View Full Version : Spoke to Assemblymember Joan Buchanan about AB357

03-26-2009, 6:23 PM
Joan Buchanan had an open house today in San Ramon. A few weeks ago I wrote a letter to show my support of AB357. My response was not what I expected: an invite to her open house. I felt compelled leave work early and voice my opinion about AB357 in person. I showed up still dressed in my banking attire, and found myself in a sea of people. The line was around the room, so I did what anyone else would do... grab someone she knows and worm my way to the front of the line.

After all of the "Hi my name is on my shirt" formalities were over, I cut directly to my AB357 Q+A:

Me: "I never thought I would be a lobbyist, yet somehow... her I am to voice my opinion, but first let me ask you a question. Where do you stand on AB357? If you have not heard of it yet, I believe it may still be in the public safety committee.

Buchanan: I am not aware of the bill.

Me: "It gives citizens of good moral character and without a criminal background the ability to carry a concealed weapon and protect themselves from criminals. Currently, A person must show good cause to carry a concealed weapon. The local sheriff then decides if there is good cause, but county to county the good cause qualification is inconstant. Here, protecting one's life is not considered good cause. What are your thoughts?"

Buchanan: "My only concern is with semi-auto weapons (*turns head mumbling) ______ cops _____ guns"

Me: "I'm sorry what did you say?"

Buchanan: "My only concern is with semi-auto weapons (*turns head mumbling) ______ cops _____ guns"

Me: "I am sorry I didnt hear you. What do semi-autos have to do with this bill?"

Buchanan: "Semi-auto weapons (*turns head mumbling followed by her recognizing a person more important than me) Oh hi!"

Me: "Well thank you for your time and letting me voice my opinion in favor of AB357."


good times.

03-26-2009, 9:27 PM
She needs more of her Calgunner constituents at the next open house, public forum or dinner party.

Congratulations, you broke the ice with her, now she will recognize you from this point forward.
Maybe a haunting influence in her thoughts?

Kinda fun isn't it?

They don't like being cornered to give a concrete cut and dried answer.


03-26-2009, 9:51 PM
It sounds more accurately like you spoke "at" her about it rather than to her; in one ear and out the other...

03-26-2009, 10:03 PM
It sounds more accurately like you spoke "at" her about it rather than to her; in one ear and out the other...

Can one OC to such an event? I mean, it is an "open" house...

03-27-2009, 2:46 AM
It seems when someone in her position is questioned about a gun topic, The immediate talking point, is always Cops, Semi-automatic, and safety. Is anything based in facts these days or is everything emotionally potent oversimplified rhetoric? Geesh!

03-27-2009, 7:17 AM
Maybe we should start having many more CalGunners show up at many more of these open houses. It's possible to dismiss one person talking about the issue; it's harder when there are a dozen.

03-27-2009, 8:09 AM
She probably said " only cops should carry guns"...

03-27-2009, 9:39 AM
We must accept the fact that many politicians vote against will vote against us and that is when the mumbling starts.

We can go to meetings and try to embarass them or we can go to the meetings and try to give them a chance to save face.

Shall issue is more than self defense, it is "Equality under the Law" and it is cleaning up "Political Corruption by many Sheriffs" which not only compromises the political process, but undermines respect for law and order.

If the top cop in a county is percieved as "corrupt", that perception filters down through the ranks of that agency and on the street.

Respect for the Law and LEO's decreases as a result.

Voting against AB357 is voting to continue a corrupt discrimnatory permit process which was started back in the days of Jim Crow.

If this becomes the perception of the general public, we possibly could label our opponents as racists.