OBAMA THROWS A FIT

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Just coz they did not go the way you feel they should does not mean they support criminals.

No but if they prevent legislation that would do nothing but severely reduce criminals' ability to acquire firearms then it means that they support criminals.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

As California goes, so does the nation. California DOJ records all transfers of firearms within the state:

California faces backlog of 40,000 weapons in hands of felons, mentally ill

Amid a national debate about preventing the mentally ill from owning firearms, one state has a potentially potent weapon -- in California, officials are allowed to confiscate guns from convicted felons and those with a history of mental illness.

Just one problem. Staff shortages and funding cuts in recent years have left a backlog of nearly 20,000 people to disarm, says Stephen Lindley, chief of the Bureau of Firearms for the state Department of Justice.

According to the state DOJ, that's nearly 40,000 handguns and assault weapons currently in circulation that shouldn't be.

As Capitol Hill begins to debate a raft of anti-gun violence measures -- ranging from gun control bills to proposals to improve screening and the mental health system -- California officials are trying to take matters into their own hands.

After Lindley testified at a hearing last week that his office lacks enough staff to confiscate weapons from felons and the mentally ill -- which are recorded in the state's Armed Prohibited Persons database -- lawmakers are fast-tracking a bill that would free up funds for that job.

Democratic Sen. Mark Leno is sponsoring a bill that would allow the state to dip into funds collected when gun buyers pay for background checks - about $19 a person. Using that money to hire more agents, he said, would allow the state to start to chip away at the nearly 40,000 weapons on the street and in homes that, according to the law, shouldn't be.

"We have only been able to confiscate a small number of these illegally possessed weapons due to lack of resources," Leno told FoxNews.com.

"Our reinvestment in this statewide identification program will help eliminate a troubling backlog and growing mountain of illegal weapons, which threatens public safety in our communities and prevents us from enforcing existing firearms laws."

Lindley told lawmakers last week that it would cost about $25 million for 50 law enforcement investigators.

There happens to be a $20 million surplus in the account that could be tapped into under Leno's proposal. The extra money could eliminate the backlog in less than three years, Leno said.

"If there is common agreement on anything, it's that we ought to get guns out of the hands of people who are prohibited," Senate President Darrell Steinberg said in a statement.

There are about 19,700 names on California's APP list. The gun owners typically bought the firearms legally, before being convicted of a felony or being diagnosed with a mental illness. Once convicted of a crime, their names are put on the state's database, which tracks people who bought handguns or assault weapons legally but fell into a prohibited category.

California has been pro-active in getting gun control legislation on the books. Nearly a dozen bills have been proposed this year, and members of both parties say more will be put forward before next month's deadline for introducing legislation. The proposals range from requiring ammunition buyers to show identification or undergo a background check to creating ways local law enforcement can check large purchases.

Gun rights advocates say that the state's gun regulations go beyond federal measures proposed by the Obama administration and argue that California does not need to consider further measures.

The National Rifle Association, though, has said one of their goals is to get governments to enforce and prosecute laws already on the books.

California Attorney General Kamala Harris, who runs the state Department of Justice, says her office will push forward with ways to prosecute those who violate gun laws. Harris has invited all 58 district attorneys in the state to attend a Feb. 12 meeting in Los Angeles.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/02/05/california-faces-backlog-40000-weapons-in-hands-felons-mentally-ill

Edited April 18, 2013 by The Patriot

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Here is how you tell if a person is being used as a prop. Ask yourself this question:

Is the person delivering factual information to help educate a person to make a logical conclusion? Or are they there to create an emotional response.

If a bridge falls its better to hear from structural engineers than victims.

PS. with the non registration clause I so no problem with the latest bill.

You live in California. You are already used to gun registration.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

They don't record everything. You are required to register handguns and "assault" weapons. They have no records for long guns that I am aware.

They didn't change that? I assume you are right. I haven't bought a firearm for at least a couple decades.

[Ban Hammer 13,429]

I said supply, not existing pool. Put quotas on new gun production. Eventually, there will be less guns in the country.

not necessarily....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Improvised_firearm

[GandD 5,966]

not necessarily....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Improvised_firearm

Yeah I considered the prohibition thing. Get rid of government monitored private alcohol producers, then the public either makes their own (usually very dangerous) alcohol to fill their need or just import it from Canada and cut it. I guess in this situation, guns we exported to mexico would end up finding their way here. BUT I digress. I don't believe there's a complete solution and I'm getting worn out of people not committing to anything as a result. Lets move towards less guns and see if that shows corresponding decreases in gun violence.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

PS. with the non registration clause I so no problem with the latest bill.

That's what a voice of reason on the pro gun side of the divide sounds like.

