“We’re looking for sensible restraints on the ways guns function and that’s all we’re asking basically.” – Mimi Budd [above, center] from the Sacramento chapter of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, quoted in Proposition 63 Has Gun Owners Scrambling while Gun Control Advocates Sing Its Praises [via fox40.com]
Sensible restraints on the way guns function….
Since all firearms I know of operate by smacking a metal pin into a small explosive, they have to be talking about removing the explosive component via the ammunition background check…
I read that as ‘guns work’, we want sensible reforms to make them NOT WORK. We don’t want to take away your right to have them under the 2nd Amendment (because that has proven to be problematic and expensive) we just want to ensure that they are all paper weights.
“…we just want to ensure that they are all paper weights.”
Because the few remaining firearms are chained to cinder blocks.
“Plenty of people have been killed with .22 blanks- what do you need this big heavy piece of lead for?”
You should instead focus on sensible restraints on the way violent criminals function.
(Hint: said violent criminals are not restrained by mere laws. They are restrained by incarceration, or other means of separation from law-abiding society.)
That would require asking difficult questions and proposing even more difficult solutions. Banning inanimate objects, on the other hand, is easy. It’s all about doing SOMETHING. Effectiveness of said something is way down the checklist.
Tell you what: I’m on board with violent felons taking the prison cells of low-level drug offenders…
While “low level druggies” are moved to tent camps where they are engaged in ditch digging etc.
Hell, I’d provide meth to the tweakers in exchange for hour after hour of mindless repetitive labor…
Well, you’d think, wouldn’t you. But this is California, and that’s not the way things work. A federal court took over (through a trustee) the California State prison system due to widespread overcrowding, in sufficient medical care, and a host of other issues. Ultimately, the court required the state to release 35,000 prisoners. To comply with this order, the State released alleged “low level offenders” to local county jails and reduced their sentences. The counties, meanwhile, had their own issues with overcrowding, or as is the case in the poorer counties, insufficient funding of county jails to permit full utilization, resulting in the release of these offenders into the local population on parole. Although this was bad enough, the voters, in their infinite wisdom (sarc/) passed an initiative proposition (proposed by our omniscient governor) that will result in even more offenders, many of whom are meth and heroin addicts convicted of robbery, burglary and other property crimes (to support their habits), being released. The crime rate will invariable rise.
When the Mothership returns, moonbeam Commiefornians will be the first to line up “To Serve Man.”
The state of Commiefornia just literally banned cow farts for causing global warming. Write this state off, they should secede and all the freaks, creeps and malcontents in the other 49 can be relocated there where they can just harm each other.
‘The state of Commiefornia just literally banned cow farts for causing global warming.’
That’s even crazier when you consider the fact that we’re living in an ice age. – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quaternary_glaciation
“…o line up “To Serve Man.””
Excellent and appropriate Twilight Zone reference!
‘It’s a cookbook!’
Do do do doo…. do do do doo
Its a shame that so few recognize references to the past anymore. Esp since we are now living in the Twilight Zone…
Totally Stupid. “Sensible restraints on the way guns function” is like asking for the return to single shot, muzzle loading matchlocks.
Oh but we can’t have those either. Don’t we know they’re military weapons designed to kill people. And sensible restraints means all military weapons have no place in civilian hands.
Senior Gun Owner
People on this site are just SO mean! These people are just trying to make the world a little safer and your just going to make fun of them just because you can! This kind mean-spirited bullying is just so wrong! Guns are dangerous so what’s so wrong with making them safer by changing the way the work? I mean, after all, you still get to keep your precious guns! The little flag that comes out and says BANG! when you pull the trigger is just a sensible and more responsible way to allow gun-ownership while saving lives and helping us reach a more sustainable environment. //SARC//
I don’t want to be unkind, but those clowns look about less than a few years away from a nursing home, and a couple from their dirt nap and horns and a pitch fork, so. . .
FOUR MORE YEARS !, FOUR MORE YEARS !, FOUR MORE YEARS !. . .
The ignorance is strong with this one.
If anyone needs further evidence California is a lost cause, voted on a party line almost the same percentage as the national vote. This state is paving the way for illegal migration. Mexico should annex CA and be done with it. Then when all the taxpayers leave making CA a third world nation, Gavin and Harris can report their job complete.
The gross domestic product of California is $2.4 trillion per year, more than double that of all of Mexico. If California were a country, it would be the fifth largest economy in the world.
The perfect size to see if a planned, Socialist economy will work this time.
I say let them secede and give it a go!
“We’re looking for sensible restraints on the ways guns function and that’s all we’re asking basically”.
Maybe it’s just too early in the morning or that I haven’t had my second cup of coffee, but I don’t know what that means…
They want restraints on the ways guns function by severely curtailing who may own a gun…
there are no sensible restraints on Liberty.
