PDA

View Full Version : NRA takes the heat for everything


mikehaas
03-03-2006, 12:24 PM
Hello, CalGuns.net! It's great to actually meet you folks and join in. I'm so buried with wemastering that I seldom have the chance to interact on public forums that much anymore, but I do enjoy occasionally visiting thehighroad.org and reloadbench.com. With the great support that calguns.net has provided to gun-rights in California, I've decided that it goes on my short list too. Apologies upfront if I don't reply to someone that promptly, though.

By way of introduction, I hold a few volunteer positions - I started the Members' Council in my area in 1996 -
http://www.nramemberscouncils.com/cgi-bin/haasmcshowwebpage.cgi?mc=westcoco
- January marked our 10 year anniversary. Developer, administrator and provider (donated) of virtually all of NRA's California state-wide electronic resources (ONE-CLICK, CAL-ERTs, Life-Clock, etc). Built most of http://nramemberscouncils.com/ and all of the state NRA legislative info system ("legs page", exportable mini-box, etc.) at http://nramemberscouncils.com/legs.shtml and work closely with NRA's top staff in the state to keep it as accurate as we can.

The MCs are 100% volunteer, and for years have served as "State-wide Electronic Coommunications Director" and either develop and implement my own web tools/new sections or, of course, that which NRA staff requests. None of the website or the entire MC network costs NRA any money. Indeed, we recruit many thousands of new members each year. (That's the good work of other fine MC volunteers, not myself.)

Other than that, you can learn more about me at
http://fiftycal.org/aboutmhaas.php

Ok, that's who I am. Total volunteer for NRA. Glad to meet you.

The subject has to do with the fact that I see a lot of negative comments about NRA in California, and as someone who is really close, even inside the process, it kinda hurts personally because I know how unfounded they are. We (and I'm including the top NRA staff in this one sentence - other than that, this is all my opinion, OK?) work really hard, ESPECIALLY staff, trying to wedge into every political crack that opens up and turn it to our advantage. I could go on for hours about the personal sacrifice I see made by the top 2 guys in the state (Ed Worley and Paul Payne), but won't. And they take advantage of the $200+ million/year corporation back in Fairfax, believe me. You would not believe what NRA spends on just attorney fees in this state! But remember that NRA has a fiduciary responsibility to every member to spend their money wisely.

And folks, in case you haven't noticed :-), California is a tough nut to crack. NRA gets blamed for all that goes wrong (and little that goes right!) because NRA is the big gorilla, but really, the mess the state is the fault of a LOT of people and groups, some big, some small, and two of those groups are political parties. We've got to keep supporting NRA because they really ARE the only big gorilla and if you have gotten so angry about something (rightly or wrongly) as to shut yourself off to them, you do so at the expense of our beloved Second Amendment. We need to fight together on as many fronts as we can.

Most folks don't realize it (guess they're listening to the wrong sources), but we've actually faired much better over the last few years than they've been led to expect. Of course, we are waging a fierce RKBA battle here, but most are surprised when they learn...
http://nramemberscouncils.com/gfx/2003-2005.gif

For reference:
http://nramemberscouncils.com/legs.shtml?year=2003
http://nramemberscouncils.com/legs.shtml?year=2004
http://nramemberscouncils.com/legs.shtml?year=2005

So, nice to meet you. That's the word from THIS 100% volunteer. Whatever else you support, stay supportive about NRA. The Members' Councils are a great way that EACH AND EVERY GUN-OWNER can become part of the team. (No other state has anything like Members' Councils, BTW. LET'S TAKE ADVANTAGE OF IT!!!)

You can join the MC network at:
http://calnra.com/volunteer/

Mike Haas
NRA Benefactor Member, volunteering as...
Electronic Communications Director, NRA Members' Councils of California
http://NRAMembersCouncils.com/ - aka http://calnra.com/
President, NRA Members' Council of West Contra Costa County
ILA EVC, CA Congressional District 7
Webmaster, Fifty Caliber Institute, http://fiftycal.org/
Webmaster, Fifty Caliber Shooter's Assn, http://fcsa.org/
Owner and Author, http://AmmoGuide.com/
Co-founder, http://E-GovMail.com/
Co-founder, http://ProjectBoreSnake.org/ (PLEASE SUPPORT OUR TROOPS!)
------------------------------------
You may enjoy some of my personal web sites...
------------------------------------
http://NRAWinningTeam.com/
http://PatriotBoxers.com/
http://NRAMembersCouncils.com/lifeclock/

6172crew
03-03-2006, 12:46 PM
Mike, Welcome to Calguns!:)

I was one of the guys bashing the NRA but when I started making phone calls myself I found the NRA was already on it.

Do us a favor and pass the scuttlebutt when you get a chance.

Chris
New NRA member

Omega13device
03-03-2006, 12:48 PM
Thanks for the post, Mike.

If people are critical, don't take it personally. Number one, if they are providing feedback (even negative) it's probably because they care and want to help improve the situation. You can't fault them for that. Number two, there's definitely an optics issue here in that people are not seeing what you are doing. At the end of the day, if you want people to know about what you're doing (and appreciate it more) you have to educate them on what's going on and how you and the NRA are helping. It's not realistic to expect people to dig that all up on their own, people are just too busy.

I have been critical of the NRA many times, but you will not see my membership lapsing because I know you guys are the last line of defense for our rights. I am guessing that most people here (even the critical ones) would share that position.

chunger
03-03-2006, 12:49 PM
Thanks for posting!

I joined NRA and CRPA before I bought my 1st gun 3 years ago. That was when I realized how bad things had gotten. . . and I wanted to spend money not only having guns, but ensuring I could still have/use them later.

-'Chung

Mute
03-03-2006, 12:51 PM
I would like to see more happen in Kali, but the only one I blame for our mess is our corrupt political system. Yes. It is corrupt. Gerrymandering. Cronyism. Bribery. Sure that describes politics in general, but it just seems to be at it's worst here. And Kali gunowners are the dogs that gets kicked the most but these dirty crooks. And for the voters who support them #*$(#@ you too! Rant off.

Welcome aboard mike.

FreedomIsNotFree
03-03-2006, 12:57 PM
Mike.....

Thank you for your time. I can see you are quite dedicated to the cause. I too am a member of both the NRA(18 years) and CRPA(2 years). I understand the tough road 2nd Amendment groups have here in CA, but I agree with a previous post when it was recommended that the NRA do more to publicize, within the community, what is actually being done. I think here in CA we often "feel" like some have forgotten us in the struggle to protect our 2nd Amendment rights. Almost like CA has been written off as the land of OZ or something with all the crazy liberals. I'm glad to see that is NOT the case and you and others like you are on the job. Thank you for doing all that you do.

And Welcome to CalGuns.net!!!

rkt88edmo
03-03-2006, 2:01 PM
After working with "grassroots" orgs at the organizer and board level, there is one thing I learned. Everyone wants to gripe about the org not doing this or the org not doing that...but in the end the org is nothing but what the members make it.

Want to know what the org has done lately? if you are a member ask yourself what you have done. A paltry $20-$30 bucks doesn't go very far beyond newsletters and basic upkeep; and most every org needs man hours more than they need a few extra bux.

:)

FreedomIsNotFree
03-03-2006, 2:18 PM
After working with "grassroots" orgs at the organizer and board level, there is one thing I learned. Everyone wants to gripe about the org not doing this or the org not doing that...but in the end the org is nothing but what the members make it.

Want to know what the org has done lately? if you are a member ask yourself what you have done. A paltry $20-$30 bucks doesn't go very far beyond newsletters and basic upkeep; and most every org needs man hours more than they need a few extra bux.

:)

Good Point.

"Ask NOT what the NRA has done for you, but what you have done for the NRA."
~~FreedomIsNotFree 2006~~

jnojr
03-03-2006, 2:34 PM
Why isn't the NRA supporting the RKBA amendment petition? Or how about just letting their CA members know about it... "We don't officially support this, but here it is, check it out for yourself"?

Roboshred
03-03-2006, 2:35 PM
The subject has to do with the fact that I see a lot of negative comments about NRA in California, and as someone who is really close, even inside the process, it kinda hurts personally because I know how unfounded they are. We (and I'm including the top NRA staff in this one sentence - other than that, this is all my opinion, OK?) work really hard, ESPECIALLY staff, trying to wedge into every political crack that opens up and turn it to our advantage. that EACH AND EVERY GUN-OWNER can become part of the team. (No other state has anything like Members' Councils, BTW. LET'S TAKE ADVANTAGE OF IT!!!)
Mike welcome on board and let me say that I can vouch for the NRA'S assistance with gun owners here in CA.. I posted on Calguns about a particular episode that I went thru when I was wrongfully denied a firearm during a background check (Sprint and clerical error at DOJ) a few years back. I am very adept at moving through bureaucracy and tenaceous when it comes to myself.
Without going into a diatribe, I will say that the NRA liaison in Sacramento worked hand in hand with me and my state representative to resolve my issue. I worked,they worked and we worked the system to my legal and rightful benefit. The NRA always has my support and and I got 4 other family members to signup since then to help with more $$.
The NRA is only as good as it's members and if you don't belong then don't whine about them. There are other good organizations as well but my NRA dues were well worth it when I needed them. "There are rules for obtaining success but none of them work unless you do" . The NRA is for the individual and the masses. RB

jnojr
03-03-2006, 2:44 PM
I would like to see more happen in Kali, but the only one I blame for our mess is our corrupt political system. Yes. It is corrupt. Gerrymandering. Cronyism. Bribery. Sure that describes politics in general, but it just seems to be at it's worst here.

The NRA could have come out strongly in favor of Prop 77. They could have encouraged every CA member to get out and vote Yes. Did they? Nope. Why? I don't know.

Until our Legislature is reformed, we cannot count on them for reform of our gun laws. More bad laws will continue to be passed. And every time a bad law is "beaten", it hasn't really been beaten, just delayed a little. They will keep coming back, year after year, until they're passed.

It's my feeling that the NRA tries to work in California the same as they do in Congress and other states. And that will never work. Our Legislators are immune from any threat the NRA might pose to them, unless the NRA weere to pull out all the stops and commit huge sums of money to district elections here. That they will not do, and I absolutely understand why... they could spend $10 million and wind up with nothing close to a guarantee of victory in any given race.

Until and unless we reform the districting process, the only chance for real change we have is through the initiative process. '08, being a Presidential election year, will have a big voter turnout. The NRA could commit to getting an RKBA initiative qualified and passed for a lot less money than trying to stick another finger in a dissolving dike. If they really, truly want to be effective in California, that's the way to do it. My prediction, though, is they'll keep doing what they've always done, and keep seeing the same (lack of) results.

taloft
03-03-2006, 4:43 PM
Thanks for all your hard work on our behalf.

I think the NRA does some great things, and should be supported. However, many in my community don't agree. Especially considering what happened with the HSC changes. To see how one of the local FFL's feels about this Click here and scroll down a page or two.http://www.elcajongun.com/rules.htm#License


For those of you who don't know, the HSC used to be called the BFSC and was good for life! :mad:

They could have at least grandfathered them in for those of us who already had it. Especially since we paid for a life time certificate.

dwtt
03-03-2006, 5:44 PM
It's my feeling that the NRA tries to work in California the same as they do in Congress and other states. And that will never work. Our Legislators are immune from any threat the NRA might pose to them, unless the NRA weere to pull out all the stops and commit huge sums of money to district elections here. That they will not do, and I absolutely understand why... they could spend $10 million and wind up with nothing close to a guarantee of victory in any given race.
I think we need to do things at the local level ourselves. I don't expect the NRA or the CRPA to do the things I can do to help us. One of which is to volunteer hours to help get gun friendly politicians elected or reelected. The NRA can't do this, we need to do this ourselves. The only thing I need the NRA, CRPA, or GOC to do is help me and others identify where the candidates stand on guns, so we can help those who support the 2nd A, and oppose those who don't.

mikehaas
03-04-2006, 5:30 AM
First, thanks all. Warmest "Howdy" I've ever gotten on a forum. Now I can't say that RKBA activism is a thankless job anymore! :-)

I think we need to do things at the local level ourselves. I don't expect the NRA or the CRPA to do the things I can do to help us. One of which is to volunteer hours to help get gun friendly politicians elected or reelected. The NRA can't do this, we need to do this ourselves. The only thing I need the NRA, CRPA, or GOC to do is help me and others identify where the candidates stand on guns, so we can help those who support the 2nd A, and oppose those who don't.

