Previous Post
Next Post


Voters “deserve” the “right” to bypass Congress to disarm civilians (a.k.a., Safety for All)? I’m not so sure about that. Is that a right like the natural, civil and Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms? The last part of that, the Constitution, is, thank God, a barrier to mob rule, which is, apparently, a right. The Second Amendment Defense Committee reminds us exactly what California Lieutenant Governor Gavin Newsmen plans to do to his citizens’ gun rights . . .

Here’s what Gavin’s anti-gun ballot initiative will really do:

  • BAN all standard (“high-capacity”) magazines, even “grandfathered” mags
  • BAN online and mail order / catalog ammunition direct purchases
  • BAN the importation of ammunition purchased out-of-state
  • DESTROY virtually all small business ammo retailers with insane new regulations
  • CRIMINALIZE the sharing of ammunition between friends
  • MANDATE a new $50 DOJ “ammunition purchase permit”
  • REQUIRE that ammunition sales are recorded in a new gun owner database

Will the petition garner the 100k signatures it needs to earn a place on the ballot? Watch this space and be afraid. Be very afraid.

Previous Post
Next Post


    • Hence why we need to break the nation apart. Any country that contains states as polarizing as Texas and California is a house divided. Better to just call it quits and separate before it gets ugly.

      • Secession is not an option.

        That said, federal troops need to take back California and execute by hanging or firing squad it’s entire traitorous government officials. I wish to see on Fox News, the liberation of these sanctuary cities and the raising of the California Republic flag just below the flag of these United States.

        • Not all of us are traitors, some have risked their jobs to protect and promote the 2nd Amendment. With that being said, most top CA officials are rabidly pro-tax, anti-gun, and anti-freedom. While enjoying armed bodyguards at that.

          You’re never wrong to do the right thing.

        • Absolutely. I can’t wait for the day President Trump orders a special department of ICE into San Francisco to remove the illegals and deport them back to their home country.

    • I dont think California is going to let the rest of you escape….. Im a firm believer in killing it from the inside out. These people are insane and they will consume all of you if they get a firm foot hold.

      • They won’t. Or more like, they can’t. At least not by other means than those involving Washington. Hence, as long as we keep our eyes on the ball, and the pressure on, for ever looser alliance with that particular cesspool, the Cali Cartel’s tentacles’ reach will be heavily stunted.

      • Pretty much. Part of it is indoctrination. They run the schools and media. They have a big population. They’ll just keep pushing out waves of people to other states to tip them next.

    • California Dem politician tries to get blatantly unconstitutional initiative on the ballot. To make Californians “safer”.

      Just when you didn’t think they could go more retrograde, they top themselves. I often travel the vast sparsely populated regions north of the pit of vipers (Sacremento), and it is very conservative. Almost like central WA.

      Something about growing food must make them bitter clingers. They really need to get in step with the people that matter in SF and LA doing all that important big city work. /sarc

    • Indeed.
      I remember when TX wanted to secede from union.
      CA should be forced to.
      I’m ok with 49 states.
      Maybe a few less too.

  1. Will the petition garner the 100k signatures it needs to earn a place on the ballot?
    Of course, that is really not that many for the State of Kommiefornication.

    • He very probably will get the signatures. He needs 365,880. We already have our reports of the paid signature-gatherers, running about $4 each to the circulator. We also have reports that the circulators are mis-representing the content, not that many folks willing to sign would understand either the correct or the wrong info.

      Newsom is running for Governor. Any publicity for him, including this absurd initiative, puts him in the public eye – it’s ‘name recognition’. He wins whether the initiative succeeds or fails.

  2. Don’t your country’s people have the right to be safe?

    The “criminals don’t follow laws hurr durr” argument is so fucking stupid. Believe it or not, criminals in Australia break laws too! Gun violence is still significantly less because it’s so much harder and more expensive to get guns. There are two facets to gun violence: gun use by criminals (which isn’t entirely eliminated but is reduced) and guns being pulled in anger during civilian confrontations (which ARE entirely eliminated).

    Source? US has 4.7 murders/100K. Australia has 1.1 murders/100K. That’s from the UNODC

    Ok two things to address here. Firstly saying “0.002% of guns in America have been used illegally therefore gun violence is a statistical anomaly” is stupid. That’s not how statistics work. 0.002% of Africans have ebola, that doesn’t mean ebola in Africa is a “statistical anomaly”. (Also cite your statistics or they carry no weight)

    Of course some criminals still get guns but significantly LESS of them do leading to LESS violence (not 0 obviously). I already gave the statistic that US has 4.7 murders/100K while Australia has 1.1 murders/100K. That’s the TOTAL homicide rate, not just guns. (source: UNODC’s Global Study on Homicide 2013)

    If you’re thinking of saying “but Australia has always had less murders”, then look at this:

    Go to “Injury and Death” then “Homicides (any method)”. Gun regulation came in in 1996 and you can see that overall murders have dropped significantly since.

    Australia hasn’t banned guns. And Australia’s gun laws HAVE saved lives: We’ve seen 0 mass shootings since the introduction of the laws (while there were 13 in the 18 years prior to 1996)

    The number of homicides caused by firearms fell dramatically, as did the number of suicides by firearm. And in addition, there was a marked reduction in accidental discharges and death / injury from those.

    So gun laws have had a noticeable effect on everything that they were intended to.

    Ohh, Wait I’m talking to a bunch of brainwashed dead gun-sheeps who enjoy their country being a 3rd world hellhole.

    • Australia enacted its gun ban in 1996. Murders have basically run flat, seeing only a small spike after the ban and then returning almost immediately to preban numbers. It is currently trending down, but is within the fluctuations exhibited in other nations.

      In other words, gun control has had no significant impact on murder rates.

    • I could tell you how many unarmed people were murdered by their own governments during the last century, but I realize that you are in fact a beta male troll who enjoys helplessness. My ancestors didn’t come here for security. They came here to be free. Now kindly pound sand. I hear the little prison colony you live in has plenty of it.

    • Calling me a gun nut I’m actualy flattered.


      But anyway, eliminating all sharks wouldve prevented all deaths from sharks. Your no-gun-no-gun-death BS goes nowhere.

      And, the society exists for individuals sake. I’d rather have a higher risk level (suppose guns actually cause that to happen, which is never proven true or false), and be able to deal with it, than be sitting ducks at the mercy of the govt and criminals. I dont give a f how anyone else ends up. I want my weapons, i solve my problems and i live my life. I pay taxes, obey the laws, and the govt’s meddling with me stops there.

      When seconds count, the cops are minutes away.

      And, ever learnt a thing or two about Opportunity Cost?

      No none of us says guns prevent determined tyrants already in action. Guns make tyranny more expensive and prevents it from happening by making other choices more attractive to the politicians.

    • Does Australia have a massive gang problem? Does it have a massive and laughably poorer border with one of the most criminal-controlled nations in the world? No? Didn’t think so. According to the CDC, 85% of America’s murders are gang-related (if you don’t believe me, you can easily find valid data on the geographic breakdown of America’s homicides, with places like Chicago, LA, and Baltimore having the vast majority of the nation’s homicides). What that means is that the rate of non gang-related murders in this country is actually about on par with that of most Western European nations.

      Plus, since you don’t seem to know how causal relationships work, why don’t you cite Australia’s murder rate prior to the Port Arthur Massacre and the regulations that followed? Oh right, there is basically no difference. So, no, gun control didn’t make your country safer. Maybe you ought to learn your own history before you go critiquing us. Typical Aussie liberal.

    • We have gangs, we have drugs, we have porous borders, one of which is the source of the gangs and drugs… and, and, and… guns! all coming across our porous borders illegally. That 4.7 by the way includes all those killed by police and any killed in self defense, they are “gun homicides” not necessarily “gun murders” and if you pull out those and the murders committed by gang related criminals I would be willing to bet we’d tie your number. We own and carry because our government won’t seal our borders and our police can’t or won’t get here fast enough to protect us when bad guys do bad things.

      Americans, doing it our way since 1776, and we don’t really give a hoot what you think. Good day.

    • The number of guns available in Australia has risen to pre-ban levels:

      In the same time period the overall levels of homicides in the United States dropped faster than in Australia:

      In the United States 13% of the population commit 52% of the murders, the majority due to urban gang violence:

      In Australia this particular group is less than 1% of the population:

    • US has 4.7 murders/100K. Australia has 1.1 murders/100K.

      @KirkWithNobrain, if take some time off from kangaroo humping, I’m sure that you can catch up. I’m rooting for you!

      Meanwhile, Australia is way ahead of the US in deaths by spider.

    • So what’s your point? The facts your relayed are not relevant asking the following question. Do individuals have the right to lawful protect themselves in public? The only correct answer is yes. The only cost effective tool to accomplish that is a hand gun. It is immoral to demand lawful citizens to face a criminal without the means to protect themselves.

      California created laws to systematically removed 1000 handguns from its formally approved roster. In six years, no magazine fed handgun will be sold in CA. 30 day wait to sell a used handgun, they already know exits. Open carry rifles was banned after people legally demonstrated with them. The Democratic control legislate would rather bring 10 gun bills forward than provide funding for idle school buses. Now CA is requiring rifles bought legally without the need to register to now register them and demanding citizens to pay 20 dollars to register them or become a felon.
      Now CA is will restrict Ammo sales for law abiding citizens.

      The bottom line is CA is restricting handgun and Ammo supply to deny California’s the right to bear arms and lawfully protect themselves from criminals.

    • See son, what you fail to comprehend here is that there are actually three Americas.

      One America, where I live and where many other People of the Gun live, is fairly free, rural, and not densely populated. It is known derisively as “Flyover Country”. This America is largely crime free. What crime we do have is of the “pulled over with weed or other petty drug” or the “petty theft that goes along with having tweekers and stoners around” variety. There has been one single solitary murder in my county in the 36 years I’ve lived here, and it was committed by an escaped convict passing through (he killed the county sheriff that happened to stop him for speeding). EVERYONE is armed. MOST have a permit to carry a handgun concealed on their person everywhere they go. Those that do not have a CCW do have guns at home. There have been zero (0) accidental shootings in my county since I’ve lived here. NONE. Most folks die of old age or car/farm accidents.

      The second America is less rural, more densely populated, and sometimes slightly intermingled with the third America (which I’ll get to in a minute). Life there is highly regulated, but because the regulations closely match the preferences of most of the inhabitants there, nobody seems to notice all the rules (unless or until they inadvertently break one, then God help them). It is also very affluent, and peopled with urban professionals who make a lot of money at their jobs (doctors, lawyers, programmers in silicon valley, actors in hollywood, stock brokers in new york city, and the socialites and ancillary people who orbit those kinds of people, etc). They’ve never touched a gun in their lives, or known anyone who has, because guns are largely illegal there. They almost never experience crime, though they read about it in their newspapers and watch its aftermath on the TV every day. They live inside secure buildings with door men and security guards, or inside gated subdivisions with guards at the gates and cops patrolling the streets. They generally feel sorry for the people who live in the third America, but are also deathly afraid of them (mostly for good reason, since the only time they’re likely to encounter one is when being robbed or assaulted). They also generally look down their nose at people like me who live in the rural America described above, believing themselves to be better and smarter people than the rubes that live in flyover country. Most folks there die of old age or car accidents. A few get killed by folks from the third America while being robbed or car jacked, but not many. People from this America feel oddly at home in Europe or Australia, and wonder why.

