Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Voters say no to firearms in San Francisco
San Francisco Examiner ^ | 11/09/05 | Bonnie Eslinger

Posted on 11/09/2005 7:00:49 AM PST by Mr. Mojo

True to their left-leaning reputation, San Francisco voters decided by a wide margin to ban the possession of handguns within city limits.

Proposition H makes it illegal for residents to keep handguns in their homes or businesses and prohibits the manufacture and sale of all firearms and ammunition in San Francisco. The City’s new ordinance will be the strictest in the nation, since it requires existing guns to be turned in to law enforcement officials by April 1. Law enforcement personnel and others who require weapons for work are exempt from the measure.

Supervisor Chris Daly, the author of the ballot measure, said the law was needed to reduce the number of guns in a city plagued by gun violence, with 88 homicides so far this year, about 60 percent of them by handguns, according to officials. Fewer guns in The City, according to Daly, means fewer guns for criminals to get their hands on.

“This is sensible gun control,” Daly said. “Prop. H isn’t going to solve violence in San Francisco, but it’s one part that we can do to get a handle on this epidemic of violence, most of it handgun-related.”

A coalition of organizations opposed to Prop. H, led by the National Rifle Association, have vowed they’ll be in court today to begin their legal challenge to San Francisco’s new law, arguing that cities do not have the authority to regulate firearms under California law.

“If you ban firearms, the criminals will have them and the law-abiding citizens won’t,” said Alan Gottlieb, chairman of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms. “San Francisco will be a magnet for crimes.”

Gottlieb said he was involved in the legal effort that took down a 1982 measure banning guns in San Francisco, which was signed into law by then-Mayor Dianne Feinstein.

Daly said the new proposition was carefully crafted to avoid the same legal traps that allowed the courts to reject The City’s first gun measure.

Only two other major U.S. cities — Washington in 1976 and Chicago in 1982 — have implemented similar handgun bans. Unlike San Francisco’s ordinance, however, both cities permitted residents to keep guns owned when the ordinance went into effect.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events; US: California
KEYWORDS: banglist; sanfrancisco; secondamendment
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-111 next last
To: Mr. Mojo

Proposition H????


41 posted on 11/09/2005 7:26:38 AM PST by LIConFem (A fronte praecipitium, a tergo lupi.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Mojo
the law was needed to reduce the number of guns in a city plagued by gun violence

Do keep us posted on:

A) Before and after data on the number of guns

B) Before and after data on the number of gunshots seen at SFGH.

42 posted on 11/09/2005 7:27:36 AM PST by Jim Noble (Non, je ne regrette rien)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie


PRECISELY!


43 posted on 11/09/2005 7:27:56 AM PST by onyx ((Vicksburg, MS) North is a direction. South is a way of life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Mojo
Proposition H

Sounds suspiciously like "Preparation H". Anyway, this truly conforms to the reputation of the city's polity of being a group of people who are fixated on being shafted in every way possible.

Morons and fools!

Regards, Ivan

44 posted on 11/09/2005 7:28:02 AM PST by MadIvan (You underestimate the power of the Dark Side - http://www.sithorder.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stevio
It was win-win. If it failed in SF, the gun grabbers are done. If it passed, it awakes a sleeping giant, and doesn't surprise most people.

If it passed statewide, or in someplace like Columbus Ohio, then I'd be more scared.

45 posted on 11/09/2005 7:37:48 AM PST by Dan from Michigan ("I got a shotgun and a rifle and a four wheel drive and a country boy can survive")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Mojo

Gun violence will likely increase over the next couple of years. That seems to be the norm for such situations. Guns now become more glamorous for gang wannabes just because of the ban.


46 posted on 11/09/2005 7:41:28 AM PST by ThanhPhero (di hanh huong den La Vang)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Mojo

More evidence in support of the theory of natural selection.

I think the proper response from the state and federal government is to make sure that San Francisco does not suck up a disporportionate amount of law enforcement funding and let them face the consequences of their decision.


47 posted on 11/09/2005 7:42:24 AM PST by untrained skeptic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan
"Sounds suspiciously like "Preparation H"."

That's what they'll need, once the thugs shove their unsurrendered gun barrels up their "minds"

Semper Fi

48 posted on 11/09/2005 7:42:25 AM PST by river rat (You may turn the other cheek, but I prefer to look into my enemy's vacant dead eyes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Horatio Gates

The coming surge in violent crime in SF will be blamed by SF and MSM and the Democrats on the rest of California for not expropriating all the other California citizens.


49 posted on 11/09/2005 7:43:58 AM PST by ThanhPhero (di hanh huong den La Vang)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Mojo
I'd be willing to forecast an accelerated exodus of businesses and citizens from San Freaksicko..
This will cause the city to slip further down the slope into debauchery, lunacy and unsustainability.

Semper Fi

50 posted on 11/09/2005 7:46:13 AM PST by river rat (You may turn the other cheek, but I prefer to look into my enemy's vacant dead eyes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: R. Scott

I think the $145 figure was just for the holster.


51 posted on 11/09/2005 7:49:57 AM PST by Disambiguator (Making accusations of racism is the last refuge of a scoundrel.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Mojo
Proving once again that institutional leftism is:

1. Stupid
2. Dangerous
3. Will eventually affect us all in a negative manner. We have to wake up to the enemy within folks, this kind of thing leaves us all weaker.
52 posted on 11/09/2005 7:50:28 AM PST by alarm rider (Irritating leftists as often as is humanly possible....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: R. Scott

I like my little snake-eyes double barreled nominally .45Colt but 410 shells fit nicely. Of course the shot spreads out a lot because the front of the cartridge is almost to the front of the barrel. It's a great piece for itty bitty coperheads and cottonmouths and other sorts of snakes, too.


53 posted on 11/09/2005 7:51:18 AM PST by ThanhPhero (di hanh huong den La Vang)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan

In San Francisco "Preparation H" I would imagine is very much in demand.


54 posted on 11/09/2005 7:51:53 AM PST by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: garyhope
I can just see the caravans of Bloods and Crips and the Latino gangs heading North to San Francisco to rob, kill and rape. Nothing to stop them.

No...No....you've got it all wrong.

Just as soon as these boys cross the Frisco city limits...they will be looking for the "Turn Your Guns in Here" signs.....and I'm quite sure will promptly comply.

55 posted on 11/09/2005 7:54:15 AM PST by Osage Orange (Brozho...nican!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Mojo
Law enforcement personnel and others who require weapons for work are exempt from the measure.

I guess there will be a boom in armed security guards. Find a willing employer, or become one, and write "armed security detail as required and other general duties" into your work contract.

56 posted on 11/09/2005 7:55:01 AM PST by 2oakes (US citizen, ex-brit, and VERY glad of it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Mojo

I think that falls under the "Mad Max" statute.

Cool gun.


57 posted on 11/09/2005 7:55:03 AM PST by rattrap
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie
I think this is a wonderful teaching moment. The city of San Francisco will serve as an excellent object lesson in the consequences of gun control.

My guess is they will cook the numbers...as best they can...from here on out.

We shall see.......

58 posted on 11/09/2005 7:55:34 AM PST by Osage Orange (Brozho...nican!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator
In San Francisco "Preparation H" I would imagine is very much in demand.

LOL.

59 posted on 11/09/2005 7:58:06 AM PST by AxelPaulsenJr (Pray Daily For Our Troops and President Bush and the SAPPS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: LIConFem

Preparation H (with Cayenne)


60 posted on 11/09/2005 7:58:21 AM PST by ThanhPhero (di hanh huong den La Vang)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-111 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson