Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Log In

A valid email is required.
Password is required.
Posted: 3/6/2001 11:59:15 PM EST
FYI : [url]http://www.sacbee.com/voices/news/voices01_20010306.html[/url] The gun control agenda: Proposal to license handgun owners makes sense (Published March 6, 2001) Of all the hot-button issues on California's political agenda over the past decade, few have stirred greater emotion than gun control. Last year, Gov. Gray Davis tried to cool things off by calling for a moratorium on new legislation, citing the need to allow time to assess the effectiveness of a package of measures enacted in 1999 banning semiautomatic weapons, limiting the sale of handguns, banning "Saturday-night-special" handguns and requiring trigger safety devices to be sold with firearms. That made sense, and after some initial defiance, the Legislature finally went along and set aside proposed new laws. But as yesterday's deadly shooting at a San Diego-area high school grimly reminds us, the gun control agenda remains unfinished and deserves to be taken up again -- and despite emotions evoked by such tragic incidents, the debate needs to proceed in an atmosphere of sober deliberation. Among bills already introduced in the Legislature, the most prominent are measures by Democrats Kevin Shelley in the Assembly and Don Perata in the Senate. They would require licensing of all new handgun purchasers, who also would have to demonstrate to a law enforcement agency proficiency in the safe handling of such firearms. These proposals deserve serious consideration, and ultimately a law requiring licensing ought to be enacted. Shelley, in announcing his introduction of AB 35 last week, set a moderate tone that ought to be maintained throughout what seems sure to be a long and polarized debate. He noted that Californians must obtain a license to drive a car, to fish and to hunt and that, given the inherent risk, the same should be true for firearms. No change in the requirements for buying a gun would result.[b] The only annoyance would be the need for handgun purchasers to deal with a bureaucratic process -- initially and once every five years when renewing licenses -- no more onerous than coping with the Department of Motor Vehicles, perhaps less. It's a modest inconvenience, and the fees -- estimated by Shelley at $32 for the license and to defray costs for law enforcement agencies -- also would be modest compared with the cost of a well-made gun.[/b] ^ continue next post: ^ www.RKBA.org/antis/hci-master www.DigitalAngel.net/da_patent/index.htm Never Again, Never Forget Seek the Truth Liberate Your Mind FIXED BAYONETS VX
Link Posted: 3/7/2001 12:00:34 AM EST
The gun control debate has been fueled by a series of multiple firearms killings, most shockingly in schools in several parts of the country. Last year, in part because Democrats feared losing elections in several states where gun ownership is high, and in California because of Davis' request for a cooling-off period, the issue was muted. But the issue will not go away, and the persistence of tragic events makes this an optimum moment to resume the debate -- and the licensing proposal is a reasonable place to start. [b]While requiring licenses would not end gun violence,[/b] it could at least create a regulatory framework that's needed for a product that is all too often used for criminal purposes to tragic effect. The governor, cautious to a fault, has not said whether he feels enough time has passed to accurately judge the effectiveness of the laws enacted in 1999 and thus whether he would welcome additional legislation. He would do well to abandon that reticence and speak out on an issue that, given its emotional magnitude and its importance to public safety, deserves more attention from the state's highest elected official. After all, Davis' signature in 1999 on four laws that moved the agenda forward strongly suggests that he does favor reasonable gun control -- doesn't it? ^ Did NOT take long for the leftist propaganda media to start spewing out it mind control brain-washing Crap. They must have these written up in advance, just waiting to release for the next tragdy, which they help create. They ignore the Fact that gun are used 2,500,000 times a year to Stop Crime. They make it sound SO reasonable and Only a minor inconvenience, just like it was for the 1932 Jews to register. This is the kind of crap the Sheeples in California are eating today. ^ www.RKBA.org/antis/hci-master www.DigitalAngel.net/da_patent/index.htm Never Again, Never Forget Seek the Truth Liberate Your Mind FIXED BAYONETS VX
Link Posted: 3/7/2001 12:11:00 AM EST
Like vultures sweeping in to feast. Disgraceful. I'm not from California, so flame away on me if you want. But speaking hypothetically, what if a compromise was reached in which the licensing measure coincided with the right to concealed carry and a repeal of all the stupid magazine capacity laws, registration, assault weapons laws, etc. In other words, if you got a license, you cound carry anywhere, not have to register you guns, and be allowed to have anything you want. If I lived in the PRK I'd be half tempted to try for some kind of compromise like that, becuase you know more and more BS is gonna plop down out of the pipe anyway. My $0.02
Link Posted: 3/7/2001 4:11:30 AM EST
[Last Edit: 3/7/2001 4:22:41 AM EST by fight4yourrights]
Great answer. Our laws don't work, so just pass more. Can anyone tell me how licensing prevents a crime? How does licensing allow you to catch the criminal? So I license my Glock 17. Abdul gets shot at the 7-11 with a 9mm and shell casings are left behind. Now what? Do we round up every owner of a 9mm pistol in a 2 block radius? 10 blocks? 10 miles? 100 miles? The dude that shot Abdul wasn't a licensed owner anyway, since he has been through the revolving door of our criminal injustice department, and making him register his gun would be a violation of the 5th amendment, so the courts have already ruled that criminals like him don't have to register their guns. So what the h&ll good did registration do???? It didn't stop the crime. It didn't catch the criminal. It did nothing but inconvience me and cost me money. Also, it puts me on a Confiscation List, but that was probably the intention from the beginning.
