Front Page  »  

Love letter to the NRA

April 5, 2013

Pete EvansOPINION By PETE EVANS

Recently the United Nations, those black booted thugs the neo cons hate, passed an arms control treaty (opposed by the National Rifle Association and its selfish allies) in an attempt to manage the obscene weapons traffic over international borders. This huge business has brought unimaginable terror, misery and death to countless millions of people. We have a similar situation here at home to contend with.

For 50 years I’ve watched the gun lobby, led by the NRA, undermine Congressional legislation by frantic lobbying in order to make money from the fear it foments. I have watched in horror as first our defenseless people, including lots of children, are murdered by misdirected cowards and have then seen the merciless and fallacious cowardly NRA evade all responsibility and actually blame the sane minds in government and society of attempting to subvert the constitution.

Guns are everywhere. Many guns and bullets are not regulated and much of the feeble regulation in existence is not effective or enforced. “Until 2006, the president had the power to install a director of the firearms bureau without Congressional approval. But under pressure from gun lobbyists, Congress changed the law that year to require Senate confirmation. Since then, the Senate has failed to confirm any nominee by either President Bush or Mr. Obama as senators who support gun rights have used their powers to delay nomination votes; Mr. Jones is the bureau’s fifth acting director since 2006.” This has led to disorganized regulation and crippled law enforcement.

We all know which party is primarily responsible for reducing or eliminating any safety regulation in this country; they are the darlings of the gun lobby. All the biggest (in fact almost all) donations went to right wing republicans like Bachmann and Boner, though plenty of Dems have been stampeded by the virulent NRA as well.

There is only one exact similarity at all the gun crimes, suicides and accidents in this country or any other. Guns. Only guns. Often the gun is a killing machine such as auto loader long gun or hand gun with large magazine. Sometimes the killer is crazed (whatever that means), sometimes crazy (whatever that means), sometimes just frustrated (like the fruitcake that threatened to shoot anyone who came for his guns (his license to carry was promptly revoked)), sometimes the shooter is just emotionally distraught and the opportunity for disaster was nearby in the form of a gun.

We have all heard the tired old evasions from the NRA and it’s minions-“guns don’t kill, people do.” “Only the mentally ill and criminals kill people.”  “The second Amendment is sacred and gives us the right to have any armaments we want.”

What a load of bull. The liars that spew that line of junk are counting on the public to be dupes, and idiots. I challenge any reader: where would you cut off the weapons that civilians should be able to have? .22 single shot rifle, .303 Enfield deer rifle, BAR (Browning Automatic Rifle), bushmaster (semi automatic assault rifle with large magazine), 50 cal machine gun, RPG (rifle propelled grenade launcher- great for bringing down planes), bazooka, small anti tank gun, stinger missile, small helicopter gunship (with a lovely mini/gun of course), F-16 Fighter plane, light destroyer for your bathtub pleasure, aircraft carrier, nuclear sub- what? Where do you cut off the debate on our frantic right to have (thereby lose to theft by stranger or relative) killing machines without any training, license or sense? Wait, I forgot to offer Sherman tanks or Bradley fighting machines. Did I mention a small tactical nuke to take care of that nuisance liberal down the street? How about one of those for the little lady for Xmas? So far I have not heard of anyone on the crazy side who has ever been able, or willing, to answer that simple question, they just want their guns!!!

I think the little people, with perhaps a small appendage they hope to enhance by clinging to a large gun, are just too greedy to listen to any sensible response to a society gone nuts with violence and deadly weapons. All I ever hear is ‘me, me, me’ from the gun nuts when the subject of reasonable gun control is discussed. What a bunch of babies, can’t see beyond their crummy little shortsighted horizons.

What about Gabby Giffords and the others shot to pieces in Tucson? What about all the school kids shot in all those attacks from Columbine to Newtown? The moviegoers in Colorado? What about all the people standing in line in the post offices — former historical favorite place to murder a bunch of innocents? Those who would cling to their guns with ‘their cold, dead hands’ have no conscience; they are sociopaths who have no remorse, shame or guilt.

Like so many other public debates truth has become a stranger, this has degenerated to a simple power struggle between good and evil. I can only hope that for once, good may triumph. We must discover a way to get rid of the avalanche of guns and the idiotic attitudes that have clouded our judgment.

I would like to get in a comment about our sheriff, who has recently licked the ground our local tea party fanatics walk on by pledging to not enforce any federal gun control plan. Good work, top cop! Violate your oath, become a crook in one foolish step, endanger your deputies. It has been my impression that most responsible law enforcement historically favors getting the machine guns and armor piecing ammo) off the streets so that a few more cops will survive any altercations with angry civilians.

“There is no reason that a peaceful society based on the rule of law needs its citizenry armed with 30-round [ammunition] magazines,” states Los Angeles Police Chief Charlie Beck during a March 2, 2011 news conference.” Such magazines transform a gun “into a weapon of mass death rather than a home protection-type device,” Beck notes.) July 13, 2009—After a birthday party shootout involving a semiautomatic AK-47 in which two young people were killed and 10 wounded, Miami Police Chief John Timoney tells ABC News, “For me it’s a no-brainer. These are weapons of war. Under no circumstance do they belong in the cities of America. Now police officers are facing—and citizens are facing—these assault weapons. If we don’t stop it now, what’s it going to look like 10 years from now? Rambo becomes reality.”

I’m so glad I voted for an honest sheriff candidate, a real man, Joe Cortez.

Recently that solidly American terrorist organization, the NRA, suggested in their latest evasion of the slightest responsibility in the carnage that teachers should be trained by the NRA to carry and operate weapons (New rep). What a joke, most teachers do not want that responsibility; they are teachers, not killers. But it led me to dream up a realistic compromise in this dysfunctional debate with mental midgets. What if the NRA (in league with the gummint) trained and licensed every gun owner in the land to safely own, protect and discharge a gun in an attempt to make sure all were mentally competent and emotionally secure enough to actually handle the great responsibility? Combine that with severe penalties for anyone in possession of a gun without said license. What about that, mister hot shot, gun-toting fire breathing gun lobby? Your goods, weapons and bullets, cost us billions each year, while you make billions in profits. Its time for you to get off the corporate welfare line and start paying your way. You are just another fat cat corporate thief feeding at the public trough- pay your way or get out of the way.

The NRA is even against background checks to make sure the absolute fruitcakes/criminals don’t get guns. It opposes ANY attempt to reduce the carnage; it is adamantly against any reform of our nightmare system. It opposes any research into the ramifications of all the unregulated guns in society. The NRA should be outlawed, for it is an outlaw organization. Many NRA members are law abiding, sensible and caring citizens. Many are not. The former should quit that outlaw group and form another with a heart.

I know many respondents will try to kick me into the middle of next week. I urge the sane readers to follow the lack of logic, lack of empathy for victims, and general lunacy of the landslide of vitriol that will spew forth from others. Some will say this message is too angry, too confrontational. Tell that to the parents, children, sisters, brothers and friends of those shot up by guns in our schools, theaters, homes, office buildings and streets. Someone out there come up with answers; I did, where’s yours?


Loading...
Subjects:     
Related:


328 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

One final question, Mr. Evans:


What happens if the latest round of proposed gun control laws pass, and like those that came before them do absolutely nothing to reduce gun-related crime? History has showed time and time again that gun control does not work.


People such as yourself will call for yet another round of gun control, right? What sort of guns would you choose to prohibit? Would you start national gun confiscations or would you wait for another round of gun control even further out in the future?


Attempts at gun control have been proven not to work — both in the USA and in other countries. So where do people like you admit that enough is enough? Do you continue to push for gun control until all firearms have been prohibited and confiscated except for the large number hidden (and used) by criminals?


0

Can you cite your sources for your assertion that gun control doesn’t work? This is not what I have read.


I don’t think many people would support another round of gun control past this one.


Why do you leap to say that all guns will be prohibited except those in the hands of criminals?


On the other hand, and sounding just as frantic, I could say, “Where will you gun-lovers stop? When you have a machine gun armed tank in your front yard? Will that be enough”


0

No, this time you first. You tell use where you have read that gun control works. I want stats not more hyperbole, please. I have my back-up, do you?


As far as espousing the belief that attempts at gun control will magically cease if this round is approved and fails to make things safer, I would have to say that you’re either galactically ignorant or you are lying on purpose.


In years past I thought that anti-Second Amendment people like you were simply desperate to show that they were doing something about the problem. While I still think that’s largely true I now believe more and more that total gun confiscation is now the ultimate goal.


Why? Because Schumer’s “universal background check” bill makes no mention of adhering to the Firearm Owners’ Protection Act of 1986. That is stunning to me! The absence of that language not only puts it in jeopardy of not being passed in the senate, it also tells me that Schumer and Co. want to create a national gun registry as a prelude to total gun confiscation.


0

The NRA could show that it cares about the problem far more effectively than anything done so far if it hadn’t been blocking funds for gun research all these years. Maybe there is no solution, but how would we know without research? You have to wonder what they were afraid to find out.


I do not believe total gun confiscation is the goal at all! Nor should it be, that is ridiculous.


Read this:


http://mediamatters.org/blog/2013/03/20/national-rifle-associations-hill-op-ed-promotes/193148


0

If you and yours get your way, and I pray that you don’t, I hope I’m chained behind you in line to the gas chambers because I want to say over and over again; “we told you so”.


0

+1 for one of the most subtle Nazi references ever ….


0

Who are you expecting to put you in that gas chamber shelworth?


0

I remember when they took Popeye off the airwaves because he was so violent and he was always beating up Brutus. Then they took the Roadrunner off the air because the coyote was always trying to hurt him. We watched those cartoons every chance we got when we were children and the majority of us turned out okay. Now our children watch violence on televisionand at the movies and the games they are glued to are the most violent games in history yet there is no problem with that. The games they play on XBOX require constant nonstop killing in order to get to the next level. Kids spend hours and hours playing these games. There are even documented cases of kids collapsing from dehydration and other physical ailments from marathon sessions playing these games. Is it any wonder a kid would take a real gun or a real arsonal and go out and try to emulate what he saw in his video games.

The makers of these violent games and movies will tell us they have no effect on people but think about this. Remember when karate movies and ninja were all the rage? What kid didn’t come out of the theater kicking and swinging and acting like a karate exper?. Kids were even dressing up as ninjas just like in the movies. How many kids had to have a Light Saber after watching star wars? Somebody made millions off this stuff. It seems like the video game industry has just taken it to the next level and nobody cares about that.Somebody needs to come to their senses and realize this is not about owning guns of any type. This as about the garbage we are allowing to be instilled in our childrens minds.


0

yep, no June & Ward, no Ozzie and Harriet, no Father Knows best. we’re cooked


0

That is part of the problem for sure Tacoma641. But unemployment, lower wages and overcrowding has a part to play too. Some parents are kept away from their kids far too long by holding two and three jobs just to live.


And the lack of mental health funding. I recall when mental health care was gutted. I did see a difference in the streets of LA when that happened. Look at the sad case of the woman who was murdered by her son right here in SLO? Where did she have to go to get mental help for him?


You can support the demise of violent games by not buying them, right? You can support care for the mentally ill by voting the monies to pay for help.


But it seems like all the money lives in the coffers of video games manufacturers and the weapons industry. How does it get there? Making pawns of us comes to mind….


0

Gun rights ARE civil rights.


Why is Mr. Evans so anti civil rights?


Don’t tread on my civil rights; I don’t tread on yours.


choprzrul


0

Mr. Evans;


You suggest that I am not addressing your “main issue.” Well here goes.


The desire to make modern sporting rifles (I refuse to call them “assault weapons”) illegal based on nothing more than cosmetic features is both ignorant and wrong. terribly wrong. Go Google a “Ruger Mini-14” which would not be banned based on Feinstein’s wet dream. This firearm has the exact same firepower as an AR-15. The differences are cosmetic yet she wants to ban one and not the other. There are many, many such examples.


Her bill also makes absolutely no mention of semi-automatic handguns, yet they are used far more often to murder people in the USA than are modern sporting rifles.


If your intent is to ban semi-automatic firearms then I say “go for it!” Your effort had better include ALL semi-auto firearms, both long guns and handguns. You won’t be successful in your attempt and it wouldn’t make any difference if you were (Americans are not about to turn in their once legal firearms) but at least your attempt would be honest.


It would be honest and not a lie based upon cosmetic features, built upon the graves of those massacred at Sandy Hook Elementary School.


0

Mr. Evans;


I am also deeply against the notion of a so-called “universal background check” (which we already have in CA) for a very specific reason — because it WILL lead to a creation of a national firearms ownership registry. History has shown time and time again that such registries are a prelude to eventual gun confiscation by the gov’t.


When most Americans buy guns today they must undergo a background check via the National Instant Criminal Background Check System administered by the FBI. I am OK with that, even with the increased cost and effort. The results of the background checks cannot be retained by the FBI per federal law (see “Firearm Owners’ Protection Act”.) They are retained at the dealership level. Most information is purged within 24 hours and all must be purged within 90 days by the FBI. That’s the federal law. You knew that, right?


The current proposed senate bill for “universal background checks” makes absolutely no mention of adhering to the Firearm Owners’ Protection Act. Are were you aware of that? That’s a huge red flag! If it did, I could support it, but omitting that from the current bill seems gravely dangerous to me. The exclusion of such language in this bill tells me that a national firearms registry and firearms registration are part of the real intent of this bill.


For if that were not the intent, why would the authors of the bill omit such important language? Including the language would certainly give their bill a far better chance of ultimately being approved.


0

SanLouis, you say, “History has shown time and time again that such registries are a prelude to eventual gun confiscation by the gov’t.”


Can you list for us which governments and if they were democracies like ours?


Thank you.


0

“…if they were democracies like ours?” Are you being facetious? The USA by definition is not a democracy. It’s a constitutional republic. By practice it’s edging ever closer to a dictatorship.


Here are a few countries that come to with regard to gun registries and eventual gun confiscation. I am sure you could find more by simply Googling the matter:


* California (not a country but certainly germane to this discussion.)


* Canada


* United Kingdom


* New Zealand


* Australia


0

You make a lot of good points but the main issue is not addressed, nor has anyone else. Here arc some current pics of the AR 15, http://www.google.com/search?q=AR15+rifle&hl=en&client=safari&rls=en&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=qjdfUfzFDePHiwLnoIDIDA&ved=0CD0QsAQ&biw=1110&bih=664. Looks like a deadly weapon to me, not necessary for home defense. I especially like the belt magazine (and I suppose altered weapon to full automatic).


A lot of the writers here think I am some whiney liberal who never got his hands dirty and knows nothing of guns. I used to shoot in Reservoir Canyon, and lots on the grade. I have many of the same memories you do of days long gone by, when we were a nation of thoughtful and decent people. Much of that has changed. I don’t like that, I like the old days you speak of. But we seem to be angrier, more dangerous and more wigged out. It is obvious that many in our society cannot handle the great responsibility of having access to guns.

Read my article again, I quote police chiefs from some of our largest cities who decry the availability of semi auto rifles with large capacity magazines. I challenged anyone to offer any solution. I mentioned how the NRA (a very small but powerful organization) has focused its animosity on many good people to maintain an absolute death grip on our rights to have any weapons, no matter who we are. No one has answered my challenge about just what weapons ought to be outlawed-no answers. It is as I said it would be, just a bunch of whining about their ‘rights’ to have any guns, unfettered by any regulation or common sense.

Follow the money, and the fear. Big money in guns, stampede the public with fears of the jack booted government thugs taking over (reminds me of Bull Conner in Birmingham cautioning the whites to watch out for the blacks coming for their women).

People more knowledgeable than us in State Legislatures are discussing and passing watered down laws to limit the carnage, based on modern life. I tell you again, I wish we could go back to those days you speak of but we have somehow progressed negatively in our march towards maturity.


When it became apparent we were losing many people to drunk drivers some brave souls took that on and after many years of being ridiculed it is now accepted that drinking and driving is not cool, and there are severe consequences. The civil rights struggle was similar, the fight for women’s right to vote (really, that was ever not allowed? In this country?…) was similar. We must reform our outlaw gunfighter mentality based on modern thinking.


And no, we will not have a quick and easy solution, but we must do something and all we can. The president and our Senator did not start any panic, you can thank the NRA for that. When we began to consider regulating drinking and driving did the liquor industry encourage everyone to go out and buy booze, drink it and drive? Not quite. There is no one out there like the dear NRA who told everyone to buy, buy, buy guns.


0

You suggest “But we seem to be angrier, more dangerous and more wigged out” today. There might indeed be more angry, dangerous and wigged-out people in today’s society — I wouldn’t argue with that. But the solution is to deal constructively and seriously with these problematic people and not to impinge upon the Second Amendment rights of non-problematic people (particularly when it impacts their ability to defend their families and themselves.)


In very practical terms unless their problems are dealt with, angry, dangerous and wigged-out people will always be able to get guns (any guns!) in the USA. Heap-on more inane gun control laws and you might well make it more difficult or impossible for the law-abiding to procure guns, but it will have absolutely no impact to criminals or would-be criminals.


0

Your attempted analogy of deaths due to drunken drivers and guns absolutely fails.


When the gov’t finally decided to deal with drunken drivers they did the right thing — they went after the drunken drivers! Being convicted of a DUI today is a horribly expensive (good!) experience that is very much looked down upon by society (good!) The gov’t did not make vehicles more difficult to obtain. They did not re-start prohibition. They did not heap additional requirements/fees on the purchase of a new vehicle. They did no crucify those who legally sold vehicles or alcohol.


You want to reduce gun crime? One way is to become absolutely brutal (and I mean BRUTAL) with those who use a firearm within the context of a criminal activity. That’s the ONLY thing that criminals will understand — at least those who are sane…


0

Can you explain the damage to us and second amendment “right taking” of having to register our cars for us please?


0

Pardon me?


Owning and operating a car is a privilege in the USA. It’s not constitutionally protected as it the right to keep and bear arms.


0

It’s ok, Lynette almost always misses the point of anything. Bitterness and self-loathing seem to be the MO for this poster.


0

1. You quote only the police chiefs who support your position.

2. Those killed by large capacity magazines are dwarfed compared to normal capacity magazines.

3. Calling for gun owners to have gun insurance is not common sense. Sounds like a registry?

4. Alcohol nor vehicles including vehicle ‘accessories’ were banned after people died from from drunk driving.

5. You can still drink and drive if you choose too. ( I find the ‘severe consequences’ statement interesting. Maybe we can apply that to those who violate existing gun laws? Nope, we choose to prosecute less than 1%)

6. Womens suffrage still allows testosterone toxic males to still vote.


What you propose is not the same. I’m sorry, its not the NRA that made me worry. Its the outright rhetoric I hear from you and the media.


0

It’s rather sad that Mr. Peter Evans relies on hyperbole and emotion rather than the facts.


We have had gun control here in CA since 1989 (beginning with Roberti-Roos). There is absolutely no evidence that it has led to a decrease in gun-related crime. None. Did you know that, Mr. Evans?


We had a federal “assault weapons ban” from 1994-2004. After it sun-setted the US Department of Justice concluded in a formal report that no decrease in crime could be attributed to the decade-long ban. None. Did you know that, Mr. Evans?


In 2010 there were 6,009 gun-related murders involving handguns and 358 murders involving rifles in the USA. Oddly enough it’s rifles and not handguns that remain the focus of people like Mr. Evans. Why? because Mr. Evans wants to feel better about himself by giving the impression that he is “doing something.” Handguns aren’t about to be banned but there is a slight hope amongst people like Mr. Evans that some modern sporting rifles could be banned if enough voters are lied to.


0

Gee, some of your comments make sense and then you shoot yourself in the foot in other posts. Asking me inane questions like “did you know that?” don’t make your previous statements true.

Of course you are ignoring the famous issue in Australia (they have a wild west mentality like we do, full of bravado and drunken boasting). They had numerous multiple murders with assault weapons and then had the sense to ban them- not one mass murder since in over ten years.

I am not focussing only on assault rifles but the reality of the power game with the NRA and their selfish allies is whatever we do, and get, will be watered down.

The reason I didn’t spend more time on statistics and back up ‘facts’ was that the simple minded whining from the gun nuts will not respect any of that so it is a waste of time. Like I said, this is a simple power struggle between good and evil, I imagine the result will be some sort of childish compromise that any sane 10 year old would scoff at- but that is the state of the current debate.

Along with climate change deniers, those who wage the war on women (their special health care needs and other issues of importance), those who can’t stand having a ‘darkie’ in the white house, those who refuse to rationally discuss change- the ‘guns at any cost’ crowd will not consider any modification of current policies to protect our children and others from the wanton slaughter. They blame the ‘crazies’, who are they?