      The last America (and I use that term loosely here) is densely packed, urban, broken/dysfunctional, poor, and mostly black or latino (depending on where it’s located, as blacks and latinos do not mix well for some reason, so they self segregate). Crime there is a way of life. Almost no one works for a living, those that do are stolen from habitually. Gang membership is the future for 70%-80% of boys born there, and some non-trivial percentage of girls too. Prostitution gets the lion’s share of the girls who don’t join a gang or make a profession of having kids. Everything is illegal there, from painting your own house, to pumping your own gas, or trying to start a business without bribing someone at city hall (not to mention paying off the local gangs). Guns and drugs are everywhere there, even though both are illegal in the extreme. People are shot every day, people die from being shot every single week, and generally speaking, nobody is willing to help the cops catch those who do the shooting. The ones that are caught spend a cursory amount of time in prison, and then are released to continue their life of crime until they are either caught again, or killed. Places like inner city Chicago, Baltimore, or LA are examples of this third America. Even though guns are as illegal in these places as they are in your beloved Australia, more people will die in each of these cities each year than soldiers were killed on a yearly basis in either Afghanistan or Iraq during the wars there.

      This third America is were almost all of the United States’ “gun crime” comes from, and guns are ALREADY ILLEGAL there.

      Gun control has failed in these places, just like drug prohibition has failed, just like trying to suppress the sex trade has failed. This third America is largely lawless, and likely will remain so without drastic measures being taken (which I do not consider myself qualified to enumerate, much less recommend).

      If you take out the inner city areas of the largest democrat controlled cities, suddenly the US crime and “gun violence” rate matches yours in Australia and much of western Europe.

      America doesn’t have a gun problem, America has an inner city culture of lawlessness problem. I’m not convinced that these places are lawless because they are populated by blacks and latinos, but it cannot be denied that black and latino gang members make up the vast majority of violent criminals in the US.

      You speak about the US like it’s one giant homogeneous nation, but unlike Australia, the US is not 92% white. With diversity comes friction and strife, simple as that.

      The US is also vastly larger than Australia, both spatially and in terms of population. You have 22M souls onboard, while we have nearly 350M, many of whom do not like each other much.

      Bottom line, you don’t know what you’re talking about.

      What works in Australia (though I’d argue that your gun control schemes are not working all that well down under either) will not work in the US.

      If you find that you don’t like our laws, I would invite you to stay in Australia and never darken our collective doorstep.

    • Dear Kirk,

      just so u know if u took out all the places with high gun control laws out of america (like new york city, chicago, all of cali) then us is 4th from bottom in number of murders.

    • Rofl, I love when slaves living in their miserable, irrelevant police states try to justify their state servitude by lambasting free people.

      Do you honestly think any of us care what a pathetic subject bowing at the feet of government has to say about us? Your condemnation is a compliment, further proof that we’re right. Back to bowing down before England’s queen, subject.

    • like wise person once said; people who trade liberty for safety deserve neither…

      that said; gun bans don’t make anyone safe… the stats you’re citing are useless because they are not in context. What did the gun bans do to the numbers? Answer: nothing. Which shows your using them in a deceptive way. Those countries had lower murder rates than the USA even when guns were legal. They’re different cultures. Now that guns are hard to legally own… surprise; lower murder rates [still]…. re: no change…

    • The real injustice is that gun laws mainly affect law abiding White people in America.
      The FBI crime statistics for 2014 indicate that blacks commit over 90% of the gun crimes and Hispanics commit around 9%. Black males between the ages of 18 to 49 who comprise just 4% of the population commit around 52% of the murders. Black males rape between 30,000 to 34,000 White women each year in the U.S.
      White people who are able to act responsibly are being punished because of the actions of blacks and non-Whites who generally lack impulse control, have a higher amount of testosterone and on average, a much lower I.Q. paired with a natural propensity for committing violence.
      Exacerbating this is the media and the Obama administration who side with the black criminals and make excuses for them by blaming their actions on anger over historical racial grievances.
      Putting all of that aside. America has a Second Amendment that Australia does not have. I cannot help but get the impression that every time I hear someone from a country like yours complain about our gun rights or the gun murder rates, that it is driven in part by envy over our freedom. Our right to keep and bear arms is a stark contrast to the totalitarian control your government has over your natural right to defend yourself.
      I suspect that you would like to see us in the same defenseless position you are in so you don’t have to be faced with your own impotence when it comes to defending your life or that of your loved ones.
      The people in Australia and Great Britain sure have a keen obsession with our Second Amendment.
      Since it has no effect on your life, I can only surmise that “misery loves company” and you wouldn’t have to admit that your government is more interested in controlling you than whether you are safe if we were put in the same defenseless position that you find yourself.
      If you feel that you are safer by not being able to own a gun for your personal defense, then you certainly can stay put in gun free Australia and not risk your life by coming to our country.
      You still have plenty of violent crime in Australia. Do you only care about gun crime?

    • The US isn’t a third world hell hole, but you know what is? Mexico. You know what country has an almost complete ban on firearms ownership but still has some of the worst crime in the “developed” world, where cartels can get a hold of shit American gun owners can’t get legally? Mexico.

      Now I understand why the 4chan culture regards Aussies as “shitposters”.

    • Braindead?

      The murder rate has fallen EVERY year for over 20 years now. And that coincides with loosening gun laws here.

      It would be naive to argue simply from that that less gun restrictions save lives. Indeed, it has fallen in every state, both those loosening and tightening laws. So a prima facie argument either way is “brain dead.”

      If we compare our historical murder rate to say Britain, before its first gun laws, we find ours to be astronomically higher, 20 x as much. Now about 4x times as much. Interestingly, while still very low, theirs went up and ours down during the 90’s.

      The fact of the matter is we are undergoing something similar to Europe in the early modern era, when their violent crime dropped. Australia, if we throw it the mix, already is ahead on that curve… and that is demographic stabilization. I am not talking about racial identity, but simply stability.

      Anyhow, the factors that contribute to crime are, well, per se incidental. The real cause ultimately is an evil will. Insofar as any thing contributes against or for, it is highly historically and culturally dependent. Deterrence, the rate of economic fatherhood, abortion, the percentage of murderers actually executed, economics, the percentage of males between 18-40 locked up etc all have some role. Some, like economic fatherhood (percentage of men 18-40 who actively take familial responsibility) have an enormous correlate, while others like the actual use of the death penalty are much smaller. It shouldn’t be surprising that acts of self-giving, pro-social acts, inversely correlate with anti-social acts like violent crime.

      At worst “gun freedom” been neutral across America. At best looser restrictions have been beneficial. Actual statisticians, who know the difference between pissant arguments like the one you presented and the standards for integration, will tell you the same.

    • You lost me at “gun violence.” So your government took most of the guns away from most of the citizens, and now there’s less gun violence and fewer accidental shootings. Do you have fewer criminals? Take a look at your country’s overall rate of violent crime for the last 30 years and you’ll see exactly what your gun violence number means. (Hint: It doesn’t look good for you.)

    • Seagull post. Comes in, craps all over everything, then leaves.

      Kirk, if you do read this…remember, you live in Australia, not the US. What we do here is none of your concern. What you do down there matters not to us. Respect that.

    • “Don’t your country’s people have the right to be safe?”

      Yes – that’s why we own weapons.

      Do you have any coherent observations?

      Sorry; rhetorical. Of course you don’t.

    • KirkfromBrisbane, the University of Melbourne study cited in the following article seems to refute your position:

      One excerpt:

      University of Melbourne researchers Wang-Sheng Lee and Sandy Suardi concluded their 2008 report on the matter with the statement, “There is little evidence to suggest that [the Australian mandatory gun-buyback program] had any significant effects on firearm homicides.” “Although gun buybacks appear to be a logical and sensible policy that helps to placate the public’s fears,” the reported continued, “the evidence so far suggests that in the Australian context, the high expenditure incurred to fund the 1996 gun buyback has not translated into any tangible reductions in terms of firearm deaths.”

    • You’ve been here before under many different names. First I noticed you it was you were using “antiquarian” as part of your name. Then you would pretend(we knew of your mistakes in your pretended dialect) at various times to be an Australian, a Norwegian, etc., always from some foreign country where it was a gun free/crime free paradise.

