http://www.naturalabortionlaws.com http://www.facebook.com/naturalabortionlaw

The fact is that 70 percent of conceptions die in the first trimester and of those that die 60 percent die due to failure to have enough human DNA to live as a human. So what we end up with is the fact that 30 percent of conceptions produce born babies, of which 1% are still born. And 42 percent of conceptions are not human enough to live as humans and die from genetic flaws. And finally 30 percent die from other causes. It is therefore not possible to claim that there is “life at conception” when in fact 42 percent of the time it is not human life and only 30 percent of conceptions are human life.

The real issue with regard to the pro life movement is the fact that pro lifers must murder born babies if they intend on saving fetuses. http://www.naturalabortionlaws.com http://www.facebook.com/naturalabortionlaw

“President Obama is not going to take your guns away — unless they are assault rifles. In that case, as a California resident you shouldn’t have them anyway.” That statement is simply inaccurate. All current assault weapon ban proposals would take away several non-assault weapon guns that are currently legal in CA. Look at the newly proposed restrictions on shotguns. Look at the new restrictions on Ruger Mini-14s. Look at the new restrictions on belt fed guns, which includes WWII relics…

And to this day, not a single person has been able to explain how an “assault weapon” is functionally more dangerous than a semi-auto hunting rifle or otherwise worthy of such a ban.

“California citizens are not affected by the proposed gun laws, because California has some of the strictest gun laws in the United States. Any California gun owner must pass the Handgun Safety Certificate, register any guns they own and are subject to a background check, according to the California Bureau of Firearms website.” Again, this statement is simply inaccurate. Besides the new restrictions already mentioned, not all guns are required to be registered and not all transfers are subject to a background check (also on the CA DOJ website). For example: transfers between a parent and child do not need a background check. Rifles and shotguns are not registered.

“What scares me is not the average gun owner, but the extreme cases–such as the Sandy Hook and Aurora shooters. In these extreme situations, the shooters were considered to be mentally unstable, but had acquired their firearms through legal loopholes.” Really? I was unaware “murdering your mother and stealing her guns” was a “legal loophole”, as was the case with the Sandy Hook shooter. And the Aurora shooter passed background checks and bought his guns from a licensed gun dealer. Where’s the loophole?

“Gun reform is not seeking to restrict the law-abiding gun owner, rather shooters such as those at Sandy Hook and Aurora.” And yet you will restrict what I can and cannot own, despite my law-abiding nature. Even if gun reform isn’t “seeking” to restrict law-abiding gun owners, that *is* certainly the end result.

“The proposals President Obama has submitted to Congress are reasonable, one that many California citizens will have no problem abiding to. The hullaballo about “Obama taking away our guns,” is a theory that is based on rhetoric and just a rumor. Unless you have a massive stash of assault rifles, clearly, Obama is not coming after your guns.” Please tell me how making certain cosmetic features of firearms (like pistol grips and thumbhole stocks) is “reasonable.” Seeing as the definition of “assault weapon” keeps changing and getting more strict, it’s difficult to say Obama (or other politicians) aren’t coming for my guns. Apparently, under the newly proposed assault weapon ban, my exhibition competition shotgun will be banned because I can fit 6 rounds into it. That extra round must be really dangerous…