Town Square

Post a New Topic

State Senate committee hears arguments on stronger gun control laws

Original post made on Apr 18, 2013

Voices on both sides of the gun control debate were heard Tuesday in Sacramento, as the Senate Committee on Public Safety discussed a package of new laws that could place new restrictions on the types of guns and ammunition that Californians are allowed to own.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Wednesday, April 17, 2013, 10:14 AM

Comments (24)

Posted by Aubrey, a resident of Alamo
on Apr 18, 2013 at 7:12 am

Except for restricting law abiding citizens from exercising their right of self-defense, how will more gun laws restrict criminal behavior since by definition criminals don't obey laws?


Posted by Huh?, a resident of Danville
on Apr 18, 2013 at 8:14 am

...and all those people who shoot somebody for the first time are "law-abiding citizens" right up until the moment they pull the trigger? How about them?

Remember the Alamo Jewelry store shooting a few years back? That was a "law-abiding" NRA member exercising his second amendment rights.

Gun nuts who fantasize about "exercising their right to self defense" are demonstrating an adolescent mentality. They are far more likely to facilitate the shooting of themself or a family member than to ever "stop a bad guy with a gun."

The immaturity of the gun nuts is one of the biggest problems in the country. "By definition."


Posted by Aubrey, a resident of Alamo
on Apr 18, 2013 at 8:34 am

How about them? Pulling the trigger doesn't automatically make you a criminal.

While you choose to abdicate your personal responsibility of defending yourself to someone who is minutes or even hours away, I'll take care of myself. If THAT makes me a gun nut, so be it. You are clearly someone who doesn't understand the 2nd Amendment and all it's implications.

I do remember the Alamo Jewelry store shooting as the robber got shot for his trouble.

Gun control nuts lack the capacity to understand the real world and are by definition the biggest problem in this country (and by extension they lack the understanding of personal responsibility).


Posted by Tom, a resident of Danville
on Apr 18, 2013 at 9:26 am

Since criminals dont obey the law I think we should do away with all the useless airport security. In fact I think we should get rid of police in general. After all most of the time they show up after a crime, they dont do anything to prevent them. A better way to protect this country is to arm everyone and the eliminate all laws. After all it is the right of people to decide what is a violation of the constitition. If my pursuit of happiness allows me to take your car and walk into your house to watch your TV that is my right under the constitution. A sesnsible law in 90% of peoples eyes is a constitutional violation in 10% of people eyes. and as we know in America the minority rules.


Posted by Huh?, a resident of Danville
on Apr 18, 2013 at 2:29 pm

"I'll take care of myself."

No you won't Aubrey. You'll screw up. You'll shoot yourself, or a family member, or they'll shoot themself, or you, or neighbor kid or a lost foreign exchange student or something. Your belief that you will have your trusty gun with you when a crime happens, you'll correctly assess the situation and do the right thing is a juvenile fantasy. That's what makes you a "nut" - the childish hero fantasy you nurture.

The Alamo jeweler got shot, too. They knew each other, and both got shot. Evidently you think that's a "good outcome."


Posted by John, a resident of Alamo
on Apr 18, 2013 at 3:35 pm

I give up on the radical right. No background checks give me a break. These people are more ignorant than they look.

Same old rhetoric. I grew up in Oakland during 60's and 70's. There was very few shootings. There has been a direct correlation between the # of guns in circulation now compared to 40 years ago.

How do you think the bad guys get their guns: straw-man purchases, stolen guns, internet sales, and from other states, all of which do not currently require background checks.

I am not against guns but we do need universal background checks. However the party of "No" and "ignorance" were brown-nosed by the NRA and came through with their "No" vote.

Protect my 2nd amendment rights require background checks. I do not want to become a gun victim because of self righteous ideologues.

These background checks should have been implemented years ago, just like DMV registration. Our progress has been "to little and to late",
the bad guys have all the illegal guns they need. To tell you the truth I'm more afraid of some the ignorant NRA members "so called good guys" who have been stock piling guns.



Posted by Aubrey, a resident of Alamo
on Apr 19, 2013 at 7:50 am

Of course I can and will take care of myself, and if I fail it's on me. I'm good with that. In the meantime, you continue to abdicate your personal responsibility and play the victim, it appears to suit you.

If personal responsibility makes me part of the radical right, so be it. I am NOT an NRA member nor a Republican. I'm simply an Independent who believes in the right to self-defense. That right is not granted by the government, it's protected by the Constitution.

Believing you aren't qualified to defend yourself doesn't give you license to disarm your neighbor. As Ben Franklin said "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote".


