Poor things are only using shotguns. Why don't they go all Harris and Kleibold and bring out the real weapons or what are they afraid of?

Have these guys no shame????

The law prohibiting open carry of longguns takes effect in just a few days. I would have joined them had I known of their plans. While the timing is regrettable, the long gun ban is worse. California is rich in cultural long gun history. To let a tragedy like Newton Conn. deter Californians from practicing their culture would be wrong. Shotguns do not cause mental illness. Guns do not cause people to act like monsters. People did not stop flying after 9-11-2011, but instead there were brave souls that stepped back on airplanes directly after to lead the way.

Ask the Jews who lived in Hitler's Germany how the ban on guns for them went.

"Tyranny thrives best where government need not fear the wrath of an armed people." ~Kozinski, 9th Circuit Court

I'll bet there were no nutballs in the area daring to start shooting up the place that day.

SacPress comments are usually cogent additions to the story above. But, of course, there are exceptions.

By restricting our right to carry, Brown and the rest of the incompetent fools under him, are in violation of our 2nd Amendment rights. By violating our rights, they are breaking the law of the land. By breaking the law of the land, they are criminals and need to be put in prison. Same goes to those ignorant fools in D.C. including Obama!

The second amendment explicitly prohibits gun control. The only honest way to accomplish gun control is to repeal the second amendment. Otherwise there will be constant legal gymnastics getting around the second amendment which will further erode the rule of law.

It seems most Americans think of the constitution as religious scripture. Which explains why so many never actually read it or know what it says.

Actually interpretation of the Second Amendment by courts so far means the government cannot ban handguns, but it can ban other weapons, for example a shot gun or assault rifle. There is still room for a lot of interpretation with the Second Amdendment. Governor Brown is not violating our rights.

This article helps clarify some of the confusion regarding all of this -
So You Think You Know the Second Amendment?
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/comment/2012/12/jeffrey-toobin-second-amendment.html

Gun control doesn't stop crazy batshit maniacs from killing other people. I thought we might have learned that from the VA Tech massacre (all guns for that were legally purchased). What does have an effect on whether or not the killings happen more or less often is highly effective mental health care and intervention.

In the case of the theater shooting that happened a little while ago, there was a gun range owner that wanted to report the shooter, but there was no facility for reporting someone with mental health issues who others felt might be a danger. Similarly, the VA Tech killer and the guy who shot the Congress woman also had people who noticed warning signs, but had nobody to report them to. All of these killings could have been mitigated or prevented with a quality mental health care system.

So, which do you think is the cheaper option- gun control, or quality public mental health? If you check with most health insurance, you will find that guns are much cheaper than intervention care or long term psychiatric treatment. People hold up the Scandinavian countries and Canada as examples of places with less gun violence, but what many don't realize is that it is just as easy to get a hold of a high capacity weapon there, too (consider the youth massacre in Norway by Brevik). The one thing that many gun control advocates are missing is that those exemplary countries have something else in common that the US does not have and will not pay for- quality public mental health care.

Let's keep in mind that the very first of those victims would have been considered to have been in violation of laws, the nature of which, many States already already have. In many States, should an otherwise responsible gun owner allow for a child to gain access to a gun and someone is harmed by that gun owner's weapon, that gun owner is subject to severe prosecution. I don't think even the most rabid NRA supporter is opposed to that kind of legislation any more so than laws that prevent upstanding citizens from keeping guns should they choose to live with convicted felons under the same roof. The nut-job that killed all those little kids should never have had access to operable weapons any more so than a toddler, and I know it might sound harsh, but his dead Mother is to blame. Passing other laws which place otherwise responsible sportsmen at risk of arrest when they transport sporting equipment in a responsible manner won't do anything to prevent another of these tragedies but placing stronger restrictions on people who live with the mentally deficient as is done with people who live with children or felons might.

"men" ? I think not. Scared, pea brained (among other diminutive organs) little boys trapped in aging, overweight adult bodies.