such a tragedy...
Bed guys get, and use guns wherever, and whenever they want, in spite of gun laws even in Kalifornia.

New Details To Emerge In Shooting Deaths Of 2 Navy Pilots, 2 Others | Fox News

Wow. A real heartbreaker. I hate so say it, but the first thing that came to my mind was illegals. My thoughts and prayers are with the families and friends of the victims.

Originally Posted by Gunfixx

Such a tragedy...
Bed guys get, and use guns wherever, and whenever they want, in spite of gun laws even in Kalifornia.

New Details To Emerge In Shooting Deaths Of 2 Navy Pilots, 2 Others | Fox News

You actually don't make sense on that one. It has been ruled murder-suicide, so likely the person was legal prior to commission of that act, and California does not prohibit law-abiding citizens from acquiring firearms. In fact it's easier to do so in California, than it is in New Jersey or NYC.

The only "real" obstacle for acquisition of firearms in California is 10 day waiting period. Now I don't know if it has changed since January 1st, but as of last year it was possible to circumvent the 10 day waiting period by doing a parking lot sale of certain long guns.

Originally Posted by fd15k

You actually don't make sense on that one. It has been ruled murder-suicide, so likely the person was legal prior to commission of that act, and California does not prohibit law-abiding citizens from acquiring firearms. In fact it's easier to do so in California, than it is in New Jersey or NYC.

The only "real" obstacle for acquisition of firearms in California is 10 day waiting period. Now I don't know if it has changed since January 1st, but as of last year it was possible to circumvent the 10 day waiting period by doing a parking lot sale of certain long guns.

The issue remains the same. If a person wants to do harm to others and/or one's self, no amount of layered and even more restrictive laws will prevent it.
What may help an individual in many cases however, (no necessarily in this one) is to be armed.
Are you a proponent of additional restrictive gun laws?
If so, why?
And, what additional laws do you propose, and if you are willing, please explain how will they enhance or ad to the effectiveness of the plethora of laws already on the books.
Thanks

Someone snapped.
Gun control wouldn't have prevented a righteous person from doing this.Or anyone else.

Obviously someone had had enough

Originally Posted by Gunfixx

The issue remains the same. If a person wants to do harm to others and/or one's self, no amount of layered and even more restrictive laws will prevent it.

When you put it like that, it makes better sense. But tying this case to "failure of gun control" in California makes no sense.

What may help an individual in many cases however, (no necessarily in this one) is to be armed.

I agree. That's really the only serious problem with firearms regulations in California - issuance of carry licenses.

Are you a proponent of additional restrictive gun laws?
If so, why?
And, what additional laws do you propose, and if you are willing, please explain how will they enhance or ad to the effectiveness of the plethora of laws already on the books.
Thanks

Can't say I have any laws to propose at this time, restrictive or otherwise

Originally Posted by fd15k

When you put it like that, it makes better sense. But tying this case to "failure of gun control" in California makes no sense.

I agree. That's really the only serious problem with firearms regulations in California - issuance of carry licenses.

I am friends with a SEAL. When I was seeing him in Coronado dring his graduation from SQT we were talking handguns. He preferred Glocks over his issue Sig. He went on to say that even though he had his own Glock it was somewhat useless in that he wasn't willing to go through the idiotic process that the local sheriff required to get a concealed carry license. He gets to shoot so much and is "on the road" so much that it just didn't make sense to try and pursue the license/permit.

Im no where near as close to CA as you NWFA guys are, but out here in missouri, the gun enthusiasts refer to them as "the peoples Republik of California" when it comes to gun laws. Look at Diane Feinstein. She was in the building when Harvey Milk and the mayor got assassinated by that guy who used the twinky defense to get out of it. ANyways San Francisco decided it was going to make a statue in the city entirely made out of melted down guns. What your average San Franciscoan doesn't know is that since the assassination and her election to CA senator, she carries a .357 magnum. Instead of donating her .357 magnum, she bought a cheap-o gun to contribute to the statue as a cheap ploy for the average San Franciscoan voter not knowing she carries a .357 magnum everyday. She refused to melt down her .357 magnum for the statue.

How ironic, that one of the most anti-gun senators in the Senate carries everyday with a decent gun, but doesn't think any other American's life is worth enough value to carry themselves.

I think South Park accurately depicted San Franciscoan's when they sniffed their own farts due to the fact they owned hybrid cars and your average American didn't. Their views on all Americans and handguns applies just about the same.

Originally Posted by mjbskwim

Someone snapped.
Gun control wouldn't have prevented a righteous person from doing this.Or anyone else.

Obviously someone had had enough

Exactly.

In life, there are inherent risks that not even a Nanny State can protect people from, even if you want to believe it is so.
Some folks just don't get it.
What's that old saying..? “The hardest thing to explain is the glaringly evident which many have decided not to see.”