PDA

View Full Version : San Diego Sheriff's Race: Beat Gore - Vote Duffy


wildhawker
05-09-2010, 10:06 PM
The race for Sheriff of San Diego County, and why Jay LaSuer may prove to be a liability

Supporting documents and exhibits: https://docs.google.com/fileview?id=0BzuDXQ308KnoODRmMTA0NjQtNjlkNy00NThmL ThkNzktZTc2YWM2NTUxNzFi&hl=en


Over the past year, I’ve offered comments within a number of discussions surrounding the San Diego Sheriff election and the candidates, mainly surrounding Jay LaSuer. The recent endorsement of Jay LaSuer by California Association of Firearms Retailers (Marc Halcon, Kathy Lynch, Gerry Upholt) and Gun Owners of California (Sam Paredes) has caused me to revisit the issue of this race and its 3 candidates.

Some here have demanded from me my preferred alternative to Mr. LaSuer, asserting that my criticism of one candidate must be accompanied by some endorsement of another. While such a demand is an affront to political discourse generally, as in no case can it reasonably be argued that an opinion or argument is somehow less correct or valuable simply for a lack of proffered alternative, I will further explain why Mr. LaSuer may prove to be a liability for San Diego gun owners and all residents. I’ll also comment on the other candidates and explain why, if I were an interested voter residing in San Diego County, I would likely vote for Mr. Jim Duffy.

The 4/27 poll and story at 10news.com shows the following spread:
Gore – 26% (up 12% from Nov 09)
LaSuer – 16% (unchanged from Nov 09)
Duffy – 15% (down 9% from Nov 09)
Undecided – 39%

If the 10 News poll is reasonably accurate, this is not good news for either Duffy or LaSuer. A well-funded, managed and endorsed incumbent like Gore could very well pick up the points to avoid a runoff election with some savvy targeted outreach spending. However, let’s assume for a minute that the outcome will be a runoff between Gore and either LaSuer or Duffy and what those might look like.

LaSuer and Duffy are within a point of each other overall in this soft numbers poll, well inside the margin of error. However, the poll results show that support for Gore is balanced across age, race and political spectrums. LaSuer, as can be seen by his endorsements page, lacks some very critical association support and has arranged his campaign to capitalize on the CCW issue and leverage it for grassroots support. He is polling nearly 2:1 Republican:Democrat and almost 3:1 Conservative:Liberal on ideology. Considering the makeup of undecided likely voters and contrasting that against the backdrop of Gore and Duffy’s ability to pull in solid numbers of moderate and liberal voters, LaSuer has a problem with having nearly – if not actually - hitting a ceiling. While I would have to research further for anything more than an anecdotal take on the interplay, I cannot fathom how LaSuer’s aligning himself with Sheriff Joe Arpaio and the far right wing helps him with the two demographics needed to beat Gore in the high-value population centers (City of SD, Chula Vista, National City and others): moderate-liberal democrats and independents as well as Hispanics.

1. Bill Gore is not friendly to firearm carry rights and has a troubling history; as such, he is not a desirable candidate for our cause.

2. Bill Gore has the support of a broad spectrum of high-juice endorsements, the establishment, state LEA groups, is the incumbent Sheriff and has substantial fundraising capability.

3. Bill Gore has significant financial resources.

4. Bill Gore polls strongly across all demographics and could carry 50%+1 in June with a well-run campaign.

5. Jay LaSuer makes significant claims to support gun rights and is a self-described shall-issue CCW candidate; however, his legislative history makes this suspect.

6. Jay LaSuer, as an Assemblyman, proposed the AW PC spot bill AB 2218 and used the gut/amend process to create the very dangerous language which would have made felons of thousands of Californians; he also attempted to cut a deal with Alberto Torrico on the original mail order ammo ban. These actions were forcefully opposed by the NRA and others in Sacramento.

7. Jay LaSuer has no significant endorsements; the “gun” endorsements he does have are from closely-networked organizations (CAFR, GOC) and associated people (Marc Halcon, Kathy Lynch, Gerry Upholt, Sam Paredes) that nearly created AW laws worse than we have, attempted to deal on the mail order ammo ban, caused us enduring problems with the Governor leading to his signing of anti-gun bills and other headaches and setbacks. Of note: Laurie Paredes is the wife of Sam Paredes, Executive Director of GOC/GOA. (“California Assemblyman Jay LaSuer, a leading Republican legislator from San Diego, agrees… says Laurie Paredes, the assemblyman's legislative director.”- WOMENSENEWS).

8. Jay LaSuer has no money, has no real fundraising capabilities and cannot execute the most basic of drills necessary to win (now or in a runoff); 29 days before an election and no money for yard signs, targeted mailers, etc…

9. Jay LaSuer, aligning himself with the far right-wing and Joe Arpaio, has a fairly limited and fixed audience of likely voters. His turnout ceiling is low.

10. Jay LaSuer is not a viable challenger to Gore and is a liability to potential endorsers, and so Duffy’s endorsements/money would likely NOT move to LaSure but to Gore.

11. Jim Duffy makes a similar claim for supporting shall-issue CCW issuance. Jim Duffy has never drafted, supported or sponsored an anti-gun bill.

12. Jim Duffy is personally endorsed by a trustworthy member of both the NRA and CRPA Board of Directors.

13. Jim Duffy has the support of a broad spectrum of high-juice endorsements, the political class, all or nearly all officer and firefighter associations and substantial fundraising capability.

14. We have no idea how legitimate gun organizations are going to weigh in on this election.

If Gore runs a good campaign and splits the middle-right vote, Gore wins outright. If LaSuer and Gore face off in a runoff election, Gore wins (likely in a landslide). If Duffy and Gore face off in a runoff election, Duffy has a reasonable chance of winning if he fundraises well, runs a solid campaign and the LaSuer voters move his way.

This race is about a lifetime position as the SD Sheriff, managing a major law enforcement department and its significant budget, human and other resources. Focusing only on CCW will lead to a Gore win. The CCW issue will be moot post-Sykes/Palmer; Duffy gives you a shot at beating Gore and having access to CCWs between now and a Sykes win. Any LaSuer success in June will virtually guarantee a Gore victory overall.

wildhawker
05-09-2010, 10:23 PM
http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/site/?q=node/6973


Ham–Handed Pro-Gun Republicans Induce Anti-Gun Response From Governor Schwarzenegger
Posted on 14 October 2007
By Bill Cavala, A veteran of over 30 years in Sacramento

Some 34 G.O.P. lawmakers (out of 46) signed a petition asking Gov. Scharzenegger to fire his Fish and Game Commissioner. Seems like the Commissioner had been acting too much like an advocate for eliminating lead shot – which would subsequently be ingested by California’s endangered condors – a very large vulture-like bird.

The Governor agreed and asked for the Commissioner’s resignation. And a firestorm of protest resulted.

The other members of the Commission closed ranks this week and adopted a new regulation outlawing the lead shot.

The Governor’s press spokesman had put out a press release saying he was not a ‘tool of the NRA’.

To prove it, the Governor signed legislation outlawing the use of lead in the condor’s habitat.

Anticipating this public relations disaster, the N.R.A. had declared it was not behind the petition – although it strongly opposed the lead shot ban.

The real irony is that the NRA was initially an organization that protected hunting by promoting conservation. Now it lobbies for munitions makers at the expense of conservation claiming that “science” doesn’t back the argument that lead poisoning is the leading cause of death in wild Condors. (It is!).

So low was the credibility of the gunners on the ‘lead shot’ issue, it affected their credibility on the issue of requiring new handguns to microstamp an I.D. on bullets.

The Governor signed that bill into law too

Earlier this summer, when the Governor needed only a single Republican vote in the Senate to pass the budget, the pro-gun forces might have gained cache with an assist.

They didn’t.

Instead, they embarrassed the Governor by pressuring him into firing a Commissioner, then forced him to bend over backwards to prove his independence.

Another gun control victory orchestrated by the “gun lobby” through incompetence.

Bill Cavala was Deputy Director of the Assembly Speaker’s Office of Member Services where he worked for over 30 years.

He attended undergraduate and graduate school in the 1960’s and received a doctorate in political science at UC Berkeley. He taught political science at UC Berkeley during the 1970's while he worked part-time for the State Assembly.

Cavala left teaching at UC Berkeley and went to work for Assembly Speaker Willie Brown in 1981 until his tenure as Speaker ended in 1995, and he has worked for his five successors as Speaker up to and including Speaker Fabian Nunez.

Mr. Cavala manages election campaigns for Democratic candidates.

hoffmang
05-09-2010, 10:24 PM
And don't forget that the primary mover behind endorsing LaSuer attempted to attack CGF (http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/lynch/) and Bill Wiese. Her significant other is also no longer part of CRPA (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=197792).

Mr. LaSuer, just like those endorsing him, tends to use gunowners for his own personal gain. It was telling that he couldn't even afford the filing fee for his campaign.

-Gene

wildhawker
05-09-2010, 10:24 PM
http://articles.latimes.com/2007/sep/14/local/me-resign14


Fish & Game officer leaves post
Commissioner who pushed to ban the use of lead bullets in condor territory resigns after GOP lawmakers demand his removal.
September 14, 2007|Evan Halper and Nancy Vogel, Times Staff Writers

SACRAMENTO -- A member of the state Fish and Game Commission who sought to ban lead hunting bullets in condor territory resigned Thursday at the request of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's administration, after Republican lawmakers demanded his removal.

Some scientific studies say lead bullets are poisonous to the federally endangered birds.

The resignation of R. Judd Hanna provoked an angry response from environmentalists and Democrats, who are calling on the governor to sign legislation enacting such a ban currently on his desk.

In an e-mail to administration officials, commissioners and others, Hanna warned the lawmakers who pushed for his ouster at the request of hunting groups that "poisoning the California condor is neither honorable nor ethical."

The bill passed Sept. 5 along party lines in the Legislature. This week, the governor received a letter from 34 GOP lawmakers asking that Hanna be ousted and alleging that he gave false information about the danger the bullets pose to condors.

"He has become an outspoken advocate seeking to achieve his own personal objectives," the letter said. "Mr. Hanna is not being impartial."

Reached by phone Thursday, Hanna said he was asked to resign by Mike Chrisman, secretary of the Resources Agency.

Chrisman's office referred calls to the governor's office, which confirmed the resignation but refused to discuss any details.

The bill the Legislature passed would ban hunters from using lead bullets in most of Monterey, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara and Ventura counties, and parts of eight other counties.

There are roughly 129 wild condors left in California and Arizona, and scientists say lead poisoning from bullets is one of their leading killers. Scientists say many of the birds ingest the lead when consuming hunted animals.

