Wednesday, April 23, 2014
PLACERVILLE, CALIFORNIA
99 CENTS

The weekly Daley: 10 reasons why I need an AR-15 and 100-round magazine

By
From page A4 | January 11, 2013 | 77 Comments

10. I’m from Florida originally, back when they didn’t have hundreds of thousands of 20-foot Burmese Pythons decimating everything from raccoons to French tourists. In those days, my uncle’s Colt 45 and a 12-gauge shotgun got me through the swamps and the canebreaks.

When I was down home last year, I didn’t see a single raccoon, ‘possum, fox or French tourist. I saw a few Germans and New Yorkers who for some reason were spared. But, anymore, who could take the chance that they won’t be surrounded by 100 or more ravenous pythons at any given time, in the forests, in the orange groves or even on the beach in Ft. Lauderdale? And those reptiles are moving north and west and fast and could be on their way to my house in Placerville. That’s why I could use an AR-15 and a 100-round magazine.

9. I go to the movies occasionally which pretty much explains why I need an AR-15 and a 100-round magazine.

8. Although I rarely go to shopping malls, you never know who else might be there on the day I decide to go to a shopping mall. I’d just feel a lot safer toting an AR-15 with a 100-round magazine.

7. Did some rude driver ever flip you off for no reason, and in response you flipped him off right back, and then you worried that maybe he was one of those guys who has an AR-15 and a 100-round magazine? I have. And I would be way outgunned — even with my five-shot .38, safely tucked away in a secret hiding place at home. If I had an AR-15 with a 100-round magazine, we’d at least be even.

6. I go to grocery stores, office buildings, government buildings, gas stations, mini-marts and the like on a regular basis, usually once a day — often more. I might be around thousands of people at any given moment in time, and the odds are pretty good that one of those thousands will have an AR-15 and a 100-round magazine. My notebook and pen aren’t much protection against an AR-15 and a 100-round magazine. The logic speaks for itself. I should have an AR-15 and a 100-round magazine.

5. People are always being shot at from overpasses when they drive on the freeway. As if it weren’t scary enough just driving on freeways, imagine that somebody is on the next overpass with a Glock 19 and a Bushmaster and maybe a Molotov cocktail. An AR-15 and a 100-round magazine could make short work of that situation and keep traffic flowing smoothly. It’s really about community service.

4. Remember how Snoopy shakes his fist and says “Curse you Red Baron?” Well, that may be how it works in the comic strips or even in cartoons, but I wouldn’t recommend it when the U.N. Black Helicopters come calling over your neighborhood. No sir. You and I will want an AR-15 with a 100-round magazine when that happens — maybe as early as next week.

3. Sometimes when you’re in a bar or a pool hall, there will be a guy who’s got the biggest muscles and the surliest attitude and he wants to take your head off because you smiled and said “Hi” to his gal. You didn’t know it was his gal, you’re just the kind of person who smiles and says “Hi” to people. No harm, no foul, except you know you’re going to get your head taken off anyway. So you say, “Let’s take this outside, partner.”

Outside, you say, “Show me yours and I’ll show you mine.” He gets a big grin and whips out his .44 magnum. You chuckle, draw back your long overcoat and pull out your AR-15 with a 100-round magazine. Now, that’s what I’m talking about.

2. I haven’t hunted in years and years. I mostly couldn’t hit much with my uncle’s Colt 45. I once knocked off a whole family of skunks with the 12-gauge though. One shot. If I’d had an AR-15 with a 100-round magazine just imagine what I could have brought home for dinner. We’d still be eating skunk, turtle, porcupine and who knows what else?

1. Suppose I’m sitting at home reading the paper, and I hear a knock on the door. I open up and there’s like 35 guys dressed in black hoodies or maybe Ninja suits, armed to the teeth, snarling and spitting like Vikings. “What’s up fellas?” I ask.

“Home invasion,” the apparent leader growls.

Well, if I only have my five-shot .38, and it’s too well hidden for me to even find, what am I going to do? If I have a rifle with a 10 or 15-round clip, I may get some of them, but they’ll eventually get me when I have to stop and reload. I and mine are in a pickle, no doubt about it. But if I had an AR-15 with a 100-round magazine, it would be a different story, I can tell you.

“Not so fast there Leader,” I’d say as I sprayed an average of 2.85 bullets per would-be home invader. I’d blow the smoke off the end of the barrel, slap in another 100-round magazine and get back to my paper. If only I had an AR-15 with a 100-round magazine.

Chris Daley is a staff writer and columnist for the Mountain Democrat. His column appears each Friday. 

Chris Daley

Last Login | Thu Apr 24 13:07:30 2014
LEAVE A COMMENT

Discussion | 77 comments

  • LakesiderJanuary 11, 2013 - 3:17 am

    I hate to bust up your party Chris but your friends in Sacramento took your 100 round magazines away years ago leaving you with only 10 rounders to fight with. (Felony to possess unless obtained pre 2001) So I guess you better head out to buy more magazines. But of course we all know the bad guys follow the rules and would never think of obtaining a 100 round Magazine. Why can we not defend ourselfs against the bad guys with what they have? Remember the bank shoot out the police had years back in Southern California? That if one reason the police even now are better armed. I just want a fair fight. Or I guess I could just call the police when I'm in a pickle. Oh that's right! Police respond to crimes, not stop them.when you call them odds are your already in the fight or its over, that's why your calling. Remember, when the &@?! Hits the fan your on your own for a while. Hope it never happens to you.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • EvelynJanuary 11, 2013 - 5:21 am

    From above: "Police respond to crimes, not stop them. when you call them odds are your already in the fight or its over" ********** Chris: True/False???

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • EvelynJanuary 11, 2013 - 5:33 am

    "Just Dial 911? The Myth of Police Protection" (NOTE: This article is nearly 13 years old, therefore pre a lot of stuff.): As Richard Mack, former sheriff of Graham County, Arizona, has observed: “Police do very little to prevent violent crime. We investigate crime after the fact.” ... Researchers found that less than 5 percent of all calls dispatched to police are made quickly enough for officers to stop a crime or arrest a suspect. ... It’s not just that the police cannot protect you. They don’t even have to come when you call. In most states the government and police owe no legal duty to protect individual citizens from criminal attack. ... As laws discourage innocent citizens from defending themselves, the violent criminals remain undeterred. HERE ********** Apologies to DB Smith for the italics used to indicate attribution ********** An excellent article, worth reading in its entirety.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • EvelynJanuary 11, 2013 - 5:46 am

    From the “American Police Beat” (Dec. 2010) – POLICE RESPONSE TIMES TO HIGH-PRIORITY EMERGENCY CALLS: • Atlanta 11 min 12 sec • El Paso 11 min 11 sec • Denver 11 min • Tucson 10 min 11 sec • Kansas City 10 min ********** Criminal justice professor Robbie Friedman said “It takes longer than the public likely thinks to respond to 911 calls.”

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • EvelynJanuary 11, 2013 - 5:55 am

    Yesterday Obama signed a law granting lifetime Secret Service protection to former presidents elected after Jan. 1, 1997 & to their wives. The new law also authorizes Secret Service protection for the children of former presidents until they turn 16.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Paddy O'furnitureJanuary 11, 2013 - 7:38 am

    Evelyn, evidently our politicians are more important than our kids. Pols and movie stars get armed guards but it's illegal for kids to have them???

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • LakesiderJanuary 11, 2013 - 8:56 am

    Evelyn, at first it looked like you questioned my statement about the police responding to not stopping crime. But I see in later posts you agree. People have a false sense of security that if I call 911 police will be busting in the door in a few minutes saving the day. If you are in the unincorperated area of El Dorado County and have a need for immediate help, Like weapons or not the odds of the sherriff getting there in time to stop the crime are very much against you. It can be 20 minutes or more in some cases meaning you are responsible to defend your house and family until deputies get there to hang the crime tape. I won't dwell on this as you either get it or not. I only hope for your loved ones sake you get it. Former deputy sheriff Melissa Meekma once told me " I suggest every citizen in El Dorado County have a loaded weapon in their house as your on your own until we get there" God rest her soul.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • EvelynJanuary 11, 2013 - 9:01 am

    Lakesider: I really DO mean that question for Chris Daley, whose article -- IMHO -- is flip.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • 1036-FrankJanuary 11, 2013 - 9:20 am

    The liberals want the law abiding public disarmed while granting early release to thousands of felons and now thousands of three strikers. What's wrong with this picture? Every criminal laughs at gun control as it provides them a safer "Work" environment. These felons are very heavily armed these days with every sort of long gun and full auto weapons, yet the law abiding citizen is targeted. How about more strict sentencing like life for felons for possessing guns and the same for all criminal gang members and close the flow of criminals and Drug-Gangs pouring in from the open unguarded entry points on the Southern border for starters, then again the Dems would lose a lot of voters and elections if they did so they will continue to go after the law abiding public thinking it will do something, the previous 10 year ban from 1994 to 2004 of so called assault rifles had no effect on crime then and will do nothing now, a felon always will find a way to get guns unless they are locked up for life and will continue to prey on the unarmed citizen.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • LakesiderJanuary 11, 2013 - 9:22 am

    Another perfect example of being prepared to defend your family and taking action. Note: The police arrived after the fact. http://myfox8.com/2013/01/06/ga-mom-shoots-intruder-5-times-saves-children/

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Ken SteersJanuary 11, 2013 - 1:01 pm

    Chris is either misinformed or delusional. Very poor taste and he needs help.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • VMischJanuary 11, 2013 - 4:32 pm

    Mr. Daley - just a suggestion - try reading the Constitution, particularly the Second Amendment - it will clarify for you why "we, the people" are entitled to own weapons. We cannot and should not, depend on any law enforcement agency to keep us and our families safe. And if you do a bit of research into the history of our country, you'll also know that the Second Amendment was put into place to allow us to protect ourselves against tyranny... I know, that has seemed far fetched for quite some time... But lately?? Not so far fetched.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • CatherineJanuary 11, 2013 - 9:36 pm

    Chris, You missed the most important one! You need that gun to fight off the US military, when the jack-booted thugs come to take your guns away. Sheesh.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • BillJanuary 12, 2013 - 7:12 am

    Exceptionaly weak attempt at humor. I expect much better from the Mt. Democrat

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • EvelynJanuary 12, 2013 - 7:19 am

    . . . then you are doomed to disappointment.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • EvelynJanuary 12, 2013 - 7:25 am

    Armed Burglar Shot and Killed by Pharmacist in Madera, CA. - HERE

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Paddy O'furnitureJanuary 12, 2013 - 8:46 am

    Daley, If a guy named Rich or Richard or Rick calls you up and tells you he wants to turn his guns in to the Sheriff, do the first useful thing you will have done a very long time and meet him and report on it. Just don't give his full name because then the bad guys in the area will know he'll be easy pickin's.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • MarkJanuary 12, 2013 - 9:57 am

    Kentucky County Sheriff to Obama: “NO GUN DISARMAMENT IN MY COUNTY.” Go Sheriff, I’m with you.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • RichardJanuary 12, 2013 - 10:40 am

    Furniture: on another post you agreed with Kentucky Sheriff Peyman, who stated, “NO GUN DISARMAMENT IN MY COUNTY,” ( your post: Evelyn, you hit on an excellent point; the county sheriff had much, much more power than most folks realize. He is really the last word in law enforcement for his area.) The facts are the Kentucky Sheriff you agree with by even the lowest law enforcement standards is a fruit cake and is the subject of a major shake-up in Jackson County, Kentucky. The county fiscal court removed the sheriff from office because of a debt of nearly $300,000 among other issues, and the County Police Department had a new force sworn in as county officials question the sheriff's handling of money. “Judge William Smith says the Sheriff's Department owes the county nearly $300,000.” The deputies stopped getting paid a month ago. The county government has issued several emergency executive orders, one of them to claim the sheriff's bond, which would effectively remove him from office, and the county hopes will pay for the thousands of dollars of debt. All but one of his deputies is on the new county controlled police force. Furniture, based on your postings, your stated desire to only give up your guns over your dead body, stated distain for the public good, I can understand way you would be attracted to the leadership style of Sheriff Peyman, who dishonored him self, his family, the Deputies who work for him and his community

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Paddy O'furnitureJanuary 12, 2013 - 10:53 am

    Richard, I'll be man enough to do what you aren't; I'll address your post. A) I don't live in Kentucky B) I don't know who this sheriff is (though I agree with his position on gun control in his county) C) My sheriff is John D'gostini, a pro-gun leader I am proud to have voted for D) If citing the allegations against One sheriff in Kentucky is the very best you can do, in the words of Buzz Lightyear to Sheriff Woody "You are a sad, strange little man". So, that having been settled, you gonna turn your guns in, or just keep calling for the rest of us to do it? C'mon, even James wants to hear you answer.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • RichardJanuary 12, 2013 - 11:11 am

    Furniture; I doubt you know anything about Sheriff Peyman other than what’s been recently reported. As for Sheriff John D’gostini, I think we both have the utmost respect for each others service and accomplishment. I do not agree with his fund raising efforts on behalf of the California Gun Owners Association, but I not the one running for re-election. Buzz Light-year quote, cute.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Ted GreshamJanuary 12, 2013 - 11:43 am

    I wonder why the NRA defenders always conflate any gun control measure with "confiscating all of our guns". Oh wait, i know, it has something to do with a slippery slope analogy and hitler. I guess if I felt as frightened and impotent as them, I would desire an arsenal also.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampJanuary 12, 2013 - 12:06 pm

    cooking frogs

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • clleaJanuary 12, 2013 - 12:09 pm

    Ted, This is what I have consistently been hearing as well--"administration trying to confiscation your guns. Trying to take your 2nd Amendment rights away." The anarchists hear what they want to hear, do what they want to do to create unrest and sales. Of course the NRA feeds this distorted information as gun sales skyrocket. Just another big time business, bureaucracy. Common sense changes are what the majority of the people are asking for, what the administration is working for, and what will happen because most reasonable people (those not so paranoid) see the big picture and do not feel they need an arsenal for their security. Unless, of course, you are an anarchist itching.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Paddy O'ffurnitureJanuary 12, 2013 - 12:51 pm

    cclea, Hello? Did you hear Phil's comment? Cooking frogs? Ring any bells? And the word "anarchist" as you have used it in reference to people on these threads; please define.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • RichardJanuary 12, 2013 - 1:46 pm

    Additional logic from Furniture; You can kill 168 people in the blink of an eye with fertilizer and diesel. Do we outlaw those? An 86 year old man can kill 10 people in a farmer's market in 2 seconds with a Buick. Do we ban elderly drivers or just Buicks? Astounding, Furniture doesn’t seem to understand anything about even the basic debut on gun control and in my opinion is representative of the majority of 2nd amendment, god gave us the right to own guns community.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Ken SteersJanuary 12, 2013 - 1:52 pm

    "boiling frogs" Phil. Cooking them would constitute corn meal and some hot grease. Patio, be careful with that D'Agostini "D)" thing you did LOL. To Ted and CClea. Common sense dictated that the universe orbited around the earth. Common sense stated that the earth is flat. Common sense mandated that the current climate change was brought forth by the internal combustion engine. It was your common sense that propels you to support Democrat Socialist. Actually I like your label of us being anarchists then. TYVM

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • RichardJanuary 12, 2013 - 2:30 pm

    Looking around the world at other advanced countries have imposed gun control laws, our America has conducted a natural experiment in what happens when a society has as many guns as people. And the results are in, and they’re counter to what intuition or common sense would indicate Incidents involving guns, (keep in mind it’s difficult to amass acute numbers on this issue because there are few federal guidelines for reportable events.)2011 figures from the Centers for Disease Control:........... Accidental discharge 851 Suicide 19,766, Homicide 11,101, Undetermined Intent 222 , Total: At least 31940 people died from gun injuries in 2011. Not appearing in general statistics, 258 people were killed during legal intervention, most of them due to guns. Guns were involved, but were not the primary cause of death: -in 2 fatal accidents.-in 6 homicides. Over 100,000 annually nationwide require medical care for gun related incidents, many of them at tax payer’s expense.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Paddy O'furnitureJanuary 12, 2013 - 2:50 pm

    Blah, blah blah, Richard. I'd be very surprised if anybody reads more than the first line of your posts. The ramblings of a drug-fueled mind. Tell you what, turn in your dope and I'll turn in my guns (maybe ;^)

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • RichardJanuary 12, 2013 - 3:27 pm

    In my experience Furniture, flakes like you when confronted most often pee their pants fall to their knees crying and begin apologues punctuated by complaints that cuffs are too tight. Additionally, your repeated comments about my "drug-fueled mind," I find amusing. Did it accrue to you that some of us adults have had life experiences where we may have been exposed to high concentrations of chemicals, most in defense of our country and that the treatment for those exposures, which I wont wish even you Furniture, effect test results. For a guy who claims, "I just want to be left alone," you spend a lot of time looking for an argument.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Paddy O'furnitureJanuary 12, 2013 - 3:34 pm

    I peed my pants just reading your post...

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • RichardJanuary 12, 2013 - 3:42 pm

    Well, don’t worry about it Furniture, two of our kids we had a hard time potty training also, but they eventual got over it. It's been fun punk, but I don’t think your ever going to grow up…

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • RichardJanuary 12, 2013 - 4:34 pm

    It appears it’s the overzealous gun owners themselves fueled by NRA and other gun owner organizations rhetoric that our responsible for a big portion of the bad guys having guns… (ATF File 38990000). "The ATF has identified gun shows as a major trafficking channel for firearms, second only to corrupt federally licensed dealers. In an analysis of 1,530 firearms trafficking investigations during the period July 1996 through December 2000, gun shows were associated with the diversion of approximately 26,000 illegal firearms.7 From 2004 to 2006, ATF conducted operations at just 195 gun shows nationwide, but these operations resulted in 121 individual arrests and 5,345 firearms seizures." Case in point: local El Dorado County CHP officer and NRA idol jailed for dealing in stolen guns, and just where would one sell these guns?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • DB SmithJanuary 12, 2013 - 5:24 pm

    Richard, you need to learn when to shut your pie hole. BTW ~ I think you made a smart move when you chickened out at the Snooty Frog.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • clleaJanuary 12, 2013 - 6:12 pm

    Mr. Furniture, no, don't understand what "cooking frogs" means. Look up anarchist in your dictionary. Richard really bothers you, huh? Mr. Steers, I am a Democrat, not a Socialist. Thank you very much.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • StudentJanuary 12, 2013 - 7:06 pm

    Well by golly! It appears we have finally moved on. With all due respect to the Superintendent, eventually we will reveal the infamous truths.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • EldoradoJanuary 12, 2013 - 8:05 pm

    Since there are a lot of folks that have no problem with putting limitations on the Second Amendment, why not, using their methods, put limitations on the First Amendment? Freedom of the Press: no newspapers with circulation over 10,000, no opinion pieces over 100 words; Freedom of Speech: there is no mention of radio, TV or the Internet in the Constitution, so it shouldn't apply to them.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • RichardJanuary 12, 2013 - 8:14 pm

    Our second amendment was not written to promote armed insurrection against the United States. It does not guarantee unrestricted personal weaponry. Just as gun owners have a right to bear arms, the rest us have a right to regulate the lethality of personal armaments through the legislative process. These regulations in no way violate or "compromise" the second amendment.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Capt. Jake HowardJanuary 12, 2013 - 9:03 pm

    I've own guns all of my adult life. I have used them to hunt and for self protection in bear country. I see no issue with licensing all guns and all gun owners on an annual basis, and paying a license fee to cover the cost of testing and assessing those who wish to own guns in our civil society. No hunter or marksman should fear an appropriate test of his or her knowledge and kills related to guns. Knowing how to handle your weapon and the rules of gun safety sshould be on the tip of every gun owners tongue. Guns are dangerous. I have killed many, many big and small creatures with them over the years, and I have a great respect for what a gun can do. We all should. They are not toys. Finally, I continue to read about the need of some Americans to own high capcity, rapid firing high powered rifles. I still don't understand why any gun with more than a five shots capacity is necessary for any legal activity. It is true that clips can be loaded and unloaded quickly, but a gun with a five shot clip capacity could never do the damage that was recently done in that school in Conneticut. That fool killed 26 people in under ten minutes with his high capacity assault rifle. We don't need that ability out on our streets. Get rid of them.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • clleaJanuary 12, 2013 - 10:13 pm

    Capt. Howard, I couldn't agree more with you. Yes, why would it be necessary for any citizen to need a gun with more than a five shots capacity for any legal activity? And in turn, as Richard stated: "Our second amendment was not written to promote armed insurrection against the United States", such as to make it easier for the mentally ill to very proficiently commit mass murder. Again, the intent is not to take away all our guns.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Kirk MacKenzieJanuary 13, 2013 - 5:55 am

    "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." One of the reasons the founders included the 2nd amendment was to enable the people to overthrow a tyrannical government. The South tried just that in our Civil War. But the fact that they also gave the people the ultimate power to control our government (the vote) made bloodless revolution possible and highly preferable. I doubt the founders would recognize our current federal government, or the inability of the people to exert our will. We the people are not doing our job at the voting booth; I believe that is where we should focus our energy, not on arming ourselves for violent revolution. The 1st and 2nd amendments already have limits placed on them. You can't yell "FIRE!" in a crowded theater, and you can't own fully automatic weapons. I agree that "common sense" restrictions are necessary. But instead of a top-down dictate from politicians, the definition of "common sense" should come from our representatives gaining that "intimate sympathy" with the people...bottom up.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • DB SmithJanuary 13, 2013 - 7:38 am

    Kirk, yes we need to be more active at the polls and take a bottom up approach. I'm sick of politicians telling me what's good for me. If I'm a law abiding tax paying citizen and I want to drink a 32 oz. soda at one time then let me do it, if I want to eat 2 large greasy fries then let me do it and if I want a 10 round magazine then let me have it. The problem is that the government machine constantly keeps whittling away at the rights we do have left and I'm tired of them dictating to me what is good for me and mine. They take away little by little and at times they can do subtle changes behind doors that we don't hear about until later. How many laws does one need. How about enforcing the ones we already have. It wasn't a large capacity fire arm that just killed the Taft High School kid in Kern county. So now should we outlaw shotguns or add more regulations to them? The law says that the shotgun should of been locked up and not accessible to children. Hold the parents responsible and see what happens. I'd bet a lot of parents and firearm owners would take a different approach when securing their firearms if they were held culpable.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Kirk MacKenzieJanuary 13, 2013 - 8:09 am

    Mr Smith -- I disagree that " The problem is that the government machine constantly keeps whittling away at the rights we do have left and I'm tired of them dictating to me what is good for me and mine." I believe the problem is that We The People let them do it. We have the power (vote), but we have yet to learn how to effectively wield that power.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • RichardJanuary 13, 2013 - 8:17 am

    If the government can mandate health insurance, why not mandate gun insurance? If every gun had to have liability insurance, then victims and their families would at least have some financial compensation. The major benefit, though, would be having the influential insurance industry interested in gun safety. Because they would have a financial interest in reducing claims, they might deny insurance to people deemed irresponsible. They might charge high premiums to insure particularly dangerous weapons. They might offer discounts for safety measures such as trigger locks, gun safes, or safety training.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Kirk MacKenzieJanuary 13, 2013 - 8:39 am

    Richard -- insuring weapons is, IMO, a great idea. It would bring market forces to bear on the issues. However, I balk at the use of the term "mandate". It should only be passed if it is the will of the people, not the whim of a tyrannical ruling class.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Paddy O'furnitureJanuary 13, 2013 - 8:39 am

    Rich(ard), do you have gun insurance for your arsenal? Have you asked your homeowner's insurance company about it?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • RichardJanuary 13, 2013 - 8:59 am

    The NRA is blaming mental heath for all the mayhem that the unfettered access to guns in this country does is just ludicrous. Statistics show that a large number of people at some time in their life suffer from mild to severe depression, both considered a form of mental illness. The same is true for other countries which only have a tiny fraction of gun injuries and death of ours.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • EvelynJanuary 13, 2013 - 9:29 am

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • EvelynJanuary 13, 2013 - 9:30 am

    . . . oops, a test (above) that went awry. Good morning anyway!

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • RichardJanuary 13, 2013 - 9:32 am

    Kirk, good advice.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Jim RiordanJanuary 13, 2013 - 10:38 am

    To "Captain" jake. I must assume you are "Captain" of a rowboat since every military man knows a "clip" is for holding Paper while a "magazine" is for holding ammo.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • RichardJanuary 13, 2013 - 11:00 am

    Jim, a clip holds the ammo which is then inserted into the magazine. "mush-brain"

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • RichardJanuary 13, 2013 - 11:04 am

    It appears it’s the overzealous gun owners themselves fueled by NRA and other gun owner organizations rhetoric that our responsible for a lot if not most of the bad guys having guns…(ATF File 38990000). The ATF has identified gun shows as a major trafficking channel for firearms, second only to corrupt federally licensed dealers. In an analysis of 1,530 firearms trafficking investigations during the period July 1996 through December 1998, gun shows were associated

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • RichardJanuary 13, 2013 - 11:33 am

    with the diversion of approximately 26,000 illegal firearms.7 From 2004 to 2006, ATF conducted operations at just 195 gun shows nationwide, but these operations resulted in 121 individual arrests and 5,345 firearms seizures.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Jim RiordanJanuary 13, 2013 - 11:45 am

    Richard read his post again. The "Captain" clearly stated "but a gun with a five shot clip capacity". Go back to school Squid brain.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Jim RiordanJanuary 13, 2013 - 11:54 am

    Richard, The extent to which logic escapes you amuses me. You stated "If every gun had to have liability insurance, then victims and their families would at least have some financial compensation" A couple sentences later you stated: . "they might deny insurance to people deemed irresponsible." So if the irresponsible ones are the ones doing the shootings and they are the ones who are uninsurable . . . .I'm sorry "Squid brain" might be doing the squid a disservice.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • RichardJanuary 13, 2013 - 12:50 pm

    Jim, the Captain said, "I still don't understand why any gun with more than a five shots capacity is necessary for any legal activity. It is true that clips can be loaded and unloaded quickly, but a gun with a five shot clip capacity could never do the damage that was recently done in that school in Connecticut." …….. What’s your problem with this statement, mush-brain, educate me? …… In the 1880′s to hold a number of rounds together and make it easier and faster to reload the gun a 5-round clip designed for the Mosin Nagant m1891 was manufactured. and is still in use today. Another example is the AR-15, which uses military style magazines which were designed to allow a metal “guide” to be attached to the back and 10 round strips of ammunition inserted into the magazine. The AR-15, for example, uses military style magazines which were designed to allow a metal “guide” to be attached to the back and 10 round strips of ammunition inserted into the magazine. These can be found at any gun show and most gun stores, usually mixed in with the assorted gun parts dealers. The guides ran about $2 each, and the strips are $10 for a pack of 40.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Paddy O'furntureJanuary 13, 2013 - 1:03 pm

    Jim, Rich(ard)'s bloviating is semi-amusing, but what's really fun to watch is him dodging questions. He's slimier than a dead catfish. He won't answer basic questions like "will you turn in your guns since you hate them so much" or "since you advocate for insurance, have you checked into it for your own guns?" He constantly evades these and I know why-it has become very obvious since he's a poor BS'er. The truth is, he doesn't own any guns. In fact, he's terrified of them. He comes on here claiming to own them, and then advocating for gun control and spouting all manner of hooey, because he's the "responsible gun owner", "the one voice of reason amidst all the wackos". This would be like me changing my pen name and in 2016 coming on this forum and trying to garner credibility by claiming to be a democrat while encouraging all democrats to spurn Hillary and vote for Ron Paul. "My fellow democrats, I'm one of you. We are one in spirit and mind, and it is out the deepest concern that I encourage you all to not vote for Hillary because she's blah, blah, blah". His claim of military service is probably BS too. Anyway, this gun control thing will die down like everything else does since Most Americans (like the most who reelected Obama) have short attention spans and are easily distracted. "Hey, look over there! It's Buzz Lightyear!" Now, where were we?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Jim RiordanJanuary 13, 2013 - 1:14 pm