Link Posted: 3/7/2001 4:25:22 AM EST
AB35 is a tax levied against handgun owners to penalize them. California already has a database of all legally purchased handguns. It only takes a couple of minutes for a police officer to confirm who a handgun is registered to. However, I'm sure the real goal here is to create a new class of criminals out of people like my mom who has a little .38 and doesn't follow all the new gun laws religiously.
Link Posted: 3/7/2001 4:49:52 AM EST
I live in NY state; licensing hasn't stopped crime in this state one bit.
Link Posted: 3/7/2001 5:03:07 AM EST
the handgun registration policies already in effect in n.y. state, and especially erie co. are strict, but do not prevent the handgun owner to use in what ever manner desireable. true, it is somewhat restrictive as far as carry permit, but not impossible. what these laws DO show is exactly what we, as responsible gun owners need, is that the vast majority of handgun crime is comitted with illegaly obtained handguns,and in retrospect, has the affect of what the anti politicians DO NOT want to face! granted, it is a nice thought to be able to buy and own whatever and wherever, but in a controlled environment such as this, the bottom can easily fall out of anti`s arguement. canada, now that is going too far, in my opinion, where actual liscencing is in effect.toronto has a NO handgun policy, but there is shooting there 3or4 nites a week! when will they friggen` wake up?
Link Posted: 3/7/2001 10:40:47 AM EST
[Last Edit: 3/7/2001 10:54:19 AM EST by Bigshooter]
Originally Posted By fight4yourrights: Great answer. Our laws don't work, so just pass more. Can anyone tell me how licensing prevents a crime? How does licensing allow you to catch the criminal? So I license my Glock 17. Abdul gets shot at the 7-11 with a 9mm and shell casings are left behind. Now what? Do we round up every owner of a 9mm pistol in a 2 block radius? 10 blocks? 10 miles? 100 miles? The dude that shot Abdul wasn't a licensed owner anyway, since he has been through the revolving door of our criminal injustice department, and making him register his gun would be a violation of the 5th amendment, so the courts have already ruled that criminals like him don't have to register their guns. So what the h&ll good did registration do???? It didn't stop the crime. It didn't catch the criminal. It did nothing but inconvience me and cost me money. Also, it puts me on a Confiscation List, but that was probably the intention from the beginning.
View Quote
You miss my point. Licensing, registration, and all that other BS doesn't work. But let's face it, most of us are registered as gun owners anyway. Even in a relativly free state like Idaho, the state has my name, address, and finger prints on file because I have a CCP. My name, SSN, and address are on a ton of those yellow forms along with info about the guns I bought, where and when. When the store goes out of business, those go to the BATF. And like it or not there's not much standing in the way of a BATF decision forcing all dealers to send in their yellow forms. And what about all the parts and accessories I've bought with my credit card? All I'm saying is that sometimes you can gain more by playing the game... and as far as I can tell, you guys in Kali, NY, and MD are being nibbled to death, and it ain't gonna get better. I'm trying my hardest to try to make a difference - I support pro-gun causes with my time and money at every opportunity - I'm just tossing out ideas.
Link Posted: 3/7/2001 11:09:44 AM EST
Originally Posted By tcsd1236: I live in NY state; licensing hasn't stopped crime in this state one bit.
View Quote
DON'T FORGET THE FREE STATE!!
Top Top