2aguy
Diamond Member
- Jul 19, 2014
- 111,977
- 52,253
- 2,290
This article lists all of the gun control laws that California has.....and all of them combined could not stop this guy from shooting 3 people.
The guy was a felon..which means he couldn't buy, own or carry a gun in any other state......and he had multiple gun convictions and he was still walking around free.....
Had they done what I have suggested....and put this felon in jail for 30 years for his illegal possession of guns as a felon......those people would still be alive ....
So......what is the next law that you guys want...that won't work....?
Strict California Gun Control Impotent to Stop Fresno Attack - Breitbart
California has universal background checks, which means no one can legally buy a gun without doing so via a background check under the auspices of a Federal Firearms License (FFL). California also requires all firearms to be registered with the state, and has gun confiscation laws, Gun Violence Restraining Orders, a 10-day waiting period on gun purchases, an “assault weapons” ban, a “high capacity” magazine ban, and so much more. Yet not one of these laws prevented Muhammad’s attack.
It is interesting to note that Breitbart News pointed out the futility of a “high capacity” magazine ban, even as California Democrats were pushing it as part of a public safety campaign last year. After all, the Santa Barbara attacker, Elliot Rodger, only used 10-round magazines in shooting three people to death on May 23, 2104. “High capacity” magazines were not necessary.
We saw the same thing in Fresno Tuesday, where the Los Angeles Times reports that Muhammad allegedly used a .357 revolver to kill three innocents. In other words, he used a gun that does not even take magazines; a gun that requires the shooter to open a cylinder, eject the shell casings, and reload every five to seven shots.
In addition, Muhammad was a felon, which means he faced a 100 percent gun ban, yet he had a gun on Tuesday. Moreover, Tuesday’s attack was not the first time Muhammad had possessed a gun as a felon: the Times noted that he “was indicted by a federal grand jury in February 2005 for possession of cocaine with intent to distribute, possession of a firearm for drug trafficking and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, after a Fresno police officer searched his car and found two large bags of cocaine, a loaded handgun and two rifles.”
The guy was a felon..which means he couldn't buy, own or carry a gun in any other state......and he had multiple gun convictions and he was still walking around free.....
Had they done what I have suggested....and put this felon in jail for 30 years for his illegal possession of guns as a felon......those people would still be alive ....
So......what is the next law that you guys want...that won't work....?
Strict California Gun Control Impotent to Stop Fresno Attack - Breitbart
California has universal background checks, which means no one can legally buy a gun without doing so via a background check under the auspices of a Federal Firearms License (FFL). California also requires all firearms to be registered with the state, and has gun confiscation laws, Gun Violence Restraining Orders, a 10-day waiting period on gun purchases, an “assault weapons” ban, a “high capacity” magazine ban, and so much more. Yet not one of these laws prevented Muhammad’s attack.
It is interesting to note that Breitbart News pointed out the futility of a “high capacity” magazine ban, even as California Democrats were pushing it as part of a public safety campaign last year. After all, the Santa Barbara attacker, Elliot Rodger, only used 10-round magazines in shooting three people to death on May 23, 2104. “High capacity” magazines were not necessary.
We saw the same thing in Fresno Tuesday, where the Los Angeles Times reports that Muhammad allegedly used a .357 revolver to kill three innocents. In other words, he used a gun that does not even take magazines; a gun that requires the shooter to open a cylinder, eject the shell casings, and reload every five to seven shots.
In addition, Muhammad was a felon, which means he faced a 100 percent gun ban, yet he had a gun on Tuesday. Moreover, Tuesday’s attack was not the first time Muhammad had possessed a gun as a felon: the Times noted that he “was indicted by a federal grand jury in February 2005 for possession of cocaine with intent to distribute, possession of a firearm for drug trafficking and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, after a Fresno police officer searched his car and found two large bags of cocaine, a loaded handgun and two rifles.”
Last edited: