Blue Force Gear Quote of the Day: Jerry Brown; Why I Signed New Gun Control Measures

Governor Jerry Brown (courtesy

“My goal in signing these bills is to enhance pubic safety by tightening our existing laws in a responsible and focused manner, while protecting the rights of law-abiding gun owners.” – California Governor Jerry Brown’s signing statement



  1. avatar John in Ohio says:

    That “law abiding gun owner” designation gets smaller and smaller all of the time. It’s plainly incrementalism.

    1. avatar Rusty Chains says:

      Yep,by design. The whole point to the Democrat plan is to punish law abiding gun owners in California, and force them to choose between attempting to follow an unjust and clearly unconstitutional laws, or fleeing the state, or ignoring the the attempts of men who wish to emulate Adolf Hitler. Whether they know it or not, they are doing their best to follow Hitlers advice for disarming those he wants to subjudgate: “The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subjugated races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subjugated races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing.”

      1. avatar DaveW says:

        Public safety? That is the same excuse prohibition, which wasn’t even a right, and that required two amendments; one to take away, and one to give back. Meanwhile, the Chicago gangs continued to use automatic weapons. It was the same excuse for the National Firearms Act of 1934, and criminals still continued to use automatic weapons.

        Brown’s words ring hollow; his words muffled by the dung he is so full of, and he thinks the people are too stupid to see through what he and the progressive controlled legislature are doing. Every single one who supported these bills violated the federal and state constitutions and their oaths of office.

        Read this yesterday but don’t recall where. ‘You are a sheep rancher and have sheepdogs to protect the flock. Then you learn a pack of wolves have moved into the region. Your first step is to muzzle your dogs so they can’t harm the wolves.’ That’s progressive thinking.

    2. avatar Cliff H says:

      Especially since “law abiding gun owners” only exist because the California lawmakers haven’t figured out how to entirely evade the second Amendment as yet. If this keeps up all the fears of Texit will be unfounded – California may be the first state to successfully secede from the Union. And no one will be trying very hard to get them back.

    3. avatar JasonM says:

      “I am Governor Jerry Brown
      My aura smiles and never frowns
      Carter power will soon go away
      I will be führer one day
      I will command all of you”

    1. avatar JR_in_NC says:


      Interestingly, I had this thought this morning while thinking about a history teacher friend who believes secession is patently illegal, the ‘right’ side won the War Between the States, Lincoln was a hero (for preserving the Union) and Sherman’s March was right, true and proper “punishment” to the nasty rebels.

      He lives in Texas.

      How he can defend the Revolution is a puzzle.

      Interestingly, too…I’ve asked him to show me where in the Constitution the Federal government as the authority to block secession, and then to square his position in regard to the 10th Amendment.

      His only answer to date has been along the lines of “Well, secession is bad for the country.”

      1. avatar JAlan says:

        Scalia summed up the matter in a way most won’t admit.

        However, the reason for revolution was taxation without representation, not just because the colonists didn’t like the laws. In the words of JFK: “Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.”

        1. avatar JR_in_NC says:

          Scalia’s response in that letter is essentially “Might Makes Right.”

          As for

          “However, the reason for revolution was taxation without representation,”

          Your public education has failed you. The Revolution was fought for far more complicated reasons than “Taxation without Representation.” You need to read the Declaration of Independence again.

          The word “Taxes” is only mentioned once, and a whole lot of other reasons were given that had nothing to do with taxes.

        2. avatar JAlan says:

          On a purely pragmatic level, I guess Scalia is still right. Rights only exist as long as you’re willing to express them. However, I do need to read more history, at least early stuff.

      2. avatar Cliff H says:

        Someone of you lawyers help me out here – Is it legal for anyone to make an unbreakable contract, other than a trust, that legally binds the actions of his future generations forever? Once a will is probated can the terms of that will never be broken?

        Jefferson stated that no laws created by a congress of men could ever be written such that future congresses could not revoke or re-write them.

        There is nothing I know of in the Constitution or any of the amendments that prohibits any state, once it has joined the Union, from changing its mind and leaving again. Brexit has proven this in Europe, Texit may (or may not) prove it here.

        And on this Fourth of July/Independence Day weekend let us keep in mind that The Declaration of Independence specifically states that free men are by definition free to break the political bonds that hold them:

        “That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”

        Happy 4th of July, Keep your powder dry.

        1. avatar peirsonb says:

          Is it legal for anyone to make an unbreakable contract, other than a trust, that legally binds the actions of his future generations forever?

          Social Security.

        2. avatar JR_in_NC says:

          “There is nothing I know of in the Constitution or any of the amendments that prohibits any state, once it has joined the Union, from changing its mind and leaving again.’

          That’s exactly my point on this subject. There is NOTHING in the Constitution prohibiting secession even though there is a specific procedure for becoming a State.

