New bill, and it’s FEDERAL

DOGHOUSE26

I've posted enough I should edit this section
Feb 22, 2004
2,097
1,337
62
Escondido, CA
Name
jeff meeker
Boat
26 Blackman Billfisher
I can't understand how these Democratic Politicians constantly think that more laws that really only impact Law Abiding Citizens will ever have a substantial positive affect in reducing gun violence in America. We have more than enough laws already on the books (too many in CA.) and even if they were enforced they don't work as the mass failures of other government agencies to communicate with each other or fail to act on obvious previous warning signs as in the Florida High School Mass Shooting. I believe in the need for a total National Firearm Registration and Background Check System, a mandatory 10 day waiting period, and stiffer mandatory penalties for illegal gun possession and/or use in the commission of a crime. California has some of the most redundant ill conceived and useless gun laws in the country and it's time to stop penalizing the Law Abiding Citizens and put the screws to the criminals that deserve it. Rant Over!
 

Wild Bill

Not Blackmouthing
Aug 4, 2010
3,518
3,577
Camano Island
Name
Steve
Boat
Otter Craft
Ain’t that just a giant Crockofcaca. I don’t see it passing but will fire of some email regardless. It never ends with these thinking challenged politicians.
 

woodfish330

I've posted enough I should edit this section
Aug 14, 2012
1,119
2,149
San Fransisco,CA USA
Name
John
Boat
Fishead
This election cycle..... The PEOPLE will drain the swamp. Time to clean the whole damn thing....blue and red. I hope Americans have the "testicular fortitude" to make some REAL changes. Career politicians. .... of every party should be booted..... for their "Career" of screwing the public for personal gain. Millionaires go first. Then puppets. Then public stooges. Just FLUSH that toilet.....
 

woodfish330

I've posted enough I should edit this section
Aug 14, 2012
1,119
2,149
San Fransisco,CA USA
Name
John
Boat
Fishead
Sorry to say.... Both sides have lying "dead weight".... yet to our faces they would both tell you they love America. America is about what we have in common.... not what we hate about each other. When "term limits" were tossed out. ... it became each man for himself.

When "dark money" was allowed to fund political campaigns by the Supreme Court.... we should have seen this crap coming. Yet we continue to blame each other. Here's my real question.... With this Covid "distraction" causing panic and anxiety to the masses..... what bills will ALL those bastards try to pass at a public moment of weakness?

Both sides be damned! Liberals.... Conservatives.... ALL of them.... using a serious situation to push through CRAP few of us will directly or indirectly benefit from. AMERICA.....CONGRESS IS BROKEN. SWEEP UP THE MESS IN NOVEMBER!

We need new blood. We need new ideas. We need new leaders... for ALL AMERICANS. If I see Mitch McConnell or Nancy Pelosi reelected again.... I'm gonna puke. Same old dog and pony show.... We've witnessed for years.....decades! What would happen if in 2021 if their were A WHOLE NEW CONGRESS AND SENATE? It would be marvelous....like our "Forefathers" envisioned.

I believe it was Einstein who said.... "the definition of INSANITY is doing the SAME DAMN THING OVER AND OVER AGAIN, AND EXPECTING DIFFERENT RESULTS".

I don't care which color your state is. I don't even care what color your vote is. I'm just saying.... If your happy with the 10 years of getting ZERO done in/by Congress.... for ALL AMERICANS... relect those current "MORONS" filling the halls with nothing..... nothing for the good of the Country.
🇺🇸
 
Last edited:

Maing

Maing
Oct 20, 2017
717
398
Washington
Name
Maing
Boat
Me yak fer now
Please watch and share

Quote from Regan!!
Ronald Reagan, then two-time Governor of California, penned this column in the September 1975 issue of "Guns and Ammo." Reagan steadfastly held to this position throughout his Presidency, even after an assassin attempted to murder him in 1981. In 1983, President Reagan noted, "You won't get gun control by disarming law-abiding citizens. There's only one way to get real gun control: Disarm the thugs and the criminals, lock them up, and if you don't actually throw away the key, at least lose it for a long time... It's a nasty truth, but those who seek to inflict harm are not fazed by gun controllers. I happen to know this from personal experience.
 

mike mitchell

I've posted enough I should edit this section
Jul 25, 2017
2,652
1,681
61
San Diego
Name
Michael Mitchell
Boat
20 Bertram
Quote from Regan!!
Ronald Reagan, then two-time Governor of California, penned this column in the September 1975 issue of "Guns and Ammo." Reagan steadfastly held to this position throughout his Presidency, even after an assassin attempted to murder him in 1981. In 1983, President Reagan noted, "You won't get gun control by disarming law-abiding citizens. There's only one way to get real gun control: Disarm the thugs and the criminals, lock them up, and if you don't actually throw away the key, at least lose it for a long time... It's a nasty truth, but those who seek to inflict harm are not fazed by gun controllers. I happen to know this from personal experience.
Where do the mentally ill fall into this category? Criminals? Thugs?
 

