PDA

View Full Version : San Diego help needed


dwtt
07-11-2005, 7:57 PM
Hi,
this is going to sound strange, but I need the help of someone in Jay LaSuer's district to find out info on AB448 for me. I went to LaSuer's assembly web site and submitted some questions about AB448, including when he plans to resubmit it and what we can do to raise support for the bill. I got back an automated reply saying he's primarily answering his constituents because he gets so much correspondence. So, if someone in Mr. LaSuer's district can ask for me, I would greatly appreciate it.

jnojr
07-12-2005, 10:18 AM
You could call his office.

But this really isn't worth worrying about... with our current Legislature, no bill like this is going to pass. What we need is redistricting. That's the only way to have any hope of fixing California at this point. If the redistricting initiative doesn't make it to the ballot, our best course of action will be to just move... if the "powers that be" are strong enough to beat redistricting, even though it would pass by a 2-to-1 margin, they're safely ensconced here until the big earthquake.

arvs
07-12-2005, 8:19 PM
Actually it would pass. Most of the state legislator doesn't even read the bills.

jnojr
07-14-2005, 9:55 AM
Originally posted by arvs:
Actually it would pass. Most of the state legislator doesn't even read the bills.

Right... they're told how to vote by their parties, special interests, etc. And they'd be inundated with letters from schoolkids begging them not to "allow evil assault weapons back onto the streets to massacre us!"

I was told my Mr. La Suer's office that part of the reason AB 448 was withdrawn was just this... a lot of letters against, and not enough for.

dwtt
07-14-2005, 9:45 PM
Originally posted by jnojr:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by arvs:
Actually it would pass. Most of the state legislator doesn't even read the bills.

Right... they're told how to vote by their parties, special interests, etc. And they'd be inundated with letters from schoolkids begging them not to "allow evil assault weapons back onto the streets to massacre us!"

I was told my Mr. La Suer's office that part of the reason AB 448 was withdrawn was just this... a lot of letters against, and not enough for. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is why I'm trying to get more letters for AB448 sent in. It would be nice to know if Mr LaSuer's going to reintroduce the bill and, if so, when.

Turbinator
07-15-2005, 7:18 AM
Hey, someone who is more in tune with politics, would you kindly please explain this redistricting thing?

Thanks..

Turby

delloro
07-15-2005, 9:19 AM
districts are supposed to be drawn to allow fair and effective representation of areas of a certain population size.

for over 200 years, politicans have changed the boundaries of their ndistricts to make their reelection more secure. as a result, the representation is often no longer effective, and the districts are no longer logically bounded. it was so bad in an early case, that one reporter said, referring to Eldbridge Gerry's district, "that district looks like a salamander" and another said "better to call it a gerrymander." and hence the term "gerrymandering" which means to manuipulate district boundaries to preserve your seat.

In CA the legislature is responsible for redistricting, which is supposed to realign districts to reflect demographic, geographic and population changes. the legislature in CA however is not representative of the population in CA, in that the legislature is less republican than the population is, proportionally speaking. that's why we can't trust them to cut their own throats and redistrict fairly. that's why arnold wants retired judges to do it.

Charliegone
07-15-2005, 1:27 PM
I think the only way here in California to get at least some gun rights back is to compromise http://calguns.net/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_redface.gif. Yes I know but this will be probably be the best way. Like say require registration no more than 32 round mags, you know that kind of thing. At we will have them! Better than not having anything at all... http://calguns.net/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

dwtt
07-15-2005, 1:38 PM
Originally posted by Charliegone:
I think the only way here in California to get at least some gun rights back is to compromise http://calguns.net/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_redface.gif. Yes I know but this will be probably be the best way. Like say require registration no more than 32 round mags, you know that kind of thing. At we will have them! Better than not having anything at all... http://calguns.net/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Absolutely NO! If we compromise, then whatever we give away will NEVER be returned. That might work well for you, but your son or daughter, and grandkids will forever be deprived of their rights. If some punk tries to take your wallet, do you take out $20 and give it to him so he won't take the rest of your wallet, compromising with the criminal? This has happened to me when I lived in San Francisco, and you know what I did? I started swinging and took his left eye, then I went for the temple and neck. I kept all of my money and the punk ran. You don't compromise with people who want to do you harm.

I know how politics works and a deal I, and I'm sure many CA gun owners are ready to make is to tell Ammiano to let AB448 pass and we'll let him have his gay marriage. But we won't say, "Let AB448 pass and you can register our magazines"

Librarian
07-15-2005, 4:39 PM
Re: districts, see Cal Voter (http://www.calvoter.org/voter/maps/) for maps, or see the Capital Museum's page (http://www.capitolmuseum.ca.gov/english/legislature/find/senatedistricts.html), and here's a page with lots of redistricting information from UC Berkeley (http://www.igs.berkeley.edu/library/reapp/). See especially their first 'hot topic' link.

OppLock
07-16-2005, 7:12 PM
Originally posted by dwtt:
I know how politics works and a deal I, and I'm sure many CA gun owners are ready to make is to tell Ammiano to let AB448 pass and we'll let him have his gay marriage. But we won't say, "Let AB448 pass and you can register our magazines"

This is actually a very interesting idea. However, considering how important the issue of gay marriage is, I'm sure we could get something more out of it...I doubt it would work, but I'm sure a huge population of California gun owners would gladly allow gay marriage in exchange for the veto of the AWB. Again, I doubt it could be organized, but...

jnojr
07-18-2005, 10:28 AM
Originally posted by Charliegone:
I think the only way here in California to get at least some gun rights back is to compromise

We've done nothing but compromise. And look where it's got us?

The problem is, "compromise" is how two parties with different viewpoints reach an agreement. But, when it comes to the gun-grabbers, "compromise" means giving them ground. They take that ground and then demand more. And more. And more still, until they have it all. Their position is that the private ownership of firearms should be completely abolished. They aren't "compromising" with us. It takes two to tango.