Sensible restraints on the way things work… I believe that’s described as “Physics”.
They’re like the anti-gun version of Gecko45!
Oh? It’s just the sensible restraints that they’re seeking? Well that changes everything. That, I can get on board with. I say let’s expand its application.
Instead of starting with the Second Amendment, let’s start with the First. All I’m seeking are sensible restraints on how speech and the press works. Let’s limit that to actual speech and actual printing presses. So you’re free to communicate via tavern chat, town criers, and fliers nailed to a tree in the town square, but T.V., radio, Internet, telephones, and pictures (moving or still) are out.
That’s just not what the Framers envisioned. Too much information spreading too quickly by unverified sources is just too much speech and must be restrained.
I know you are trying to make an absurd 1st amendment argument in order to high-light the absurdity of their 2nd amendment argument, but pretty much everything you said, there are already lefty forces pushing for those restraints on the 1st amendment, even using very similar arguments to what you put forth in jest.
It’s getting harder and harder to parody the left.
Yes, I agreed ! Let’s start by having a review of CNN, and MSNBCs 1st Amendment License and press credentials ! And a complete universal background and mental healthcare checks on their reporters!
Has anyone considered common sense? In the three BIG cities like Chicago where there is VERY STRICT gun controls that it is not working is it?? Carson City has close to the same size in area as chicago but has 1/8th the population. When I go to Carson City to shop I see several open carry in any store/business I visit even in bars. Carson city has had one shooting this year resulting in murder. Chicago has 3,454 thus far this year. I comparison Carson City should have 900 shooting and 57 murders. It is evident that firearms so visible retards shooting!!
Fortunately these people have lost any relevance they may have once had, and at least for now we can safely ignore them. I will say this for them, at least they aren’t on the Soros busses going someplace to riot and burn.
I would caution against ignoring them lest they come back stronger than ever. Now is the time, with our collective boot on the gun grabber’s throat, to give a little twist….
The gun grabbers may be discredited, but that doesn’t deter them. And they may have lost more than half of their ballot proposals this year, but that is cold-comfort if you are a gun owner in California.
May I suggest restraints on gun-grabbers instead?
But only common sense and reasonable restraints on said gun grabbers.
I mean, how much food, air and water does a person actually need? Surely there are some excesses that should be cut back.
They actually don’t know what they’re asking. They’re “supporters” (meaning “donors”) to the cause because they were attracted to the simple solution that appealed to their feelz; they showed up to present the usual mindless emotional testimony “in favor” of tyranny; and somebody asked them an actual technical or procedural question that exceeded the limits of their tiny bubble of enthusiasm and required actual thought, which they had never exercised.
And they just lost the argument, and their audience…
Once they start talking “sensible” they have to answer “What is ‘sense?'”, and *that* opens a whole can of worms that don’t fit their agenda at all. This is what happens when you go: “Verdict first; trial after!”
I think it’s “sensible” that personal guns have all manner of safeties, firing interlocks, and other devices, driven only by the users’ and manufacturers’ interest in being safe.
I think it would be “sensible” to modify the operation of guns to make them safer, for example to people’s hearing, but that’s illegal. (Why is that again?)
In particular it is “sensible” to make sure guns fire when an otherwise victim needs to protect their own safety.
It would be grand to keep guns away from people so damaged, dumb, or irresponsible they’ll use them unsafely, but that’s hard. Building that kind of prescience into a chunk of hardware is harder. Doing that without leaving responsible, peaceful people to harm from whackjobs and thugs is harder still. I look forward to an answer to that one.
I’ll wait.
Yes, yes we have been through this exercise before…This is nothing more than a private persons , organization, businesses ,etc.. With the help of Liberal Progressive government to give the mentally ill, mentally challenged, moronic, hysterical, etc… a job, a militant soapbox, or Pulpit to assail others outside of a Liberal Progressive agendas…The prime example was the complete mental meltdowns, and violent rioting by SJW’s across the nation…This is why all Laws created by these kind of people under this form of governance, or conditions, or events…Need to nullified and declared unconstitutional !
If drugs can arrive by the container load, how much space does a few thousands rounds of ammunition take?
Hint: not much. Look at a crate of Turkish 8mm Mauser that contains 1200+ rounds in bandoliers and clips. It could easily fit in the footwell area of most cars.
Just another opportunity for “urban entrepreneurs”.
I’d like to invite one of these fools to write us an explanation of how a firearm functions, without using the term “magic”. I don’t believe they have any idea.
I am surprised the Brady campaign is still around even after the Brady’s themselves died. Like others said it must be the patronage of rich, anti-gun donors (Soros, Bloomberg, etc.) keeping them relevant.