Maing

Maing
Oct 20, 2017
717
398
Washington
Name
Maing
Boat
Me yak fer now
Where do the mentally ill fall into this category? Criminals? Thugs?
That would obviously need to be amended. I’m gonna post the whole article. So as not to take snippets of a read and not get the whole context of what was being said. This article
Was written some time ago and mentally ill was probably not even a thought.
 

Maing

Maing
Oct 20, 2017
717
398
Washington
Name
Maing
Boat
Me yak fer now
Toggle navigation
Logo: The Patriot Post
Ronald Reagan -- The Gun Owner's Champion
Ronald Reagan, then two-time Governor of California, penned this column in the September 1975 issue of "Guns and Ammo." Reagan steadfastly held to this position throughout his Presidency, even after an assassin attempted to murder him in 1981. In 1983, President Reagan noted, "You won't get gun control by disarming law-abiding citizens. There's only one way to get real gun control: Disarm the thugs and the criminals, lock them up, and if you don't actually throw away the key, at least lose it for a long time... It's a nasty truth, but those who seek to inflict harm are not fazed by gun controllers. I happen to know this from personal experience."

There are tales of robbery victims that are shot down in cold blood or executed "gangland style." There are stories of deranged parents killing their children or deranged children killing their parents. There are reports of snipers. And now and then the headlines blurt out that an assassin has struck again, killing a prominent official or citizen. All of these stories involve the use of guns, or seem to. As a result, there is growing clamor to outlaw guns, to ban guns, to confiscate guns in the name of public safety and public good.

These demands come from people genuinely concerned about rising crime rates, persons such as Sheriff Peter Pitchess of Los Angeles, who says gun control is an idea whose time has come. They come from people who see the outlawing of guns as a way of outlawing violence. And they come from those who see confiscation of weapons as one way of keeping the people under control.

Now I yield to no one in my concern about crime, and especially crimes of violence. As governor of California for eight years, I struggled daily with that problem. I appointed judges who, to the best of my information, would be tough on criminals. We approved legislation to make it more difficult for persons with records of crime or instability to purchase firearms legally. We worked to bring about swift and certain punishment for persons guilty of crimes of violence.

We fought hard to reinstate the death sentence after our state Supreme Court outlawed it, and after the U.S. Supreme Court followed suit, we won.

Now, however, the California court that sought eagerly to be the first to outlaw the death penalty is dragging its heels as it waits for the U.S. Court to rule. The Chief Justice in California, whom I appointed with such high hopes, in this regard has disappointed many of us who looked to him to help again make our streets, our shops and our homes safe. I find it difficult to understand persons like President Ford's new Attorney General, Edward H. Levi. Attorney General Levi would ban guns in areas with high rates of crime.

Mr. Levi is confused. He thinks somehow that banning guns keeps them out of the hands of criminals. New Yorkers who suffer under the Sullivan Act know better, they know that the Sullivan Act makes law-abiding citizens sitting ducks for criminals who have no qualms about violating it in the process of killing and robbing and burglarizing. Despite this, Mr. Levi apparently thinks that criminals will be willing to give up their guns if he makes carrying them against the law. What naivete!

Mightn't it be better in those areas of high crime to arm the homeowner and the shopkeeper, teach him how to use his weapons and put the word out to the underworld that it is not longer totally safe to rob and murder?

Our nation was built and civilized by men and women who used guns in self-defense and in pursuit of peace. One wonders indeed, if the rising crime rate, isn't due as much as anything to the criminal's instinctive knowledge that the average victim no longer has means of self-protection.

No one knows how many crimes are committed because the criminal knows he has a soft touch. No one knows how many stores have been let alone because the criminals knew it was guarded by a man with a gun or manned by a proprietor who knew how to use a gun.

Criminals are not dissuaded by soft words, soft judges or easy laws. They are dissuaded by fear and they are prevented from repeating their crimes by death or by incarceration.

In my opinion, proposals to outlaw or confiscate guns are simply unrealistic panacea. We are never going to prevent murder; we are never going to eliminate crime; we are never going to end violent action by the criminals and the crazies--with or without guns.

True, guns are a means for committing murder and other crimes. But they are not an essential means. The Los Angeles Slasher of last winter killed nine men without using a gun. People kill and rob with knives and clubs. Yet we have not talked about outlawing them. Poisons are easy to come by for the silent killer.

