California's Bad Santa exposes the complete and utter failure of gun control laws
Submitted by cbaus on Tue, 12/30/2008 - 00:05.

This article is also being featured United States Concealed Carry Association's website.

By Chad D. Baus

News of a man dressing up in a Santa suit and murdering nine people in Los Angeles on Christmas Eve dominated cable news headlines for days after the event. News reports suggest Bruce Pardo took as many as four handguns and a homemade flame-thrower to the home of his ex-wife's parents, where at least 25 people were enjoying a Christmas Eve party. Pardo shot at partygoers and burned down the house, murdering at least nine people before committing suicide hours later.

Damage from the flames has thus far prevented officials from determining how many of the victims were shot to death, but hasn't stopped the gun ban lobby from attempting to capitalize on the tragedy.

Less than 48 hours after the attack occurred, the Brady Campaign Against Gun Violence issued a press release lamenting the "steady drumbeat of gun deaths and injuries that tears our families and communities apart," and suggesting that our nation's leaders "should do all that is within our power to find solutions to gun violence."

While the Brady press release could be considered somewhat distasteful, the truth is that both sides in the fight over gun rights and crime reduction have and will continue to use these tragedies as teachable moments. In fact, I find myself in agreement with the Brady Campaign President Paul Helmke's statement that "we should not despair and say this kind of violence is inevitable."

Indeed, there is much to be learned from this tragedy, which occurred in a state that has passed every conceivable form of gun control the gun grabbers have promoted, all in the name of reducing the violence.

From the California Attorney General's website:

One month waiting period for gun purchase? Check.
Assault weapons ban? Check.
Handgun registration? Check.
Ban on most private transfers of firearms? Check.
Armor-piercing bullet ban? Check.
Noise suppressor/ "silencer" ban? Check.
.50 caliber rifle ban? Check.
Infrared sight/"Sniperscope" ban? Check.
Ban on projecting a laser sight beam on a person? Check.
Prohibition on concealed carry? Check.*
Large-capacity magazine ban? Check.
Handgun safety certificate requirement? Check.
Mandatory safe storage? Check.
Ban on sale of imitation firearms? Check.
Ban on loaded firearms in public places? Check.
Prohibition on public display of imitation firearms? Check.
Oh, and while the Brady bunch seems unconcerned, let me also point out that California Health and Safety Code § 12761 bans the possession of flamethrower devices like the one Bruce Pardo used to torch his victims, and penal code § 12355 even bans booby traps. But that law, too, failed to stop Pardo from rigging his discarded Santa suit to explode when police officers moved it.

In the Brady bunch press release, Brady Campaign President Paul Helmke said that "in the New Year, we hope that our nation's leaders have the courage and conviction to take steps that will help protect our families and communities from gun violence."

The State of California is doing everything Helmke claims is necessary to " protect our families and communities from gun violence." In fact, California earns the #1 ranking on the 2007 Brady Campaign State Scorecard Rankings, which records which states the Brady bunch claim have the most "sensible" gun control laws. After all, the grade card slogan reminds, "sensible gun laws save lives."

By my count, there are now nine more funerals to be held in Los Angeles which prove that so-called "sensible" gun laws like these do anything BUT save lives.

Some will argue that the odds of Santa shooting you, or the odds of dying from any kind of assault are slim, so carrying a gun is an over-reaction by vigilante wanna-be's. But consider the following odds from the National Safety Council:

Your odds of drowning in a swimming pool are 1 in 6,279, and society has deemed it "sensible" to place live-saving devices and fences around the pool.
Your odds of dying riding your bike are 1 in 4,111, and society has deemed it "sensible" to wear a helmet.
Your odds of dying in a car accident are 1 in 261, and society has deemed it "sensible" to wear a seat belt.
Your odds of dying from assault are 1 in 210. Why would anyone think it's not "sensible" to have a means of protection?
The 2008 Bad Santa Attack in Los Angeles offers much for policy-makers to learn, as the Brady Campaign suggests. In view of these and other recent mass murders, our nation's leaders are beginning to realize that gun control laws like those in California are a complete and utter failure.

Chad D. Baus is the Buckeye Firearms Association Vice Chairman, and teaches concealed carry courses through Northwest Self Defense LLC.

*While California is a may-issue state, try getting a license in Los Angeles County if you're anyone but a Hollywood celebrity

good article. Thanks for posting.

Gun control as never been about crime control that is just an excuse.

It has always been about people control.