PDA

View Full Version : how many gun laws are in the book for kalif?


ldivinag
01-28-2008, 12:21 PM
i coulda sworn hearing this used as an argument for MORE gun laws: we have over 22000 already in the books.

would one more make a difference?


is 22000 for the state, federal or combined?

Patriot
01-28-2008, 12:37 PM
Gun Control

Q. Mr. President, Charlton Heston is on the college speaking circuit and he said last night it amazes me that the president is so stubborn when it comes to guns. And he notes that there are already 22,000 gun laws on the books by his count, which he says that the administration does not enforce. Could you do more to enforce existing gun laws? And how do you feel about the attack that the N.R.A. has mounted on you and your administration?

A. Well, let me answer the question on the merits. Gun prosecutions are up under our administration and I have asked in this budget for a significant increase to enforce the laws, including more prosecutors, more A.T.F. agents. But, again, I would make the main point, the N.R.A.'s position is that if somebody does something wrong, throw the book at them, but do not have any preventive measures when it comes to guns. They believe that unlike every other area of our life, there should be no prevention. So they say, they didn't want us to have the Brady bill. They said it was too burdensome, but it hasn't been burdensome. They don't want us to close the gun-show loophole, they say it's too burdensome. They're not even for the research into smart-gun technology or for banning large-ammunition clips. There's a case where we have a law on the books, it can't be effectively enforced. These assault weapons are illegal, but the big ammunition clips can be imported because of a loophole in the law, so a law we have can't be effectively enforced. You know, I think that it's just wrong to say that because of the Second Amendment and because there are a lot of people that like to hunt and sport shoot, that prevention plays no role in this. How would you feel if I said, for example, the following: you know, all these people that go through airport metal detectors, 99.999 percent of them are law-abiding, good people, and it is really a pain to go through those metal detectors if you got a money clip in your pocket or a rodeo belt buckle on or something else, and you have to go through two or three times and take your belt off or whatever. It's just too burdensome and I'm just sick and tired of it and I'm going to take these metal detectors down in the airports. And the next time a plane blows up, we're going to throw the book at them.

Now, you're laughing, but what if I said, you know, most people who drive are good, honest, responsible people. And we should just, we ought to repeal the laws, the driver's license laws and repeal the speed limits, and the next time somebody does something wrong and has a 25-car pile-up, we'll just throw the book at them. I mean, a sensible society has a balance between prevention and punishment. . . . And in terms of their attacks on me, you know, that's what I get hired to do, that's part of the president's job description, being attacked by people who disagree with him. That doesn't matter. I still think Charlton Heston is a great actor and I love his movies and I still watch him every time I get a chance. And I loved having him here at the White House not very long ago when he got one of the Kennedy Center Awards. But that's irrelevant to me. The only question is, what is best for the safety of the American people? And guns are no different than any other area of our life. We need a balance between prevention and punishment.

Guns make us safe

Tuesday, November 9, 1999

By Cal Thomas

The latest shootings by two maniacs with grudges in Honolulu
and in Seattle produced the predictable cries for more gun
laws from Attorney General Janet Reno, Vice President
Al(pha) Gore, the big media and the usual suspects in the
anti-gun lobby who won't be satisfied until the only people with
access to guns are criminals.

As National Rifle Association President Charlton Heston testified last
week on Capitol Hill, there are 22,000 federal, state and local gun laws
on the books, most of which are never enforced. He properly asked
why more gun laws are the answer when current laws are not being
enforced and criminals pay no attention to them at all.

Anti-gun people are trying to sell more restrictive legislation on the false
premise that fewer guns mean a safer society. Writing in the New York
Times, Josh Sugarmann, executive director of the Violence Policy
Center, urges Congress to skip "incremental legislation that won't
control handgun violence" and "immediately call on Congress to pass
far-reaching industry regulation" that would effectively "ban" handguns.

Whether such legislation would make us safer is no longer a matter of
conjecture. Evidence in countries where gun laws tougher than ours
exist show more, not less, crime.