    Richard What you are mistakenly referring to as "clips", are actually called "stripper clips" , which just happen to quickly load magazines. Here is a ref for you since you seem to be lacking one. http://www.aaconsult.com/ammoreview/html/stripper_clips.html So do us all a favor and if you want to be Mr. Science, then use the correct terminology. A clip holds sheets of paper a magazine holds ammo in a gun. Go back to sleep.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • RichardJanuary 13, 2013 - 1:27 pm

    Jim, do you really think any insurance company would issue a policy to someone who has failed the back ground check? Which would know doubt be required if the insurance company were to issue a policy.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • RichardJanuary 13, 2013 - 1:40 pm

    Jim, I’ve already given the information on the clips, your sarcastic response is redundant. Maybe the weather in Mexico will cheer you up. Temperature: 75°F | °C Weather for Mexico City Temp: 75 Scattered Clouds Wind: NE at 4 mph

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Paddy O'furnitureJanuary 13, 2013 - 4:30 pm

    In the year the term "assault weapon" was invented (1989), Josh Sugarmann of the Violence Policy Center, an anti-gun lobby, explained its purpose: "[H]andgun restriction is simply not viewed as a priority. Assault weapons...are a new topic. The weapons' menacing looks, coupled with the public's confusion over fully automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault weapons—anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun—can only increase the chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons".

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • RichardJanuary 13, 2013 - 5:20 pm

    SAN FRANCISCO (KGO) -- San Francisco's mayor is supporting a gun control measures following the killings in Newtown, Connecticut. On Thursday, Ed Lee presented a plan that will be taken up by the San Francisco Board of Supervisors.The mayor said he feels strongly about gun control measures after what happened in Connecticut and he also pointed out the number of homicides in San Francisco has gone up. There have been 67 so far this year.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • RichardJanuary 13, 2013 - 5:23 pm

    Dated Dec. 20, 2012****

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • DB SmithJanuary 13, 2013 - 5:30 pm

    SanFransicko is a sanctuary city that should begin supporting basic law and not harboring illegal criminals!

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • RichardJanuary 13, 2013 - 5:40 pm

    Los Angeles: LA City's Police Chief on Wednesday (1-2-13) endorsed a proposed federal ban on the sale of high-capacity ammunition magazines that have been used in mass shootings. Police Chief Charlie Beck said, adding a high-capacity magazine transform a gun "into a weapon of mass death rather than a home-protection-type device."

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • DB SmithJanuary 13, 2013 - 5:40 pm

    Richard, that's a hell of lot of homicides in 13 days.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • RichardJanuary 13, 2013 - 6:12 pm

    Ever vigilant Mr. Smith, 12-13-12. Thank you

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • RichardJanuary 13, 2013 - 6:15 pm

    Chief, Walt Neil, President of the International Police Officers Association: Police Chief Neil says, gun violence isn't new - but the availability of assault weapons and armor has made it harder for them to fight. "Do citizens have the right to have bazookas? Do they have the right to have grenades, grenade launchers? Where does it stop in terms of the right to bear arms?"

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • DB SmithJanuary 13, 2013 - 6:23 pm

    It stops where it is already Richard. We have the laws in place so leave it alone and enforce the laws that are in place. I don't want to own a grenade or bazooka even though I'd like to use them once sometime in my life. I do need to check on my potato gun (oh what fun) though to see if it's currently legal.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • DB SmithJanuary 13, 2013 - 6:46 pm

    Damn it! My little old spud gun is illegal in California. Penal Code section 12303. During all these years we've had so much fun fertilizing the hillside and never hurt anyone. Who would of thought?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • DB SmithJanuary 13, 2013 - 6:49 pm

    Damn it! My little old spud gun is illegal in California. Penal Code section 12303. During all these years we've had so much fun fertilizing the hillside and never hurt anyone. I guess that makes me a criminal like Richard. Who would of thought?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • RichardJanuary 13, 2013 - 7:39 pm

    DG Smith, your just to funny, well by golly, we have something in common. I only bring out the old potato gun when we have company to my wife’s chagrin. About guns, obviously I have deep feelings about the use of weapons that can accommodate a forty+ round magazine available in plastic for 20.00 bucks, can simply be altered to full automatic, and purchased everywhere that sells guns legally. I honestly feel at the rate their being manufactured and purchased, in a decade they will be the weapon of choice for most criminals putting law enforcement at a disadvantage and giving the general public a real reason to be scared. I understand what’s been sold has been sold, but have you given any thought to what the future holds, with over two million AR-15s manufactured and sold in recent years, aren’t there enough to go around. I have a very personal hated for that AR-15 and its destructive powers; I wish you could see though my eyes the carnage it can bestow on humans in the time it takes you to say good morning to your neighbor, enough said…. •

