California radical Progressives take anti-gun fervor to new heights

[Jerry]

Age restrictions are not the only reasonable restriction and restrictions on objects are not always unreasonable. To make such a blanket statement is ignorant.

I'm very well informed on this issue. No kind of firearm should be banned.

A compromise on "reasonable restrictions" looks like a training certification, not a capacity limit.

 

[Jerry]

There are a lot of armed individuals in this country...

All the more reason not to go off on anyone, ever.

 

[CalGun]

Glad I moved.

BTW the ammo tax failed - for whatever reason IDK.

Also for those in free states, the vote isn't in yet, but there may be a lot of people dumping AR's on the 49 free state market pretty soon.
Its either that or register it with the state for future confiscation.

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.

 

[AlabamaPaul]

All the more reason not to go off on anyone, ever.

Lighten up Jerry...

 

[Goshin]

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.

I don't know... I see a number of hints there that your facts may be somewhat off...

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)

First of all, necessity is not the standard for gun ownership. The Supreme Court has established that standard, namely that weapons which are in common use like semi-auto firearms, are covered by the 2A. No one has to prove to you that they NEED or it is NECESSARY that they own a semi-auto for it to be covered under one of our most fundamental and enumerated rights... just that it is a common weapon which is useful for lawful purposes and not demonstrably a severe threat to the public safety.

Incidentally, semi-auto rifles are used in fewer murders than clubs and fists.

FBI: More Club and Hammer Homicides Than Rifle


Not to mention, 50 to 100 rounds mags are not in common use... mainly because they are jam-o-matics. Most people use 20 or 30 round magazines or smaller.

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

Again, that is not the standard. The standard in use established by SCOTUS is common-use weapons that can be used in lawful purposes that do not pose a demonstrable extrodinary danger to society. Semi-auto firearms are specifically covered.

Do you know what semi-auto is? It is NOT a machinegun. Semi-auto fires ONE shot per trigger pull... it is distinctly different from full-auto.

MOST modern firearms are Semi-auto. It is definitely a common weapon. It is definitely useful for lawful purposes, and is used thus by hunters, police, security guards, and citizen in sport and self-defense. As I demonstrated in the link above, they are not demonstrably of extraordinary harm to society.

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.

Cars have been driven into crowds at speed with devastating effects on any number of occasions. The OKC bombing that killed over a hundred and severely injured hundreds more was accomplished by a bomb hidden in a van. The worst US school mass-murder was done with a car rigged with dynamite in the 1920s.

 

[Jerry]

Lighten up Jerry...

Why ?

 

[AlabamaPaul]

Why ?

Well, if you're not feeling it, carry on... :mrgreen:

 

[Jerry]

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)

I actualy have to somewhat agree here, and I know my pro-gun buddies are going to hate me for saying this, but....it's true: The FBI does not need 10 bullets to kill a deer.

The NYPD, however, may require several dozen bullets to kill one deer.

 

[TurtleDude]

maybe the people of california can do penance for allowing that oozing pus of gun confiscation to grow by lancing the pimple.

 

[opendebate]

I don't know... I see a number of hints there that your facts may be somewhat off...

I don't mean to say that I always have the right info but rather that I try to chose a position based on facts as opposed to emotion. So ideally, if I find out that I've got the facts wrong I will accept them and allow them to alter my position if warranted.

First of all, necessity is not the standard for gun ownership. The Supreme Court has established that standard, namely that weapons which are in common use like semi-auto firearms, are covered by the 2A. No one has to prove to you that they NEED or it is NECESSARY that they own a semi-auto for it to be covered under one of our most fundamental and enumerated rights... just that it is a common weapon which is useful for lawful purposes and not demonstrably a severe threat to the public safety.

I am just talking about my opinion here not what the Supreme Court would use to make a decision.

Incidentally, semi-auto rifles are used in fewer murders than clubs and fists.

Is this incidents or deaths?

Try not to pass out after reading
Believe it or not what I have learned here (from various posters) has impacted my position on this issue.

 

[opendebate]

I actualy have to somewhat agree here, and I know my pro-gun buddies are going to hate me for saying this, but....it's true: The FBI does not need 10 bullets to kill a deer.

The NYPD, however, may require several dozen bullets to kill one deer.

Hi Jerry and thank you for your perspective. You have given me a lot to chew on.

 

[Master PO]

maybe the people of california can do penance for allowing that oozing pus of gun confiscation to grow by lancing the pimple.

ah!!!, more colorful wit...

 

[LaMidRighter]

I don't mean to say that I always have the right info but rather that I try to chose a position based on facts as opposed to emotion. So ideally, if I find out that I've got the facts wrong I will accept them and allow them to alter my position if warranted.

Numbers can be tricky in any political debate, some are fabricated, or otherwise tweaked by omission to make a statement, so you have to get them from all sides and do some analysis of your own. Like crime data, most countries already had low gun violence before they instituted bans and confiscations, they didn't see any significant reduction and some actually had increases, but knowing that comes from looking at decades of data and making comparisons. Many countries had a bad tradeoff, for any minor gains in violence they saw upticks in victimization crimes like assaults, robberies, and rapes. All things are subjective honestly, and one thing to consider is that the highest rate of violence here is criminal on criminal, i.e., gang/drug related violence.

