California Democrats Propose Strictest Gun Regulations In The Nation

[Two Thumbs]

Notice the proposed legislation does not prevent a citizen for owning, possessin or having in their custody and control all firearms, only certain types of firearms and other devices.

This person will claim we still get to keep knives as an excuse once he's told to support a ban on all guns.

He will of course do so, w/o any thought what so ever

 

[Two Thumbs]

By Zack Beauchamp

Thursday afternoon, a group of California Senate Democrats rolled out a legislative package that would create what would likely be the tightest gun regulation system in the nation, ranging from sweeping prohibitions on semi-automatic rifles to restrictions on guns in the home. The proposal consists of ten points:

1. Ban all semi-automatic rifles that accept detachable magazines.

2. Ban possession of high-capacity magazines.

3. Ban “bullet button” conversion kits.

4. Bans shotgun-rifle combinations.

5. Universal registration of all guns.

6. Background checks on ammunition.

7. Regulating gun loans.

8. Prevent prohibited individuals from living in homes with guns.

9. Cracking down on people who can’t own guns legally but do anyway.

10. Required safety training for handgun owners.

DETAILS: California Democrats Propose Strictest Gun Regulations In The Nation | ThinkProgress

Now we are getting somewhere. If they could add a system to renew that registration, making sure the owner still has possession of the gun and add ballistics test, it should cut down on gun violence. Some harse penalties for possessing unregistered firearms and stolen weapons are also needed.

So you hate freedom and liberty. And are dumb enough to STILL think more gun laws are the answer.


quell surprise

 

[Dubya]

DETAILS: California Democrats Propose Strictest Gun Regulations In The Nation | ThinkProgress

Now we are getting somewhere. If they could add a system to renew that registration, making sure the owner still has possession of the gun and add ballistics test, it should cut down on gun violence. Some harse penalties for possessing unregistered firearms and stolen weapons are also needed.

So you hate freedom and liberty. And are dumb enough to STILL think more gun laws are the answer.


quell surprise

The 2nd Amendment only prohibits the populace from being disarmed. In no way shape or form does the 2nd Amendment give unlimited permission to own each and every kind of weapon or arm. It is not unconstitional to require registering a weapon or making laws against possession of an unregistered weapon.

The gun laws I proposed with renewable registration, ballistics tests and severe penalties for possession of an unregistered firearm are a good answer and if that doesn't work, it's time for single shot only weapons, so take your pick!

 

[Missourian]

Now we are getting somewhere. If they could add a system to renew that registration, making sure the owner still has possession of the gun and add ballistics test, it should cut down on gun violence. Some harse penalties for possessing unregistered firearms and stolen weapons are also needed.

So you hate freedom and liberty. And are dumb enough to STILL think more gun laws are the answer.


quell surprise

The 2nd Amendment only prohibits the populace from being disarmed. In no way shape or form does the 2nd Amendment give unlimited permission to own each and every kind of weapon or arm. It is not unconstitional to require registering a weapon or making laws against possession of an unregistered weapon.

The gun laws I proposed with renewable registration, ballistics tests and severe penalties for possession of an unregistered firearm are a good answer and if that doesn't work, it's time for single shot only weapons, so take your pick!

I pick none of the above.

If California chooses this route, that's Californians decision...and those in the minority can move to another state.

When it fails to reduce crime, it will be another nail in the coffin of gun control.

Plus, if folks move away, it will ultimately reduce their representation in Congress.

That's win/win as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Papageorgio]

States are free to enact their own gun-control laws - so long as they meet the minimum federal standards.

Ain't states' rights and the Tenth Amendment great. The Tenthers should be elated.

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."​

As long as those laws do not infringe on citizens Constitutional rights.

Infringe? I wish righties could understand something: The 2nd Amendment was ratified in 1791 - and do you know how many times that state and federal courts have restricted it since then? The 2nd Amendment is a fossil from another time - and it no longer means what it says it means. Even Scalia has made that clear.