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • RichardJanuary 13, 2013 - 8:39 pm

    Smith, funny, now we know why some animals eat their own children.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • JohnJanuary 27, 2013 - 10:41 pm

    Chris: Judging from most of the reactions to your column, your sense of humor is too cerebral, too intellectual for this bunch. They need the written equivalent of "Three Stooges" stuff--with guns.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampJanuary 28, 2013 - 6:17 am

    John, speaking of, "humor is too cerebral", did you hear about the two gay judges who tried each other?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • EvelynJanuary 28, 2013 - 8:14 am

    "Hartzler v. City of San Jose (1975), 46 Cal.App.3d 6" - The first amended complaint alleged in substance: On September 4, 1972, plaintiff's decedent, Ruth Bunnell, telephoned the main office of the San Jose Police Department and reported that her estranged husband, Mack Bunnell, had called her, saying that he was coming to her residence to kill her. She requested immediate police aid; the department refused to come to her aid at that time, and asked that she call the department again when Mack Bunnell had arrived. Approximately 45 minutes later, Mack Bunnell arrived at her home and stabbed her to death. The police did not arrive until 3 a.m., in response to a call of a neighbor. By this time Mrs. Bunnell was dead. - HERE ********** Unfortunate for Mrs. Bunnell that she missed Chris Daley's cerebral humor.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
.

News

Herard over the back fence: Try fishing at Wakamatsu

By Bob Billingsley | From Page: B1

 
Downtown group coordinates painting, awnings

By Wendy Schultz | From Page: A1

 
More mountain lion sightings reported

By Dawn Hodson | From Page: A1, 8 Comments

Supervisor Nutting trial begins

By Cole Mayer | From Page: A1, 88 Comments | Gallery

 
Sanford murder case to jury

By Cole Mayer | From Page: A1 | Gallery

 
Gearing tax questions to correct office saves time

By Treasurer-Tax Collector | From Page: A3

.

Opinion

My turn: More than a buzzword

By Special to the Democrat | From Page: A4, 41 Comments

 
Building restored

By Mountain Democrat | From Page: A4

 
Outstanding dog

By Mountain Democrat | From Page: A4

.

Letters

National Day of Prayer

By Letters to the Editor | From Page: A5, 4 Comments

 
‘Parents, be afraid’ letter

By Letters to the Editor | From Page: A5, 32 Comments

Ukranian situation

By Letters to the Editor | From Page: A5, 5 Comments

 
Misquote

By Letters to the Editor | From Page: A5, 11 Comments

Altshuler framing

By Letters to the Editor | From Page: A5, 9 Comments

 
.

Sports

Pitching the ‘Root’ cause of Trojans’ victory

By Mike Bush | From Page: A6 | Gallery

 
Pedal power at the forefront next month

By Jerry Heinzer | From Page: A6 | Gallery

Outside with Charlie: Transitioning

By Charlie Ferris | From Page: A6

 
Sports Scene: April 22, 2014

By Democrat Staff | From Page: A7

Roundup: April 22, 2014

By Democrat Staff | From Page: A7

 
.

Prospecting

4-H’ers star at showcase

By Dawn Hodson | From Page: B1 | Gallery

 
At a glance: Look for fireballs

By Mimi Escabar | From Page: B2, 1 Comment

Authors to share their stories

By Pat Lakey | From Page: B2, 2 Comments

 
Church to host human trafficking conference

By Pollock Pines | From Page: B3

Grow For It! Flower of Easter

By Barbara Schuchart | From Page: B5

 
.

Essentials

Crime Log: April 1-3

By Cole Mayer | From Page: A2

 
Weather stats 4-22-14

By Michael Raffety | From Page: A2

Building permits 4/7-11/2014

By Michael Raffety | From Page: A2

 
.

Obituaries

Bobby Lloyd Bridges

By Contributor | From Page: A2

 
Harry Frank Harper

By Contributor | From Page: A2, 6 Comments

Marion “Wayne” Griswold

By Contributor | From Page: A2

 
.

Real Estate

.

Comics

Rubes

By Contributor | From Page: A8

 
New York Times Crossword

By Contributor | From Page: A8

Flying McCoys

By Contributor | From Page: A8

 
Speed Bump

By Contributor | From Page: A8

Tundra

By Contributor | From Page: A8

 
Horoscope, Thursday, April 24, 2014

By Contributor | From Page: A8

Horoscope, Wednesday, April 23, 2014

By Contributor | From Page: A8

 
Working It Out

By Contributor | From Page: A8

TV Listings

By Contributor | From Page: A8

 
Shoe

By Contributor | From Page: A8

Sudoku

By Contributor | From Page: A8