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.
The whole point of this thread is that guns used in at least three CA mass casualty shootings were legally bought in CA, under CA's severe restrictions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by beb0p
Exactly!
Many of the guns found in blue liberal cities originated from gun-nut red areas.
This morning there was yet another mass shooting in California. One little fact I pulled out of the news coverage for this was that the gun involved was legally purchased in California. This brings up an inconvenient fact for gun control proponents.
California has some of the strictest gun control in the country. It's gun control laws are a model of what the left wing gun control advocates want to foist on the country as a while. But now we've had the third (at least) mass shooting where the gun(s) used were legally purchased in CA, under it's gun control laws. The other two are San Bernadino and Isla Vista.
The reason this is a major point of the failure of gun control is that gun grabbers in liberal states complain that other states more reasonable gun laws allow guns to come into the hard core gun control states, and cause the killings. This was plainly not the case in these events. So it goes to show that even if CA's laws were implemented at the federal level, they'd have little or no effect in reducing mass shootings.
The Isla Vista shooting is also instructive in evaluating the effectiveness of another pet policy of gun control advocates. They want to screen people buying or owning guns for mental instability, and try and take away their guns.
Democrat gun laws do not stop all mentally ill people from buying guns, rather they stop people "who have been deemed mentally incapable of managing their financial affairs" from buying guns. https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-...lly-ill-people
Democrat gun laws do not stop all mentally ill people from buying guns, rather they stop people "who have been deemed mentally incapable of managing their financial affairs" from buying guns. https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-...lly-ill-people
The mentally ill provision he blocked was poorly written. Anyone who had someone help them manage their money could have been ineligible to own a gun under that flawed idea. It considered those people mentally deficient.
Many of the guns found in blue liberal cities originated from gun-nut red areas.
Thanks for proving my point.
.
So what. Do guns only exist in "gun nut red areas"? Last time I checked there was a whole world out there with LOTS of guns. Cut out the freedom of the free states and bad guys will still get guns. Smuggling is a thing, after all.
So because California authorities did not use a law available to them you think "better" (new?) laws are needed?
Quote:
Originally Posted by chad3
Democrat gun laws do not stop all mentally ill people from buying guns, rather they stop people "who have been deemed mentally incapable of managing their financial affairs" from buying guns. https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-...lly-ill-people
Same proposal as above . . . Obama doesn't get to do Congress' job of adding to 18 U.S.C. § 922(1-9), especially when no commitment or adjudication occurs.
Mentioning the Obama SS rule change twice only leads me to believe you don't have a clue about this topic.
We should end DUI laws because we still get drunk driving..
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.