Assemblyman Pedro Nava (D-Santa Barbara), the author of the bill, called Hanna's resignation "tragic."

"I think what it says to other Fish and Game commissioners is if they don't toe the [National Rifle Assn.] line, their jobs are in jeopardy," Nava said. "If this is all it takes to change the composition of the Fish and Game Commission, there's more stability in the Iraqi legislature."

Hanna is the second appointee of the governor forced to vacate a seat on a state board this summer after championing the cause of environmentalists. In June, Air Resources Board Chairman Robert Sawyer was removed from his position after pushing for more aggressive limits on greenhouse gases than the governor supported.

Schwarzenegger appointed Hanna to the commission in February. A Vietnam veteran and former Navy test pilot, Hanna owned a Bay Area real estate development company and lives on a ranch near Lassen Volcanic National Park. His term on the commission would have expired in 2013.

"The mission of the commission has been deflected by a special interest group," Hanna wrote in his e-mail, referring to the NRA. "Thus, an issue bearing on one of the commission's most important mandates, protection of an endangered species, has been hijacked."

Officials from the NRA could not be reached for comment. In documents submitted to the Legislature, the group joined a coalition of hunting organizations in arguing that there is no "irrefutable" scientific proof that the bullets have caused the death of the endangered birds through lead poisoning.

They warned that a ban could result in a decline of big-game hunting in California, forcing gun and ammunition retailers to lose business and state revenue associated with hunting to drop.

Several of the state's major environmental groups, including Defenders of Wildlife, the Sierra Club, the Audubon Society and Environmental Defense, called on the governor to reinstate Hanna immediately.

Officials from the groups said that in addition to the Hanna dismissal, they were alarmed by a letter sent by the commission earlier this week urging the governor to veto the lead bullet ban passed by the Legislature.

The letter took up the cause of ammunition manufacturers, who have argued they do not have the technology to manufacture the type of lead-free bullets the new law would require.

"The requirement for the ammunition to have no lead content would essentially completely ban hunting of big game and coyotes throughout Condor range," the letter said.

The letter urging a veto of the bill said the commission is studying the issue and will curb use of the bullets, if warranted, through regulatory action. But conservationists are dubious.

Said Kim Delfino, state program director for Defenders of Wildlife: "We don't know where this will all end up."

bwiese
05-09-2010, 10:26 PM
The above piece from the late Cavala gets most of the truth but with a spin that taints NRA with GOC action by grouping them both as 'gunnies':
one screws up, the other gets the blame.

Kinda funny... a "no-compromise" gun org got us microstamping plus the lead ammo ban.

wildhawker
05-09-2010, 10:28 PM
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/10/14/195317/38


Why Scwarzenegger bucked the NRA, what it teaches us
by Dan Quixote
Sun Oct 14, 2007 at 07:01:32 PM PDT

A friend of mine with the Audubon Society of California forwarded me a press release. The governator, quietly, very quietly, defied the NRA and signed into law a bill that the NRA fought hard against, but now claim they had no position on.

This is a move that should have happened thirty years ago, when it was already clear that the California Condor was one step from extinct and that lead poisoning from ammunition laden carrion was one of their biggest problems. The interesting question is, if the gun lobby kept regulation at bay so long, why did they fall apart now? Is there some lesson for other efforts?

Here is the release:

Audubon California applauds signing of legislation to protect California Condor (AB 821)

Sacramento, CA – Audubon California today applauded Gov. Schwarzenegger’s decision to sign AB 821, which will help the continued recovery of the California Condor by banning the use of lead ammunition from areas inhabited by the endangered species.

"This is a great day for the California Condor and the State of California," said Glenn Olson, executive director of Audubon California. "I would like to commend Governor Schwarzenegger for signing the Ridley-Tree Condor Conservation Act and again putting our state at the forefront on wildlife protection."

Condors frequently feed on animal carcasses left behind by hunters, and ingest dangerously high levels of lead from ammunition. Audubon California, which has long advocated on behalf of the endangered species, has been pushing for additional protections for the Condor both among hunters and actively at the legislative and policy levels.

The new law, authored by Assemblyman Pedro Nava, will require the use of non-lead centerfire ammunition within the Department of Fish and Game’s deer hunting zones within current and potential condor range in California. Lead-free ammunition is increasingly available and will have no effect on hunters’ enjoyment of their sport. To the extent funding is available, big game hunters in these hunting zones will get coupons for non-lead ammunition at no or reduced charge.

"This legislation is clear proof that creative solutions are available to our most vexing environmental issues, and that Californians need not choose between wildlife protection and recreational uses, such as hunting," added Olson.

A month ago, it seemed the NRA had killed off efforts to protect the condors (and quite possibly the condors). Schwartzenegger had appointed Republican and long time hunter Judd Hanna to the California Fish and Game Commission just before a vote by that commission on regulations that would have banned the use of lead ammunition in hunting in the condor's range. When Hanna actually sat down, looked at the evidence he found it was clear that the use of lead ammunition is a major threat to condors. Then he did what is totally unacceptable in Republican circles. He put together a packet of all the research on the effects of lead on Condors and sent copies to the other members of the commission. The NRA, horrified, gathered up all their bought legislators to sign a letter to the Governor demanding that Hanna be removed. Hanna, fired the next day, blasted the NRA for ignoring overwhelming scientific consensus and forcing Schwazenegger into firing him.

While all this was going on, Assemblyman Pedro Nava (D Santa Barbara), pushed a bill through the legislature banning the the use of lead ammunition in the condor's range. To get it through, he drew on powerful connections within the legislature, an important committee chairmanship, a statement signed by dozens of biologist laying out rock solid evidence of every step in the chain from lead bullet manufacture to condor population decline, and an increasingly pro conservation mood in the California electorate. Almost everyone, including me, took the recent firing of Hanna as a sign that Arnold was the NRA's lapdog and would veto the bill.

Now here is where it gets really interesting. Hanna's firing made the condor/lead story much bigger news. The Humane Society got very involved on a national level. Papers all over the state wrote editorials. Hanna said a bunch of quotable things about the NRA and implied a bunch of things about the Governor's lack of ability to buck them. The press coverage consistently pointed out that the scientific evidence all supported a strong link between lead and condor deaths, and all made it clear that if Schwarzenegger vetoed the bill, it would be because the NRA ordered him to do so. And a lot of that coverage, especially the editorials, questioned not just Schwarzenegger's judgment, or his much touted commitment to the environment, but rather his leadership, his independence, his strength under pressure. In other words, his manhood. The issue was framed as a choice for Arnold. Keep on "caving" (a word used in almost every editorial on the subject) to pressure from the NRA, continue being their boy, or stand up, be strong and do what's right because he was a leader.

I guess once it was framed that way, his handlers decided it was better to quietly sign the bill, along with dozens of others, rather than veto it. And so after thirty years, an obviously necessary policy became law.

To generalize a bit, the important elements here were:

Overwhelming scientific evidence actively communicated to the public and politicians by scientists.

A press that was willing to say "the scientific consensus is strong" rather than "Democrats and tree humppers claim that their is science." Democratic leaders who understand and care about the scientific evidence and conservation. (Assemblyman Nava deserves a huge amount of credit here.)

Questioning a Republican governor's manhood.

Democrats usually have the science on our side. We need to make sure that scientist are communicating their results to the public, the press and leaders in both parties. We need to elect leaders who have shown an ability to understand and act on scientific evidence. We need to encourage the press to make statements of fact (the world is round), rather than just quotes of statements of facts from partisans (Mayor Tom Bates of Berkeley, at a rally for the reproductive rights of homosexual female terrorism suspects, said, "the world is round"). And we need to hit Republican leaders where it hurts, in their machismo, by pointing out that if they were so tough, they wouldn't lick the boots of every far right lobbyist that came through their doors.

Now, if you will excuse me, I'm going to write the Governor a letter congratulating him on being a real man.

wildhawker
05-09-2010, 10:30 PM
http://democrats.assembly.ca.gov/members/a35/Pressroom/News/20070914AD35AR02.aspx

Ventura County Star
Advocate of lead ban resigns from panel
Fish and Game Commission member says action forced
By Timm Herdt
Friday, September 14, 2007

SACRAMENTO - A state Fish and Game commissioner, who last month indicated he would support a ban on the use of lead ammunition in areas where condors roam, resigned Thursday, saying his resignation was requested by the Schwarzenegger administration.

R. Judd Hanna's resignation came the day after 34 Republican legislators sent Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger a letter asking for his dismissal.

The events were the latest in a continuing struggle over attempts by lawmakers and regulators to require deer hunters to use copper bullets in condor zones. Lead poisoning caused by ingesting bullet fragments in the carcasses of fallen animals is the leading cause of mortality among condors in the wild.

"This is going to be a big black eye for the governor," said Pamela Flick of the Defenders of Wildlife, which is advocating for the ban. "The NRA gets together in cahoots with Republican legislators, and three days later we've got a good commissioner who's done his job booted out the door."

An alliance of gun and hunting groups earlier called the proposed ban on lead bullets "draconian." In a letter to the commission last month, the group said the proposal "reflects a hidden agenda by some to ban all hunting in California."

Hanna declined to elaborate on his resignation, but in an e-mail to Resources Secretary Mike Chrisman he wrote that he had been asked to resign.

"The mission of the commission has been deflected by a special interest group," he wrote in the e-mail obtained by The Star. "One of the commission's most important mandates, protection of an endangered species has been hijacked."

Passed along information

Schwarzenegger's office declined to comment on the resignation, or to say whether anyone in the administration has requested that Hanna quit. "We never comment on personnel matters," said Press Secretary Aaron McLear.
Sam Paredes, executive director of the Gun Owners of California, praised the action, saying Hanna had violated his role as a commissioner by indicating his support for the proposed ban.

"You're supposed to sit there taking in information, weighing both sides," Paredes said. "He was, in effect, being an advocate."

In his e-mail, Hanna acknowledged he had passed along information he had gathered to other commissioners, and said he did so because the commission's legal counsel advised he was obligated to share such information with his colleagues.
In their letter, the GOP lawmakers said Hanna distributed 167 pages of documents to fellow commissioners "with his own personal annotations throughout, in an effort to support a lead ammunition ban."

Urged veto

Hanna, a former U.S. Navy combat pilot, has a Master of Business Administration from Stanford and owns a ranch in Tehama County. A hunter and fisherman, he was appointed by Schwarzenegger in February to a term that had been scheduled to run through 2013.

His resignation also comes two days after Commission President Richard Rogers of Santa Barbara sent a letter to Schwarzenegger urging him to veto legislation that would enact the ban by statute.

Rogers wrote the commission is the agency that should make such decisions, arguing its "decision-making process ensures that a decision will be based on the best available science."

The commission argued any ban should be in the form of regulations adopted by the commission, not state statute.

'No regard for the process'

Assemblyman Pedro Nava, D-Santa Barbara, who wrote the bill that would prohibit deer hunters from using lead ammunition in condor areas, said the events that led to Hanna's resignation show the commission process is, in fact, political.

"The fate of the condor is too important to leave to a political commission subject to the whims of disgruntled elected officials," Nava said. "We are dealing with folks who have absolutely no regard for the process."

Schwarzenegger must decide whether to sign or veto Nava's AB821 by Oct. 12. Meanwhile, the commission is on course to hold hearings on the issue at its October meeting and to make a decision either in November or December.
The issue was first brought to the commission's attention in 2003. The agency has been sued by the Natural Resources Defense Council for having failed to protect an endangered species.

In comments directed "to 34 legislators, the NRA and fellow hunters," Hanna wrote in his e-mail that the hunting community will alienate the public at large with its resistance to changing from lead bullets to copper.

The public, Hanna wrote, "will tolerate hunting providing it is done ethically and honorably. Poisoning the California condor is neither honorable nor ethical."

wildhawker
05-09-2010, 10:36 PM
State Sen. Dennis Hollingsworth (R-Murrieta), who spearheaded the GOP legislators' letter to Schwarzenegger, did not return telephone calls, nor did two other legislators who signed the letter.

The NRA never contacted the governor's office about ousting Hanna, McLear said, adding that the gun lobby has criticized the governor on some other gun-related measures.

The NRA on Monday denied playing a role in Hanna's departure.

"If we were to call for the ouster of anyone, we would let people know, and we would be open," said NRA spokesman Andrew Arulanandam. - LA Times, http://articles.latimes.com/2007/sep/25/local/me-condor25

66th Assembly District
The election of Dennis Hollingsworth was of paramount importance to GOC. Hollingsworth, who won his election in a landslide 64% to 32%, is an active shooter, an avid hunter and he is a well-grounded philosophical defender of the Constitution. We will be able to count on him for leadership and support at all times. - GOC, http://www.gunownersca.com/Newsletters/newsletter.php?newsletter=postele2000genele

Not since Senator H.L. Richardson served as Senate Republican Caucus Leader have we had one of our own as the leader in the State Senate. - GOC, http://www.gunownersca.com/Newsletters/PDFs/20091Q.pdf

ChaparralCommando
05-10-2010, 12:16 AM
Wildhawker, I'm not sure what you're getting at with all the quotes about the lead bullet ban for the condors in relation to the SD Co. Sheriff race, but I liked your analysis in the first post. I think you changed my mind.

bwiese
05-10-2010, 1:35 AM
Wildhawker, I'm not sure what you're getting at with all the quotes about the lead bullet ban for the condors in relation to the SD Co. Sheriff race, but I liked your analysis in the first post. I think you changed my mind.

JLS is intertwined with 'those people'.

eaglemike
05-10-2010, 8:47 AM
Brandon,
There were requests - I did not see any posts that would stimulate the type of attitude displayed in the above posts.

I do appreciate your information, and will take some time to evaluate it.

I would label the string of posts above as somewhat "over the top" though.... IMHO an improvement in presentation would stimulate a more positive discourse.

all the best,
Mike

N6ATF
05-10-2010, 9:16 AM
Duffy is listed in the sample ballot as "Chief of Staff". In the candidate statements, it says "San Diego County Sheriff Lieutenant" under his name, and "I strongly support the Second Amendment" in the second-to-last paragraph.

He's not on here: http://www.sdsheriff.net/about_cmdstaff.html - because he's not the CoS for the Sheriff, he was County Supervisor Ron Roberts' CoS - http://www.sdnn.com/sandiego/2010-03-10/politics-city-county-government/jim-duffy-to-announce-run-for-county-sheriff

Being the CoS to a (R) county supervisor in a military town is practically the least likely place to affect laws infringing on the 2A. Take that as you will.

La Suer: "Law-abiding citizens will receive concealed weapons permits to help protect themselves and their families... I WILL KEEP MY OATH."

ned946
05-10-2010, 9:21 AM
I thought I read elsewhere on this site that Duffy was out....?

GuyW
05-10-2010, 9:24 AM
Jay LaSuer makes significant claims to support gun rights and is a self-described shall-issue CCW candidate; however, his legislative history makes this suspect.

You continue to ignore the first person testimonials here on CalGuns that Jay La Suer, as a La Mesa City Councilman, drafted, introduced, and got passed, an ordinance to make La Mesa start issuing CCWs.

Straight up - are you calling us all liars?

As well, Jay is a longtime NRA member (Life IIRC).

He IS pro-gun.




Jay LaSuer has no money, has no real fundraising capabilities and cannot execute the most basic of drills necessary to win (now or in a runoff); 29 days before an election and no money for yard signs, targeted mailers, etc…


Jay has yard signs, bumper stickers, an organization, volunteers, and I believe has plans and contingency plans.

He has run for 2 City Council and Legislature and won. The political neophytes in this race are Duffy and Gore.



Jay LaSuer is not a viable challenger to Gore and is a liability to potential endorsers, and so Duffy’s endorsements/money would likely NOT move to LaSure but to Gore.


According to the North County Times newspaper he is a viable challenger, in fact, they don't like your Mr. Duffy - so what makes your out-of-area Democrat partisan view more informed and valid than a San Diego newspaper?

BTW, Ruff's votes in the Ch 10 poll, and Ruff's past votes that are yet undecided, go to Jay.



Jim Duffy makes a similar claim for supporting shall-issue CCW issuance.


Duffy never said one word about CCWs until he came to some San Diego gunowner events and got significant and vociferous negative comments.

So, now your standard is if a politician claims it, it must be true, huh?

BTW - where's Duffy's participation on CalGuns - given that he's such a warrior for gun rights?



Jim Duffy has never drafted, supported or sponsored an anti-gun bill.



This is not evidence of anything (except your blind support for Duffy driven by your hate for LaSuer) - Duffy has never drafted, supported or sponsored ANY BILL whatsoever.





Jim Duffy is personally endorsed by a trustworthy member of both the NRA and CRPA Board of Directors.


Now we're getting close to the truth - this is a personal vendetta against LaSuer.




Jim Duffy has the support of a broad spectrum of high-juice endorsements, the political class, all or nearly all officer and firefighter associations and substantial fundraising capability.



Wow - there's some cogent reasons for CalGuns members and gunowners to support Duffy -the "political class" does.

Duffy is connected at the hip to public unions, and most sentient voters these days resent public unions. Duffy's plan to make jail deputies equal in pay and benefits to street deputies is a financial disaster, and won't be well received.



We have no idea how legitimate gun organizations are going to weigh in on this election.


Yeah - will they support Duffy who has ZERO pro-gun bonafides (is he even an NRA member?), or Gore who is anti-gun, or La Suer, who has actual pro-gun, pro-CCW bonafides?

BUT you mis-represent by implication (again) what that GOC endorsement is about - it is about telling voters that Jay is pro-gun, nothing more, nothing less. I know Jay would be proud to have the NRA endorsement and the CRPA endorsement.

If the "rules" allowed it - Jay would already have the OFFICIAL endorsement of the San Diego NRA Members Council (you know - those on-the-scene grassroots activists that are purportedly so important to NRA?)

Gore and Duffy have assumed (before your intervention) that LaSuer had the NRA endorsement wrapped up...



If Gore runs a good campaign and splits the middle-right vote, Gore wins outright. If LaSuer and Gore face off in a runoff election, Gore wins (likely in a landslide). If Duffy and Gore face off in a runoff election, Duffy has a reasonable chance of winning if he fundraises well, runs a solid campaign and the LaSuer voters move his way.


Lots of "ifs", wishful thinking, and spin.

If the voters across the spectrum get wind of what a JBT Gore is - he loses no matter which man is the opponent.

Gore is beatable, and Jay can win.



This race is about a lifetime position as the SD Sheriff


Yep - and Jay would be in one or two terms - Duffy would be in for 24 years or more.

That's bad policy.



...managing a major law enforcement department and its significant budget, human and other resources. Focusing only on CCW will lead to a Gore win.

Jay has campaigned on many issues other than CCWs (remember Arpaio up above?) CCWs are mostly spoken of here because its a gun forum.



Any LaSuer success in June will virtually guarantee a Gore victory overall.

LaSuer success on June 8 will guarantee a public thrashing of Gore over Ruby Ridge et seq that will leave him UNELECTABLE.

.

GuyW
05-10-2010, 9:40 AM
And don't forget that the primary mover behind endorsing LaSuer

Quit misrespresenting the relationship - this endorsement was solely about having a pro-gun endorsement from a somewhat-recognized "name" to educate voters.

It was necessary because other pro-gun endorsements are late in the game...



It was telling that he couldn't even afford the filing fee for his campaign.

What it said, was that he was thrifty with donors' contributions - not that he didn't have the money.

wildhawker
05-10-2010, 9:49 AM
I'm sure we'll see some additional contributions and loans very soon, and some much more accurate post-absentee ballot polling, but this is an indicator of a campaign that is running larger than it really is (and can support):

SHERIFF RACE FUNDRAISING TOTALS
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
posted by Rostra Administrator (Thor's Assistant)

Just a quick post to show how money is shaping up in the Sheriff’s race. These are from the reports just filed for the period Jan.1 thru Mar. 17:

Jim Duffy
Contributions: $8,167
Expenditures: $30,009
Cash on Hand: $25,579
Debt: 0

Bill Gore
Contributions: $34,550
Expenditures: $33,703
Cash on Hand: $112,829
Debt: $46,070 (all accrued expenses/no personal loans)

Jay La Suer
Contributions: $4,349
Expenditures: $16,962
Cash on Hand: ($2,276)
Debt: 0

Source: http://sdrostra.com/?p=3930

You continue to ignore the first person testimonials here on CalGuns that Jay La Suer, as a La Mesa City Councilman, drafted, introduced, and got passed, an ordinance to make La Mesa start issuing CCWs.

Straight up - are you calling us all liars?

As well, Jay is a longtime NRA member (Life IIRC).

He IS pro-gun.

No, I'm simply highlighting his record as a legislator. I have no doubt Mr. LaSuer was a friendly candidate in the past, but his actions as Assemblyman were either suspect or incompetent. Either way, it is a record relevant to this community.


Jay has yard signs, bumper stickers, an organization, volunteers, and I believe has plans and contingency plans.

He has run for 2 City Council and Legislature and won. The political neophytes in this race are Duffy and Gore.

Does it tell you anything when, as a long-time "local boy", 23 year veteran of the department, former Assemblyman from AD77, the former Undersheriff and you can't raise any substantial endorsers or money contributers (or money)? Research his previous campaigns, because I did - he had *substantial* funding in his bid for Assembly and a very respectable level for his re-election campaigns. Where did all those friends go? (Gore, and Duffy)



According to the North County Times newspaper he is a viable challenger, in fact, they don't like your Mr. Duffy - so what makes your out-of-area Democrat partisan view more informed and valid than a San Diego newspaper?

BTW, Ruff's votes in the Ch 10 poll, and Ruff's past votes that are yet undecided, go to Jay.

You have no idea about my ideology, and it's amusing that your insults just highlight your lack of substantive argument. Show me polls after the absentee ballots start rolling in. Will Jay LaSuer do his own poll and create targeted mailers, calls, etc? If so, with what money?


Duffy never said one word about CCWs until he came to some San Diego gunowner events and got significant and vociferous negative comments.

So, now your standard is if a politician claims it, it must be true, huh?

BTW - where's Duffy's participation on CalGuns - given that he's such a warrior for gun rights?

Do you think I judge candidates to a serious office by their post count? Why would anyone?


This is not evidence of anything (except your blind support for Duffy driven by your hate for LaSuer) - Duffy has never drafted, supported or sponsored ANY BILL whatsoever.

Not blind, informed. I made it clear that Jay LaSuer was not someone I could support long ago. I've seen many posts like this one directed at me for some time:

What I'm saying is, yes you have made your statements. All you have done is attack him. Do you have something positive to add? Do you have an alternative? If you want another candidate, all the power to you, make them a thread. If you want to make a bash JLS thread, that would be awesome, you could keep it in there. It's annoying when people are trying to organize for a cause and people have to bash him again, and again, and again.

There are some people in this thread, people whose opinion I usually respect, who have been pretty consistent about their dislike of LaSuer. I understand some of their opposition to him, but I am curious: exactly what do they want gunnies in San Diego County to do in this Sheriff's election?

At some point, the negativity hurts more than it helps. Do you guys really want the San Diego Sheriffs office to be in the hands of someone who is overtly anti-CCW?

Put another way: there seems to be two candidates of note in this race, one is on the record as being pro-CCW, and the other is on the record as being anti-CCW. Do you really want the anti-CCW candidate to win this race? I mean, do we really need the anti-gun lobby in this state to feel even more powerful than they already are?

Brandon,
It is getting a bit tiresome..... seriously.....

Now, who would you support in this race, and why?

Thanks!
all the best,
Mike

You have to understand - they are just trying to be consistent in their political views - because they ALWAYS insist on a perfect candidate to support, over real politik....


NOT

.

They speak out against him because they need our money to support the CGF.

It's smelly, but understandable. If we elect pro-CCW sheriffs in SD and Orange counties then why would we support the broader CCW cause at the state level? These counties are highly populated, relatively affluent, with large #'s of gunnies and CGF/CGN contributors. They fear we won't, so they decide to attack our best candidates for CCW to keep us motivated to contribute.

With friends like this who needs enemies?
As has been the long standing question by many here when the JLS debate comes up......of the official candidates now on the ballot which is the best choice? JLS may not be perfect, but I am hard pressed to see how he's any worse then any of the others.

So if you're gonna bash a particular candidate, even if the bashing is fairly deserved, then PLEASE.....offer an alternative. Is that so much to ask?

YES.

http://images.art.com/images/products/regular/13688000/13688600.jpg

:banghead:

Not to far of a stretch to think this is the bigger picture he keeps rambling about.

Obviously. He's been asked in almost every post and has no response. Out of curiosity, am I the only one that imagines his voice being Eric Cartman's from South Park. Reminds me of the "I do what I want" attitude. It's an open forum, I can post what I want, go post somewhere else. Sorry that I came to a gun forum, to organize with other pro gunnies, to support a pro gun candidate. If you don't agree with this awesome, make your point and provide an alternative. If you don't have an alternative at least have some manners. You have successfully made a whole page of nothing. Now once again, DO YOU HAVE AN ALTERNATIVE OR DO YOU JUST LIKE READING YOUR WRITING.


These requests prompted this "real politik" thread.

Now we're getting close to the truth - this is a personal vendetta against LaSuer.

No more and no less than any gun owner and 2A advocate who is dumbfounded by Jay LaSuer's actions to create thousands of felons and ban mail order ammo since "ammo is just like wine".

Wow - there's some cogent reasons for CalGuns members and gunowners to support Duffy -the "political class" does.

Duffy is connected at the hip to public unions, and most sentient voters these days resent public unions. Duffy's plan to make jail deputies equal in pay and benefits to street deputies is a financial disaster, and won't be well received.

Wait a minute, I thought you were "real politik"? Are you asserting that Gore and Duffy's association support is not bearing on political outcomes?


Yeah - will they support Duffy who has ZERO pro-gun bonafides (is he even an NRA member?), or Gore who is anti-gun, or La Suer, who has actual pro-gun, pro-CCW bonafides?

BUT you mis-represent by implication (again) what that GOC endorsement is about - it is about telling voters that Jay is pro-gun, nothing more, nothing less. I know Jay would be proud to have the NRA endorsement and the CRPA endorsement.

If the "rules" allowed it - Jay would already have the OFFICIAL endorsement of the San Diego NRA Members Council (you know - those on-the-scene grassroots activists that are purportedly so important to NRA?)

Gore and Duffy have assumed (before your intervention) that LaSuer had the NRA endorsement wrapped up...


I didn't mis-represent GOC, CAFR, those involved, the spiderweb of people so closely-connected that they hire each other, loan each other money and create serious problems for California gun owners. That's an interesting way to prove pro-gun cred.


Lots of "ifs", wishful thinking, and spin.

If the voters across the spectrum get wind of what a JBT Gore is - he loses no matter which man is the opponent.

Gore is beatable, and Jay can win.

I'm sorry, what hard information do you have that suggests LaSuer can beat Gore in a runoff? Everything in front of me strongly suggests otherwise. Sounds like LaSuer is running on "lots of "ifs", wishful thinking, and spin."

I want to see Gore lose. The fundamental problem is that LaSuer cannot beat him, period. Duffy has a legitimate shot of keeping up in a runoff election.


Yep - and Jay would be in one or two terms - Duffy would be in for 24 years or more.

That's bad policy.

So when Jay retires/dies, what would stop another Gore from replacing him?


Jay has campaigned on many issues other than CCWs (remember Arpaio up above?) CCWs are mostly spoken of here because its a gun forum.


LaSuer success on June 8 will guarantee a public thrashing of Gore over Ruby Ridge et seq that will leave him UNELECTABLE.

.

Look at the demographics of likely voters in San Diego county. Joe Arpaio & CCWs lock up the far-far-right vote for LaSuer. Now, here's the question- what other demographic can he carry? None - he can't. Gore is strong across all party affiliations, ideologies, race, age... Duffy is polling fairly balanced also, and stronger middle-left, the voting bloc which LaSuer can't and won't touch in the urban areas. These votes will be "anything but LaArpaio", and you can default these to Gore as the safe, establishment incumbent. Only Duffy can compete where it matters to beat Gore.

And that's what this is all about. Beating Gore.

GuyW
05-10-2010, 9:49 AM
I don't see San Diego gunowners (or the members AS INDIVIDUALS of the San Diego NRA Members Council) appreciating the interference in our affairs by individuals carrying personal grudges.

....these hit pieces on Jay LaSuer will have ramifications for years.

.

The Duke
05-10-2010, 9:52 AM
If you drive down to any gun shop in San Diego, you will see who San Diego gun owners believe is THEIR candidate. It is Jay LaSuer. This is from El Cajon Gun Exchange's website http://www.elcajongun.com/:

Jay is THE ONLY candidate that will not put roadblocks between law abiding citizens and a CCW permit. More info and detail on Jay's web site!

Jay has the MOST experience of all the candidates - former Under Sheriff of San Diego County, 30 plus years LE experience! More info and detail on Jay's web site!

Jay has the best CONSERVATIVE TRACK RECORD of all the candidates - La Mesa City Council, former State Assemblyman. More info and detail on Jay's web site!

Jay is the ONLY candidate endorsed by the El cajon Gun Exchange, the California Association fo Firearms Retailers, Sheriff Joe Arpaio, and Gun Owners of California! More info and detail on Jay's web site!

And the American Shooting Center endorses and link's to Jay on their site: http://www.gotammo.com/

I'm sorry to say it but Duffy is a union rep, big government guy. I don't doubt that he'll do a great job protecting deputies, getting them good equipment, defending their retirement benefits, etc, but he is NOT the most conservative candidate and he DOES NOT have 2A credentials. I would of course prefer Duffy to Gore but La Suer is our only true candidate.

dmattix
05-10-2010, 9:56 AM
About that "grassroots" support thing:

I drive 50-100 miles a day around San Diego. In the past 6 months I've seen perhaps a total of 5 Duffy or Gore bumperstickers.

I saw more LaSuer bumperstickers than that before I got onto the freeway to start the 22 mile drive in to work this morning.

Forget the local paper Union Tribune (aka The Soviet Union Buffoon) supporting Gore. That's a net negative for Gore with demographic that's going actually get out and vote this year. Esp, the TEA partiers.

Local talk radio is full on behind La Suer. At least the ones that matter most (Roger Hedgecock, Mark Larson,...)

GuyW
05-10-2010, 10:01 AM
"Jay La Suer
Contributions: $4,349"

And if contributions remain at this level, it will be, once again, an indictment of gun owners, ala the email that Bill Hunt sent me in 2008,

"...was unable to generate enough support in the past. Especially from the 2A community considering my position on CCW's which has been public since 2005! I got virtually no financial support from them despite many promises to the contrary."

.

bwiese
05-10-2010, 10:30 AM
If you drive down to any gun shop in San Diego, you will see who San Diego gun owners believe is THEIR candidate. It is Jay LaSuer. This is from El Cajon Gun Exchange's website http://www.elcajongun.com/:

El Cajon Gun Exchange is a known collaborator with CAFR, Kathy Lynch and others using RKBA as cover.

Their endorsement means nothing (or in fact is negative).

I think it's notable that they try to mix in 'conservative' politics along with gunrights, which has proven to alienate quite a few folks from otherwise being pro-gun (or at least not being anti-gun).

wildhawker
05-10-2010, 10:37 AM
You know that LaSuer had strong union support for his run and re-election to State Assembly, right?

Do you realize that the El Cajon Gun Exchange is an extension of CAFR/GOC?

I admit that LaSuer has done an admirable job locking up the one demographic that he can carry in this election.

Federal litigation will bring CCWs to all, equally.

If you drive down to any gun shop in San Diego, you will see who San Diego gun owners believe is THEIR candidate. It is Jay LaSuer. This is from El Cajon Gun Exchange's website http://www.elcajongun.com/:

Jay is THE ONLY candidate that will not put roadblocks between law abiding citizens and a CCW permit. More info and detail on Jay's web site!

