Not sure the timing is too good on this, being so close to November. The high capacity magazine turn-in is probably a bad move. More effective would be to restrict the capacity even further.
Future California governor Gavin Newsom got the ball rolling on marriage equality in San Francisco in 2004. It led to the ugly Prop 8 but the Supreme Court eventually invalidated it.
I have high hopes that this push will be the beginning of something similar around sane gun control laws. If a challenge to law like this goes to a Supreme Court with the 9th seat filled by Clinton⌠well I get giddy at the thought.
They are restricting the new laws in expectation of legal challenges. The NRA will raise millions on this law, and they will spend some of it fighting against it in court.
Politically speaking, vote ur gunz types were already going to vote against Hillary. People have been wondering why the hell we have to put up with highly lethal weapons in the hands of any damn fool. Voters may be motivated by what they are finally seeing as a tipping point in gun violence control. La Pierre and the terrorist enabling gun manufacturers have nothing new to say.
The Australian solution to mass murder will eventually be enacted in the U.S. Years of fighting any and all efforts to moderate military weapons by the NRA leave no other choice.
âOn the eve of Independence Day, independence and freedom and liberty in California has been chopped down at the knees and kicked between the legs,â said Sam Paredes, executive director of the advocacy group Gun Owners of California.
Still better than being shot to death while dancing with your friends, watching a movie, or going to kindergarten.
Action has to start somewhere-- and Orlando is still fresh in public consciousness.
On a state level-- and in a state like CA-- I donât see it as detrimental.
I have a positive feel about Gov Brownâs instincts.
jw1
I seem to recall a popular Republican â hugely, incredibly popular, more popular than Reagan ever was â who has the good idea that an effective response to extremists is for people in their community to turn them in. They know who the bad guys are. Popular, popular Republican.
And when people donât turn in terrorists in their community, then the government will come down hard. Heâs right, proving most Republicans donât understand the war on terror.
Restrictions wonât solve the gun problem, as long as gun enthusiasts cop an âI donât careâ attitude, and let the corrupt gun stores and the crooked gun show dealers keep handing lethal weapons to every terrorist and nutcase who flashes a few bucks at them.
If gun enthusiasts donât care about the integrity of their sport, then I do, and I expect my government to imposes tighter and tighter restrictions until gun enthusiasts do care about their community, or else take everybodyâs toys completely away.
Government isnât the solution. Gun enthusiasts are. What the hell are you guys doing to stop murders?
Second that.
This bill will not affect the election if anything itâs a good thing since 90% of the country wanted someone to do something and my governor did it/ So proud to be a Californian and if this isnât enough, thereâs this
Itâs a mixed bag, really. There are some good steps in there, but thereâs also a bunch of problems with these laws⌠or more accurately, a single problem with a bunch of them: enforcement.
Brownâs action will require people who own magazines that hold more than 10 rounds to give them up.
Joe gun nut has 100 30-rnd magazines. They are in his house. How do you get them? How do you even know they exist to get them? Are you going to claim that owning a gun capable of fitting a high-capacity magazine is tantamount to probable cause, so you can search the homes of gun-owners? Thatâll go over well.
So Joe canât take these magazines to the range anymore, because he canât put them in the gun where a cop might see him. Having these at the range was never the problem. If theyâre out there, theyâll still be in circulation.
He also opted to require a background check before a gun can be loaned to someone who isnât a family member.
But he didnât sign the âreport if lost/stolenâ. âDid you loan this man this weapon?â âNo sir. I lost that gun. I guess he found it!â And why is the cop checking to see who owns that gun in the first place? Itâs a law that will only catch people who are already getting caught committing a crime with a gun. So whatâs the point? To make sure the people who are breaking the law have more of a deterrent?
To keep otherwise responsible, law-abiding people from loaning out their guns?
Who the hell does that now?
