PDA

View Full Version : Ever notice that "gun laws" are always labled "common sense"?


TrailerparkTrash
04-12-2008, 12:25 PM
Ever notice that when a democrat seeks gun banning (legislation), that they always claim it as "sensible gun control" or "common sense gun control"?

Also, always always always, after one legislature gets his/her laws passed, they are RELENTLESS! They continue to seek more and more and more anti-gun legislation!

Just when you think the gun control debate is over, or is not so fierce, it comes back at us with a vengence! The damn liberal anti-gunner legislatures are chipping away at our second amendment rights bit by bit. They know that they can't just take away all guns and ammo in one fell swoop. They have to do it piece by piece.

I believe the liberals know that the "way to go" in anti gun legislation is to take "baby steps" and take away our rights a little at a time. That way the main stream gun owners don't really notice that much while bits and pieces of our rights are removed from the books.

ANY ANTI GUN LAW is a bad law. Pretty soon, our young kids won't have the same rights and fun when it comes to shooting guns as we adults have had in the past.

savasyn
04-12-2008, 12:39 PM
Well if they called it "arbitrary and asinine gun control", I doubt they could sell that to the far left, let alone the moderates.
I imagine a vast majority of the people that think this garbage is a good idea don't even think about what is being proposed, they just hear "safer", "common sense", "for the kids". It's all in the marketing.

Matt C
04-12-2008, 12:59 PM
You guys just need to stop clinging to your guns in frustration due to economic hardships caused by the government not giving you enough of other people's money.

kap
04-12-2008, 1:23 PM
You guys just need to stop clinging to your guns in frustration due to economic hardships caused by the government not giving you enough of other people's money.

You are so right Mr. Obama. :rolleyes:

Crazed_SS
04-12-2008, 1:50 PM
It's a very effective tactic, after all,, how can someone argue against "Common Sense"? :)

Piper
04-12-2008, 1:53 PM
Ever notice that when a democrat seeks gun banning (legislation), that they always claim it as "sensible gun control" or "common sense gun control"?

Also, always always always, after one legislature gets his/her laws passed, they are RELENTLESS! They continue to seek more and more and more anti-gun legislation!

Just when you think the gun control debate is over, or is not so fierce, it comes back at us with a vengence! The damn liberal anti-gunner legislatures are chipping away at our second amendment rights bit by bit. They know that they can't just take away all guns and ammo in one fell swoop. They have to do it piece by piece.

I believe the liberals know that the "way to go" in anti gun legislation is to take "baby steps" and take away our rights a little at a time. That way the main stream gun owners don't really notice that much while bits and pieces of our rights are removed from the books.

ANY ANTI GUN LAW is a bad law. Pretty soon, our young kids won't have the same rights and fun when it comes to shooting guns as we adults have had in the past.

Yeah, it's too bad that the progun crowd in California doesn't do the same thing. The rest of progun America is progressing by leaps and bounds, but in California, we just keep inventing excuses for not getting major progun bills passed. We blame it on the liberal legislature, ignorant people and the one that I find most interesting is blaming the lack of progress on the "christian right." If we make any significant progress in the future, it will be from court decisions and legislation outside of California, like Heller as the most contemporary example.

Librarian
04-12-2008, 2:36 PM
Yeah, it's too bad that the progun crowd in California doesn't do the same thing. The rest of progun America is progressing by leaps and bounds, but in California, we just keep inventing excuses for not getting major progun bills passed. We blame it on the liberal legislature, ignorant people and the one that I find most interesting is blaming the lack of progress on the "christian right." If we make any significant progress in the future, it will be from court decisions and legislation outside of California, like Heller as the most contemporary example.Ok, I'm curious. What tactic will get a pro-gun bill through our current legislature?

Piper
04-12-2008, 2:45 PM
Ok, I'm curious. What tactic will get a pro-gun bill through our current legislature?

Persistance and perserverence. The same things that everyone else is using to be successful. You can't get it passed, if you don't submit it.

Harrison_Bergeron
04-12-2008, 3:12 PM
Persistance and perserverence. The same things that everyone else is using to be successful. You can't get it passed, if you don't submit it.

And who do you submit your bill too?

I can't tell, are you being naive, or sarcastic?

Librarian
04-12-2008, 3:15 PM
Persistance and perserverence. The same things that everyone else is using to be successful. You can't get it passed, if you don't submit it.

Fine.

Let's pretend.

Assemblymember Aghazarian introduces a bill: it says "Penal Code sections 12125, 12126, 12127, 12128, 12129, 12130, 12131, 12131.5, 12132, and 12133, relating to the Roster of Handguns Certified for Sale, are hereby repealed."

Who votes for it on the Assembly Public Safety Committee?

