California Senate rejects open-carry gun ban

Although it seems they will retry the vote after doing a little arm twisting, Californians get to retain what little freedom they have today. But I’ve never understood policies like this:

Lawmakers also defeated a bill by Assemblyman Mike Feuer, D-Los Angeles, that would have required owners of rifles and shotguns to register those weapons, similar to the requirement already in place for handguns.

The bill, AB1810, would let police track gun sales and ownership through a state database. It fell three votes short and will be reconsidered on Tuesday.

via California Senate rejects open-carry gun ban.

No one ever explains what the problem registering firearms is supposed to solve or when they do it makes no sense. I have heard that it is so cops will know when responding to a call that there is a firearm in the house or when they pull you over that you might have a gun. Have you ever seen cops pull a car over? They ALWAYS assume the occupant is armed. That is why they approach from the blind side and make you talk to them by craning your neck. If they aren’t doing this it is a training problem, not a registration problem.

So what .gov purpose does it solve to register guns? Well I seem to remember California made .50 BMG owners register their rifles. It made it much easier to come confiscate them a few years later when they were outlawed. That is the real purpose of registration.

My plan for California, New York, New Jersey, Massachusets and Illinois and any other state that treats their population as subjects instead of citizens:

Don’t go there. Don’t spend my money there. Leave them to their fate. If the local citizens can take control and fix the problems then I will be happy to come back.

I really liked San Diego too.

Advertisements
Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

Comments

  • Tony  On August 31, 2010 at 5:44 pm

    I think that gun registration is also meant for at least two other reasons.

    It functions as a barrier to entry. People don’t like the hassle and they don’t like being on lists. So maybe they didn’t want a gun that much after all.

    Also it sets up gun ownership as a special privilege rather than a basic right. From that position, later bans are a much smaller leap. Taking away specials perks of a few is much more palatable than rights violations.

    • trackerk  On August 31, 2010 at 8:50 pm

      I know what it is meant to do, I just wonder how it gets sold. Registering guns should have to have some ‘purpose’ that can be discussed, even though what they want to do is ban them. They should have to say, “If we register guns, then X bad thing won’t happen.” I’ve never heard of an even legitimate bad thing.

  • Jennifer  On August 31, 2010 at 7:56 pm

    I loved San Francisco as a kid, but I’ll not go back unless things change there. I’ll spend my money in free states thank you very much.

%d bloggers like this: