If Having More Gun Laws Works, Why Do We Hear of So Much Gun Crime in California??

L

LanceOregon

Moderator
California has so many gun laws and regulations. Yet, one continues to hear about the most brazen of gun crimes there. If having more gun laws does have a positive effect on gun violence, then why do we continue to hear about so much gun violence there?

Just today, police in Bay City, CA responded to a report of man hiding in ambush among some bushes near an ATM machine. When an officer confronted the man, the man attempted to pull a loaded AK-47 from out of his pants!!!

Now, it is illegal to own AK-47's in California. Yet, this man had one concealed inside his pants!! As the suspect struggled to get his AK out of his pants, the officer repeatedly ordered the man to drop his weapon. However, he instead continue to try to extract the weapon from his trousers.

After the man continued to disobey the officer's orders, the officer was forced to open fire several times. The suspect died at the scene.

It just seems to me that if gun control really worked that well in controlling criminals, that incidents like this should not be possible in California. Why isn't California safer than other states??

Here is a news story about this particular incident:

http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_10357117

.
 
LOL, what about the UK, where gun crime and violent crime in general has increased since they passed gun control laws so strict they make California look like Texas?

Know what the next step has been in the UK? Knife control! There are now campaigns to ban various types of knives because knife crime has gone up so much now that guns are harder to get. Of course, knives are a lot harder to regulate since it's really easy to make a simple improvised shiv. What's next? Cricket bats, glass bottles, forks?

EDIT: Some quick Google searches reveal that, at points in the past, the UK has actually tried to ban cricket bats! Can't tell if they've tried to ban glass bottles but at least some local communities have tried, as far as I can tell.

The upside of banning forks would not only be a reduction in fork-related crime, but it would also reduce obesity. :D
 
Stanley, brand of choice by ATM robbers

stanley-hammer-51-169.jpg
 
Now what's the point of having a hammer like that? It's only to intimidate and devastate. NO reasonable carpenter would need something like that hammer. It will only be used to obliterate our youth. Nails can be driven with more effective devices these days.

---Left-Wing Crazed "Reverend" discussing recent hammer trends
:D:D:D
 
What's after cricket bats, forks and hammers? Boards with nails in them?

When will people learn that cause of crime is poverty and disparity of wealth,
not guns, knives, forks, bats, hammers and boards with nails in them?
 
stanley-hammer-51-169.jpg


Let's categorize that hammer and other hammers like it as "Assault Hammers",
and let's ban their use by civilians.
 
Let's categorize that hammer and other hammers like it as "Assault Hammers",
and let's ban their use by civilians.
Click to expand...

Just as a start! We shall then begin a public relations campaign to suggest that it is "bad taste" for even LE to use such a thing. Begin a worldwide "assault hammer" moratorium. Add their mere presence in a room to the Geneva Convention under "Torture Devices". Tax the day lights out of the companies that make them, ostensibly to fund emergency rooms, then reallocate the money to the home states of several senators!
 
Tried to pull the AK out of his pants???

How big are his pants????

Some of us have hard times hiding handguns, but this dude got a whole AK in his pants.....
 
Let's see. Last year there were 68 murders in San Diego (higest in recent record, up 33%). If we compare that figure to cities of similar size, say, Dallas and San Antonio, both, of course, in Texas, we see that Dallas had 187 murders and San Antonio had 119. Looks to me as if the foundational premise of "so much gun crime in California" is more than slightly flawed! :)

In fact, if you look at all crimes of violence you will see that Alaska, Delaware, Florida, Louisiana, Maryland, Nevada, New Mexico, South Carolina, Tennessee, and, of course, the most dangerous place on earth, with more deaths per hundred thousand than Iraq is, you guessed it, Washington D.C., all have higher incidence of crimes of violence than relatively quiet and safe California. :)
 
Old Timer said:
Let's see. Last year there were 68 murders in San Diego (higest in recent record, up 33%). If we compare that figure to cities of similar size, say, Dallas and San Antonio, both, of course, in Texas, we see that Dallas had 187 murders and San Antonio had 119. Looks to me as if the foundational premise of "so much gun crime in California" is more than slightly flawed!
Click to expand...

Do a real comparison, such as Oakland with Dallas or South Central LA with Houston :rolleyes:
 
Lance Oregon posted:
California has so many gun laws and regulations. Yet, one continues to hear about the most brazen of gun crimes there. If having more gun laws does have a positive effect on gun violence, then why do we continue to hear about so much gun violence there?
Click to expand...

Real answer: Criminals don't obey laws or regulations, pure and simple.

Pro gun control answer: Because other states have such lax laws, criminals easily travel to other states, buy firearms, and bring them back to California illegally. If all the other states were as tough as California, we would have very little gun crime in the US. :rolleyes:
 
Oakland drove out all firearms years ago

I don't think they actually tried to ban them like preparation H(Sorry-Proposition H) in SF. Oakland did start to tax all gun shops within the city limits until they could no longer afford to remain open. To this day you cannot find guns for retail sale in that town.
With the economy gone south there are something like 40 armed robberies per day in the bay area. Oakland and San Francisco lead the pack, but I'm certain Richmond and a few other firearms hating communities contribute their share.
Crime is spiking up and gun ownership will be blamed. I remember a short time ago when crime was trending down and we all were happy as clams wanting it to be becasue of increased gun ownership. Does gun ownship really affect crime rates that much? Seems to me it's the "economy stupid".
 
Seems to me it's the "economy stupid".
Click to expand...

Only on the surface. Bad circumstances only make people do bad things if their moral code allows for it. MANY people have been broke, homeless, foreclosed on, had cars repossessed, lost jobs and lived in squalor - all while not committing a single crime.
 
If Having More Gun Laws Works, Why Do We Hear of So Much Gun Crime in California??
Click to expand...

I wish I could just agree with you plain and simple, but I can't. There are just way too many factors and variables to be considered.

If you look, you could find plenty of evidence to support both sides. Also, whether or not more gun control works to reduce violence may vary from place to place. It's just far too complex to easily come up with an answer.

Me personally, I support reasonable gun laws (machine guns are probably best out of the hands of the public), but I'd rather be able to shoot (back) when the time arises than rely on whether some dude is obeying the gun control laws.
 
Stanley, brand of choice by ATM robbers

stanley-hammer-51-169.jpg

__________________
Click to expand...

But can that hammer be effectively concealed and drawn from inside your pants?

The AK-47 proved to be rather difficult for the suspect in this case to get out of his pants.

There would be no reason to ban hammers that could not be concealed, no??

big_hammer.jpg

.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top