San Francisco Bans Guns!


Squirrelhunter91

Recommended Posts

What idiots !!!!!!!

--------------------

San Francisco Voters Approve Handgun Ban By LOUISE CHU, Associated Press Writer

Wed Nov 9, 6:27 AM ET

SAN FRANCISCO - Voters approved ballot measures to ban handguns in San Francisco and urge the city's public high schools and college campuses to keep out military recruiters.

ADVERTISEMENT

The gun ban prohibits the manufacture and sale of all firearms and ammunition in the city, and makes it illegal for residents to keep handguns in their homes or businesses.

Only two other major U.S. cities — Washington and Chicago — have implemented such sweeping handgun bans.

With all precincts reporting early Wednesday, 58 percent of voters backed the proposed gun ban while 42 percent opposed it.

Although law enforcement, security guards and others who require weapons for work are exempt from the measure, current handgun owners would have to surrender their firearms by April.

A coalition led by the National Rifle Association has said it plans to challenge the initiative in court, arguing that cities do not have the authority to regulate firearms under California law.

The military recruitment initiative won with 60 percent in favor and 40 percent against.

The measure, dubbed "College Not Combat," opposes the presence of military recruiters at public high schools and colleges. However, it would not ban the armed forces from seeking enlistees at city campuses, since that would put schools at risk of losing federal funding.

It encourages city officials and university administrators to exclude recruiters and create scholarships and training programs that would reduce the military's appeal to young adults.

"We now have the moral weight of the city behind us, and it's definitely a valuable asset to have in our corner," said Bob Matthews, an activist for the proposition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: San Francisco Bans Guns!

[ QUOTE ]

"i wonder what their problem is?" wake up, ks. they are 1) californians 2) liberals 3) faggots.

what would they need guns for? lol

[/ QUOTE ]

First off, what an ignorant comment. And this from a Realtree Pro? Wonderful representative of Bill Jordans fine company you are.

Second of all, the voters voted for it, democracy in action. If thats what they want, that's what they'll get. It's a lot better than the city council deciding for the whole population. I don't see why everybody cares so much on here what the people in San Fran decided for their city. Like I said, I could understand if the council forced it on them, but they didn't. The citizens made their bed, let them lie in it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest INHunterman

Re: San Francisco Bans Guns!

[ QUOTE ]

"i wonder what their problem is?" wake up, ks. they are 1) californians 2) liberals 3) faggots.

what would they need guns for? lol

[/ QUOTE ]

Ain't that the truth!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: San Francisco Bans Guns!

The citizens may have voted for it and those that did vote for it will have to live with it. But I don't care if it was only a handful on the city council who forced it on the whole population or a vote by 58 percent. That means that 42 percent of the people who opposed it (and they were probably gun owners or sportsmen) have had it forced on them. They now either have to get rid of their handguns or be in violation of a law that contradicts a constitutionally guaranteed right.

I don't care if it's only a hanful shoving it down your throat or a majority - it still leaves a bad taste.

Why don't we restrict other rights - only liberal comments can be put forth in the press; or cops have to get search warrants if they want to; only minorities get Miranda read to them; and so forth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: San Francisco Bans Guns!

[ QUOTE ]

or cops have to get search warrants if they want to;

[/ QUOTE ]

I certainly hope they do.

edited part actually a addition.

Then by the same reasoning all elections and votes are wrong also?or just the things you thing should be your way?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: San Francisco Bans Guns!

[ QUOTE ]

or cops have to get search warrants if they want to;

[/ QUOTE ]

They don't even need a search warrant thanks to the Patriot Act, all they have to do is say you are a terrorist, or think you may be one.

I agree with above comments. Any vote is taken is going to be a specific law forced on those who were opposed to it. Heck, I didn't vote for Bush, so, technically, he was forced on me, am I gonna take it to court and say it violates my rights as a citizen to have a President I don't want, no, I live with it, take the good with the bad, and hope for a more favorable outcome the next time around.

Now, you want to talk forced decisions. Lets talk about the annexation of 27 square miles and 40,000+ citizens into the City of Fayetteville. State law allows a city to annex any part of the county they want, whenever they want, the Mayor drew up the plan, the city council voted on it, done. Now there are 40,000+ people who are paying taxes on a sewer system that isn't there and won't be there for a decade. Needless to say that last Tuesday, the Mayor and 2 city councilman are today looking for new jobs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: San Francisco Bans Guns!

[ QUOTE ]

or just the things you thing should be your way?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not my way - but my rights. You are correct - I will object and I hope you would too. The only way the government gets away with taking away rights is because people allow it.

And the election of a President is a whole lot different than the loss of a right. One is temporary and can change the other is more permanent. If the ability of one city to take away your rights goes unchallanged and is held lawful, then what if a domino effect occurs and this is adopted by other towns, then counties, then states, then...... And, before long it won't apply to just handguns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: San Francisco Bans Guns!

[ QUOTE ]

Now, you want to talk forced decisions. Lets talk about the annexation of 27 square miles and 40,000+ citizens into the City of Fayetteville. State law allows a city to annex any part of the county they want, whenever they want, the Mayor drew up the plan, the city council voted on it, done. Now there are 40,000+ people who are paying taxes on a sewer system that isn't there and won't be there for a decade. Needless to say that last Tuesday, the Mayor and 2 city councilman are today looking for new jobs.

[/ QUOTE ]

They do that sort of thing here all the time Marc.

We had a vote here a few years ago, whether or not we wanted to be annexed into the city or not. The whole neighborhood voted NO, so the city turned around and counted up all the empty property and lots in the area, and put a yes vote on them. tongue.giftongue.gif

How's that for crazy.

Then they turned around and condemned all the septic tanks and fields in the area, and last year I was forced to pay $10,000.00 to hook up to the city sewer and fill in my perfectly working septic tank. tongue.gif

I know..I'm getting off topic grin.giffrown.gifblush.giftongue.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: San Francisco Bans Guns!

Wake up folks and think about it. The right to self defense (which is what this is really all about) is one of the things guaranteed by the Bill of Rights. If they can vote to restrict a person's right to self defense, they can just as easily vote to restrict the right to free speech, the right to freely practice your religion, or the right to freely assemble.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: San Francisco Bans Guns!

[ QUOTE ]

There needs to be an effort from every corner of this country to oppose this. It starts in a couple places then when they get away with it now the politicians and anti's in say Detriot decide to try it. Then Baltimore, and LA, and Boston. It seeps all over the country. Sportsman in Florida need to be concerned with what happens in California as well as sportsman in Portland Maine need to be concerned with what happens in Houston.

I'll tell ya one thing. Don't come pounding on my door looking for my firearms. That crap don't fly here.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree completely

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest INHunterman

Re: San Francisco Bans Guns!

[ QUOTE ]

There needs to be an effort from every corner of this country to oppose this. It starts in a couple places then when they get away with it now the politicians and anti's in say Detriot decide to try it. Then Baltimore, and LA, and Boston. It seeps all over the country. Sportsman in Florida need to be concerned with what happens in California as well as sportsman in Portland Maine need to be concerned with what happens in Houston.

I'll tell ya one thing. Don't come pounding on my door looking for my firearms. That crap don't fly here.

[/ QUOTE ]

Bravo my friend bravo! wink.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: San Francisco Bans Guns!

Welcome to the forums octoberman.

I could not disagree more. At least on the part where you state that all is lost and we might as well give up. I for one don't subscribe to such a defeatist attitude, and like the founders of this nation, I'm both willing and able to take up my arms and defend the Constitution and our way of life from all enemies, BOTH FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: San Francisco Bans Guns!

[ QUOTE ]

I am completely staggered by the American citizens support of "Homeland Security", and "The Patriot Act". I shake my head as I see people who claim to be lovers of freedom, and liberty, hail a Federal Government decree that allows the Government to by-pass what few rights to privacy, and due process the citizens have left, in the name of "security", and "protection"

To me it's almost laughable to worry about owning a gun in America, when at the Governments whim, you can be arrested without charge, and jailed without time limits, and denied all rights under the Constitution.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think I found a new friend. grin.gif

Seriuosly though, great post, although some of my brethren on here may not agree entirely with you. I for one have never been a fan of the USA PATRIOT Act because of the things you mentioned. You should have been on here when I posed a question to my more conservative friends here, as to whether they would support gun registration if it were put under the guise of "Homeland Security" and the USA PATRIOT Act, you would have been surprised at the number who said they would.

During the campaigns, all I heard was how ani-gun John Kerry and the rest of the Democratic candidates were/are. Well, what has George Bush done to secure our gun rights and hunting rights since being in office, except pose for the same photo ops as John Kerry holding a shotgun. The only comments I remember Bush saying as far as gun ownership was that he would re-sign the AWB if passed again in Congress. This is hardly a quote from a supposed supporter of gun rights if based on the litmus test applied by some forum members.

It seems to me that no matter who the politician is, he will make decisions that reflect the voice of the most vocal group, minority or majority, because that is what drives his approval ratings.

Welcome to the forums octoberman.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: San Francisco Bans Guns!

Welcome to the forums octoberman. cool.gif

I agree with what you have written for the most part. However it is my hope that many of the followers of both political parties will wake up someday and send a message against the lobbyists and special interest groups who rule them by voting them out of office.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: San Francisco Bans Guns!

[ QUOTE ]

How do you propose to stand against "foreign" and "domestic" enemies, when the establishment of Government has all but outlawed your right to form into an armed militia???. How can our friends in the states under powerful Federal sway stand in defense of tyranny when the very law they are sworn to uphold as citizens disallows their right to carry firearms, be they concealed, or open??? How can we as citizens choose the weapons we feel are needed for defense, when the Federal government defines which weapons are "acceptable" for the citizen to pocess???

[/ QUOTE ]

I propose to do so by educating people as to the true meaning of the Constitution, especially the Bill of Rights; by supporting and voting for the most conservative candidate in every election; by supporting organizations that are working to strengthen the Constitution (i.e. the NRA); and, as a last resort, by force of arms against the tyrants.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.