LOS ANGELES – The Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors voted unanimously Tuesday to explore options for regulating firearms, including restricting sales to anyone under 21, banning .50-caliber handguns, strengthening safe storage laws and prohibiting gun sales near schools.
Supervisor Sheila Kuehl recommended the review.
“This is a very important motion to me and, I think, to many others who have contacted us after yet another mass shooting in this country,” Kuehl said. “A lot of people have said what can we do, what can we do?”
Kuehl said she believed the motion, co-authored by Supervisor Mark Ridley-Thomas, was an answer of sorts.
It calls for a review of four regulations that have already been successfully implemented by other California counties and cities and were cited in a 2017 county report requested in the wake of the 2015 terror attack on San Bernardino County employees.
Supervisor Janice Hahn asked that the review be expanded to consider a ban on assault weapons and a law to prevent individuals on the federal no- fly list or convicted of domestic violence crimes from owning weapons.
The motion also directs county staffers to develop a prevention plan that looks beyond guns to include other forms of violence, such as elder abuse, child abuse and domestic violence. Current county efforts are marked by a lack of coordination between departments, according to the motion. [View it here.]
“We put a lot of money into treating trauma … (and) medical treatment … (and) the results of violence,” Kuehl said. “We do not, as yet, invest very much in prevention.”
Ridley-Thomas said the issue of gun violence is bigger than the headlines that follow tragic mass shootings, noting that more than 30,000 Americans die every year from gunshot wounds. An average of three people die daily in Los Angeles County as a result of gunfire.
“My view is we have no choice but to do this,” Ridley-Thomas said.
Many advocates of gun control turned out in support.
“We need to stand up to the NRA,” said Jenna Schwartz of Moms Demand Action. “We need to stop trying to put band-aids on bullet holes.”
Members of Moms Demand Action described the nonprofit as a national, nonpartisan, grassroots effort with 5 million members seeking to implement common-sense gun laws. They and others urged the supervisors to be proactive, rather than reactionary, and to also focus on factors underlying gun violence, including domestic abuse, racial inequities and uneven criminal sentencing.
Supervisor Kathryn Barger said she agreed with the motion’s “critical safeguards,” adding, “Our families should not have to be afraid to send their children to school.”
However, Barger also believes California laws aimed at regulating guns and ammunition lack strict enforcement and run contrary to legislation that modifies sentencing requirements for violent felonies committed using guns. She asked that the review include a look at options to resolve legal inconsistencies.
A senior from Palisades Charter High School invited the board to join school walk-outs planned across the country Wednesday to mark the one-month anniversary of the mass shooting at Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida.
“Not for thoughts and prayers, but for policies and change,” Amir Ebtehadj said. “We are the future … we will change the world.”
–
Alexis says
Gun laws stop at state lines, guns don’t.
Tim says
No civilian needs a military weapon. I support the right of militia members to own a musket. Anything else – no.
Mike says
Yea. Because the government will never go door to door and conduct illegal search and seizures stripping citizens of their guns (and right to self defense) like they did during hurricane Katrina…would they. Look it up. Videos all over YouTube.
Alexis says
@Mike…The NRA twisted a tiny part of the Katrina disaster to fit its bigger agenda. Their narrative distorts what the storm revealed about government power, and embraces a kind of paranoia that place gun owners always at the center of attention. The result is an imaginative self-centered rumor mill of misremembered Katrina, and nonsensical dystopian futures. Read what Brannon LeBouef says about the events that took place. Remember, Mike, if it’s on the internet (also you tube), it might not be true.
tsparky says
Right, then of course free speech does not apply to any digital format, including the internet.
Tom says
The next step is all guns will be stored in an armory. When you want your gun you go down and sign it out then must have it turned in by sun down. There are no other laws or rules they can enforce in California its a waist of time and money.
Tim Scott says
Funny how well that meets the definition of “well regulated militia.” If we were REALLY concerned about a militia we would have an armory where their weapons would be kept, and taken out for training or when the militia is called out. That way the militia wouldn’t be limited to people who can afford and choose to own their own guns. But the people who TALK about the second amendment are actually just interested in protecting private gun ownership.
William says
The reason gun advocates, the NRA and gun manufacturers spend millions buying politicians is because they know that the so-called “gun debate” is really up for grabs as far as legislation. And, they’ve been winning that ‘war’ so far.
They know that laws can be written and passed that will do what they don’t want. The student movement to replace such elected officials is really on to something.
Politicians owned by the gun lobby can be replaced and should be if we really want to take back our country from the above lobby.
That’s all. If new laws and regulations are unconstitutional, the courts will decide, not the gun lobby. It’s really that simple. Even trump can understand that. But I could be wrong about that.
Laughing says
The militias of the day stored their weapons at home. The militia were also distributed sentries.
Not to mention the weapons were used for home defense and hunting.
Well regulated , I believe, referred to being properly trained and joining in group trainings on a regular basis. As well as being trained in signaling and communications.
Tim Scott says
No disagreement. But the fact remains that since that day isn’t this day, and most people recognize that they have no day to day use for a privately owned weapon, a modern militia would be open to a much larger membership if it were provided with an armory of publicly provided weaponry.
