2007-03-10 02:36:50 · 3 answers · asked by ProLife Liberal 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Well, the obvious answers is because neither the legislature nor the people (since CA allows voter referendums) have cared enough about the issue to change the laws.
Until people get emotionally riled up about something, the general apathy level of the populace tends to keep laws in place once they are passed. It takes a lot to get enough people riled up to actually change things.
2007-03-10 03:15:58 · answer #1 · answered by coragryph 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If anything, gun control laws in California and elsewhere should be stricter! Isn't it the case that EVERY US PRESIDENT WHO WAS ASSASSINATED OR ALMOST ASSASSINATED was shot with a GUN?
The right to bear arms was included in the constitution specifically so Americans could defend themselves, their families and their country against foreign intrusions and attacks. The Second Amendment was not written so that drug dealers could protect their turf, so that gangs could kill their rivals in drive-by's, so that disgruntled post office workers could spray their co-workers or cult leaders could do away with the disobedient. It was not meant to protect armed robbers, disappointed lovers, crazed kids or careless hunters. And anybody who does not understand and agree with that principle 100% should never be given a license to own a firearm.
2007-03-10 11:25:08 · answer #2 · answered by lesroys 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Why should they? Can you give us a reason why this should be a top priority for the people of California?
2007-03-10 10:40:11 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