PDA

View Full Version : Meeting with Steve Poizner


mike_schwartz@mail.com
04-28-2010, 12:50 AM
Steve Poizner

A couple of weeks ago I grilled a volunteer for Steve Poizner on Commissioner Poizner’s stance on guns. I found out the volunteer was actually a gun guy. He told me he thought maybe it was studied by the campaign and decided to not take a stand on guns at all. I said I was not suggesting he run his entire campaign on guns, but at least let us know where he stands.

This conversation got me on an e-mail list. I received a few e-mails and even a phone call from Commissioner Poizner’s San Diego campaigners. As a result, tonight I spoke with Commissioner Poizner in person specifically about his views on the Second Amendment.

I started by thanking Commissioner Poizner for coming out against AB962 and for going so far to say he would like to see it repealed. (See his website) I told him it has been frustrating for gun owners in California because all of the three major candidates have been quiet on guns.

He said he’d heard Attorney General Brown was “cozying up to the gun crowd” and referenced the amicus brief in favor of incorporating the Second Amendment against the states. I told him I was happy to hear that and I wanted everyone to cozy up to gun owners and support our rights.

He said he and his staff were just discussing the NRA questionnaire and asked if I thought they would really endorse in a primary. I told him that the NRA is always looking for good people to support and that NOT returning the questionnaire would probably be seen as displaying a hostile attitude towards the NRA. He said he’d fill it out.

He said he is a supporter of the Second Amendment and is “fundamentally in line” with the NRA, but did not know enough about the details. He said he would not support any new gun laws and would support going line by line to see what gun laws could be repealed that are on the books right now. He then asked me “how’s that”, but not in a flippant way. He seemed genuinely interested in finding out what’s missing from this part of his platform.

I told him it was a good start, but lacks specifics.

I asked specifically about CCW reform and repealing the CA AWB. He asked me to talk about both a little, which I did. He knew some of the terminology like “shall issue”, etc, but is not familiar with specifics, as he stated. He again said he did not know the specifics on the troubles of gun owners in California, but wanted to. He reiterated his opinion on the importance of the Second Amendment and said that when elected, he wanted to “protect our rights”.

He asked if Meg Whitman had a statement on the Second Amendment. I said that her website had the obligatory “I support the Second Amendment” that every politician has on their website and that she doesn’t support any new laws either. I said that most were very disappointed that she stopped the sale of firearms on EBAY. He said he’d heard about her choice and seemed to recall that she stated it was for moral reasons. He pointed out that she didn’t stop the sale of porn on EBAY for moral reasons and then said “gun owners deserve to be treated better than that”.

I told him a concern of mine was to un-do laws that had already been put in place. Being against new guns laws is great, but repealing existing oppressive laws is necessary. He said he’d be interested in doing just that once he was brought up to speed on the subject.

My time was limited, but he ended with saying he will make sure the NRA questionnaire is completed and returned ASAP and that he will educate himself on our subject. My opinion is that he appeared sincere and interested, but uninformed. I also got the impression that there had been discussions on guns in California and wasn’t positive of the specific problems or solutions.

-Michael

johnthomas
04-28-2010, 1:26 AM
I have been leaning towards Poizner. The one thing I don't like is that he voted to get rid of prop 13.

OleCuss
04-28-2010, 4:17 AM
Thank you for the info on Poizner. Sounds like he might be a good guy on 2A once he is up to speed on the subject.

BadIndianSwamp
04-28-2010, 6:15 AM
Thank you for the effort to contact Mr. Poizner and for the excellent post!

Hogxtz
04-28-2010, 6:32 AM
Very, very interesting. A Gov that would undue gun laws already in place? He might be our guy after all. Can't wait to see what the NRA says, and to see how much he educates himself on our issues.

ned946
04-28-2010, 8:09 AM
Sounds like he's a tell ya what you wanna hear kinda guy...and I'm not just trying to dis him - I'm leaning toward supporting him myself. But I'm disappointed in his replies.

BUT, a candidate who does not clearly know where he stands on a hot button topic is going to go with public demand and outcry all the while trying to superficially entice along those he's going to offend.

Always remember, words are not worth the paper they're written on. Actions speak volumes. What has he done or not done (supported) in the past that would lead me to believe any of his words?

And, by the way, thank you for taking the time to interview and post up. ITs a great starting point.

Ding126
04-28-2010, 8:25 AM
Interesting information...not much meat on the bone. Sounds like normal political responses but I wasn't there and have to take the OP's feel for the conversation. Good job and thanks for the intel

Full Clip
04-28-2010, 8:29 AM
He pointed out that she didn’t stop the sale of porn on EBAY for moral reasons and then said “gun owners deserve to be treated better than that”.

Ha, classic line.
Yes, we do deserve better than that.

mcholak
04-28-2010, 8:32 AM
I like the "I don't know enough about it" approach, I'd rather see him open and asking questions than making statements on something he doesn't understand. I am however concerned that he wasn't prepared and hasn't studied up on a topic that was bound to come up. I'm sure he has feelings on the economy, abortion, illegal immigration,etc.

chiselchst
04-28-2010, 9:24 AM
Thank you for the effort to contact Mr. Poizner and for the excellent post!

+1 Thanks for sharing...

bwiese
04-28-2010, 9:27 AM
Odd that Poizner just now is seeing the light, with his campaign in the dumps.
All the skilled campaign staff left and jumped to Whitman. The only way Poizner gets traction is if Meg explodes.

I'd heard that in the past he'd refused to meet with NRA folks (which apparently is often done quietly).

hnoppenberger
04-28-2010, 9:30 AM
He is a CA republican. I think he's the best choice, as Meg is a clear lib.
I know we will be dissapointed with Poizner at times, but i'm sure it can't be as bad as Arnold the Nazi from Austria.

Ding126
04-28-2010, 9:35 AM
But does SP have a chance...he is so far down for many reasons. Meg Whitless is going against JB its a clear fact..like it or not.
If SP wins the Rep. nomination, I would be very surprised. He has a chance but a very slim one.

OleCuss
04-28-2010, 9:40 AM
I'm still tempted to again register as a Republican just so that I can vote against Whitman in the Primary. Poizner would almost have to be much better.

OleCuss
04-28-2010, 9:41 AM
Odd that Poizner just now is seeing the light, with his campaign in the dumps.
All the skilled campaign staff left and jumped to Whitman. The only way Poizner gets traction is if Meg explodes.

I'd heard that in the past he'd refused to meet with NRA folks (which apparently is often done quietly).

Any chance he would meet with you CGF folks? Given my 'druthers, you all would be the ones I'd like him to spend a few hours with.

Mordeen
04-28-2010, 4:23 PM
Another thread starts about Poizner, and the usual suspects quickly jump in to remind us all that it's too late, he's doomed, no chance. Well of course he doesn't have a chance, as long as there is a steady supply of naysayers with clout counting him out.

An election can change in days, and it doesn't take an implosion. The Mass. senate race changed in days. With the CA primaries weeks away, alot can happen, but what is required is action, not words. Positive actions, not negative words.

Why not start an effort, an all-out movement, to get Whitman off the ballot in June if she's so bad (which she is)? I know many of you have already sold out conservative governance in favor of one aspect of our liberties --i.e. voting for Jerry Brown just because he's apparently pro 2A at this moment in time-- but the Democratic side of the fight has already been settled. Stop talking about Jerry Brown, for now, and focus all energies on shaping the Republican ticket in June. And if Poizner gets on the ballot, he's got until November to take a clearer stance on the issues that matter to all of us.

This isn't over. In a state where 50,000 votes can easily change the outcome of an election, the 2A community is poised to make its mark. Let's make a mark! Register as a republican and vote in the primaries. Boot Meg, vote Steve, and hold his feet to the fire on 2A.

Hey OP, thanks for asking those questions. Great post.

mike_schwartz@mail.com
04-28-2010, 8:32 PM
I do not know how this will all go with Steve Poizner. I hope it goes well. One of his campaign people called and talked to me today to follow up. He was very well informed on our subject and the conversation went well.

Two things occurred to me:
1) If Jerry Brown is in fact as pro-gun as we think he might be, we have a chance of going into a general election in November for California governor with a choice between two pro-gun candidates.
2) Mr. Poizner is low hanging fruit. As an activist, do not go and try to change the minds of the local Brady Org members. Imagine how hard it would be to change your mind about guns. Find people who are open to listening, but uneducated on the subject. Then educate them using a level head. Arm him with facts and when an anti-gun nut comes along and tries to feed him lies, he’ll know better.

Our subject is not exactly a vote grabber in this state. To suggest Mr. Poizner is coming around to our way of thinking for political reasons is frankly silly. Perhaps he was not interested in our subject at one time. Now he is showing interest. I do not think the right thing to do now is to crush the guy for not liking us a year ago. What’s the point of trying to convert people to our way of thinking if when they convert we yell at them for not converting earlier?

Now is the time to cultivate a relationship. Win or lose it looks like we have another elected official who is coming around to our way of thinking.

dfletcher
04-28-2010, 8:47 PM
For the sake of discussion, if Poizner is moderately progun and Brown is moderately progun - whatever the hell that may mean - does it make any difference, on the gun issue only, who wins?

If Brown wins and turns out to be not so progun, gun owners get to turn to the Republicans for help. If Poizner wins and turns out to be not so progun, to whom do we turn - the Democrats? :(

Blue
04-28-2010, 8:49 PM
I worked at his house a few years ago. I'd vote for him.

CitaDeL
04-28-2010, 9:01 PM
Sounds like he's a tell ya what you wanna hear kinda guy....

This^

Look, the reality in my view is, if you say arent already up to speed on the 2nd amendment, you are likely hedging so that you dont have to make your true feelings known to those who you know dont feel the same way you do.

While it may be debated among those who have only a peripheral understanding of the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the general principles of liberty- these issues should be a completely settled matter in your mind if you are seeking public office.

mattmcg
04-28-2010, 9:18 PM
Good post and a good outreach effort. The Calguns voting block is becoming more substantial by the day and having politicians cater to us as constituents is a positive development.

Whatever happens with Poizner's popularity, it is a good thing to have somebody attempt to differentiate their campaign by putting together a pro-gun 2A stance. From there, competitors will take heed and sooner or later follow suit if the differentiators start making headway.

Good work.

OleCuss
04-28-2010, 10:23 PM
OK, a little reality check? We don't know where Poizner will go. He may end up saying that he wants to ban all guns. He is undefined at this time. I have hope for the guy and have what I think is a naive belief that he will adopt a true commitment to the RKBA - but I know that it is not yet warranted.

The other thing is that we really need to give him a break on his rather deficient fund of knowledge on the subject. Heck, I know gun shop people who do not understand the 2A/14A issue well at all and don't have any real idea of the implications of Heller, the status of Heller 2, the pending Sykes and Nordyke, etc. They are committed to the RKBA but aren't very knowledgeable. Poizner may not be far off their mark and is at least willing to admit that he has a deficiency in the matter - I like people who admit failings and try to remedy them a lot more than those who just fling platitudes and shine you on so you'll vote for them.

galekowitz
04-28-2010, 11:04 PM
At least he took the time to talk to somebody. Thanks OP for the insight.

WaR_ClouD-VII
04-28-2010, 11:10 PM
Great post, thanks for the info.

Barkoff
04-28-2010, 11:18 PM
I like the "I don't know enough about it" approach, I'd rather see him open and asking questions than making statements on something he doesn't understand.

Providing that isn't cover because he knows he is talking to a guns advocate. What easier way to avoid telling the OP what he really believes?

