California radical Progressives take anti-gun fervor to new heights (1 Viewer)

[ocean515]

Lawmakers send tough gun control bills to the governor - latimes.com

By Patrick McGreevy
September 12, 2013, 10:53 p.m.



SACRAMENTO -- State lawmakers late Thursday sent Gov. Jerry Brown bills that would outlaw the sale of rifles with detachable magazines and expand the list of crimes that result in a 10-year ban on possessing firearms.

Thursday’s action follows the approval of nine other gun control bills earlier in the week in a state that already had some of the toughest restrictions in the nation.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Merely more "reasonble restrictions" until a legal firearm in CA is 7 feet long, has a large flashing light attached, weighs 20 pounds and can fire a single non-lethal round. After completing a PHD program in Japanese Arithmetic, waiting for 6 years, having your application approved by a 75% margin of the CA state legislature, you may then, with the express permission of the CA governor, be issued a permit to carry one for $20,000/year. This restriction will not apply to CA law enforcement or any private security personnel assigned to protect CA lawmakers or to their desiganted major campaign donors.

 

[CRUE CAB]

Lawmakers send tough gun control bills to the governor - latimes.com

By Patrick McGreevy
September 12, 2013, 10:53 p.m.



SACRAMENTO -- State lawmakers late Thursday sent Gov. Jerry Brown bills that would outlaw the sale of rifles with detachable magazines and expand the list of crimes that result in a 10-year ban on possessing firearms.

Thursday’s action follows the approval of nine other gun control bills earlier in the week in a state that already had some of the toughest restrictions in the nation.

When I was younger, I always wanted to visit Cali. Cruise Sunset in my Monte Carlo, get tatted at the place Crue does.
Hit the Wiskey for a drink.
Now, I couldnt care less if it fell into the ocean.

 

[APACHERAT]

It looks like on July 14th of next year the California leftist will have turned me into a criminal. :scared:

Well it's off to my local electrical wholesale warehouse and purchasing some schedule 80 4" PVC conduit and cap ends for burial.

 

[opendebate]

Lawmakers send tough gun control bills to the governor - latimes.com

By Patrick McGreevy
September 12, 2013, 10:53 p.m.

SACRAMENTO -- State lawmakers late Thursday sent Gov. Jerry Brown bills that would outlaw the sale of rifles with detachable magazines and expand the list of crimes that result in a 10-year ban on possessing firearms.

Thursday’s action follows the approval of nine other gun control bills earlier in the week in a state that already had some of the toughest restrictions in the nation.

I say great news. Why exactly does anyone need to own a semiautomatic rifle. Is this just fear that they are going to take away all your guns or is there some legitimate need for a gun like this that I am unaware of?

 

[lizzie]

I say great news. Why exactly does anyone need to own a semiautomatic rifle. Is this just fear that they are going to take away all your guns or is there some legitimate need for a gun like this that I am unaware of?

They are wonderful for taking down a deer, when the first shot didn't do it.

 

[ocean515]

When I was younger, I always wanted to visit Cali. Cruise Sunset in my Monte Carlo, get tatted at the place Crue does.
Hit the Wiskey for a drink.
Now, I couldnt care less if it fell into the ocean.

I understand. For many of us, the pluses have outweighed the negatives. Weather, etc.

Progressives are pushing the "X", "Y" cross over point lower and lower.

At some point Progressives are going to have to print their own money, because there will be few left who make enough to feed the beast.

 

[ocean515]

I say great news. Why exactly does anyone need to own a semiautomatic rifle. Is this just fear that they are going to take away all your guns or is there some legitimate need for a gun like this that I am unaware of?

Yes, there is some legitimate need for a gun like this you are unaware of.

 

[opendebate]

Yes, there is some legitimate need for a gun like this you are unaware of.

Like what? And by legitimate I mean it can not be done using a different weapon that is not as dangerous.

 

[opendebate]

They are wonderful for taking down a deer, when the first shot didn't do it.

Are you being sarcastic?

 

[lizzie]

Are you being sarcastic?

No. There are times when a hunter doesn't take the deer down with the first shot. A semi-automatic comes in pretty handy when that happens.

 

[ocean515]

Like what? And by legitimate I mean it can not be done using a different weapon that is not as dangerous.

Hmmm. So in your mind what type of gun would be less dangerous?

To be honest, I'm not arrogant enough to believe anything I write would change your position. The debate has been long and hard fought, and I don't think for a minute my words would be any more profound than others that have been posted before.

Unfortunately, anti-gun sentiment is all about emotion, rather than logic, which makes it rather difficult to debate.

 

[disneydude]

No. There are times when a hunter doesn't take the deer down with the first shot. A semi-automatic comes in pretty handy when that happens.

A better solution would be to get to be a better hunter.

 

[opendebate]

No. There are times when a hunter doesn't take the deer down with the first shot. A semi-automatic comes in pretty handy when that happens.

Easier for the hunter but not a necessity then? Seems an unfair match in the first place.