I wish you could understand, state laws do not try and override the Constitution. You want the 2nd amendment thrown out? Fine, do it the right way.

 

[Dubya]

So you hate freedom and liberty. And are dumb enough to STILL think more gun laws are the answer.


quell surprise

The 2nd Amendment only prohibits the populace from being disarmed. In no way shape or form does the 2nd Amendment give unlimited permission to own each and every kind of weapon or arm. It is not unconstitional to require registering a weapon or making laws against possession of an unregistered weapon.

The gun laws I proposed with renewable registration, ballistics tests and severe penalties for possession of an unregistered firearm are a good answer and if that doesn't work, it's time for single shot only weapons, so take your pick!

I pick none of the above.

If California chooses this route, that's Californians decision...and those in the minority can move to another state.

When it fails to reduce crime, it will be another nail in the coffin of gun control.

Plus, if folks move away, it will ultimately reduce their representation in Congress.

That's win/win as far as I'm concerned.

You are dreaming and it's not California Dreaming. I already anticipate problems with Nevada.

Let's see how many whacked out NRA gun nuts this country really has!

 

[mudwhistle]

By Zack Beauchamp

Thursday afternoon, a group of California Senate Democrats rolled out a legislative package that would create what would likely be the tightest gun regulation system in the nation, ranging from sweeping prohibitions on semi-automatic rifles to restrictions on guns in the home. The proposal consists of ten points:

1. Ban all semi-automatic rifles that accept detachable magazines.

2. Ban possession of high-capacity magazines.

3. Ban “bullet button” conversion kits.

4. Bans shotgun-rifle combinations.

5. Universal registration of all guns.

6. Background checks on ammunition.

7. Regulating gun loans.

8. Prevent prohibited individuals from living in homes with guns.

9. Cracking down on people who can’t own guns legally but do anyway.

10. Required safety training for handgun owners.

DETAILS: California Democrats Propose Strictest Gun Regulations In The Nation | ThinkProgress

I can say one thing, the Democrats in CA have really great timing.

Some black ex-cop is running around shooting people and they want to take everyone's guns away? Are they friggen nuts???

 

[The Rabbi]

Notice the proposed legislation does not prevent a citizen for owning, possessin or having in their custody and control all firearms, only certain types of firearms and other devices.

Yes, those firearms commonly in use. Which means the law flunks the Heller test.
Thanks for playing.

 

[bripat9643]

The 2nd Amendment only prohibits the populace from being disarmed. In no way shape or form does the 2nd Amendment give unlimited permission to own each and every kind of weapon or arm. It is not unconstitional to require registering a weapon or making laws against possession of an unregistered weapon.

Sure it is, dipstick. What part of "shall not be infringed" don't you understand? Registration is just the first step on the road to confiscation. It's an infringement.

The gun laws I proposed with renewable registration, ballistics tests and severe penalties for possession of an unregistered firearm are a good answer and if that doesn't work, it's time for single shot only weapons, so take your pick!

They are an "answer" for nothing. They won't stop criminals from using guns.

Single shot only? You have to be joking. Only a retard would believe that was Constitutional.

 

[The Rabbi]

Let's see how many whacked out NRA gun nuts this country really has!

I guess 8,000 more every day.

 

[bripat9643]

Notice the proposed legislation does not prevent a citizen for owning, possessin or having in their custody and control all firearms, only certain types of firearms and other devices.

Yes, those firearms commonly in use. Which means the law flunks the Heller test.
Thanks for playing.

These gun control morons seem to think that "shall not be infringed" means that so long as a law that doesn't outlaw every single class of firearms, then it passes Constitutional muster.

 

[Dubya]

The 2nd Amendment only prohibits the populace from being disarmed. In no way shape or form does the 2nd Amendment give unlimited permission to own each and every kind of weapon or arm. It is not unconstitional to require registering a weapon or making laws against possession of an unregistered weapon.

Sure it is, dipstick. What part of "shall not be infringed" don't you understand? Registration is just the first step on the road to confiscation. It's an infringement.