Is this incidents or deaths?

Try not to pass out after reading
Believe it or not what I have learned here (from various posters) has impacted my position on this issue.

Homicide numbers.

 

[Master PO]

i just wish i could have someone explain to me, why they believe one set of citizens should be able to tell what another set of citizens what they will own, purchase even though those citizens have not violated the rights of anyone........it smells a lot like democracy to me, and i dont like it, neither does Madison.

 

[opendebate]

Numbers can be tricky in any political debate, some are fabricated, or otherwise tweaked by omission to make a statement, so you have to get them from all sides and do some analysis of your own. Like crime data, most countries already had low gun violence before they instituted bans and confiscations, they didn't see any significant reduction and some actually had increases, but knowing that comes from looking at decades of data and making comparisons. Many countries had a bad tradeoff, for any minor gains in violence they saw upticks in victimization crimes like assaults, robberies, and rapes. All things are subjective honestly, and one thing to consider is that the highest rate of violence here is criminal on criminal, i.e., gang/drug related violence. .

After doing an inordinate amount of reading on this issue today I am feeling more and more like the first thing that needs to be addressed is how we view and provide treatment for mental illness in this country. Especially for men. As if being pressuredto be emotionally oppressed in the first place isn't enough god forbid you have some kind of psychological complication or issue, it's not fair and frankly pisses me off.

 

[Jerry]

U

Hi Jerry and thank you for your perspective. You have given me a lot to chew on.

You're welcome.

A note on my swipe at NYPD: I don't have a link handy but last year there was a news story about a particuler NYPD shooting. Many shots were fired by the NYPD and 7 bystanders were injured as a result. I don't recal if the suspect was ever actualy hit.

Anyway, you had made a comment about some guns being more dangerous than others, and I wanted to let you know that you're correct. You see, what caused the NYPD to consistantly miss that suspect was not the lack of training, but the gun issued to the NYPD.

The trigger was costom made for NYPD by the manufacturer to be very hard to pull. The "NewYork Trigger" it was called. A normal factory trigger takes about 4-6lbs of pressure to pull and fire the gun. The New York Trigger required 13lbs of pressure to pull.

This harder trigger pull causes your hand to pull your gun off of what you're aiming at at the last instant.

Most private gun owners buy a trigger kit to make the trigger pull lighter, about 2-3lbs of pressure. This increases accuracy quite a bit.

Instead of worrying about a magazien capacity limit, folks should make a trigger-pull resistance limit of 6lbs.

 

[LaMidRighter]

After doing an inordinate amount of reading on this issue today I am feeling more and more like the first thing that needs to be addressed is how we view and provide treatment for mental illness in this country. Especially for men. As if being pressuredto be emotionally oppressed in the first place isn't enough god forbid you have some kind of psychological complication or issue, it's not fair and frankly pisses me off.

I agree. Mental health funding got gutted last century, and the courts made it much harder to compel help for people who really need it, to the point that people who are potentially dangerous to themselves and others don't get much needed help. That is a huge problem and complicating factor.

 

[TurtleDude]

You're welcome.

A note on my swipe at NYPD: I don't have a link handy but last year there was a news story about a particuler NYPD shooting. Many shots were fired by the NYPD and 7 bystanders were injured as a result. I don't recal if the suspect was ever actualy hit.

Anyway, you had made a comment about some guns being more dangerous than others, and I wanted to let you know that you're correct. You see, what caused the NYPD to consistantly miss that suspect was not the lack of training, but the gun issued to the NYPD.

The trigger was costom made for NYPD by the manufacturer to be very hard to pull. The "NewYork Trigger" it was called. A normal factory trigger takes about 4-6lbs of pressure to pull and fire the gun. The New York Trigger required 13lbs of pressure to pull.

This harder trigger pull causes your hand to pull your gun off of what you're aiming at at the last instant.

Most private gun owners buy a trigger kit to make the trigger pull lighter, about 2-3lbs of pressure. This increases accuracy quite a bit.

as a member of the GSSF "500" club I note that the lightest a stock glock can be set for with standard parts is 3.5 pounds. Some top gunsmiths can get them lighter. I don't know what the greatest glock shooter in history had his set at (Dave Sevigny) but I doubt it was two pounds. KC Eusubio's Open Glock that he used to win the World Speed Shooting Challenge might be that light though. But it takes a lot of work to get it that light and stay reliable.

 

[Excon]

The Bill of Rights was introduced when....1798? You think it would not have included exceptions if these kinds of weapons were what was available at the time?

No, I don't.
See below:

Nope. The second was to apply to all weapons used by a militia unit. The founders said as much in their own writings, and in fact, pre NFA many Gattling guns were owned privately, as were cannons on merchant ships, and howitzers.

And!

Girandoni Air Rifle

The Girandoni air rifle was in service with the Austrian army from 1780 to around 1815.
...
While the detachable air reservoir was capable of around 30 shots it took nearly 1500 strokes of a hand pump to fill those reservoirs.
...
The Lewis and Clark Expedition used the rifle in the demonstrations that they performed for nearly every Native American tribe they encountered on the expedition.

