HankT wrote:I don't think there should have to be a "fast track" to purchase a gun... the problem is the waiting period in the first place. I doubt that has stopped a single crime from being committed, since most criminals buy their guns illegally too.Sometimes the coppers get it right.Even the Oakland coppers...
In general, I think that a any woman who is actually being threatened by the man in her life, or the ex out of it, should be put on a fast track to purchase a gun and get training for it.
Also, I don't think the government is a solution to much of anything, and the last thing CA needs is more socialism... let people provide their own guns. Again, if there wasn't so much gov't regulation, it would be much cheaper to buy a gun in CA, since manufacturers wouldn't need to produce special models for CA.Maybe even havethe gubm'nt issue the firearm to the woman.
I'm not sure where you get your information that firearms are the weapon of choice for estranged spouses. I would be interested in seeing it if you can share your source.I dunno... I hate to see these cases. All it takes is a goof with a broken heart and a gun (usually) and it's curtains for the woman. Not fair.
I don't see anything in this article that indicates a gun was involved in this crime. Actually, reading this article I would have to say the state has a very weak case... no body, no witnesses (to the disappearance/murder), no murder weapon, no crime scene... It's gonna be really tough getting a conviction based on menacing looks and the purchase of a couple murder novels. I hope the prosecution has some solid evidence, otherwise this is a huge waste of taxpayer dollars (not to mention harassment of a man presumed to be innocent).