I do agree that more ‘enhancements’ in using a gun in a crime could help.


0

Thanks for your post Pete! I sadly see how “watered down” is the best we will get.


It’s interesting that the NRA suggests the solution to gun violence in schools should be putting armed guards there and then fail to suggest putting mental health professionals in schools to treat the crazies before they become killers. No incentives for the gun lobby for that I guess…..


Hey! Shrinks should be lobbying to put a mental health professional in every school or would there be an ethical problem with that……


No ethics problems if you are trying to sell a product and a mindset though….


0

Do you really think you can sell this? There are MANY things that can be done to prevent gun-related violence in schools. One of the few that will have an IMMEDIATE impact is increasing armed security.


When the NRA presented their School Shield program to county the biased popular media attacked the NRA like a pack of rabid dogs. They didn’t even stop to think how many good schools already have the sort of armed security the NRA was speaking of. How Bill Clinton pushed for such security and was unable to get it funded.


Your false armed security at the cost of “mental health professional” construct is pure crap. The NRA never said one had to come at the expense of the other. You need to either start thinking or you need to stop lying. Sorry but no sale.


0

OF course you are wrong about what the NRA suggested for school safety. They emphasized training teachers and administrators and giving them conceal carry, and did not support adding armed guards.


Then again, if it does not align with your agenda, just lie. I’m sure no one will notice you at all.


0

Dear Pete Evans:


You’re simply wrong. You want to give the appearance that you care, that you are “doing something.” Rather than actually deal with the terribly difficult problems of today’s society, you’re seeking an easy, quick fix — you’re blaming guns and the NRA and not criminals. Utterly ludicrous.


Please consider an updated version of my comparison between SLO today and SLO 50 years ago with regard to firearms:


[B]San Luis Obispo in 1963 (50 years ago:)[/B]


* Shooting range in basement of SLO City Hall. (Yes, really.)


* Shooting range in basement of SLO Junior High School Library. (Yes, really.)


* Shooting range on Cal Poly Campus (Yes, really.)


* Firearms safety training and hunter safety was widely taught in schools, 4H, Cub/Boy Scouts, Indian Guides, etc. SLO had at least one rifle club for kids sponsored by a national fraternal organization. Cal Poly had a competitive rifle team. If you were fortunate, your junior high biology teacher would bring a collection of long arms to school on Fridays that you and your friends would droll over during your hunter safety mini-course.


* Handguns, rifles, shotguns and ammo could be purchased through the mail with no background checks, registration or waiting periods.


* Colt introduced the AR-15 modern sporting rifle for sale to the public in 1963. It would take 30+ years for them to become a “problem” in some peoples’ eyes.


* Firearms were widely available at hardware stores (like Forden’s), drugstores (like Rexall), auto parts stores (like Western Auto), some gas stations, department stores (Sears, Monkey Wards, et. al.) One paid for their new firearm and took it home on the spot. There was no such thing as a “Federally Licensed Firearms Dealer.”


* Want to take your kids shooting? If you didn’t own a gun you asked your next door neighbor and they would hand a .22 rifle over the fence along with a half box of ammo. You would then go shooting (at no cost) at Reservoir Canyon or later, at the top of the Cuesta Grade. When you returned the gun it would be with a full box of ammo as a small thanks.


* Need .22 ammo on a Sunday when Ed’s or Borah’s was closed? No problem — Don at Uptown Liquor always had a stock of .22 ammo for locals who knew to ask.


* Many homes proudly displayed firearms (many were historic family heirlooms) in fine gun cases located in their living rooms or dens. A family’s firearms and their histories were important topics of conversation


* We never heard much about shootings/massacres. Guns were not a political issue, particularly out West here in CA.


[B]San Luis Obispo in 2013:[/B]


* There is no firearms safety training in local schools even though the NRA makes its Eddy Eagle Gun Safety Program available to schools at not cost. Rather than endeavor to train students to UNDERSTAND and RESPECT firearms, they are indoctrinated to FEAR and HATE them — and the law-abiding people who legally own and shoot them.


