9 2

I posted this as a reply to another issue concerning the shooter in the Garlic Festival's buying his assault weapon in Nevada and bringing it back to California. I thought maybe it deserved a discussion of its own.
This is the problem in a nut shell! Any weapons or accessories (high capacity magazines, bump stocks, laser sights) have to be banned nationally to be effective. Cities like New York, Chicago etc. have strong gun laws, but because gun access is just a short drive away to a nearby state or sometimes just outside the city, they are highly ineffective. Which of course the NRA is fond of pointing out.
The second problem is that there is such a glut of these high kill weapons and accessories already out there in the hands of people who are borderline schizophrenic but never charged, any kind of ban at this point would take decades to actually make a dent in the killing sprees. But throwing your hands up and doing nothing, as promoted by gunaholics is not an answer either.
Having drivers licenses, regulations and DUI laws does not stop people from driving illegal, stupid and drunk. But I don’t recall people saying all these regulations should be eliminated! The most common response to this by gunaholics is that, unlike the Second Amendment, there are no Constitutional guarantees to transportation. Given the odd conservative interpretation of the Second Amendment, which completely negated the “well trained militia” wording, I’m guessing a clause could be found to deny driving laws and regulations as well, but that’s an argument for another time.

View Results
Barnie2years 8 July 30

Post a comment Author often replies/likes Reply Author often replies/likes Add Photo

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account


Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.


People think i am crazy for this, but i would like to see a federal government issue conceal carry permits instead of the states. now before some goes all hell bent on me, let me explain. Right now we have laws in place that all states must report felons and mental problem people to them so for a nation data base, this data base has been around since the early 90's. but not all states are doing what they are suppose to be doing. now that would fix alot problems if the states would jsut do there job, and let the federal government issue the conceal carry permits and do there full back ground checks which would work the way it is if the states would do there reporting like they are suppose. Yes i am a conceal carry holder in washington state. also i wish they woudl stop calling ar-15 assault weapons, please they are not! lol no one person in the military would ever take that weapon into war. not one.

There are states that allow concealed carry with no permit, Many, including PA allow open carry, no permit. Few have any kind of training to obtain a permit, just fill out the form and pass the background check.

@Barnie2years this is true idaho is one too.


How about treating gun ownership/use more like car ownership/use. In order to own a gun you must be trained, licensed and insured.

My point exactly! But if the AAA spent as much money on politicians and had as many anarchists members as the NRA, our nations highways would be even more of a free for all than they are. The NRA will fight EVERY rule and regulation and own a political party.

@Barnie2years as a gun owner, i do not endorse the NRA. they do some good but they also do alot of bad too.


There is a simple solution but politically untenable so there will always be rogue wannabes wandering the highways and byways of America.

Too much political capital invested and so children and people of all races will continue to die as a result.

No wonder there is such a buffoon sitting in the big chair! No political will to make a sensible change.


It’s one of those things that I always say “our freedom will be our downfall”.


Just take a gun course and find out how ineffective gun laws are state to state. Any instructor will let you know.

It would be best if the laws were United across the board. An agreed upon standard we all abided by that was reasonable and enforceable - across all borders. None of this cross the border nonsense.

Someday something bad enough will happen and reasonable voices will prevail.
I hope anyway.

I believe people should be able to have weapons to hunt.

I even believe in the ability to protect yourself and your home.

But this brandishing a weapon openly that goes on in some States? That's not cool.
It's a constant open threat to others and that's just crazy.

And for all that's reasonable - box up weapons when they aren't under your direct control and maintain control of those keys or combinations. An angry or depressed human is not rational and will use them to commit harm.

We all know this. Don't provide the weapon.

And if you think you've reached the point where you are the person about to use a weapon in the wrong way? Turn the guardianship over to someone else.

My Uncle did this when his son became depressed. I always found this to be a damn smart move. Get the weapon(s) out of harms way to someone else who is licensed. You'll never regret that.


Firearms are over regulated. Well armed free citizens would be able to take out mass murderers in a blink of an eye!

zesty Level 7 July 30, 2019

We have the highest level of gun ownership per capita in the industrialized world.
By your logic, shouldn’t we be the the safest?

@Haemish1 Exactly. We are the safest. Being free means being safe. And nobody is as free as we are!

If we are the safest, why do we have more fatalities due to fire arms than any other industrialized nation?
Safety and freedom do not necessarily equate.
As FDR said “a necessitous man is not a free man.” By this definition I think many other countries would have greater freedom than the US.

@Haemish1 No. It is just the socialist goal. Disarm the free citizens, enslave and reeducate them, take away their property and let live them as poor animals. Just observe history! Russia, China, Korea, Cuba, etc.

@zesty, you live in your own little world don’t you? Never saw a factual statement that you couldn’t overcome with baloney. Most any developed country in the world is safer from being killed in than ours.

@Barnie2years As in Germany? How many thousands of women must be raped by Muslims before you rethink this idea of disarming decent people?

Can you name one Democrat who has advocated the government removal of guns?
How many guns did Obama take?
This is the fear the fascists use to get people to vote against their own best interests.

@Haemish1 Of course, almost all Democrats advocate gun control!

Gun control is different than government confiscation of guns.

@Haemish1 Yes, it is different. However gun control is always the first step toward confiscation! Everybody knows it.

We’ve done it in the US before, Australia has done it without confiscation.

