A California politician proposed a bullet bill to restrict ammo sales in the state.

View more videos at: http://nbcbayarea.com.

California assembly member Nancy Skinner proposed the bill to restrict ammunition sales in the state.
NBC Bay Area reported:

The massacre in Newton, Conn., and other mass shootings have prompted for a call to curb gun violence.

California assembly member Nancy Skinner answered that call with a proposal to restrict ammunition sales in the state.

“2,800 people in California were killed last year by gunfire,” Skinner said. “It is easier to buy bullets than cough medicine or alcohol. It should not be that easy. We need to have much more scrutiny when it comes to the purchase of guns.”

Monday she unveiled Assembly Bill 48. It would require bullet buyers to show identification. It would also require ammunition dealers to be licensed and report all sales to the department of justice.

Emmeryville police chief Ken James supports the tighter restrictions.

”Right now you can buy bullets in any store and the sale is not recorded”, James said. “Gun violence will continue unless we control the sale of bullets.”

Oakland mayor Jean Quan also said she supports the bill and that Oakland has seen too much gun violence and the changes may help.

 

 

Disable Refresh for 30 Days

Cookies and JavaScript must be enabled for your setting to be saved.

1 2 3

`
  1. I see someone’s a Chris Rock fan…

  2. “Oakland mayor Jean Quan also said she supports the bill and that Oakland has seen too much gun violence and the changes may help.” — because guns in themselves cause violence, right Quan? And I suppose it was the LAW ABIDING citizens causing the “gun violence,” right Quan? What a moron. Will Quan be giving up her security detail???

  3. Wasn’t this a Chris Rock joke.

    Make bullets cost $5000 a piece than when somebody got shot you would know they did something.

  4. This is the dumbest state run by the dumbest people you can imagine. The super-majority dems are bragging about all the wonderful new things they are going to do with their(our) new tax money(mainly for illegals education and low income takers). Having lived here my whole life I have seen the deterioration first hand. Yeah–registering bullets is going to reduce gun violence–exactly how? You can go into central LA or Santa Ana and buy any fake ID you want. These idiots don’t think that will happen with bullets.
    Like to go to Vegas once or twice per year–will just load up when I’m there. Everything is cheaper in Vegas anyhow.
    Saw Lou Dobbs do a report where there are something like 140 govt workers for evey private sector worker–most of any state. Explains alot.

  5. Just more stimulus for the black market.
    Wonder how many of those 2,800 Californians were shot by illegal aliens?

  6. Califailure’s legislature is a ‘supermajority’ of Democrats.

    Nothing can stop them other than their own court system – which on a federal level, is the 9th Circus.

    Based on the major ‘nudges’ coming from SCOTUS, expect them to either refuse to hear any case saying it’s a state’s rights deal, or hear it and uphold 5-4 with Justice Roberts -again- offering ‘you voted this cr*p in, now deal with it’.

  7. How about we ban pink eyed liberal Moonbats from Congress?

  8. state assembly reps being the nesting grounds for our U.S.House reps, evidently what I heard about some of our reps in DC is correct.

    quote:
    “there’s people occupying seats in the U.S. House of Representatives who in a perfect world could be seen hanging out on the rear of the garbage truck on trash pick-up day.”

    no truer words were ever spoken or quoted.

  9. but then we have one in the White House too, so no big surprise.

  10. And just how many people were killed slipping in the bathtub/shower? how many were killed in car “accidents”? Stupid is as stupid does.

  11. Ill-informed control-freak leftists on parade.

    At least when Mel Brooks did it, it was funny: http://youtu.be/JN99jshaQbY

  12. ++

    Obama is hell bent on correcting Hitler’s mistakes, fulfilling his
    Fathers Dreams (more) via fulfilling his Revolutionary Dream,
    aka, an American Nightmare.. and there is no shortage of RICH
    OLD WHITE MEN FANCIER PUPPETEERS
    .. *sigh*

    ==

  13. Run more businesses out of your state. That’s the way to get California out of bankruptcy.

    Politicians named Nancy are stupid in California. Must be something in the medical marijuana.

  14. What about those who make their own ammo? You can buy all you need to make your own just about anywhere.

  15. Alex JonesTown..video Postscript to Piers Morgan interview from his hotel room …> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2_AkCEU72c

  16. wth #8

    re Wonder how many of those 2,800 Californians were shot by illegal aliens

    Quite a few and by black gangbangers.

    related.

