Safety laws are the wrong category, the equivalent regulations would be those that forbid the use of cars for drive-by shootings or as robbery getaway vehicles, and regulations against the use of food to provide crime energy.
> Haven’t tried getting a gun in California. How bad is it? How could it be improved?
You have to pass a basic knowledge test, have a clean background, prove residency in the state, be 21 (or 18 for hunting rifles, IIRC) and then wait 10 days.
Which is to say that it’s a very burdensome process if you think you should be able to go to Walmart, exchange cash for goods, and walk out with a gun, but pretty simple by the standards of regulated goods. The basic knowledge test is very basic, so the pain points are just that sometimes background checks are incorrect, the waiting period can be inconvenient, and just the general annoyances of government bureaucracy.
Yes, we define crimes based on what you say. For example, libel or yelling “fire” at a movie theater.
But you are allowed to say whatever you want. If what you say is reflected as an offense, then you get some consequence (I am not speaking of UK where you can post something about immigrants in Facebook and get arrested; I’m speaking only of USA).
There are gun regulations too. Most are reasonable, but many are not. Liberals think that they can simply restrict the right to guns unconstitutionally because “guns are scary.” That is clearly not a sufficient basis to deny a right.
In the case of LA County, they just settled with the Feds because they had approved 2 concealed carry permits out of thousands of applications. That clearly shows the government was simply curtailing your right.
It depends on the county. Some Sheriffs think it’s them who gives you your RIGHT to own a gun or a concealed weapon license. They don’t understand they are servants.
LA just settled the Fed lawsuit over their terrible practices:
