The legislature has again denied the citizens their right to self defense by killing AB357 in the Assembly Public Safety committee. The bill by Assemblyman Pete Knight sought to provide a uniform system of concealed carry licensing throughtout the state for those that wish to assume the responsibility of their own defense by carrying a concealed handgun on their person. The current system is a discretionary one left to the county Sheriff to determine whether the applicant has "good cause" to carry a concealed weapon. Self defense in the absense of a police officer is not considered sufficient justification in most counties in California. The only persons that can obtain a license are cele

On January 1st a new law will take effect that will require all semi-automatic handguns to have the capability to imprint identification on each expended cartridge case when it is fired. The legislature passed AB 1471 Feurer in 2007 that mandated this technology on all new pistols starting in 2010. The main drawback to this law is there are no firearms manufactured with this capability. The patent holder has not relaxed the restrictions to implement his invention. It has been theorized that this will ocurr in the near future. During arguments for the bill some legislators postured as if they were experts in firearms design and manufacturing processes and proferred cost estimates for the i

As a civil rights activist will the candidate work towards an equitable right to bear arms as is specified in the Bill of Rights, or is he another politician that only selectively suports some civil rights to the abandonment of others?

I personally know at least 7 people that will not jump through the hoops established by the legislature. The cost of concealable firearms has been increased to cover the political requirements of purchase. Persons that live in low income neighborhoods are denied a defensive firearm by the state due to the cost and the type of inexpensive gun not being available to them. The state has preempted free choice of available inventory with their politically inspired firearms safety board that determines which guns are "worthy" of being sold in California. So yes people are being denied the right to purchase any defensive firearm they wish. All citizens in the state are being denied the right of self defense by the inability to obtain a CCW permit. They are denied free choice of the type of firearm they wish to carry and they are subjected to completely useless regulation in securing the most effective personal defense tool available unless you are fortunate to have your own cop.

Law abiding citizens in California must sumount many political hurdles in order to obtain a gun and many just give up, but then that is the gun hating legislature's desired goal to frustrate, delay and complicate the process so no one will buy a gun. Murderers, rapists and robbers do not obtain the Firearms Safety Certificate required by those that wish to purchase a defensive firearm. They do not abide by the ten day waiting period, they do not submit to a backgroud check, they do not go to a licensed dealer to process the transaction so these crooks are not denied any gun they wish. The law abiding are the ones that are stifled, regulated and purposely confused by the myriad of laws, policies and hostile legislature that impede their constitutional rights.

The U.K. is in the midst of the great experiment on abolishing gun ownership. The more restrictions placed on gun ownership the higher the crime rate, likewise Australia and California. The population of the U.K. is somewhat more than California with that state about equal with Canada. Area wise our northern neighbor is, roughly, the size of the U.S. The Canadiens are also struggling with a liberal minority over the obliteration of firearms in that country. Their gun registry has exceeded 2 billion dollars when early estimates quoted a 2 million dollar price tag for no perceived benefit. They are now trying to scrap the long gun registry as a fools solution to no problem The Japanese population is approximately 127.2 million, less than half that of the U.S., yet their suicide rate is over twice that of our country despite the ever increasing number of guns here and no gun possession allowed there. It is also curious as to why our overall crime rare continues to decline when so many new firearms are added to the private possession of citizens daily.

Research by Professor Gary Kleck of the University of Florida has determined that defensive fireams uses occur up to 2.5 million times a year. Professor Kleck is not an NRA stooge. Another researcher is Professor John Lott and in his book "More Guns, Less Crime" documents that the more law abiding citizens that possess firearms the safer is society. The Brady Bunch has poo-pooed the study at every turn but cannot disprove it. Along with gun ownership comes responsibility in securing them against unauthorized use. This is not to say they should be made inoperable for emergency defensive use. Each firearm owner must evaluate their own circumstances with regards to securing their guns. Universal mandates by the state cannot forsee individual needs without some conflict with individual constitutional rights. The notion that those that possess firearms are more likely to injure themselves than those that don't is just that, a notion. Every person, no doubt, possesses a knife of some kind, does this theory hold true for them also?