Posted by Danville Independent, a resident of San Ramon Valley High School
on Apr 19, 2013 at 7:50 am

The rage continues about gun control here in our Country. It seems the NRA is winning, and it's a shame. Bottom line: we DO have a gun problem in the country ~ If Sandy Hook didn't teach you this, then you don't have a heart.
There are those of us who believe that with gun ownership, comes gun responsibilities. How to safely handle guns. How to safely store guns in the house. How to safely sell a gun to someone who A) is legally able to buy a gun, and B) someone who in turn has proved he knows how to "handle" that gun (see all above). There are those of us who think that military-style weapons do not belong in civilian life. There are those of us who want to see magazine loads limited (it will not stop the insane carnage, but it might limit the deaths). There are those of us who think these are reasonable standards for gun ownership, and that these changes in no way take away your Second Amendment rights.
Then,...there are those on the opposite side who want ZERO changes with ANY policy towards gun ownership. This to me, ...after the horrible tragedy at Sandy Hook Elementary school, is just ludicrous. I'm a gun owner. I'm an outdoorsman. I take my responsibilities seriously. I wish other citizens, and our politicians, would do the same.


Posted by Mr. Nothing to hide, a resident of Danville
on Apr 19, 2013 at 8:22 am

Get back to reality! Do the gun nuts really need Assault weapons with high capacity clips to defend themselves in todays age? I think not. The second amendment is old, out of date and needs to be revamped. We're in the 21st century and we need to change with the times. "Make it Better" You can keep your weapons just not massive killing weapons. And YES all gun owners should have to have a background check as well as any one who is given a gun. As the OLD saying goes "IF YOU DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO HIDE THERE SHOULD BE NO PROBLEM GIVING THE INFORMATION"


Posted by Bob, a resident of San Ramon
on Apr 19, 2013 at 9:23 am

When the ghetto bunnies turn their high capacity weapons in then there will be a discussion. Hope Feinstein is planning to ban pressure cookers now.


Posted by Steve Anderson, a resident of Alamo
on Apr 19, 2013 at 9:27 am

I hope Aubrey realizes "Huh" is one of the many low information koolaid drinkers voters. Just ignor his liberal/socialist diatribes. Thank God and our founders for the second amendment. They must have foreseen something like the current regime's attempt at destroying our liberty.


Posted by Dave, a resident of Danville
on Apr 19, 2013 at 9:35 am

Leave it to Bob to hurl out a racist slur. It says more about him than anything else.


Posted by Aubrey, a resident of Alamo
on Apr 19, 2013 at 9:40 am

OK "mr. nothing to hide", what is your bank account balance? None of my business? I feel the same way about ALL of my personal information and belongings, including weapons.


Posted by Aubrey, a resident of Alamo
on Apr 19, 2013 at 9:49 am

Now to address the gun control nuts. Who are you to say what I need? Do you need that BMW when a Ford will serve the same purpose of basic transportation?

The ONLY thing that would have stopped Sandy Hook would have been NOT to make it a killing ground. Every time one of these nuts decides to go on a shooting spree they choose a "gun free zone" for minimal opposition, and when they finally see someone with a weapon they turn their own gun on themselves (see Portland Mall, Sandy Hook, etc).

Bringing a knife, or less, to gunfight is never a good plan...


Posted by Conservator, a resident of Danville
on Apr 19, 2013 at 10:00 am

@Anderson, I suspect that you're a man of significant life experience (i.e. >60). As such, your view of guns had to have been shaped by far too many Hollywood renditions of the 'grandeur' and glory of old West gunfighter (put in your own analogies here - Gary Cooper, The Duke, Hopalong Cassidy, whatever) just like the rest of us.

Do a little history searching of life on the frontier (Dodge City, Tombstone, Deadwood...) in the late 19th century. Our forefathers in that era exercised their second amendment rights much more freely then what is common today except when we have these heinous events occur. For good reason (hmm...???), we as society seemed to find that life unacceptable and moved away from it. Think about it.


Posted by Linda Donaldson, a resident of San Ramon
on Apr 19, 2013 at 8:58 pm

I like the idea of banning pressure cookers. And maybe nails and all Home Depots too. Ban ban ban---of course do nothing about the current criminals with arsenals.


Posted by Citizen Paine, a resident of Danville
on Apr 20, 2013 at 7:52 am

The Second Amendment is a historical artifact from the days when the republic did not have the money to fund a standing army. Anyone who believes it now provides any kind of a check on an over-reaching government is indulging in an adolescent fantasy. You are out-gunned.

Just as you don't bring a knife to a gun fight, you don't bring a gun to a drone fight.

We pay a terrible price for that artifact, every day, all over the country -- to the point where we are numb to its toll. You know what's the greatest guarantee of personal liberty in our nation. It's the FIRST Amendment. If you are truly worried about the direction of our nation, spend your energies recapturing the government from the special interests that currently control it for their private profit -- including, of course, the gun lobby.