In Australia, where strict new gun legislation was passed following a
[1996]* shooting rampage by a man who killed 35 people and wounded
19 others, gun-related crime has increased. According to the Australian
Bureau of Statistics, the number of armed robberies went up 39
percent last year and assaults involving guns rose 28 percent. Gun
murders increased 19 percent. In addition to laws so strict that Olympic
shooters must leave the country in order to practice, an expensive gun
buy-back program resulted in 640,000 guns being turned in to
authorities. The cost of the program averaged $57 per Australian. Still,
gun crime is up. Prior to the new gun laws, crime in Australia was in
decline.

Phillip Adams, a prominent Australian columnist and radio talk show
host, who turned in several of his own guns, got to the heart of the
thinking of anti-gun zealots when he told the Washington Post two
years ago about the main point of the gun laws: "The whole country
feels better." So, facts don't matter, just feelings?

In Great Britain, where massive firearms-confiscation programs were
enacted following a widely publicized shooting in Scotland, gun-related
crimes have increased, including "hot" robberies, meaning those
conducted while the victims are at home. Criminals apparently believe
their odds have improved since many of the law-abiding have been
disarmed.

Even the liberal-leaning Democratic governor of Vermont, Howard
Dean, said after last summer's synagogue shooting in Los Angeles: "Gun
laws wouldn't have helped .... Better enforcement would have helped."

That was Heston's point when he testified before a congressional
committee last week. Only a fraction of laws on the books is enforced,
so why pass more laws? Heston quoted Deputy Attorney General Eric
Holder, who told USA Today, "It's not the federal government's role to
prosecute" gun cases. Then why pass the laws in the first place?

The goal of the anti-gun lobby is confiscation. In Canada, a law that
took effect last December required many new categories of guns to be
surrendered. Those who keep them face prosecution and the potential
for police invasion of their homes and businesses. Fifty-eight percent of
handguns registered in Canada since 1935 are now banned. Those who
fail to turn them in can be tracked down and forced to comply, while
being charged with a crime.

The criminals, meanwhile, are largely undeterred by new laws. Why
should they be when they haven't obeyed the old ones? But more laws
make some people feel good, including the criminals who now have
easier pickings in Australia and Great Britain and probably will have in
Canada when new crime figures are available. Maybe the NRA has
been right all along. When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have
guns. Anyone want to debate that point with facts instead of feelings?

Not sure what criteria the NRA used to arrive at that exact number, but here's the statistic in the news circa 1999. One article suggests that it represents local, state, and federal laws combined.

Librarian
01-28-2008, 1:32 PM
how many gun laws are in the book for kalif?
What's a 'law'?

For example, let's take Roberti-Roos and all its bits and pieces, starting at PC 12275 thru 12290.

Is that ONE law, the a-w law, or is it a bunch of laws:

named a-w
feature-aw
list a-w
.50 bmg
penalties
exceptions
transportation requirements

etc.

Or should we count sections?

12275
12276
12276.1
12276.5
12277
12278
12280
12282
12285
12286
12287
12288
12288.5
12289
12289.5
12290


My preference is for the section-count, so whatever the section count is for 12000 - 12900 or so, plus some in education code, welfare and institutions code, fish and game code is approximately the 'number' of California State gun laws.

Now, look at the Vehicle Code, and decide how many sections govern driving. Looks like Division 11 (http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/vc/vctoc.htm), VC 21000 - 23336 (and no, I'm not going to count).

What can we conclude from that comparison, PC/guns vs VC/driving? I suggest 'not much'.

I'm of the opinion that the 'number' of laws is not very interesting - the intent and the enforcement of them is.

Rob P.
01-28-2008, 2:32 PM
What's a 'law'?

For example, let's take Roberti-Roos and all its bits and pieces, starting at PC 12275 thru 12290.

Is that ONE law, the a-w law, or is it a bunch of laws:

named a-w
feature-aw
list a-w
.50 bmg
penalties
exceptions
transportation requirements

etc.

Or should we count sections?

12275
12276
12276.1
12276.5
12277
12278
12280
12282
12285
12286
12287
12288
12288.5
12289
12289.5
12290


My preference is for the section-count, so whatever the section count is for 12000 - 12900 or so, plus some in education code, welfare and institutions code, fish and game code is approximately the 'number' of California State gun laws.

Now, look at the Vehicle Code, and decide how many sections govern driving. Looks like Division 11 (http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/vc/vctoc.htm), VC 21000 - 23336 (and no, I'm not going to count).

What can we conclude from that comparison, PC/guns vs VC/driving? I suggest 'not much'.

I'm of the opinion that the 'number' of laws is not very interesting - the intent and the enforcement of them is.

I would think that if you wanted to count laws, you need to count each section AND subsection unless the subsection was a "list" or clarifying paragraph of some type merely referred to in the section.

For instance, a law which says: It shall be illegal to do either act contained in subsection (a). And sub section (a) just gives a list of acts then it is only 1 law.

However, a statute which says: Pursuant to the provisions of subsection (a) it shall be illegal for a person to rub their stomach and pat their head at the same time in public. And, subsection (a) says that in public means IF you're at the beach, AND standing, AND talking to a real hottie, AND who is wearing a skimpy thong bikini. This would be 2 laws. One specifying the prohibited act and another specifying what "in public" means.

I think the 22,000 laws are a combination of fed and ALL the individual states' laws.

ldivinag
01-28-2008, 2:54 PM
i guess i wanted something like:

a gun is a

1. rifle
2. shotgun
3. handgun


so that 3 "laws" for example.


reason i brought it up is that, i work for a pubic university (cal state hayward) and the school paper ran a small column where they posted 4 people's opinion on "With the Bay Area's high crime rates, do you think gun control would decrease crime? If yes, do you think it would infringe upon our rights?"...

http://pioneer.csueastbay.edu/PioneerWeb/PioneerNews1-24-08/PioneerNews1-24-08-Page4.pdf

actually one response was on the spot.

i was gonna write a LETTER TO THE EDITOR reply...

Hopi
01-28-2008, 2:57 PM
how many gun laws are in the book for kalif?

When I first found out that there was even 1 infringement, i thought to myself
"one too many"......

-hanko
01-28-2008, 4:16 PM
The ATF just mailed me State Laws and Published Ordinances - Firearms.

The laws for all 50 states total 487 pages.

The PRK accounts for 68 pages. :rolleyes: Even NY only needs 26, NJ 24, and MD 18.

AK takes 5 pages, VT 3, and, thank you, God, ID uses 5:)

-hanko

Librarian
01-28-2008, 4:22 PM
reason i brought it up is that, i work for a pubic university (cal state hayward) and the school paper ran a small column where they posted 4 people's opinion on "With the Bay Area's high crime rates, do you think gun control would decrease crime? If yes, do you think it would infringe upon our rights?"...

http://pioneer.csueastbay.edu/PioneerWeb/PioneerNews1-24-08/PioneerNews1-24-08-Page4.pdf

actually one response was on the spot.
Yay, Jessica, and too bad about the History that Jon learned or failed to learn.

bluestaterebel
01-29-2008, 12:57 AM
too many.

jumbopanda
01-29-2008, 1:35 AM
The ATF just mailed me State Laws and Published Ordinances - Firearms.

The laws for all 50 states total 487 pages.

The PRK accounts for 68 pages. :rolleyes: Even NY only needs 26, NJ 24, and MD 18.

AK takes 5 pages, VT 3, and, thank you, God, ID uses 5:)

-hanko

68...ewwwww...


2500!

KenpoProfessor
01-29-2008, 5:14 AM
The ATF just mailed me State Laws and Published Ordinances - Firearms.

The laws for all 50 states total 487 pages.

The PRK accounts for 68 pages. :rolleyes: Even NY only needs 26, NJ 24, and MD 18.

AK takes 5 pages, VT 3, and, thank you, God, ID uses 5:)

-hanko

Just looked at mine (got it with my C & R).


AZ 4 AR 3 MS 3


Love the free states :D

Have a great gun carryin' Kenpo day

Clyde