Ideas for gun control

Rep. Mike Thompson, D-St. Helena, asked for ideas from the community for combating gun violence at three forums last week - one in rural Napa, one in urban Vallejo and one in suburban Santa Rosa.

[obamas son]

liberals and democrats won't follow any rules in the Constitution but will do anything to circumvent the rules and create all levels of lies to stay in power.

[uts]

Gun control? Easy. Use both hands.

[GEE]

Quote: A gun registry and required test to insure the gun owner is competent and responsible is one idea. Required liability insurance (both ideas borrowed from vehicle licensing and registration) is another.

...and it is well known how effective and safe this action makes our roads.

Come right out and say it; here is an opportunity and the future ability to generate revenue from those that can and are willing to pay to own a weapon. Those that can not or are unwilling to pay will circumvent it the same way than people driving without a license, insurance and or current registration.

How thoroughly and effectively are drivers of motorized vehicles tested to their mental status at the time of their first DMV encounter?
...and as in this country never again if they are able to keep their nose relatively clean?

How many accidental deaths could be avoided if we had retesting of drivers after say 5 years? Here would be another source of revenue and additional governmental jobs creation!
By the amount of accidents on our roads the ability to steer does not equal mental ability, yet they still get behind the wheel of a "killing machine" that has been registered and insured ...never mind those having neither.

With respect to weapons…..All this will do is put additional burdens on the legal and responsible gun owners who already have shown (as required) that they are competent to own a weapon by participating in "hunter safety courses, have been members of the military, etc.! The criminal element will always find what they are looking for and I suspect even with a little help from some high placed friends….. But that is not the issue at this time!

Enforce the laws already in place and remove ueber liberal judges that swore to uphold them when they are broken and not continue to interpret them as they please.

Mr. Thompson may go about and solicit input from the public. I consider that a waste of the taxpayer’s and his time.
This is a feel good move so we, the people are lulled into the believe to have had a say so about a matter that has already been decided on in D.C..

[Can Of Worms]

There's a new technology called rd identification and if it can be used to track down guns, then it's possible to stop its use. The rf id chip is slightly bigger than a grain of rice so it can be easily installed inside any gun. Here's the link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio-frequency_...

[Squach]

If we were talking about the 1st amendment, would we be considering registering and taxing our voices, typewriters/PCs, pens and pencils? Would we need to get a special permit to carry a written document? Would we feel safer with a micro-recorder installed in the skull of everyone who uses speech or the written word so they can be tracked down if desired by the "powers that be"?
After all, the pen is mightier than the sword. We're talking about a constitutional right here; do we really want to set a precedent for taking rights away from the American people? If the 2nd amendment falls, what's next? Will disarming honest law abiding people do anything to prevent future crime or mass shootings? Will criminals and psychos obey the law if guns are banned? Isn't gun control, by its very nature and intent, unconstitutional and contrary to the founding fathers mandate? Just some food for thought.

[Post Turtle]

If you trust your government you are stupid. I used to but I wised up. The longer I live and more I read and see the more I'm convinced the government cannot be trusted. Too much power given to or taken by the government is dangerous. Be diligent and be aware.

[Can Of Worms]

When the issues surrounding the events that happened in Sandy Cook becomes politicized and requires the vote of Congress, you can be sure the special interest groups will exert their influence that may even prevent the implementation of the needed changes to protect the innocents. However, the 2nd amendment has a loophole because it does not address the fact that children cannot bear arms to defend themselves. I hope the NRA does not demand that we arm them too.

[Squach]

Can Of Worms wrote:

When the issues surrounding the events that happened in Sandy Cook becomes politicized and requires the vote of Congress, you can be sure the special interest groups will exert their influence that may even prevent the implementation of the needed changes to protect the innocents. However, the 2nd amendment has a loophole because it does not address the fact that children cannot bear arms to defend themselves. I hope the NRA does not demand that we arm them too.

Why would the 2nd amendment address arming children when it guarantees the right of the people to arm themselves to protect the children if necessary? The NRA does not "demand" anything beyond the rights we already have, it is an organization that supports your second amendment rights and the constitution. The NRA also offers training in the safe and proper use of firearms.

What are the "changes needed to protect the innocents" that you speak of?

[Raptor in Michigan]

Squach wrote:

If we were talking about the 1st amendment, would we be considering registering and taxing our voices, typewriters/PCs, pens and pencils? Would we need to get a special permit to carry a written document? Would we feel safer with a micro-recorder installed in the skull of everyone who uses speech or the written word so they can be tracked down if desired by the "powers that be"?
After all, the pen is mightier than the sword. We're talking about a constitutional right here; do we really want to set a precedent for taking rights away from the American people? If the 2nd amendment falls, what's next? Will disarming honest law abiding people do anything to prevent future crime or mass shootings? Will criminals and psychos obey the law if guns are banned? Isn't gun control, by its very nature and intent, unconstitutional and contrary to the founding fathers mandate? Just some food for thought.

"If we were talking about the 1st amendment, would we be considering registering and taxing our voices, typewriters/PCs, pens and pencils?"
Good point. Let's also put waiting periods on newspapers before we can buy them and limit the number of words we can read to ten.
The liberal media would scream "First Amendment!"