Jay has the MOST experience of all the candidates - former Under Sheriff of San Diego County, 30 plus years LE experience! More info and detail on Jay's web site!

Jay has the best CONSERVATIVE TRACK RECORD of all the candidates - La Mesa City Council, former State Assemblyman. More info and detail on Jay's web site!

Jay is the ONLY candidate endorsed by the El cajon Gun Exchange, the California Association fo Firearms Retailers, Sheriff Joe Arpaio, and Gun Owners of California! More info and detail on Jay's web site!

And the American Shooting Center endorses and link's to Jay on their site: http://www.gotammo.com/

I'm sorry to say it but Duffy is a union rep, big government guy. I don't doubt that he'll do a great job protecting deputies, getting them good equipment, defending their retirement benefits, etc, but he is NOT the most conservative candidate and he DOES NOT have 2A credentials. I would of course prefer Duffy to Gore but La Suer is our only true candidate.

"True candidates" are attractive but are at a substantial disadvantage to the incumbent; if your choice becomes LaSuer-Gore, Gore wins. The only thing you can do is try to make it a closer fight via Gore-Duffy.

bwiese
05-10-2010, 10:37 AM
....these hit pieces on Jay LaSuer will have ramifications for years.


Yes, there's a risk Jay could cost us NRA support in CA if he were backed.

Whaddya think the PR would be in the free states for someone who tried to ban magazines and create constructive possession of AWs would be regarded? Look at the negative feedback on Joaquin Jackson and multiply by 100X

And when he wanted to roll over for Kathy for the 2006 Torrico ammo bill? ("Let's put some lipstick on this pig..... it's just like mail order wine!"). We got 4+ extra years of mailorder ammo by not following LaSeur & cronies.

I could perhaps give him a "stupidity pass" on one individual item, but the conglomeration of events, behaviors, etc.

I'm unsure also why San Diegans need custom local CCWs when the whole state needs - and will get - them thru litigation, and that will happen much sooner than expected. (We're already seeing CCW issuance increases in certain NorCal areas....)

LaSeur supporters need to realize he's toast anyway.

The Duke
05-10-2010, 12:26 PM
El Cajon Gun Exchange is a known collaborator with CAFR, Kathy Lynch and others using RKBA as cover.

Their endorsement means nothing (or in fact is negative).

I think it's notable that they try to mix in 'conservative' politics along with gunrights, which has proven to alienate quite a few folks from otherwise being pro-gun (or at least not being anti-gun).

That is a very revealing statement about you Bwiese. Gun rights are one of the pillars of conservatism. It sounds like you think we would be better served trying to market pro-gun beliefs to liberals. I personally believe that is trying to sell something to a crowd that will not buy, and is hence a losing battle.

Conservatism is on the upswing this year, and by tying gun rights to conservatives, this may the best chance to install some pro-2A sheriff's around the state & country. I think you are WAY wrong to think we should be backing a more "moderate" and "inclusive" candidate. The Whitmans and Fiorinas of this world will only stab you in the back, and in a Conservative county like San Diego, 2A voters don't need to take that chance.

bwiese
05-10-2010, 12:32 PM
That is a very revealing statement about you Bwiese. Gun rights are one of the pillars of conservatism.

No, they're one of the pillars of freedom.


It sounds like you think we would be better served trying to market pro-gun beliefs to liberals. I personally believe that is trying to sell something to a crowd that will not buy, and is hence a losing battle.
I'm just saying the SD cabal has coupled gunrights to 'rightwingedness' that it disserves us certainly at the state level. The various gun orgs mentioned above use gunrights as a hook to other R issues.

If you think the gun fight will be won in CA with only R votes, you're wrong. We've seen how the R's love to lose with their stances.

Yes, conservatism is on the upswing in CA. We'll get a few more R assembly members and maybe one? two? state senators.
Bully.

The Duke
05-10-2010, 12:36 PM
Bwiese, I think your ideology is just plain broken and it's people like you that drove the republican party into the ditch. Here's what you said about Jerry Brown:



He's politically very wise and would not support a tax increase. I actually think he can control wasteful Prop 98 school spending from his side.

And here's what you said about Obama's socialist Supreme Court nominee:

We may actually be indirectly well-served by someone who has a strong scholarly background and seems to honor stare decisis.

Don't let blind dislike of a Harvard-trained possible lesbian cloud gunrights/civil rights issues.

People like you have managed to find the 'acceptable' bits in every dictatorial regime and oppressive government in history, while short circuiting the true patriots and freedom lovers who are trying to sound the alarm and return governments to their people. Keep your 'new majority', because you sir, are dangerous.

bwiese
05-10-2010, 12:51 PM
Bwiese, I think your ideology is just plain broken and it's people like you that
drove the republican party into the ditch. Here's what you said about Jerry Brown:


He's politically very wise and would not support a tax increase.
I actually think he can control wasteful Prop 98 school spending
from his side


Yup. I have zero confidence Whitman or Poizner can deal with a Dem legislature.

I'm likely a bit older than you and I remember a better California.


And here's what you said about Obama's socialist Supreme Court nominee:

We may actually be indirectly well-served by
someone who has a strong scholarly background and seems
to honor stare decisis.

Don't let blind dislike of a Harvard-trained possible lesbian cloud gunrights/civil rights issues.


My statement stands, especially:
1. R's lost the election, what else can they do? They have no control; a nomination and appointment WILL be made.
2. Any other choice on Obama's list will be worse.
3. Those were very encouraging words about Heller matters you seemed to ignore.

I'll take other smart lawyers' (Volokh, Somin, etc.) fact-based opinions about her before yours.


And, sonnyboy, my ideology is pro-gun with a realpolitik outlook.

I want to fight to win on gunrights; that's all I care about.

If the CA Republican party weren't broken by the antichoice/religionists, it would actually be a winning party and could move gunrights forward.
They chose not to win and thus chose to abandon gunrights and we have to find other supporters.

The CA Republican party has thus sacrificed gun rights to get local pols elected to safe seats who can't eventually make statewide office - and then in turn we get the Whitmans, Poizners and Schwareneggers types in place for statewide seats.

BTW, Duke, there's a lotta pro-gun lesbians out there. One of them is a plaintiff in a CGF lawsuit that will lead to your getting unencumbered CCW without having to kiss a politician's arse.

The Duke
05-10-2010, 1:04 PM
Bwiese, your analysis may be right and it may be wrong. I'm not saying it isn't a well thought out position. But I'm glad you spelled all this out. I consider myself a principled conservative. You make very clear that you want to win, but that you are also neither principled nor conservative.

So when you ring your endorsement of Duffy, I just want all the readers on the fence to know where you're coming from, and if you get your way, what our next generation of leaders...the leaders who grab back power from the Obama democrats, will look like. Enjoy.

berto
05-10-2010, 1:19 PM
Gun rights are one of the pillars of conservatism. It sounds like you think we would be better served trying to market pro-gun beliefs to liberals. I personally believe that is trying to sell something to a crowd that will not buy, and is hence a losing battle.

Conservatism is on the upswing this year, and by tying gun rights to conservatives, this may the best chance to install some pro-2A sheriff's around the state & country. I think you are WAY wrong to think we should be backing a more "moderate" and "inclusive" candidate. The Whitmans and Fiorinas of this world will only stab you in the back, and in a Conservative county like San Diego, 2A voters don't need to take that chance.

We'd be better served removing the 2A fight from the left/right battlefield entirely. The right to keep and bear arms is a fundamental civil right that shouldn't depend on which way the electoral wind blows.

Linking the 2A fight to an increasingly irrelevant republican party in CA has yielded squat in the 18 years I've been eligible to vote. How many republicans hold statewide office? (hint: you can't count Arnie if you're going to call him a RINO) What's the trend been the past two decades? Why are the viable candidates for statewide office squarely on the so called RINO side of the ledger? Where is this wellspring of true conservative voters uniting behind some savior?

The conservative San Diego isn't quite so conservative when the coastal areas and the southern part of the county are considered. Some voters in those areas might be up for grabs. I remember Brian Bilbray being panned for not being conservative enough.

loather
05-10-2010, 1:58 PM
...and in a Conservative county like San Diego, 2A voters don't need to take that chance.

You're sorely mistaken if you think San Diego County is a red county. As with most of the rest of the urbanized counties in the state, it's about as blue as they come.

dwtt
05-10-2010, 2:12 PM
[B]
If Gore runs a good campaign and splits the middle-right vote, Gore wins outright. If LaSuer and Gore face off in a runoff election, Gore wins (likely in a landslide). If Duffy and Gore face off in a runoff election, Duffy has a reasonable chance of winning if he fundraises well, runs a solid campaign and the LaSuer voters move his way.

This is looking like the Roberti fiasco all over again. You guys remember, don't you? How one of the gun groups split the opposition to Roberti and allow that fat slob to be re-elected to office.

wildhawker
05-10-2010, 2:34 PM
It's a bit disconcerting to hear so many personal attacks against me and others for providing the information that was requested of me.

LaSuer is not in a position to beat Gore. If that (a Gore loss) is the goal, and it should be, then LaSuer supporters need to get pragmatic about the race very very quickly.

N6ATF
05-10-2010, 2:40 PM
So, the campaign that has spent the most on signs and bumper stickers (judging by their presence overwhelming all other candidates') will lose, so horribly that it's as if they had never spent a dime to begin with?

Alaric
05-10-2010, 3:27 PM
Look at the demographics of likely voters in San Diego county. Joe Arpaio & CCWs lock up the far-far-right vote for LaSuer. Now, here's the question- what other demographic can he carry? None - he can't. Gore is strong across all party affiliations, ideologies, race, age... Duffy is polling fairly balanced also, and stronger middle-left, the voting bloc which LaSuer can't and won't touch in the urban areas. These votes will be "anything but LaArpaio", and you can default these to Gore as the safe, establishment incumbent. Only Duffy can compete where it matters to beat Gore.

This is a falsehood. According to the county registrar of voters (http://www.sdcounty.ca.gov/voters/Eng/reports/current_reg_report.pdf), Republicans and Libertarians as a block could easily elect LaSuer, especially when you take into account that Duffy and Gore are likely to split the liberal and moderate votes.

I don't see San Diego gunowners (or the members AS INDIVIDUALS of the San Diego NRA Members Council) appreciating the interference in our affairs by individuals carrying personal grudges.

....these hit pieces on Jay LaSuer will have ramifications for years.

.

We will not forget how this went down.

Yes, there's a risk Jay could cost us NRA support in CA if he were backed.

