Calguns.net  

Home My iTrader Join the NRA Donate to CGSSA Sponsors CGN Google Search
CA Semiauto Ban(AW)ID Flowchart CA Handgun Ban ID Flowchart CA Shotgun Ban ID Flowchart
Go Back   Calguns.net > POLITICS, LITIGATION AND ACTIVISM > California 2nd Amend. Political Discussion & Activism
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

California 2nd Amend. Political Discussion & Activism Discuss gun rights activism and 2A related political topics here. All advice given is NOT legal counsel.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old 11-17-2012, 4:32 AM
CDFingers CDFingers is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Chico, CA
Posts: 1,853
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

From the "Methodology" page (.pdf) linked above, I have the biggest problem with this:

quote:

>Laws requiring that relevant mental health records are sent to the F.B.I. for the purpose of firearm purchaser background checks

(CDF): I see that as a total 4th Amendment violation. I reject it. Any bureaucrat can decide whether something is "relevant". Bad proposal, in my opinion.

As gun owners, however, we have to look in the graphic there, at the correlation shown between what the article considers "strong" gun laws and states with low rates of so-called "gun violence." When lowest gun death rates correlate with strong gun laws, we can't just ignore that. We have to find out which aspects of these gun laws, if any, actually correlate with lower gun deaths. Otherwise gun law proponents will claim that all gun laws worked to achieve such and such a result.

Such a correlation might result from a whole host of things outside of gun laws, such as demographics, geography, political or religious affiliations, police presence, military bases--a whole host of possibilities exist, including caliber of weapons used that did not result in death. But if we just poo poo articles like this, we miss the opportunity to clarify which laws if any we would support.

We will win this argument based on facts, not on emotions. We also can't ignore easily verified facts.

CDFingers
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 11-17-2012, 8:05 AM
ShooterMcFly's Avatar
ShooterMcFly ShooterMcFly is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 109
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kauf View Post
Lol California is only an A-! As if there is still "room for improvement" here? Take away ALL the guns. Then you get an A+
I didn't see an "A" or "A+" for anyone. I don't want to think what "A+" for gun laws would be...
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 11-17-2012, 8:59 AM
vantec08 vantec08 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Beaumont
Posts: 3,801
iTrader: 13 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverTauron View Post
We face a disadvantage against the Disarmament Lobby on that topic, just because quantifying defensive gun uses where an attack was prevented is nearly impossible. Even determining legitimate cases of self defense is difficult due to how some legal areas classify incidents. If there's a No-Bill its easy enough to determine, but sometimes the DA just declines to file charges and that's the end of it. Was incident X a case of self defense? Who knows, it never went to court.

But crimes with guns, well, those are downright childs play to locate and post for all the world to see , even if no actual criminal attack happened with a firearm. DEA raids a crack den and finds an SBR next to the drugs? BAM! GUN CRIME!

If the truth about self defense with firearms were told on the airwaves, we'd have a "national conversation on gun laws" alright.........


BTW ,South Dakota is #1 in the USA for Lax Gun Laws! Funny, I have yet to see a kid get shot by gang crossfire on the news. In point of fact, the only time a gun got used in anger at all in the past 90 days in this state is when someone tried to run over a State LEO , who thus understandably drew his weapon.
Yup, this place is just a cesspool of gun violence and death, where just one shooting a year is considered ultra violent. I should move to someplace safer like Chicago.
Good point. Many "brandishing-attacker-flees" wouldnt make the list or the stats. Have heard that used with antis, who simply explain it away with "then it cant be proven." Well, neither can picking your nose if nobody sees it.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 11-17-2012, 3:24 PM
Dreaded Claymore Dreaded Claymore is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 3,240
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vantec08 View Post
Good point. Many "brandishing-attacker-flees" wouldnt make the list or the stats. Have heard that used with antis, who simply explain it away with "then it cant be proven." Well, neither can picking your nose if nobody sees it.
I frequently rely on that fact in the comfort of my home, especially when I'm badly congested.
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 11-17-2012, 8:31 PM
Hank Stamper Hank Stamper is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Lakeside,San Diego County
Posts: 44
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Untamed1972 View Post
"F".....you mean like in "Freedom"?
One of the first infringements of freedom in the 13 Colonies was a tax and restrictions on alcohol. Which led to the beginnings of the rebellion against the crown. Texass still has anitquated alcohol laws, like freekin DRY counties. LOL Yeah real free. Perhaps Texans should grow some and be as vociferous in lessening alcohol laws in their state, than worrying about California laws.
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 11-17-2012, 8:55 PM
Meplat1's Avatar
Meplat1 Meplat1 is offline
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 202
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by redhead View Post
I looked at their nice little map. We're #1! I feel much safer now. I guess I can go into any neighborhood in places like Oakland and Richmond and feel safe now. On the other hand, I see the state I grew up in rated an F. Funny that. They still don't have much in the way of "gun violence."

People swallow this stuff whole, don't they? Gun control laws = less "gun violence."
Yep, gun violence, like when mom swats the 4 yo through an 8” diaper for trying to get into the gun safe? Or when she blows the *** off a serial rapist and RSO? That kind of violence.
__________________
May all your enemies be on full-auto
Jeff Cooper
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 11-17-2012, 11:33 PM
fizux's Avatar
fizux fizux is offline
Senior Member
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 1,541
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverTauron View Post
If there's a No-Bill its easy enough to determine
Not always. In many jurisdictions, self defense is basically a mandatory arrest. The Brady Bunch, et al., call that a gun homicide, and ignore the grand jury.

Their stats are as accurate as Blago and Daley counting the vote in Colma.
__________________
Nationwide Master List of Current 2A Cases, courtesy of Al Norris @ TFL.

Reloading Clubs: SF, East Bay

Case Status: Peña v. Cid (Handgun Roster). SF v. 44Mag (Mag Parts Kits). Bauer v. Harris (DROS Fees). Davis v. LA (CCW policy). Jackson v. SF (Ammo/Storage). Teixeira (FFL Zoning). First Unitarian v. NSA (Privacy). Silvester (Waiting Period). Schoepf (DROS Delay). Haynie (AW ban). SFVPOA v. SF (10+ mag possession ban). Bear in Public: Drake (3CA); Moore (7CA); Richards, Peruta, McKay (9CA).
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 11-18-2012, 5:35 AM
Ford8N's Avatar
Ford8N Ford8N is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Northern Rhovanion
Posts: 4,991
iTrader: 17 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by XDshooter View Post
I wonder how California would do if they included violent crime rates.

http://www.statemaster.com/graph/cri...-crime-violent
Interesting, North Dakota has the lowest violent crime rate, yet gets an F rating. In ND you can get a full auto, silencers, SBR and SBS. There is no AW laws. There is no waiting period. Face to face sales. Shall issue. There is something going on, a huge elephant that nobody want's to talk about. Look at the US census for a clue.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverTauron View Post
We face a disadvantage against the Disarmament Lobby on that topic, just because quantifying defensive gun uses where an attack was prevented is nearly impossible. Even determining legitimate cases of self defense is difficult due to how some legal areas classify incidents. If there's a No-Bill its easy enough to determine, but sometimes the DA just declines to file charges and that's the end of it. Was incident X a case of self defense? Who knows, it never went to court.

But crimes with guns, well, those are downright childs play to locate and post for all the world to see , even if no actual criminal attack happened with a firearm. DEA raids a crack den and finds an SBR next to the drugs? BAM! GUN CRIME!

If the truth about self defense with firearms were told on the airwaves, we'd have a "national conversation on gun laws" alright.........


BTW ,South Dakota is #1 in the USA for Lax Gun Laws! Funny, I have yet to see a kid get shot by gang crossfire on the news. In point of fact, the only time a gun got used in anger at all in the past 90 days in this state is when someone tried to run over a State LEO , who thus understandably drew his weapon.
Yup, this place is just a cesspool of gun violence and death, where just one shooting a year is considered ultra violent. I should move to someplace safer like Chicago.
Yup, I love the Dakotas.
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 11-18-2012, 6:19 AM
liberty08's Avatar
liberty08 liberty08 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Northern CA
Posts: 807
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Guns are evil to these people. They "go off" and kill people.
__________________
“When you can't make them see the light, make them feel the heat.” Ronald Reagan
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 11-18-2012, 4:58 PM
jokat989 jokat989 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: the last (free) frontier
Posts: 573
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

alaska scored a 6.1%

you really have to try to fail this hard lol
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 11-18-2012, 7:30 PM
hornswaggled's Avatar
hornswaggled hornswaggled is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,653
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

And yet I'd feel safer in Amarillo than in Chicago. Funny how that works.
__________________
NRA Endowment Member
SAF Defender's Club
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 11-19-2012, 9:05 AM
Wiz-of-Awd Wiz-of-Awd is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Where I'm at ;)
Posts: 2,290
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Redhead,

Here's the scenario for you...


"A suspected badguy has been spotted preparing to "do bad" in a crowded public place. He has a baseball bat or a gun."

Which one makes you more afraid of the potential harm he can do?

I suspect that you would fear this man with a gun, much more so than if he just had a baseball bat.

The problem still, is firearms are simply much more capable of doing devastating harm quite easily - and from a distance, whereas many others things are not.

Additionally, it's much easier to evade or subdue a "bad guy" who wields something other than a gun in most cases. This is why the anti's push "gun violence" and "gun laws" to a never ending limit.