[Raptor in Michigan]

Post Turtle wrote:

If you trust your government you are stupid. I used to but I wised up. The longer I live and more I read and see the more I'm convinced the government cannot be trusted. Too much power given to or taken by the government is dangerous. Be diligent and be aware.

Not only do I not trust them, it wouldn't surprise me if there is more to the Newtown shooting than what we know. Is it any coincidence it comes a few day before Christmas, and it involves small children? What better way to tug at the heartstrings of the American public and get the support needed for the anti-gun agenda we all know they are trying to implement!

Why was the Mother killed? Speaking of the Mother, how many women collect the kinds of guns she supposedly had? Not many! Something is fishy, IMO.

There's only one way to destroy the Second Amendment in this country. That is to get the people behind it's destruction. Would they go to that extent to turn people off to guns and disarm us? You decide.

BTW, I'm not even saying Obama, or any politician would do something like that. I personally don't think so. But there is a movement going on by the left-wing anti-gun nuts who can't stand the fact that people have guns.

[Raptor in Michigan]

Can Of Worms wrote:

When the issues surrounding the events that happened in Sandy Cook becomes politicized and requires the vote of Congress, you can be sure the special interest groups will exert their influence that may even prevent the implementation of the needed changes to protect the innocents. However, the 2nd amendment has a loophole because it does not address the fact that children cannot bear arms to defend themselves. I hope the NRA does not demand that we arm them too.

"the special interest groups will exert their influence that may even prevent the implementation of the needed changes to protect the innocents."
How about this change: Take away the "gun-free zone" signs outside and let the school employees concealed carry to defend themselves and the children they are responsible for all day?

[Can Of Worms]

Raptor in Michigan wrote:

<quoted text>
"the special interest groups will exert their influence that may even prevent the implementation of the needed changes to protect the innocents."
How about this change: Take away the "gun-free zone" signs outside and let the school employees concealed carry to defend themselves and the children they are responsible for all day?

The presence of guns in school is danger in itself, I would rather adopt the NRA's solution of setting up security screening before entering the school to stop any armed assailant. Screening is already done at airports and courthouses, and they really work.

[Wanglow]

If all the bed-wetting, pink-panty anti-constitutionalists really believe in what they're doing then oobama should issue placards and signs that they could post in front of their houses stating "Proud to say No Gun in This House".

[Raptor in Michigan]

Can Of Worms wrote:

<quoted text>
The presence of guns in school is danger in itself, I would rather adopt the NRA's solution of setting up security screening before entering the school to stop any armed assailant. Screening is already done at airports and courthouses, and they really work.

"The presence of guns in school is danger in itself"
BULLSHIT! It is bad people entering the school that is a threat. Guns do not point themselves at people and pull their own trigger!

"I would rather adopt the NRA's solution of setting up security screening before entering the school"
You mean a metal detector? Outside? Where at; in the parking lot? On the playground? Maybe on every school bus too? Who does the screening? The secretary? The principal? The hall monitor? The custodian? Don't you think they have other things to do? If they are unarmed, they can be shot at the door and the shooter still gets in.

Or do you hire a fleet of (armed?) security guards like they have at airports and courthouses? Who pays for that? Who gets laid off to make up the shortfall? If you want armed guards, you are right back where you started from; Guns in schools! In that case, why not just let the employees exercise their Constitutional right to bear arms if they choose to? People with carry permits can shoot just as well as any "official" armed guard.

Or are you talking about naked screening and sexual violations like at the airports? I don't know what parents will think of that idea.

[Raptor in Michigan]

Wanglow wrote:

If all the bed-wetting, pink-panty anti-constitutionalists really believe in what they're doing then oobama should issue placards and signs that they could post in front of their houses stating "Proud to say No Gun in This House".

Let the anti-gunners have their own state and create their own Utopia. They can stuff their beliefs up their rectum, because normal people believe their lives are worth defending.

Amazing how people who work or go to school in "gun-free zones" are running scared; terrified of being shot while in that gun-free zone, but when out in public where there are lots of guns and nobody knows who's carrying, they don't have that same fear.

[Post Turtle]

If there is a ban on so called assault rifles and high capacity Mags. the only thing it will do is stop the sale of new ones. What do you anti gun #$%$ suggest we do about the millions and millions that people already have? A ban will do no good, The only thing it will do is take away more rights from law abiding sports men and women.

[Raptor in Michigan]

Post Turtle wrote:

If there is a ban on so called assault rifles and high capacity Mags. the only thing it will do is stop the sale of new ones. What do you anti gun #$%$ suggest we do about the millions and millions that people already have? A ban will do no good, The only thing it will do is take away more rights from law abiding sports men and women.

Until now, I never considered stocking up on ammo and more high capacity magazines. They are giving me no choice now. Friends and relatives feel the same way.

[Wanglow]

What's kind of funny is that the morons who tell the head negroe what to do must actually think that somebody believes that the dull-witted individuals surrounding oobama, at any photo-shoot, are there because they represent Americans in general. I doubt anyone really thinks those kids are anything more than cheap-shot advertising for this failed socialist agitator. I wonder how America can ever erase the stain and stench this imposter and his gluttonous wife have left on our once great land.

[Linda Fay]

Spank me