  3. Kirk:
    The Trolls are coming! The trolls are coming! We whipped your mother country’s English arse, and you are more than welcome to stay in Australia, eat your vegemite (don’t know if I spelled it correctly, don’t care), and piss off! And besides, who wants a fucking lever action shotgun, anyway?
    Feel free to post over at HuffPo with Mike the “gun guy”

    • Hey, hey…. No. Lever action shotguns are awesome, thank you very much (though I still enjoy my handguns and AK’s as much as anyone).

  4. When can people in that cesspool realize that owning weapons is a survival necessity, not merely a right.

    You need to breathe, eat, drink and protect yourself before talking shit, soldier-outta-my-house shit, privacy shit, and silence shit.

    • Are they going to put a tax stamp/seal on each box like they do with cigarettes? Are they going to stop each vehicle at their bug-check stations on the border and check for contraband ammo? That should make for some fun YouTube encounters.

      • “Are they going to put a tax stamp/seal on each box like they do with cigarettes?”

        Cliff, you are on to something with that.

        *Please*, someone suggest that to them!

        That will be the spark that ignites a war. 🙂

  5. Robert, so you do believe in God? Awesome!

    Gavin Newsome should be thrown out for bypassing the Constitution which I bet he swore an OATH to protect and defend.

    • He should be tarred and feathered, then shot in his nut sack with an out of state handgun, not on CA approve list, with a micro stamp using resgistered salt peter ammo.

  6. I keep stressing the importance of what happens in states like the PRK. But everyone in a “free” state thinks SCOTUS justices are immortal and the balance of power is stable ……

  7. More proof than ever that America needs to split into two nations. Let the left have their third world totalitarian police state, leave free people alone.

    I’d also accept a civil war. Either option is better than what we have now. The left deserves to suffer and live in misery for what they do.

    • The trouble is they doubt want to let us have our free state. They would move to the free half, imbed themselves in the education system, etc…

      The Soviets weren’t content to be socialist totalitarians and leave everyone else alone, they did everything in their power to inject their ideology into the culture of other countries, and had even turned ding so into a refined methodology.

      This is why China went communist, India became socialist, north Korea, north Vietnam, etc…

      There was a man by the name of Yuri Bezmenov who as part of this process before defecting and coming to north America. He settled in Canada and his interviews in a Canadian program and his lectures in a classroom are available on YouTube and Metacafe. Scary stuff.

  8. It is amazing to watch freedom disappear from the state of my birth.
    But you will still have gay pride parades with tens of thousands of people holding hands and smiling. And children being instructed in public schools on famous people who have anal sex. Free condoms for all and Marijuana intoxication free from fear of arrest.
    Those of you who like to drink raw milk might have a problem though.

      • If you notice, the state has no problem with people exercising rights that do not challenge the state. Gay marriage doesn’t challenge the states power so they have no problem with it and will even work to promote it. Rights thay limit the power of the state are targeted for infringement of elimination. This is why Social Justice Warriors are tolerated for the most part. Most of what they want eithet is neutral or enhances the states power as their agenda is accomplished. If gay marriage somehow challenged the states power power, you can bet they would stop supporting it.

        • Sixpack 70
          Thank you
          You are the first person to finally catch on to what I have been saying. California homosexual voters and their straight supporters made a conscious decision to put a sexual activity over a fundmental founding civil right.
          They “challenged” the society to change and accept new sexual thinking.
          Now they are loosing their guns. And it seems that is ok. To them it was an equal trade. Every elected supporter of the homosexual legal agenda is anti gun civil rights. The last elected homosexual who supported the second amendment was Harvey Milk. I have never forgotten the massive negative reaction Milk got when he came out of the closet for gun rights. His fellow homosexuals said he was wrong. He was murdered along with the San Francisco mayor George Moscone by an ex police officer Dan White.
          Every elected supporter of legalized Marijuana is anti gun civil rights. The medical pot supporters never supported the second amendment when I was in California.