In today's legislature, it gets rejected 5-2.

What has to happen before that vote changes?

CCWFacts
04-12-2008, 3:28 PM
They always say that. In my opinion, the only gun laws that are common sense are ones that keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people, in particular, felons, the mentally ill, etc.

Rivers
04-12-2008, 3:48 PM
Ok, I'm curious. What tactic will get a pro-gun bill through our current legislature?

I think a gun bill that doesn't look like a gun bill. It should be a public safety bill, or something like that. Start with removing the law enforcement exemption from the Safe Gun List. A legislator can justify that by not wanting the government to incur any legal liability should an "unsafe" gun issued by a police department injure or kill either a civilian or the officer. The law would require LEO to only use "safe" guns like the rest of the population.

Further, LEO should use microstamped handguns. The cost saving of a forensic shooting investigation will justify this. Remember that forensic "experts" said that by the simple location of an expended shell casing, they could locate where the shooter was when the shot was fired. Again, not a "pro-gun" argument but one that promotes a (claimed) cost saving to the state.

Of course, LEO will hate this. But it is logical and the legislators can get legal eagles behind it. But after a year or so, LEO will oppose the existence of the whole "safe list" garbage. That would benefit the whole pro-gun community.

Solidsnake87
04-12-2008, 5:41 PM
Common sense is not so common and is most often mis-interpreted. After all, wouldn't be enough common sense to realize that criminals do not obey the law?

bohoki
04-12-2008, 6:03 PM
to me it goes along with "the road to hell is paved with good intentions"

RRangel
04-12-2008, 6:12 PM
Make no mistake, the "common sense" ruse is by design. You can be rest assured that all of the victim disarmament organizations mentioned in articles, and our media, that are endorsing anti-gun legislation, have spent countless hours writing their lines in order for you not to be able to pin them down.

Take a look at the Brady Campaign's website. It is very crafty, and written very well, so as not to make any negativity obvious, unless it is in regard to firearms. It is almost hard to find a quote there, that gives you the reality of the organizations true purpose.

bg
04-12-2008, 10:11 PM
Here's person who believes in "common sense" gun laws.
She look like she has any common sense to you ?

http://pic14.picturetrail.com/VOL544/713502/13881785/186642879.jpg

dragonbait1a
04-12-2008, 10:36 PM
Their "best" :rolleyes: use of the 'common sense' moniker is "Senator Suchandsuch repeatedly voted AGAINST common sense Gun control measures. is this someone we can trust with our children's future? Vote Democrat!"

Of course we can't oppose "Common Sense" legislation, that would make us crazy fanatics who see Criminals, black helicopters and foreign invaders behind every corner and bush

It is a corruption for the basic legal idea of the "Reasonable Person". They use fear and strawman arguments to make prohibition seem reasonable. The media (Movies and television and news for the most part) empathize the "evils" of weapons, the helplessness and undeservingness of the victims, and the unreasonable "redneck, NRA racist types who fight to keep these 'on the street'"

The Shall Issue States have gone a long way to prove the reasonableness of firearms for personal protection. The expiration of the Federal AW ban helps too.

But "Mr and Mrs America" don't see the millions of guns that didn't hurt anyone today. They DO see the 11 o'clock news about the shooting in Richmond. With the wailing mother and the church leader praying to "Stop the Violence."

RGB

yellowfin
04-13-2008, 1:25 PM
It is not shown enough is the the anti gun ideology is not common, let alone sensical. It is not the law of the land and is rightly rejected most everywhere else and its premise disproven. The antis do not get put in the perspective that they are the minority. They are given much too much comfort.

Librarian
04-14-2008, 7:23 PM
Fine.

Let's pretend.

Assemblymember Aghazarian introduces a bill: it says "Penal Code sections 12125, 12126, 12127, 12128, 12129, 12130, 12131, 12131.5, 12132, and 12133, relating to the Roster of Handguns Certified for Sale, are hereby repealed."

Who votes for it on the Assembly Public Safety Committee?

In today's legislature, it gets rejected 5-2.

What has to happen before that vote changes?

So let me drag this to where I show that Piper, while good-hearted, and with whom I am in agreement about trying to get some of these crummy laws dumped, is somewhat impractical.

To answer my hanging question, to change the vote in the Assembly Public Safety Committee, we need to get a different Speaker, one who does not perceive that gun control bills are to his or his party's advantage. This is required, because I have seen that just a few fair-minded Democrats on a committee are not sufficient; the Speaker has, in the past, replaced Committee members - up to and including putting himself on the committee - to be sure that a gun control bill passes.

The only way to get a Speaker who will not devote extraordinary efforts to pass gun control bills is for the majority party to elect a Speaker without that agenda.

