Anti-Gun Senator Makes a Fool of Himself

Looks like an incomplete build or an SBR - which is illegal in the Republik of Caliphornia

Looks like an incomplete build or an SBR - which is illegal in the Republik of Caliphornia

A “ghost gun” is a firearm that isn’t registered with the government. Especially and specifically modern sporting rifles made from so-called “80 percent lower receivers”: parts that do NOT have to be registered as firearms with the ATF.

Federal law says you can sell them, but not if your intent is to make money (go figure).

State law says . . . different things in different places.  California’s civilian disarmament extremists (a redundant term but there it is) are looking to close this freedom loophole with SB 808, which would force “ghost guns” into their regulatory maw. Or, if you prefer, to turn their legal owners into criminals.

Gun rights advocates are organizing opposition but how do you defend “untraceable guns”? By saying that guns shouldn’t be traceable, to guard against government tyranny.

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2014/01/robert-farago/birth-of-an-anti-gun-media-meme-ghost-gun/

What do you expect from a Kalifornia legislator who's tried to make a name for himself by taking on the airsoft industry?   Beyond FAIL! Lol.   

His comments in full, if interested in hearing the whole, stupid, thing ....

I can't stop looking at his hair.

Notice the people in the background?

Jeeeze, these guy make me want to vomit.   

I suppose these are illegal too......

Someone should give him one of these,

Watch / listen to the words he is using. This is a call for more registration.

They used "assault" weapons to ban some guns.

Now, scary "ghost" guns is to start a conversation to scare the sheeple and a call to register all firearms.

Watch / listen to the words he is using. This is a call for more registration.

They used "assault" weapons to ban some guns.

Now, scary "ghost" guns is to start a conversation to scare the sheeple and a call to register all firearms.

This pretty much mirrors the attempt to expand background checks because it will keep guns out of the hands of criminals.  I would guess that these "ghost guns" represent an extremely small percentage of guns.  So this too would make it harder on law abiding people and have little effect on the unlawful individuals who aren't going to register guns and who aren't going to subject themselves to the background checks.

This pretty much mirrors the attempt to expand background checks because it will keep guns out of the hands of criminals.  I would guess that these "ghost guns" represent an extremely small percentage of guns.  So this too would make it harder on law abiding people and have little effect on the unlawful individuals who aren't going to register guns and who aren't going to subject themselves to the background checks.

Think of this.  If 80% lowers are not firearms, and the ATF doesn't track them, then what's to stop an entrepreneur from driving to another state, buying a few cases (no background checks or paperwork needed for non-firearms), then selling them to people from the back of his van?    As you said, the criminals won't care.  They will be happy to take the risk of having an unregistered 80% lower if it means they can now make it into an unregistered firearm.  Their end goal is to bypass the legal process and obtain firearms.

What I would like this California Representative to discuss is, once that mental patient was denied a gun purchase, what steps were taken to punish him?  Was he locked up for a couple of months?  Was he fined?  No!  The government lets felons and others who are ineligible take a "free shot" at getting a gun legally.  If they are turned down, they just grin and walk out.  Nothing happens to them.  There should be at least some minimal action taken against a person in a high-risk category attempting to buy firearms.  At the least, there should be a police interview and maybe contacting the person's caregiver (if one exists) or other concerned person in that individual's life.  If the person is a felon, they maybe ought to report a violation if he's on parole.  At least make someone near the individual aware so they can be alert and look for other behaviors, and make sure their own guns are secured.

What I would like this California Representative to discuss is, once that mental patient was denied a gun purchase, what steps were taken to punish him?  Was he locked up for a couple of months?  Was he fined?  No!  The government lets felons and others who are ineligible take a "free shot" at getting a gun legally.  If they are turned down, they just grin and walk out.  Nothing happens to them.  There should be at least some minimal action taken against a person in a high-risk category attempting to buy firearms.  At the least, there should be a police interview and maybe contacting the person's caregiver (if one exists) or other concerned person in that individual's life.  If the person is a felon, they maybe ought to report a violation if he's on parole.  At least make someone near the individual aware so they can be alert and look for other behaviors, and make sure their own guns are secured.

Biden already answered that one: (paraphrase) "We don't have the time or resources to bother with all that paperwork."

Here's the actual quote in response to a question about prosecuting felons applying for guns by Jim Baker of the NRA to Biden: “And to your point, Mr. Baker, regarding the lack of prosecutions on lying on Form 4473s, we simply don’t have the time or manpower to prosecute everybody who lies on a form, that checks a wrong box, that answers a question inaccurately.”

 http://dailycaller.com/2013/01/18/biden-to-nra-we-dont-have-the-time-to-prosecute-people-who-lie-on-background-checks/#ixzz2r9tDtHjA

Biden already answered that one: (paraphrase) "We don't have the time or resources to bother with all that paperwork."

Here's the actual quote in response to a question about prosecuting felons applying for guns by Jim Baker of the NRA to Biden: “And to your point, Mr. Baker, regarding the lack of prosecutions on lying on Form 4473s, we simply don’t have the time or manpower to prosecute everybody who lies on a form, that checks a wrong box, that answers a question inaccurately.”

 http://dailycaller.com/2013/01/18/biden-to-nra-we-dont-have-the-time-to-prosecute-people-who-lie-on-background-checks/#ixzz2r9tDtHjA

And the very logical response to that was:  if you don't have the time or manpower to investigate and prosecute people breaking the laws already on the books, how, exactly, will MORE laws help the situation??

And the very logical response to that was:  if you don't have the time or manpower to investigate and prosecute people breaking the laws already on the books, how, exactly, will MORE laws help the situation??

They gave the NRA all of five minutes to present ALL their suggestions, which included prosecuting people who lie on the 4473 forms...  tens of thousands per year, of which only 66 (sixty-six) were prosecuted the previous year. Mr. Baker took the full five minutes to present his suggestions, thus he was allowed no time to give a response, including a logical answer, to Mr. Biden's inane answer. They then moved on to considering what new gun laws (there are only 20,000 in effect at the moment) could be passed...  Logic doesn't seem to be the strong suit of these folks...

I found it:  A MAGAZINE CLIP!   Only, this clip would have a tough time holding 30 magazines, so dispersing 30 magazines in half a second would take serious practice!!                                

A well thought out response. http://shar.es/UJHN9

Bota, very good response in that article. Aloha