We’ll never know. Because the liberal TV networks hosting debates will never ask the question.
One city? 
I go out there 3 or 4 times a year(reluctantly) because my wife has relatives out there. Was out there for a week only 3 weeks ago was most recent trip.
The homelessness is in just about every city plus all the other mess i mentioned.
I wouldn’t have those left wing PC pols controling my life either.
They can put up a shack in front of someone’s apartment, inject heroin and take a dump in the street. And that’s just fine in California.
Exactly. I did notice they aren’t allowed in some of the nicer locations however.
Seems a bit hypocritical of them.
Guvnah
45
Exactly.
Foot in the door. Camel’s nose under the tent.
“Common sense regulations” are not the end game. They are merely the opening of Pandora’s Box toward further and further “regulation”.
1 Like
Guvnah
46
Once it’s implemented, there would be no going back when the experiment fails.
1 Like
Cool, I’ve lived here for 30 years. It’s not as rampant as you think it is.
Capitalism
Guilds
48
Depending on the state, barriers for pools are required.
Drownings have been reduced significantly due to these requirements.
Maybe, but if the data is striking then I believe libs would have no choice. If we ban guns for 10 years and gun violence stays the same or goes up? No way would I say we should keep them banned. Honestly, I would actually agree with cons vehemently on this subject. Guns do help keep gun violence down.
More than a bit. A state that prides itself on being green allows a biohazard to happen in it’s city streets? Insane. The California EPA is asleep at the switch. Where the hell are they?
Guilds
51
There is no claim that regulations would prevent accidental shootings.
Regulations and guidelines would certainly reduce the amount of accidental shootings.
There is no serious effort to ban private firearms.
I never said regulations prevent anything. That’s actually not the purpose of regulations. Safety Regulations seeks to lower risk of accidental death.
So would a mandatory NRA class. The NRA is the world’s foremost authority on Gun safety. Would you be in favor of that?
1 Like
Guvnah
54
I consider that naive.
Step back. Banning requires confiscation.
Good luck with that.
(PS: It’s also naive to assume that this 10-year-ban would take guns out of criminal hands that already have guns.)
No question about it. YOU proposed ending the ban. You and I have both expressed our opinions about such an end in your first sentence and my reply to it at the top of this reply.
Guilds
55
What is the biggest city in the state where you live?
Guvnah
56
I wasn’t replying to you in that post.
But a question for you: If you’re not saying regulations prevent anything, what’s the point at all in having them?
Guilds
57
Yes, with oversight.
I would also require registration of guns, with their serial numbers as well.
Much like a vehicle.
That would be nothing like a vehicle.
Your vehicle is not registered with the federal government. So would the feds interfere with state law? After the feds force the states to register guns and it has no affect on gun violence, what would you do next?
Homelessness in every big city is an issue. Ever hear of Lower Wacker Drive?
It is an underworld unto itself in Chicago. It is a street beneath a street. It is much warmer on lower wacker than it is above. People live down there right on the other side of the barrier walls. It is pretty bad too.
They seek to lower risk of accidental safety incidents, I’ve said that several times.
