By Samuel Strait, Reporter at Large – November 7, 2021
If it is one thing that has been brought to public attention during
these last twenty months of the Pandemic is the increasing feeling of
lack of personal safety brought on by riots, “Black lives Matter”,
Antifa, and the concept that policing is unnecessary. In response, the
general public many of which had never considered gun ownership in their
entire lives, have made the decision to purchase a firearm. Aside from
the self protection factor, most citizens did not view 2020’s summer of
love as a good thing and taken action. On that front, the State of
California is not a particularly friendly State when it come to the
ownership of any kind of firearm.
From the days of Ronald Reagan as California’s governor, the steadily
restrictions on firearm ownership has piled up to the point that
currently on the books are over 110 laws covering the topic. The maze
of restrictions has reached a point that even reasonable and responsible
citizens of the State find the task of purchasing said weapons
overwhelming. Likely not so for those with nefarious purposes in mind.
While gun control advocates continue to point to California’s middle of
the road position on murders, and suicides, it apparently hasn’t
resonated with the current rush to purchase guns.
First of all, gun violence as a cause of death is relatively rare in
this Country in spite of efforts to make comparisons with other
countries notorious with that sort of violence. Mass shootings, which
inevitably become national news and rallying cries for ever more gun
control are equally rare. The very idea that most mass shooting by
crazy people are to be legislated out of existence is foolish beyond
words. It has been pointed out numerous times that those events would not
have been changed by any of California’s current legislative efforts.
While mass killings are horrific, gun control is not the answer.
More importantly, firearm possession while currently guaranteed by the
US Constitution in the second amendment, is not about what most people
assume it to be. It is not about target shooting, hunting, or personal
protection. It is about a check on over zealous and corrupt
government. For the most part it is meant to be a metaphor that does
not signal active insurrection against government, but a clear message
to government that the possibility exists should government over step.
The failure to have such a provision as a guaranteed right in our
Constitution is what insures that basic freedoms cannot be erased and
the citizens of this Country remain self governing should existing
government revert to central government dictates and whims.
It is unfortunate that this kind of education has been stripped from
most educational platforms and relegated to talking about the
Constitution as a “living document” easily “adjusted” to suit those in
power. The founders of this Country recognized the power of free speech
and an armed population as critical opposition to any movement towards
what is being promoted in our educational communities, the media, and
government circles. California may say it is about gun violence and the
need to protect with its 100 plus laws, but the reality is that it is
meant to control and nothing else. As much as citizens wish to feel
safe in their own Country from “gun violence”, gun control will never be
the answer when your government comes knocking at your door to tell you,
“you must comply to something that is beyond their authority in a free
3 thoughts on “Gun Control In California, Necessary, or not?”
When is the News Media going to attack Hollywood with three deaths with three empty guns three people have lost their lives and Hollywood goes on like o’well leave law bidden citizens alone.
you are correct to say idiots in Hollywood making movies should not have access to real guns because if you can’t tell the difference between a live round and a prop then you probably should not be handling a gun. Alec Baldwin’s excuse, “oh the gun was cleared. He took the gun, without checking the gun himself, aimed the gun, shot, and murdered the camera person.
Although there was no intent, he should be held negligent for his actions. Inexcusable. How that action contributes to law-abiding citizens who have taken their safety class, passed the safety class, and are responsible gun owners is beyond logical thought.
Great article Sam. The Democrats of California and the entire United States are pro-criminal and pro-crime. They defund the police, release dangerous felons from our prisons, and they refuse to prosecute crimes. Victims are less than an afterthought; but rather entertainment to be captured on their phone-cams and shared with their friends. The entire State of California has become much like the 40 minute rape of a woman aboard a Philadelphia train, where fellow passengers pulled out their phones to record the incident instead of calling the police. It is not only 2nd Amendment rights regarding to firearms that California politicians and so many US legislators are opposed to; many less-than-lethal self-defense options are also banned from California’s citizens. Sure, you can own hand-held tasers, pepper-spray and Mace, which can practically be deployed when an assailant is just about to strike. However, that is not a viable option for the elderly and infirm who are increasingly the targets of random assaults. Other “Red” conservative States allow less-than-lethal projectiles, such as taser-guns, pepper-guns, and airgun propelled pepper-balls; all of which can be employed against an attacker at distances up to 20 feet away, and even farther for pepper-balls. In California, these less-than-lethal options are not only illegal to possess on the streets; but in the home, or ANYWHERE!
The platform for the American Communist Party and the Democrats is identical. Democrats are pro-crime and pro-criminal, and hide behind the law to protect them from victims. The Biden Administration claimed to be at war with the MAGA Movement and any “Patriot Extremist Group.” The right to any form of self-defense is just one part of that war!