Just being skeptical, I'll probablly give him my X.

steelrain82
04-29-2010, 2:01 AM
is there a place that shows info on all possible candidates. that way i can try to make an educated decision on who to choose

Forestgnome
04-29-2010, 5:03 AM
I'm not saying I won't vote for Poizner, but his responses don't comfort me at all. It's too bad we don't have politicians that bother to learn anything about the issues that are important to people. They seem to be sheltered in their own little world. You can talk to him all you want about gun rights, but clearly there's no passion there and that's what it takes to get something done. Seems like the gun rights issue is pretty much a non-issue in this election. At least he was willing to talk a while with a voter. Next time we need someone to pose as someone concerned about gun violence and how there are too many guns and see what he says then.

vantec08
04-29-2010, 5:34 AM
Doesnt make a particle of difference who the Guv is without a serious change in Congress, and the congressional voting strength to enforce vetoes.

TripleT
04-29-2010, 9:32 AM
IMHO, the Poizner vs Brown debate is premature. Let's focus on Poizner vs Whitman. We know she sucks so let's support the person that looks like he'd be a better 2A candidate. If your registered republican, the June choice should be clear. We'll come back to the Brown vs ? after the June primary... Just my .02

Poizner get's my vote,,, for now...

IGOTDIRT4U
04-29-2010, 9:45 AM
IMHO, the Poizner vs Brown debate is premature. Let's focus on Poizner vs Whitman. We know she sucks so let's support the person that looks like he'd be a better 2A candidate. If your registered republican, the June choice should be clear. We'll come back to the Brown vs ? after the June primary... Just my .02

Poizner get's my vote,,, for now...

I don't intend to change my party affiliation for the primary; JB is a shoe-in for his party. I will vote for Poizner then, just to be able to say I did everything I could to keep her out.

As to the general election, I am strongly leaning to JB, but I have yet to hear clear answers on his "plan" for CA for the next 6 years.

MichaelKent
04-29-2010, 12:54 PM
I asked specifically about CCW reform and repealing the CA AWB. He asked me to talk about both a little, which I did. He knew some of the terminology like “shall issue”, etc, but is not familiar with specifics, as he stated. He again said he did not know the specifics on the troubles of gun owners in California, but wanted to.

This sounds exactly like the sort of guy we want. Somebody who not only admits a lack of knowledge for specific details but asks for input and information upon which to make a judgment. A lot of politicians may say something like "I support/oppose Legislation concerning CCW" without knowing much about it - it's better to have someone willing to ask for specifics. Adjusting your viewpoint to accommodate new information is one of the operating definitions of intelligence.


In contrast to some of what's been said here, it is completely unreasonable to expect him (or any politician) to be intimately familiar with all the little details and laws/restrictions that we gun owners face. We know all the details because we are enthusiasts on the subject, but none of the candidates likely are.

Politicians have a LOT on their plates. Imagine if he sat down with someone passionate about the farm industry, or the biomedical field, or vehicle regulations, and so on... Would you honestly expect anybody to know all the specifics and minute laws regarding all of those subjects? He couldn't possibly. Let's just be glad he's in line with the NRA. Specifics he can learn on the job.

BigDogatPlay
04-29-2010, 1:23 PM
I will likely vote for Steve Poizner in the primary for two reasons....

** He is not Meg Whitman
** There is not anyone else on the primary ballot I can honestly vote for

That said, and all naysaying aside, the political reality is that Poizner's candidacy is for all intents and purposes a dead duck walking. Whitman has shown clearly that she is willing to spend any amount of money (her's or otherwise) for the job, which fact always makes my shenanigan sensors tingle just a little wondering what her real agenda is.

Poizner is also, generally speaking, wholly uninspiring on the stump and has long had a reputation for being very reticent to take hard stands on hard issues lest he appear to not be following the conventional wisdom. And he has in the past, or so I've gleaned from some of the tea leaves, been less than interested in even talking to NRA.

What should be of concern is that Meg Whitman has been tending to run slightly ahead of JB in most recent polling of a head to head race. Link here. (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/governor/election_2010_governor_races.html) The most recent Rasmussen poll (which is typically one of the most reliable polls there is) has JB up by a few.