@Haemish1 Americans have nothing to learn from other nations! We are so exceptional and above everybody, it is just amazing.


Actually there are guarantees of travel: "The Right of the Citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, either by horse drawn carriage or by automobile, is not a mere privilege which a city can prohibit or permit at will, but a common Right which he has under the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."

1of5 Level 8 July 30, 2019

“Right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” is not part of the Constitution but the Declaration of Independence which has no legal standing. And there are anarchiste groups in the country who refuse to license their vehicles or have drivers licenses, claiming personal sovereignty. That idea has not spread as far as the majority of gun toters...yet. But the radical Second Amendment groups are pretty close.

@Barnie2years "Freedom of movement under United States law is governed primarily by the Privileges and Immunities Clause of the United States Constitution which states, "The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.

Case #1: "The use of the highway for the purpose of travel and transportation is not a mere privilege, but a common fundamental right of which the public and individuals cannot rightfully be deprived." Chicago Motor Coach v. Chicago, 169 NE 221.

Case #2: "The right of the citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, either by carriage or by automobile, is not a mere privilege which a city may prohibit or permit at will, but a common law right which he has under the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Thompson v. Smith, 154 SE 579.

Case #3: "The right to travel is a part of the liberty of which the citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law under the Fifth Amendment." Kent v. Dulles, 357 US 116, 125.

Case #4: "The right to travel is a well-established common right that does not owe its existence to the federal government. It is recognized by the courts as a natural right." Schactman v. Dulles 96 App DC 287, 225 F2d 938, at 941."

@1of5, thank you. Looking through these cases, using the logic of Second Amendment fanatics, one should be able to put any vehicle on the road, drive it anyway they want. No rules, no regulations that might infringe on their right to move around. So why do we accept those rules (well most do), but feel the weapons should have no restrictions and little control over who can have them?

@Barnie2years because we're idiots?


The federal government should renew and reinforce the original "well trained militia" section and introduce two weeks continuous compulsory military service per year, plus 4 extended weekends of military exercises per year for all those who wish to bear arms.
Not attending should carry the same penalties as desertion. Draft dodging would be impossible, since carrying a weapon automatically implies the bearer has "signed up". Thus, any criminal caught with a weapon becomes subject to Military Law.

Petter Level 9 July 30, 2019

excellent idea Petter.

Ah but what about the folks who don't believe in killing other humans? Conscientious objectors might still be hunters? 😀

There would have to be a work around for them. (The training in firearms should still apply though!).

I took a training and it didn't hurt me. Never mind what my Dad ran through with me as a kid.
He wouldn't have a weapon in the house without us having the basic knowledge of what not to do. Smart guy.

@RavenCT, I taught my son how to check every weapon in the house and make it safe. I was a hunter and the weapons were stored safely. But knowledge in safety and the dangers (they are not toys) goes a long way in preventing accidents.

Yes - learning those basics is essential if you are going to have guns in a home.

Learning to make a weapon safe is essential for everyone's safety.

I had a revolver pointed at my face when I was babysitting. To this day I don't know if it was empty or loaded. I was 13 yo - I simply got the kid to put it back where it belonged.

I wish those parents didn't leave an untended gun hanging on a closet door where an 8 yr old who was playing chase - could find it? He thought he was being "funny".

(Those people were idiots). I am lucky to be here. Neither parent was home and there was the gun. Durr. No trigger lock either.

@RavenCT I grew up in "wildest"Africa. Rifles or shotguns were second nature, but pistols and revolvers were rare. The rifles/shotguns were always locked away safely when one was at home and safety catches were rigorously activated. Military service was compulsory, where we were taught how to use automatic weapons, such as machine guns and had safety drummed into us.
We ourselves shunned "gung-ho" types - and anyone like that was instinctively reported by us to the police and had their weapons confiscated. Ammunition sales were compulsorily recorded and heavy usage had to be explained.
There were very few accidents!


Just a point of fact, in DC vs Heller 2008 the SCOTUS ruled that the second amendment is an individual right, so the militia etc debate is over. That being said, just means outright gun bans are unconstitutional, they can still be regulated. And frankly magazine loaded semi-automatics like the one used in Gilroy really don't belong in civilian hands. Certainly not widely and easily available like they are.

What's awful is anyone with a 3-D printer can now print a bump stock. (Sigh).

If you have a home workshop with, say a "Smithy" multi tool for metalworking set up with CNC capability, you can turn out all the receivers for small arms you want. It's way too late to attempt to remove firearms from circulation in the general population. @Petter proposed an interesting solution. Probably a nefarious attempt to re-conquer the colonies. 🤨

@bigpawbullets I don't think so. 😉

I'm thinking it's Sweden that has a military program where all youth participate - learn to handle arms and people are almost never shot accidentally?

Everyone grows up knowing about guns - but they don't have that stupid "gun mentality" we have here in the US.

It's going to take us a while to ever shake that. It's been programmed into us.
Including the women (I know a ton of women gun owners).

Some gun owners are smart - others - not so smart. It would be great if there were some process to weed out the folks who were gonna get people killed?

@RavenCT The country is Switzerland.

@Petter Of course it is... I said that first and someone corrected me... darnit.... I'm so bad at remembering countries correctly.

Here's the information: []

@RavenCT I have Swiss friends, I visit Switzerland almost every year and I'm quarter Swiss. (I'm also half Scandinavian!)
I never listen to "someones". 😂🤣

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:381394
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.