California empowers police to seize citizens' guns

[numan]

Fuck the Second Amendment.

Numan hates that pesky thing called the Bill of Rights.

I am very irritated by all the fuss made about that antiquated relic of a by-gone era, the Second Amendment.

The rest of the Bill of Rights is OK as far as it goes, but is still inadequate for the modern world. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is much superior.

What I really hate and despise is the Constitution itself. That antiquated and inadequate Rube Goldberg contraption of 18th century colonial hicks is unworkable in the 21st century, and is a major roadblock to the USA becoming a sensibly run modern nation. It should be chucked into a garbage bin, where it belongs, and we should start out afresh, from first principles, and create a decent system of government -- that would be a refreshing change to the centuries' long series of disasters which the present Constitution has presided over.

Unfortunately, it would be a big job to counter the unremitting barrage of Constitution Idolatry which oppresses the USA with its evil brainwashing.
.

 

[Londoner]

And so it begins.

California now has a law empowering the government to seize the firearms of people it disapproves of.

What did you say when Florida enforced the law to prevent felons from voting?

Did you re-describe "Felon" as "people Florida disapproves of"?

We know you don't want background checks or limits to high-capacity magazines (so that it's easier for retarded violent psychopaths to kill people), but we had no idea that you would admit it publicly.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Are you stoned?

 

[numan]

California empowers police to seize citizens' guns

This should have been done a long time ago, as it is not against any constitution to do so, local states governments can confiscate guns and citizens are not protected under some silly constitution that doesn't mean shit, all states should follow suit so we can get this over with quickly.

I am very pleased to see someone with even more red badges than I have.
Congratulations!!

It's really funny that the Yahoos whom you enrage don't have a clue that your tongue is so firmly tucked into the your cheek!!

Though your goals may be different, I salute a fellow ironist !!
.

 

[Harry Dresden]

Fuck the Second Amendment.

Numan hates that pesky thing called the Bill of Rights.

I am very irritated by all the fuss made about that antiquated relic of a by-gone era, the Second Amendment.

The rest of the Bill of Rights is OK as far as it goes, but is still inadequate for the modern world. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is much superior.

What I really hate and despise is the Constitution itself. That antiquated and inadequate Rube Goldberg contraption of 18th century colonial hicks is unworkable in the 21st century, and is a major roadblock to the USA becoming a sensibly run modern nation. It should be chucked into a garbage bin, where it belongs, and we should start out afresh, from first principles, and create a decent system of government -- that would be a refreshing change to the centuries' long series of disasters which the present Constitution has presided over.

Unfortunately, it would be a big job to counter the unremitting barrage of Constitution Idolatry which oppresses the USA with its evil brainwashing.
.

Canada has room for one more.....should i tell them to expect you?....

 

[numan]

Canada has room for one more.....should i tell them to expect you?....

I go to Canada often. I have many friends there. Apart from its superb natural beauty and freedom from guns and violence, its people are sensible, courteous, better educated and blessedly free from the belligerence, tetchiness and hysteria which are so regretably common in the USA.

Being there, one has the bitter-sweet awareness that this is what the USA could have been, if it had not been for those terrorist traitors of 1776 who hornswoggled the French to win their war for them.

Some people, of shallow understanding, divide people into so-called liberals and so-called conservatives.

I divide them whether they take their vacations in Canada or in Mexico.
.

 

[boedicca]

Some people, of shallow understanding, divide people into so-called liberals and so-called conservatives.

I divide them whether they take their vacations in Canada or in Mexico.
.

Your understanding is as deep as a damp spot in a nearly dry puddle of mud.

 

[hortysir]

This defining the second amendment is so simple if one just follows the wording in the amendment.

Fuck the Second Amendment.
.

Good thing the 1st amendment is there, then, hunh?

 

[numan]

Fuck the Second Amendment.

Good thing the 1st amendment is there, then, hunh?

It would be good -- if the First Amendment were of any practical value.

The forces of government, economy and brainwashing are arrayed against it so that it is a dead letter. But that is true of the rest of the Constitution also, isn't it?

There are so many people in America who get furious if anyone has an opinion which is different from theirs -- then, hunh?
.

 

[hortysir]

Fuck the Second Amendment.

Good thing the 1st amendment is there, then, hunh?

It would be good -- if the First Amendment were of any practical value.

The forces of government, economy and brainwashing are arrayed against it so that it is a dead letter. But that is true of the rest of the Constitution also, isn't it?

There are so many people in America who get furious if anyone has an opinion which is different from theirs -- then, hunh?
.

A few countries come to mind where one is not as free to speak their minds

 

[numan]

A few countries come to mind where one is not as free to speak their minds

But none where dissent is so carefully prevented from having any effect.

Where there is no official censorship, it is pretty certain that the official spokesmen have all the loudspeakers.
---Paul Goodman
.

 

[Harry Dresden]

Canada has room for one more.....should i tell them to expect you?....

I go to Canada often. I have many friends there. Apart from its superb natural beauty and freedom from guns and violence, its people are sensible, courteous, better educated and blessedly free from the belligerence, tetchiness and hysteria which are so regretably common in the USA.

Being there, one has the bitter-sweet awareness that this is what the USA could have been, if it had not been for those terrorist traitors of 1776 who hornswoggled the French to win their war for them.

Some people, of shallow understanding, divide people into so-called liberals and so-called conservatives.

I divide them whether they take their vacations in Canada or in Mexico.
.

so is that a yes or a no?.....going to live there or not?....

 

[Spoonman]

Canada has room for one more.....should i tell them to expect you?....

I go to Canada often. I have many friends there. Apart from its superb natural beauty and freedom from guns and violence, its people are sensible, courteous, better educated and blessedly free from the belligerence, tetchiness and hysteria which are so regretably common in the USA.

Being there, one has the bitter-sweet awareness that this is what the USA could have been, if it had not been for those terrorist traitors of 1776 who hornswoggled the French to win their war for them.

Some people, of shallow understanding, divide people into so-called liberals and so-called conservatives.

I divide them whether they take their vacations in Canada or in Mexico.
.

everyone i know from canada has a gun. they are huge hunters there. most people have a shotgun, ducks and geese, large caliber rifle, big game and small caliber, small game. not a lot have pistols, but most people have a few rifles.

 

[numan]

everyone i know from canada has a gun. they are huge hunters there. most people have a shotgun, ducks and geese, large caliber rifle, big game and small caliber, small game. not a lot have pistols, but most people have a few rifles.

How interesting that you know such an unrepresentative sampling of Canadians !
.

 

[Mustang]

And so it begins.

California now has a law empowering the government to seize the firearms of people it disapproves of.

It starts with the obvious ones that no one can object to, of course: Felons, non compos mentis... and people under restraining orders.

And the liberals assure us that the govt (that is, liberals) would never, ever seize the guns of anyone else. Why no, of course not.

Until they run across some group of people making plans to build up a truck-fertilizer bomb and park it on the Golden Gate Bridge. Well, of course it will be OK to seize their guns too. I mean, look at them! Maybe they haven't actually been convicted of any crime, but you know and I know it's just a matter of time. So we'll add them to the list.

And then the next.....

This has happened so many times throughout history, it's sad.

Except to liberals who KNOW that they, of course, would never continue such a pattern. So it's OK in their case.

And so it begins.

-----------------------------

Oh, BTW...

A very long time ago, I filed for divorce in California. It was granted, and my son lived with me for the next ten years until he went to college.

But during the proceedings, the judge entered standard restraining orders against myself and my wife, each telling us not to harass, bother, threaten, or commit violence upon the other. Both of us had stated repeatedly that there had never been any violence, threats, or any other such things, from either of us, ever. But the judge simply said these were routine restraining orders, that were always issued in any such divorce, don't worry about them.

At that instant, I became a felon, since I was a gun owner. The so-called "Lautenberg Amendment", a Federal law, stated that no one who is under a restraining order that mentioned domestic violence, could own a gun.