    ‘Overview

    Before the Civil War ended, State “Slave Codes” prohibited slaves from owning guns. After President Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation in 1863, and after the Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution abolishing slavery was adopted and the Civil War ended in 1865, States persisted in prohibiting blacks, now freemen, from owning guns under laws renamed “Black Codes.” They did so on the basis that blacks were not citizens, and thus did not have the same rights, including the right to keep and bear arms protected in the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, as whites. This view was specifically articulated by the U.S. Supreme Court in its infamous 1857 decision in Dred Scott v. Sandford to uphold slavery.

    The United States Congress overrode most portions of the Black Codes by passing the Civil Rights Act of 1866. The legislative histories of both the Civil Rights Act and the Fourteenth Amendment, as well as The Special Report of the Anti-Slavery Conference of 1867, are replete with denunciations of those particular statutes that denied blacks equal access to firearms. [Kates, Handgun Prohibition and the Original Meaning of the Second Amendment, 82 Mich. L. Rev. 204, 256 (1983)] However, facially neutral disarming through economic means laws remain in effect.

    After the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution in 1878, most States turned to “facially neutral” business or transaction taxes on handgun purchases. However, the intention of these laws was not neutral. An article in Virginia’s official university law review called for a “prohibitive tax … on the privilege” of selling handguns as a way of disarming “the son of Ham”, whose “cowardly practice of ‘toting’ guns has been one of the most fruitful sources of crime … .Let a negro board a railroad train with a quart of mean whiskey and a pistol in his grip and the chances are that there will be a murder, or at least a row, before he alights.” [Comment, Carrying Concealed Weapons, 15 Va L. Reg. 391, 391-92 (1909); George Mason University Civil Rights Law Journal, Vol. 2, No. 1, “Gun Control and Racism,” Stefan Tahmassebi, 1991, p. 75] Thus, many Southern States imposed high taxes or banned inexpensive guns so as to price blacks and poor whites out of the gun market.

    In the 1990s, “gun control” laws continue to be enacted so as to have a racist effect if not intent:’…

    Laws Designed to Disarm Slaves, Freedmen, and African-Americans

    ‘The historical record provides compelling evidence that racism underlies gun control laws — and not in any subtle way. Throughout much of American history, gun control was openly stated as a method for keeping blacks and Hispanics “in their place,” and to quiet the racial fears of whites. This paper is intended to provide a brief summary of this unholy alliance of gun control and racism, and to suggest that gun control laws should be regarded as “suspect ideas,” analogous to the “suspect classifications” theory of discrimination already part of the American legal system.

    Racist arms laws predate the establishment of the United States. Starting in 1751, the French Black Code required Louisiana colonists to stop any blacks, and if necessary, beat “any black carrying any potential weapon, such as a cane.” If a black refused to stop on demand, and was on horseback, the colonist was authorized to “shoot to kill.” [1] Slave possession of firearms was a necessity at times in a frontier society, yet laws continued to be passed in an attempt to prohibit slaves or free blacks from possessing firearms, except under very restrictively controlled conditions. [2] Similarly, in the sixteenth century the colony of New Spain, terrified of black slave revolts, prohibited all blacks, free and slave, from carrying arms. [3]

    In the Haitian Revolution of the 1790s, the slave population successfully threw off their French masters, but the Revolution degenerated into a race war, aggravating existing fears in the French Louisiana colony, and among whites in the slave states of the United States. When the first U. S. official arrived in New Orleans in 1803 to take charge of this new American possession, the planters sought to have the existing free black militia disarmed, and otherwise exclude “free blacks from positions in which they were required to bear arms,” including such non-military functions as slave-catching crews. The New Orleans city government also stopped whites from teaching fencing to free blacks, and then, when free blacks sought to teach fencing, similarly prohibited their efforts as well. [4]

    It is not surprising that the first North American English colonies, then the states of the new republic, remained in dread fear of armed blacks, for slave revolts against slave owners often degenerated into less selective forms of racial warfare. The perception that free blacks were sympathetic to the plight of their enslaved brothers, and the dangerous example that “a Negro could be free” also caused the slave states to pass laws designed to disarm all blacks, both slave and free. Unlike the gun control laws passed after the Civil War, these antebellum statutes were for blacks alone. In Maryland, these prohibitions went so far as to prohibit free blacks from owning dogs without a license, and authorizing any white to kill an unlicensed dog owned by a free black, for fear that blacks would use dogs as weapons. Mississippi went further, and prohibited any ownership of a dog by a black person. [5]‘…

    The Racist Roots of Gun Control

    It is certainly not law obeying Americans whether white black or tan shooting each other but gun ‘control’ laws will have a disproportionate effect on law abiding people more than on criminals.



1 2 3


`

© Copyright 2014, TheGatewayPundit.com. All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Terms and Conditions