Thank California for violating peoples rights.

http://www.libertybelles.org/articles/confiscations.htm

Rediculous, I mean sorry but should they not be worrying about oh I don't know Drugs, and other more serious problems than law abiding gun owners?

Oh of course, why would California go and do something stupid like banning assault weapons?

SPOILERS! (Click to view)

Rational perspective and discourse eludes both sides of this debate.

They're looking for un-registered assault weapons.

How are they law abiding gun owners if they aren't abiding by gun registration laws?

They aren't however I am curious where they are getting the probable cause for the search warrants.

If you can't spell ridiculous, you shouldn't be let loose with a gun.

Search warrants must be approved by a neutral magistrate and must be based on probable cause. If the search warrant is not based on probable cause, then any evidence siezed as a result of it is fruit of the poisonous tree and is generally excluded.

My opinion.

"Assault weapons" of this nature are made for one purpose and one purpose only, to kill lots of people in a short amount of time; not hunting, not sportsmanship, but killing. Assault weapons in the hands of potential criminals puts law enforcement agencies at a disadvantage. In order to help police and the like do their job best, then they alone must have the monopoly on those kinds of weapons.

And as far as the article is concerned, I see no problem with arresting those who do not abide by the law and register themselves and their guns. Gun owners say that more people die in car accidents than from gun violence, but just like a gun, there are controls on automobile ownership, you need car insurance, your car needs to be licensed, you need to have a driver's licence after taking a test to prove you can operate an automobi

Because it's REDICULOUS. Duh.

I would never own a gun because I'm a big pussy, but......If Cheney and Bush decided to cancel the election in 2008 and then decide that anyone who isn't a practicing Christian, needs to be rounded up because they are a threat to national security....I'd want to be able to protect myself. And uncle Jesse's pea shooter ain't gonna cut it.

The likely counter arguments to this are:

1) Oh come on, like that could ever happen!
Well yeah, but it's happened hundreds of times through the course of history.

2) Oh come on, if that happened one dude with an Ak-47 isn't going to pose much resistance to the U.S. Army.
True but if all guns were outlawed, in that scenario, it would be a crime to even try to protect yourself.

3) From a probabalistic perspective, the scenario you lay out is much less likely than the scenario that assault weapons fall into the hands of assholes who mow down a mall full of people.
True and that's a risk reward equation that I believe should be decided at the state level.

I would fight that to the bitter end if I was one of the people who owned one... There would be lawsuits. These gun laws are probably temporary. When the legislature sees a fall in gun related crimes the bills will be pulled. I'm guessing it will probably become more clear that there is a necessity for guns, and if public safety is at stake i think more will become legal. With gangs we have found that you can't really give people enough rope to hang themselves with though. People do have the right to protect themselves from home invasion and attackers, but I think long story short some of the gunowner ideology is askew and people would do well to become more educated about their guns. Maybe required classes should be offered to those still in possession of the firearms under this ban.

Wait, you think that drugs are a bigger problem than gun owners who are violating the law? Seriously?

I mean wait, yeah, I would much rather they get that pot off the streets. Fucking stoners kill a lot of people in LA.

b

I agree with your larger point, but I hate how people pretend that pot is the only "drug."

I always look to sources with names like the Fifty Caliber Institute for commentary on such issues. I'm sure they will have a balanced perspective and offer helpful, rational solutions to our country's peaceful M2 machine gun owners.

Did I mention that if you get two of them, you can build your own anti-aircraft installation?

Why do I find this so completely stupid?

Compliance with the new law could lead to additional gun bans and abuses of gun rights

Since when does obeying laws mean that they make more? Fucking idiots. I see nothing wrong with these types (actually all types) of guns being registered. The majority of assault rifles like AK's & AR's really aren't real-world practical weapons in America. A shotgun is better at home defense, and regular rifles like the 30-30 or .243 are better for hunting (IMO). Should people still be allowed to own them? Sure, why not. My stepdad has an AK, it's a fun little gun to mess around with at the lease, but it was bought legally and registered and he isn't about to go out and kill 30 people in gang related violence.

I'm a huge believer in gun ownership rights, but not wanting to register your weapon because Big Brother will then know that you have it, and will come take it away from you smacks of tinfoil hat in the mountain bunker to me.

I think he meant "natural law"? Law of the jungle? The law of gravity, maybe.

I don't pretend it, but it's certainly the easiest drug to make the point with. I would argue that there are more reaons to ban civilians from handling assault weapons than meth or heroin, but it's still lacks the oomph.

In CA, in 2004, 72.6% of homicides were committed using firearms, with 61.4% of those murders being committed with handguns, not assault rifles. Maybe they are barking up the wrong tree.


Source

Gangsters don't get them illegally, either. 33.7% of homicides in CA for 2004 were gang related, 4.2% drug related. (although those two categories can kinda tie in together a lot)

Source again

Except if it was inevitable for the police to find it.

I know all that already but there are Judges out there that rubber stamp search warrants and I am still trying to figure out where the probable cause is coming from. I would guess the only source could be informants but that opens a whole other can of worms as to if the informant has ulterior motives.