A friend just sent me a flowchart he’d come across for demystifying California’s manifold “common-sense-gun-laws.” The level of complexity is so high, California gun owners will probably have better luck printing this as a Twister Mat. Fall over and you go to jail for evil-looking-gun.

Here’s the chart. It’s not going to fit in your wallet, or above your car visor.

That’s some Twister Mat. Try it at your next Patriot BBQ. Right hand: 16 inch barrel. Left foot: define pistol grip. Oh! And he fell over and ‘goes to jail!’

Laws Designed to Make you a Law Breaker

When you see this much complicated gobbledegook, all it accomplishes is to ensure that every citizen is guilty of something. Even if you print that flowchart and tape it to your gun safe and your monitor and your credit card so you never accidently buy a gun in violation of all those laws, how do you know you have the most up-to-date version? Maybe the law just quietly changed last week and that firearm in your car that was legal a week ago is now considered the hallmark of a mass shooter [you] on his way to the crime scene.

I mean, look at that gun! It just looks evil! Just like in the Hollywood movies!

Here’s a fascinating video by a law professor and criminal defense attorney in which he strongly advises all hearers to NEVER speak to the police about a crime without an attorney present. Why? He assumes zero police corruption. But he explains how there are so many thousands of federal laws on the books that no man can track them all. It turns out our federal laws are so convoluted, you could receive a felony conviction for “Possession of Lobster.” This is not a joke and he shows you where this law is in the federal code. He goes on to show how even if you (or your client, for law students) talks to the police and only says completely honest and innocent things including an alibi, your words can ONLY be used against you and innocent mistakes in the system could still land a conviction which would not have stuck if you had not talked to the police.

I highly recommend the whole thing. The first half is the law professor making an excellent case for the 5th amendment. The second half is a cop who explains why everything the law professor said is exactly right. But if you’re short on time, the first 10 minutes or so are must see for any US citizen.

The info in the above video is both entertaining and will keep you out of a world of injustice, so schedule a movie night to watch the whole 45 minutes if you must. It’s worth every minute of your time.

It’s Going to Get Worse

You’ve probably seen the news about an “elementary school shooting” in California just yesterday. Sadly, the headlines are misleading. My first impression from the headlines was that some young kid had brought a gun to school and gone on a shooting rampage. I was shocked that these Columbine-style killings are happening at a younger and younger age. Fortunately, my initial impression was wrong.

Here’s what you find when digging through the details. Some older man (age 53) knows an older woman (age 53) for a few years, and they decide to get married. The older woman teaches at the local elementary school. Both adults have previous marriages, so this is their “redo.” She thinks he is of great character, because he also happens to be a pastor. Yet somehow, after just over a month of marriage, the woman realizes that he’s totally not the person she thought she’d gotten to know over the years and separates from him and pursues divorce. None of this justifies (or even suggests what’s coming) but we should be able to see trouble brewing. A lot of men don’t take a one-sided divorce well, especially if it is their second time around. But he IS A PASTOR, so he’s past whatever sins he practiced years ago, right?

Anyway, pastor guy comes to the school while carrying concealed. He makes it through every access point with no employee noticing or stopping him. A school is already a gun-free zone, and had someone noticed they’d know he shouldn’t be armed. I’m not blaming any employees. I’m just making the ex-military security observation that control points existed (and that’s great), but the existing control points all failed to prevent an incident, so something went wrong there.

Next security question: where’s the armed defense? If the teachers and staff are not allowed to be armed, shouldn’t there be a security detail at least? Armed campus police officers? If this guy was thinking like many killers do, he was probably thinking that she would definitely be defenseless while on school grounds.

It is tragic to hear that a child died and another was injured (and all the rest traumatized), but it seems that nothing so far indicates that any kids were targets. Sounds like the perp opened fire and accidently hit some kids while aiming for his estranged spouse. After he got her, he did himself in. Mass shooters, on the other hand, have demonstrated a habit of trying to maximize casualties until they run out of ammo or until a shootout with the cops puts an end to the rampage. This guy didn’t even wait for police response before he was done. Ergo, not a mass shooter.

All together, a more accurate headline would have said something like “Angry husband shoots estranged schoolteacher wife, school kids injured and slain in the shootout.” Sorry, but “elementary school shooting” sounds like the school kids in general were the target, when in fact the target was a specific school employee involved in a domestic dispute, who happened to be at the school when the killer came for her.

It’s overblown in the media, making it sound like a Columbine repeat when it is nothing of the sort.

But here’s why California’s flowchart above might be about to get more complicated. At the end of the news story(emphasis added in italics):

Rep. Pete Aguilar (D-Redlands) issued a statement in response to the shooting, saying … “As we have done before, we need to come together to support those affected and rededicate ourselves to ending gun violence in our community.”

Ending Gun Violence?

You can be sure that in the days to come, you’ll see the standard talking points about “common-sense-gun-laws” highlighted again and again.

BUT WHY ARE THEY ONLY DEDICATED TO ENDING GUN VIOLENCE? What about other violence?

I mean, would headlines like this be totally cool in this community: “Boyfriend forced to watch as refugee rapes his girlfriend at knifepoint during camping trip“?

I mean, it’s not GUN violence, so Rep. Aguilar doesn’t see a need to end that kind of thing if it were happening in his community, right? That refugee made a local man watch his girlfriend get raped at knifepoint. At least it’s not gun violence, so we can all relax. But if the refugee had used a gun, then that would be truly unconscionable!

That’s how you know the talking points are not about stopping violence all around, but about reducing legal gun ownership. I mean, this pastor may have been booked for domestic violence but all charges were eventually dropped. There’s nothing yet that says he wasn’t allowed to have a gun. So surely if there were a law that all guns are illegal, like Britain or something, then all violent crime would come to an abrupt end, right?

The problem isn’t even simply violence, but lawlessness. (At this level, we’re not even digging into a discussion of human nature…) I’ve never seen an explanation for why a criminal who shows up someplace with an intent to commit murder would suddenly balk at a gun control law. “Aw, nuts! I was gonna totally waste this person, but my firearm has a detachable magazine that can hold more than 10 rounds. I don’t wanna take the heat for violating Penal Code section 30515 (a)(2) on top of first degree murder! Guess I’ll just have to kill her with this box-cutter knife. I can handle the years I’ll be doing for just that…”

And if the problem is lawlessness, good luck to a local sanctuary city government explaining to its citizens: “We will not be following the law when it comes to immigration and that’s a virtue, but you still have to follow the law about the types of features you can have on your gun, or you’ll do hard time!”

Solution?

I don’t see any hope of California suddenly reversing itself. Not unless it falls to such a state of violence in the streets that, like Detroit, the police chief finally advises citizens that their only hope of staying safe is to arm themselves.

Do you want to be there for that level of chaos?

If you’re sane, and are comfortable with fellow citizens being responsibly armed to the teeth, Flee The City now!