Dwtt really lays it on the line. Truth is, if even a majority of gun-owners would do this, gun control wouldn't be a problem anywhere - such are our numbers. But the 'take a pill' mentality has taken hold here too. Once a gun owner has paid their $35/year, "Well, I've done my part to protect the Second Amendment. Now, let's go shootin'..." Being a member of NRA is important, but following up at the voting booth IS necessary. But that's not enough either. For those that can...

1. Pro-gun candidates need help in their campaigns, from stuffing envelopes to walking precincts. Most campaigns I've offered help to are amazed - the only 'volunteers' they expect to see walking in the door are young students that were offered $20. Imagine how appreciated it is when you show up with 5 REAL volunteers - "We're here to help... we're here because of NRA... What needs done?" And if the candidate is successful, don't think that doesn't pay off later on, when someone is trying to pass gun control in your area! The ILA EVC program is designed to hookup volunteers with pro-gun campaigns. In California, we also have the Members' Councils. http://calnra.com/ (NOTE: Don't give your personal info to the candidate's staff or political party! Just tell them "You can get hold of me and others like me through NRA." That way, they can't contact you directly and it keeps the candate-maybe-elected-official dependant on NRA for that kind of GOLDEN support at re-election time.)

2. Find a way to get 'hooked in' to what's happening legislatively. For Californians, I recommend http://calnra.com/legs.shtml and associated tools (of course :-) When NRA sets a course, support it. They are on the inside - constantly. Ed Worley always makes sure that, when the Sacramento legislature adjourns on the last day of each year (at 4AM after all their backroom deals are cut), when the legicritters are leaving exhausted, he is standing at the door saying goodbye to them, then he leaves. And you know what? We have MC networked volunteers all across the state, standing by their email programs, ready to turn out phone calls - that finally go to bed too!

(You have no idea how it impresses some, pisses off others, when Ed leaves a leg staffer's office at 3AM and 2 minutes later, phone calls start streaming in. :-}

and finally...

3. Go shootin'.

I believe thare's also a 'magic pill' mentality - thinking that it can all be solved at once - that causes the RKBA Initiative to keep coming back. If only it were true. Look at Prop 187 and the millions wasted.

Mike

jnojr
03-04-2006, 9:14 AM
I can't help but notice that, as usual, a question about the RKBA amendment is just quietly ignored by an NRA representative.

It's kind of tough for any NRA members to "take initiative", volunteer, etc. for something they don't even know about.

I have never asked once that the NRA "go and do this for us"... just to let their members know that this opportunity is here. At this point, I know that will never happen, but I would like to know why. Is it the "not invented here" syndrome? Is it that the NRA simply cannot abide having the slightest association with something with too high of a chance of failure? That can't be it, not with the three bills referenced in this thread (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=29641) Is it that success might make the NRA and CRPA "obsolete"? I hate to think that... I would hope that they would love to be made "obsolete".

I just don't get it... it's the only real chance we have in California with the political landscape in Sacramento right now.

johnny_22
03-04-2006, 12:22 PM
http://www.ambackforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=13544&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

Paladin
03-04-2006, 2:41 PM
Yeah, as a Kalifornia gun owner, I am ticked at all the shackles that have been place upon my 2nd A rts by Sacto. Yes, when I look at the other side of the state border I see plenty of green grass that I can't enjoy. And yes, I often wonder where is the NRA.

But then I come back to my senses. Watch the 20 sec animation at: www.gun-nuttery.com/rtc.php I'd guess most of those changes over the past 20 yrs were because of the NRA. (Note: I'm not saying other gun orgs were not involved in these fights, only that, as I'm sure we'll all agree, the NRA is the "800 lb gorilla" of gun rts orgs.) Right now, those 5 remaining midwest states are in political fights for Shall Issue and 2 to 4 of them will probably pass it in the next 2 yrs.

The political reality is that if the NRA 20 yrs ago decided to put Kali, MA, IL, NY, and HA as their top five priority states NOTHING would have changed and they would have squandered millions of dollars in time, money and manpower. Remember, even the NRA has limited resources. So instead they focused on the "low hanging fruit" first, and then went after the ones that were tougher.

Now we (i.e., the US) have 20 yrs of experience w/Shall Issue RTC. Now we've got studies to support the beneficial effects and the lack of "blood in the streets" "High Noon" shootouts. We've got more CoPs/Sheriffs who realize that CCW'ers are "good guys" and not a threat to their officers. (One CCW'er actually saved a LEO's tail the other week. See http://www.wafb.com/Global/story.asp?S=4527526 ).

Because of the NRA strategy, we in Kali will have a viable chance to get Shall Issue RTC (via initiative IMO) because of all the ground work laid by the NRA in other states. We'll have experts w/facts and statistics and CoPs/Sheriffs/governors w/experience to counter the anti-2nd A "experts" that the MSM will trot out. We won't be going into this battle only armed w/constitutional theory, but w/arguments based on historic facts that will persuade not us, the "converted," but those who are on the fence, be they gun owners (sad, but true) or not.

Watch that animation again when you get depressed. The future for Kali is bright! Because we have the initiative process, our turn is coming soon. :D

Supernam
03-04-2006, 3:50 PM
I just joined the NRA today (Sat. Mar. 4th 2006)!!!!

artherd
03-04-2006, 5:06 PM
Welcome to the board, let me know if I can help out in any way. I own a webhosting company and could host all of that free of charge if you like.

Best!
Ben.

jnojr
03-04-2006, 8:45 PM
Because of the NRA strategy, we in Kali will have a viable chance to get Shall Issue RTC (via initiative IMO) because of all the ground work laid by the NRA in other states. We'll have experts w/facts and statistics and CoPs/Sheriffs/governors w/experience to counter the anti-2nd A "experts" that the MSM will trot out. We won't be going into this battle only armed w/constitutional theory, but w/arguments based on historic facts that will persuade not us, the "converted," but those who are on the fence, be they gun owners (sad, but true) or not.

Not a chance in Hades. A shall-issue CCW proposition would never pass in this state, not as things are. Heck, it wouldn't pass in most of the states that have shall-issue CCWs now. The only way that's happening is via the legislative process. And the only way that's going to happen is with A) a sea-change in our Legislature; or B) a foundation laid by the RKBA amendment that basically forces the issue.

Facts, reason, and logic have never played an important role in gun laws. If they did, there would be few if any gun laws at any level.

jnojr
03-04-2006, 8:46 PM
I would very much like to see the NRA's opinion on this , Mr. Haas. Please answer.

My prediction... any response will be preceeded by "This is my own opinion, and not that of the NRA..."

mikehaas
03-05-2006, 3:41 AM
Thanks all for the vote of confidence, but I'm not a representative of NRA, I'm a volunteer. Don't set policy (I am asked my opinion), just support/help implement it. I can't discuss NRA's plans or internal discussions publicly - no gun owner should want that! Public forums are not the best place for laying out strategies, y'know?

But as far as the RKBA Initiative, NRA was VERY vocal about their thoughts in 2000 (Initiative #1). The leadership (Wayne, Sandy, Kayne, Board members, lobbyist, etc) even came out to California and held 2 meetings to address the issue of the growing RKBA Initiative movement back then - one in Northern CA (Burlingame), the other in So. Cal (Culver City). Hundreds of members showed in both meetings, NRA directly addressed "Why aren't you supporting the RKBA Initiative?" and any other question, right down to the dollars and details of the political scene. Even Don Kilmer and Geoff Metcalf were at the Burlingame meeting. They weren't happy, but they were there.

Was anybody on this forum at those meetings? I was - helped organize both meetings. (Drove down to Culver City just for the southern meeting, then right back! Yes, I was younger then :-) NRA laid it all out, no hedging - each meeting took HOURS. I guess NRA doesn't budget for an annual trip to CA to explain why the RKBA Initiative is not a very good tact for California (and in fact is dangerous to gun rights and candidates who support RKBA), and this is the third time it's been proposed.

We could discuss some of the content of those meetings, but I'm not sure it would be productive. There are obviously some strong proponents of the initiative here and nobody wants to antagonize them. I try to remember who the enemy is - it's not RKBA Initiative supporters - we're on the same team, even if we don't agree about this one issue.

But in those 2000 meeting, they fully explained why they were not supporting the RKBA Initiative.

Mike

mikehaas
03-05-2006, 5:03 AM
I even found some pictures from those meetings (Feb 2000). Enjoy! In attendance:
Ed Worley, ILA CA State Liaison
Chuck Michel, NRA Attorney
Manny Fernandez, NRA Board Member
Sandy Froman, Current NRA President (then, NRA Second Vice-President)
Wayne LaPierre, NRA Executive Vice-President
Kayne Robinson, Current NRA Director of General Operations (then, NRA First Vice-President)
http://nrawinningteam.com/gfx/cameetings2000.jpg
Mike

Ford8N
03-05-2006, 6:13 AM
So.....your telling us the NRA will not fight in Kali for a variety of reasons? And that it wants to pick and choose it's battles. I'm ok with that. But my concern is how to get AW laws brought back to what the rest of Free America has. Are we not citizens of the US or are we subjects of the separate country called Kalifornia?

jnojr
03-05-2006, 7:55 AM
Thanks all for the vote of confidence, but I'm not a representative of NRA, I'm a volunteer. Don't set policy (I am asked my opinion), just support/help implement it. I can't discuss NRA's plans or internal discussions publicly - no gun owner should want that!

/me takes a bow :)

But as far as the RKBA Initiative, NRA was VERY vocal about their thoughts in 2000 (Initiative #1). The leadership (Wayne, Sandy, Kayne, Board members, lobbyist, etc) even came out to California and held 2 meetings to address the issue of the growing RKBA Initiative movement back then - one in Northern CA (Burlingame), the other in So. Cal (Culver City). Hundreds of members showed in both meetings, NRA directly addressed "Why aren't you supporting the RKBA Initiative?" and any other question, right down to the dollars and details of the political scene. Even Don Kilmer and Geoff Metcalf were at the Burlingame meeting. They weren't happy, but they were there.

So, if the NRA "directly addressed" this issue in a public forum... why is it that you think it's a bad idea to repeat that info here?

taloft
03-05-2006, 12:01 PM
So, if the NRA "directly addressed" this issue in a public forum... why is it that you think it's a bad idea to repeat that info here?

I agree, if this was a matter already put before the public why not share that information here?

As you so aptly put it, many of us were not at the meeting. We would like to know what the logic was behind not supporting the RKBA initiatives. Just the nuts and bolts will suffice. Then each person can decide for themselves whether or not to agree with the decision.

I feel, as do many others, that the sharing of information is the best weapon we have to combat poor gun legislation. I'm not trying to shake your tree here Mike, I just want to understand.

mikehaas
03-05-2006, 1:19 PM
You guys raise great points. It was all public knowledge. And, mind you, it's info that purports to reflect NRA's position in 2000 - not today. BUT - I DO KNOW THEY HAVE LOOKED AT THE INITIATIVE EFFORT CAREFULLY EVERY TIME IT HAS APPEARED.

Now, I'm not an NRA spokesperson and that has to be clearly understood. If I relate some of that info, you guys won't shoot the messenger, will you? If you're genuinely curious, I guess I could try. And putting myself in your place, if I were an RKBA Initiative supporter, I'm sure I would want to know.

The RKBA Initiative supporters at those meetings were disappointed, but understood NRA's message and were respectful. Some seemed to go away thinking there maybe was more to this than meets the eye. In other words, enlightened, even if they didn't agree.

I think you guys have convinced me. Standby.

otteray
03-05-2006, 2:24 PM
I agree, if this was a matter already put before the public why not share that information here?

As you so aptly put it, many of us were not at the meeting. We would like to know what the logic was behind not supporting the RKBA initiatives. Just the nuts and bolts will suffice. Then each person can decide for themselves whether or not to agree with the decision.

I feel, as do many others, that the sharing of information is the best weapon we have to combat poor gun legislation. I'm not trying to shake your tree here Mike, I just want to understand.

I'm a member of the NRA and CRPA and know how important they and volunteers, like yourself, are to us, so let me say "thank you" for your efforts, before I go on.

I too, am interested in this. Lots of people ask why the NRA is not backing this petition up.
This state is being run by a small percentage of the population who have anti-traditional values and view all guns as evil, based on hysteria, not fact.
If we just lay back, we lose more. Want proof? The 50 Cal. ban; SF gun ban in court; Clinton assult weapon ban overturned everywhere else, but not in our state; or go to the different websites selling guns and look how many say "not available for California".
I'm sick of it and that's why I signed the RKBA petition, so that a stricter scrutiny would apply before making these nutty laws.

jnojr
03-05-2006, 2:43 PM
You guys raise great points. It was all public knowledge. And, mind you, it's info that purports to reflect NRA's position in 2000 - not today. BUT - I DO KNOW THEY HAVE LOOKED AT THE INITIATIVE EFFORT CAREFULLY EVERY TIME IT HAS APPEARED.

Now, I'm not an NRA spokesperson and that has to be clearly understood. If I relate some of that info, you guys won't shoot the messenger, will you?

No :)

If you're genuinely curious, I guess I could try.

Please... it would be a big help.

And putting myself in your place, if I were an RKBA Initiative supporter, I'm sure I would want to know.

If??? How can you not support the idea of an RKBA amendment?

Granted, it's a far cry from a slam-dunk sure thing... but it's clear at this point that nothing else is going to work in California. The courts have failed us. Everyone working together and exerting maximum effort in Sacramento can, at best, delay the inevitable.

Short of The Big One knocking the Bay Area into the Pacific, what chance do we have other than the RKBA amendment?

The RKBA Initiative supporters at those meetings were disappointed, but understood NRA's message and were respectful. Some seemed to go away thinking there maybe was more to this than meets the eye. In other words, enlightened, even if they didn't agree.

I find that difficult to comprehend. Again, I don't think anybody has stood up demanding that the NRA drop everything else and put all of their eggs in the RKBA basket. All we have really wanted is for the NRA to simply notify their CA members that this effort exists. That's it... let them volunteer, sign, contribute, whatever as they see fit. No spending money, no "putting their name on the line".

Another thing I would expect from the NRA would be, if they don't think the RKBA amendment is the way to go, what is? What's the plan? I would happily donate time and money to a clear-cut, well-run effort. What I'm tired of is the "Send us more money, and we'll see what we can do". A response of "We can't tell you our strategy" amounts to the same thing.

Ford8N
03-05-2006, 4:26 PM
Another thing I would expect from the NRA would be, if they don't think the RKBA amendment is the way to go, what is? What's the plan? I would happily donate time and money to a clear-cut, well-run effort. What I'm tired of is the "Send us more money, and we'll see what we can do". A response of "We can't tell you our strategy" amounts to the same thing.



Excellent point! This is the crux of the problem. You can't win if you have no plan. Offense instead of defense.

otteray
03-05-2006, 5:14 PM
All we have really wanted is for the NRA to simply notify their CA members that this effort exists. That's it... let them volunteer, sign, contribute, whatever as they see fit. No spending money, no "putting their name on the line".

Another thing I would expect from the NRA would be, if they don't think the RKBA amendment is the way to go, what is? What's the plan? I would happily donate time and money to a clear-cut, well-run effort. QUOTE]


+1, jnojr

ligamentum flavum
03-05-2006, 11:14 PM
Is mikehaas also ammoguide (joined Sept2004)?

Mikehaas apparently owns ammoguide.com. Coincidentally(?), the user ammoguide happened to be publicizing some NRA info.

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=29641

NRA is moving 3 Pro-Gun Bills in California!

WORKER'S PROTECTION - AB 1912
http://calnra.com/legs.shtml?summary=ab1912

FIREARM SAFETY DEVICES TAX EXEMPTIONS - AB 2096
http://calnra.com/legs.shtml?summary=ab2096

ASSAULT WEAPONS - AB 2131
http://calnra.com/legs.shtml?summary=ab2131

Stay tuned to the Legislative Information Page:
http://calnra.com/legs.shtml
YOUR SUPPORT WILL BE NEEDED

-------------------------------------------------
California NRA Members' Councils
The California Grassroots Gun-Rights Organization

Working in close association with NRA's top staff in
the Golden State, the California NRA Members' Councils
are NRA's "Army on the Ground". This 100% volunteer
state-wide network stands ready day or night to respond
to the needs of NRA to further gun-owner interests
at all levels of government. No other group or
association has the membership to support such a
necessary effort, employing consistent, experienced
and reliable volunteers on a massive scale throughout
the state.

Have you joined your local NRA Members' Council yet?
http://calnra.com/volunteer/

Just thought the coincidence was interesting.

No offense intended.

mikehaas
03-06-2006, 5:38 AM
>No offense intended.

And none taken. Yes, http://ammoguide.com/ is my company (hope u like it). Standing in awe of Ronnie Barrett (who doesn't?)...
http://www.nramemberscouncils.com/caspecial/la50banbarrett.shtml
...I've always wanted shooting-related businesses to more publicly defend RKBA. So when I produced an actual shooting-related company in early 2004, I considered involving it in in RBKA-related activity. (It's a risk to introduce politics into one's business, but to not do so would be hypocritical.)

But AmmoGuide is not as well known as "Barrett Farearms" (at least not yet :-) and I'm finding I get better response (as evidenced by activity at nramemberscouncils.com) when posting pro-gun stuff as "mikehaas". And, like I said in my first post as me (starting this thread), CalGuns.net is a site I wanted to join personally. One of the first to post our "mini leg info box", the webmaster of THIS site is someone I'd like to buy a beer (or soft drink or tea or...) for sometime.

BTW - trivia time - I was the first one to post Ronnie Barrett's letter at nramemberscouncils.com (even before Barrett!) - received it from NRA Attorney Chuck Michel and had it up fast! It was simply amazing - over 3,000 visits in the first 24 hours and the link was circulated among dozens of forums. I bet it sold a few Barretts! :-)

Paladin
03-06-2006, 11:03 AM
Not a chance in Hades. A shall-issue CCW proposition would never pass in this state, not as things are. Heck, it wouldn't pass in most of the states that have shall-issue CCWs now. The only way that's happening is via the legislative process. And the only way that's going to happen is with A) a sea-change in our Legislature; or B) a foundation laid by the RKBA amendment that basically forces the issue.

If we assume for the sake of argument your belief is true that "shall issue" RTC wouldn't have been able to pass as an initiative in other states where it has passed and that it can't pass in Kali as an initiative, then why are you supporting an INITIATIVE for a RKBA amendment when Art. 18, Sec. 1 of the CA Con allows it to get on the ballot LEGISLATIVELY? "Shall Issue" RTC via initiative: No; RKBA via initiative: Yes?

Please explain.

Facts, reason, and logic have never played an important role in gun laws. If they did, there would be few if any gun laws at any level.

If we assuming for the sake of argument your belief re the role "facts, reason, and logic" play in gun law is true, then why are you supporting GS2AC/TARC that are airing radio ads using "facts, reason, and logic"?

If you don't believe in using those, then what do you use to "sell" people on signing the RKBA initiative?

Not trying to start a "flame war," just trying to understand your reasoning.

mikehaas
03-06-2006, 11:07 AM
I just joined the NRA today (Sat. Mar. 4th 2006)!!!!

Welcome, Supernam! (sems funny, me welcoming someone to anything, having just joined CalGuns.net and saying "Hi" in this thread.) If you are a Californian, please take a look at -
http://nramemberscouncils.com/
- it's a way for every gun owner to get hands-on experience working with NRA in the field. You can help fight gun control right in your area! And NRA doesn't waste your time, focusing your efforts where it's needed most. (BTW, one has to be an NRA member and registered to vote to join the "MCs", but it's free.)

Mike

mechandy
03-06-2006, 11:39 AM
Mike,
It is real cool that you posted here...Thank you.
That being said I feel like a forgotten red headed step child to the NRA.
It's hard not to think that we are just cash cows for their work in the rest of the states....any idea of the percentage of CA money going to protect CA rights?
Any idea when they will try to correct the "crony" and chosen few policy that some counties have for CCW.
CCW is a big thing as far as I'm concerned.
Jim Marsh needs help and if he ain't the right guy (since he pissed off many)we need another guy like him.
Have they written any letters to the Sherriffs that have these shady (if not illegal) policies?
Where is the NRA when we need need support with this?
I paid 20 years of membership before I gave up on them.
I also written letters,vote correctly and have been involved with demonstrations.
I do care.

Paladin
03-06-2006, 11:54 AM
I can't discuss NRA's plans or internal discussions publicly - no gun owner should want that! Public forums are not the best place for laying out strategies, y'know?

Wise words. Unfortunately, as you can see in this thread, the result can be frustration among the "troops," the foot soldiers not privy to the overall strategy. When I get that way, I watch that 20 sec animation again and realize the NRA leadership is running out of states in which to wage the battle. :) They'll either quit, abandon Kali, HI, IL, and a handfull of New England states (I'm assuming all of midwest states other than IL will go shall issue w/in the next 4 yrs), or our turn is coming. I'll believe the latter until I see proof of the former. The remaining non-Shall Issue states will be politically like Guadalcanal and Tarawa -- fighting a determined and entrenched enemy. I can hardly wait! :D

I try to remember who the enemy is - it's not RKBA Initiative supporters - we're on the same team, even if we don't agree about this one issue.

MegaDittos! I assume we all have the same goals in mind, it's just a question of method and timing.

rips31
03-06-2006, 12:20 PM
They'll either quit, abandon Kali, HA, IL...
where's HA? if you mean hawaii, they have a shall-issue law being debated (or at least proposed). there's some hope.

btw, welcome to the board, mike.

Paladin
03-06-2006, 12:49 PM
where's HA? if you mean hawaii, they have a shall-issue law being debated (or at least proposed). there's some hope.

Yep, Hawaii. I know it's being debated there, but what do you think the odds are of it being passed, let's say, within the next 4 yrs? I put HI in the same basket w/Kali, IL, and the half-dozen N.E. states that will be very tough fights.

rips31
03-06-2006, 1:45 PM
Yep, Hawaii. I know it's being debated there, but what do you think the odds are of it being passed, let's say, within the next 4 yrs? I put HA in the same basket w/Kali, IL, and the half-dozen N.E. states that will be very tough fights.
lol...like i told a friend, that state is so blue that it disappears during aerial surveys. it's pathetic to know that only 1 ccw was issued there...worse odds than sf. bleh. so to answer your question, i'm waiting for either a new chief or the federal shall-issue/ccw law.

at least the silver lining is that i moved from hawaii to sf, so this snowball's got a bit more chance to get a ccw. :rolleyes:

Can'thavenuthingood
03-06-2006, 2:44 PM
Coming in late here, just read the thread.

Seems to be alot of kittyfooting around the issue here Mike. In post #29 you said standby as you are convinced.

Why not directly answer the question on the non support of the NRA for the RKBA petition?

I get at least one letter a week from the NRA-ILA and there is always room left over at the bottom they could put in something like "We support the current petition drive".

Howcum you spend alot of words promoting your site but won't answer the question?

I know you are not the board of directors, but you have been smelling them for how many years now?

There's an odor in this thread.

Vick

otteray
03-06-2006, 6:57 PM
I Googled the question of the NRA official response
(NRA 2000 Initiative #1) and this as well as other links showed up:
Go for the whole article:
http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:zwFP59y7WtcJ:www.commondreams.org/headlines/050400-01.htm++NRA++2000+Initiative+%231&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=22

"The NRA officials had traveled to California in part to speak with disgruntled members who believe that the NRA's Virginia headquarters hasn't been sufficiently aggressive or politically adept."

"Their anger boiled over last year, after the NRA suffered a loss in California when Gov. Gray Davis (D) signed four gun control bills into law. Now, some NRA members there are trying to get an initiative onto the November ballot to roll back those laws. But NRA leaders, fearing that such an initiative could divert energy from other electoral priorities and likely would lose anyway, aren't helping on the ballot measure--which has angered some members there."

Another article ( can't find the link!) said that they are going to deal with the RKBA in the future. That article is dated from 2000.
Yes, I am angry and trying to do something about it. But I'm not angered at the NRA; just impatient and frustrated with them. We do need their support. I just don't think that it all has to be on their terms.
So I circulate the petition, instead of waiting another six years.

Paladin
03-06-2006, 7:23 PM
lol...like i told a friend, that state is so blue that it disappears during aerial surveys. it's pathetic to know that only 1 ccw was issued there...worse odds than sf. bleh.

Sounds like it is true that HI is more likely to secede from the US than to go to Shall Issue RTC. ;)

PanzerAce
03-06-2006, 7:35 PM
Well mike, I am kind of disappointed. You said to stand by for the reason as to why the NRA will not mention the RKBA, and now, more than a day later, after numerous posts, you still have yet to answer the question...

rkt88edmo
03-06-2006, 7:43 PM
Wow, is your life as a fruitfly just about over?

C'mon mikehaas, DANCE MONKEY DANCE!

Can'thavenuthingood
03-06-2006, 8:03 PM
What formula was used to figure it would lose anyway? Was this decision taken to a vote? Who decides?

Is anybody out there on the National Rifle Association Board of Directors reading this thread?

You stepped in here Mike and stirred it up, what now?

Where are you Mike?