A.W.D.

Quote:
Originally Posted by redhead View Post
Why are these groups so concerned with "gun violence" in particular? Is there no other kind of violence? If guns are somehow magically removed from society we will all be peacable people with no one having any inclination to violence? People won't get all worked up and pick up a baseball bat, hammer or knife, or whatever, to wreak violence on a fellow human once guns are removed?

Rating a state on their gun laws is just so stupid. How about looking at results of the gun laws. is "gun violence" down because of these laws? California has a lot of guns laws. How do we compare to other states in terms of homicides and injuries due to criminal use of a firearm? I know that the state I grew up didn't have much in the way of gun control laws, yet the homicide rates were quite low. But, I guess logic doesn't enter into the equation.
__________________
Quote:
In the end, time and irony always win.
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 11-19-2012, 10:12 AM
vantec08 vantec08 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Beaumont
Posts: 3,801
iTrader: 13 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiz-of-Awd View Post
Redhead,

Here's the scenario for you...


"A suspected badguy has been spotted preparing to "do bad" in a crowded public place. He has a baseball bat or a gun."

Which one makes you more afraid of the potential harm he can do?

I suspect that you would fear this man with a gun, much more so than if he just had a baseball bat.

The problem still, is firearms are simply much more capable of doing devastating harm quite easily - and from a distance, whereas many others things are not.

Additionally, it's much easier to evade or subdue a "bad guy" who wields something other than a gun in most cases. This is why the anti's push "gun violence" and "gun laws" to a never ending limit.

A.W.D.

You bet. Never ceases to amaze me how antis believe criminals will obey laws, especially considering they are exempt from prosecution for even trying to purchase a gun legally (Haynes). Most of them never heard of that decision.
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 11-19-2012, 11:29 AM
SilverTauron SilverTauron is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 5,705
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vantec08 View Post
You bet. Never ceases to amaze me how antis believe criminals will obey laws, especially considering they are exempt from prosecution for even trying to purchase a gun legally (Haynes). Most of them never heard of that decision.
What amazes me on this topic is that the Disarmament Lobby pretends the only way people can be killed is with a firearm.

If I had to choose between facing an active shooter armed with an AR15 and 10 mags versus the same bad guy driving a tractor trailer rig loaded with 70 tons of ammonium nitrate and a detonator, I'm taking option A.
__________________
The more prohibitions you have, the less virtuous people will be.
The more subsidies you have, the less self reliant people will be.
-Lao-Tzu, Tau Te Ching. 479 BCE

The 1911 may have been in wars for 100 years, but Masetro Bartolomeo Beretta was arming the world 400 years before John Browning was ever a wet dream.
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 11-19-2012, 11:43 AM
Fatgunman's Avatar
Fatgunman Fatgunman is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Orange County, Commiefornia
Posts: 883
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

HaHaHa, did yall see illinois got a B, more people die chicago aparently than in afghanistan and they have strict gun laws. if that dosent disprove their bs alone nothing will, they must not like getting confused with facts.
__________________
BOOO anti-gun people, HOOORAAAYY GUNS!
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 11-19-2012, 5:51 PM
epilepticninja's Avatar
epilepticninja epilepticninja is offline
misanthrope
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: In a van, down by the river...
Posts: 3,648
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by redhead View Post
Why are these groups so concerned with "gun violence" in particular? Is there no other kind of violence? If guns are somehow magically removed from society we will all be peacable people with no one having any inclination to violence? People won't get all worked up and pick up a baseball bat, hammer or knife, or whatever, to wreak violence on a fellow human once guns are removed?
I ask these same questions all the time.
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 11-19-2012, 7:47 PM
DavidJacob's Avatar
DavidJacob DavidJacob is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Texas
Posts: 176
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

They have a facebook page. http://www.facebook.com/pages/Law-Ce...e/215654610808
Sad how many people buy into that crap.
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 11-20-2012, 4:15 AM
Ford8N's Avatar
Ford8N Ford8N is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Northern Rhovanion
Posts: 4,991
iTrader: 17 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidJacob View Post
They have a facebook page. http://www.facebook.com/pages/Law-Ce...e/215654610808
Sad how many people buy into that crap.

They are the majority of voters in California. Sadly, even some gun owners too.
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 11-20-2012, 5:56 PM
MattyB MattyB is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Orangevale, CA
Posts: 350
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Im glad that my soon-to-be home state has such archaic policies in place that dont help impede on The Constitution.

Shame they didnt get an F-
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:31 AM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Proudly hosted by GeoVario the Premier 2A host.
Calguns.net, the 'Calguns' name and all associated variants and logos are ® Trademark and © Copyright 2002-2016, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.