I don't oppose gun ownership, I have one. But I find it hard to justify owning a semi especially with a detachable mag with a 50 to 100 capacity. It seems like killing a roach with anvil, unnecessary overkill (if you will)

 

[disneydude]

Unfortunately, anti-gun sentiment is all about emotion, rather than logic, which makes it rather difficult to debate.

I would say just the opposite. The anti-reasonable regulation crowd is so ultra paranoid that the govment is coming to take their guns that they are completely irrational. If they could control their emotions for 5 minutes they would see that not every regulation is leading to an all out ban.

 

[ttwtt78640]

I say great news. Why exactly does anyone need to own a semiautomatic rifle. Is this just fear that they are going to take away all your guns or is there some legitimate need for a gun like this that I am unaware of?

Why does anyone need to own a car that can exceed the maximum legal speed limit? Why does anyone need an automatic clothes washing/drying machine? Why does anyone need a TV screen larger than 20"? If there is no need for them then why exempt local police and security agents - do they face different criminal threats?

 

[opendebate]

Hmmm. So in your mind what type of gun would be less dangerous?

To be honest, I'm not arrogant enough to believe anything I write would change your position. The debate has been long and hard fought, and I don't think for a minute my words would be any more profound than others that have been posted before.

Unfortunately, anti-gun sentiment is all about emotion, rather than logic, which makes it rather difficult to debate.

I am not anti gun. I do however, support gun control. I think limits are necessary. I am pretty fact based, despite the consensus from Cons on this site, in my positions. You know BTW, when you go into a discussion and tell me I am a waste of time to talk to without ever having had a discussion it makes you appear more emotional then me. This is our first exchange....isn't it.

 

[disneydude]

Why does anyone need to own a car that can exceed the maximum legal speed limit? Why does anyone need an automatic clothes washing/drying machine? Why does anyone need a TV screen larger than 20"? If there is no need for them then why exempt local police and security agents - do they face different criminal threats?

Bad analogies....cars, washing machines, TV....are not designed to kill.

 

[ocean515]

I would say just the opposite. The anti-reasonable regulation crowd is so ultra paranoid that the govment is coming to take their guns that they are completely irrational. If they could control their emotions for 5 minutes they would see that not every regulation is leading to an all out ban.

I see, so the long and ever growing list of "cant's", "not allowed's", and "illegal to possess" is not leading to an all out ban.

Forgive me if I reject your logic in the face of reality.

 

[opendebate]

Why does anyone need to own a car that can exceed the maximum legal speed limit? Why does anyone need an automatic clothes washing/drying machine? Why does anyone need a TV screen larger than 20"? If there is no need for them then why exempt local police and security agents - do they face different criminal threats?

Well, I don't necessarily think people NEED to own a car that can reach excessive speed I think they WANT to. But I can't take my car into a movie theater or a school or a shopping mall and kill or wound large numbers of innocent people at once. The other comparisons are just silly.

 

[CRUE CAB]

I say great news. Why exactly does anyone need to own a semiautomatic rifle. Is this just fear that they are going to take away all your guns or is there some legitimate need for a gun like this that I am unaware of?

Show me in the Bill of Rights the line that determines what type of guns we can own.
Do you also know that less than on half of one percent of all gun crime is done with a semiauto rifle.
Exactly? Well if I want to do an extended stay in the mountains, they (the black guns) are less susceptible to corrosion and damage from the elements.
Also good defence from wild animals such as bear.
And the other biggie. Guess what, they are fun to shoot.

 

[opendebate]

I see, so the long and ever growing list of "cant's", "not allowed's", and "illegal to possess" is not leading to an all out ban.

Forgive me if I reject your logic in the face of reality.

That is not reality. It is what you FEAR will happen. And if you look back through our history and all the irrational fears people attempted to use to stop progress none of them were ever realized.

 

[CRUE CAB]

That is not reality. It is what you FEAR will happen. And if you look back through our history and all the irrational fears people attempted to use to stop progress none of them were ever realized.

So stripping down peoples 2A rights is "progress"?

 

[jamesrage]

I say great news. Why exactly does anyone need to own a semiautomatic rifle. Is this just fear that they are going to take away all your guns or is there some legitimate need for a gun like this that I am unaware of?

1.Hunting.
2.The same reason the cops and other law enforcement need them.
3.The same reason the president's, other politician's or rich celeb's security detail needs them.
4.I have a constitutional right to keep and bear arms,so I do not need to prove a need.

 

[ocean515]

I am not anti gun. I do however, support gun control. I think limits are necessary. I am pretty fact based, despite the consensus from Cons on this site, in my positions. You know BTW, when you go into a discussion and tell me I am a waste of time to talk to without ever having had a discussion it makes you appear more emotional then me. This is our first exchange....isn't it.

Interesting how you've responded to a calm and reasonable response to a question you asked. As you've indicated, this is our first exchange, and yet you've jumped to the conclusion that I have announced any debate with you is a waste of time. What I did was acknowledge your right to your position, and my belief that I'm incapable of changing it.

Frankly, you included the word "legitimate" in your question. Forgive me, but that is a word that falls in the class of "eye of the beholder", and in the context you used it, serves no purpose other than to set up any response for a subjective rejection. So what would be the point of offering one?