Seriously, I know people who let other folks use their guns. They let other folks use their guns in their presence. You wanna shoot one of Bobâs AKs, you go with Bob to the range and heâs happy to let you try it out. But no, youâre not going home with his gun. Holy crap, man, thatâs like âdude, can I borrow your grenade? I wanna put it in an environment you canât control where it might kill or injure people without you being able to prevent itâ.
Seriously, itâs not rocket surgery, folks - if someone kills someone with your car, youâre on the hook. Know why? Itâs your car. Youâre already legally responsible for acts committed with your property, and this shit goes back to pre-Revolutionary common law. So what, exactly, is the aim of this law without requiring the reporting of lost or stolen weapons? To make sure that anyone who is crazy enough to loan someone else a killing tool gets arrested unless theyâre smart enough to go âdude mustâve stolen mâgun, brah!â?
Both together wouldâve been effective at catching the irresponsible jackasses. One of them on its own would have at least improved tracking, and made the irresponsible liable for their irresponsibility. The other, on its own, is useless, and probably wonât survive court challenge.
The bullet-button ban, and background checks for ammo by comparison? Totally fine - one is a ban on the production of new weapons of a certain type, and the other is a point-of-sale control.
The registration of existing âCalifornia compliantâ weapons⌠that might be problematic, but it might work - it depends entirely on whether thereâs someone - not necessarily a cop, but able to call them - at every range during operating hours to check those registrations, like at a traffic stop. Got the gun with you? Have the registration ticket on you. Basically, when you go to a range, the operators would have to be liable for checking the guns youâre using to make sure theyâre all legal.
Overall, though, those three are reasonably easy to enforce, effective in their aims. Not empty measures. More like these, please - laws that will do something, not just give people a big olâ âMission Accomplishedâ moment.
You probably already know about this. A death penalty repeal measure will be on the November ballot.
https://ballotpedia.org/California_Death_Penalty_Repeal_(2016)
@horrido We cannot resign ourselves to inaction because an election is on the horizon. Most of the repubs say something similar after shootings to the effect this isnât the time to talk about gun control and then go on to offer hollow thoughts and prayers.
@chammy Hadnât yet looked at the NYT thoroughly. Thanks for this. I sent you a link to this story other the day about a woman whoâs getting a replacement coin after the one she received from the president was stolen during a home invasion. Sheâs the oldest park ranger in the country.
Yes I do and I know you read the NYT story about Obama The Night Guy. I am not ready to let him go - probably will never be able to other than having no choice.
NEWSFLASH. MSNBC has just reported that HRC has meet with the FBI in a long interview and hopefully we can get this story concluded even though the GOPers will find some way to keep it alive
Wow that is so fricking disgusting but leave it to Obama to make it right. What a man
You are going to love the story, I have no doubt.
You must read some of the 500 comments posted by readers about this story. So much love, respect and admiration even among who say straight out they donât always agree with his policies but understand his dedication.
President Obama is always known as a thinker and criticized for being that way. Never shoots off of his mouth or tweets away.
I just hope he will not be the last intellectual President we will ever have.
Wish we could have his for another eight years.
Obamaâs penchant for being alone reflects the fact that his motivation in life is more than a narcissistic urge to have constant confirmation from others of his âgreatnessâ. Contrast this with Trumpâs unflagging need to get in front of the cameras or his loyal followers at campaign rallies and youâll see why The Donald is not worthy of even being mentioned in the same breath with the current occupant of the oval office. Obama is one of the best to ever occupy the Presidency
I heard the end of President Obamaâs speech to the Canadian Parliament yesterday.
So humbling to hear them chant âFour more yearsâ to our President.
In contrast, countries want to ban the Republican nominee. It shows just how much the conservative movement has decimated the Party.
Of course, they were willing accomplices. Still are.
Whereâs the vote on Garland? Whereâs the vote on gun control? Whereâs the declaration of war? Whereâs the infrastructure plan? Whereâs the health care plan? Whereâs the clean water? Whereâs the jobs?