Shop More Submit  Join Login
×

More from deviantART



Details

Submitted on
May 3, 2013
Link
Thumb

Stats

Views
1,259
Favourites
4 (who?)
Comments
71
×
Sigh. Wouldn't you know it? One day after I said I was taking a break from politics, and I come across, not one, but two articles that piss me off so much that I have no choice but to rant about them.

You know how anti-gun Democrats claim that stricter gun laws will not lead to gun confiscation? Well California is living proof that they're full of :iconfluttershysqueeplz:!

The state has some of the strictest gun laws in the country, and recently, it's governor signed legislation that will allow law enforcement to confiscate guns from over 20,000 citizens who had bought them legally.

Yes, you read that correctly: California is going to be confiscating legally-owned guns!
California plans to confiscate guns from 20,000 people who bought them legally but have since been disqualified because of criminal or psychiatric problems, boosting the state's relatively tough approach to gun control.

Governor Jerry Brown signed legislation on Wednesday allocating $24m generated by fees taken from gun buyers at the time of purchase to the crackdown, the first in a series of gun control bills following the Sandy Hook massacre.

"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's Bureau of Firearms has identified about 20,000 people who illegally possess about 40,000 handguns and assault weapons, a list which grows by 15 to 20 daily.

The bill, known as SB140, directs $24m from the Dealers' Record of Sale fund, a fee on gun purchases, to the state's Department of Justice.

The money will pay for an extra 36 agents to help clear a backlog using a a database that cross-references a list of gun owners with those disqualified later from owning guns. Budget cuts had slowed the effort.

Of course the government isn't trying to take away our guns--except, of course, THEY TOTALLY :iconfluttershysqueeplz:ING ARE!

Okay. Sure. This legislation is aimed at criminals and psychiatric nutcases who probably shouldn't be owning guns in the first place--just like the PATRIOT ACT is only aimed at terrorists who pose a threat to national security! But it doesn't take much imagination to consider how this can easily be used to confiscate weapons from law-abiding citizens.

And before you get your hopes up that the NRA will rush to our rescue, you may want to sit down for what I'm about to tell you next.

The NRA recently elected a new president, Jim Porter, who claims Obama is a "fake president" and calls the Civil War "the War of Northern Aggression."

So not only does this organization think the best way to prevent school shootings is to transform our schools into maximum security prisons and to ban violent video games, but their new president is a neo-Confederate birther.

Sometimes I wonder if the NRA is really a Democratic front in order to make gun owners look bat:iconfluttershysqueeplz: insane! No other organization does a better job of discrediting responsible gun ownership.

Gun-taking fascists to the left. Gun-toting racists to the right. If this is what the country has come to, we are royally :iconfluttershysqueeplz:!

And with that, I am officially stepping away from politics for a good month. If I have to be exposed to anymore bat:iconfluttershysqueeplz: insanity like this, I'm going to die from an aneurysm from sheer stupidity.

IMMA GONNA GO INSANE!
Add a Comment:
 
:iconcorvuscorax92:
CorvusCorax92 Featured By Owner May 4, 2013  Hobbyist Digital Artist
As a side note on Porter, in his defense, the so-called Civil War really was a war of northern aggression; secession is the essence of liberty, right down to individual, and the USA disregarded it (of course) to crush the CSA. I don't support slavery by any means under any condition, but no other country needed a massive aggressive war to abolish it.

If you have no freedom of exit, what liberty do you really have? Secession is a necessary--but not sufficient--condition of liberty.
Reply
:iconblamethe1st:
BlameThe1st Featured By Owner May 7, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
I somewhat understand that, but it didn't help that the South supported slavery.
Reply
:iconcorvuscorax92:
CorvusCorax92 Featured By Owner May 11, 2013  Hobbyist Digital Artist
No, of course. I'm not defending slavery; but keep in mind, there were legal slaves held in the US at the time as well, and for a few years afterward, their bondage protected by grandfather clauses. The anti-slavery crusade began as a political ploy to keep Britain and France from siding with the CSA (from which they received cotton at agreeable prices, compared to the protectionist policies the US establishment wanted). Lincoln made it clear what the slavery issue meant to him: "My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery."
Reply
:iconblamethe1st:
BlameThe1st Featured By Owner May 23, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
Funny how most historians overlook that. So much for honest Abe.
Reply
:iconcorvuscorax92:
CorvusCorax92 Featured By Owner May 23, 2013  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Yep. The worst presidents are lionized and glorified, while the best are marginalized and smeared. Of course, the best out of a group of thugs are still thugs, but those least thuggish barely get a word of mention.
Reply
:iconblamethe1st:
BlameThe1st Featured By Owner Jun 4, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
At this point, I don't consider most presidents to be good. The closest one I can think of is Calvin Coolidge, and like you said, he's demonized.
Reply
:iconcorvuscorax92:
CorvusCorax92 Featured By Owner Jun 9, 2013  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Or Warren Harding, and when did we ever hear about him in school? I just watched this video about the way his administration handled the Forgotten Depression of 1920-1921--that is, by not handling it, and letting the market correct itself: [link] Interesting stuff.
Reply
:iconblamethe1st:
BlameThe1st Featured By Owner Jun 10, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
Funny how that is. It's like history is written by the winners.
Reply
(1 Reply)
:icondrybonesreborn:
DryBonesReborn Featured By Owner May 4, 2013  Hobbyist Digital Artist
"Christianity is a psychiatric disorder" (Not really, but the DSMV can be changed). Thus, all guns from Christians will be gone. I can see where that can lead.
Reply
:iconblamethe1st:
BlameThe1st Featured By Owner May 4, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
Which is why I shudder to think what would happen if someone like Dawkins or Harris took political power.
Reply
Add a Comment: