Source: Patrick Luscri

I’ve noticed something about California lawmakers:  They don’t trust us citizens to be good people on our own.  So they create laws to help us become better people… with their help.

As a transplanted Texan, do I need the enlightened folks in Sacramento to help me be a better person?  Nope.  When it comes to lightbulbs and handguns, I need a nanny state like I need a hole in the head.

Take this legislative push to help Californians use less energy.  If you add floodlights to the outside of your home, by law they must have motion sensors that kick them on and then turn them off after the neighbor’s cat triggers them at 3 a.m.  Why not just leave them turned off when you go to bed?  Because this makes way too much sense.

You see, most Californians can’t be trusted to turn off their floodlights before turning in.  The folks in Sacramento know this right well, which is why they created a law to help mitigate our thoughtlessness.  However, if you buy newer, more efficient LED floodlights, you don’t need a motion sensor built in.

It’s kind of a carrot, you see — do the right thing, and buy an energy-efficient LED floodlight, and it doesn’t matter that you’re still likely to leave your floodlight on.  This way, thoughtlessly burning it all night uses much less energy.

Many Californians use LEDs because they use a fraction of the energy of fluorescents and incandescents.  They’re smart and cheaper.  Do we need a law to be wise and thrifty?  Nope.

As silly as the lightbulb thing is, California’s handling of the “gun issue” is the mother of all efforts to make us citizens better people.  Here’s an irony — once a part of the Old West where saloon disputes were solved with revolvers on main street, California has become an overprotective, hyperlegislative wuss of a state.

Conversely, Texas is the rootinest tootinest shootinest hombre east and north of the Rio Grande.  Most Texans take a heap of pride in this distinction.  Mostly for this reason — despite all its bluster, Texas runs on common sense.

Funny thing is that for years as a Texas resident, I didn’t give a hoot about owning a gun.  After moving to California and experiencing the angst and annoyance many Northern Californians felt during the Obama years, I now exercise my Second Amendment rights with grit and gusto.

You see, when a silly pseudo-Old West state like California tries to force itself on us for our own protection, we’re likely to protect ourselves from it.  It’s called Freedom, and it’s mighty scarce ’round here.

It all boils down to this:  California lawmakers, many of them hailing from the Northeast either directly or one or two generations removed, don’t trust their citizens — or anyone for that matter — to do the right thing.  This goes for energy use and for self and/or property protection.  In the case of firearms, these Yankee know-it-alls think California citizens don’t need those dangerous, treacherous things.

Know how many guns kill people in California annually?  A big, fat zero.  Criminals kill people — with guns.  Folks in Sacramento don’t seem to understand this about guns:  They need a finger to trigger them.  Otherwise, they’re just pieces of steel or alloy.  And limiting magazines to 10 rounds doesn’t do diddly.

You see, it’s not like bad people are gonna abide by the law and make sure their magazines are legal capacity.  They don’t follow the rules in getting weapons; why would they give two shakes about a 10-round magazine limit?  Here’s a timeless truth:  Criminals will always have and use guns.

Here’s another truth:  Good can always more effectively combat evil. How many times do we hear of a good guy with a gun saving others by stopping a bad guy with a gun? Depends on where we get our “news.”  It happens more than we know — just as it used to be natural and right for police to stop criminals by shooting them.

How’s this for fair:  A background-checked and trained citizen is ready to protect others, but the 10-round limit gives the criminal the advantage in a firefight.  Here’s an idea:  Instead of forcing citizens to carry more magazines (which negates concealment, by the way), why not let good guys and girls use magazines that hold as many rounds as the handgun can manage?

Level the playing field between good guy and bad guy, right?  Common sense?  Nope. California lawmakers don’t consider this commonsensical; they think it’s dangerous. Why?  The answer brings us back to an earlier point:  If they don’t trust us to turn off floodlights, why would they trust us with guns?

The truth is that they want to eliminate gun ownership in California… period.  It’s that simple.  They think citizens who want to own and use guns shouldn’t.  Their legislative message is always this:  Don’t be a right-wing, gun-crazy nutjob — that’s what Texans are for.

To comment, you can find the MeWe post for this article here.