[...]

The rifle was 4 ft (1.2 m) long and weighed 10 lbs (4.5 kg), about the same basic size and weight as other muskets of the time. It fired a .46 caliber ball at a velocity similar to that of a modern .45 ACP and it had a tubular, gravity-fed magazine with a capacity of 20 balls.

[...]
Girandoni Air Rifle - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia​

 

[Willie Orwontee]

...what CAN we do to prevent the kind of tragedies that happened in Aurora and in Sandy Hook.

The determined lone-wolf who has never blipped on any radar screen of law-enforcement / psych services is impossible to stop beforehand.

Your focus on these rarities and advocating that restrictive changes in gun laws on the gen-pop are the primary remedy for incidents, is not legitimate (constitutionally speaking).

I want to reduce all misuse of guns and the best way to do that is to focus on those who are doing the misusing . . .

To focus on those who are least likely to commit a crime or use a gun in an irresponsible manner is a waste of energy and resources and cultivates indifference to the law and authority in criminals and contempt for the law and authorities among regular citizens.

To reduce all types of criminal gun violence I would do the following:

1) Decriminalize drugs and review the status of incarcerated non-violent drug offenders and expedite conditional release for those eligible.
2) Enforce with vigor, laws on the criminal use of firearms:

a) Don't use any weapons offenses as bargaining chips to be thrown out for guilty pleas for other charges; never allow the pleading down of felony gun charges to misdemeanors.
b) Mandate full time sentenced to be served for any violent misuse of a firearm.​

3) Increase funding for states & cities for the arrest and detention of Failure to Appear / fugitives and violators of conditional release, with a priority on violent offenders.
4) Enhanced sentences for repeat offenders / felon in possession with reduced appeal opportunities, including capital crimes.
5) Increase funding for parole/probation programs -- for civilian / community oversight of the boards responsible for release, the enforcement of all conditions of release and tightening supervision and controls on those under conditional release.
6) Mandate states maintain an up-to-date database of prohibited persons (including a red flag for mental issues - HIPPA be damned) and this be shared with the federal NICS system and all other states.
7) Mandate national concealed weapon permit reciprocity for law-abiding citizens that no state or municipality can opt out of.​

If these steps were taken, criminal firearm homicide would fall 60%+.

 

[TurtleDude]

No, I don't.
See below:

​

And!

Girandoni Air Rifle

The Girandoni air rifle was in service with the Austrian army from 1780 to around 1815.
...
While the detachable air reservoir was capable of around 30 shots it took nearly 1500 strokes of a hand pump to fill those reservoirs.
...
The Lewis and Clark Expedition used the rifle in the demonstrations that they performed for nearly every Native American tribe they encountered on the expedition.

[...]

The rifle was 4 ft (1.2 m) long and weighed 10 lbs (4.5 kg), about the same basic size and weight as other muskets of the time. It fired a .46 caliber ball at a velocity similar to that of a modern .45 ACP and it had a tubular, gravity-fed magazine with a capacity of 20 balls.

[...]
Girandoni Air Rifle - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia​

Napoleon threatened summary execution of any soldiers caught using one against the french

 

[Excon]

To reduce all types of criminal gun violence I would do the following:

1) Decriminalize drugs and review the status of incarcerated non-violent drug offenders and expedite conditional release for those eligible.
​

This would have hardly any effect. Most are not there for usage, but for the real offenses of manufacturing and trafficking. That is the real criminal thought process compared to use. Criminal enterprise. To illegally make a buck.
You do not want to free these kind of folks. They will just find other ways to engage in criminal activity.

 

[Surtr]

Napoleon threatened summary execution of any soldiers caught using one against the french

It was also a piece of garbage. Sure, it was technologically advanced for its time, but it relied on a weak sheet iron reservoir that was brazed together. Any little split or crack would render it completely useless, not to mention that there is no way you could get a proper shoulder and cheek weld with that thing. I'd take my chances with the Kentucky Rifle. Similiar caliber, rifled barrel, stronger, rugged design.

 

[Kal'Stang]

This would have hardly any effect. Most are not there for usage, but for the real offenses of manufacturing and trafficking. That is the real criminal thought process compared to use. Criminal enterprise. To illegally make a buck.
You do not want to free these kind of folks. They will just find other ways to engage in criminal activity.

You should note that just carrying 1lb of MJ would get you charged with trafficking whether you were going to sell it or personally use it over time. And the same could probably be said for manufacturing to a much lesser extent (my guesstimate of 50% less).

 

[ttwtt78640]

This would have hardly any effect. Most are not there for usage, but for the real offenses of manufacturing and trafficking. That is the real criminal thought process compared to use. Criminal enterprise. To illegally make a buck.
You do not want to free these kind of folks. They will just find other ways to engage in criminal activity.

That is quite silly. Many buy booze in quantity, say for a party, poker game or simply because it was on sale, yet never intend to resell it. The automatic assumption, used ONLY for other recreational drugs, is that the quantity possessed alone is evidence of the intent to (re)sell it.