California Will Allow Family Members to Seek Seizure of Guns
The law will allow law enforcement officials, family members and some others to seek a gun restraining order from a judge. That order would authorize officials to temporarily seize any firearm owned by someone deemed potentially violent, who would also be placed on a list of people prohibited from purchasing weapons.
I think this is a good idea but I can already hear the crazy slippery slope arguments coming.
The Second Amendment was Ratified to Preserve Slavery
The real reason the Second Amendment was ratified, and why it says “State” instead of “Country” (the Framers knew the difference – see the 10th Amendment), was to preserve the slave patrol militias in the southern states, which was necessary to get Virginia’s vote. Founders Patrick Henry, George Mason, and James Madison were totally clear on that … and we all should be too.
In the beginning, there were the militias. In the South, they were also called the “slave patrols,” and they were regulated by the states…
I don’t agree with this view that militia refers only to slave militias. Most states had militias at the time of the founders, including free states.
The Hitler gun control lie
As it turns out, the Weimar Republic, the German government that immediately preceded Hitler’s, actually had tougher gun laws than the Nazi regime. After its defeat in World War I, and agreeing to the harsh surrender terms laid out in the Treaty of Versailles, the German legislature in 1919 passed a law that effectively banned all private firearm possession, leading the government to confiscate guns already in circulation. In 1928, the Reichstag relaxed the regulation a bit, but put in place a strict registration regime that required citizens to acquire separate permits to own guns, sell them or carry them. The 1938 law signed by Hitler that LaPierre mentions in his book basically does the opposite of what he says it did. “The 1938 revisions completely deregulated the acquisition and transfer of rifles and shotguns, as well as ammunition,” Harcourt wrote. Meanwhile, many more categories of people, including Nazi party members, were exempted from gun ownership regulations altogether, while the legal age of purchase was lowered from 20 to 18, and permit lengths were extended from one year to three years.
Worth a read.
Why the ‘More Guns’ Argument Doesn’t Make Sense
Last August, two New York police officers fired 16 rounds in an altercation with an armed man outside the Empire State Building. Ten people were hit – the gunman and nine bystanders. Does anyone think armed civilians without training would do better?
Cop in every school: How much would Wayne LaPierre’s proposal cost.
How will they suggest it be paid for? Taxes on bullets and guns or cutting school budgets? I’m guessing its the latter.
A Modest Proposal: What If We Required Mandatory Gun Insurance?
If you have a rifle and it’s only used for hunting, low rates. If you have a Glock and you carry it in an open-carry town or state, your rates will be very high – because odds are so much higher that innocent bystanders may get caught in a shootout.
The more training and safety classes you take, the cheaper the premium.
I like this idea. And we can make the insurance tax deductible in cases where it makes sense. No one has to give up their gun, but those who might be putting others at risk with irresponsible gun ownership will pay into a fund to pay for tax deductions for responsible gun owners.
Top House GOPer: ‘We Have To Be Careful’ About New Gun Laws
Can we just discuss ways that might make it harder for crazy people to get access to guns?
I love the way the GOP thinks it is perfectly acceptable to inconvenience people who want to vote by demanding all types of paperwork accessible only in remove government offices when there is little to no voter fraud but doesn’t want to inconvenience a person who wants to buy 6000 rounds of ammunition and a 100 round clip.