Comments on: Which Journalist Will Ask Kamala About Her Decade-Long Ban on Handgun Sales in California?

By: Mark N.

Mark N. — Sun, 22 Sep 2024 06:02:25 +0000

There are two things not mentioned: First, Kamala’s certification was under penalty of perjury, which is important because her certification was undeniably false, i.e., she committed perjury. That lets you know how far this woman will go to get her way., Second, the law as it was then written required that the microstamp appear in TWO places on the spent cartridge, and the allegedly compliant machine only stamped it in one place, on the primer. Then there is the whole issue that, as Konstadinos points out, the experimental method is not reliable; after as few as twenty rounds, the microstamp is illegible. And yes, it is easily defeated, which the Legislature sought to remedy by banning the sale of “blank” firing pins, and criminalizing the exchange of or filing of firing pins. There is no cure for the use of stolen firearms, unless of course “tracing” is effective. (I think it significant that the ATF refuses to release statistics on the number of traces that actually lead to a perpetrator, suggesting that it is embarrassingly low.)

By: .40 cal Booger

.40 cal Booger — Sat, 21 Sep 2024 20:31:25 +0000

I think also it should be noted that Comrade Kamala’s ‘gun owner ship’ (if its true) is not like yours or my gun ownership. She automatically qualified for it with no questions asked because of her position and didn’t need to ask the state for ‘permission’. She did not need to have her ‘suitability’ determined by the state of California and wait. And although she might (yes, that’s might) have had to do the 4473 if she purchased it herself she was exempt from the very background check she wants to subject others to and its more likely that the state bought it and gave it to her or just gave her one they already had thus pretty darn likely no 4473 was done by her. So Kamala is the ‘elite ruler’ hypocrite type of ‘gun owner’ (if she does actually own a gun) that is ‘privileged’ and sees herself as above us mere mortals. So she doesn’t need to worry about defense because she has armed security available to her and is immune from the trials and tribulations we mere mortals are subjected to so we can exercise a constitutional right that says specifically ‘shall not be infringed’. So sure, she says very disengenously she supports the 2A, she says that because she is free to do as she pleases to have guns while the rest of us she wants subjected to her ‘ruling’ us.

So no Kamala, you are not a gun owner like us.

By: .40 cal Booger

.40 cal Booger — Sat, 21 Sep 2024 20:02:22 +0000

In reply to Fix2!. Yes

By: Fox2!

Fox2! — Sat, 21 Sep 2024 17:59:40 +0000

In reply to Fix2!. Typo in nick.

By: Fix2!

Fix2! — Sat, 21 Sep 2024 17:59:04 +0000

Is the Attorney General an “Exempt Person” as a law enforcement official?