LA Times calls for more gun control laws

[GeeBee49]

Yes. I have my CCW under state law. AND, that is a violation of the constitution. We have the right to keep and bear arms WITHOUT any piece of paper. The state and federal laws in this country are a violation of that fact.
Our problem is that gun owners have mentally accepted their lies and they think they can negotiate with demoncrat terrorists. You can't. They want you disarmed.
If Trump loses, they are coming for everything. Get ready.

If you live in California there is no right to bear arms clause in the state constitution. There are five other states that do not have a right to bear arms.
As mentioned earlier SCOTUS decides what is and is not constitutional but they refuse to do there job. We do not vote for supreme court justices, they are appointed.

[CaliGunOwner_Mike]

[GeeBee49]

If that happens he should be able to place at least two more justices on the Supreme Court during his second term. This is one of the big reasons why the Dems want so badly to beat him. Since justices are appointed for life it could take them twenty years to get SCOTUS back.

[CaliGunOwner_Mike]

If that happens he should be able to place at least two more justices on the Supreme Court during his second term. This is one of the big reasons why the Dems want so badly to beat him. Since justices are appointed for life it could take them twenty years to get SCOTUS back.

I really hope we get more Republican justices but ultimately I hope they can become more aggressive in defending the Constitution. [emoji120]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GeeBee49]

I really hope we get more Republican justices but ultimately I hope they can become more aggressive in defending the Constitution. [emoji120]

Yes, that would be nice but I've had a problem with do nothing Republicans for quite some time. The left has been aggressive for years while the Repubs just coast along. It's their fault we are in the situation we're in today.
If Trump gets two more justices on the bench they have to fight for what's right. If he manages to keep the oval office, the senate and possibly take back
the house then they have four years to solidify this country to the point that the Dems can't tear it down the next time they take power.

[CaliGunOwner_Mike]

YES! Trump had the House and the Senate in the first 2 years of his first term. If he gets that opportunity again he better not let the Dems sandbag his administration with bull***** cases and distract him. He needs to stay laser focused and do everything in his power to save citizens who have had their constitutional rights stripped from them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Wheellock]

Most people with any common sense knows that a suicidal person will eventually follow through whether they own a gun or not. Those same people also know that gang bangers do not use legally owned guns. When you eliminate those two large groups the annual gun related death toll does not serve the purpose of the gun control crowd.

This is not true, and is something that we, as a group, need to stop saying.

There have been (unintentional) studies to the contrary, notably the switch from "town gas" to natural gas in the UK. A good explanation is in Malcolm Gladwell's book "Talking to Strangers" (and nothing to do with gun control).

If we advocate responsible gun ownership, we need to acknowledge the negatives and positives equally and use facts, not the "common sense" we deride when it is used against us.

[Wheellock]

Mike is the reason why we have no rights. He thinks we can negotiate with terrorists.

Mike - you disgust me.

Any testing for CCWs is a violation of the human right to self defense. You want testing? How about tests for voting. Constitution. Bill of Rights. Let's make it English only and hard.

Are you advocating people may carry firearms who have no clue how to use them? Who may be a danger to themselves and others?

All rights come with conditions and limitations. We need to put forward more good ideas instead of just saying "UNCONSTITUTIONAL!!!".

[GeeBee49]

This is not true, and is something that we, as a group, need to stop saying.
There have been (unintentional) studies to the contrary, notably the switch from "town gas" to natural gas in the UK. A good explanation is in Malcolm Gladwell's book "Talking to Strangers" (and nothing to do with gun control).
If we advocate responsible gun ownership, we need to acknowledge the negatives and positives equally and use facts, not the "common sense" we deride when it is used against us.

