PDA

View Full Version : Dont be afraid to ask for help.


6172crew
02-23-2006, 4:13 PM
I have called the NRA and the only gun freindly Senator Tom McClintock and havent heard much back, so I called both offices and was told that Im like the only guy beating the bush. http://www.ar15.com/images/smilies/smiley_abused.gif

OK guys first, even if you dont live near Thousand Oaks let the Senator know we need his help asking the DOJ to update the AW list and that a CAT4 AW law is unwanted and not needed. Let him know you support his campain for LtGov and that gun owners need a voice and he can count on us to help when he comes through for us.

I was told he reads his own email.:) We need to flood his email box, and lets let the NRA have it also, let them know the DOJ has been deceiving and wont seem to give us straight answers and want to add yet another confusing cat. of assault weapons.

senator.mcclintock@sen.ca.gov
State Capitol, Room 3070
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: (916) 445-8873
Fax: (916) 324-7544
http://republican.sen.ca.gov/web/mcclintock/district.asp
http://www.tommcclintock.net/startup.html

Second, call the NRA office in Sac and let them know we need help getting the DOJ to update the list and not waste tax payers $$ just update the list.
(916) 446-2455
1 800 392-8683
email???
Any letter writting help would be great just post it so it can be Copied and Pasted to a email.

rkt88edmo
02-23-2006, 11:38 PM
Also, our NRA ballots are out. There are two Californians on the nominating committees list. Almost everyone on this list is bound to be elected, but let's make sure those two are.

There is also this guy from New York (http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=8&f=9&t=222980) who probably has sympathy for our CA predicament.

hitnrun
02-24-2006, 1:33 AM
Bump for approval!:D

6172crew
02-24-2006, 5:20 AM
60 emails to the Senator and Im sure he will get on board, let get er done.:)

mrhappym1a
02-24-2006, 11:02 AM
I'm gonna' put this up here for you to critique. Any suggestions/recommended changes? Be gentle, I'm a dumbass.

Dear Sir,

I am a registered voter living in the east San Francisco bay area. I am a conservative voter, a member of the NRA and I vote in every election. I also make sure that my friends and family are informed on the issues before they vote. Especially when it comes to gun control and the California Department Of Justice.

You may or may not be aware that recent rulings by the California Supreme Court allow the legal importation and sale of "off list" or unnamed manufacturer rifles. Rifles that were previously banned as "Series Assault Weapons". The ruling states that the DOJ must specifically name the manufacturer and model in order for said rifles to be banned from sale in CA. Hence, since the ruling thousands upon thousands of rifles/ rifle receivers have been legally imported into the state and sold on the retail market to thousands of shooting enthusiasts.

The CA DOJ and the Attorney General have since attempted to try at every turn to spread misinformation and outright lies on this issue. Reports of field agents using scare tactics and spreading misinformation both at gun shows and at retail stores are rampant on the internet gun boards. There are so many rumors in circulation that nobody knows the truth on this matter. This is only compounded by the DOJ and the CA Attorney General's office lack of action on this issue. DOJ internal memos have supposedly been leaked to the public spreading even further misinformation and causing further confusion amongst sportsmen, gun enthusiasts, range operators, retailers and law enforcement agencies. Nobody who now owns one of these legally acquired rifles knows for certain if they will be arrested if they go onto a public range with their legally configured rifle.

Is there any way possible for you to look into this issue? Specifically the misuse of power by the DOJ and it's field agents. Also the creation of a new "assault weapon" category (Category 4).

Thousands of law abiding sportsmen and women would certainly appreciate your assistance in any way in addressing this matter.

Thank you,

Mesa Tactical
02-24-2006, 11:30 AM
Why not change this:


You may or may not be aware that due to recent rulings by the California Supreme Court a "loophole" was discovered that allows the legal importation and sale of "off list" or unnamed manufacturer rifles.

To this:

"You may or may not be aware that recent rulings by the California Supreme Court allow the legal importation and sale of "off list" or unnamed manufacturer rifles."

mrhappym1a
02-24-2006, 11:43 AM
Why not change this:



To this:

"You may or may not be aware that recent rulings by the California Supreme Court allow the legal importation and sale of "off list" or unnamed manufacturer rifles."

Okay, thanks for the input.

Anyone else have any suggestions?

xenophobe
02-24-2006, 11:56 AM
PM sent...

mrhappym1a
02-24-2006, 12:06 PM
PM sent...

LOL! Okay, remember, I did say that I was a dumbass. I caught a few and made corrections.

You see any more?

ETA also please correct me if I have my facts bassackwards.

1911_Mitch
02-24-2006, 12:32 PM
second paragraph - DOJ must list manufacturer AND model.

fourth paragraph, second sentence - you bring up another issue (Cat 4 AW) that you have not explained. Might be a good idea to explain this, and/or bring reference to the DOJ memo.

6172crew
02-24-2006, 12:44 PM
I think a new cat4 will just make things more confusing and treating all AWs the same is a way to keep it simple to understand.
:eek:

BTW thanks for the help, I suck at writing.:o

second paragraph - DOJ must list manufacturer AND model.

fourth paragraph, second sentence - you bring up another issue (Cat 4 AW) that you have not explained. Might be a good idea to explain this, and/or bring reference to the DOJ memo.

Mr331
02-24-2006, 1:49 PM
Second, call the NRA office in Sac and let them know we need help getting the DOJ to update the list and not waste tax payers $$ just update the list.
(916) 446-2455
1 800 392-8683
email???

Ask for Ed Worley. I got him in on this long ago. The Sacramento NRA office is fully aware of this issue. I referred a few out of state sellers his way to explain the whole situation.

Glasshat
02-24-2006, 2:17 PM
mrhappym1a: good letter.

If I sent it to my state senator (Torlakson) he would stop reading as soon as he got to the part about "I am a conservative, member of the NRA" and then he would file it in the round file after sending me his standard "thank you for your concern" letter.

I will send him a version of your letter that will at least get read in full before being filed.

My state assemblyman (Houston) would read your entire letter.

6172crew
02-24-2006, 3:21 PM
+1, just got off the phone w/ Ed W. they are on top of it.:D

Ed told me to pass along that putting our legal rifles together is a no-no until we get word on how they want us to fix the mag, he asked me to get some pics of the kits and they will draft up a letter to send to the head of the firearms division.:)

Just need to get our freindly Senators on board now.;) Does anyone have a good list of the freindly state guys and maybe the grades they received from the NRA?

Ask for Ed Worley. I got him in on this long ago. The Sacramento NRA office is fully aware of this issue. I referred a few out of state sellers his way to explain the whole situation.

blacklisted
02-24-2006, 3:23 PM
I think most people will put together their rifle the way that the law says (mag must require tool to remove). It doesn't matter what the DoJ wants.

You can't always get what you want. ;)

EBWhite
02-24-2006, 3:32 PM
I would rather play it safe, no evil features and a detach mag. That is the only 100 percent legit way right now...the mag lock could be a concern.

6172crew
02-24-2006, 3:33 PM
I think his point was that pushing them into a corner could turn out to be worst than just waiting for a list to be published on the DOJ website.
The lawyer told Ed that building them up could get sticky and to just wait, Im just passing the word (I dont want anyone in trouble;) )

He also told me to tone it down and not to call the AG fatboy:o , So I told me Id try to keep it civil on the net.:cool:
I guess his worry is teh AG doing somthing like going to the media and scaring the soccer moms.

I think most people will put together their rifle the way that the law says (mag must require tool to remove). It doesn't matter what the DoJ wants.

You can't always get what you want. ;)

mrhappym1a
02-24-2006, 3:34 PM
second paragraph - DOJ must list manufacturer AND model.

fourth paragraph, second sentence - you bring up another issue (Cat 4 AW) that you have not explained. Might be a good idea to explain this, and/or bring reference to the DOJ memo.

Thanks, I took your first suggestion.

The second suggestion is, um, confusing. I don't mean that your suggestion is confusing, just I don't know how to explain it clearly with out confusing him. Doesn't he have a staff or some interns to do the research?

caliar15
02-24-2006, 3:34 PM
I think most people will put together their rifle the way that the law says (mag must require tool to remove). It doesn't matter what the DoJ wants.

You can't always get what you want. ;)
I agree, Why would I let doj tell me I can't do what is legal?

dwtt
02-24-2006, 3:49 PM
Just need to get our freindly Senators on board now.;) Does anyone have a good list of the freindly state guys and maybe the grades they received from the NRA?
Ok, I'm in. I'm going to send a letter to Liz Fig, my senator, and to McClintock, even though I'm not in his district. Liz Figeuroa is anti-gun and I'm not sure I should send a letter to an unfriendly senator, but I know McClintock is friendly to gun owners.
Anyone else want to help?

-aK-
02-24-2006, 4:00 PM
I'm happy to send mail to any senator or legistlator or congressman.

It would be nice if someone better at it wrote up a good arguement.

I don't articulate very well.

6172crew
02-24-2006, 4:51 PM
AK, here is a good version.:)

I'm gonna' put this up here for you to critique. Any suggestions/recommended changes? Be gentle, I'm a dumbass.

Dear Sir,

I am a registered voter living in the east San Francisco bay area. I am a conservative voter, a member of the NRA and I vote in every election. I also make sure that my friends and family are informed on the issues before they vote. Especially when it comes to gun control and the California Department Of Justice.

You may or may not be aware that recent rulings by the California Supreme Court allow the legal importation and sale of "off list" or unnamed manufacturer rifles. Rifles that were previously banned as "Series Assault Weapons". The ruling states that the DOJ must specifically name the manufacturer and model in order for said rifles to be banned from sale in CA. Hence, since the ruling thousands upon thousands of rifles/ rifle receivers have been legally imported into the state and sold on the retail market to thousands of shooting enthusiasts.

The CA DOJ and the Attorney General have since attempted to try at every turn to spread misinformation and outright lies on this issue. Reports of field agents using scare tactics and spreading misinformation both at gun shows and at retail stores are rampant on the internet gun boards. There are so many rumors in circulation that nobody knows the truth on this matter. This is only compounded by the DOJ and the CA Attorney General's office lack of action on this issue. DOJ internal memos have supposedly been leaked to the public spreading even further misinformation and causing further confusion amongst sportsmen, gun enthusiasts, range operators, retailers and law enforcement agencies. Nobody who now owns one of these legally acquired rifles knows for certain if they will be arrested if they go onto a public range with their legally configured rifle.

Is there any way possible for you to look into this issue? Specifically the misuse of power by the DOJ and it's field agents. Also the creation of a new "assault weapon" category (Category 4).

Thousands of law abiding sportsmen and women would certainly appreciate your assistance in any way in addressing this matter.

Thank you,

yiha
02-24-2006, 5:32 PM
good effort, email senders.

ja391
02-24-2006, 8:47 PM
Should we also contact the CRPA about this?

http://www.crpa.org/contact.asp

artherd
02-24-2006, 9:41 PM
Should we also contact the CRPA about this?

http://www.crpa.org/contact.asp

My law firm actually owns the CRPA, I can assure you they're informed :D

That said, support in the form of donations and/or new memberships I am sure is quite appreciated, and infact goes towards paying both their full-time salaried lobbiest, and a barage of some of the most baddass pro-2a attorneys in the land! (they're busy right now ripping SF's Prop-H to shreads)

thmpr
02-24-2006, 9:55 PM
+1 Just joined the CRPA as a life member. Life member for the NRA for awhile now. Thanks Ben, Bill and all gun enthusiast for making this happen!

6172crew
02-25-2006, 5:37 PM
Thats some good info Ben, Im glad they are in on the fun.

I was a little skeptical about how far the NRA would get involved but after speaking with them on Friday I will be signing on for another 3 years.