          Taking that with the 10th Amendment would suggest, to my feeble mind anyway, that the Federal Government has no Constitutional Authority to interfere in a State’s secession from the Union.

        3. avatar neiowa says:

          Clergy can opt out of Social Security

          What do the “contracts” between the Fed Gov’t and individual states say about the terms of the their admission to the Union?

        4. avatar Cliff H says:

          Sorry, Social Security is not an unbreakable contract. When the number of young people paying in are far outnumbered by the old people collecting we may find this out for certain.

          Even so, a Congress with enough balls and a president willing to take the heat could legally modify or repeal Social Security next week, after the 4th of July break, of course.

          Many suggestions have been made to alter the terms of SS and been voted on or rejected outright. It is a tough nut, but it could be and may someday be a relic.

        5. avatar Ralph says:

          Q: Is it legal for anyone to make an unbreakable contract, other than a trust, that legally binds the actions of his future generations forever?

          The Rule Against Perpetuities in most (if not all) states forbids “dead hand control” of a deceased’s assets after an established time period, often twenty-one years after the death of some life in being at the creation of the interest. The “life in being” need not be the testator.

          Contracts can have perpetual existence, but may be subject to future changes.

          Q: Once a will is probated can the terms of that will never be broken?

          There are grounds that will allow a will or provisions of a will to be set aside.

          I am a lawyer but I’m not your lawyer, so this is not intended to be offered or taken as legal advice.

        6. avatar FormerWaterWalker says:

          Like perpetual slavery Cliff? One reason we have guns is to fight against tyranny(or George the 3rd)…laws are made to be broken.

        7. avatar peirsonb says:

          Clergy can opt out of social security and yes, the money will dry up.

          But clergy are entered into the system at birth. And even though projections show I’ll never see a dime I still have to pay in.

          Try to prevent a new born from getting entered into the social security system at all. I did. It’s pretty unbreakable.

  2. avatar Mk10108 says:

    And the final reason why I’m leaving the state.

  3. avatar Rusty Chains says:

    Jerry “Moon Beam” Brown wouldn’t know truth if it slapped him in the face. I would be quite willing to take the place of truth and do the deed, even though it is unlikely to loosen up the few brain cells he has left, all of which are stuck to the left side of his skull!

  4. avatar John L. says:

    Dear Jerry,

    You missed.

    Signed, a former CA resident who will not be moving back if he can help it.

  5. avatar Bigred2989 says:

    I wonder if someone is going to change the locks on his office door while he’s on vacation?

    1. avatar James in AZ says:

      He just needs to sign a bill outlawing any and all locks

      And the wrong lock suddenly just disappears

  6. avatar Surivordude says:

    “In other news, there’s been a great surge in unexplained boating accidents in Northern California…”

  7. Well… that’s a couple grand I have to stash away and a couple grand to spend on supplies. No paper and pen can deprive me of my lawfully purchased property. Come and take it.

    1. avatar barnbwt says:

      Why keep paying taxes & granting congressional apportionment to the shithole that forces you to stockpile guns you’ll see confiscated? We could use your resources & support elsewhere, and with it force Kali back in line with America.

      1. avatar Indiana Tom says:

        Especially if you understand how Congressional apportionment and the Electorial College works.

  8. avatar Ralph says:

    Glad I live in a free state.
    Kalifornia has it completely backwards – control guns for law abiding citizens, but let illegals in.
    Sounds really stupid if you look at it at face value.l

  9. avatar Jp says:

    Does he even realize how incredibly stupid that statement was??????? Those laws will do nothing except erode the rights of law abiding gun owners.

    Used to be a nice place to visit. Never again.

    1. avatar Cliff H says:

      I left California in 1999 for Tacoma, Washington. Then they Californicated Washington so I moved to Nevada.

      Las Vegas is only @50 miles from California and I have a sister in San Diego so it is possible that I will someday cross that border again, but it will be under protest and last only as long as absolutely necessary.

    2. avatar Mr. 308 says:

      The statement is not meant to deliver what the writer really believes, it is written for reporters to report, and for historical record, nothing more.

      I am perfectly willing to abide by the constitution and afford other men their rights, but I demand they do the same for me. If these men do not respect your rights in the one case, they clearly will not respect any of them.

      And add to that we have half or more of the country paying nothing in taxes – while I work and pay and work and pay mine as a productive and law respecting citizen.

      This is not the country I grew up in.

      1. avatar cisco kid says:

        My feelings and thoughts exactly. America today is nowhere near the same as it once was and unfortunately will never be the same again. Jerry Jung Brown’s dream of a Socialist Utopian State is now a reality and it will only get worse in the days and years to come. The Proletariat is asleep and when they wake up from their fantasy world it will be too late to change anything ever again. Democracy has always been a fleeting thing and todays world a fantasy and an obscene joke echoing among the ruins of the Parthenon, the crumbling decaying parchment of the Constitution and the moaning of the Founding Fathers in their long forgotten graves.

