Archive, Gun safety, Issues

Apr 30 – Mad About the Senate Vote on Gun Safety? Join Our Rally

April 17, our Senate stood firmly to protect gun purchasing loopholes for criminals.

This was a great victory for those criminals who want to purchase weapons to target innocent victims.

We will not accept that.

It’s shocking.

It’s a complete disregard for all those lives lost to gun violence, including the lives of our children.

Why did so many Senators vote against it common sense gun safety laws? Because they are getting MORE pressure from constituents who oppose gun safety legislation than they are from constituents who support gun safety laws.

We have to change that.

Gun Safety Rally / March at the Mission Bay Park

Tuesday April 30th – 5:30 pm

East Mission Bay Park / Clairemont Drive overpass
Click here to RSVP

Thank you for standing up for what’s right.

Rhoda Quate
Neighborhood Team Leader
Organizing for Action (OFA)
(619) 742-9555


  1. Acegirlshusband says

    It’s a great idea except for one, little detail. Most criminals don’t purchase their guns from anyone who would background them. 1) They steal them directly, or 2) they buy them from a fence who is selling stolen guns. 3) Or they get some hapless fool to make a straw purchase and pay that person for the gun.

    But, anyway, I’m all for universal registration. It won’t make one itty, bitty dent on crime, but let’s go ahead and do it if it makes everyone feel better.

    And, yes, I’m a democrat.


  2. Criminals don’t care about laws, even if they would have passed that bill and it became law it would not have stopped a criminal from getting a gun and using it. The reason for this is simple, especially in CA all gun sales have to have a background check, even those at gun shows. This has been the law here for some time now and we still have criminals getting guns and killing people. I think the senators that voted against this bill know this and are trying to come up with a better plan.


  3. Rick says

    Point Loma Leftist Club, Dont tread on me. Support our American Constitution and stop breaking it down with 2A violations, Imigration etc, Get up and stand up for our rights.

    Support our Second Amendment 100% and nothing less….


  4. Rick says

    By registration of cars, Does it prevent theft of vehicles by bad guys NO…., By registration of vehicles does it prevent illegal drivers NO.. By registration of vehicles does it prevent illegal vehicle and vehicle deaths NO…. Enforce laws that are already in the books and stop trying to recreate the wheel… Criminals will always get the cars and weapons of choice. Stop trying to violate our constitution !!


    • Rick, thanks for your comment. There is a misconception that Manchin (D-WV) and Toomey (R-PA) ‘s recently proposed Senate legislation calls for the creation of a gun registry. It doesn’t, it is about background checks. Using your analogy to vehicles and how their use is regulated, it’s similar to asking driving license applicants to undergo an eyesight check. I hope we can all agree that only issuing vehicle licenses to sighted drivers is reasonable.


  5. May I ask you a question mister Administrator, Can you pleas explain to me how background checks make a difference?

    Last time I check criminals dont follow Laws, or rules and like it was pointed out get there guns illegally, one more question………………How does making it more burdensome on a law abiding citizen help the situation?


    • Background checks alter the behavior of both parties involved in a sale. Responsible vendors exhibit more care than when checks are not required. An alcohol or tobacco vendor inspects an ID before making a sale, as failure to do so may result in serious penalties or punishments. Similarly, straw purchases decline when checks and penalties are enforced. Sure, it may be a little more onerous when our pharmacist has to check our identity before handing over certain prescription drugs, but it’s a small price that a large majority are willing to pay.


      • But you didn’t answer my question…….Checking an ID is not even near the same as a background check. Don’t get me wrong I do agree with background checks, but I fail to see how this is going to stop any crime. Like it was stated why not enforce the laws already on the books instead of making thee feel good laws that don’t really help anything at all. Like I said already in California background checks are already enforced at all sales. How would this bill help?


  6. Interesting in that criminals who have done time still think they can own guns; according to FBI records, from 2001 – 2011, there were 100,000,000 background checks made on those who wanted to purchase a gun; 700,000 were refused with 76% of that figure being denied due to having a past criminal history. Think those guys/gals wanted to go hunting???? The bill works, and of course there’ll always be a way SOME of them will try to buy a gun on the sly, but NOT ALL will follow through. I don’t want those with past mental history getting gun either unless with someone saying they’ll be responsible, but I wouldn’t even go for that. Bet the Newton shooter’s mother would be for that if she could come back from being killed by her son pulling the trigger.
    Jeffrey, why do you believe in background checks if you don’t think it stops crime?
    The law that Congress was to deal with had more than just background checks that would have been addressed. No one needs assault weapons to defend themselves.


  7. They DO NOT stop crimes. If they stopped crime seems to me there would be a whole lot less crime in California.(but there isn’t) Define assault weapon for me please. Better yet I will define it…………An assault rifle is a Select fire weapon capable of firing in Semi automatic or full automatic or Burst mode. An AR 15 is not an assault weapon it is only a semi automatic rifle. And cannot be made into an assault weapon by someone other than a machinist that knows how to do it and then you get into a whole different category of laws. To even have parts to make a full auto weapon is illegal. And has been for many years.

    And you are correct no one needs an assault rifle. But like I said an AR15 is not an assault weapon. Just because one item look like the other does not mean they are the same. There are Magazines that hold 10 rounds but by looks they look exactly like a 30 rd magazine, they are not the same. If I had a twin brother he may look like me but he is not me! Does that make sense?

    No one needs a car or motorcycle that goes over 100 mph but there are plenty of those around. And no one is trying to ban them or tell people they cant buy them!

    Background Checks work if a person acquires a gun legally. But again most criminals don’t do that.

    It is odd you mention Newtown, from all the readings I have come across or seen an AR-15 or what the media incorrectly identifies as an assault rife, was not even used. The shooter reportedly used handguns.


    • Perhaps you could let the Tennessee Firearms Association know that they raffled off the wrong weapon.

      The weapons seized from the attacker Adam Lanza were as follows, according to the State Police:

      #1. Bushmaster .223 caliber– model XM15-E2S rifle with high capacity 30 round clips
      #2. Glock 10 mm handgun
      #3. Sig-Sauer P226 9mm handgun
      #4. Izhmash Canta-12 12 gauge Shotgun (seized from car in parking lot)

      The Bushmaster .223 (not .233) can be assumed to be a semi-automatic rifle, although variants in fully automatic have been made for military and police purchasers. It is a “lightweight, small-caliber semi-automatic rifle, with a light recoil and a variety of optional barrel lengths and targeting/aiming devices.”


    • The TFA raffled off the type of weapon that the police say he used, but you say that he didn’t. I suggested that you might want to contact the Association, to let them know.


  8. Pingback: May 12 – “Moms Don’t Forget” Day of Remembrance Rally and March in Balboa Park | The Point Loma Democratic Club

Comments are closed.