PDA

View Full Version : Government workers on Calguns.


nicki
05-10-2009, 1:29 PM
I am sure we have a few people on this board who work for various government agencies across the state and are Union members, although not by choice for everyone.

If there are enough of us, perhaps we can start shifting the unions to our side because "Victim disarmenant" creates another batch of loss of government revenues due to "unneeded lawsuits".

Unions can reach many swing legislators. The bottom line appeal, their self interest.

Nicki

AJAX22
05-10-2009, 1:33 PM
As much as I dislike the modern incarnation of unions, they do provide a ready orgainzational structure that we could tap into which is outside our normal circles of political influence.

If we could get the teachers union, UAW, Teamsters, etc. etc. on board for the 2A... we'd have an instant dramatic increase in our voting base.

the best part is that its a top down leadership so if we can get the leaders on board, then the rest will follow.

berto
05-10-2009, 1:34 PM
Seems like tilting at windmills.

Entrenched union leaders enjoy their backscratching relationship with politicians and have little reason to rock a profitable and beneficial boat.

AJAX22
05-10-2009, 1:42 PM
So how much will it cost to buy the leadership?

cryptkeeper
05-10-2009, 1:43 PM
You forgot district level agencies. Mine is above county but below state. Teamsters.

nicki
05-10-2009, 1:45 PM
Seems like tilting at windmills.

Entrenched union leaders enjoy their backscratching relationship with politicians and have little reason to rock a profitable and beneficial boat.


That was true until the current budget crisis hit and it is going to get worse.

That being said, the Unions don't want to give in, and taxpayer groups are revolting, so something has to give.

Avoiding stupid lawsuits means the Unions will have less pressure to make concessions.

Union leaders like their power and most labor contracts happen at the local and county level.

Budget battles are bad publicity. If there is a budget shortfall, the Unions will look for other ways to avoid concessions.

Say you have a county with a sheriff who revokes a bunch of people's CCW permits, say like 500 to 1000, and that group of people gets together, sues and wins.

How much is the county going to have to spend. When the county loses, they are going to have to make cuts somewhere.

Local Union heads may be interested in avoiding such situations. If they are not, well, word can be spread among union workers about how the union is violating their legal obligation to watch out for worker's rights.

Hell, maybe we could even start our own petitions.

Most Unions are only a few thousand strong.

Nicki

sfpcservice
05-10-2009, 1:55 PM
I am sure we have a few people on this board who work for various government agencies across the state and are Union members, although not by choice for everyone.

If there are enough of us, perhaps we can start shifting the unions to our side because "Victim disarmenant" creates another batch of loss of government revenues due to "unneeded lawsuits".

Unions can reach many swing legislators. The bottom line appeal, their self interest.

Nicki

I saw state and local, but no Federal Govt jobs. I am a Federal Employee and a Union Officer and very Pro Gun.

AggregatVier
05-10-2009, 5:32 PM
Ditto, no Federal option.

nicki
05-10-2009, 7:14 PM
Sorry guys, my line of thinking is that we will probably be suing city, county and maybe the state on gun lawsuits and as such, I was focused in on who would lose if when we win

My intent is to see what kind of pressure could be applied on California gun laws from the Union side.

Unions are not going to be too happy about making concessions because of civil rights lawsuits that the city/county could have avoided.

Everybody who gets government money is looking to protect their share of the pie.

Everyone who pays taxes is looking to reduce the amount that they contribute to the pie.

Civil rights losses indirectly hit many groups. By identifying those groups, we can turn those groups against those who are against us.

Gun legislation is not a top priority for most elected officials.

If support for gun laws compromises their ability to get anything else done, they will take political hits.

With term limits, we will have new legislative blood anyway. If the Unions see gun control as a liablity, they may make sure that we don't elect someone who is anti gun in the first place.

Next year, one third of the legislature will be term limited out.

We are stuck with having Reps and Dems due to districts, but the primaries are open season. A pro gun vote is a pro gun vote, doesn't matter if it is from a Dem, Rep or 3rd party.

41 assembly seats or 21 Senate seats and we stop gun legislation cold.



Nicki

KylaGWolf
05-10-2009, 9:14 PM
Im not union so can't say either way. Although someone on here mentioned getting teacher unions to change their view. It will never happen I don't think. That organization is so entrenched in anti-gun propaganda that they would not know the truth if it bit them on the tushie.

HunterJim
05-11-2009, 9:25 AM
Formerly I worked as a contractor for the federal government for 10 years, followed by another 10 years of the same for state and local government -- mostly in California. I was never in a union. The govies I worked with knew I was a gunner.

jim