You don’t fight crime after the fact nearly as well as you fight crime during the fact. After the fact, when crime has come and gone, you have the score of Crime 1 and the People 0. You certainly do not fight crime by fighting the electorate over more laws criminals ignore anyway, and all gun control does nothing but fight the electorate and ignore criminals.
I am speaking of California Assembly Bill 962. You can read it all here.
Fundamentally, it restricts a citizen’s ammunition acquisition and transfer of ammunition to fifty rounds per month. A student goes through more than that in a two hour class. Police officers go through more than that in qualifying when they need to qualify for their weapons. My other observation is that most our police are just as honest as our citizens, but the law will exempt them as it will exempt them from Microstamping of ammunition soon. A lot of our laws restricting the sovereign exempt the servants of the sovereign, and it is this which does not fight crime, but fights the sovereign. .jpg)
The entire legislature employs European Thinking in an American public service; lawmaking. Actually, that's our job; they are hired to carry out our wishes, not their own.
Americans cannot use European thinking; it freezes the citizen out of the process and never works. Their idea of lawmaking circumvents our due process by infringement where the language of the Second Amendment states that it shall not be infringed. It’s another example of those German Philosophers who furnish blueprints of abuses of powers by continuing the crisis... after crisis...after crisis.
As I mention often, gun control isn’t supposed to work. Neither is ammunition control. The blueprints of governance from those German Philosophers calls for the 1800 guidance which has survived into the twenty-first century but good. It says, 'Never let a good crisis go to waste.' It is the sum total of knowledge of all of those Philosophers. Crisis.
What is the difference between American thinking and European thinking? We’re both free, aren’t we?
No, we are not both free. We have a Constitution which was blueprinted on what we didn’t want any more of, and Europe lives by blueprints of German Philosophers who handed them more of what they didn’t want more of. Get it? You can see it all in almost any library. See Hegel.
There is nothing the California Legislature can say which will make any sense to the law abiding in how AB 962 fights crime. It won’t. You do not fight crime by criminalizing your taxpayer.
For years now, gun control has succeeded in back-door confiscations by restricting and punishing ammunition the type of ammunition, type of weapon, where it can be carried, owned or changed, then the regulation of ammo, then the amount you can buy and how you must qualify for that. Nothing new, just more of the same. Why? Because it works in Europe. It’s not supposed to work their either, but it depends on what you’re trying to get working. .jpg)
Gun control or Safety? You'll never have both.
In America, you have to remember that millions of citizens who are now buying handguns are casting a vote of a sort, and it is a vote of non-confidence in our public servants, especially socialists. It may set up the Republicans to kick the democrats out of office and to the curb, as all of this will be in recent memory come the elections. If the Republicans are smart – and there is little available evidence that they are – they will make this a plank on their platform and even seriously consider the repeal of many gun laws which fail to fight crime and only hurt their constituents.
This is the time for republicans to take a gun owner to lunch.
You have to wonder why our public servants want to disarm their sovereign superiors. When non-gun owners elect to buy Guns, they have come to a decision and cast a vote of a sort.
Will the government respect the election?
_______________________________________________
You never know who may be hearing the liberty message for the very first time. See Safe Streets In the Nationwide Concealed Carry Of Handguns, available in England at Amazon.co.uk and in Canada at Amazon.ca.
Comments
Every four months all California's armed security officers have to qualify with fifty rounds. This legislation will mean that unless my employer (a University) becomes an ammunition dealer, he will have to give me my fifty training rounds one month, and my fifty qualifiaction rounds the next - and I will have to store the first fifty until I go to the range. How is this safer than him issuing me one hundred rounds ten minutes before I go to train and qualify?
Crime prevention? Is the carrier of an illegal handgun going to be in any way influenced by a fifty round transfer limit. Is there ONE legislator who will stand up and say that they really believe this legislation will affect the criminal possession of ammunition???
They know better, Medic. It's all about regulating guns out of existence, except, of course, for themselves.
Why, do you suppose, is what I want every non-gun owner to think over.
The criminals will always be out of reach, but your billfold is within reach.
All gun control facilitates control in other areas, including banking, bailouts, and climate control.
The "non-violent" solution is the one the politions fear most: An enraged electorate.
Call your congressman and senators: Let them know that if they vote anything but "NO" on any measure that smells of 2nd Amendment limits, that you will vote them out (then they can go back to being used car dealers).
Tell them that if they speak out in favor of gun control, in any fashion, that you will treat them as traitors to their Oath (...Support and Defend the Constitution), and thus you will begin impeachment procedings immediately.
After the first one gets impeached, they will all fall into line.
Even state judges, who are subject to re-election, can be thus swayed.
More guns are sold in California than any other state. Estimates put the number of legal gun owners in the State at somewhere over 10 million. In a state with an estimated 23 million eligible voters (not all of whom are registered), gun owners represents the single largest potential voting block in the State. If those gun owners made it plain that they will vote against *any* incumbent who
1. Votes for an antigun bill or
2. Against a progun bill.
The onerous gun laws in California would disappear in a decade or less.
People get the government they deserve. In California gun owners are getting it good and hard. If they want it otherwise they will have to stop presenting their naked rumps like a bunch of whipped chimpanzees.
If you want to stand erect like free men and women the first thing to do is straighten your spine.
It will be difficult to get any real progression in Commufornia, due to the overly indulged, over paid, sociopathic "pillars" of the community,i.e., actors. But you are exactly right, they are getting what they deserve. The only thing that really ticks me off is the way that everyone seems to think that because Commufornia is doing it, all other states should follow suit.
I really wish they would get rid of Feinstein, then maybe some change for the better would present itself. Same goes for Kennedy and Clinton. Everyone knows where they stand on these issues. STOP RE-ELECTING THEM!!! Your messing it up for the rest of us.
Remember that the police have no legal obligation to protect and individual. There are numerous court cases which "support" this position. The job of the police is to investigate crime after it happens.
As long a California voters think that the legislators will do it for them they will continue to get re-elected.
Only when the California voter is willing to do it for themselves will the political winds begin to change.
This is why I want to ask Sotomayor whether she understands that police have no duty to protect individuals from the criminal acts of others.
Gun control puts the constituents at the mercy of both the criminal and an indifferent system. Between the two, there is no 'compelling interest of the state' in stopping crime, but an interest in keeping it flourishing. People get rich on crime fromRFID tracking to National ID Card.
If she does not have the soul to comprehend this, perhaps she is only an ignoramus (Ignorama?) pawn of a larger movement. Who protects her family? Certainly, she doesn't, which is part of my point in asking.
Sure hope those 7 Republicans read my column...
You should all know that it does not matter how strict a gun law gets, criminals don't care. They will always commit a crime regardless weather they have a gun are not. these polititians are only makeing it easy for them not the law abiding citizen. the reason they attack the secound ammendment is because it is the key to them all. If they get rid of the right to keep and bear arms. whats to stop them from destroying the 1st 3rd are even the rest of the ammendmants. We better fight hard and not give up because if we give up, thats how the anti gun loby wins. And for you voters, vote for someone that knows what their doing and for your rights, not somebody that Makes a good speech, just so they get ellected.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!