ETA.... many thanks to the OP for his determination in running Mr. Poizner at least somewhat to ground on the issues that mean the most to folks here. I'm simply afraid that Poizner's reaching out is, at this point, born of at least a bit of desperation.

a1c
04-29-2010, 1:53 PM
There is something really fishy going on right now regarding his book sales and what he wrote in it.

Not only does it sound like he made it look like he worked in a tough San Jose school even though the research suggests he embellished his experience quite a bit, but suddenly a lot of people whose names start with an M are getting free copies from Amazon - his book briefly shot to the 5th place in the New York Times bestsellers list.

I hope someone gets to the bottom of this, because if he indeed bull****ted about his experience and bought copies of his own book to make it look like it was a success, that's not the kind of guy I want as a governor.

mike_schwartz@mail.com
04-29-2010, 9:38 PM
I am really glad that this post sparked some debate. But I wanted to clarify why I put this post up originally. I am not saying anyone should or should not vote for Poizner. I know the NRA staff is working hard to let us all know the story with the candidates before we head to the polls.

At this point and knowing what we now know it is time to act. Almost 1000 people have read this post. Take 5 minutes to write an e-mail to the Poizner campaign that:
• Thanks him for opposing AB962
• Tells him your one biggest concern about gun laws in CA (CCW law, AWB, etc)
• Lets him know about your support of the NRA and calguns

Keep it short, professional, and focused. I believe this would actually accomplish something. If he wins or loses, this will have an effect. It will get the word out. Show strength and organization. It will continue to help make us relevant. The next election, people will remember and after this campaign, people will be better educated, thanks to us.

This was my intent.

johnthomas
04-29-2010, 10:09 PM
The only contact on his website was website feedback. I went to facebook and no place to comment or contact. Do you have an address?

mike_schwartz@mail.com
04-29-2010, 10:43 PM
John,
send a message on Facebook:
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1511441553&ref=pymk#!/poizner?ref=ts

Or send a message via the "contact us" section of his website:
http://action.stevepoizner.com/site/c.rkI3KhMRIpF/b.5710393/k.2A49/Contact_Us.htm

HondaMasterTech
04-29-2010, 10:49 PM
Meg Witmans agenda is power. She probably feels a need to "compensate for something".

CalNRA
04-30-2010, 3:55 AM
OK, a little reality check? We don't know where Poizner will go. He may end up saying that he wants to ban all guns. He is undefined at this time. I have hope for the guy and have what I think is a naive belief that he will adopt a true commitment to the RKBA - but I know that it is not yet warranted.

he kinda signed his death warrant with the Brady's with this one:
<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/xCdInwNVtks&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/xCdInwNVtks&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

motorhead
04-30-2010, 10:21 AM
thanks for the info. most of us see a neglect to adress gun laws as anti. i truly hope he is interested in studying the issues, not just having his spin doctors see how this affects his popularity. his responses were positive but noncomittal.

gn3hz3ku1*
05-01-2010, 6:02 PM
I don't intend to change my party affiliation for the primary; JB is a shoe-in for his party. I will vote for Poizner then, just to be able to say I did everything I could to keep her out.

As to the general election, I am strongly leaning to JB, but I have yet to hear clear answers on his "plan" for CA for the next 6 years.

wait your a demmmoooocrate? :eek: ;)

big red
05-01-2010, 6:11 PM
I sent a copy of Mike's thread portion of this thread and no one else's to the Poizner camp and suggested they start revising their positions on the second amendment and more importantly the gun laws of this state if they did not want to alienate a huge portion of the voting public. No response so far so maybe a few more people should contact the Poizner people and start hammering them about it and see if they respond with anything other than what we have seen. We could tip it in his favor but he has to know he must be willing to work with us as well. And Mike, thank you for giving me a good piece to quote when I contacted his people. Maybe you will shake something up and we might get a reasonably straight and HONEST answer.

MolonLabe2008
05-01-2010, 6:39 PM
Tom McClintock is now endorsing Poizner.

warbird
05-01-2010, 6:43 PM
sounds good but we need to get him to come more clearly on his position on california gun laws and the second amenment or he is going to lose the primary.

bwiese
05-01-2010, 10:42 PM
crossposted from other thread regarding Whitman and Poizner at Cow Palace gunshow...



