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

By: Evelyn

Evelyn — Mon, 28 Jan 2013 16:14:22 +0000

"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.

By: Phil Veerkamp

Phil Veerkamp — Mon, 28 Jan 2013 14:17:00 +0000

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

By: John

John — Mon, 28 Jan 2013 06:41:01 +0000

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.

By: Richard

Richard — Mon, 14 Jan 2013 04:39:17 +0000

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

By: Richard

Richard — Mon, 14 Jan 2013 03:39:59 +0000

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….
•

By: DB Smith

DB Smith — Mon, 14 Jan 2013 02:49:06 +0000

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?

By: DB Smith

DB Smith — Mon, 14 Jan 2013 02:46:53 +0000

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?

By: DB Smith

DB Smith — Mon, 14 Jan 2013 02:23:36 +0000

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.

By: Richard

Richard — Mon, 14 Jan 2013 02:15:34 +0000

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?”

By: Richard

Richard — Mon, 14 Jan 2013 02:12:53 +0000

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

By: DB Smith

DB Smith — Mon, 14 Jan 2013 01:40:57 +0000

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

By: Richard

Richard — Mon, 14 Jan 2013 01:40:28 +0000

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.”

By: DB Smith

DB Smith — Mon, 14 Jan 2013 01:30:17 +0000

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

By: Richard

Richard — Mon, 14 Jan 2013 01:23:49 +0000

Dated Dec. 20, 2012****

By: Richard

Richard — Mon, 14 Jan 2013 01:20:41 +0000

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.

By: Paddy O'furniture

Paddy O'furniture — Mon, 14 Jan 2013 00:30:00 +0000

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”.

By: Richard

Richard — Sun, 13 Jan 2013 21:40:30 +0000

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

By: Richard

Richard — Sun, 13 Jan 2013 21:27:01 +0000

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.

By: Jim Riordan

Jim Riordan — Sun, 13 Jan 2013 21:14:29 +0000

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.

By: Paddy O'furnture

Paddy O'furnture — Sun, 13 Jan 2013 21:03:09 +0000

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?

By: Richard

Richard — Sun, 13 Jan 2013 20:50:48 +0000

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.

By: Jim Riordan

Jim Riordan — Sun, 13 Jan 2013 19:54:45 +0000

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.

By: Jim Riordan

Jim Riordan — Sun, 13 Jan 2013 19:45:05 +0000

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

By: Richard

Richard — Sun, 13 Jan 2013 19:33:49 +0000

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.

By: Richard

Richard — Sun, 13 Jan 2013 19:04:06 +0000

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

By: Richard

Richard — Sun, 13 Jan 2013 19:00:54 +0000

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

By: Jim Riordan

Jim Riordan — Sun, 13 Jan 2013 18:38:45 +0000

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.

By: Richard

Richard — Sun, 13 Jan 2013 17:32:57 +0000

Kirk, good advice.

By: Evelyn

Evelyn — Sun, 13 Jan 2013 17:30:34 +0000

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

By: Evelyn

Evelyn — Sun, 13 Jan 2013 17:29:24 +0000

By: Richard

Richard — Sun, 13 Jan 2013 16:59:20 +0000

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.

By: Paddy O'furniture

Paddy O'furniture — Sun, 13 Jan 2013 16:39:48 +0000

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

By: Kirk MacKenzie

Kirk MacKenzie — Sun, 13 Jan 2013 16:39:26 +0000

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.

By: Richard

Richard — Sun, 13 Jan 2013 16:17:43 +0000

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.

By: Kirk MacKenzie

Kirk MacKenzie — Sun, 13 Jan 2013 16:09:45 +0000

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.

By: DB Smith

DB Smith — Sun, 13 Jan 2013 15:38:44 +0000

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.

By: Kirk MacKenzie

Kirk MacKenzie — Sun, 13 Jan 2013 13:55:19 +0000

“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.

By: cllea

cllea — Sun, 13 Jan 2013 06:13:25 +0000

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.

By: Capt. Jake Howard

Capt. Jake Howard — Sun, 13 Jan 2013 05:03:17 +0000

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.

By: Richard

Richard — Sun, 13 Jan 2013 04:14:22 +0000

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.

By: Eldorado

Eldorado — Sun, 13 Jan 2013 04:05:23 +0000

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.

By: Student

Student — Sun, 13 Jan 2013 03:06:02 +0000

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

By: cllea

cllea — Sun, 13 Jan 2013 02:12:17 +0000

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.

By: DB Smith

DB Smith — Sun, 13 Jan 2013 01:24:18 +0000

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.

By: Richard

Richard — Sun, 13 Jan 2013 00:34:28 +0000

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?

By: Richard

Richard — Sat, 12 Jan 2013 23:42:28 +0000

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…

By: Paddy O'furniture

Paddy O'furniture — Sat, 12 Jan 2013 23:34:42 +0000

I peed my pants just reading your post…

By: Richard

Richard — Sat, 12 Jan 2013 23:27:45 +0000

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.

By: Paddy O'furniture

Paddy O'furniture — Sat, 12 Jan 2013 22:50:46 +0000

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 ;^)

By: Richard

Richard — Sat, 12 Jan 2013 22:30:02 +0000

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.