California lawmakers pass unprecedented package of gun control bills

[bluesmoke]

really? many gun owners are leaving the socialists cesspools and will end up in free states where their votes will be a safeguard against the idiocy of California style laws

Good. But our laws will have our waters "cesspool" free while your laws will allow cesspool front homes.

 

[TurtleDude]

Good. But our laws will have our waters "cesspool" free while your laws will allow cesspool front homes.

what are you talking about. the people who leave california because its run by the fruit cake coalition, are people who won't vote for the same idiocy in say Arizona or Utah

 

[imyoda]

Got it you do no care about the rights of your fellow citizens.

The subject is state's passing gun control legislation............and not how I may feel ...........

Rather trying to get off on me......

Why not tell us what/how you feel about the new normal........

 

[MickeyW]

why? you are charged 15 or so dollars for a background check by California. So you want to take your kid shooting and buy a 3 dollar box of 22 LR? and you can buy in other states with no ID. Its a stupid law

Beyond that....an Asinine law!

Time for many of us to load up our vehicles with ammo, to help out friends and relatives in California.

I've been reloading for 37 years, I think I will go down once or twice a month, to teach classes on that. I've got free room and board when I do.

He's a hard core left winger and loves to see laws harassing gun owners, whom he perceives to be mainly right wingers.

Pathetic for sure, the ignorance of liberalism

"But it's all over now." Where California goes, so goes...

Not any more buster! Where California is going...is to ****! And sane people do not want to follow California's lead any longer. In about 10 years or less, Californians will be eating their own.

none of that crap is sensible-its all designed to pander to the weak minded low wattage voters and to harass gun owners. You call crap like that sensible because your goal is to harass gun owners. Its not Sensible crime control legislation

It certainly isn't!

Good. But our laws will have our waters "cesspool" free while your laws will allow cesspool front homes.

:lamo:lamo What utter malarky!!!

Calif. is a cesspool already ...........and it's growing by leaps and bounds. Laws making it increasingly difficult for a person to defend themselves will leave Californians in the same boat as France. See my recent thread in the Europe section.

what are you talking about. the people who leave california because its run by the fruit cake coalition, are people who won't vote for the same idiocy in say Arizona or Utah

Or Nevada or Idaho. Sadly, Oregon has gone bloody liberal stupid... and we are not looking forward to the next legislative session in January!

The subject is state's passing gun control legislation............and not how I may feel ...........

Rather trying to get off on me......

Why not tell us what/how you feel about the new normal........

It's not normal.....anymore than gayism is normal.....it's all abnormal!

 

[imyoda]

Michey my friend...........

The times are a changing.........

You will need to adjust to the new normal

 

[cpgrad08]

Michey my friend...........

The times are a changing.........

You will need to adjust to the new normal

LOL the new normal.

 

[bluesmoke]

what are you talking about. the people who leave california because its run by the fruit cake coalition, are people who won't vote for the same idiocy in say Arizona or Utah

The post I was replying to boasted that many were leaving California, in response to Brown's approved legislation, to gun friendlier states. I'm fine with that. Though I don't believe it is statistically so true. Still, it would localize gunheads into fewer states where they would end up with less power than the becoming majority. The NRA won't change, but level-headed gun owners are willing to put up with "California" type law because they recognize Orlando was basta. "The table's turnin' now it's their (her) turn to cry".

 

[TurtleDude]

The post I was replying to boasted that many were leaving California, in response to Brown's approved legislation, to gun friendlier states. I'm fine with that. Though I don't believe it is statistically so true. Still, it would localize gunheads into fewer states where they would end up with less power than the becoming majority. The NRA won't change, but level-headed gun owners are willing to put up with "California" type law because they recognize Orlando was basta. "The table's turnin' now it's their (her) turn to cry".

that's one of the most stupid things I have seen. the california laws have nothing to do with stopping mass murderers. One has to be either really ignorant to believe that

 

[bluesmoke]

that's one of the most stupid things I have seen. the california laws have nothing to do with stopping mass murderers. One has to be either really ignorant to believe that

It's a visceral thing. Orlando is representative in nature. It is long proven that various laws regulating the sale and use of guns lead to lower violent crime rates involving guns. Such regulation would save more lives en toto than any singular act such as Orlando. You are suffering from egotistical igno.