Whaddya think the PR would be in the free states for someone who tried to ban magazines and create constructive possession of AWs would be regarded? Look at the negative feedback on Joaquin Jackson and multiply by 100X

Surely you forget that NRA has consistently rated Jay an A+ (http://www.nrapvf.org/ELECTIONS/State.aspx?y=2004&State=CA#STATE ASSEMBLY) as recently as 2004. What problem would any gunny have with an A+ NRA rated candidate?

I'm unsure also why San Diegans need custom local CCWs when the whole state needs - and will get - them thru litigation, and that will happen much sooner than expected. (We're already seeing CCW issuance increases in certain NorCal areas....)

LaSeur supporters need to realize he's toast anyway.

Don't count your chickens before they hatch Bill. We still have a system dependent on the CCW issuance policies of local law enforcement officials. Sure, your CGF suit might change that, or it might not. It might change if for about 5 minutes before the state legislature figures out another way to restrict issuance as well.

You're sorely mistaken if you think San Diego County is a red county. As with most of the rest of the urbanized counties in the state, it's about as blue as they come.

Wrong. SD is still a red county in many ways. For instance, it was one of only a handful of urban coastal counties in CA to go for Bush over Kerry in 2004 (http://www.uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/state.php?f=0&fips=6&year=2004).

It's a bit disconcerting to hear so many personal attacks against me and others for providing the information that was requested of me.

LaSuer is not in a position to beat Gore. If that (a Gore loss) is the goal, and it should be, then LaSuer supporters need to get pragmatic about the race very very quickly.

I thought your goal was to insure LaSuer doesn't win.

So which is more important to you Brandon, Gore not winning or LaSuer not winning?

Seeing as how the vast majority of gunnies in SD County support LaSuer, wouldn't it make more sense to get behind him if the goal is really to defeat Gore?

eaglemike
05-10-2010, 3:39 PM
It's a bit disconcerting to hear so many personal attacks against me and others for providing the information that was requested of me.

LaSuer is not in a position to beat Gore. If that (a Gore loss) is the goal, and it should be, then LaSuer supporters need to get pragmatic about the race very very quickly.
Brandon,
I don't see any personal attacks here.
I think the style of communication might be hurting your cause (just my opinion). Too many posts in a row, no room for discussion - more of a bludgeon.......

I'm still looking into the information you presented before making up my mind. Thanks you again for the information.

I think it is very reasonable to ask you for an alternative given the vehemence and repetition of your attacks on JLS. I would think you would even welcome the request - I'm open to evaluating your choice of candidate if it looks like they're better for the community.

all the best,
Mike

gravedigger
05-10-2010, 4:34 PM
Plan A: Elect Jay LaSuer Sheriff. Move out of Commiefornia.

Plan B: Move out of Commiefornia.

I win either way!

GuyW
05-10-2010, 6:32 PM
Jay LaSuer makes significant claims to support gun rights and is a self-described shall-issue CCW candidate; however, his legislative history makes this suspect.

You continue to ignore the first person testimonials here on CalGuns that Jay La Suer, as a La Mesa City Councilman, drafted, introduced, and got passed, an ordinance to make La Mesa start issuing CCWs.

Straight up - are you calling us all liars?




No, I'm simply highlighting his record as a legislator. I have no doubt Mr. LaSuer was a friendly candidate in the past, but his actions as Assemblyman were....

BS - you are dismissing all of the independant testimony about his pro-CCW activities in La Mesa. The issue for us in San Diego is CCWs, not ancient legislative battles.

He is pro-CCW, has been pro-CCW, and will remain pro-CCW.

.

mike_schwartz@mail.com
05-10-2010, 6:32 PM
The purpose of this post is to talk about facts when it comes to the race for Sheriff in San Diego County. Not personal agenda or opinion….facts. I have been researching this race for over a year now and have gotten to know each of the candidates on a first name basis (including Ruff and Bejarano before they left the race). I’ve met with, had lunch with, formally interviewed, and informally conversed with LaSuer, Duffy, and Gore on more than one occasion. I’ve been to 4 of their debates. Everything I will tell you about these candidates is from conversations I’ve had with them or things I’ve heard them say while present at a debate. You already know about the Ruby Ridge and 9/11 terrorist stuff with Gore so I will leave that out.

Here is a list of facts:

Jay LaSuer:
•NRA Member (and he sees to it each family member is too)
•Pro CCW and will issue using “personal protection” as “good cause”. Issuing CCWs is a major part of his platform as Sheriff.
•Pro CCW as a La Mesa City Council Member and tried to pass a measure allowing La Mesa to issue CCWs.
•“A” rated as an Assemblyman from 2000 to 2006 (even after he killed his own “watered-down” version of the AWB in 2000.)
•Active in Lemon Grove Rod and Gun Club, very well respected by members and leadership
•Mentors at “Women on Target” clinics without mentioning he is running for office.
•Attends Friends of the NRA Dinners (usually as a sponsor)
•Completely against recently proposed regulations by the Sheriff to the County Board regarding shooting ranges and said if elected they will all “disappear”
•Against the California “assault” weapon ban and voted against it as an Assemblyman
•Endorsed by Rick Amato, iCaucus, Sheriff Arpaio, Sheriff Mack, El Cajon Gun Exchange, On Target Radio, Rick Roberts, Roger Hedgecock, Duncan Hunter, Duncan D Hunter, Dennis Hollingsworth, Gun Owners Of America
•Believes the Supreme Court made the right decision on Heller vs. D.C. and wants them to incorporate it against the states in MacDonald vs. Chicago.
•He would help support gun owners by issuing CCWs, voicing his concerns for anti-gun legislation, and by not emphasizing enforcement of AWB laws; rather enforcement of violent crimes and property crimes (robbery, etc).
•Proposed an assault weapon ban that the NRA strongly opposed. Mr. LaSuer contends that it was an attempt to “water down” the current ban and he points out he killed it himself before it even got out of committee. The main difference in his bill and the current ban is that the possession of all magazines that hold over 10 rounds and the definition of an “assault weapon” would be any rifle that has a magazine with over 10 rounds in it. The NRA came out strongly against this legislation.
•In 2004 proposed AB448 to overturn the CA AWB.

William “Bill” Gore:
•Not an NRA member
•Will “maintain the current policy of issuing a CCWs” and will not issue a CCW to a law abiding citizen “just because they want one”. Will only issue to “victims of crimes like rape” or “if, say, a business owners needs one on the job”.
•Is not a member of any gun clubs or shooting related clubs.
•Not an NRA member.
•Says he likes some of the safety and education programs from the NRA, but that is where his beliefs and the NRA’s beliefs “part ways”.
•Was Under Sheriff and Sheriff during the time the proposal for changing San Diego County regulations for gun ranges was produced and proposed. He was aware and involved. Had the regulatiosn not been stopped, they would have passed and they would have put onerous regulations of all ranges in the unincorporated San Diego County.
•Is in favor of the current “assault” weapon ban in California
•When asked what I can tell the gun community about his views he answered “tell them it is not the only issue when running for sheriff”.
•Endorsed by California Narcotics Officers’ Assoc, California Peace Officers; Assoc., San Diego County Police Chief’s and Sheriff’s Association
•Disagrees with Heller vs. D.C. “I am not a guy who thinks just anyone should have a gun”
•Currently being sued by Chuck Michel’s office over his CCW policy.
Jim Duffy:
•NRA member
•Pro CCW and will issue using “personal protection” as good cause, but will conduct an interview before issuing. He has promised the CCW application/interview process will also have an appeal process in place in case someone is turned down.
•As president of the Deputy Sheriff Association he fought in court for the ability for off-duty law enforcement officers to be able to carry their weapon concealed while off-duty at the San Diego County Fair at Del Mar.
•Very helpful in fighting Sheriff’s proposal to the County regarding the change in shooting and shooting range regulations as well as providing feedback for our re-write.
•Against the California “assault” weapon ban
•Endorsed by DSA, Chula Vista Police Association, many southern California law enforcement organizations.
•Believes the Supreme Court made the right decision on Heller vs. D.C. and will do the same in MacDonald vs. Chicago.
•He would support gun owners by stopping proposal to the County to restrict shooting and protecting the process by which he issues CCWs from state interference.
•No involvement in any NRA related programs or training.


The bullet points offered above are facts. Now my opinion: don’t vote for Gore. Appointed Sheriff Gore will make it through the primary, I am pretty sure. Vote for whoever is his opponent. Between Duffy and LaSuer, after looking at the facts, I know who I am voting for. I will wait and follow what the NRA says and not issue an endorsement or recommendation from me personally. Just do not vote for Gore.

Too many gun advocates on this message board are pushing some kind of personal agenda. They have chosen to trash gun advocates like LaSuer without bothering to look at all the facts. In March I offered to inform two prominent calgunners on the other candidates in this race because these two calgunners post frequently against LaSuer. The idea behind reaching out to them being that they sounded like a broken record bashing LaSuer and I knew I had no shot of convincing them to support LaSuer so at least I could give them enough knowledge on the other candidates so they could start to promote or attack other candidates and back off of LaSuer. Both of them refused. My conclusion is they have an anti LaSuer agenda and no real interest in spending 10 minutes hearing first hand knowledge of the candidates. They are not interested in the race, just bashing LaSuer.

I honestly cannot think of many gun enthusiasts who do not support Jay LaSuer in this race. Even the trusted CRPA board member mentioned by Wildhawker who endorses Duffy told me he does not think ill of LaSuer, but prefers Duffy. Amazingly, nobody who actually lives in San Diego is bashing LaSuer. That says a lot.

It doesn’t matter who you like or dislike or who they like or dislike. What matters is what they think about the Second Amendment. I am not trying to halt all healthy debate. Debate is good. But what has gone on when it comes to Jay LaSuer on calguns has not been healthy and has not been debate. If you are engaged in this, you are harming the cause, not advancing it.

We have to stop attacking each other. Do you think the Brady org is sitting around trashing each other for not being anti-gun enough? No. Too many times our community has no problem trashing their own and doing it publicly. We need leadership. True leadership. We need involvement. Meaningful and effective activism.

A good friend of mine whose life’s work is gun rights tells me “we are the good guys so we don’t have to use dirty tactics”. I believe him.


-Michael

“Know your friends, know your enemies, know the difference” – Joel Friedman, NRA Board Member. (He didn’t make it up, but he was the first person I ever heard say it and it stuck with me.)

Alaric
05-10-2010, 7:15 PM
Hallellujah Mike, great post.

Alaric
05-10-2010, 7:23 PM
One more item about why so many of us are supporting JLS, that has nothing to do with guns, but rather illegal immigration. From Jay's web site:

Should Local Law Enforcement Enforce Illegal Immigration Laws?

