Kerby Anderson

Before we head to Thanksgiving dinners, I wanted to talk about the mass shooting in California. Although the shooting and the public reactions were similar, the venue was different and worthy of a mention. For months, pundits and candidates have talked about the need for “common sense gun control measures.” Whenever I use the term on radio, I inevitably get a caller asking me what these common sense measures might be. I explain that is mostly a term probably developed from focus groups and used so you don’t have to go into specifics. But I think you could say that the state of California has implemented most (if not all) of the measures gun control advocates desire. Don’t take my word for it, just look at the number one rating the Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence gives to California. It exceeds every other state in gun regulation. Obviously, it requires all gun sales to be processed through a licensed dealer who must do a background check. It bans most so-called “assault weapons” as well as .50 caliber rifles. It restricts the sale, transfer, manufacture, and possession of large capacity ammunition magazines. It regulates gun shows. It imposes a ten-day waiting period. It gives local law enforcement discretion to deny a license to carry a concealed weapon. And it became the first jurisdiction in the nation to enact a Gun Violence Restraining order. Actually, that’s a partial list, but you get the idea. If there was ever a state that has implemented what advocates have called “common sense” gun laws, it is the state of California. Thus, the obvious question we should ask of people advocating more restrictive gun control is: What additional laws could have prevented the shooting in the California bar? I can’t think of any. Sadly, it’s hard to prevent an evil or unbalanced person who wants to use a weapon to kill others.