Anti-gun lawmakers lead gun hearing today

Jan. 29, 2013

By Katy Grimes

Jumping on the anti-gun movement in the country, two of California anti-gun lawmakers will lead a hearing today about guns and violence. Assemblyman Tom Ammiano, D-San Francisco, Chairman of the Assembly Public Safety Committee, and Sen. Loni Hancock, D-Berkeley, Chairwoman of the Senate Public Safety Committee, will be taking a look at gun violence and firearm law in California.

guns and american revolution, cagle, Dec. 24, 2012

However, putting Ammiano and Hancock in charge of the gun and violence hearing is like having Lindsay Lohan lead an Alcoholics Anonymous meeting, and Tiger Woods in charge of sex addicts anonymous.

Ammiano was instrumental in getting rid of San Francisco’s High School competitive .22 cal rifle teams, and worked to put an end to the junior ROTC program in San Francisco’s High Schools. Ammiano supported the ban on allowing gun owners to carry an unloaded gun in public. “Whether a gun is loaded or not, it’s still an act of intimidation and bullying,” Ammiano said.

It was reported yesterday that Ammiano is about to introduce a bill to tighten gun-safety laws already in place by adding a safe-storage requirement when a person prohibited from gun possession is living in the home. Ammiano’s bill also would let the state Justice Department extend the state’s 10-day waiting period when necessary for background checks.

The East Bay Patch recently reported State Sen. Loni Hancock “said she hopes to follow the president’s lead at the state Capitol. ‘The president is setting the tone for the national conversation that has to take place.  I strongly agree with him that we need to take action in order to protect our children,’ said Hancock. ‘As someone who represents Oakland, I’ve seen the tragic consequences of gun violence – too many children are dying.'”

I’ll report later about this hearing.



Write a comment
  1. Dyspeptic
    Dyspeptic 29 January, 2013, 10:52

    “we need to take action in order to protect our children”

    Oooh! that’s such an original line. Did loony Loni think that one up all by herself. The “Progressive” Fascists running this state are completely predictable and seem to communicate only with trite and juvenile bumper sticker slogans. Yes, it’s all about the kiddies and has nothing to do with citizen disarmament or denial of individual rights. Notice how these fools who are so eager to portray themselves as civil rights proponents go to any length to attack our 2nd amendment civil rights.

    Luckily, these buffoons are so incompetent as legislators that they can’t even write laws that pass minimum judicial scrutiny. Apparently they haven’t read the Heller or McDonald SCOTUS decisions and for that matter, they have probably never read the U.S. Constitution, nor that of the state.

    Their lust for gun prohibition is so mindless and their hubris so excessive that they think anything will fly. They will over reach as usual and the pro freedom civil rights activists will prevail in the end. It will be interesting to see how much of this gets vetoed by Moonbeam, who makes intermittent noises about being a 2nd Amendment supporter and complained in his State Of The State speech about excessive regulation.

    Well Governor, now is the time to prove you’re not just passing gas through your pie hole. Please try to discipline the ignorant and obnoxious frauds who represent your sorry excuse for a political party.

    Reply this comment
  2. StevefromSacto
    StevefromSacto 29 January, 2013, 11:58

    Wow, dyspeptic, that’s an amazing and nonsensical rant, even for you.

    Why do you need a 30-round ammo magazine to hunt or protect yourself? Are you really that poor a shot, or is it just that size really matters?

    Why should people be required to take a written and driver’s test and obtain a license in order to drive a car, but not to own an assault weapon?

    Even your buddy Justice Scalia has said that the Second Amendment is not absolute and that reasonable requirements for gun ownership are allowed.

    If the First Amendment is not absolute (for example, you can’t yell “fire” in a crowded theater), neither should the Second Amendment be.

    Lastly, Gov. Brown’s political party kicked butt in the last election here in California and nationally. If we’re a “sorry excuse for a political party”, what’s that make you losers?

    Reply this comment
  3. CalWatchdog
    CalWatchdog Author 29 January, 2013, 12:36

    Steve, since you do not know what people use to hunt, protect themselves or target shoot, try again. Or maybe ask someone who legally owns weapons, and uses them.

    “If the First Amendment is not absolute (for example, you can’t yell “fire” in a crowded theater), neither should the Second Amendment be.” Try again. What you want and what legal is have no relevance.

    The car argument is illogical and does not apply. There is no Constitutional right to drive a car. But there is a right to own weapons. Try again.

    The law is on the side of the gun owners despite how many times anti-gun zealots try to water it down.


    Reply this comment
  4. Hondo
    Hondo 29 January, 2013, 18:27

    Home invasions are the newest rage in robberies and often there are 3 or more thugs armed with semiautomatic pistols with each mag 15 shots or more, coming through the door. They could care less about gun laws. They are there prepared to kill and since felony murder basically carries a life sentence, the gun magazine crime is free.
    But me at home having to defend my self from them with a 38 five shot snubby is a joke. Especially if I have to figure out a gun lock combo as they are kicking in the door. In that situation, an AK47 with a 30 round mag may just even the tables.
    I would rather not have to own a gun. But the police unions have priced themselves out of a job and with all the cuts to police all over the state, call 911 and wait a while, and hope it ain’t a busy night. In San Berdoo the city is telling the people to lock their doors and get their guns because with the budget cuts, they don’t have the money to put enough cops on the streets.
    I say we take the advice from that San Berdoo official.

    Reply this comment
  5. Okole Puka
    Okole Puka 31 January, 2013, 09:37

    Gee….WHY not ENFORCE the LAWs already ON the BOOKS?? Anybody….. LA Times Jan 29.
    California unable to DISARM 19,700 felons and mentally ill people

    Despite being able to take weapons owned by felons and the mentally ill, state officials say staff shortages and funding cuts have slowed seizures

    Those gun owners have roughly 39,000 FIREARMS, said Stephen Lindley, chief of the Bureau of Firearms for the state Department of Justice….

    Reply this comment

Write a Comment

Leave a Reply

Related Articles

Ruling adds to case against San Onofre settlement

A judicial ruling last week slamming Southern California Edison adds to pressure on the California Public Utilities Commission to abandon

Good 1% vs. bad 1%

YouTubes like this give me hope that young folks are figuring out what’s going on. After all, they’re the ones

Next Week: Dumbest New Bills

Steven Greenhut: The deadline for introducing new legislation is tomorrow at 5 pm. By Monday, we should have a good