America is a huge family and has flourished for well over 200 years. The branches of our family tree reflect that our family members come from all parts of the world and compose all or nearly all religions, ethnicities and races and at the base of these branches is a sturdy trunk where we all come together as Americans. America has always experienced internal problems but like the majority of families we have always come together as one in times of crisis. Americans of all colors, creeds and religions have fought, bled and more times than we as a nation like, died for the freedom that we as Americans cherish and enjoy. People from throughout the world look to America as a shining light of freedom.

The freedom of our nation and our communities is based on the rule of law. Just as our armed forces protect us from foreign aggression our law enforcement officers, federal, state and local are charged with the responsibility of keeping our citizens free from crime. American has a right to expect that all of our laws are enforced and that law enforcement, at all levels, does not selectively enforce the laws of our nation, state and communities. When “Political Correctness” dictates what laws are not enforced we are no longer a nation of laws, we are a nation which has lost its’ moral bearings.

In California our state is facing a crisis in our prisons from over crowding. It is estimated that in fiscal year 2002 that of criminals sentenced under federal guidelines 36% were non-citizens and 55% of the non-citizens were in our nation illegally. Illegal aliens enter America from all of our borders, North, South, East and West.. In 2004 over 23,000 individuals with criminal histories were apprehended by the U.S. Border Patrol trying to enter the United States illegally. That figure reflects only the number who were apprehended, we have no way of knowing how many other illegal aliens with criminal histories entered America without being apprehended.

Illegal immigration is more than a national security problem; it is also very much a question of personal and family security and safety. The San Diego Union Tribune reported in an article in their December 4, 2008, edition that “Mexico’s death toll from drug violence has soared above 4,000 so far this year, and drug-related murders and kidnappings are spilling over the U.S. border as well." The same article relates that “President Felipe Calderon has said more than half of state and local police can’t be trusted, and federal ranks are rife with corruption.” If we are to stop the murders and kidnappings that are spilling over the U.S. border than local law enforcement must work with federal authorities.

It has been said by many that San Diego County is in fact a “Sanctuary County”, a county which looks the other way and practices very little cooperation with federal law enforcement to stem the flow of persons entering our nation illegally. Who does the public look to when elected officials fail to see the “elephant” of illegal immigration in our county? It has been reported that illegal immigration in California has cost the taxpayers of our state approximately $9 billion per year. Neither the State of California nor you or I can afford this expense any longer.

Law enforcement cannot stop illegal immigration by “painting with a broad brush”. It is obvious, even to the casual observer, that illegal immigration cannot be tied to race. Illegal entry into this nation and this state involves peoples of all races, colors and creeds. Law enforcement must also come to the realization that enforcing the law is neither racist nor does it reflect bigotry. Apprehending all criminals and proactive practices of preventing crime is their core responsibility whether they are federal, state or local law enforcement. All law enforcement officers when first sworn into office took an oath to “Protect and Defend the Constitution of The United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic”.

Local law enforcement must communicate and cooperate with federal law enforcement on a daily basis. Such a practice is a simple step towards achieving the goal of protecting the public. As sheriff I will work closely with federal law enforcement authorities to stop the problems we are currently experiencing.

Grakken
05-10-2010, 7:58 PM
Thanks for your post (OP) Wildhawker.

So if it is Gore vs Lasuer for Sheriff, who would you vote for?

Bweise? Wildhawker? Hoffmang?

dwtt
05-10-2010, 8:03 PM
[ Much Deleted ]

Too many gun advocates on this message board are pushing some kind of personal agenda. They have chosen to trash gun advocates like LaSuer without bothering to look at all the facts. In March I offered to inform two prominent calgunners on the other candidates in this race because these two calgunners post frequently against LaSuer. The idea behind reaching out to them being that they sounded like a broken record bashing LaSuer and I knew I had no shot of convincing them to support LaSuer so at least I could give them enough knowledge on the other candidates so they could start to promote or attack other candidates and back off of LaSuer. Both of them refused. My conclusion is they have an anti LaSuer agenda and no real interest in spending 10 minutes hearing first hand knowledge of the candidates. They are not interested in the race, just bashing LaSuer.

Did you remember what happened when gun owners in CA tried to get Roberti of Roos-Roberti fame voted out of office? Am I the only one old enough to remember this?
What I see Wildhawker saying is that LaSuer is not a viable candidate to win the election, and throwing gun owners votes behind someone who doesn't have a broad base of support will end up hurting all gun owners by allowing an anti-gun candidate win. I don't know if his arguments are valid or if there are holes in his analysis, but I do know from what I've seen in the past, diehard gun owners can waste their votes on an idealogue instead of backing a viable candidate, with the result that an incumbent gun banner is reelected.

hoffmang
05-10-2010, 8:23 PM
-Michael

“Know your friends, know your enemies, know the difference” – Joel Friedman, NRA Board Member. (He didn’t make it up, but he was the first person I ever heard say it and it stuck with me.)

Michael,

Have you read what Joel Friedman had to say about Jay LaSuer here on Calguns.net? A hint: Joel doesn't consider Mr. LaSuer a friend...

-Gene

Scarecrow Repair
05-10-2010, 10:07 PM
Straight up - are you calling us all liars?

Oh, knock it off. You're the one calling everybody else liars. It gets tiring after a few repetitions.

gravedigger
05-10-2010, 10:08 PM
What I see Wildhawker saying is that LaSuer is not a viable candidate to win the election, and throwing gun owners votes behind someone who doesn't have a broad base of support will end up hurting all gun owners by allowing an anti-gun candidate win.That is the logic that gave us Arnold, the RINO. "Don't vote for Hunter! He doesn't have a chance! If you don't vote for Ah-nold, his opponent will win!..." and we got ... ARNOLD SWARZENEGGAR.

Choice:

Gore - No way in Hell
Duffy - lukewarm support
LaSuer - My choice!

I love how people always tell others, "Don't vote for the guy you like! He won't win! Vote for the guy you sort of like, so you don't get the guy you don't like!"

This is still America. I'm voting for the man I like. If Gore wins, so be it. He will let southern Commiefornia turn into another Detroit, and the next election will give us a pro-CCW candidate. The pendulum swings in BOTH directions.

Gray Peterson
05-10-2010, 10:26 PM
This is still America. I'm voting for the man I like. If Gore wins, so be it. He will let southern Commiefornia turn into another Detroit, and the next election will give us a pro-CCW candidate. The pendulum swings in BOTH directions.

Not in California.

2009_gunner
05-10-2010, 11:29 PM
Not in California.

ha ha. so true.

jdberger
05-11-2010, 12:23 AM
<snip>



Surely you forget that NRA has consistently rated Jay an A+ (http://www.nrapvf.org/ELECTIONS/State.aspx?y=2004&State=CA#STATE ASSEMBLY) as recently as 2004. What problem would any gunny have with an A+ NRA rated candidate?




Just checking your political compass to see if it points true north.

Does the above bolded statement mean that you would vote for Harry Reid if you could? He's in a pretty tight election. Maybe you could kick him a couple of bucks. .....

Just checking...... :)

GuyW
05-11-2010, 9:31 AM
Oh, knock it off. You're the one calling everybody else liars. It gets tiring after a few repetitions.

Post where I called anyone a liar in this thread

.

Grakken
05-11-2010, 9:34 AM
How come no one will answer my question? because there is a good chance it will be Jay L Vs Gore...

Alaric
05-11-2010, 10:48 AM
Just checking your political compass to see if it points true north.

Does the above bolded statement mean that you would vote for Harry Reid if you could? He's in a pretty tight election. Maybe you could kick him a couple of bucks. .....

Just checking...... :)

In 2004 (last time Reid was reelected to the Senate), he was rated a 'B' by the NRA. His Republican opponent Ziser was rated 'A' by the NRA. So, if I were to base my decision solely upon NRA ratings - which I do not - then I would've voted for Ziser.

Are you saying that we should just ignore NRA candidate grades altogether?

ned946
05-11-2010, 10:52 AM
ha ha. so true.

nice avatar! :D

wildhawker
05-11-2010, 11:01 AM
We should remember that much has transpired since 2004. I am curious myself as to how the candidates will be graded.

Grakken, LaSuer cannot beat Gore. Polling 3 weeks from now will likely show duffy pulling ahead; the real questions to ask are:

* Who is LaSuer's pollster and what do his internal numbers show?

* What are city voters' responses to LaSuer's policy positions re illegals/Arpaio?

* Do the voters feel Gore has been an acceptable Sheriff? What would cause them to consider voting for an alternative?

* In a LaSuer/Gore runoff, who would they be more likely to vote for?

Someone close to JLS may have a better idea of what the closed door conversations have been lately. There has to be something that tells them they can beat Gore, but I'm afraid such evidence just doesn't exists in public at this point. That being said, when are LaSuer's big money supporters going to juice up the desperately-needed COH and who are they?

Alaric
05-11-2010, 11:19 AM
Brandon, I think the mistake you're making in your analysis is focusing too much on the City of San Diego, rather than the county as a whole. Looking at the city, it is largely urban, liberal, and "diverse" coastal California politics as usual. Sure, JLS is going to have problems carrying much of the vote there (outside of Rancho Bernardo and a few other more conservative parts of town).

Now looking at the county as a whole, it suddenly becomes much more conservative, white, affluent, even libertarian in it's politics. Keep in mind, the population of the city is less than half the total for the county as a whole.

City of San Dieg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Diego)o population: 1,359,132
County of San Diego (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Diego_county) population: 3,222,466

Jay will carry rural county areas, the north county cities (Escondido, San Marcos, Vista), east county, and basically everywhere that isn't the urban or coastal center of the county. These places don't get as much attention, including polling, as pollsters tend to concentrate on what they deem to be representative, diverse and trend setting areas. In other words, urban areas.

Now, if Duffy can turn out his union supporters as he threatens to do, he could give Jay a little surprise. However, primaries tend to have lower turnout among more liberal voters (Union voters included), so that's not a sure thing.

wildhawker
05-11-2010, 11:25 AM
Alaric, what polls are showing that JLS carries 50% of the county pop via non-CitySD voters? I see Gore polling strongly and balanced enough to grossly diminish the value of the non-city vote for JLS.

jdberger
05-11-2010, 11:34 AM
In 2004 (last time Reid was reelected to the Senate), he was rated a 'B' by the NRA. His Republican opponent Ziser was rated 'A' by the NRA. So, if I were to base my decision solely upon NRA ratings - which I do not - then I would've voted for Ziser.

Are you saying that we should just ignore NRA candidate grades altogether?

Ignore them altogether? No. But you asked:

What problem would any gunny have with an A+ NRA rated candidate?

One I can think of is that they might be non-electable.

Reid beat Ziser by a margin of 61 to 35 points in 2004 in a state that Bush won.