The automobile is the greatest peacetime killer in history. There is no talk of banning the auto. With the auto we have cracked down on drunken drivers and on careless drivers. We need also to crack down on people who use guns carelessly or with criminal intent.

I believe criminals who use guns in the commission of a crime, or who carry guns, should be given mandatory sentences with no opportunity for parole. That would put the burden where it belongs--on the criminal, not on the law abiding citizen.

Let's not kid ourselves about what the purpose of prison should be: It should be to remove criminals from circulation so that they cannot prey upon society. Punishment for deterrent purposes, also plays a part. Rehabilitation, as many experts, including California Attorney General Evelle Younger, have discovered, is not a very good reason for imprisoning people. People don't rehabilitate very well in prison.

There is an old saying that slaves remain slaves while free men set themselves free. It is true with rehabilitation, also. Criminals rehabilitate themselves, there is little you and I can do about it. But back to the purpose of this article which, hopefully, is to make the case against gun control.

The starting point must be the Constitution, because, above all, we are a nation of laws and the foundation for our laws, or lack of same, is the Constitution.

It is amazing to me how so many people pay lip service to the Constitution, yet set out to twist and distort it when it stands in the way of things they think ought to be done or laws they believe ought to be passed. It is also amazing to me how often our courts do the same thing.

The Second Amendment is clear, or ought to be. It appears to leave little, if any, leeway for the gun control advocate. It reads: "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

There are those who say that, since we have no militia, the amendment no longer applies; they would just ignore it. Others say nuclear weapons have made the right to keep and bear arms irrelevant, since arms are of little use against weapons of such terrible destructive power. Both arguments are specious.

We may not have a well-regulated militia, but it does not necessarily follow that we should not be prepared to have one. The day could easily come when we need one.

The nuclear weapon argument is even more silly. Many wars have been fought since World War II and no nuclear bomb has been dropped. We have no assurance that the next world war will be a nuclear war. But, regardless of any possible merit they might have, both these arguments beg the question, which is: Shall the people have a right to keep and bear arms?

There is little doubt that the founding fathers thought they should have this right, and for a very specific reason: They distrusted government. All of the first 10 amendments make that clear. Each of them specifies an area where government cannot impose itself on the individual or where the individual must be protected from government.

The second amendment gives the individual citizen a means of protection against the despotism of the state. Look what it refers to: "The security of a free state." The word "free" should be underlined because that is what they are talking about and that is what the Constitution is about--a free nation and a free people, where the rights of the individual are pre-eminent. The founding fathers had seen, as the Declaration of Independence tells us, what a despotic government can do to its own people. Indeed, every American should read the Declaration of Independence before he reads the Constitution, and he will see that the Constitution aims at preventing a recurrence of the way George III's government treated the colonies.

The declaration states this plainly: "But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government and to provide new Guards for their future security."

There is no question that the first 10 amendments are a part of those "new guards" for their future security. And one of the most basic of those guards is the right to keep and bear arms.

There are those in America today who have come to depend absolutely on government for their security. And when government fails they seek to rectify that failure in the form of granting government more power. So, as government has failed to control crime and violence with the means given it by the Constitution, they seek to give it more power at the expense of the Constitution. But in doing so, in their willingness to give up their arms in the name of safety, they are really giving up their protection from what has always been the chief source of despotism--government.

Lord Acton said power corrupts. Surely then, if this is true, the more power we give the government the more corrupt it will become. And if we give it the power to confiscate our arms we also give up the ultimate means to combat that corrupt power. In doing so we can only assure that we will eventually be totally subject to it. When dictators come to power, the first thing they do is take away the people's weapons. It makes it so much easier for the secret police to operate, it makes it so much easier to force the will of the ruler upon the ruled.

Now I believe our nation's leaders are good and well-meaning people. I do not believe that they have any desire to impose a dictatorship upon us. But this does not mean that such will always be the case. A nation rent internally, as ours has been in recent years, is always ripe for a "man on a white horse." A deterrent to that man, or to any man seeking unlawful power, is the knowledge that those who oppose him are not helpless.

The gun has been called the great equalizer, meaning that a small person with a gun is equal to a large person, but it is a great equalizer in another way, too. It insures that the people are the equal of their government whenever that government forgets that it is servant and not master of the governed. When the British forgot that they got a revolution. And, as a result, we Americans got a Constitution; a Constitution that, as those who wrote it were determined, would keep men free. If we give up part of that Constitution we give up part of our freedom and increase the chance that we will lose it all.

I am not ready to take that risk. I believe that the right of the citizen to keep and bear arms must not be infringed if liberty in America is to survive
 

invictus

AVD
May 26, 2006
4,306
1,873
Orange County
Name
Jason
Boat
Tiara 2000 Cuddy
I suppose we could prevent a lot of DUIs by putting a cop in your driveway every time you left your house, and testing your impairment level, probably even make some arrests.

The last argument on appeal bu Becerra for the ammo harassment bill, basically what the background deal is, was that they prevented 726 people from buying ammo, that shouldn’t have it. In a state of nearly 40 million, with untold 100,000s of transactions. State interest versus infringement of rights and invasiveness.

We don’t punish possible or maybe mis-conduct, that was Reagan’s sentiment in that article. However, we no longer punish criminal in CA, we punish regular folks, with fines, fees and bureaucracy.
 

gecsr1

28' Aquasport "Reel Adventure II"
Jul 15, 2005
14,062
3,569
Poway Ca
Name
Gary
Boat
28' Aquasport "Reel Adventure II" / PlainJaneRods
Gosh does it ever end......
 

Maing

Maing
Oct 20, 2017
717
398
Washington
Name
Maing
Boat
Me yak fer now
Nope!!! You have different people with different ideals and ways that would be better. But my belief is that the government is afraid of the shear # of people that own guns and need a way to get control. They don’t want to go after the individuals that have guns that commit crimes. The guy earlier mentioned what may happen or could happen. We don’t have the tech like in the minority report. However my thought is, make the penalty so great for doing crime with a gun that those who commit crimes with guns will think twice. Now is this a cure all. No! But neither is infringing on my rights as an individual. And eventually taking away something I have had for years based off of an uncontrolled emotional response becuase someone made a conscious decision to pick up an inert object to inflict harm.If you don’t own a gun that is your choice. And you are not wrong.

I don’t like to say anyone’s choice is wrong I have my opinion and if I was in a position of power I would have to think in a bipartisan way. Which I think is a place we should all be. But the last thing I want is to infringe on your freedoms, your choice and rights. Becuase what’s the flip side to that. If not dealing with a reasonable person,They will lash out and start to chip away at mine. I am not unfair, I am not unreasonable but making it hard for tax paying law abiding citizens that enjoy the freedoms of gun ownership... is completely and utterly wrong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Arima-bob

JamesTaylor

Question Everything
Jan 7, 2019
447
495
28
Cypress, Ca
Name
James Taylor
Boat
Not yet
“When they outlaw the guns only the outlaws will have guns”. I am sick and tired of this agenda. The crooked ass demonic permanent government wants to make us unarmed, broke and dead In the name of public safety when in reality they do not give 2 fucks about our health and safety. Mandatory vaccines and gun confiscationt will wake a sleeping giant. 1776
 
  • Like
Reactions: Maing

Aggro

Keepin my pimp hand strong!
Mar 4, 2005
13,572
2,710
Clairemont
Name
AGGRO
Boat
skiff
30% extra tax off the top. 50% tax on ammo. Guns for the rich. You immediately become a criminal with the stroke of a pen. National firearm database for registration.
 

gnehekul

I've posted enough I should edit this section
Mar 23, 2012
2,729
1,210
los angeles
Name
Fishead
Boat
cash carrying ho
Please watch and share
Damn it bob! What am I going to do now after your horrible boat driving skills ended up dumping all my guns in the middle of international waters? And why the hell did you lay all our guns and ammo on the bow is beyond me
 
  • Like
Reactions: Arima-bob

yakdout

Professional
Jun 26, 2014
1,560
2,200
San Diego
Name
Brandon
Boat
s and hoes
The same idiot trying to pass this bill thought Guam would tip over and capsize if 8000 marines were deployed there. Really.... here’s the video..

 

Arima-bob

Ship faced aquaholic
Mar 9, 2012
5,023
3,674
Too far from water
Name
Beeulzebob
Boat
uh....
The same idiot trying to pass this bill thought Guam would tip over and capsize if 8000 marines were deployed there. Really.... here’s the video..

No doubt the guy is dumb as a box of rocks, but he gets to write up and introduce bills that some people out there would love to get behind.
 

Maing

Maing
Oct 20, 2017
717
398
Washington
Name
Maing
Boat
Me yak fer now
Yeah!!! Unfortunately and people don’t realize what the ramifications are. It’s a slow break down of our rights that are outlined in the constitution!!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Arima-bob

MATTANZA

old man of the sea, in training.
Aug 23, 2004
5,566
3,024
Cali the state of confusion, the state of shock
Name
RICK
Boat
Boston Whaler 25' Outrage "MATTANZA II", 34' Radovcich "AMY ANNE" {when it needs to be fixed}
it light of everything that has been going on for the past 4 years, the last thing this tyrannical deep state will get is my guns ... our 1st and 2nd are the corrupt , career politicians worst enemy. hopefully trump will executive action term limits. if this were 200 years ago , there'd be a revolution against these corrupt , career politicians, and they'd hang for their high treason.