[Ban Hammer 13,429]

Yeah I considered the prohibition thing. Get rid of government monitored private alcohol producers, then the public either makes their own (usually very dangerous) alcohol to fill their need or just import it from Canada and cut it. I guess in this situation, guns we exported to mexico would end up finding their way here. BUT I digress. I don't believe there's a complete solution and I'm getting worn out of people not committing to anything as a result. Lets move towards less guns and see if that shows corresponding decreases in gun violence.

as long as there's ammo, guns can be made. i'd liken it to once the genie is out of the bottle, you can't put it back in. we've got a porous border to the south and north. we can't stop people or drugs from coming into this country, we certainly can't stop ammo or guns either.

[himher 634]

How do you know it wouldn't?

Against the law for felons and nuts to possess a gun. Law's not workin'. Evidence therefore says new laws won't work either.

Innocently wondering if you have evidence from somewhere like maybe Washington, DC or another place where they are strictly controlled and that law is working. Please share this evidence. Let's play fun with numbers. Its my favorite VJ game.

[himher 634]

That is true. But I can stop the supply of the tool that allows the criminal or nutjob to most effectively multiply the harmful impact they have on others. That's what this is about.

I see that. In Boston. Criminal or nutjob locked up or dead, no Boston. Criminal or nutjob denied one way to hurt people finds another to hurt people.

Summary of liberal logic: Somebody shoots someone it's all about the gun. Somebody sets off a bomb it's all about the bomber. ####### is this about

I do however always love liberal logic.

[himher 634]

Sorry but that's what it is. There was an opportunity to shut of several channels of the firearm supply to criminals and the mentally ill - it's common sense to turn off that supply. And yet, the NRA pushed to ensure the continued supply of firearms to criminals and the mentally ill and a minority of Senators opted to bow to that push and leave that supply open and available to criminals and the mentally ill. 9 out of 10 Americans say shut off that supply. But they care more about criminals than they do about law abiding Americans. They are scum.

Too bad. Are libs and the lib administration taking the time to go after the 77,000 ANNUALLY who they know for sure tried illegally to buy a gun? NO. Instead, they are wasting time whining about the loss of opportunity to create a bigger list of people to choose not to prosecute. WE meanwhile are done with dealing with libs and their empty lib promises. We gave them background checks and they identify people who violate the law and don't do anything about it. Now we wish unrestricted right (call it "stand your ground" right) to take care of things ourselves. Don't like it - tough.

[lostinblue 1,989]

Yeah I considered the prohibition thing. Get rid of government monitored private alcohol producers, then the public either makes their own (usually very dangerous) alcohol to fill their need or just import it from Canada and cut it. I guess in this situation, guns we exported to mexico would end up finding their way here. BUT I digress. I don't believe there's a complete solution and I'm getting worn out of people not committing to anything as a result. Lets move towards less guns and see if that shows corresponding decreases in gun violence.

So how do you decide who needs less guns.? My gun sat in the corner and did not attempt to kill anything all day. Even when the mail was delivered. Over 1/3 of all mass murders in this country is caused by fire, So we ban matches of the high tech lighters. Perhaps mass produced plastic lighters.

Edited April 19, 2013 by lostinblue

[himher 634]

That, right there, is the root of all the problems I have with America, summed up in a rap lyric.

The best thing about America is the revolving door. Don't let it hit you on the way out. 2nd Ammendment was written hundreds of years ago. It's not a sudden or recent thing. That's America and either like it or don't.

[himher 634]

Yes. So the only way to reduce the violence is to reduce the guns. Cus people can go around law. They can't get around something not existing.

Nice try. Another view is that the only thing to reduce the violence is reduce the violent people. Violent people commit violence in secure prisons if they want to. No guns there. So you were saying?

[GandD 5,966]

as long as there's ammo, guns can be made. i'd liken it to once the genie is out of the bottle, you can't put it back in. we've got a porous border to the south and north. we can't stop people or drugs from coming into this country, we certainly can't stop ammo or guns either.

All true statements. Definitely not a fix all solution. Something must be done though and as I mentioned any gun law can circumvented easily from my perspective. I stand by my thinking of less guns = less gun violence. I think you hit the nail on the head with the genie out of the bottle reference. Most of the gun owners I know either collect guns as a hobby or have them for personal protection. The personal protection folks will never give up their guns as long as illegal guns are easily available on the streets. I'm prob going to buy one soon based on my assumption of the number of bad guys with guns.

Nice try. Another view is that the only thing to reduce the violence is reduce the violent people. Violent people commit violence in secure prisons if they want to. No guns there. So you were saying?

How are you going to reduce the violent people?