          In nazi Germany the SA or brown shirts were a nasty evil homosexual lead group. They recruited gays and straights. Hitler was ok with the homosexual part until the leader Ernst Rome challenged the leadership of Adolf Hitler. The ” night of the long knives ” put an end to the SA leadership.
          Facists California will do the samething when the sexual liberated challenge the state government.

        • This is why Social Justice Warriors are tolerated. Most of what they want enhances the states power
          Useful idiots.

        • Giving up my guns for some one elses rights was never on the table. We didn’t stand around and debate givingup our rights. But how is taking other rights from other folks advancing our cause? You give the state the power to regulate your bedroom, your body , your marriege and your kids lives but declare yourself a free man cause you can carry a gun?

          You tell the state that it’s ok to take away the individual rights of people based on their sexuality, drug use or reigion and then you call others useful idiots for letting the state take individual rights away?

          You know what. I’d rather have you on hillery’s side than mine.

    • I guess free here means that you should be free to live the way he tells you to. I do get tired of people that claim to follow the teachings of Christ spew hatred and intolerance, and I get tired of those demanding freedom who insist on dictating how I should live my personal life.

  9. I bet the cartels would love this, make up for the loss of revenue from the legalization of Marijuana in California.

  10. California’s a bit unclear on the concept that rights aren’t up for voting. There’s no “except” clause after “shall not be infringed”.

    To KirkfromBrisbane: I don’t really care what an Australian thinks about our gun laws or our Constitution. You don’t get a vote.

    Likewise, I don’t expect a vote on what Australia does or doesn’t do. How you want to mismanage your country is up to you.

    • He is NOT an Australian. He has been before, posting under many different names. I recognize his short paragraphs and memes anywhere.

  11. I have no idea if kirk from Bris is really from Australia but the only restriction on me buying ammunition is my wife asking what is that on my credit card and why wasn’t she invited.

    Other states I have heard restrict you to calibres that you a a firearm licence for but I have never been asked for anything aside from how do you want to pay. No limits on quantity etc in Queensland

  12. Yet another nagging reminder that I was born in a state that I want no part of. It’s tiring to see so many people here who are just wrong about our 2nd amendment rights, the state has no business in knowing that I buy ammunition, or how much, or even what firearms I own, but disingenuous politicians like Newsom continue to peddle their disinformation that doing SOMETHING about guns is the answer, when it is completely and absolutely the entire problem. If his ilk wanted to truly do something about crimes involving firearms, then they would promote bills that address the veritable ocean of “homies” who live in every city in this state by doing wide sweeping crackdowns on the true criminals and would ensure that firearm violations would be prosecuted to the full letter of law; but its so much easier to unabashedly vilify honest firearm owners like me and my family.
    This state is a write off, once I leave I will never return.

  13. 25% of what? What people in the CA don’t realize is that allowing 1 billion illegals into your state to vote doesn’t dilute my citizenship, it dilutes theirs. Here’s a fine example of rubber-road introductions. They could get a trillion names on their Petition and still #NaCl.

    • the dems knew it… and that 60% of them are anti gun and pro bigger gov. Ergo they supported letting them in… the dems were hoping for more of course…

  14. “Voters “deserve” the “right” to bypass Congress to disarm civilians ”

    That’s what happens when enough idiots are indoctrinated to believe totalitarian states concocting wacko rituals including voting booths, are somehow different/more legitimate than their brethren whose equally mindless rituals differ in some way.

  15. This is really boiling my blood. I saw some jackwad in front of a grocery store trying to get signatures. I walked passed him without issue but afterwards I went straight to the LGS and spent 4 digits on new guns and ammo. I’m incredulous at this rampant idiocy but I’m not surprised. You’d think some one like Gavin Newsom would understand individual rights aren’t up to majority vote (prop 8), but that would mean he had principals to begin with.

    • You should have bought a large tipped marker; gone back and told that douche-bag “Yes, I’d love to sign your petition!” Then when he(she, or whatever sex it was on that day) handed you the clipboard; write “Go F#$% yourself Gavin” diagonally across the page. Just to make a point, then walk away……

  16. Such naivete. While resources are wasted enforcing these measures, true gun crimes will continue simply because criminals by definition do not obey laws. Wishful thinking does not good, effective policy make.