I don't know where you're going with your post but I'll stick with my opinion on people with suicidal tendencies. Suicide by gun has very little to do with the gun and has everything to do with a person's mental state. Gun control advocates like to use suicide by gun as a strong case against guns. They will say if that person did not have a gun they probably would not have committed suicide. My point is that if a suicidal person didn't have a gun they would find some other way to do it.
The UK switched to natural gas because a large quantity was discovered under the North Sea and it was cheaper and cleaner. I assume you had some kind of "head in the oven" reason for including that.
Talking To Strangers? I looked into this book and found nothing about guns or suicide. I found references to rape, sexual assault, sodomy and sexual abuse of children. Oh yeah, and something about Chamberlain and Hitler.

[Featureless]

YES! Trump had the House and the Senate in the first 2 years of his first term. If he gets that opportunity again he better not let the Dems sandbag his administration with bull***** cases and distract him. He needs to stay laser focused and do everything in his power to save citizens who have had their constitutional rights stripped from them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes he had Ryan who fought him all the way. So he didn't really have 'the House'

[Thoughts]

This is not true, and is something that we, as a group, need to stop saying.

I disagree. There is no reason to believe that access to guns increases the suicide rate. Studies that "prove" that all seem to assume correlation proves causality, which is absurd. The Australian data on their gun bans shows at most a very minuscule effect, probably no effect at all. There is no way in which the suicide rate in the USA is unusually high in any moderately reasonable cross-country comparison, which makes the whole idea that guns cause suicide rather, well, doubtful.

[johncage]

guns do make it easier, but so does a rope. banning the latter will also make it less easy to commit suicide, so the argument is pretty irrelevant.

[ja308]

The 1st amendment was designed to facilitate conversation for the furtherance of American liberty.
It was not designed to encourage the enslavment of Americans by Communist inspired propaganda mills.

While I do believe its the right of totalitarians to publish this nonsense. They should be required to register as agents of a foreign government and have that posted on the front page.

Last time I saw an issue of the democrat times of Los Angeles it was about the size of grocery fliers that come in the mail. That said if anyone see's who advertises in this pathetic rag. Let me know I still have room to save a few bucks by avoiding whoever it is !

[Wheellock]

I don't know where you're going with your post but I'll stick with my opinion on people with suicidal tendencies. Suicide by gun has very little to do with the gun and has everything to do with a person's mental state. Gun control advocates like to use suicide by gun as a strong case against guns. They will say if that person did not have a gun they probably would not have committed suicide. My point is that if a suicidal person didn't have a gun they would find some other way to do it.
The UK switched to natural gas because a large quantity was discovered under the North Sea and it was cheaper and cleaner. I assume you had some kind of "head in the oven" reason for including that.
Talking To Strangers? I looked into this book and found nothing about guns or suicide. I found references to rape, sexual assault, sodomy and sexual abuse of children. Oh yeah, and something about Chamberlain and Hitler.

Where I am going with this is, I hear the same opinion about suicide, but this is not something an opinion is valid for. Facts are relevant in this case, and the few studies I have read about don't support the common narrative I hear on our side. I think we need to deal with the issue rather than deny it because it sounds good and supports our argument.

I will correct something slightly that you said (bold above). Attempting suicide has to do with a person's mental state, whether or not they succeed has to do with what method they use. Firearms are very effective, that's why we use them to protect ourselves. Suicide is frequently impulsive, unplanned, and unsuccessful.

The gas connection, from the book, is after the switch to natural gas (for the reasons you mentioned above) it was no longer possible to commit suicide by putting your head in the oven, which was possible with the higher CO content of town gas. The suicide rate overall decreased after the switch, with very strong connections to the gas switch.

The book "Talking to Strangers" is not about gun control, which is why I mentioned it as more of a neutral source rather than propaganda for one side. It deals with the bad outcomes of mis-judging people we don't know, of which the Chamberlain/Hitler relationship was a good example (not sure why you emphasised that). It is certainly not a bed time story for the kids, so yes, there is a lot of horrible stuff in there. It is meant to learn from and make you think.

So, what I really want, is to go to the range and be otherwise left alone. That is in jeopardy because we are the minority in this case. If we use dishonest arguments or opinions for facts, it is easy for the opposition to undermine us.

[The War Wagon]