And how do we get such a Speaker? I hope it's obvious, we (collectively, in CA) elect Assembly members who hold that agenda in the minority.

If we do not manage that - and I'll be happy if someone comes up with a plan to get there before 2100 - then we get the problem that genuinely sensible gun control bills (primarily dismantling the nonsensical ones already in place) get introduced, rejected in committee, and those members who introduce such bills are politically 'castrated'. Nothing they might support (beyond things following the Speaker's lead) will get passed. Assembly members who never successfully get their bills passed do not get re-elected. Introducing bills that get rejected, over and over again, is not the path to a long political career -- and people inclined to want to pursue such a path will stop getting elected because their constituents will want someone effective to represent them.

There are very few Tom McClintocks in California politics; acting on principle nearly always is submerged to getting re-elected.

So, it's obvious, in the tautological sense, that bills never introduced never get passed. It's also obvious that until we elect a majority of Assembly members who are not ideologically committed to, or financially supported by, or cynically acting as fellow-travelers to 'gun control', introducing the bills is not going to make progress.

yellowfin
04-14-2008, 8:03 PM
Just curious, but who are some of the individuals and groups responsible for financing the anti firearm movement in CA? Who are the puppeteers?

Librarian
04-14-2008, 8:31 PM
Just curious, but who are some of the individuals and groups responsible for financing the anti firearm movement in CA? Who are the puppeteers?

Brady Campaign; they have their hooks into DeSaulnier, for sure; Mark used to be a Republican but switched parties (good riddance, not that the folks who remained all are particularly useful).

LCAV (http://www.lcav.org/) -
Legal Community Against Violence grew out of a terrible tragedy – the July 1, 1993 assault weapon rampage that began at a law firm at 101 California Street in San Francisco and ended with nine people dead, including the shooter, and six wounded, one of whom subsequently died. Within days of the shooting, Bay Area lawyers formed LCAV.

The LA Times editors. The SF Chronicle editors. The SJ Mercury News editors (Media News Group, these days - W D Singleton, founder is on the board of AP, but SJMN has been anti-gun since McNamara was police chief, 1976-1991). Any television station in English in those three markets (non-English might also be so, but nobody broadcasts in a language I know besides English - working on a little Spanish, but no Chinese or Vietnamese).

The Dave Bohnett Foundation (http://www.bohnettfoundation.org/Programs/Recipients/900011/).
The Joyce Foundation (http://www.joycefdn.org/Programs/GunViolence/GrantList.aspx)

That covers a lot of it.

And how could I forget George Soros (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Soros)? Wikipedia, but still ...
Gun control

Directly and through his organization Open Society Institute (OSI), he has funded various gun control organizations, such as the Tides Foundation, the HELP Network and SAFE Colorado. He and seven friends founded their own political committee — Campaign for a Progressive Future — and spent $2 million on political activities in 2000, including providing the prime financial backing for the Million Mom March. OSI has supported UN efforts to create international gun control regulations and has singled out the United States for failing to go along with other countries on national gun control measures

Pink pistols has a list; (http://www.pinkpistols.org/antigun.html) don't know how current it is.

taloft
04-14-2008, 8:34 PM
They have to add the term "Common Sense" to every speech about anti gun laws because, there is no other common sense contained with the law itself.;)

spgk380
04-14-2008, 9:05 PM
Well, I don't put much stock in common sense anyway---it is usually wrong. As Mencken said "For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong".

But common sense is just that--common sense. So if something appears to be common sense, it is probably the simple, neat and wrong solution that everybody believes.

ibanezfoo
04-15-2008, 8:53 AM
Ever notice that when a democrat seeks gun banning (legislation), that they always claim it as "sensible gun control" or "common sense gun control"?

It is a psychological tactic used against people that can't think for themselves. You'll also find words like "obvious" and "clearly" thrown around by their lot as well. The small thinkers want to do what everyone else is doing and not upset the herd, so carefully placed words like this are effective ways of controlling thought. Don't take my word for it, try it out yourself. I've experimented a lot with slipping in words like that. It really is amazing how you can control thought with them. It doesn't work on everyone, of course, just the smaller thinkers.

For example, I worked with this one guy who was very opinionated about politics but never really had any proof to back up anything he said. Wouldn't listen to you even if you provided proof. I started slipping in words like "obviously", "everyone agrees", and "common sense". At first it didn't seem to make any difference in his argument, but then something very odd started happening. He started telling me things that I already told him in the past! For some reason he didn't remember me telling him and was now nearly quoting my arguments back to me as his own....

These speeches the politicians give are not off the cuff. They are carefully crafted with buzz words and other sub conscious triggering words, IMHO. :TFH:

-Bryan