California confiscates "assault weapons" from law abiding citizens!

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Magus, Mar 12, 2013.

  1. Bobbb

    Bobbb Well-Known Member

    Like I said, a constitution which is followed to the letter, in very black and white terms, which leads to a contravention of the public good and violates common sense, then becomes a suicide pact - people supporting societal destruction because the mechanisms involved happen to be protected by the Supreme Document.

    The classic case here is yelling fire in a crowded theater. If no abridgement of free speech can be sanctioned by society then anonymous troublemakers can disrupt the gatherings of thousands and possibly leading to people dying from being trampled.

    As I noted in my first comment, this mental illness vector for gun confiscation has the potential to be abused. When people are mentally ill, when they're delusional, when they think that their cat is giving them orders to kill people, society is better off with those people not having the means to follow through on what the cat tells them to do.

    As Andi pointed out if you're 4 years old you can't go and buy a firearm with your allowance money.

    The right to bear arms is not absolute. See felons.
  2. Dude111

    Dude111 An Awesome Dude

    This soon will spread all over the country!

  3. drfacefixer

    drfacefixer Well-Known Member

    Well said Bobbb. I think many people forget that the constitution is not absolute unless we were in 1776. The true power of the constitution is that the government AND the people were given means to amend it and that there are checks of balance spelled out with in it. It's silly to scream that we will lose all our rights if the status quo changes. It has been for 200+ years.
  4. Ireight

    Ireight Active Member

    When most people carried, then true criminals were not so brave as today.

    When we all start carrying again, I bet quite a few truly dangerous people will die fast, hazard of their own doing.
    I also bet that all the crazys will calm down for fear of the same fate.
    An armed society is a polite society.
    Proof is all over in this great land.
  5. worldengineer

    worldengineer Well-Known Member

    Is the constituion merely a figment of our imaginations?

    And Sanity is determined merely by the majority. California seems to think even possessing a gun is a admition of insanity. Vote with your feet.
  6. LongRider

    LongRider Well-Known Member

    Change potential to is being or will be and I'm in full agreement

    That ban is still fairly new historically. In my mind unconstitutional. Where does it say anywhere that a man convicted of a felony shall lose all rights bestowed upon him by God (or nature if you prefer) for the remainder of his life. Used to be not so long ago a felon was given a gun upon release. If a man has served his sentence, paid his dues or has otherwise been vouched safe to be out of prison why should he not have ALL of his rights back? If he is unfit or unsafe to carry a firearm than he should not be out on the streets. IMO treating a man like a second class citizen for his entire life does little to encourage him to assimilate and be one of us. All that does is validate the whole us vs them mind set attitude and behavior.
  7. Bobbb

    Bobbb Well-Known Member

    Punishment meted out by the courts TRIES to do justice but in many, or most, cases it simply cannot undo what has been done. A woman raped, a husband murdered, a child killed by a drive-by shooting, a sister killed by a drunk driver, a brother forced into destitution by someone's fraud, etc don't get their lives back in the state they were before they were the victims of crime.

    Once we figure out a way to restore to the victims that which the criminal has taken from them then it will be time to consider granting to the criminal the rights that were taken from him during his time of punishment but until that time both the criminal and the victim have to live the remainder of their lives with the consequences of the criminal event.

    Seeing your argument above I'm wondering how you feel about sex offender lists where the ex-con, who has served his time, is now marked for life where ever he goes and also how you feel about involuntary commitment of sex offenders who've served their time but are not released from custody, only from prison custody and moved over to some more pleasant form of confinement due to the government believing that they are at a high risk to reoffend?
  8. Magus

    Magus Scavenger deluxe

    I can only hope.

    Shoot the knees, don't make a martyr!
  9. Dakine

    Dakine Uber Newbie

    the cost of guns, licenses and fees associated with them has been successfully argued by the ACLU. One of the extremely few times I agree with them, but in this case they are absolutely correct.

    Putting a CASH litmus test on a constitutional right is a violation of the rights of anyone who can't afford to buy their own protection and yet must rely on a "percepted" safety of a police department. Personally, I like have a gun nearby because carrying my own personal cop is really heavy... and he's gonna want to take a break here an there, and then there's there 40 hour work week... :rolleyes:

    Also, I think it's worth pointing out that the Aurora shooter chose THAT theater because it was the one that doesn't allow CCW, and he's a chem grad student who rigged his apartment to explode. If this guy hadn't had access to firearms, he'd have left backpack bombs all over the place and nobody would have understood what was happening until it was all over.

    Accountability is the real test right?

    If you yell FIRE in a theater, you need your *** kicked. If you shoot someone in a theater one of the guys near him should be sending you to the next life immediately afterwards, not a 50 year prison sentence after a not guilty by insanity plea.