Vick

ligamentum flavum
03-06-2006, 9:45 PM
>
And none taken. Yes, http://ammoguide.com/ is my company (hope u like it). Standing in awe of Ronnie Barrett (who doesn't?)...
http://www.nramemberscouncils.com/caspecial/la50banbarrett.shtml
...I've always wanted shooting-related businesses to more publicly defend RKBA. So when I produced an actual shooting-related company in early 2004, I considered involving it in in RBKA-related activity. (It's a risk to introduce politics into one's business, but to not do so would be hypocritical.)

But AmmoGuide is not as well known as "Barrett Farearms" (at least not yet :-) and I'm finding I get better response (as evidenced by activity at nramemberscouncils.com) when posting pro-gun stuff as "mikehaas". And, like I said in my first post as me (starting this thread), CalGuns.net is a site I wanted to join personally. One of the first to post our "mini leg info box", the webmaster of THIS site is someone I'd like to buy a beer (or soft drink or tea or...) for sometime.

BTW - trivia time - I was the first one to post Ronnie Barrett's letter at nramemberscouncils.com (even before Barrett!) - received it from NRA Attorney Chuck Michel and had it up fast! It was simply amazing - over 3,000 visits in the first 24 hours and the link was circulated among dozens of forums. I bet it sold a few Barretts! :-)

um, okay, but i'm asking if you are also registered as the calguns.net user Ammoguide.

Paladin
03-06-2006, 10:10 PM
I Googled the question of the NRA official response
(NRA 2000 Initiative #1) and this as well as other links showed up:
Go for the whole article:
http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:zwFP59y7WtcJ:www.commondreams.org/headlines/050400-01.htm++NRA++2000+Initiative+%231&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=22

"The NRA officials had traveled to California in part to speak with disgruntled members who believe that the NRA's Virginia headquarters hasn't been sufficiently aggressive or politically adept."

"Their anger boiled over last year, after the NRA suffered a loss in California when Gov. Gray Davis (D) signed four gun control bills into law. Now, some NRA members there are trying to get an initiative onto the November ballot to roll back those laws. But NRA leaders, fearing that such an initiative could divert energy from other electoral priorities and likely would lose anyway, aren't helping on the ballot measure--which has angered some members there."

Another article ( can't find the link!) said that they are going to deal with the RKBA in the future. That article is dated from 2000.

I think that is from the same article (Washington Post, 4 May 2000, posted at: http://www.commondreams.org/headlines/050400-01.htm ).

Below's a larger quote that gives a more fully picture of the NRAs situation at the time. In essence, they had to focus on the "N" of NRA. It's a national organization that had to execute what they thought was the best strategy for the nation as a whole. Sure it sucks if you're in Kali. But the war involves more than just Kali -- 49 other states, plus DC, plus the fed executive, house, senate, judicial nominees (fed and, I hope, state), bringing/defending lawsuits and appeals (state & fed), raising membership numbers, getting those members to then volunteer, or, if nothing else, call their (state & fed) reps when the time is right, etc. etc. etc. Like soldiers under fire w/o getting much support, we in Kali sometimes feel abandoned. Perhaps if Wayne et al made another visit thru the state, that might help encourage some of us. They've got to realize that as more of us get on the internet and start connecting and encouraging one another, the more we want to engage this fight. To that end, I will start adding www.calguns.net to my personal email sig (should have done that months ago), and to my sigs at the various gun forum I hang out at so that I automatically let people know about this forum.

Rant off. Here's the quote:

The NRA officials had traveled to California in part to speak with disgruntled members who believe that the NRA's Virginia headquarters hasn't been sufficiently aggressive or politically adept.

Their anger boiled over last year, after the NRA suffered a loss in California when Gov. Gray Davis (D) signed four gun control bills into law. Now, some NRA members there are trying to get an initiative onto the November ballot to roll back those laws. But NRA leaders, fearing that such an initiative could divert energy from other electoral priorities and likely would lose anyway, aren't helping on the ballot measure--which has angered some members there.

During the February visit, the NRA officials assured members that they will eventually help overturn the new gun laws and that NRA officials are aware of the high political stakes this year.

"We're facing a critical election," Robinson said. "All three branches of the federal government are at stake, first time in a long time. . . . There will be four, maybe five justices of the Supreme Court appointed in the first term of the next president. . . . If Gore is the president, every one of those people will be rabidly anti-gun.

"If we win, we'll have a Supreme Court that will back us to the hilt," added Robinson, a former police official in Des Moines. "If we win, we'll have a president, with at least one of the people that's running, a president where we work out of their office. Unbelievably friendly relations."

Robinson didn't mention Bush's name, but NRA officials acknowledge he was referring to the Texas governor. The two men grew close over the past year, when Bush spent long stretches of time campaigning in Iowa, where Robinson, as GOP head, oversaw the party's crucial caucuses, NRA officials said.

Robinson also said that if the GOP loses its razor-thin control of the House, it will seriously injure the NRA. "Every one of those [now-friendly] committees could be run by people that not only dislike us, but hate us," he said.

50BMGBOB
03-06-2006, 10:25 PM
That would be the same Bush that said if they put the renewal of the federal AWB on his desk that he would sign it.

Paladin
03-06-2006, 10:41 PM
That would be the same Bush that said if they put the renewal of the federal AWB on his desk that he would sign it.

And it conviently never arrived on his desk, did it? You mean there might have been some planning between the Republican House and the Republican President before his re-election, to take a hot issue away from anti-gun Kerry? ;) I'm glad Bush rather than Kerry has appointed 2 new justices to the USSC and I hope and pray that, ideally, Stevens and Ginsberg leave the bench in time for Bush to nominate their replacements.

Frankly, I don't care how we get there (RKBA, Shall Issue RTC, goodbye Kali AWB & .50 cal ban), as long as we get there (legally).

Ford8N
03-07-2006, 5:14 AM
And it conviently never arrived on his desk, did it? You mean there might have been some planning between the Republican House and the Republican President before his re-election, to take a hot issue away from anti-gun Kerry? ;) I'm glad Bush rather than Kerry has appointed 2 new justices to the USSC and I hope and pray that, ideally, Stevens and Ginsberg leave the bench in time for Bush to nominate their replacements.

Frankly, I don't care how we get there -- RKBA, Shall Issue RTC, goodbye Kali AWB & .50 cal ban -- as long as we get there (legally).

Ya, I'd rather have a strongly pro Second Amendment SC.

mikehaas
03-07-2006, 5:20 AM
Thanks again, all. I can assure you that the staff I work with at NRA is every bit as frustrated as we are, but as professionals they have to be unerringly realistic in their evaluation of tactics and strategy. NEVER LOSE SIGHT OF THE FACT THAT WE ARE ALL ON THE SAME SIDE.

As requested, I’ve pieced this together from memory of the 2000 meetings in which NRA addressed the RKBA Initiative and I sincerely hope it does not antagonize the RKBA amendment supporters. As I said before, this is from 2000, but NRA has seriously examined the initiative every time it has been put up. Of course, having an RKBA amendment in the CA constitution would be a great thing – no one disagrees with that. The issues had to do with feasibility and the political ramifications of putting the issue before the California voter and the always, always recognizing the realities of advancing RKBA in the state.

For those that might knee-jerk and/or minimize these factors, I stress they are not manufactured; they are real concerns. NRA has to be focused on the entire RKBA picture, not just pieces of it.

Opposition – NRA determined that the presence of a gun-related initiative on the ballot would “gen-up” opposition forces to such an extent as to help anti-gun forces better organize and fund themselves. California is currently the anti-gunner’s fertile ground – gun control has much public support. They have an advantage out of the starting gate in terms of public support, media and other resources. All the left’s machinery would come into play for a gun initiative.

Hurts other causes – this buildup of the left against a public gun issue would result in defeat for many real pro-gun candidates who might even be running on other issues, resulting in a decrease of elected pro-gun representation in the legislature and local governments all across the state. Because of the single public gun-measure, everyone’s “gun voting record” will automatically become an issue and many “conservative” agendas will be negatively affected (much like Arnold’s initiative foolishness hurt us by bringing out the vote in support of Prop H in San Francisco as a side effect – http://calnra.com/legs.shtml?summary=proph - many of my friends think, from the margin it passed by, it would have been defeated but for that.).

Hurts legislative effort – decreasing elected pro-gun representation has an obvious detrimental effect in being able to affect legislation in Sacramento the following year(s).

Financial cost – If the proponents of the initiative intend to spend money on TV ads, Radio Ads, Newspaper ads and political mailings, start stacking the MILLIONS of $$ because California is the most expense media market in the United States. It’s simple arithmetic. There are 14 million voters in the Golden State. The cost of producing and mailing JUST A SINGLE BROCHURE to the electorate in support of any issue runs into the millions of dollars. Add to this the sure knowledge that neither political party will help. If memory serves, NRA estimated between $45 and $100 million to conduct the effort with no guarantee of success. (The Indian Gaming Initiative cost $110 million.)

Obviously, no one involved with the initiative has these kinds of resources – the plan has been “let’s get there; then NRA will HAVE TO support it”. Not a good plan. This logic assumes NRA 1). has $45-100 million floating around for a single agenda engineered by non-NRA officers and their experts and 2). doesn’t have a fiduciary responsibility to it’s entire membership under corporate law. Support for such an initiative would far exceed any amount ever provided to any state for any election year effort. That could affect NRA’s ability to be effective nationally and in other states. Should we detract from our efforts in Illinois, New York, etc. to throw everything into an “all or nothing” initiative in California?

The fact is that qualifying an initiative is the easy part. Once it is on the ballot, the need for resources increases exponentially and the political effects spread out like cracks in glass. IT BECOMES POLITICAL WAR AT THAT POINT, AND IT WOULD BE VICIOUS. The parties that keep proposing the initiative seem not to know about or care about those effects and have no plan for acquiring the needed resources other than trying to publicly force NRA into supporting the measure if it qualifies. In 2000, the initiative originators publicly lambasted NRA leaders for not supporting their brainchild, but did not reveal to their supporters the funding issues that would arise if the qualifying effort was successful.

And, if everything went perfectly and the initiative qualifies and passes, the next day there is sure to be a court action filed against it in a very liberal California court, preventing implementation. Prop 187, anyone?

Reality: if pro-gun organizations had the MILLIONS to fight this kind of public war, they could use the MILLIONS to ELECT a PROGUN majority in the state assembly and senate and REPEAL the anti gun laws and punish selected anti-gun politicians and make the gun issue radioactive for future political fights.

mikehaas
03-07-2006, 6:52 AM
If memory serves, NRA estimated between $45 and $100 million to conduct the effort with no guarantee of success. (The Indian Gaming Initiative cost $110 million.)


An after-thought from me (the peanut section) - last I checked, NRA was about a $250 million-per-year corporation.

6172crew
03-07-2006, 7:17 AM
Mike, Does the NRA work behind scene towards a 2nd amendment for CA? You have made some good points and just wondering if the NRA will block any attempts to send this to the SC?

I remember there was a disabled guy who argued he was discriminated against with the whole pistol grip deal. Rumor was the NRA didnt think it was a good idea to have the SC look at the case, but now we have a better chance at winning in thye SC do you think the NRA would back a case going to the top?

Not bashing just wondering about these questions for the last few years.:)

Chris

mikehaas
03-07-2006, 7:52 AM
Mr. Haas,

Thank you for your reply. It explained much, and I appreciate your efforts. However, it sounds like the NRA has resolved NOT to touch California because it believes it won't win. Is this, essentially, the case? ... I can't escape the thought that, the NRA has written off California... It seems like the NRA will only step in when they know they will have a very public, softball win.

As someone who devotes (at times) well over half of my waking time trying to keep up with staff who is coordinating volunteers, attorneys and legislative agendas all across the state, inside the Sacramento belway and outside of it, I can truly say that the phrase "written off California" is NOT what comes to mind. In fact, I can say unequivacably, no other state gets the investment in terms of fighting this stuff (that I said that may cause problems for someone from members of other states asking "Why does Mike Haas say California gets more...??" etc - please try to understand why most folks on the inside don't post publicly this way!)

No other state has it's own NRA office - right there in Sacramento.

No other state has Members' Councils. They have the ILA EVC's (a system of one Election Volunteer Coordinator per congressional district, helps connect members with pro-gun campaigns). Members' Councils are a state-wide network of groups of volunteers each with a president, vice-president, etc. CA also has EVC's too, but they are just about always MC officers too. Feel free to join and contribute. I recommend it, certainly before deciding NRA has written off California. http://nramemberscouncils.com/volunteer/ will get you started.

there are huge opportunities here for loyal NRA members to become real RKBA leaders in your community. or even just come to the meetings and help out in some way.

And the fact that we are constantly coming up with plans, both legislative and activism based. Here's one I'm particularly proud of:
http://www.nrawinningteam.com/0105/camc.html
(That really turned Sacramento on it's head for a day! Anti-gun legislative staffers were so upset they were running out in the hall yelling at our lobbyist, while pro-gunners were winking at him. :-)

I think this is a lot like other issues. if you want to know the truth, you have to actively search for it, not depend on what others tell you. (Especially others that may be supporting competing agendas.)

mikehaas
03-07-2006, 7:58 AM
Oh, and don't forget: NRA is moving 3 Pro-Gun Bills in California!

WORKER'S PROTECTION - AB 1912
http://calnra.com/legs.shtml?summary=ab1912

FIREARM SAFETY DEVICES TAX EXEMPTIONS - AB 2096
http://calnra.com/legs.shtml?summary=ab2096

ASSAULT WEAPONS - AB 2131
http://calnra.com/legs.shtml?summary=ab2131

Stay tuned to the Legislative Information Page:
http://calnra.com/legs.shtml
YOUR SUPPORT WILL BE NEEDED

Question is, have YOU written off California?

mikehaas
03-07-2006, 8:36 AM
Mike, Does the NRA work behind scene towards a 2nd amendment for CA? You have made some good points and just wondering if the NRA will block any attempts to send this to the SC?

I remember there was a disabled guy who argued he was discriminated against with the whole pistol grip deal. Rumor was the NRA didnt think it was a good idea to have the SC look at the case, but now we have a better chance at winning in thye SC do you think the NRA would back a case going to the top?

Not bashing just wondering about these questions for the last few years.:)

Chris

First, I'm impressed. No flaming. Thanks, all, I know some of that tome was probably hard to read.

To answer your question, I can't predict what NRA will do. I'm not a lawyer - don't even play one on TV! :-) But after listening to some 2A attys (I do a lot of listening when I'm around these folks), any Second Amendment SC case scares the hell out of me. A loss at the SC level can set gun rights NATIONALLY back such that it would never recover. One doesn't "Charge!" the SC.

I know it sounds like I'm a total "company" many, but the reason NRA is the biggest is because millions of gun-owners have supported it and equipped it to handle these issues using the best and brightest minds available. I want the expertise of the NRA board, it's army of lawyers and team of professionals at work when a case goes there. I do NOT want it to be a case that was instigated by a small group of frustrated pro-gunners, unknown attorneys, etc. I can identify with that frustration and the goal, but evaluating tactics and strategy in those cases requires real skill. I know this much - THE CASE THAT IS SELECTED TO CARRY THE 2A TO THE SC IS AN EXTREMEMLY IMPORTANT CONSIDERATION. It cannot be just any case.

A lot of angry, frustrated activists supported Silveira's journey to the SC but 2A scholar after 2A scholar warned it was a disaster. if we move foolishly toward the SC we place the rights of all future generations of Americans at risk.

The scope of these plans, borne from frustration, tend to be huge. Remember how gun-rights were lost in California. Incrementally, slowly, over time. When the anti-gunners tried a state-wide proposition to ban handguns in 1982, (prop 15), they lost their *** and it took them years to recover. But when they did, they had figured it out - chip, chip, chip.

We are now doing the same thing and only our frustration and lack of faith in our own team can defeat us.

Talkin2u2
03-07-2006, 8:48 AM
Being new to Calguns, I probably shouldn't get involved with this discussion, but I felt I should thank Mr. Haas for this entire discussion. However, after reading many of the critically pointed responses, I had some doubts to the validity of a few of his stated facts.

In the interest of full disclosure, I must state that I am an NRA member and base many of my politically based opionions on my nearly 20 years of professional experience involved with California politics. Currently, I am semi-retired from this profession. I am also a person that verifies many facts, examining details, before making a decision.

After reading these postings, I decided to find to what level the NRA is involved in California and how accurate Mr. Haas has been with his postings. I Googled "nra california" and found "www.nramemberscouncils.com" at the top of the list. Being familiar with the NRA Members Councils and their propensity to fill some of my (state legislative) clients' In boxes and electronic mail accounts with correspondence, I opened their web site and called the phone number listed.

I was quite surprised when a man answered so early in the morning. My assumption was that I would reach a message service. The gentleman identified himself a "Paul" and addressed all of my questions and asked me several in return. The exchange was pleasant and surprisingly candid.

My conclusion, regarding the initiative, is that it must be extremely well funded and --- without trying to sound self-serving --- must be run by professionals who are familiar with the issue, political system, media, fund-raising, electorate, and other variables.

My conclusion, regarding the NRA in California, is they are alive and well and working actively/pro-actively. But if we expect to see them charging the Capitol with flags flying, we will be disappointed. They have a strong presence, but because of the make-up of the legislature, must function on a one-on-one basis with the legislators. Equally so, if we expect their strategy to be posted on public Internet forums --- such as Calguns --- or released beyond those who are directly involved with their activities. No, I now understand the NRA is quite free and open to their activists within their NRA Members Councils but they stress the point that strategy, and sometimes even tactics, must be held close to be effective.

My conclusion, regarding Mr. Haas, is feel I almost owe you an apology for my doubts of your veracity. My only remaining objection with your statements is your/NRA estimate of "between $45 and $100 million" to produce a serious campaign for a California constitutional amendment seems woefully optimistic by a factor of 1.25.

Can'thavenuthingood
03-07-2006, 8:59 AM
So the NRA does not support the RKBA petition because of what could be a scary outcome?

The NRA does not support redistricting because it might distress some politicians in Sacramento?

Sounds French to me.

Vick

Paladin
03-07-2006, 9:16 AM
Just have a couple of minutes right now so . . .

First off, Calguns.net Admin please consider making this thread a "sticky" since this issue is likely to continue to come up, esp as we get new pro-2nd A people on this forum.

Second, Mike, thanks for "taking the heat" here for the NRA and thanks esp for your post re the rationale of the NRA back in 2000 re the RKBA initiative. I'm sure that post will be sobering for many not familiar w/the political process and the calculus involved w/advancing a political & legal agenda nationally. I, for one, really appreciate the work and results of the NRA's and other pro-2nd A orgs over the past 20 yrs to get the US where it is ( http://www.gun-nuttery.com/rtc.php ). I am sure the NRA will not leave us in Kali treading water forever. (If for no other reason, we're too big a potential CCW & AW gun market ;) ).

jnojr
03-07-2006, 9:18 AM
If we assume for the sake of argument your belief is true that "shall issue" RTC wouldn't have been able to pass as an initiative in other states where it has passed and that it can't pass in Kali as an initiative, then why are you supporting an INITIATIVE for a RKBA amendment when Art. 18, Sec. 1 of the CA Con allows it to get on the ballot LEGISLATIVELY? "Shall Issue" RTC via initiative: No; RKBA via initiative: Yes?

Easy.

Lots of people believe in the concept of a "right to keep and bear arms". lots of people believe in the concept of being able to defend themselves against attack. Fewer like the idea of the idiot screaming at them on the freeway carrying a gun. Few of them like the idea of "assault rifles". Lots of them thing registration, testing, etc. are good ideas.

The RKBA amendment stands a decent chance of passing just because it's non-threatening. And it's a little tougher for the left to attack... they would have to, ultimately, admit that they do not believe in an individual RKBA, and could alienate a lot of their constituents (union members who vote Democrat because of the unions, but who do not believe in "gun control", etc.)

If we assuming for the sake of argument your belief re the role "facts, reason, and logic" play in gun law is true, then why are you supporting GS2AC/TARC that are airing radio ads using "facts, reason, and logic"?

Well, I don't "support" GS2AC / TACR... I know very little of them outside of the RKBA initiative. maybe they're doing a lot in the Bay Area, but I don't hear squat from them down here, nor do I hear squat from them about the RKBA initiative. Frankly, I would be happier with someone else running the RKBA show. Someone who communicates and keeps on top of it, not who throws up a web page and lets it sit unattended for months at a time.

But, back to your question. "Facts, reason, and logic" have no part when dealing with this at a Legislative level. Sacramento is run by people who have solidly closed their minds. Guns are bad, period, and any attempt to get them to see otherwise will just be ignored. A lot of people (like the NRA, apparently) believe that the initiative process is a bad idea and that we should be working through the Legislature, since that's worked in so many other states. But California is very, very different from those states. They don't have a Legislature that's locked in for life.

As things stand, there is little point in trying to regain our RKBA in Sacramento. Good bills will never make it out of the Public Safety Committee. It takes enormous expenditures of time and effort to put roadblocks in the way of bad bills... but they just keep coming back over and over until they pass. NRA, CRPA, etc. are, at best, just delaying the inevitable. We will] see ammo stamping / serialization, a more all-encompassing AWB, and all sorts of other stupid laws. It might take years, but it will happen.

Our only real chance is to let the voters decide themselves. A fairly innocuous, easy-to-understand proposition that's supported with good press, facts, etc. still faces an uphill battle because a lot of them will vote No because the Democratic party tells them to, and more will believe the same tired lies that are spread every time. But lots of conservative propositions have been passed in this state. We just need to get it out when a lot of right-thinking voters are heading to the ballot, like in '08

jnojr
03-07-2006, 9:22 AM
Mike,

Any idea when they will try to correct the "crony" and chosen few policy that some counties have for CCW.

With all fairness, the NRA can't do a thing about that. Our current CCW law is what it is, and there isn't much the NRA can do to change the minds of 58 Sheriffs.

We need a new CCW law, but as things are in Sacramento, a real fix will never pass. The foundation that the RKBA amendment lays down would provide for shall-issue CCW... it would still be tied up in the courts, maybe for years, but the language added to the state Constitution would make shall-issue CCW, as well as a repeal of the AWB and so many other bad laws, almost inevitable.

PanzerAce
03-07-2006, 9:27 AM
+1 Jnojr, I think that the RKBA initiatives non threatening nature is it's best atribute. after all, it still keeps you safe. *rolls eyes*

PanzerAce
03-07-2006, 9:31 AM
Ok, Mike, I thank you for coming here and talking to us, but I still have a major problem. From what I have heard from other members, the NRA does not even mention the fact that there is an RKBA initiative in CA (I am not a member, so I cannot say for sure). Why does the NRA refuse to even acknoledge that there are people in this state that are trying to change things?

jnojr
03-07-2006, 9:46 AM
Thanks again, all. I can assure you that the staff I work with at NRA is every bit as frustrated as we are, but as professionals they have to be unerringly realistic in their evaluation of tactics and strategy. NEVER LOSE SIGHT OF THE FACT THAT WE ARE ALL ON THE SAME SIDE.

But what side is that? The side that wants, no needs to get the gun situation in California fixed, or the side that thinks that would be nice, but there are a lot more pressing issues somewhere else, and oh, after all, we have our CCW, AR-15, .50 cal, etc?

Opposition – NRA determined that the presence of a gun-related initiative on the ballot would “gen-up” opposition forces to such an extent as to help anti-gun forces better organize and fund themselves.

If they truly believe and accept that, then they have written us off. there is no two ways about it.

Hurts other causes – this buildup of the left against a public gun issue would result in defeat for many real pro-gun candidates who might even be running on other issues, resulting in a decrease of elected pro-gun representation in the legislature and local governments all across the state.

But, again, that's aying "Too bad, California... nothing we can do for you"

We who are stuck here do not and cannot subscribe to that philosophy. A fight that isn't fought is a fight that has already been lost.

Because of the single public gun-measure, everyone’s “gun voting record” will automatically become an issue and many “conservative” agendas will be negatively affected (much like Arnold’s initiative foolishness hurt us by bringing out the vote in support of Prop H in San Francisco as a side effect – http://calnra.com/legs.shtml?summary=proph - many of my friends think, from the margin it passed by, it would have been defeated but for that.).

And I say that the republican parties betrayal on that issue, and the failure of major organizations (like the NRA) to support those initiatives is what's to blame. The CTA spent $50,000,000 against them. All of those measures were good, sound, and necessary. The problem was putting them out in a special election when so few registered voters would be coming out. Put them back out in '08 and see what happens.

Hurts legislative effort – decreasing elected pro-gun representation has an obvious detrimental effect in being able to affect legislation in Sacramento the following year(s).

Huh? What does that mean?

How does a ballot initiative "decrease pro-gun representation"?

Financial cost – If the proponents of the initiative intend to spend money on TV ads, Radio Ads, Newspaper ads and political mailings, start stacking the MILLIONS of $$ because California is the most expense media market in the United States. It’s simple arithmetic. There are 14 million voters in the Golden State. The cost of producing and mailing JUST A SINGLE BROCHURE to the electorate in support of any issue runs into the millions of dollars. Add to this the sure knowledge that neither political party will help. If memory serves, NRA estimated between $45 and $100 million to conduct the effort with no guarantee of success. (The Indian Gaming Initiative cost $110 million.)

Obviously, no one involved with the initiative has these kinds of resources – the plan has been “let’s get there; then NRA will HAVE TO support it”. Not a good plan. This logic assumes NRA 1). has $45-100 million floating around for a single agenda engineered by non-NRA officers and their experts and 2). doesn’t have a fiduciary responsibility to it’s entire membership under corporate law. Support for such an initiative would far exceed any amount ever provided to any state for any election year effort. That could affect NRA’s ability to be effective nationally and in other states. Should we detract from our efforts in Illinois, New York, etc. to throw everything into an “all or nothing” initiative in California?

The fact is that qualifying an initiative is the easy part. Once it is on the ballot, the need for resources increases exponentially and the political effects spread out like cracks in glass. IT BECOMES POLITICAL WAR AT THAT POINT, AND IT WOULD BE VICIOUS. The parties that keep proposing the initiative seem not to know about or care about those effects and have no plan for acquiring the needed resources other than trying to publicly force NRA into supporting the measure if it qualifies. In 2000, the initiative originators publicly lambasted NRA leaders for not supporting their brainchild, but did not reveal to their supporters the funding issues that would arise if the qualifying effort was successful.

Now this is absolutely true. Which is why my position is that California NRA and CRPA members would be better off sending their dues and donations to a California rights group that is not beholden to the NRA. A group that doesn't wring their hands over who thought the initiative up. A group that's sole purpose is to advance the pro-gun cause in California.

And, if everything went perfectly and the initiative qualifies and passes, the next day there is sure to be a court action filed against it in a very liberal California court, preventing implementation. Prop 187, anyone?

Of course they'd run to court. But... on what grounds? Prop 187 was defeated on Constitutional issues. This initiative amends our Constitution, and so cannot be unConstitutional. The only possible grounds would be under the US Constitution, and honestly, that would be the best thing to ever happen for all US gun owners... a challenge to the Second Amendment brought by some California fruitcakes? After SCOTUS rendered their decision, we'd say goodbye to NFA, GCA, the '86 MG ban, and most other nonsense laws after the Second was held to be an individual right. And, if they decided to hold that it was not an individual right... a pretty clear message that it's time to use the Second Amendment for the purpose it was originally intended.

Reality: if pro-gun organizations had the MILLIONS to fight this kind of public war, they could use the MILLIONS to ELECT a PROGUN majority in the state assembly and senate and REPEAL the anti gun laws and punish selected anti-gun politicians and make the gun issue radioactive for future political fights.

This is what I mean about the NRA having no clue in California. All the money in the world will not sway elections in state districts... that's the whole problem with gerrymandering, a Legislature that draws its own district boundaries, etc.

So, basically, the NRA wants to keep fighting the fight they've always been fighting... and losing. There's really no difference between that position and coming out and saying "We aren't wasting any more time in California". I'd prefer the later, actually... the NRA could go ahead and focus their efforts everywhere else, and Californians stop thinking the NRA was going to ride in and save them.

jnojr
03-07-2006, 9:54 AM
As someone who devotes (at times) well over half of my waking time trying to keep up with staff who is coordinating volunteers, attorneys and legislative agendas all across the state, inside the Sacramento belway and outside of it, I can truly say that the phrase "written off California" is NOT what comes to mind. In fact, I can say unequivacably, no other state gets the investment in terms of fighting this stuff (that I said that may cause problems for someone from members of other states asking "Why does Mike Haas say California gets more...??" etc - please try to understand why most folks on the inside don't post publicly this way!)

No other state has it's own NRA office - right there in Sacramento.

No other state has Members' Councils. They have the ILA EVC's (a system of one Election Volunteer Coordinator per congressional district, helps connect members with pro-gun campaigns). Members' Councils are a state-wide network of groups of volunteers each with a president, vice-president, etc. CA also has EVC's too, but they are just about always MC officers too. Feel free to join and contribute. I recommend it, certainly before deciding NRA has written off California. http://nramemberscouncils.com/volunteer/ will get you started.

there are huge opportunities here for loyal NRA members to become real RKBA leaders in your community. or even just come to the meetings and help out in some way.

And the fact that we are constantly coming up with plans, both legislative and activism based. Here's one I'm particularly proud of:
http://www.nrawinningteam.com/0105/camc.html
(That really turned Sacramento on it's head for a day! Anti-gun legislative staffers were so upset they were running out in the hall yelling at our lobbyist, while pro-gunners were winking at him. :-)

I think this is a lot like other issues. if you want to know the truth, you have to actively search for it, not depend on what others tell you. (Especially others that may be supporting competing agendas.)

Err, you're kinda missing the point, Mike. All that wonderful effort... and what's the result? More gun laws every year.

The NRA in California is like horse-and-buggy proponents desperately fighting the last century's fight against the onslaught of technology. We cannot win in Sacramento. Everything you could point to and call a "victory" is nothing more than a slight delay for the other side. Every one of their bad laws just keeps coming back until it passes, and then they move on to the next loony idea. You fight and fight, and delay some more... but then it passes. Lather, rinse, and repeat.

At what point does the NRA say "We need to radically change how we're approaching the situation in California"?

jnojr
03-07-2006, 9:56 AM
We are now doing the same thing and only our frustration and lack of faith in our own team can defeat us.

OK... what effort is the NRA putting forward that's going to win the day? What should I be supporting?

Oh, yeah... "We can't talk about our strategy" and "Just keep sending us money... we haven't forgotten about you, we promise!"

Please forgive me if I'm not exactly heartened.

jnojr
03-07-2006, 10:00 AM
+1 Jnojr, I think that the RKBA initiatives non threatening nature is it's best atribute. after all, it still keeps you safe. *rolls eyes*

Do you really not understand what I said and the viewpoint I was saying it from, or are you just trying to be difficult?

Do you really not understand the difference between asking voters to "support the right to keep and bear arms" vs. asking them to pass a shall-issue CCW law, or repeal the AW ban?

I've explained it about as many different ways as I can at this point. I don't think I can put it into any better words. Maybe someone else can... I'm obviously not being clear.

PanzerAce
03-07-2006, 10:19 AM
That was actually referring to the post two up from it, and I guess my sarcasm didnt work, sorry.

mikehaas
03-07-2006, 10:26 AM
But what side is that? ...

jnojr, I apologize for upsetting you, it was not the goal. I was asked to post that info from NRA's 2000 meeting by my new friends, other calguns.net members. I voiced reservations about posting it but agreed to. Perhaps that wasn't a good decision, but I take responsibility for it.

This thread was to introduce myself and discuss that NRA takes heat for lots of things that I think are undeserved. I thought that went really well. I did not intend on addressing any specific issue, certainly not impugn any other effort and certainly not the RKBA initiative.

I think it was even you that first asked about NRA and the RKBA Initiative and I've tried to answer your questions and those of others as best I can. I'm not here to make enemies, I'm hoping we can all work together to better protect our rights.

Mike

jnojr
03-07-2006, 10:30 AM
Let's try looking at this from a different angle.

Mike - what would it take for the NRA to support this initiative?

I'm not talking right now. Let's talk about '08 It's a Presidential election year. All the voters will be coming out, and we have two years to work on this.

What would they want to see in a group that was officially putting it forward? What would it take to enlist the NRAs help to present a fundraising opportunity to gun manufacturers, etc.? Selling it wouldn't be too tough... any manufacturer, wholesaler, etc. can see that opening up the California market to their products would be huge.

Is there a pro-gun version of George Soros who would be willing to put up money to help create the spectacle of overturning Californis anti-gun culture in one fell swoop? Such an achievement would echo through the whole nation... it could even be the deathblow to the anti-gun "cause".

Can'thavenuthingood
03-07-2006, 1:00 PM
I don't think you will ever see the NRA support the RKBA initiative in California. We are a cash cow. Need money? Run out there and squeeze a teat, get a bucketfull.

On the face of it, there is absolutely no reason why the NRA cannot support this. It is what the organization is all about is it not? The 2nd Amendment?
It takes little effort to inform members of the RKBA petition. And how much political capital would have been spent supporting Arnold in Prop 77 Redistricting.

Redistricting is the biggy here. Without it, there ain't no political philosophy going to change in the Assembly or Senate, no reason to.

If what Mike Haas posted from the 2000 meeting is still true 6 years later, what was going on way back before 2000? or 1995? or 1990? How long does it take for the liberal left to actually take control? They are proactive, we respond, always on the defense.

We are contained and controlled.

Sacramento calls the shots the NRA will take.

Redistricting and RKBA both need to be on the ballot in the next general election.

The NRA needs to openly support both.

Vick

Mute
03-08-2006, 8:34 AM
I appreciate the work that the NRA does. The problem is more and more people are getting very disillusioned with the NRA in Kalifornia because of what they perceive as inaction or worst, indifference to Kali gunowners. If this keeps up, the NRA is going to lose more of its Kali members and see even less new gunowners joining. This will be bad not just for Kalifornia but for the whole organization.

Alot of non-Kali gunowners would just as soon lump us all in with the liberals in this state and watch us all fall into the ocean with the next big earthquake. That kind of attidude doesn't exactly foster unity among gunowners nationwide.

Can'thavenuthingood
03-08-2006, 11:08 AM
I walk into the gunshop wearing my NRA hat, the blue one with the big yellow letters "NRA" and the owner/FFL says "No Real Action".

Mike Haas opens this thread as an advertisement for his site and all the wonderful things he does and how the NRA takes the heat for everything.

Its been 24 hours since Mike's last post.

He thinks it went well and left the building.

We are the NRA, why hasn't the Board of Directors or any one of them campaigning to become a Director chimed in on the RKBA petition or the redistricting issue in California?

This state has a population of over 36 million or thereabouts, and I think 57 Reps in congress and 2 Senators, big numbers.

From reading threads on The High Road, the folks in Maryland aren't too thrilled with the NRA leadership either.

I sure hate to give up the best gun magazine out there, but I'm thinking I could probably live without it.

Vick

mow
03-08-2006, 11:30 AM
I think the issue (in reading Mike's post) is that for the NRA, appropriating money for the RKBA which might get on the ballot this year but probably has a snowballs chance in hell of passing through the "gun scared" voters in this state is not a wise use of said funds. These funds can be better used to fight impending legislation (like prop H? maybe) or push other legislation that might pass easier than this would.

Truthfully I never thought of it that way and I can understand why the NRA might not support the most recent RKBA as it did not support it here 6 years ago. The climate in this state is very anti-gun as many of you agree right? Getting something on the ballot only to have it fail because there are not enough votes in favor of passing it doesn't make much sense. That being said I support the RKBA, I have signed it and continue to get signatures.

I do not think canceling your NRA membership is the answer. They are still very much behind gun owners, and try to spend their money as wisely as possible.

6172crew
03-08-2006, 12:09 PM
I think the issue (in reading Mike's post) is that for the NRA, appropriating money for the RKBA which might get on the ballot this year but probably has a snowballs chance in hell of passing through the "gun scared" voters in this state is not a wise use of said funds. These funds can be better used to fight impending legislation (like prop H? maybe) or push other legislation that might pass easier than this would.

Truthfully I never thought of it that way and I can understand why the NRA might not support the most recent RKBA as it did not support it here 6 years ago. The climate in this state is very anti-gun as many of you agree right? Getting something on the ballot only to have it fail because there are not enough votes in favor of passing it doesn't make much sense. That being said I support the RKBA, I have signed it and continue to get signatures.

I do not think canceling your NRA membership is the answer. They are still very much behind gun owners, and try to spend their money as wisely as possible.

+1, Id be happy if you guys didnt run Mike off because of your frustration with the state. Id sure like him here to answer questions on future legislation, bills, laws, etc.

If the RKBA bill isnt what the NRA wants to support and yet you havent written them and told them you think its a good idea then your off base.

If you did write them then whould you post the NRAs response please.

Mute
03-08-2006, 12:14 PM
I can understand the NRA not wanting to put money into this. However, I disagree on their reasoning for not even showing support and getting the word out to members. Based on the explanation, they are absolutely opposed to the RKBA initiative because it might jeopardize some "pro-gun" politicians' campaigns in the next election. If that's the case, I'd like to see who these candidates are, what their real position on guns are and just how the RKBA initiative will hurt them. They make it sound like anti-gunners will come out in droves to vote against this and while they're at it sweep out any pro-gun candidates. I disagree. Those who are anti-gun will already be voting regardless. It's generally the pro-gun folks who are the least politically active. If anything, a well directed RKBA initiative should bring these folks out and hopefull sweep out any anti-gun politicians.