The gun laws I proposed with renewable registration, ballistics tests and severe penalties for possession of an unregistered firearm are a good answer and if that doesn't work, it's time for single shot only weapons, so take your pick!

They are an "answer" for nothing. They won't stop criminals from using guns.

Single shot only? You have to be joking. Only a retard would believe that was Constitutional.

If all gun owners were like you, I'd change it to BB guns.

 

[bripat9643]

They are an "answer" for nothing. They won't stop criminals from using guns.

Single shot only? You have to be joking. Only a retard would believe that was Constitutional.

If all gun were like you, I'd change it to BB guns.

Thanks for confirming that you're a moron.

 

[Wry Catcher]

They are an "answer" for nothing. They won't stop criminals from using guns.

Single shot only? You have to be joking. Only a retard would believe that was Constitutional.

If all gun were like you, I'd change it to BB guns.

Thanks for confirming that you're a moron.

If the law restricted the mentally ill bripat, your comments on this message board would likely put you on the the do not own a gun list. .

Why not stop calling everyone who disagrees with you morons; it's clearly a sign of projecting your mental disacuity onto others.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

By Zack Beauchamp

Thursday afternoon, a group of California Senate Democrats rolled out a legislative package that would create what would likely be the tightest gun regulation system in the nation, ranging from sweeping prohibitions on semi-automatic rifles to restrictions on guns in the home. The proposal consists of ten points:

1. Ban all semi-automatic rifles that accept detachable magazines.

2. Ban possession of high-capacity magazines.

3. Ban “bullet button” conversion kits.

4. Bans shotgun-rifle combinations.

5. Universal registration of all guns.

6. Background checks on ammunition.

7. Regulating gun loans.

8. Prevent prohibited individuals from living in homes with guns.

9. Cracking down on people who can’t own guns legally but do anyway.

10. Required safety training for handgun owners.

DETAILS: California Democrats Propose Strictest Gun Regulations In The Nation | ThinkProgress

What a bunch of idiots!


Whatever you morons do in California, KEEP IT IN CALIFORNIA!

 

[bripat9643]

If all gun were like you, I'd change it to BB guns.

Thanks for confirming that you're a moron.

If the law restricted the mentally ill bripat, your comments on this message board would likely put you on the the do not own a gun list. .

You're fascist comments are exactly the reason no sensible person wants people like you deciding who can have guns.

Why not stop calling everyone who disagrees with you morons; it's clearly a sign of projecting your mental disacuity onto others.

No, it's actually a sign that you're probably a moron.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Thanks for confirming that you're a moron.

If the law restricted the mentally ill bripat, your comments on this message board would likely put you on the the do not own a gun list. .

You're fascist comments are exactly the reason no sensible person wants people like you deciding who can have guns.

Why not stop calling everyone who disagrees with you morons; it's clearly a sign of projecting your mental disacuity onto others.

No, it's actually a sign that you're probably a moron.

Denial is to be expected, but on some level you must know you're at best dull normal. Normal in this case only means intellectually slow; I suspect other irregularities need to be ruled out.

 

[Dubya]

Thanks for confirming that you're a moron.

If the law restricted the mentally ill bripat, your comments on this message board would likely put you on the the do not own a gun list. .

You're fascist comments are exactly the reason no sensible person wants people like you deciding who can have guns.

Why not stop calling everyone who disagrees with you morons; it's clearly a sign of projecting your mental disacuity onto others.

No, it's actually a sign that you're probably a moron.

You're the moron, FingerBoy!

 

[bripat9643]

Denial is to be expected, but on some level you must know you're at best dull normal. Normal in this case only means intellectually slow; I suspect other irregularities need to be ruled out.

What could be more ironic than a dim bulb like you commenting on the intelligence of other forum members?

 

[Dubya]

Let's see how many whacked out NRA gun nuts this country really has!

I guess 8,000 more every day.

Get them all to join so we can save money on bombs!