* Politicos vilify modern sporting rifles like the AR15 [(A)rmalite (R)ifle Model 15] by referring to them as “assault weapons” (a term originally coined by the Nazis in 1944 for the StG 44 fully automatic machine gun.) The drive to misrepresent semi-automatic modern sporting rifles as fully automatic machine guns or “assault weapons” is in full force today.


* Want to buy a gun from a local shop? Be prepared to pay a $25.00 Dealer’s Record of Sale (DROS) fee. If you want to buy a handgun you’ll also first need to obtain a Handgun Safety Certificate (HSC) which requires passing a test and paying another $25.00. In most cases you’ll also need a gun lock with a sales receipt less than 6 months old (don’t ask.) Further, you can only purchase one handgun a month — even if you run into a great deal or what to purchase someone’s firearms collection.


* Want to purchase a firearm from a relative, friend or neighbor? That’s be a $10.00 transfer fee (many shops try to charge more even though it is illegal to do so) plus the $25.00 DROS and $25.00 HSC fees (it it’s a handgun) plus tax even if it’s an old single shot .22 rifle that was originally purchased in downtown SLO in 1973 for $18.99.


* Want to buy a gun from out of the area? Maybe your aunt wants to ship you your late favorite uncle’s shotgun? That would require it to be shipped to a local licensed firearms dealer through a licensed dealer where your aunt lives. Both are free to charge you as much as they want (typically $50-150.00/gun) if they agree to send/receive one at all. They’ll also be the standard $25.00 DROS fee of course, the $25.00 HSC fee (if it’s a handgun.) So $125-325.00 in fees alone to take possession of a shotgun inherited from a favorite uncle.


* Want to borrow a gun from a friend or neighbor? Better check the laws to make certain you aren’t breaking one of them that could well send you to jail.


* Want to go shooting today in SLO? Unless you’re up for a long drive you’ll have to go to a shooting range that charges a fee. Reservoir Canyon and Cuesta Grade have long been closed to weekend plinkers.


* Want to purchase some .22 ammo? Good luck! Nut-jobs like Barack Obama and Dianne Feinstein have triggered panic buying with their antics. There’s none to be had!


* If you own guns today you keep them hidden and you keep quiet about them unless you are around other pro-Second Amendment individuals.


* We hear a lot about shootings/massacres. Gun are now a hot political issue.


WHAT CHANGED in 50 years!?! Hint: It was neither the guns nor access to them. In a word it was “politics.” More directly, it’s stultified people like you, Mr. Pete Evans who really have no idea what they are talking about. People seeking a quick and easy solution to a very difficult problem. People who want to appear as if they are doing something.


0

I remember one Saturday morning many years ago we were going to go .22 plinking. I needed to get a new rifle, so we went to the Coast to Coast store in University Plaza. I think I was 18. In a matter of minutes, I left there with a new Marlin .22 and a brick of ammo and enjoyed the rest of the day. Still have that rifle, and no it will never be registered!

We live now in a strange society led by weak idiots.


0

Let’s see, if you tried that today you could go to a place like Big 5 Sporting Goods or maybe Dick’s Sporting Goods (few hardware stores sell firearms any longer.)


Assuming the store had a .22 rifle in stock (most have been sold out for a couple of months at the time of this writing) you could buy the rifle, do your NICS background check and pay your $25.00 Dealer Record of Sale (DROS) fee (thus adding about 15-20% to the purchase price of the rifle) and watch as your new rifle was secured at the store for its 10 day waiting period.


(Note: profits from charging the DROS fee are then used by the state to fund even more gun control.)


That 10 day waiting period is mandatory even if you already own plenty of firearms. The 10 days will also give you some time to hunt down some .22 ammo as most stores have been out of stock for the last couple of months.


When you go to pick-up your rifle in 10 days you’ll need either a gun lock (purchased within the past 6 months — keep your receipt — no, the free ones from the police do not “count”) or have the make and model number of your gun safe at hand.


Yeah, things are far safer today…not!


0

You know what else has changed in 50 years? Population density and poverty levels. Think there might be a correlation with that to gun violence?


SamLouis, when you call the President of the U.S. a nut job, all the good points that you made are lost..


0

You need to bring something to the table other than false dichotomies, ludicrous comparisons and ad hominem attacks.


0
1 2 3 4 5 … 10