Sample Ad Code Sample Ad Code

Socialize

Ban Assault Weapons and High Capacity Clips

By Brian Hews

Publisher and President, Los Cerritos Community News

 

Before all you NRA members dismiss this column, I grew up shooting guns; youngest of three brothers who all hunted, I was shooting at ten years old; my trustee “4-10” shotgun. Handguns, rifles, you name it. So I can speak from experience of a gun owner.

Yes this is in the wake of the senseless tragedy at the Sandy Hook Elementary.

Our gun control laws are broken and need to be fixed. Access is to guns is too easy.

All you NRA members who say guns don’t kill people, I would agree, you are right.

It’s the NRA lobby, lining the pockets of Congress so they vote to more easily put guns in the hands of deranged people who then go out and kill people.

And there have been nineteen of these massacres since the Virginia Tech shooting. Nineteen counting the Sandy Hook tragedy.

And the NRA has the brass to hold a press conference today saying we should put armed guards at every school in the nation. Great idea! Why not at shopping malls, churches, libraries, and other high traffic areas while we are at it?

What are we a third-world country now?

The money lobby is blinding the NRA’s Wayne Le Pierre. Instead of solving the problem the NRA endorses putting more guns in the hands of non-police trained guards; sure, nothing will go wrong.

The myopic NRA is ignoring the real problem. When something is broken to the point it is causing deaths, either directly or indirectly, it must be fixed, no matter the cost, be it in financial or in freedom terms.

When a car is found to have a defective accident system, the car company will spend money to fix it, they have to or people will die and the company will go out of business.

When an airplane is found to have a defective system, every plane is pulled out of service and the company is ordered to fix it.

After 9/11 the whole concept of airport security changed to the point we now have no problem taking our shoes off and getting dosed with radiation to feel safe.

Yet instead of taking their shoes off, the NRA says give people more guns.

We have defective gun laws that need to be fixed. As a gun owner, I know the only thing assault rifles and handguns are good for is shooting targets, cans….. and people. You don’t go out dear hunting with an assault rifle.

So here’s an idea: ban the sale of all guns (toy guns too, sorry kids) , with the exception of sales to police agencies, etc., that shoot more than six bullets, no more assault rifles or high capacity clips.

If you can’t hit something using six bullets you don’t deserve to own a gun anyway.

You can only own three guns. The government implements a bullet registry system so a person can only buy a certain amount of bullets per month/year. If you go to a shooting range that does not count against your bullet ration, you use their bullets. Same goes with shells used for shooting clay pigeons.

Ban the sale of all guns and ammunition on the Internet unless you register and follow strict guidelines and background checks.

(Did you know the Mormon Church owns the largest gun sale site on the Internet? It is KSL.com, look under their classified section. )

What is your problem with that NRA?

Every year you have to register your car, pay taxes, renew your insurance, and so forth. Why not your guns and bullets?

Sure this will hurt the gun industry. Given what Wall Street and CalPERS/STERS are doing they have to react anyway, their stock is getting dumped.

The unregulated sale of guns is a problem that needs to be fixed, exactly like we fixed airport security. Something has to give; arming more people is not the solution.

Lastly and most important, Congress and the Senate must act.

They must always be reminded of those who were killed at Sandy Hook, those innocent little kids and the adults who tried to save them, and just say no to the NRA lobby.

It’s the right thing to do.

Dianne Feinstein To Introduce Assault Weapons Ban On First Day 

Lieberman, Democrats want ban on assault weapons

Comments

comments

Powered by Facebook Comments

10 Responses to Ban Assault Weapons and High Capacity Clips

  1. eben pagan accelerate Reply

    April 30, 2013 at 8:46 pm

    wonderful put up, very informative. I wonder why the opposite specialists
    of this sector do not understand this. You should continue your writing.
    I’m sure, you’ve a great readers’ base already!

  2. Mike Scullin Reply

    January 23, 2013 at 12:10 am

    There are so many flaws in your argument that I barely know where to start. I guess I will start at the headline. First of all ” Clips” and Magazines” are two different things and the names are not interchangeable.I will refer to them correctly so as not to cause any confusion. A Glock 17 was designed to carry a 17 round magazine. That would make a 17 round magazine a standard magazine not a hi-capacity magazine. So that means that a hi-capacity magazine is higher than the manufacturer’s standard size. The standard magazine size for an Ar-15 is 20 or 30 rounds. There are laws already in place in California that do not let you purchase or sell or bring in magazines larger than 10 rounds. So that point in California is moot.Israel has armed guards at schools, malls, churches and other high human traffic areas. Are they a third world country? Flying is not a right so of course TSA can employ anti 4th amendment practices like searching you without a search warrant because people are like sheep. (Sheeple).I do not think you understand 2nd amendment rights as a right not given but acknowledged. Your solutions are laughable. Your comparison to what we have to do to be allowed to drive which by the way is a privilege not a right is way off base and besides are there not people driving all over California without insurance or a drivers license or current registration. If you think you only need 6 rounds to defend yourself than you are opposed to the position taken by every gun self defense expert and every law enforcement agency in the United States. I will now discuss your other article in the January 18,2013 Community News. You state that a one-time membership fee for an individual is $11 when in fact it is $1,000. Then you quote a left wing liberal news agencies poll findings. Them like you have an agenda and will purposely provide incorrect information. There are no gun-show loopholes in California and since when did doing something that a state allows equal a loophole. I could go on but I would not want to confuse you with facts and I would not change your mind. I hope some readers see this and see the incorrect information you give out and the fallacy in your plan……http://www.minutemanreview.com/2008/09/clip-vs-magazine-lesson-in-firearm.html……https://membership.nrahq.org/forms/signup.asp

    • OMG Reply

      January 24, 2013 at 8:58 am

      Thanks you for giving readers an education on clips can’t wait to use that at a party conference
      So you are comparing the US to Israel to make you point? What’s next?
      How about London, 36 gun deaths last year. Japan 45, no guns allowed.
      Of course all news outlets are left wing when you do not agree with them.
      So the fee is 1,000 do you think that pay La Pierres 1 million salary?
      You are in the minority the NRA has an idiot running it.
      Gun deaths were WAY down when the assault ban was in place, which was started by the God of Repubs Regan and stopped by idiot bot Bush.
      How do you argue that?
      You are laughable.

      • Mike Scullin Reply

        January 27, 2013 at 9:28 am

        Typical liberal response. Upset when they are proven to be wrong in the facts they use. Regarding the clips versus magazines comparison if you look at Dianne Feinstein’s ban proposal she lists specifics regarding guns. You have to get these right otherwise your law will not stand. If the ban is of hi-capacity clips it will not affect hi-capacity magazines. Just like when they tried to ban “Saturday Night Specials” by that name when there are no guns called “Saturday Night Specials”. When California first banned “Assault Weapons” by product names and not features they had to go back and re-write the law. I only mentioned Israel because the author alluded that having armed guards at certain venues would make us a third world country so I asked him if he thought Israel was a third world country because they do..I only mentioned NRA membership because in a printed opinion he wrote that it was 11 dollars not the 1000 that it actually is. Just like a typical liberal you attacked me by calling me laughable but did not address any of the truth’s that I mentioned .Gun issues in Japan and London have nothing to do with gun issues here. They have no 2nd amendment.

        • OMG Reply

          January 28, 2013 at 11:24 am

          I am not a liberal that is typical of a Republican to assume that. Ok so I was wrong on the 11, I heard that on the radio, just shows you are a 1,000 times more stupid.How about these facts? I am sure you will say liberal media right?