Sgt Raven
03-08-2006, 12:42 PM
What I took away from the Y2K meeting, and I was at the Burlingame one, was the NRA was more interested in getting Republicans elected than the RKBA passed. I'm a life member of the NRA and have been active in stuff here for 25+ years. The problem in Kali is the NRA means the National Republican Assoc. to many in this state. I don't care which party someone is a member of, as long as they're pro-gun. There are a lot of people that won't suport a pro-gun/ pro-choise canidate. For me any other item is 2nd to my gun rights.

Sgt Raven
03-08-2006, 12:46 PM
I disagree. Those who are anti-gun will already be voting regardless. It's generally the pro-gun folks who are the least politically active. If anything, a well directed RKBA initiative should bring these folks out and hopefull sweep out any anti-gun politicians.

This happened in '82 when Prop 15 was on the ballot. Bradley, the Demo, was for Prop 15 (handgun ban) and lost the election. It was the pro-gun people that cost him the election.

6172crew
03-08-2006, 1:56 PM
Mike if your in for another beating would you mind telling us why Ed W. doesnt think the we should go to the media with the lower receiver deal, some think the DOJ should be shamed by th eleft into listing the receivers and that the leftwingnuts will ban these anyway and that forcing the list will allow us to build the rifle into a true ar15.

Ed and the NRA has promised to keep the DOJ honest but just wonder about any other thoughts.

shecky
03-08-2006, 2:01 PM
Oh, and don't forget: NRA is moving 3 Pro-Gun Bills in California!

WORKER'S PROTECTION - AB 1912
http://calnra.com/legs.shtml?summary=ab1912

FIREARM SAFETY DEVICES TAX EXEMPTIONS - AB 2096
http://calnra.com/legs.shtml?summary=ab2096

ASSAULT WEAPONS - AB 2131
http://calnra.com/legs.shtml?summary=ab2131

Question is, have YOU written off California?


I'm not too impressed with these bills. All three seem unlikely to hold out very long. AB 1912 in particular seems to have had a setback in OK recently on a related court ruling. Frankly, I think the NRA's efforts should be saved for better things.

6172crew
03-08-2006, 2:21 PM
AB2131 is step in the right direction, I didnt even know this was up. Damn,
the NRA needs to get some folks on each gun board to pass the word.:)


I'm not too impressed with these bills. All three seem unlikely to hold out very long. AB 1912 in particular seems to have had a setback in OK recently on a related court ruling. Frankly, I think the NRA's efforts should be saved for better things.

Can'thavenuthingood
03-08-2006, 2:27 PM
I think that would be a strategic mistake coming before the RKBA petition is voted on by the populace. Too much hay to be made there by the anti's.

Vick

mikehaas
03-08-2006, 4:30 PM
Mike if your in for another beating would you mind telling us why Ed W. doesnt think the we should go to the media with the lower receiver deal, some think the DOJ should be shamed by th eleft into listing the receivers and that the leftwingnuts will ban these anyway and that forcing the list will allow us to build the rifle into a true ar15.

Ed and the NRA has promised to keep the DOJ honest but just wonder about any other thoughts.

I have a feeling if I responded to everyone that I wanted to, I'd wear out my welcome in a hurry just due to the volume of responses. I have a tendency to want to convince everyone that indeed - NRA is on the job. It's just that it's a damn tough job. I already think I may have overdone it a bit and intimidated some.

I'll tell you guys (and gals) what - I'll mention to the top brass that I have found a great new PUBLIC forum - calguns.net - that seems to be a great place for putting out info. But you'll have to understand, as frustrating as it is, to reveal a lot of NRA's plans and strategies here would be a bad idea in the long run, so that can't happen. NRA does lots of good things behind the scenes and the last thing any of us would want is to screw any of that up.

I hope you folks can see that I'm kind of between a rock and a hard place. I'm a volunteer activist like you and fully understand you all wanting to know what's going on, but also, this is a public forum and not protected even as much as personal conversation and telephone calls. In fact, I think public domain, right?

So would you really want me to reveal what's going on between NRA and DOJ regarding the AR lower issue? I assure you they are on it.

Look, we (pro-gunners) are the underdogs in California. That means we tend to make progress by NOT stepping out in the light as much (harder to get swatted down). Quietly convincing legislators and DOJ officials of "the truth" actually works in this state.

In fact, Prop H is a great example. Believe it or not, initially, behind the scenes, NRA had gotten a majority of SF supes to quietly agree NOT to support prop H. It's true. Originally, we had won by keeping the damn thing from even appearing on the ballot. But GUESS WHAT HAPPENED! Two (count them - 2!) angry gun activists decided to attack some supes in the paper and elsewhere very aggressively. They PUBLICLY dared them to support Prop H! Soon, the antis saw an opportunity and started framing the controversy as "NRA challenges city supes" even though NRA had nothing to do with it. Publicly challenged "by NRA" (that was the perception), those supes now HAD to support it (otherwise they would be seen as "caving to NRA"). So Prop H went on the ballot, passed and will now cost half-million to a million to defeat in the courts, if we can (there are NO guarentees in the courts).

Loose cannons can cause real damage in this movement. I try really hard not to be one, even by accident.

6172crew
03-08-2006, 4:54 PM
Two (count them - 2!) angry gun activists decided to attack some supes in the paper and elsewhere very aggressively. They PUBLICLY dared them to support Prop H! Soon, the antis saw an opportunity and started framing the controversy as "NRA challenges city supes" even though NRA had nothing to do with it. Publicly challenged "by NRA" (that was the perception), those supes now HAD to support it (otherwise they would be seen as "caving to NRA"). So Prop H went on the ballot, passed and will now cost half-million to a million to defeat in the courts, if we can (there are NO guarentees in the courts).

Loose cannons can cause real damage in this movement. I try really hard not to be one, even by accident.

Damn! 2 guys who were pissed off railroaded SF. Its crazy how things work out.

Well for the record Ed asked that we not piss off the AG by going to the media and after hearing the story I can see how we have to be carefull.

The media saw a way to sell papers to the moonbats. I hope those sups loose the next election....dirtbags:(

otteray
03-08-2006, 6:19 PM
As far as it passing, if we get it on the ballot and then we need a gazillion dollars for ballot literature;

Of all the people I asked to sign, both Demo and Rep, only one refused, and I live in Santa Cruz ( pretty close to SF)....
Using that fact, from my very left leaning community:
I can't see it failing to pass, even using only cheap homemade grassroots flyers used to counter the extreme antis, that are in a hugh minority, on this ancient God given right of self defense.

PanzerAce
03-08-2006, 6:31 PM
Look, we (pro-gunners) are the underdogs in California. That means we tend to make progress by NOT stepping out in the light as much (harder to get swatted down). Quietly convincing legislators and DOJ officials of "the truth" actually works in this state.

I have to disagree with this. looking at the American political system makes it clear to me that it will almost always be the VOCAL minority that wins out. And as for convincing people of the truth, the problem is that most people that are anti gun are not going to even listen to the NRA...

otteray
03-08-2006, 6:35 PM
Okay, to be fair with my "poll":
The majority were at my gun club meeting.
However, I also asked just as many co-workers, checkout counter people, friends (left and right), and some neighbors.
So I think it's a fair guesstimation of about 75 to 100 signature requests in about two weeks:)
Also many folks asked for petition forms to share with their personal circle of friends, co-workers, etc.

Paladin
03-08-2006, 8:45 PM
Lots of people believe in the concept of a "right to keep and bear arms". <snip> Lots of them thing registration, testing, etc. are good ideas.

The RKBA amendment stands a decent chance of passing just because it's non-threatening. And it's a little tougher for the left to attack... they would have to, ultimately, admit that they do not believe in an individual RKBA,
<snip>

If it ever got on the ballot, the anti's will have TV ads scaring everybody w/its effects, saying that "registration, testing, etc" will all be swept away by this "unnecessary" and "dangerous" amendment. I could go on, but I don't want to give them any free ammo they might not have considered.

Well, I don't "support" GS2AC / TACR... I know very little of them outside of the RKBA initiative. maybe they're doing a lot in the Bay Area, but I don't hear squat from them down here, nor do I hear squat from them about the RKBA initiative. Frankly, I would be happier with someone else running the RKBA show. <snip>.

Sorry for the mistaken assumption.

GS2AC has decided to spend some of their limited time, money and manpower during the signature period to produce radio ads to run on, of all things, Al Franken's radio show on Air America in Santa Cruz. (If you CANNOT believe that, go to http://www.gs2ac.com/ and click on "Announcements" on the left.) If anyone wonders why the NRA isn't jumping on the GS2AC/TACR ship, that might answer your question. Spending your limited resources to tell your opponets that you hope to fight them in 9 months is not wise campaigning. To put it mildly & politely, the GS2AC/TACR leadership lacks much political acumen. That's just one mistake, and a small one compared to other mistakes they've made and are making. But, as Mike has so often pointed out, we don't want to waste our time knocking each other down. As Franklin said, if we don't hang together we will surely hang separately.

At this point, IMO, signature gathering is a waste of time, money, and manpower that could be better used to plan for 2008. But even that is highly unlikely if the numbers given by Mike and Talkin2u2 are to believed. Another approach is wisest at this time, IMHO. (I will not post my ideas on this public forum, but plan to pass them onto the NRA.)

Meanwhile, there are plenty of other things we can and should be doing at this point: taking friends who have never shot to go to the range w/us (after in home intro & instruction); getting ALL the shooters you know to join the NRA/GOC/CRPA/etc; getting them to call their reps and/or volunteer at the county level, like Mike suggested. Things that, I admit, I have NOT done consistently. For example, I'm going to give my Members Council a call for the first time tomorrow. In other words, we have to fight defensively until WE get our act together, get more "troops" and all our troops fighting fit for an offensive fight.

But, back to your question. "Facts, reason, and logic" have no part when dealing with this at a Legislative level.

I was talking about using facts, history, experts, etc. in add'n to constitutional theory when "selling" RKBA to the public, not to the politicians. I know politicians are, esp in Kali, pretty much set on one side or the other wrt gun issues, esp re our top goals.

I think I've dealt w/most of your major points. If not, feel free to PM me if you've got some OT issues.

To all: Mike's point re the unintended consequences of a failed RKBA initiative should not be minimized. When you're hanging on by your fingertips, as gun owners are in this state, you have to be especially wise in what you do. You could lose both what you were reaching for and the handhold you had.

Can'thavenuthingood
03-08-2006, 10:09 PM
The RKBA is not about Liberals, Conservatives, Republicans, Democrats, plumbers, teachers, carpenters, programmers, Catholics or Muslims.

Its about Americans.
Each faction have the individuals within that group that have a strong sense of self worth and a survival instinct. Protection of self and family has moved to the forefront of many peoples thoughts since 911 and Katrina. Regardless of what the press and television put forth as news and the good things the politicians are doing for us, its the individual thats going to protect home and family. And he/she knows this, they just don't want to sign on to all the "other" stuff they don't believe in, but the RKBA they do.

When you are standing alone against someone that wants what you have, you want every available advantage to defeat them.

Outfits like the NRA, GOA, JFPO, CRPA, SAS, Pink Pistols, would do best to contact their members and advise support via mail. In the meantime its just a one on one people gathering signatures. No talk of other agenda's or party plank's, slate's etc. No talk of abortion, Judge nominees, death penalties, PETA, oil or the environment. Just the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.

Its from the RKBA that all other firearm categories are built on. Without it, its a mish mash of gun laws.

Then we fix the districts.

Thats my late night thoughts.

Vick

50BMGBOB
03-08-2006, 11:07 PM
It's generally the pro-gun folks who are the least politically active. If anything, a well directed RKBA initiative should bring these folks out and hopefull sweep out any anti-gun politicians.

If pro-gun people would get out and vote maybe we would have better people in Sac. As PanzerAce said, the VOCAL minority usally wins BECAUSE THEY VOTE! I don't always agree with the NRA and I'm gathering signatures but they could do more and be more agressive if we not only supported them but if more of us voted. If you don't think your opinion is worth voting for, then it isn't worth me listening to you gripe. So many people I know complain but don't vote. Even if your canidate doesn't win the fact that you vote can keep the other guy from getting to radical. they know that at least some are watching. If you can't find a canidate you like and you have to choose the lesser of two evils. Let both of them know what you like and that you not only vote but that you are watching how they vote. If they only hear from their chior, they will get more bold to please them. We not only have to let them know that we don't like it, but there is a price to pay if they do. If enough of us do this they will have to wiegh if it is worth doing. Politicians go with the polls, their polls, they won't come ask us so we have to let them know our opinions otherwise they will just do what their chior wants.

blacklisted
03-08-2006, 11:12 PM
I have observed that most people (even gun owners) are not one-issue voters. If a candidate wants to maybe ban a few guns but their stance fits on issues that are more important to the voter, they can win. Too many gun owners vote for RINOs because of their stance on abortions or something else. I don't think the average gun owner cares about assault weapons or .50 BMG (but most of us sure do).

