The L.A. Times is rife with politically biased articles. That's the starting point for research on any article which appears there, and seems to have holes in it. Because she wrote for a "newspaper" which publishes the likes of Robert Scheer, a detailed examination was appropriate.
I'm not a "gun nut." I'm just a follower of the Constitution, ALL of the Constitution. Unlike Jenny -- and many other self-appointed do-gooders -- I do not consign to the trash can any part of the Constitution which interferes with my chosen political outcome in any situation. And THAT is the great divide between the likes of Jenny and the likes of the more polite citizens of FR.
Jenny, I hope you Google this. Though I doubt you will understand it.
Congressman Billybob
Latest article: "The Democrat Party - 1828 - 2006 - R.I.P."
Please see my most recent statement on running for Congress, here.
"What is this woman's point? Does she contend that the gun laws of Los Angeles and California could or should have kept her brother's mother-in-law from getting the gun she used to kill her own daughter and son-in-law? If not, then all that followed in attacks on her was logical."
Her point was that the laws of the US should ban private gun ownership since no law can guarantee that some one, some where, some time, won't kill some one with a gun. Of course, the same logic would lead to banning anything, anywhere, any time that anyone could use to kill some one. However, if you pointed that out to her, she would say that guns are different from all the other things that could be used to kill someone because guns are 'different'.