PDA

View Full Version : AB962 Opposition Letter Thread


natasha69
09-01-2009, 9:39 AM
Dear Senator / Governor,

I am writing to you as a concerned California citizen, in opposition to bill AB962.

This bill, if passed:
(a) WILL NOT reduce criminal gun violence and/or crimes
(b) INCREASES TAXES
(c) NEGATIVELY affects revenue in a State that is struggling to survive this recession.
(d) has NO ACCOUNTABILITY built in to the bill to measure success or failure metrics

A. This bill intends to reduce gun violence by reducing the amount of ammunition criminals can purchase. It allows for private transfer of only 50 rounds between individuals. No long argument here. 99.999% of all gun crimes/violent acts involve less than 50 rounds of ammunition. If you have an ounce of grey matter between your ears, you realize that criminals will still easily have access to the ammunition they need for their crimes, and if they are committing criminal acts, they will not care about the 50 round limit. This bill FAILS in denying access to ammunition by criminals.

B. The first version of this bill grossly underestimated the costs needed to fund all the background checks and finger printing required by the bill. The author quickly slipped in an amendment which increases taxes on ammunition to pay for these new activities. These taxes are passed on to sportsmen across the state who participate in shooting matches at public and private clubs. This is an unfair tax passed on to sportsmen such as myself, for a bill that won't even accomplish what it tasks out to do.

C. Ammunition sales will decrease if this bill passes. State income tax revenue from those sales will decrease as well. Shooting ranges, sporting events involving pistols will decrease. This bill affects law abiding Californians across the state who make their living in these areas.

D. This pie in the sky "good idea" bill offers up a grandious solution to criminal gun violence. But it does not offer up any level of metrics and accountability to measure if it is succeeding or failing. Similar legislation was present in the 1960's and was repealed due to it being ineffective. This bill, even if it were to pass needs to publicly offer metrics, easily accessible to anyone, which summarizes ammunition sales across the state over time, and criminal gun violence across the state over time.

I urge you to vote against this bill. Whether you are anti or pro gun, it does not make a difference. This bill just fails before it starts. Please spend your valuable time working on a bill that will actually reduce crime, rather than a bill that just punishes sportsmen across the State.

Very truly yours,
<insert name here>

=============

Modify to make it yours, and send it on to all the Senators of the State, and our Governor.

Anyone willing to wordsmith this letter, I welcome your edits. Including factual information about previous legislation, or specific numbers with regards to revenue decrease and/or tax increase.

Let's make it easy for all members of this forum, (and other forums) to write good solid letters and help defeat this bill.

Legasat
09-01-2009, 10:15 AM
My Letters tend to be simple:


Dear Senator,

I know the hearings for AB962 are coming up shortly.

This is just another example of California spending money we do not have. This is another bill that will not pay for itself,

putting the people of California in further economic jeopardy.

This bill essentially does nothing to reduce violent crime, while increasing the bureaucracy of the State, and the burdens on

the California tax payer (like me).

I do NOT support this bill, and hope you will not either.

Thank You.

natasha69
09-01-2009, 1:24 PM
My Letters tend to be simple:


Dear Senator,

I know the hearings for AB962 are coming up shortly.

This is just another example of California spending money we do not have. This is another bill that will not pay for itself,

putting the people of California in further economic jeopardy.

This bill essentially does nothing to reduce violent crime, while increasing the bureaucracy of the State, and the burdens on

the California tax payer (like me).

I do NOT support this bill, and hope you will not either.

Thank You.

great letter. lets get a few others up here. we need a few varieties, and then need everyone to kick it into high gear to generate volume to the senators and gov.

obeygiant
09-01-2009, 3:20 PM
Here are the template letters i set up on freedomspeaks.

Oppose AB962 (http://www.freedomspeaks.com/letter/848096/oppose-ab962-send-this-letter-to-the-ca-senate-appropriations-committee)
AB 962 (De Leon) Ammunition (http://www.freedomspeaks.com/letter/801298/re-ab-962-de-leon-ammunition)
Oppose AB962 1st draft. (http://www.freedomspeaks.com/letter/800489/oppose-ab962)

TaxAnnihilator
09-01-2009, 3:25 PM
Former speaker of the state assembly told me, "Constituent letters? Yea, we get 'em. Interns respond. They do not have an effect on how I vote."

The reason behind this he explained is because those who do letter writing campaigns are generally not the ones who got you elected. If they are, he already is voting their agenda.

Good luck with your letters, though I have a feeling that a stack of cash would speak much louder! (Unfortunately).

great letter. lets get a few others up here. we need a few varieties, and then need everyone to kick it into high gear to generate volume to the senators and gov.

cousinkix1953
09-01-2009, 4:16 PM
Former speaker of the state assembly told me, "Constituent letters? Yea, we get 'em. Interns respond. They do not have an effect on how I vote."

The reason behind this he explained is because those who do letter writing campaigns are generally not the ones who got you elected. If they are, he already is voting their agenda.

Good luck with your letters, though I have a feeling that a stack of cash would speak much louder! (Unfortunately).
Isn't this just the nice way of saying, "f--- you?" It's time to finger print and run background on the candidates who run for office. We shouldn't have to find out later that our hypocritical politicians have a police record for drug offenses, drunken driving, beating their wives or any other crimes. Barack Obama's association with the leaders of a 1960's terrorist group should have made anybody puke...

8-Ball
09-01-2009, 4:58 PM
sent my four out...

Nevermore
09-01-2009, 5:44 PM
Here's the text of the letter I've prepared for the various members of the Appropriations Committee. I used a template and format approach suggested by the CA Chamber of Commerce for lobbying the legislature. This is one page on Word when printed. Fill in appropriate values for (XX).


September 1, 2009

The Honorable (Senator)
State Capitol
Room (XXXX)
Sacramento, CA 94248-0001

SUBJECT: AB962, HANDGUN AMMO VENDOR LICENSING – OPPOSE
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE

Dear Senator (Name Here):

I am writing to you to OPPOSE Assembly Member DeLeon’s AB 962, which is currently in the Suspense File of the Senate Appropriations Committee, of which you are a member. This bill will create a new regulatory regime by requiring anyone who sells or transfers more than 50 rounds of ammunition per month to obtain licensure with the CA Dept. of Justice (CADOJ).

This bill can only hamper legitimate commerce and restrict lawful sporting activities in the state. Furthermore, at a time when this state has just barely circumvented the largest fiscal crisis of its history, it would be irresponsible in the extreme to introduce a new program with no funding mechanism. I hardly need remind you of the difficulties in finding the required funds to pay for existing state programs in recent months, much less new ones.

In particular, I am disturbed that the Dealer Record of Sale (DROS) funds will be raided to help pay for this new licensing program. These funds are intended to pay for the existing law enforcement mechanisms to run background checks and certify that firearms dealers in the state are keeping up-to-date with legal obligations. How will diverting resources from criminal background checks for firearm purchases help keep us safe when this bill will require that the CADOJ shoulder the additional duties of processing and approving hundreds of thousands – if not millions – of ammunition transactions in addition to their existing duties with no additional funding?

If AB 962 passes, the simple act of sharing ammunition at a range between family members and friends would result in the criminalization of an entirely innocuous act. It will do nothing to prevent “Community Terrorism”, as Assembly Member DeLeon so colorfully describes in his bill, nor will it deter street criminals from simply smuggling in ammunition from neighboring states – an act already illegal in California.

While I can certainly appreciate an honest attempt to curb criminal behavior, the State of California would be better served spending its dwindling enforcement resources elsewhere.

I, and many lawful sportsmen and sportswomen, look forward to you OPPOSING AB 962.

Sincerely,


(Your Name)
(Your Address)
District (XX) (Resident/Voter/Constituent/Taxpayer)

goober
09-01-2009, 5:51 PM
Here's the text of the letter I've prepared for the various members of the Appropriations Committee. I used a template and format approach suggested by the CA Chamber of Commerce for lobbying the legislature. This is one page on Word when printed. Fill in appropriate values for (XX).
great letter, Nevermore......last week! :rolleyes:
AB962 was taken out of suspense and passed out of the Senate Appropriations Committee already.
not trying to be a jerk at all.... it happened awful fast.
and i'm serious about your letter. it is good. with slight revision you can craft an equally great letter to send to your senator and/or the entire senate!
keep it up!

Nevermore
09-01-2009, 5:52 PM
great letter, Nevermore......last week! :rolleyes:
AB962 was taken out of suspense and passed out of the Senate Appropriations Committee already.
not trying to be a jerk at all.... it happened awful fast.
and i'm serious about your letter. it is good. with slight revision you can craft an equally great letter to send to your senator and/or the entire senate!
keep it up!

D'oh. Well, I can retool it a bit and send it out generally since it still needs a vote of the full Senate.

Clearly I should read this board more frequently!

TaxAnnihilator
09-01-2009, 6:19 PM
:yes: But, this would require a law... think they will self regulate? Sure, initiative, but this state is drowning in all the initiatives (I could go on for too long about my dislike of the initiative process in CA).

As a young person I realize that my vote does not count for much when it comes to the budget when my needs (tuition, which I have paid myself, but...) conflict with those of a strong voting block such as the elderly or teacher's union.

There is a lot that makes me sick about the state of politics, but I blame weak minded people more than the power monger's they create (aside from the naturally bad eggs).

Isn't this just the nice way of saying, "f--- you?" It's time to finger print and run background on the candidates who run for office. We shouldn't have to find out later that our hypocritical politicians have a police record for drug offenses, drunken driving, beating their wives or any other crimes. Barack Obama's association with the leaders of a 1960's terrorist group should have made anybody puke...

whatmeworry
09-01-2009, 10:25 PM
So let me get this right. They want to spend our tax dollars on preventing you and me, law abiding citizens, from purchasing ammo over the internet - which will eat into already limited and obviously inadequate resources to protect our children from sexual predators. :mad::mad:

cousinkix1953
09-01-2009, 10:47 PM
So let me get this right. They want to spend our tax dollars on preventing you and me, law abiding citizens, from purchasing ammo over the internet - which will eat into already limited and obviously inadequate resources to protect our children from sexual predators. :mad::mad:
You won't be able to buy many of the oddball rounds OTC either. Most stores see no reason to stockpile an item which is not in high demand. Nobody wants to be stuck with items that are hard to sell either. They will never pass a law requiring stores to stockpile most of the items in that Cartridges of the World book. If buying calibers like 8mm Nambu, .45/90, .32/40 etc becomes a hassle; then maybe a class action lawsuit is in order...

natasha69
09-02-2009, 8:54 AM
You won't be able to buy many of the oddball rounds OTC either. Most stores see no reason to stockpile an item which is not in high demand. Nobody wants to be stuck with items that are hard to sell either. They will never pass a law requiring stores to stockpile most of the items in that Cartridges of the World book. If buying calibers like 8mm Nambu, .45/90, .32/40 etc becomes a hassle; then maybe a class action lawsuit is in order...

lets do what we can now - write the letters - or compel the current senators to vote against it (if you have the ability to fiscally motivate them).

obeygiant
09-04-2009, 9:06 AM
bump.

Get those letters out today!

woodsman
09-04-2009, 9:14 AM
So let me get this right. They want to spend our tax dollars on preventing you and me, law abiding citizens, from purchasing ammo over the internet - which will eat into already limited and obviously inadequate resources to protect our children from sexual predators. :mad::mad:

YES! But it would seem that, the California powers that be, tend to view them less as predators but more as mentally stricken. Thus they can be rehabilitated - NOT.

curtisfong
09-04-2009, 11:03 AM
here is mine

AB 962 provides that: "No person shall sell or otherwise transfer ownership of
more than 50 rounds of ammunition in any month unless the person is licensed by
the department as a licensed handgun ammunition vendor..."

No reasonable argument can be made that this Bill is in effort to reduce crime.
Existing law already provides for penalties for the possession of or provision
to prohibited persons. All it does it make it harder for law abiding citizens
to obtain ammunition for *legal* purposes, such as target shooting and
home/personal defense.

Furthermore, before the last Appropriations hearing, Finance *OPPOSED* AB962,
and yet it still (inexplicably) passed Appropriations, even during the fiscal
emergency CA is facing today.

http://www.dof.ca.gov/legislative_analyses/LIS_PDF/09/AB-962-20090504035415PM-AB00962.pdf

"Finance believes creating a new database and registration program would
require significant staff and contract resources. The bill would allow for a
fee to be charged to cover DOJ's costs, but caps that fee at $50. It is not
clear that this program can be implemented at that fee level. If it cannot, DOJ
would have to seek additional funding, creating pressure on other special funds
and possibly the General Fund."

Finance *opposed* this bill, and yet appropriations passed it, after amending
it to provide "funding". Funding in the form of an *additional* tax on
ammunition, which criminals are unlikley to ever pay regardless!

Taxes, I might add, that punish *law abiding* citizens who buy ammunition, not
to mention the businesses that are sure to see plummeting sales in the face of
cost increases and burdensome regulation. Tax revenue from ammunition sales is
sure to plummet. Many smaller retail stores will probably go out of business.
There is literally no way to fund this ill-conceived bill.

Furthermore, criminals do not buy more than 50 rounds at a time. Sportsmen and
target shooters buy more than 50 rounds at a time.

In fact, several *sheriffs* oppose this bill. They know it will do nothing
to curb crime or gun violence.

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/09-10/bill/asm/ab_0951-1000/ab_962_cfa_20090902_174119_sen_floor.html

Butte County Sheriff
Del Norte County Sheriff
Fresno County Sheriff
Glenn County Sheriff
Kern County Sheriff
Lassen County Sheriff
Riverside County Sheriff
San Benito County Sheriff
San Bernardino County Sheriff
San Joaquin County Sheriff
Shasta County Sheriff
Stanislaus County Sheriff
Sutter County Sheriff
Tehama County Sheriff
Trinity County Sheriff

Please, join the many Law Enforcement officials who oppose AB962,
and vote against, regardless of your party affiliation.

Nevermore
09-08-2009, 12:08 PM
A follow-up letter of mine, incorporating recent developments on the Senate floor:

September 8, 2009

The Honorable (Senator)
State Capitol
Room (XXX)
Sacramento, CA 94248-0001

SUBJECT: AB962, HANDGUN AMMO VENDOR REGULATIONS – OPPOSE

Dear Senator Corbett:

I am writing to you to OPPOSE Assembly Member DeLeon’s AB 962, which is currently on the Senate floor. This bill will create new regulatory requirements for all handgun ammo vendors as well as restricting mail order or online purchases of handgun ammunition into California.

Despite the modifications introduced on September 4, 2009, this bill shall only hamper legitimate commerce and restrict lawful sporting activities in the state. In particular, the state is in the legally precarious position of creating law with respect to interstate commerce, an area wholly occupied by the Federal Government and the U.S. Constitution (Article I, Section 8). Additionally, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that state interference in interstate commerce is unconstitutional in 2005 with Granholm v. Heald. Ironically, this was a case where several states banned the import of certain goods from California into their states.

With the state of California’s fiscal health, it is irresponsible to introduce a new program out of shrinking general funds to create additional bureaucracy that would net a negligible number of criminals – criminals created by prosecuting vendors who neglect to fingerprint law-abiding ammunition purchasers, or those who ‘improperly’ fingerprint as determined by the whim of a Dept. of Justice inspector. Also, this bill will get challenged on Commerce Clause grounds: Is it really a good use of state money defending an unconstitutional law?

AB 962 will do nothing to prevent “Community Terrorism”, as Assembly Member DeLeon so colorfully describes in his bill, nor will it deter street criminals from simply smuggling in ammunition from neighboring states – an act already illegal in California. The only clause related to “community terrorists” prohibits some from engaging in “gang activities”. California already has laws dealing with violations of parole restrictions of former gang members, which cover a broad spectrum of activities including supplying and possessing ammunition.

While I can certainly appreciate an honest attempt to curb criminal behavior, the State of California would be better served spending its enforcement resources in other ways. This bill has both redundant and unconstitutional elements in it.

I, and many lawful sportsmen and sportswomen, look forward to you OPPOSING AB 962.

Sincerely,


(Your Name)
(Your Address)
District (XX) Voter/Resident/Constituent/Employer

rxdude
09-21-2009, 10:33 PM
I just emailed the governor urging a veto and will follow-up with a phone call.

It would be great if a link to this thread was included in the other threads that contain updates and contact tools.

If anyone else is like me, writing a letter or email of this nature is so much easier when a template is available containing key points.

It is one thing to get mad and disgusted when presented with information about this type of legislation, but it takes a little bit of time and effort to do something about it.

Thanks everyone for making it easier. Keep up the letters and phone calls!

obeygiant
09-21-2009, 11:03 PM
I just emailed the governor urging a veto and will follow-up with a phone call.

It would be great if a link to this thread was included in the other threads that contain updates and contact tools.

If anyone else is like me, writing a letter or email of this nature is so much easier when a template is available containing key points.

It is one thing to get mad and disgusted when presented with information about this type of legislation, but it takes a little bit of time and effort to do something about it.

Thanks everyone for making it easier. Keep up the letters and phone calls!

from the main thread.

916-445-2841

Step 1: Call the number in the subject
Step 2: Press 1 for English.
Step 3: Press 2 for commenting on a bill on the Governor’s desk
Step 4: Press 2 for AB962
Step 5: Press 2 for Oppose
Step 6: Repeat as necessary (preferably once or twice a day).

Thanks,
Scott

Step 4a. Press 3 for SB585
Step 5a. Press 2 for Oppose
Step 6: Repeat as necessary (preferably once or twice a day).

rxdude
09-22-2009, 8:09 AM
from the main thread.

916-445-2841



Yes, I've done that and have been urging others to do the same. Does the phone yes/no tally system carry the same weight as a letter or email? I did the email as I figured someone had to read it and understand why it is a bad idea.

Nevermore
09-22-2009, 12:09 PM
I've been sending Twitter messages to Schwarzenegger's official Twitter feed, as well as faxing in letters. I'm down to a 'short and sweet' version, since the Governor's office is spammed with requests for the current period (30 days between the Legislature's end and when he needs to sign/veto them).

Current letter, sent AND faxed to his office:

The Honorable Arnold Schwarzenegger
Office of the Governor
State Capitol
Sacramento, CA 95814
Fax: 916-558-3160

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger,

Please VETO SB 585 (Leno). This bill is a blatant attempt to eliminate lawful firearms sales on state property. Please do not allow those who disrespect the Second Amendment to gain a foothold to outlawing any and all lawful firearms-related activities on state properties.

Please VETO AB 962 (De Leon). This ammunition registration bill has constitutionally questionable elements, while the rest are redundant restatements of existing California law. It also creates a new Dept. of Justice program with no funding mechanism.

Sincerely,


[Your Name]
[Your Address]
[Your Phone/E-mail]


You can also ask him to sign/veto any other legislation you're paying attention to. I figure at this point, the key things to communicate are:

1) Sign/Veto request
2) Bill Number (with sponsor)

At this point, his staff probably know what's being lobbied for. We just need the numbers to let them know that there's a lot of unhappy Californians who want Bill X shot down (or signed, as the case may be).