 

[TurtleDude]

It's a visceral thing. Orlando is representative in nature. It is long proven that various laws regulating the sale and use of guns lead to lower violent crime rates involving guns. Such regulation would save more lives en toto than any singular act such as Orlando. You are suffering from egotistical igno.

your first comment is a lie given Chicago and DC. and there are no credible studies that suggest all the Bannerrhoid nonsense the democrap party schemes to impose on people in various states, decrease crime. And we know both the brady bill and the clinton scary looking gun ban did squat as well.

You are suffering from having absolutely no understanding of this issue and sadly for you, you want to go head to head with someone who knows this subject inside and out.

 

[Fledermaus]

Times are changing guys…….
Given all the carnage of the once a week mass shooting…….
The public has now focusing on the problems with guns….
And demanding the state take action to enact some sensible and legal gun regulations
So forget all the BS arguments……..like it will steal mu freedom………. It is unconstitutional……My constitutional rights are being violated………the law will do no good…….criminals will still get guns…….It takes a good guy with a gun silliness…….
So yall better get used to the new normal………

What gun law would have prevented the Orlando shooting?

 

[TurtleDude]

What gun law would have prevented the Orlando shooting?

do you actually think that preventing another massacre is what really motivates the members of the Bannerrhoid movement?

 

[imyoda]

My guess is one of them will be an NRA-sponsored lawsuit.

I doubt NRA will fund a law suit challenging the laws........

Because they would lose........

And the NRA does not wish to create precedent which can later used against them down the road..........

 

[TurtleDude]

I doubt NRA will fund a law suit challenging the laws........

Because they would lose........

And the NRA does not wish to create precedent which can later used against them down the road..........

that's really stupid of course. the californian morons in office get slapped down all the time. and its a good move during an election year to show why we don't want more democrap judges in office.

 

[Fledermaus]

do you actually think that preventing another massacre is what really motivates the members of the Bannerrhoid movement?

I actually believe some are motivated by the massacres....

Some.

Definitely not all.

 

[TurtleDude]

I actually believe some are motivated by the massacres....

Some.

Definitely not all.

oh the rank and fail sure. not the leaders. not the ones who spend months and years whining about gun owners

 

[bluesmoke]

your first comment is a lie given Chicago and DC. and there are no credible studies that suggest all the Bannerrhoid nonsense the democrap party schemes to impose on people in various states, decrease crime. And we know both the brady bill and the clinton scary looking gun ban did squat as well.

You are suffering from having absolutely no understanding of this issue and sadly for you, you want to go head to head with someone who knows this subject inside and out.

Pointing out two cities experience does not disprove all correlation between gun regulation and gun crime. And, there is a correlation between gun ownership and gun related homicides:

BU Researcher Finds Correlation Between Gun Ownership and Firearm Homicide | Public Relations

Do you have any reference to refute the research information I posted?

Civility is not your strong suite. Your strong suite is a stand-off between a high level of self-confidence or a strong ego, that lowers others so as to climb higher on their backs, and appear head and shoulders above others.`

 

[TurtleDude]

Pointing out two cities experience does not disprove all correlation between gun regulation and gun crime. And, there is a correlation between gun ownership and gun related homicides:

BU Researcher Finds Correlation Between Gun Ownership and Firearm Homicide | Public Relations

Do you have any reference to refute the research information I posted?

Civility is not your strong suite. Your strong suite is a stand-off between a high level of self-confidence or a strong ego, that lowers others so as to climb higher on their backs, and appear head and shoulders above others.`

I don't have much use for the positions of people that are based on lies, false motivations and seek to restrain our liberty for specious reasons. you have proven you have little knowledge of this subject and that research doesn't delineate between legal gun owners and those who are owning guns contrary to law because they are felons

it also is bogus given that gun crime is decreasing while the number of guns in circulation have gone way up

You are citing a study done by leftwing anti gun researchers in a public university in one of the most anti gun states in the nation and even they stated this

Siegel noted that the study did not determine causation, allowing that it is theoretically possible that people are more likely to purchase guns if they live in states with higher levels of firearm homicide. But he said the issue warrants further study.

 

[bluesmoke]

I don't have much use for the positions of people that are based on lies, false motivations and seek to restrain our liberty for specious reasons. you have proven you have little knowledge of this subject and that research doesn't delineate between legal gun owners and those who are owning guns contrary to law because they are felons

it also is bogus given that gun crime is decreasing while the number of guns in circulation have gone way up

You are citing a study done by leftwing anti gun researchers in a public university in one of the most anti gun states in the nation and even they stated this

Siegel noted that the study did not determine causation, allowing that it is theoretically possible that people are more likely to purchase guns if they live in states with higher levels of firearm homicide. But he said the issue warrants furtherr study.

I already said the study was a correlation, which is a meaning that does not include causation. The kind of information found is worthy of further study. You, on the other hand, have no study or data that refutes Siegel's research. You can only use the "L" word, and allege the study is bogus, giving reason that does not change the study's findings. The study is by state. The states that have higher rates of gun ownership also have higher rates of gun homicide. Your "bogus" charge is weak and does not apply.

 

[AGENT J]

Governor Brown Vetoed number 12.

Well IMO that was a numb one to veto

 

[TurtleDude]

I already said the study was a correlation, which is a meaning that does not include causation. The kind of information found is worthy of further study. You, on the other hand, have no study or data that refutes Siegel's research. You can only use the "L" word, and allege the study is bogus, giving reason that does not change the study's findings. The study is by state. The states that have higher rates of gun ownership also have higher rates of gun homicide. Your "bogus" charge is weak and does not apply.

let me ask a question i doubt you will answer

who did you vote for in the 2012 presidential election and who do you plan on voting for in the fall?

why is it that gun control as crime control is only adopted by the left? why is it that places like chicago that had NO LEGAL HANDGUN OWNERSHIP have far higher rates of gun crime than areas that do? ponder that

 

[AGENT J]

why? you are charged 15 or so dollars for a background check by California.
2.) So you want to take your kid shooting and buy a 3 dollar box of 22 LR? and you can buy in other states with no ID.
3.) Its a stupid law

1.) I didn't say Id support charging. If thats the case, I wouldnt support the charge nor the check if they dont remove the charge. Pretty simple. Charge = no support. No charge then Id support it.
2.) again, i dont support the charge but the ID doesnt bother me one bit, im my state required ID and others didnt, that would be meaningless to me
3.) if it induces an extra 15$ a sell then I agree its stupid. If theres no charge then im fine with it.

 

[jet57]

It is now up to Gov. Brown to stop the goose stepping Progressive Legislature from applying an even greater stranglehold on the citizens of California. There is only a slight hope that will happen.

As an example of the malfeasance that is the hallmark of their reign, two of the measures, AB 450 and AB 466, resulted from "gut and amend" strategies that seek to hide their actions from the public.

To explain, in a gut and amend offensive, an unrelated bill that has passed out of committee is selected, and it's entire contents erased, with the controversial contents of a bill the people have rejected inserted. This way, the public can be caught unaware, and the Progressives can move forward unopposed. It's the same method they used to become the first government in the world to regulate CO2.

Well, Jerry Brown doesn't goose step and he singed those bills into law. He's a very smart guy and knows people well. Remember, he didn't even run a campaign last election and still beat the pants of of the Republican candidate. Brown knows what he's doing and the gang problem in California has got to go.

 

[jet57]

My guess is one of them will be an NRA-sponsored lawsuit.

Ya mean like the ones that the supreme court has been throwing back into the water? Or the one that just outlawed machine guns?

 

[bluesmoke]

let me ask a question i doubt you will answer

who did you vote for in the 2012 presidential election and who do you plan on voting for in the fall?

why is it that gun control as crime control is only adopted by the left? why is it that places like chicago that had NO LEGAL HANDGUN OWNERSHIP have far higher rates of gun crime than areas that do? ponder that

Saying "... i doubt you will answer." is an unnecessary emotiply. Nonetheless, Obama and Clinton. Both of whose foreign policies are disappointments. Hillary never met a military intervention she didn't like.

I don't know the answer to your "why" question. Actually, major cities gun control has no showed significant drop in violent gun crime.

Many conservatives, including a majority of NRA members support gun registration. I doubt they'd support all the bills California legislated.

I see more a correlation that state gun control legislation works enough to support that it should continue and studies of same, and of the opposite, should continue in depth. There are a number of very detailed studies that show gun control does not work. Then other articles that debunk those studies. Anyway, the pendulum is swinging the other way, and it might go too far.