Half a year later, when the divorce became final, the judge routinely rescinded the orders. Seven years after that, the statute of limitations on my "felony" status ran out. Finally I could no longer be arrested or convicted for the felony I had committed by owning a gun while I (and my ex-wife) were under those "routine" restraining orders.

Today's point?

Under the law just signed by Gov. Moonbeam, I could expect armed police or even a SWAT team to break into my house at any time of the day or night to arrest me and confiscate my guns... if the restraining order issued during my divorce, were still active.

Because I would be a felon in possession of a gun I had (previously) legally acquired... exactly the target of this new law.

Remind me again, please, that "Nobody is coming for your guns, you stupid redneck"?

----------------------------------------------------------------

Jerry Brown OKs funds to seize guns held illegally - Los Angeles Times

Jerry Brown OKs funds to seize guns held illegally

The governor approves $24 million to confiscate weapons from people who can no longer own them due to criminal convictions, restraining orders or mental illness.

May 01, 2013|By Patrick McGreevy, Los Angeles Times

SACRAMENTO — The state will send dozens of new agents into California neighborhoods this summer to confiscate nearly 40,000 handguns and assault rifles from people barred by law from owning firearms, officials said Wednesday.

The plan received the green light Wednesday, when Gov. Jerry Brown signed legislation providing $24 million to clear the backlog of weapons known to be in the hands of about 20,000 people who acquired them legally. They were later disqualified because of criminal convictions, restraining orders or serious mental illness.

The bill is the first of more than a dozen gun measures introduced by California lawmakers after the December massacre of 20 children and six adults at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn.

"This bipartisan bill makes our communities safer by giving law enforcement the resources they need to get guns out of the hands of potentially dangerous individuals," said Evan Westrup, a spokesman for the governor.

California is the only state in the nation to operate a database that cross-references gun owners with those who are subsequently disqualified from owning firearms. But budget cuts have prevented the state Department of Justice from keeping up with the list, which grows by 15 to 20 names every day, officials said.

Why can't convicts (currently incarcerated AND ex-convicts) have firearms in their possession if they so choose? I mean, does the US Constitution's 2nd Amendment say ANYTHING about convicts NOT being able to own guns? NO IT DOES NOT! And isn't it DANGEROUS in prison? Shouldn't convicts be allowed to exercise their Constitutional rights in order to protect themselves while in prison?

 

[Spoonman]

everyone i know from canada has a gun. they are huge hunters there. most people have a shotgun, ducks and geese, large caliber rifle, big game and small caliber, small game. not a lot have pistols, but most people have a few rifles.

How interesting that you know such an unrepresentative sampling of Canadians !
.

i don't think so. i'm not talking about a few. I'm talking about a lot. hunting is huge

 

[numan]

'
Ah! I see! Your experience has been limited to the wilderness!

Yes, many Canadians, for very proper reasons, who live in the bush have appropriate weaponry.

But in urban areas, firearms are very scarce, indeed -- especially handguns and other devices which so many Americans like to have around for murdering humans.
.

 

[Spoonman]

'
Ah! I see! Your experience has been limited to the wilderness!

Yes, many Canadians, for very proper reasons, who live in the bush have appropriate weaponry.

But in urban areas, firearms are very scarce, indeed -- especially handguns and other devices which so many Americans like to have around for murdering humans.
.

so I was right.

well lets see, most of my friends run from the Sherbrooke area, up to trois rivieres, west through montreal, laval, Ottawa, nepean, Kingston, Toronto, kitchener, London, out to Detroit. hardly the bush. why they even have running water

 

[numan]

so I was right.

I am sure that you will continue to imagine so.
.

 

[Politico]

And so it begins.

California now has a law empowering the government to seize the firearms of people it disapproves of.

Felons

Wife beaters

Stalkers with restraining orders

Fugitives

The seriously mentally ill

Dishonorable discharges....


Explain why any one of these people shouldn't have their 2nd amendment rights taken away.


The only thing that has "begun" is enforcement of the law in a meaningful manner.

You are such a mental midget.

Felons, fugitives and convicted wife beaters already can't have a gun.

That's why when they illegally continue to obtain them you take them away.