Posted by Freedom advocate, a resident of another community
on Apr 22, 2013 at 2:19 pm

I didn't realize there were so many shallow minded folks in Danville. Shameful 'Citizens'. and 'Huh? could be Duh ! groan
I'll stand with Aubrey. He's called each of you anti-Americans out.
Sending a handy list of gunowners to Sacto or DC, for future confiscation, is unfair to future generations, who are entitled to our founders idea of personal liberty, though some today are willing to toss it all.
We have shallow and gullible nitwits among us, who will tolerate Boston 'bombers' but not lawful gun owners. Next they'll be chanting that Ace hardware can no longer sell nails....SAME (il)logic !
As for LABELING youth as mentally unstable, that would forever deem them UNemployable. So you're stepping up to his financiall support for all his life. Certainly you wouldn't expect me, a taxpayer, to be lifetime support, when it's you who are choosing to LABEL a teen for seeking 3 or 6 sessions. So rich parents (like newtown) bribe the counselor to keep the label off their boy.
I fear for America that we even have such 'burn 'em at the state' people who would CONSIDER SUCH NON 'solutions'. Those are very scary folk.....well meaning fools.
Be VERY careful where you tread. The LABELING of youths will PREVENT youths and parents from SEEKING help. Don't forget many psychs are more 'confused' than their patients, which is why they went into the field in the first place.
Sadly, as Editor stated above, the Sacto crowd, themselves unfit creeps, EACH EAGER to AUTHOR any illogical, Ca junk law....already Ca is the most restrictive of our 50 states !!!
Tread very carefully. The UNintended consequences from hasty, stupid laws could be severe...tread very carefully, we've seen the damage of stupic laws by, stupid people.


Posted by Julia, a resident of Alamo
on Apr 23, 2013 at 9:01 am

My...My...My...talk about schools money issues and guns and you get responses...That's good. The Danville Express should learn something about this. Some of the stuff they publish is boring as hell.

Well as I see it, more gun control at the Federal level and the State level will not happen.

I am a loyal member of the NRA and proud of it...

I am happy to see this gun topic brought out opinions. I don't agree with some of them but at least they have been put on the table for discussion.

Go NRA...Thanks again for reading and listening to my opinion.

Julia Pardini from beautiful Alamo


Posted by Citizen Paine, a resident of Danville
on Apr 24, 2013 at 9:39 am

"Freedom advocate:" For all your dark and dire warnings, you fail to say Why it's "shameful" to express what is so patently obvious: the Second Amendment is simply not a relevant check on a tyrannical government in the 21st century. Far from being sacrosanct, it could be eliminated without endangering the fundamental freedoms for which we Both advocate.

Talk about unintended consequences -- do you really think the Founders would consider 30,000 American gun deaths/year to be tolerable collateral damage?

The First Amendment Is such a check on governmental power, among other good things it does. Better to put your faith in It, than in some popgun against the paranoid delusion of a tank or a fighter jet.


Posted by Freedom advocate, a resident of another community
on Apr 24, 2013 at 11:39 am

More children die in backyard swimming pools. Would the founders outlaw family pools?


Posted by Citizen Paine, a resident of Danville
on Apr 24, 2013 at 12:30 pm

@FA: Let's pretend that your 'statistic' is at all relevant to my question. Only trouble with it: it's a pile of crap.

Per the CDC: avg TOTAL drownings in ALL recreational water: 3,880/yr. Injuries add another 5,789/year. (That's adults and kids, pools, lakes, rivers, ocean, hottubs, etc., 2005-9) Web Link

Contrast guns, also CDC: in 2011, 31,672 deaths and 73,883 injuries.

That's Guns 105,555 to Water 9,669. A real slaughter, at better than 10-to-1.

Now, why is it "shameful" to express what is so patently obvious: the Second Amendment is simply not a relevant check on a tyrannical government in the 21st century?


Posted by S. Poollover , a resident of Blackhawk
on Apr 24, 2013 at 4:43 pm

Not to let anybody off the hook, but Mr. Citizen might have added that, if you want to have a backyard pool, first you get a permit, and you build a fence at least x feet high, then you put a locking gate on the fence, and you get a safety diving board, if you get one at all -- so that kiddlies don't drown.

Does Mr. Freedom want to submit to similar, common-sense government-imposed safety regulations regarding his firearms? Okay by me.


Posted by Raul, a resident of San Ramon
on Apr 24, 2013 at 11:38 pm

I want to see Feinstein go into Oakland, Modesto, Redwood City and demand the gang bangers turn their gun in!!!!!!!!!


If you were a member and logged in you could track comments from this story.

Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: *

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields

Moneyball, the Sequel: Billy Beane for President!
By Tom Cushing | 6 comments | 1,005 views

Spedowfski Announces run for Livermore City Council
By Roz Rogoff | 1 comment | 889 views

Planning the "Pleasanton way"
By Tim Hunt | 11 comments | 869 views

Take Full Advantage of Free Standardized Testing Opportunities
By Elizabeth LaScala | 0 comments | 361 views