          The Hypocrisy of the NRA

          The NRA is not for the little guy, their main funding comes from all the large manufacturers of assault rifles and guns.
          Never the less after Vice President Joe Biden delivered his suggestions for a series of gun violence prevention measures to the President this week, and after the President voiced those suggestions in his speech Tuesday, true to their hypocrisy, the gun lobby argued that such laws are out of step with the opinions of gun owners.
          This is in the face of new Washington Post-ABC News poll that shows that people who have firearms in their home actually support many of the gun safety measures.
          Here are the top five gun laws that most gun owners would like to see:
          1. Universal background checks. The poll found that a huge majority of gun owners — 86 percent — would like to see every single person who wants to purchase a firearm go through a background check. Currently, the so-called ‘gun show loophole’ allows some purchasers (those who buy used guns and those who buy at gun shows) to forgo a background check, setting up a system where criminals can easily purchase weapons.
          2. Background checks for ammunition purchasing. As the law currently stands, ammunition can be purchased in bulk online with absolutely no background check. This is how mass murderer James Holmes was able to stockpile so much ammunition without anyone noticing. Seventy six percent of gun owners surveyed by the Washington Post want to see this law changed by instituting background checks for buying ammunition.
          3. Ban on extended magazines. Extended magazine clips have been a focus of the recent gun law debate. Such clips, when used in mass killings, prove exceptionally deadly since, paired with an assault weapon, the gunman rarely has to stop and reload. Adam Lanza, the gunman responsible for the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School, used extended clips, as did Holmes. There’s no reason why a clip with more than is necessary to hunt, or for self protection, and 55 percent of gun owners want to see them outlawed.
          4. Gun database. The United States already has a database of those who cannot buy guns — the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, NICS — but has much weaker methods of tracking the guns sold in the United States. Sixty two percent of gun owners like the idea of a database of guns purchases, so that the government has some handle on how many guns are out there. This was one of Biden’s suggestions.
          5. Assault weapons ban. There’s not quite a majority of gun owners who support an assault weapons ban, but at 45 percent popularity, it’s close to tied between those who support and those who oppose. An assault weapons ban would block military-grade weapons, like those used by Lanza and Holmes, from sale on the public market. There’s evidence that such bans reduce the number of firearms deaths.
          The support for each of these measures demonstrates that the gun lobby is out of step with everyday gun owners. NRA representatives insist that Congress won’t pass ammunition clip bans, for example, and say that background checks are “unnecessary” and expensive. But even NRA members support more regulations on guns than the lobby would like to indicate.
          And members of Congress will soon have an opportunity to stand with the gun owners who support these stronger gun laws. Eight bills have already been introduced in the House that deal with these issues, and more are likely to be introduced after Biden presents the findings of his task force to President Obama.
          Remember the kids of Sandy Hook you hypocrites.

  3. Erin Reply

    December 26, 2012 at 11:59 pm

    Why can’t the Anti-gun crowd get it through their thick skulls?! CRIMINALS DON’T CARE ABOUT GUN BANS! That’s why they’re CRIMINALS! Lanza committed 26 brutal murders…do you think he gave a damn that the guns he used were stolen? NO! Do you think he would have reconsidered his actions if the guns he used were on a “banned weapons list”? NO! Gun control only disarms the law-abiding. For the love of God and liberty, use your brain.

  4. fred Reply

    December 24, 2012 at 12:19 am

    Ban Assault Media and High Capacity Reporting

    We have defective speech laws that need to be fixed.

    You can only write three articles. The government implements an article registry system so a person can only buy a certain amount of words per month/year.

    Ban the publication of all articles on the Internet unless you register and follow strict guidelines and background checks.

    What is your problem with that Brian?

    It’s the right thing to do.

    • ADMIN Reply

      December 24, 2012 at 9:42 am

      Wayne La Pierre we presume, what happened? Talk shows do not want to hear you speak of armed guards at schools? You can at least leave you real name Wayne.

      • mark Reply

        January 14, 2013 at 1:25 am

        Obviously…he must be gun nut right…because he doesn’t support new gun restrictions…or because he disagrees with the author and your opinions.

        “Talk shows do not want to hear you speak of armed guards at schools?”

        Of course they don’t just like neither does the current administration even though they want to have a “open discussions about solutions”. Because they really care about discussing anything they have their minds made up and their agenda. While I’m not saying armed guards or guns in school is the answer, I think it’s has a more realistic chance of stopping the massacres the author speaks of than a ban on guns will do. It would be like outlawing bras for women and thinking that they would all be turned in because you made them illegal. ABSURD to outlaw them and ABSURD to think that just by making them against the law they’re just going to disappear.

  5. Stan Klecha Reply

    December 21, 2012 at 3:35 pm

    Excellent article Mr. Hews ..money talks even in
    Congress .. the American people must call or
    e-mail their representatives to pass legistalion ..
    the will of the public must be strong and loud ..
    The gun lobby will fight and pay their respective
    legislators to kill any bill that relates to the
    control of sales of any weapons .. and the will
    of the public must be heard concerning the
    mentally ill and their ability to acquire any
    firearm ..

Leave a Reply

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

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>