Gun control restrictions need implementation

After the recent mass shootings in Aurora and Sandy Hook, it is evident that we have a problem. The time has come for Congress to enact reasonable gun control and protect the innocent, so why is Obama’s proposed gun control policy reform being met with so much resistance? Obama’s proposed gun control reform focuses on law enforcement, school safety, mental health and the availability of assault weapons and high capacity magazines.

It is of the utmost importance to get one thing straight: No one is trying to take away our beloved firearms and none of our constitutionally-guaranteed rights are being violated. The president, like most Americans, supports the second amendment: the right to bear arms.

In fact, for most Californians, Obama’s gun control proposals will be hardly noticeable. California already bans assault-style weapons and large-capacity weapons. If you are a law abiding citizen or resident of California, you have nothing to worry about. Obama’s gun control proposals aim to close loopholes in the legal system that make it possible for felons, fugitives and the mentally ill to acquire firearms.

The Los Angeles Times has reported that there are more than 19,700 people in California who are convicted felons and/or mentally ill who own firearms. Total ownership is roughly 39,000 firearms. The Bureau of Firearms does not have the resources to seize all of the weapons owned by persons recorded in the state’s Armed Prohibited Persons database, Obama’s gun control proposal would direct $4 billion into communities to keep 15,000 police officers on the street.

It is difficult to come up with a legitimate reason why a civilian would need a large-capacity magazine or assault weapon. What could anybody possibly be shooting at that would take more than 10 shots? Trapper shooters or hunters could easily compensate by using multiple magazines. A high-capacity magazine may make things a bit more convenient for shooters, but the convenience is not worth the risk.

The most common online explanations as to why one would need a large-capacity magazine or assault weapon include: “Zombie apocalypse,” “Overthrow of the government by dictator or tyrant” and “Multiple assailants forcing entry into your home… all packing large-capacity magazines and fully automatic assault weapons.”

Okay, we all watch a lot of TV, but let’s put the paranoid delusions aside and try to apply some logic and reasoning here. None of these events is taking place anytime soon, but real people are being killed in mass shootings, not in imaginary scenarios, but in real life. Even if any one of these fantasies did happen, an additional 15-20 rounds in your magazine wouldn’t stop it.

We cannot stand idly by as mass shootings become common place. It is unrealistic to think that there is an easy solution to the problem. No one expects Obama’s gun control proposals to stop people from killing each other, but they could make it more difficult for criminals and the mentally ill to commit mass murder.

In the coming months, as you are bombarded with witty catchphrases and biased YouTube videos, consider the following when forming your own opinion: We will still have the right to bear arms, California already has banned assault weapons and large-capacity magazines and innocent people are dying at the hands of evil and deranged murderers.


'Gun control restrictions need implementation' have 1 comment

  1. April 26, 2013 @ 2:13 pm Allen Piercy

    Hello Mrs. Gudino, To begin with, California does not ban assault style weapons and high capacity magazines. Current California law only bans the sale of them. Why the resistance? Gun control advocates began their campaign by trying to demonize law abiding gun owners and distorting the statistical facts. Why would citizens want to work with any government official that generalizes them as gun nuts? They said in the beginning they want to focus on barring the mentally ill but what they really focused on was restricting lawful gun owners. I’m sure we are generally safe here in our small California suburbs. How about families that live along the Mexican border? California, Arizona, New Mexico? Would you go tell that single mom living in Texas border town she is out of line for wanting a high capacity magazine to protect her kids when some of the most evil men in the world sneak through her neighborhood in the middle of the night? The rest of the world is not like Glendora. Most Americans will never experience real evil in this world. They will never experience a home invasion robbery or drug smugglers or a third world apartment building in Chicago infested with murderous gang-bangers. It’s easy for VP Biden to say all you need is a double barrel shot gun and just shoot through the door and you will be plenty safe. He doesn’t live in an area that warrants it. Feinstein has already stated that her ultimate goal is to ban all guns and have all Americans turn them in. I don’t remember the exact quote but you can look it up. She is not referring to assault “style” weapons, she is referring to all guns. It is no wonder lawful gun owners have zero trust in this administration. When she proclaims that we need to ban these machine guns(full auto), these are for only for war. What she is doing is trying to do is mislead the public. Machines guns are already banned from civilians and have been since 1934, and AK-15 rifles are not what the military uses and does not have the same capabilities as an M16 or M4 assault weapon that our military currently uses. Our gun control advocates are misrepresenting the facts. If they were truly intent on preventing another Sand Hook then they would be honest and open. They should of focused on the mentally ill, they should of legislated mandatory gun locks and mandatory safe-storage laws. Just having the guns locked would of prevented Sandy Hook.


Would you like reply to Allen Piercy

Your email address will not be published.