Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It's not "gun free" California. You can absolutely have a gun in this state. I brought my gun into this state. The hard part is conceal carry. The other hard part is if you ever have to use it, (meaning self defense), you can have a jury loaded with gun hating people who will find any excuse to toss you into prison for defending yourself. But you can have a gun in this state.
However, he did have a magazine that carried more than CA allows - they have a law against that, it didn't stop him from having and using one, because these laws are nothing but feel good laws. It doesn't stop people from having them, it doesn't stop people from using them. Twelve people are dead despite CA's law about the magazine.
It wouldn't have mattered if he had a legal magazine or not, anyway, because as one witness pointed out, he knew exactly what he was doing and changed magazines during the shootout in seconds. Which is yet another point that gun haters don't get. They can ban all these magazines for "carrying too many rounds", but anyone with any decent experience with guns can change those magazines extremely fast and continue shooting.
The bolded part is something that I think a lot of anti-gun folks don't understand. There are laws against everything, but it doesn't stop people from breaking said laws. There's no way you can stop people from doing something they want to do, regardless of their reasoning or motivation.
A lot of folks use extended magazines at the range simply so they don't have to reload as often at the gun range, that's what my BIL does about why he owns his.
I don't really take sides on gun issues because I'm not really into guns, but some of the laws that are aimed at trying to limit a few crazy people from doing something bad impacts/inconveniences 100x that many who would never have any intention of doing anything wrong. Just wondering if there's a way to find a balance for things like this.
Well it clearly demonstrates he wasn't a good marine. Just used it to buy time before he moved back in with his mother, or he got in trouble at one point and lost rank.
Either way, most people will make rank with the amount of years the suspect served.
I don't get that. I own guns, but that isn't even on the long list of things that I would consider as being part of my identity. It's a tool that I own. I also own a drill press, and a band saw, those aren't part of my identity either.
Rather than taking guns away we should work on making them about as cool as a drill. Maybe stop putting them in so many movies and videogames in a heroic fashion. Lets get back to making them a tool rather than a fetish, which attracts angry mentally ill people to want to use them on innocents.
Rather than taking guns away we should work on making them about as cool as a drill. Maybe stop putting them in so many movies and videogames in a heroic fashion. Lets get back to making them a tool rather than a fetish, which attracts angry mentally ill people to want to use them on innocents.
Oh that whole movie and video game argument doesn't work. When you have other countries with the exact kind of entertainment and they don't have this problem.
Then why has it worked in: Australia, the UK, New Zealand, the Netherlands, Japan, Germany, Spain, Italy, Singapore, Denmark, Italy, France, Sweden, and so on and so on.
The blueprint has been tried and tested in nation after nation after nation. And this country of idiots still thinks it won't work.
All countries where it is much, much easier to involuntarily commit someone with mental illness. You can make all the gun laws you want but until something is done to be able to force commitment, medication compliance, and/or medical custodianship on the mentally unstable this will remain an issue. Without a gun they will just find another method - you know, like the latest pre-midterm inept bomber.
An attempt was made in April to do something about this guy but the current laws prevented mandated intervention that might have provided another safety net safeguarding either himself, his family, or the community.
__________________
When I post in bold red that is moderator action and, per the TOS, can only be discussed through Direct Message.
An ex-Marine... just the sort that people on my local Facebook page (and elsewhere) think should be keeping the schools safe from Bad Guys With Guns. What could go wrong?
You said that, not I. In both of the cases I posted , the focus is on the individual. With distracted driving they are trying to teach teens to put the phones down.
They're also making cars safer with automatic breaking, and lane change assist. Smart phones have apps you can use to prevent the phone from being used while driving... They are focusing on both the tools used and the person.
What have been your ideas? Because I don’t remember any.
Probably because you haven't been around long enough. Search is your friend. There have been countless threads on this topic.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
