California gun laws under fire
The scourge of gun violence wipes across our nation, and many Americans fear for their safety as they continue day-to-day life. The danger level of going to school, going to a concert, and just simply leaving the house has skyrocketed with the commercialization of assault weapons. Many laws are threatened or struck down, leaving the public feeling defenseless from the senseless violence that guns can bring. The Olympian took these thoughts to the California state Capitol, bravely asking the question “What are the plans to stop this?”
Recently, the Supreme Court struck down gun laws. One of these laws, which let the state of California ban guns in most public places, was recently taken down. Protected and important laws like this being threatened in the first place terrifies Californians and California-based politicians.
Sacramento politicians who met The Olympian are proud of their stance on gun violence, and the prospect of having such grounding laws stripped away goes against many of their wishes. At the Capitol, Assemblymember Liz Ortega showed deep-seated concern for her daughter and the California youth as the horror of school shootings continues to plague America.
“California is a model state for gun laws, and we need to make a change on a national level,” said Ortega.
Ortega reflected the belief of many of the politicians that California’s gun laws were a pillar for other states to learn from. However, Assemblyman Juan Alanis, former police officer and Republican, provided a different view. He expressed worry about some of our laws in place, including the “Gun Free Zones.”
“We have to also worry about these gun safety zones,” commented Alanis, “knowing that there are no guns to stop them, people think they can commit whatever crime they want.”
Alanis makes an interesting point, wondering if laws meant for protection can lead to more violence. The law he references is penal code 626.9 PC, which outlaws the carrying of guns within 1000 feet of a public school. Many Californians don’t oppose this law, as it helps them feel a little more protected from school shootings. The biggest opposition comes from gun rights supporters who value their right to bear arms. In a modern context, with the weaponry readily available, one is left to wonder what exactly is needed to protect themselves.
State Senator Nancy Skinner is passionate about keeping gun violence away from California and its citizens.
“The Supreme Court has the power to jeopardize our laws,” Skinner emphasized, “and that is a tragedy.”
Skinner is a leading voice in the fight against gun violence, and she continues to preserve what we hold dear as valiantly as she can.
The Olympian truly learned at the state Capitol that while our laws may be under fire, there is hope for the future. Many of our brightest minds are working towards protecting the citizens, and listening to their concerns and cries for help. A recently passed law, SB 2, raised the permit age from 18 to 21, being just one of many combative steps being taken against guns.
California will continue to be a leading state against guns and will fight to uphold the laws that some wish to take down. Although the threat of mass shootings and gun-related violence never truly goes away, it can be comforting to know that the people in charge are looking out for California. The battle continues and only the future will tell where California, and the United States, will take it.
I think that it is crazy that we have gun safety laws in the first place, when the root of the issue is guns themselves. I think that regardless of how many restrictions you put, people are still going to violate them as long as they’re able to acquire a gun.
I agree with this article. People at least needs a place that is safe where there is no guns. Although there are right to bear arms in the Bill of Rights. I think assault rifles, especially the auto-rifles should be ban because it is only for massacre purpose and not for hunting and other “proper” and safe purpose. Although there are other dangerous things out in the world, you’ll never know what will happens if a person holds a gun because once the trigger being pulled, there is no coming back and if that bullet hit someone, you might regret for rest of your life.
Additionally, even though there are not enough police officers to be everywhere, I think there should be no guns in urban areas, because there are already people who could help each other in times of emergency.
I think that the idea of having “gun-free zones” is bad because the main reason why mass shooters target places like schools and theatres is because they know it has a high concentration of people and it would be difficult for them to fight back. As the ability for a person to defend themselves is removed, more of these targets will be available for twisted people to commit atrocities.
Some responsible people want to be able to defend themselves. There are not enough police or law enforcement to protect everyone, or be everywhere. I’m not going to hide in fear and hope someone gets to me in time to save me. You want to punish all of the law abiding people for things they haven’t done.
What’s your definition of an assault weapon I am curious?????? Also cars are deadly weapons shall we have more strict driving laws, people use knives for unintended purposes shall we ban them, I suppose since food can cause people to get fat let’s ban that, it’s not the fault of the supposed weapon that these problems occur its the moron who is using it.