STEVE POIZNER ... in some recent posts I had stated that he'd refused to meet with NRA reps in the past.

It turns out that it's worse: back when Poizner was running against Ira Ruskin for Bay Area 21st dist assy seat, friggin' Poizner told NRA reps to "f***k off, I don't need your right-wing BS."

It was so bad Ruskin was even looked at afterward as possibly somewhat more favorable than Poizner (though Ruskin was terrible and stayed that way).

While the above Poizner 'quote' is only approximate in its wording, its tone/demeanor and overall content are indeed correct. If necessary, folks with high credibility would be able to be deposed under oath to the overall veracity of the above paraphrased comment of his.

Furthermore, please ignore the Tom McClintock statment or at best please ignore any RKBA inferences therefrom. These are internal campaign & aide matters and a bit of backslapping-exchange for future races. [Frankly, to the best of my knowledge Tom McClintock has relatively little RKBA relevance in CA other than his 'no' vote on bad gun bills and some friendly public statements: I have not seen him drive achievable incrimental gun bills - unlike folks like, say, Curt Hagman who really tried to drive AB962 repeal or Doug LaMalfa and the Katrina bill etc.]

I know that some nice gunnies are supporting Poizner, but I hope they see the light or come to understand Mr. Poizner has either badly represented his past gunrights stance or he just had a massive new vision 2 months ago. I've had such visions too, but they usually involved large amounts of Wild Turkey and a night of vomiting cured it.

And to the best of my knowledge, Mr. Poizner has not returned/completed an NRA candidate questionnaire. I'd bet that would be necessary for someone in his position (past repudiation, supposed new convert, looking for the gun vote...)

bwiese
05-01-2010, 10:43 PM
Tom McClintock is now endorsing Poizner.

has nothing to do with gunrights, that's just some "I don't like Meg" crap, etc. Plus, Tom McClintock has done little for gunrights in CA.

mike_schwartz@mail.com
05-01-2010, 11:24 PM
Just to re-reiterate my point in posting…the NRA will let us know the story on the guy all in good time. Of that I am sure. Now is the time for all reading this to influence Poizner to come around to our way of thinking. If he wins or loses, let it be due to the efforts of gun owners and calgunners.

Don’t just sit there at your computer and spout off complaints. Do something to make things better. We are now up to 1200+ people who have read this thread. If ¼ of you followed through on my earlier suggestion and wrote the guy a well written note, things could happen. Be an activist. Not a sit-on-your-asstivist.

wildhawker
05-02-2010, 12:44 AM
If you had any idea who preceded your below post, or what he does for the gun rights movement, you'd laugh too.

Why do you assume the NRA *hasn't* let us know the story behind the candidates?

The Poizner campaign has, and now Whitman's has also, taken a very keen interest in the gun movement after years of ignoring us or being outright hostile toward us.

Their campaigns see us as free labor. My suggestion is to not allow yourself to be suckered in and used up by people who have no chance of winning an election or are simply extraordinarily wealthy RINOs hostile to our civil rights.

Just to re-reiterate my point in posting…the NRA will let us know the story on the guy all in good time. Of that I am sure. Now is the time for all reading this to influence Poizner to come around to our way of thinking. If he wins or loses, let it be due to the efforts of gun owners and calgunners.

Don’t just sit there at your computer and spout off complaints. Do something to make things better. We are now up to 1200+ people who have read this thread. If ¼ of you followed through on my earlier suggestion and wrote the guy a well written note, things could happen. Be an activist. Not a sit-on-your-asstivist.

big red
05-02-2010, 12:46 AM
Mike you are correct and they could use some good points that were pointed out in these threads. As I said I did send your first comments in this thread to his staff and they have not responded. But maybe if more calgunners do it and ask simple to the point questions about gun rights in california and the second amendment being incorporated into the california constitution we might get a better picture of whether this man deserves our vote or not in the primary.