Ford8N
03-09-2006, 5:25 AM
I have observed that most people (even gun owners) are not one-issue voters. If a candidate wants to maybe ban a few guns but their stance fits on issues that are more important to the voter, they can win. Too many gun owners vote for RINOs because of their stance on abortions or something else. I don't think the average gun owner cares about assault weapons or .50 BMG (but most of us sure do).

Your right, that is the problem. If there was a pro-gun Democrat out there, I would vote for him/her. And the other big problem is, as you pointed out, educating "Elmer Fudd" that his Remington 81 does the same thing as an AK47.

artherd
03-09-2006, 6:05 PM
I will say this about NRA:

1) The more involved I become with NRA, the more I respect and admire how hard they actually do fight in this state.

2) I also gain new understanding as to why they must be much more discreet here than they are in other states. This is the front lines, in basically a gurrila campaign people.

3) They spend more money here than in ANY OTHER STATE, and keep some very good company.

Gregas
03-09-2006, 8:59 PM
The RKBA is not about Liberals, Conservatives, Republicans, Democrats, plumbers, teachers, carpenters, programmers, Catholics or Muslims.

Its about Americans.


That's what I like to hear!

mikehaas
03-10-2006, 6:49 AM
BTW, the latest example of the NRA Members' Councils working closely with NRA staff and attorneys was our Feb 28th victory against a Glendale Gun Ban...

http://calnra.com/legs.shtml?summary=glendale.1

IMO, there's one California Mayor that isn't likely to try THAT again!

BTW, we need YOUR help! To hookup with your local "MC"...
http://calnra.com/volunteer/

That page will use your zip code to identify your local MC, when and where they have their monthly meetings etc. Our MC 'map' is at:
http://calnra.com/mc/directory/

(If there is no MC local to you, you may be able to START one!)

Mike

Paladin
03-10-2006, 8:31 PM
While this is getting OT, since I'll only deal w/this one time, we should be able to steer things back to the work of the NRA in Kali. If anyone wants to continue this topic, please start a new thread.

The RKBA is not about Liberals, Conservatives, Republicans, Democrats

I guess this is because I pointed out how GS2AC has spent time, money and manpower (T/M/M) producing radio ads that they are airing on, of all places, Al Franken's program on Air America.

I'll skip all the categories listed above after Democrats since they are irrelevant to the discussion. Note: sometimes I use ALL CAPS below because I don't know how to make text italics.

Just as not all Republicans are hypocrites (RINOs), so also not all Democrats are hypocrites -- many actually believe in what their state party platform advocates. In other words, many Democrats agree w/their Democratic leaders (e.g., Feinstein, Boxer, Pelosi) wrt guns. If you read the most recent California Democratic party platform ( http://www.cadem.org/site/c.jrLZK2PyHmF/b.981867/k.3FFC/2004_Platform.htm ), on page 5 under Criminal Justice, you'll find:

"Support Responsible Gun Possession. We support efforts to require reasonable controls on weapons that are not used for legitimate hunting, sporting and self defense purposes. California must take the lead in continuing to support the federal ban on deadly assault weapons and eliminating the sale and manufacture of easily procured and hidden handguns. We support the prohibition of gun dealers operating from residential dwellings and strongly urge that all sales at gun show and sales between private parties in California conform to the same requirements as any licensed gun dealer. When a weapon used in a criminal act is obtained through a “straw buyer” (one who illegally provides a weapon to another), that provider should be found culpable as an accessory to the crime. We support maintaining the 10-7 day waiting period currently required for delivery of guns, the background checks for anyone who wants to purchase guns, the ban on flea market gun shows and internet gun sales. We support fighting all efforts to overturn the Brady Bill and the Assault Weapons Ban. We further support continued adequate funding at the national level for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF).

"Support Handgun Safety. We must protect public safety by supporting reasonable laws that provide training for handgun owners, make handguns safer and keep guns out of the hands of our children. All guns stored where minors reside or visit should be locked up or have effective trigger locks properly maintained and installed."

Al Franken's program is primarily targeted at liberals/Democrats, the very ones whose beliefs are most likely are consistent w/that platform (or are even stronger anti-gun). If you will grant that, you will have to agree that very few of his listeners probably have the goals that we do wrt gun laws in Kali. Therefore, the question is, why is GS2AC spending T/M/M running those ads? The answer, to be found on the link I previously provided, is that they want to save just one anti-gun person from their hostility to guns. In other words, "sell" them on our position.

This again highlights GS2AC/TACR's lack of political acumen. The signature period is NOT the time to spend T/M/M trying to convert fence straddlers, much less the hardcore antis. During the sig period you are to focus all your resources on rallying your troops, getting the message out to them to sign up, spread the word, and volunteer. That is a lot "cheaper" in T/M/M than trying to "convert" an anti. That's why volunteers go to gun shows, not dog shows, to gather signatures. Your goal is to qualify for the ballot -- PERIOD. Only after you are on the ballot and have mustered all your troops do you then try to get the undecideds or try to sell mildly antis to switch positions. Hardcore antis are not worth wasting campaign T/M/M trying to convert during a campaign.

Its about Americans.
Each faction have the individuals within that group that have a strong sense of self worth and a survival instinct. Protection of self and family has moved to the forefront of many peoples thoughts since 911 and Katrina. Regardless of what the press and television put forth as news and the good things the politicians are doing for us, its the individual thats going to protect home and family. And he/she knows this, they just don't want to sign on to all the "other" stuff they don't believe in, but the RKBA they do.

Are you saying you believe the percentage of liberals/Democrats who ALREADY believe this is equal to or greater than that of conservatives/Republicans? If not, you agree w/me that this is a waste of ever limited T/M/M. I believe there are MORE consistent Democrats plus inconsistent Republicans in Al Franken's audience THAN inconsistent Democrats plus consistent Republicans (i.e., people who are most likely to share our gun goals). (For simplicity's sake I'm only mentioning the two major parties.) So, basically, Franken's radio audience is a very target poor environment to select DURING THE SIGNATURE PERIOD.

Remember, party membership means something to most people. Shall Issue swept the South during the same period that the "Solid South" went from solidly Democratic to solidly Republican. This wasn't due to immigration/emigration. It was due to the parties becoming more consistent with their fundamental beliefs and Southerners switching parties. Now, lest you think I'm a Republican hack, I'd LOVE it if ALL political parties shared our top gun goals.

When you are standing alone against someone that wants what you have, you want every available advantage to defeat them.

Outfits like the NRA, GOA, JFPO, CRPA, SAS, Pink Pistols, would do best to contact their members and advise support via mail. In the meantime its just a one on one people gathering signatures.

No disagreement here.

No talk of other agenda's or party plank's, slate's etc. No talk of abortion, Judge nominees, death penalties, PETA, oil or the environment. Just the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.

Since I have posted re judge nominees and my sig line has to do w/the death penalty (as well as border security), I will deal w/those and nothing else listed.

First off, as I previously posted, there is no way the RKBA initiative will make it in 2006 (I think, at this point, they SHOULD have gathered around 600,000 sigs by now.) So I WILL talk of other agendas, party planks and anything else that directly or indirectly bears upon my gun rights, because talking will not prevent its passage.

Re. justices: they determine how statutes are interpreted. The Kali SC ruled that the AWB was valid under the state constitution. Other judges, if they sat on the Kali SC, might have ruled otherwise. Perhaps that doesn't matter to you, but it does to me. What is particularly ironic is that the main strength of the RKBA initiative is how it restricts justices ability to interpret and construe the RKBA. So, ironically, in supporting the initiative you are demonstrating that you too believe justices are important (i.e., you are supporting my position).

Re. the Death Penalty: as the quote on my sig line indicates, the death penalty, if carried out swiftly and surely (not after >16 yrs of appeals after the verdict which is avg for Kali), may have a deterrent effect upon other murders. (BTW factoid: twice as many Kali death row immates die of natural causes as get executed.) State Sen. Ray Ashburn has a bill (SB 378) that will greatly speed up the appeals process w/o decreasing defendent's rights by reducing the bottlenecks in the process ( http://republican.sen.ca.gov/opeds/18/oped3047.asp ).

Re. border security (a "freebie" since you didn't bring it up): I heard on the radio a couple of months ago the Sheriff of LA say that something like 50% of the inmates in LA county jails are illegal aliens. I tried to search to find an article to support that, but too many came up. But I did find "In Los Angeles, 95 percent of all outstanding homicide warrants and 60 percent of outstanding felony warrants are for illegal aliens" and other interesting facts at: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,150638,00.html So our porous border may not just let terrorists enter America to launch an attack against our nation, but also that many criminals and gang members (in add'n to drug smugglers) may enter to attack us individually.

So what does the DP and border security have to do w/gun rts? What does the MSM and the antis use to sell gun control: teen pregnancy? the state budget deficit? corporate corruption? pollution? No, they use violent crime. So policies that will reduce violent crime ARE relevant to maintaining gun rts. Even the NRA, about 10 yrs ago, figured this out and started advocating a program (I forget its name) that coordinated fed, state and local LEOs to get repeat (firearms laws?) offenders into fed courts to be given longer sentences (reducing the "revolving door" justice of some state courts), keeping them off the streets, reducing crime and thus reducing the pressure on politicians to pass more gun laws. And what is a common MSM cry against Homeland Defense Rifles (aka assault rifles)? That they are the preferred weapons of gang members.

So, I will raise those issues when appropriate since violent and gang crime is the justification used to scare the populace into accepting more shackles upon their 2nd A rights.

Note: If I were in a position of authority in GS2AC/TACR, or trying to get sigs for the initiative or when I'm trying to get a non-shooter to go to the range w/me, then broaching such subjects would take the focus off the goal.

Paladin
03-10-2006, 8:50 PM
I have observed that most people (even gun owners) are not one-issue voters. If a candidate wants to maybe ban a few guns but their stance fits on issues that are more important to the voter, they can win. Too many gun owners vote for RINOs because of their stance on abortions or something else.

I couldn't agree more. If a pro-gun rts Republican is also pro-life, gun owners should NOT vote in the primary for the anti-gun and pro-abortion RINO who is going against the party platform on BOTH issues (platform available by linking to Your Party in left column at: http://www.cagop.org/ ).

I don't think the average gun owner cares about assault weapons or .50 BMG (but most of us sure do).

Unfortunately they don't realize that once you allow the nose of the camel into the tent, pretty soon his whole body will be inside. Application for those who aren't familiar w/the saying: once you accept a new kind of legislation (trigger locks, minimal melting temps for pistols, banning .50 cals), thereafter it is only a matter of degree to be forced to accept other restrictions (banning >.338 cals, drop tests, etc.). Once you've acquiesced to the principle in one instance, the politicians or courts will start holding you more and more consistently (ie, expansively) to it. With respect to gun rts, you end up being a subject rather than a citizen.

Can'thavenuthingood
03-11-2006, 1:34 PM
The exact point I was attempting to make. I have no immediate concerns of someones politics or opinions, just sign the petition and please step aside.

My comments had nothing to do with how GS2AC has spent its time, it matters not. My comments were made as an attempt to focus on getting signatures for RKBA.

Your posted discussion seems to be trying to read between the lines of my post. There is nothing between the lines but blank space.

I've stated nothing pro or con to any issue, party or denomination other than the RKBA.

Keep the focus.

Vick

AntiBubba 2.1
03-18-2006, 2:56 AM
It's obvious to us in CA, and who worked on the initiative drive, that we're going to need a much greater degree of organization, committed volunteers, and money, if we are going to mount an RKBA initiative that stands a good chance of getting on the ballot and passing. We also realize that the NRA has other battles it feels it can win, and must win, before focusing on us. But we need some questions answered.

First, what kind and level of in-state commitment would convince the NRA that there is a decent to good chance of winning this at the ballot?

Second, is there anything in the wording of the initiative as it is now written that the NRA cannot get behind, or might word differently?

Third, the NRA is essentially saying, "Eventually" to California. A great many of us are going to start working soon on the 2008 drive (and not waiting until ballot signing starts to organize :o ). Does that conflict with the NRA's "timetable"? Are we, as far as NRA is concerned, "Pissing into the wind"?

Yes, yes, you are just a volunteer. But you seem to have your finger on the pulse of the 800 lb gorilla. Tell us what Kong thinks.