  17. It will be interesting to see how this works if it happens, NYS didn’t go through with it just on a cost basis. That’s a lotta transactions to keep track of and a lot of infrastructure to gather and store that stuff. I would see reloading being popular after though.

  18. So based on Gavin Newsome’s logic, if a majority of people decided that they were fed up with the fact that blacks commit the overwhelming majority of gun crimes, we could just sign a petition to make them slaves in order to make our society safer.
    Newsome is counting on the ignorance of the population to suggest that majority rule trumps the constitution.

  19. There’s no doubt in my mind this will get on the ballot. All they need to do is head to San Francisco for a few weeks. They’d easily get all the signatures they needed.

  20. Gavin Newsom is Lieutenant Governor now and aspires to take Jerry Brown’s place as Governor when Brown’s Term expires. Newsom is doing this to get name recognition Statewide and to ingratiate himself to the commies in Sacramento/San Francisco/San Jose/ Los Angeles and Hollyweird.
    This Law is nefarious and presents a dangerous model other States may follow, so when RF advises to “…be afraid. Be very afraid.” his warning is well taken.
    Newsom will get this onto the November Ballot. Hopefully, we California gun owners can provide our State gun rights organizations with the resources to mount an effective fight to defeat it. HOPEFULLY, California gun owners will turn-out in record numbers to vote against it.

  21. If they can push through Bills transfering medical decision making for your children from the parents to the state and private industry, they can, and will push through anything.

  22. Why don’t we fight fire with fire? Let’s get a petition started to amend California’s State Constitution to include arms-rights language as well as pre-emption language. We could add something as simple as the “right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed and no local municipality or authority can enact laws that in any way contravene the individual right.”

    They want to use the petition system which means if we use it too they can’t tell us its wrong because if it’s wrong when we do it why is it not equally wrong when they do it?

    • That’s a lovely idea.

      I see you have not experienced a California initiative campaign.

      It’s going to cost around $1.2 million to gather the signatures. Volunteer labor won’t get it done. An anecdote: several years ago some folks tried that; they set up in gun stores and ranges, figuring pro-gun people go there, and a pro-gun measure should be easy. Nope; many people explicitly declined, saying approximately “I don’t want to get on some list.” Most simply ignored even persistent approaches. (Yes, we are our own worst enemies.)

      Let’s say a miracle occurs, and the measure gets on the ballot.

      How does the voting public learn about these things? Answer: advertising.

      What is a consistent characteristic of ALL the media in the populated areas of California? Answer: Without exception, they are anti-gun.

      In fact, these media channels refuse to sell advertising to pro-gun efforts. Got another idea to reach the electorate?

      Skip that; let’s pretend the media are just money-hungry and will sell to anyone. How much will a campaign cost?

      An example of a contested measure: A few years ago, differing factions backing casino gambling got a couple measures on the ballot. Each side spent about $70,000,000 to run so many ads they threatened to grind those few neurons possessed by CA voters into mush. 30-second spots, for and against, back to back in 4-6 minute commercial breaks on tv. Multiple flyers on each side in my mailbox every day. Newspaper ads; newspaper articles and editorials (you don’t think that taking our money would take away the media editorial slant, do you?), billboards. I suppose radio too, but I don’t listen to much.

      And then, suppose whatever measure submitted loses, a really high probability – not only because the advertising would be against us and there have been years of propaganda to make the people generally anti-gun, but also because most initiatives are defeated. Every pro-gun comment for the next 20 years will be answered with ‘you guys tried that back in ’16; the people of California rejected your barbaric ideas’.

      What we need is our own set of propaganda channels (“Propaganda: information intended to persuade”). I like Instapundit’s suggestion – buy some of the struggling women’s mags and flip their editorial policies.

      You won’t enjoy it, but the information on initiatives is at the California Secretary of State’s web site, and anyone can do the research on results and expenditures.

Comments are closed.