Laughing says
You may not have realized it, but part of your statement is supported by ‘gun nuts’ with a twist of course. Many of them buy several/many weapons to help arm the populace. Kid you not.
My argument against a centralized armory is that it is easier to target than a well distributed system would be. Just like computers.
I may be incorrect, but I believe the percentages of gun owning versus non-gun owning homes has not changed much looking at a period of peace back then compared to a period of peace now. During the war for independence the distribution was likely much higher.
Tsparky says
-restricting sales to anyone under 21
Almost all killings involve handguns and they are already require you to be 21.
I have no idea how these laws will help keep people safe.
-banning .50-caliber handguns,
Has anyone in CA been killed by one of these (other than in movies)? They are 2 or 3 specialty guns that cost near 2,000 or more.
-strengthening safe storage laws
You are already required to lock up any gun if there is anyone under 18 in the house?
-prohibiting gun sales near schools
10 day waiting period on all gun sales so it’s not like restricting liquor near a school.
Barry-Barry says
They want your 1st amendment privilege. But, first things first, to get that, they’ll have to erode your 2nd amendment privilege, entirely. Once they’ve got your 2nd amendment privilege, in-hand, so goes your first. Their strategy: “…let’s make it harder for law abiding citizens to purchase guns, and let’s make it easier, for the hoodlums, the punks, the brothas and the gangbangers.”
William says
Barry-Barry
What has made it easier for the hoodlums, the punks, the brothas and the gangbangers to get guns is………..wait for it…..the NRA…..the gun lobby…………..the GOP.
That’s right, Barry-Barry. They prevented the ‘well-regulated’ part of the 2nd Amendment from happening. Now, there are almost as many guns as people in this country and gun manufacturers still want to keep selling more every year because, y’know, they wear out quickly or something. The proliferation of guns, guns, guns has made it easy for anyone to get ’em whether they are mentally ill like trump or not.
And, according to the NRA/gun lobby/GOP because there are so many guns available to hoodlums, etc. we need more guns to protect ourselves. Isn’t that their story? Flood the country with guns and then claim we need even more to fend off the home invaders and school shooters who have easy access to guns because the same folks above won’t let the government pass strict laws.
Remember, trump said he could shoot someone on 5th Avenue in New York and not lose any support. If a high school student running for class president said that, he’d be in trouble.
Time to let the citizens who favor stricter laws to prevail instead of the NRA writing the legislation on behlaf of the gun manufacturers. It will happen at the ballot box if the current generation of young people have their way in the coming years.
They are having a march on the 24th. Stay tuned.
Alexis says
@Barry-Barry…Most of the guns on the street are provided, first, by the Federal Firearms Licensees (FFLs.) they sell the guns to traffickers, who in turn sell the guns on the street. There are plenty of guns for everyone, and it isn’t going to get any better. Go ahead and stockpile Barry-Barry, and see where that gets you.
Angie says
@BARRY-BARRY I agree with you! It’s scary to think these laws are going to affect law biding citizens and their right to carry a gun. I’m still amazed by the people who really think these strict laws are going to prevent criminals from getting guns and from us law biding citizens to be able to protect ourselves. I guess people like to think that the guns are the problem not the person pulling the trigger.
William says
No. It’s people like you, Barry-Barry, the NRA, the gun lobby and the gop that have prevented stricter laws from being passed and allowing 300 million guns to be passed around in this country and the problems that that has created.
Now that there are so many guns and many in the hands of people who shouldn’t have them, you think you need more guns to protect yourselves from the problem you created.
CONGRATULATIONS!!!
Glenn says
So tell me William how are those strict guns laws working in Chicago? Strictest gun laws in the Country and it has the most gun related deaths in the Country. How are you going to spin that to fit your narrative? And before you attack me as a gun lover, I do not own a gun and I am not a member of the NRA.
Alexis says
@Glenn…Great comment!
William says
Glenn, it’s pointless to tell you that guns from nearby states with less restrictive gun laws have made their way into Illinois. You asked me to tell you and I just did. I’m pretty sure you won’t accept an answer that you requested.
Why do you think the gun lobby contributes to trump and congressional members since you think that state laws that are the only laws on gun sales? trump and congressional members work for the federal govenment not the state of Illinois. Did you not know that?
Do you really think that your reply to me was a “great comment”?
There. I didn’t attack you as a gun lover. I responded to your reply with some well-known facts that I didn’t have to research. And, your reply didn’t come from your own thinking but a comment heard millions of times already by……………………………….the NRA/gun lobby’gop/fox news folk and others.
Because you don’t own a gun or are not an NRA member doesn’t excuse your reply based on not knowing who writes the laws for the nation.
Was that a spin or just the facts on who writes nationsal gun laws?
Now, it’s your turn. Your silence will be noted.
Alexis says
Nevada with less restrictive gun laws, have an impact on gun violence in California. Guns make their way into California from states with less restrictive gun laws. So all the sweeping gun laws, and restrictions in California are futile. Why? Federal government trumps state law. It’s been this way before Trump, the GOP, and Fox News.
