The worst thing here is that nobody seems to care.

One of those eleven laws was curbing the use of lead-based ammunition for hunting. Hardly a gun control measure.

Others include the introduction of a written test before owning a long gun, which by all accounts is not exactly an onerous challenge; another means that permits for assault weapons must be given to named individuals rather than to corporations; another allows the California DoJ to extend a waiting period beyond the existing 10-day limit if a background check cannot be completed in that time; I could go on. None of these actually limit gun ownership in California.

Bills that Brown vetoed on the same day he passed these included those outlawing assault weapons; one that would restrict gun-ownership rights of convicted DUI drivers; one that would have allowed the city of Oakland to impose its own registry and licensing requirements within city limits.

As I said, it's all full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

The glaring difference is perhaps the access to universal socialised medicare that may well contribute to people not getting to the point where they snap and go on a killing spree.

The other factor raised in Bowling for Columbine was that Americans appear to be a lot more paranoid about violence, being more inclined to shoot first and ask questions later, but thats not really relevent if the discussion is regarding shooting rampages rather than single homicides.

This IIRC was attributed to American society being more focused on the ability of an individual to be able to make things happen, to live the american dream and to rise to the top, whereas Canada is more of liberal society where people work as more social groups and take care of the weaker members of society. Its simplistic but the general logic is that some stranger on the street approaching you in the US is more likely to be seen as a threat, looking to take what you have rightfully earned for yourself, whereas in Canada they would be seen as someone who you may be expected to help, as they would help you if your circumstances were reversed....

Am I the only person who can use Google? The NY SAFE Act didn't just require registration, it BANNED those guns and the grandfathered owners were allowed to keep them IF they registered them. Moreover magazines that hold more than 10 rounds were already banned from sale in NY, now the possession of them is also banned.

Connecticut passed a similar law. California passed a whole laundry list of laws. In Connecticut now you need a licence just to buy ammunition.

Colorado for example banned transfers of magazines that hold more than 15 rounds of ammunition and instituted background checks on private transfer of firearms. Maryland passed a ban on a long list of firearms and now has a permit to purchase requirement to buy a handgun (already had a waiting period and a list of "approved" guns which have to have integral locking devices).

And what has it achieved - basically f all as this shooting in Santa Barbara showed and also there was a shooting at a school in Colorado.

No, we are top of the food chain after all. Hunting to eat is one thing hunting for fun is quite another & I think there is something wrong with people who find enjoyment in taking another living creatures life

California already has pretty restrictive gun laws so now they're fiddling around the edges of them. For example the registration of long guns came into force at the start of January - Canada recently scrapped the registration of long guns, so California by any reasonable measure has tougher gun laws now than Canada does.

The point being that I keep seeing articles about how guns should be treated the same way as cars - well in California you have to take a test in order to be able to buy a gun, and moreover you have to take that test every 5 years if you want to keep on buying guns, which is more restrictive than for getting a DL. Guns are registered in California. You have to undergo a pretty extensive criminal and mental health history background check - which is way more than you have to do to buy a car. Handguns are subject to various "safety" tests, to the point now that there are no new handgun models that can be introduced for sale in California as the manufacturers cannot comply with the requirements. "Assault weapons" are banned in California - that bill you mention would have broadened the ban so far that even super left-winger Jerry Brown refused to sign it.

And none of this of course lets you have a gun in a public place, like you can with a car. To do that you have to get a carry permit from the Sheriff, which requires a training course which is given at the local community college.

And so on.

+1

This is what I was partially referring to in my Hollywood/gaming comment, there is a theme of "retribution" writ large in popular American culture, and I think it influences some of the less stable members of the society. The massacre perpetrators have a heightened sense of injustice, and the consequences are tragic.

Admittedly this happens all the over the world. The Chechen school massacre, for example. But it is somehow more understandable in a situation of war, national suppression or even terrorism. It should not happen in places like affluent California or Connecticut.

Your kids are firing shotguns at 8 & 11?

Well yes, this is what I always think when I go into say, Cabela's or Bass Pro Shops (although I rarely do as their prices are bonkers). Go up to the gun counter in Canada and the discussion is about what is the best type of ammunition to go hunting or target shooting, go into one in the US and the discussion is what is the best type of ammunition to kill someone when they break into your house, etc.

Contrary to popular belief there is no specific law that says you can't have a gun for self-defence in your house in Canada, it's just not really the "done" thing. You could if you wanted to keep a shotgun under the bed with a trigger lock on it, but who does? It just seems silly to do it.

If that is true & is actually enforced then how did Elliot Rodgers pass?

Well this isn't quite true. To concede a point to the NRA, there are many Americans that live in very rural locations in which it would take too long for law enforcement to reach their property. And fewer neighbours around. This is much less the case in Europe.

With appropriate supervision

They prefer the 22 target rifles, the little one needs help dealing with the kick with the shotgun. I forget what gauge it is... smaller than a 12 gauge for less kick.

Cant be a member of the club till they are 12 I think... cant own a gun until 16 maybe?

You have to watch this thrilling video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uX_dWQQA_zM and then take a written test on it, which is analogous to the PAL safety test in Canada, in California though it is a de facto licensing requirement as you can't buy a gun without a certificate and it has to be renewed every 5 years.

Mr Rodgers hadn't been committed or even put on a psych hold, going to see a psychiatrist and having a chat with him doesn't prohibit you from owning a gun. Psychiatrists are supposed to report specific threats to the police, but he apparently never made any, so there was no reason for him to be reported. So he passed the background check. From what I can gather in the press, his parents also didn't know he owned guns, so they never mentioned it to the police - however the police could have checked with the DoJ and discovered his gun ownership, but they never even bothered to look at his YouTube videos after his mother called the police.

Bottom line, it will keep happening.

Perhaps he bought them before he got sick?

No system is going to be perfect, and there are a lot of guns available illegally anyway. Lets face it, killing people is illegal and that also doesnt stop people doing it.

The problem for me is not in the selling and licensing of guns, its in recognising when people are going to go postal and getting effective treatment in time, and for a country with some of the best facilities in the world, the US is woeful at providing it for all that need it. Clearly no sane person goes on a killing spree, pretty much by definition

Then again there was the guy on a greyhound bus out west who hacked off another passengers head , so the system here isnt perfect either, with or without guns available.