putting kids in danger, cali and the 9th support it

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/03/26/appeals-court-upholds-strict-san-francisco-gun-laws/

A federal appeals court on Tuesday upheld two San Francisco gun laws challenged by the National Rifle Association and gun owners who live in the city.

San Francisco requires handgun owners to secure weapons in their homes by storing them in a locker, keeping them on their bodies or applying trigger locks. The city also bans the sale of ammunition that expands on impact, has "no sporting purpose" and is commonly referred to as hollow-point bullets.

The San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said the requirements are reasonable attempts to increase public safety without trampling on Second Amendment rights.

Judge Sandra Ikuta, writing for the unanimous three-judge panel, said modern gun lockers can be opened quickly and "may be readily accessed in case of an emergency." She also said that gun owners concerned about safety can carry them around the home as well.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=96055

A stranger broke into a home and fatally stabbed a 9-year-old girl and her 8-year-old brother with a pitchfork before he was shot to death by sheriff's deputies.

Three other siblings, including one who was bleeding from puncture wounds, escaped by climbing through windows and running through fields to a neighbor’s house, where one called 911.

“There’s somebody in my house who I don’t know,” 14-year-old Jessica Lynn Carpenter told the dispatcher. “[He’s] stabbing my brother and sister with a pitchfork. You have to careful—he’s going to kill them.”

When deputies arrived at the house in this rural community about 60 miles north of Fresno, the stranger charged at them with the pitchfork, authorities said.

“He was pointing it at them and going right after them. He wouldn’t stop,” Assistant Sheriff Henry Strength said. “They were hollering at him to stop, but he wouldn’t stop. Finally they had to shoot him.”

Ashley Danielle Carpenter, 9, and John William Carpenter, 8, were killed in their beds at their home on Vassar Avenue on the outskirts of the city.

The children’s parents were not at home at the time, the Merced Sun-Star reported.

The girl who phoned 911 told authorities she had just woken up and when she left her bedroom she noticed that the man appeared to be getting dressed. He had closed all the windows and pushed the furniture pushed up against the walls.

Jessica ran back to her room, locked the door and tried to call for help from her phone, but the line was dead, she told relatives. She escaped out of her window and ran barefoot through the fields until she found a neighbor who was at home.

she might have been able to save her siblings if her fathers guns hadn't been locked and secured because of Cali law.
 
Also, too, what this tragedy in Merced, California has to do with a San Francisco city ordinance is beyond me. But hey, let's not let facts get in the way of our gun idolatry.
 
The people of San Francisco have elected officials who made a judgement call as to what is more safe, having guns locked up, or not having guns locked up.

The people of SF can elect new officials of they don't like the judgement call. This is how democracy works, this is not a Constitutional issue.
 
Yeah, if only guns could have been accessible to unsupervised children nothing bad would have happened.

are teenagers untrainable? or better yet, shouldn't 'unsupervised' children be allowed to defend themselves as well? or should they be forced to be potential victims for anyone?
 
Also, too, what this tragedy in Merced, California has to do with a San Francisco city ordinance is beyond me. But hey, let's not let facts get in the way of our gun idolatry.

right, because what happens in merced, stays in merced? could NEVER happen in San Fran, could it.
 
The people of San Francisco have elected officials who made a judgement call as to what is more safe, having guns locked up, or not having guns locked up.

The people of SF can elect new officials of they don't like the judgement call. This is how democracy works, this is not a Constitutional issue.

so children have no constitutional right to be safe? only anti gun adults?
 
so children have no constitutional right to be safe? only anti gun adults?

Children have a right to be safe, and the elected officials of SF, and by extension the people of SF have passed a law that they believe makes the children of SF safer.
The collective judgement of the voters of SF have elected these people to make laws for their safety.
 
Children have a right to be safe, and the elected officials of SF, and by extension the people of SF have passed a law that they believe makes the children of SF safer.
The collective judgement of the voters of SF have elected these people to make laws for their safety.

when did the elected officials of SF, and by extension the people of SF, get the power to decide constitutional rights?
 
right, because what happens in merced, stays in merced? could NEVER happen in San Fran, could it.


I'm sorry, STY, I thought when you wrote "she might have been able to save her siblings if her father's guns hadn't been locked and secured because of Cali (sic) law" you were making a statement about the particular incident in your post and were not raising a hypothetical scenario under which an unidentified female might be able to save her hypothetical siblings in a hypothetical attack and her father's hypothetical guns were locked and stored because of a hypothetical California law.
 
The people of San Francisco have elected officials who made a judgement call as to what is more safe, having guns locked up, or not having guns locked up.

The people of SF can elect new officials of they don't like the judgement call. This is how democracy works, this is not a Constitutional issue.
Would you express the same attitude if local officials negated a constitutional right that you like? Say that they required a religious test to hold public office?
 
I'm sorry, STY, I thought when you wrote "she might have been able to save her siblings if her father's guns hadn't been locked and secured because of Cali (sic) law" you were making a statement about the particular incident in your post and were not raising a hypothetical scenario under which an unidentified female might be able to save her hypothetical siblings in a hypothetical attack and her father's hypothetical guns were locked and stored because of a hypothetical California law.

you mean like SFs new law that might keep hypothetical children safe from hypothetical accidents with hypothetically unsecured guns?
 
are teenagers untrainable? or better yet, shouldn't 'unsupervised' children be allowed to defend themselves as well? or should they be forced to be potential victims for anyone?

The most likely scenario with unsupervised kids and accessible guns is not the kids using the guns to defend themselves against an unlikely attacker. It's the kids accidently shooting themselves or others, which is why storage laws exist in the first instance.
 
The most likely scenario with unsupervised kids and accessible guns is not the kids using the guns to defend themselves against an unlikely attacker. It's the kids accidently shooting themselves or others, which is why storage laws exist in the first instance.

is that the liberal MO? protect kids from accidents but not criminals?
 
no mistake here from me. I showed you anti gun males how your laws kill kids, yet you're digging in your heels on hypothetical accidents.

I order to actually show that, you'd have to first show that such a law exists in the first instance. It doesn't. And even if such a law did exist, I'm quite sure that it is not capable of wielding a pitchfork.

Also too: guns don't kill people, pitchfork wielding gun storage laws kill people.
 
Back
Top