William says
Alexis, that’s why the Parkland students are leading the way.
They have been saying “Replace those electied officials. local, state or federal, that are owned by the gun lobby.”
Debate at this point is futile. I give you Glenn’s reply that is used as an excuse while ignoring the federal government’s part in it. Again, why does the gun looby contribute to federal officials? Pointing to Chicago is called “deflection”.
Like you said “Federal law trumps state law.” so why did you say Glenn’s reply was a “Great comment”. He was using Chicago as an example of state laws not working to make his point. Was Glenn trying to make the point that federal laws are needed because it sure didn’t seem that way?
Now, do you get it? IT’S ABOUT FEDERAL LAWS, so quit talking about state laws being useless to make your point. It doesn’t work and it shows how fuitle the debate is at this point if you, Glenn, the NRA, fox news, trump et al are going to keep doing that.
Frankly, I don’t know what you and Glenn are trying to say. Are you both arguing for stricter federal laws? If so, say so. You are both making a case for state laws being ineffective.
Glenn says
The point was gun laws do not work. The criminals will always find a way to get them. And yes I am aware of the difference between state and federal gum laws. Also where in my comment did you see me saying anything about me making a great comment to you? I was just curious how you would spin it to fit your narrative and got about what I expected.
William says
Glenn. The “great comment” referred to Alexis’ reply to you. It was a 2-fer.
You were trying to make a case that state laws didn’t keep Chicago safe while ignoring that federal laws would help prevent other states with lax laws being able to provide guns across the state line to Illinois.
Like I’ve said many times, it’s pointless to debate people like you because your arguments are so flawed and when I pointed it out to you, you still didn’t get.
You’re the one spinning your narrative which is that laws don’t work but you only pointed to Chicago’s strict laws as your example. So, why do the NRA/gun lobby/gop work so hard and spend so much money trying to prevent any federal laws from takling effect?
Don’t bother replying as your arguments are bankrupt and aren’t worthy of debate.
Or, you can reply and prove it.
Alexis says
Actually William, you are the one with the flawed argument. You are too one sided to see the bigger picture. You only see the color blue and it is blinding you, and that is why it is futile to debate you. Your mind is completely closed, and to have a debate you have to be willing to see all sides and you have never been willing to do that. It’s like California being a sanctuary state, but that isn’t going to do any good, is it? The feds are doubling down on rounding up so called illegal immigrants. All of this has been going during all administrations, William. This administration is just more chaotic and in your face. Don’t bother to reply because we both think very differently. You are entitled to your opinion , Glenn is entitled to his, and I am entitled to mine.
Alexis says
William…I see much more than just your side. That is why I said Glenn’s comment is great. I am not political; I despise politics, because I see too many people with opposite views, tearing each other down, by thinking they have the truth and the other does not. The ugly tribal mind-set that says who’s side are you on anyway? Guess what, William, we’re all in this together.
William says
Alexis,
My point with Glenn was his pointing to Chicago’s gun laws as being ineffective which they are since guns can cross state lines readily. He deliberatley ignored the existence of federal laws to make that point. That’s why national gun laws need to be passed and enforced and why the gun lobby contributes to trump and congressional members….to prevent such laws from being passed. That fact seems lost on Glenn and others who try to point to Chicago or even California’s laws as being ineffective. They aren’t being honest.
I also make the point that if he or other like-minded folk are going to make dishonest and/or misleading statements about the gun issue the gun debate is over. You can’t debate with people like Glenn and his ilk.
The students acitvated by the Parkland tragedy are leading the way by saying that we need to get rid of elected officials who are owned by the gun lobby. That’s all there is to it. The debate is over. And, I’ll keep saying that as long as the gun folk keep putting forth their tired, old NRA talking points.
BTW I didn’t think Glenn’s comment was a “great comment”. Not at all for the reason I gave above.
Glenn says
Here are some facts for you regarding the shooting at a school in Maryland this week.Here is what did not work to stop the shooting. Maryland has gun laws that
Ban Assault weapons
It also has a 10 round magazine limit
Universal background requirement
exhausted application process to obtain a permit to purchase a handgun
Prohibits purchase of more than 1 firearm per month
Handgun registration requirement
Licensing of handgun owners
Extremely limited approval for a concealed carry permit
Refuses to honor any concealed carry permits from other states
Federal law that prohibits handgun possesion of anyone under 21
Federal Law against carrying without a permit
Federal law against discharging a firearm in public
Federal gun free zone
Federal law against attempted murder
What did stop the attack was am armed personwho engaged the shooter in less than a minute.
I included both Federal and State laws so there is nothing misleading about this comment, not that there was anything misleading about my statement about Chicago, it is a fact you cannot argue but deflect to other areas about why gun laws do not work
Alby says
Barry bo barry. They’re not priviliges, they’re rights.
Tim Scott says
I don’t get the “no sales near schools” part. Liquor and pot sales, and porn, are restricted so the students can’t run out at lunchtime and see if they can get someone to straw buy for them. But it isn’t like school shootings have anything to do with that. To the best of my knowledge there hasn’t been a school shooter who just stopped on their way there to pick up a weapon.