  10. avatar MiniMe says:

    “My goal in signing these bills is to enhance pubic safety by tightening our existing laws in a responsible and focused manner, while protecting the rights of law-abiding gun owners.” – California Governor Jerry Brown’s signing statement

    Lying lier is still lying and will continue to lie. Commiefornia has any way of recalling this dbag?

  11. avatar CTstooge says:

    Perfectly executed Double-Fail.

  12. avatar BlackoutFan says:

    Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.

    -Ben Franklin.

    Based on this, since he specifically stated this was to “enhance public SAFETY”, he deserves neither. And neither do the people in their legislature who voted for these laws.

    Those that would ignore these laws, either openly or otherwise, in a civil disobedience, deserves BOTH.

  13. avatar jwm says:

    Fuck off.

  14. avatar Indiana Tom says:

    Hey, it’s good to be the King! Piss boy, piss boy, here piss boy! Silly serfs!

    1. avatar Cliff H says:

      “You want a 10 round clip, er, magazine for your assault weapon -here ya go…”

      Tosses a midget Pmag into a bucket of piss.

  15. avatar Tom in Oregon says:

    Short form of the law-
    You have to register to become an ammo buyer. Cost not to exceed $50.00.
    Present your ammo buyers license to buy any ammo, clip, magazine, bullet, projectile.
    The seller has to keep a record of the transaction and may charge you up to a dollar for that action.
    Takes effect 1-1-17

    I haven’t read Gruesome Newsome’s version set to be voted on in November, but a dollar says it even worse.

    I think places like Vegas and Reno will be quite busy with sales.

    1. avatar Cliff H says:

      Will the CHP now have a greater presence at the “Bug Check” station on I-15 at Calico complete with ammo-sniffing dogs to check west-bound cars with California plates for contraband ammo?

      1. avatar Mr. 308 says:

        They will be using automated license plate readers matching that to the list of gun owners and then pulling you over for whatever excuse they can come up with, e.g., busted taillight, cracked windshield.

        Statism is fun when you are loaded with money to implement it. Oh yea, and armed enforcers, which we know California has loads of.

      2. avatar Robert Farago says:


  16. avatar ButtHurtz says:

    People in Cali, why are you not shooting back?

  17. avatar Pg2 says:

    Surprise, surprise….Government further restricting individual rights in the name of public safety….who would’ve guessed?

  18. avatar Dev says:

    Why he signed these laws? Because he’sa narcissist and elitist, a piece of garbage who feels he’s superior to the common folk. He doesn’t care about safety, he cares about his political legacy and the impression he makes. This is the type of ruler that forced the ccreation of our country. Ironic, isn’t it?

  19. avatar Excedrine says:

    “My goal in signing these bills is to [blame and punish peaceable people for the actions of lunatics, because I’d rather pander to the emotionally-compromised and dull-witted for votes.]” – California Governor Jerry Brown’s signing statement

    Fixed that for you, Governor Shitstain.

  20. avatar Kroglikepie says:

    *Ahem*… *BULLSHIT!*

    That is all…

  21. avatar Ing says:

    “to enhance pubic safety…”

    Heh. Pubic/Public is my favorite typo of all time. Sometimes when I’m proofreading I leave it as-is just because it’s so funny.

  22. avatar Wood says:

    Unconstitutional law is null and void at the very moment of its passage. I expect an earnest movement by NorCal to split the state. It should be split. I’d like to visit sometime, but it will have to be after the birth of our 51st state!

  23. avatar pieslapper says:

    ” ‘Cuz I’m a douche, and Bloomie’s money’s too sweet.”

  24. avatar Anonymous says:

    Yep. Nothing feels as good as “law abiding gun owner” when the state demands you discard all your 30rd mags that you paid for, and arbitrarily sets a limit at 10.

  25. avatar IYearn4nARnCali says:

    This latest affront gives me that sick feeling in my stomach you get as you fall. The one where you anticipate the damage you’re going to suffer, as your brain mulls the sick calculus of loss and pain.

    Our ruling elite here in California are building a wall, a far more egregious thing then the constantly chided Trump wall, and this wall built law by law is meant to stand between the citizenry and the manner in which they choose to freely exercise their rights as citizens. The America of old no longer exists, the time when gun culture was a cornerstone of the American identity, as such, to stay in California after these laws take effect forces you to either non-compliance or moving from our homes, lives, friends, and families; but it is necessary for those of us who do not want the state to dictate the manner in which we carry out living our lives.

  26. avatar LHW says:

    Statists gonna state.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
Blue Force Gear Quote of the Day: Jerry Brown; Why I Signed New Gun Control Measures" title="Email to a friend/colleague">
button to share via email