Wildhawker, maybe you could post what the NRA has said so the rest of us can be educated.

wildhawker
05-02-2010, 1:16 AM
See Bill's comments and read between the lines.

big red
05-02-2010, 1:21 AM
Personally I hate reading between lines. Fifty people do that and fifty different conclusions come out of it. I would prefer to see whatever the NRA has said in print so there is no mistake. Is Bill officially speaking for the NRA? If so then we have something to chew on.

mike_schwartz@mail.com
05-02-2010, 1:27 AM
Am I not typing in English here?

I don’t support Poizner or Whitman or Brown. I also am not recommending you support them. Nor do I condemn them or recommend you do. It’s May. Not June 8th.

What I thought we all might try is letting candidates know how we feel about guns rather than just ranting to each other.

Who has done more for gun right at this very moment? The guy who drags a potential CA governors name through the mud on a message board? Or the guy who wrote the potential governor an e-mail/letter letting him know how important gun rights and the NRA are to his vote?

I don’t know who will win. I do know that if you kick a guy in the teeth and then he does win, your issue won’t be worth much to him. I know that if everything you post sounds like it came from someone in a diaper it doesn’t do a thing to advance our cause.

Not sure if you have noticed, but gun rights in California is not exactly a success story. We are extremely outnumbered and surrounded. We could continue to circle the wagons and watch our rights get picked off one by one, or we could make more friends who will fight with us (especially friends who hold an office). If someone reaches out to you…educate them. That is a victory. If an enemy reaches out to you…well, that is a huge victory. So don’t spit in their face.

Stop and think about what we are trying to do here. Is our goal to get people on our side and preserve rights? Or was this website just set up so a bunch of gun guys have a place to be snide?

big red
05-02-2010, 1:34 AM
Mike, If you read my posts I have been backing your request that more of us write the candidates including Poizner and not make any judgements until we get some straight answers that are quoteable. If he or Witman avoid us then that says alot. My vote is still out and I would like a lot of the same answers you want. I do not want to be "reading between the lines" or guessing if I can avoid it. It is obvious some people have chosen their candidate and that is the freedom of choice. Some of the rest of us, you and I, are still looking for answers to questions that are important to us. Is there anything wrong with that?

mike_schwartz@mail.com
05-02-2010, 1:45 AM
Big Red, if you any of what I said seemed like it was directed your way, my apologies. It was not. The NRA is working on it endorsements and grading candidates as we speak. We’ll all know what is what by the election.

big red
05-02-2010, 2:05 AM
Mike, you have nothing to apologize for to me. I want honest answers just like everyone else who has not made up their mind yet and I suspect that is a large number of us. Thank you for the well wirtten piece at the start and like I said I am still waiting on an e-mail from the Poizner camp myself.

vladbutsky
05-02-2010, 7:42 PM
I watched it today at 5pm. There was one direct question about new proposal to ban open carry and if it is wrong. Both of them decided to spend time answering previous question, but Poizner at least said that we do not need any new gun laws and he wouldn't support it. Whitman said only that she supports the Second Amendment and completely ignored the question.
I don't know if what Poizner said is true or just another election promise, but shouldn't we support him on June 8? I mean these of us who vote in republican primaries. If not him, then whom? Is there anyone else who really has a shot at it?
Even if you believe that Poizner is bluffing and just trying to get gun owners on board to get elected, I think we still can get something out of it by just writing emails to him and to Whitman. It will not change who they are, but it will register in their heads that people are not ignoring gun rights and they should not be able to just skip gun rights questions in the debate.
I think it is time to write now and I'm going to write to both of them.

Here is link for story: http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=news/politics&id=7418643
I couldn't find any links for video yet.

ja308
05-02-2010, 11:27 PM
Doesnt make a particle of difference who the Guv is without a serious change in Congress, and the congressional voting strength to enforce vetoes.

true ,although in Cal.the 100% anti gun democrat controlled assembly + senate are the problem. BTW the democrat assembly wrote nearly 2000 laws ,last year.
A good republican gov ,could veto bad bills + dems not wanting the spotlight would probably not overide it.
The key is to get more republicans in the cali senate and assembly.

bwiese
05-02-2010, 11:31 PM
A good republican gov ,could veto bad bills + dems not wanting the spotlight would probably not overide it.
The key is to get more republicans in the cali senate and assembly.

Let the CA Republicans know. The party seems to not want to win elections in CA except in Orange County and rural areas.

wildhawker
05-03-2010, 12:28 AM
true ,although in Cal.the 100% anti gun democrat controlled assembly + senate are the problem. BTW the democrat assembly wrote nearly 2000 laws ,last year.
A good republican gov ,could veto bad bills + dems not wanting the spotlight would probably not overide it.
The key is to get more republicans in the cali senate and assembly.

Funny, there are enough pro/semi-pro-2A dems in CA so as to make our Reep contingent look really, really RINO when it counts...

mike_schwartz@mail.com
05-03-2010, 6:37 PM
A couple of interesting points…their campaign staff called me today. They have a new stance on the Second Amendment on their website. I invite you all to take a look to see what you think.

The campaign also returned the NRA questionnaire over the weekend. Reading between the lines during the conversation, it was due to the interest shown by the gun community in his opinion. Getting them to make a statement about the Second Amendment and getting them to work with the NRA is the goal and it was accomplished. Good work to everyone who contacted them!

Again…I have no idea who I will vote for. That is not what this was about. The NRA has carried the water and I believe their members (you and I) helped in the end. Now the NRA will have good information to help make a judgment.

I really encourage all of you to use the information you find on calguns to motivate action. Don’t just post a complaint or forward some e-mails to your buddies. Engage the people running for office in a professional manner. It will make a difference.

One last thing, after talking to the staffer from Poizner’s office…apparently he contacted someone who posts a lot on calguns and is a part of the leadership of the Foundation. He was reaching out to the gun community. But this person wouldn’t talk to him and the reason given is that Poizner is not a Democrat. That’s disappointing. I hate to hear stories like that. It certainly doesn’t help the long term goal and seems childish. Personal agendas really get in the way of progress.


-Michael

Shotgun Man
05-03-2010, 6:47 PM
A couple of interesting points…their campaign staff called me today. They have a new stance on the Second Amendment on their website. I invite you all to take a look to see what you think.

The campaign also returned the NRA questionnaire over the weekend. Reading between the lines during the conversation, it was due to the interest shown by the gun community in his opinion. Getting them to make a statement about the Second Amendment and getting them to work with the NRA is the goal and it was accomplished. Good work to everyone who contacted them!

Again…I have no idea who I will vote for. That is not what this was about. The NRA has carried the water and I believe their members (you and I) helped in the end. Now the NRA will have good information to help make a judgment.

I really encourage all of you to use the information you find on calguns to motivate action. Don’t just post a complaint or forward some e-mails to your buddies. Engage the people running for office in a professional manner. It will make a difference.

One last thing, after talking to the staffer from Poizner’s office…apparently he contacted someone who posts a lot on calguns and is a part of the leadership of the Foundation. He was reaching out to the gun community. But this person wouldn’t talk to him and the reason given is that Poizner is not a Democrat. That’s disappointing. I hate to hear stories like that. It certainly doesn’t help the long term goal and seems childish. Personal agendas really get in the way of progress.


-Michael

You duped your post, so I'll dupe my reply.

Who did the Poizner staffer talk to on CGF? You gotta name names if you're gonna make such explosive allegations.

Sinixstar
05-03-2010, 6:48 PM
So wait, let me get this right.

He's "fundamentally in line" with the NRA, supports "gun rights", knows buzzwords like "shall issue" - but is unaware of the details gun owners in California have with the current gun laws? How is that possible exactly?

How can you support something when you clearly have a lack of any/all knowledge on the subject?

OleCuss
05-03-2010, 7:02 PM
Posted in another thread on the "change" in Poizner's stance. It still means next to nothing.

Don't get me wrong, I may still change my registration so that I can vote Poizner over Whitman (I think he is much better), but I have no confidence that he'll actually be good on the RKBA.