And the next year Reid "was instrumental in Senate passage twice and eventual enactment into law in 2005 of the Protection ofLawful Commerce in Arms Act which shut down lawsuits against gun manufacturers and dealers attempting to hold them liable for the criminal misuse fIrearms by otbers." according to the NRA. (http://media.lasvegassun.com/media/pdfs/blogs/documents/2009/07/15/Reid_-_NRA_Letter.pdf)

I'll take a B who can get stuff done over an A+ who can't find his friggin shoelaces any day. ;)

If anyone is missing Wildhawker's point, that was it.....

Alaric
05-11-2010, 12:21 PM
Alaric, what polls are showing that JLS carries 50% of the county pop via non-CitySD voters? I see Gore polling strongly and balanced enough to grossly diminish the value of the non-city vote for JLS.

None, but that's my point. The polls don't accurately reflect the county as a whole, they focus more on the city. If we get a large rural conservative turnout and a low urban liberal turnout (as is usually the case in primary elections) then JLS will likely fare far better than the polls show him doing. This is informed speculation of course, but we'll find out soon enough.

...
I'll take a B who can get stuff done over an A+ who can't find his friggin shoelaces any day. ;)

If anyone is missing Wildhawker's point, that was it.....

JLS has a long record of service in law enforcement, local and state politics. Jim Duffy has a record in law enforcement and a short run as CoS for a county supe. Jay can fall back on his political and LEO experience, his contacts, connections, and network to inform and assist him in his duties as Sheriff. Duffy can call his dad and beg for advice. Or not, since the late sheriff John Duffy is now deceased, RIP.

Duffy has the endorsement of the Latino American Political Association of San Diego due to his weak stance on immigration. JLS has the endorsement of Joe Arpaio and other proponents of strong immigration reform.

So, thanks for your input and suggestions, but my fellow San Diegans and I would prefer to vote for our best candidate for Sheriff - Jay LaSuer.

eaglemike
05-11-2010, 2:48 PM
It is a very interesting situation. My shop is down in Barrio Logan. For those not familiar with San Diego, this isn't a terrific part of town, although it is near Petco Park, just off the 5 freeway.

The trolley runs outside my door - and there are 3 JLS signs easily visible here. (no, I didn't put them up). I don't see any Duffy signs........ This might get JLS some votes.

I'm also pretty sure most people in this area aren't really informed. I'm also not sure how many of them vote. :) Fair number of homeless, lots of un-insured drivers, too. (no, I'm not really guessing, got the RT hit by one a few years ago).
all the best,
Mike

TKM
05-11-2010, 7:16 PM
As much as I like being told that my ideas are stupid because lots of people believe otherwise, I still believe that Sheriff Jay is the best candidate in the race.

This is my vote. There are many like it, but this one is mine.

ENVYGREEN
05-11-2010, 8:59 PM
Jay for the win! I saw one duffy sign today, And a ton of Jay stickers and signs...

Gray Peterson
05-11-2010, 11:06 PM
You continue to ignore the first person testimonials here on CalGuns that Jay La Suer, as a La Mesa City Councilman, drafted, introduced, and got passed, an ordinance to make La Mesa start issuing CCWs.

I checked the La Mesa ordinances and don't find such a law. Can you clarify please?

tango-52
05-12-2010, 5:27 AM
You continue to ignore the first person testimonials here on CalGuns that Jay La Suer, as a La Mesa City Councilman, drafted, introduced, and got passed, an ordinance to make La Mesa start issuing CCWs.

I checked the La Mesa ordinances and don't find such a law. Can you clarify please?

Unfortunately, the ordinance did not pass. I was at that council meeting when the vote went 3-2 against Jay's proposed ordinance.

GuyW
05-12-2010, 8:45 AM
Unfortunately, the ordinance did not pass. I was at that council meeting when the vote went 3-2 against Jay's proposed ordinance.

Yes - less than clear fact pattern on my part.

The Ordinance Jay brought forward passed on the first vote, 3-2.

A mandatory second vote is taken 30 days later, usually via consent agenda.

By this time a weak-minded councilman had been leaned-on by the anti's and changed his vote.

I would appreciate Tango-52 verifying this sequence of events.
.

tango-52
05-12-2010, 9:02 AM
Yes - less than clear fact pattern on my part.

The Ordinance Jay brought forward passed on the first vote, 3-2.

A second vote is taken 30 days later, usually via consent agenda.

By this time a weak-minded councilman had been leaned-on by the anti's and changed his vote.

I would appreciate Tango-52 verifying this sequence of events.
.

You are correct. It was the second vote that failed. I went to that meeting prepared to celebrate its final approval, and was very disappointed by the weakness of that other council member.

AEC1
05-12-2010, 9:40 AM
I have been following this thread and all the JLS threads over the last 6 months or so. I support jay, and have maxed out my donations already. I know that he gets alot of airplay on 760 as a guest of Rick Roberts, who is the #1 local talk radio in San Diego.

In recient months I have come to realize that a large percentage of this forum is very liberal in all areas except guns. This is ok with me. However as with the current SCOTUS case some are more concerned with the side issues that can be argued from the gun issue then with the gun issue itself. That is ok to. Just realize that when entering these debates guns may not be the #1 issue being argued, and the passion that we see here is based on other agendas.

wildhawker
05-12-2010, 12:21 PM
I think one would be foolish to make assumptions about the personal political and ideological views of those who post on these boards.

Many mistake a pragmatic approach to gun rights - our cause and the purpose of these forums - as some sort of failure to reconcile with a comprehensive "patriotism indices".

Liberty transcends political party affiliation, and, sometimes, personal policy preferences. The choice to empower and support the former often appears as a divergence from the latter; outside the context of personal knowledge, there is simply not enough information present online to make any accurate predictions of propensities.

I have been following this thread and all the JLS threads over the last 6 months or so. I support jay, and have maxed out my donations already. I know that he gets alot of airplay on 760 as a guest of Rick Roberts, who is the #1 local talk radio in San Diego.

In recient months I have come to realize that a large percentage of this forum is very liberal in all areas except guns. This is ok with me. However as with the current SCOTUS case some are more concerned with the side issues that can be argued from the gun issue then with the gun issue itself. That is ok to. Just realize that when entering these debates guns may not be the #1 issue being argued, and the passion that we see here is based on other agendas.

AEC1
05-12-2010, 12:37 PM
Wow, more big words then my public high school education can comprehend. So I will just feel like i have been put back in my place and carry on.

Please dont try and explain it to me. I am happy with it as is. Once explained I will probably just get angry and start an uneducated flame war that I have no chance of winning...

Also are you fixing a roof, if not what is the latter for?

wildhawker
05-12-2010, 12:49 PM
Before you go further than you already have, note that my highest completed grade level of education is actually probably less than almost everyone here - not that it matters, but if you are going to attempt to use schooling and "big words" as a personal attack to avoid responding to the substantive portion of my reply you might be surprised that it, too, will fail you.

Wow, more big words then my public high school education can comprehend. So I will just feel like i have been put back in my place and carry on.

Please dont try and explain it to me. I am happy with it as is. Once explained I will probably just get angry and start an uneducated flame war that I have no chance of winning...

Also are you fixing a roof, if not what is the latter for?

AEC1
05-12-2010, 12:53 PM
huh?

GuyW
05-12-2010, 6:04 PM
I think one would be foolish to make assumptions about the personal political and ideological views of those who post on these boards.

Many mistake a pragmatic approach to gun rights - our cause and the purpose of these forums - as some sort of failure to reconcile with a comprehensive "patriotism indices".

Liberty transcends political party affiliation, and, sometimes, personal policy preferences. The choice to empower and support the former often appears as a divergence from the latter; outside the context of personal knowledge, there is simply not enough information present online to make any accurate predictions of propensities.

Nah, no mistake - some of us know or suspect that there's sometimes hidden agendas and hypocrisy offered under the rubrik of "a pragmatic approach to gun rights", and calls 'em as we sees 'em....

.

wildhawker
05-12-2010, 6:47 PM
Nah, no mistake - some of us know or suspect that there's sometimes hidden agendas and hypocrisy offered under the rubrik of "a pragmatic approach to gun rights", and calls 'em as we sees 'em....

.

Guy, care to offer what those might be?

I'm growing tired of your underhanded remarks. Have the courtesy and fortitude to speak plainly or move on from your name calling and unsubstantiated digs.

I was asked for my honest analysis and I gave it to you. Would you return the favor and be forthcoming instead of playing games with your insults and smear tactics? I'm in no way connected to any campaign for SD Sheriff - simply an unpaid volunteer working for this community - no more, no less.

Who here has the hidden agenda?

hoffmang
05-12-2010, 8:01 PM
huh?

I think Wildhawker may have been hinting to you that he didn't complete high school in the usual method.

-Gene

akzl
05-12-2010, 8:15 PM
I have been following this thread and all the JLS threads over the last 6 months or so. I support jay, and have maxed out my donations already. I know that he gets alot of airplay on 760 as a guest of Rick Roberts, who is the #1 local talk radio in San Diego.

In recient months I have come to realize that a large percentage of this forum is very liberal in all areas except guns. This is ok with me. However as with the current SCOTUS case some are more concerned with the side issues that can be argued from the gun issue then with the gun issue itself. That is ok to. Just realize that when entering these debates guns may not be the #1 issue being argued, and the passion that we see here is based on other agendas.

+1 Well said! Thanks for an interesting take from another resident that will be actually voting in the election that this thread concerns.................

mike_schwartz@mail.com
05-12-2010, 9:08 PM
Wow. This thread has degenerated significantly.

Two things:
1) One of my facts was wrong. Jay LaSuer introduced his “watered down” replacement for the AWB in his last term in the assembly. I stated that he was still “A” rated after authoring this bill and that is not true. My apologies. It was not and is never my intention to mislead.
2) Get off this message board and go help a candidate win! We’ve done enough pontificating. The time to act is NOW. Go find a pro-gun candidate and volunteer. Host a coffee to introduce him to your friends. Give him money. Walk a precinct for him to drop off material. Posting on this board won’t help a single pro-gun candidate get elected.

Listen to the NRA and join your local Members’ Council.


-Michael

Kestryll
05-12-2010, 9:17 PM
Just checking your political compass to see if it points true north.

Does the above bolded statement mean that you would vote for Harry Reid if you could? He's in a pretty tight election. Maybe you could kick him a couple of bucks. .....

Just checking...... :)

Well, apparently Bill Wiese would vote for Reid.

Which direction does Bill's political compass point?

What worries me is that in NV, Harry Reid has been the gun owner's friend on a NATIONAL basis - he helped drive PLCAA, which saved the 2nd Amendment. (You can't really have an enforced right without a thriving commerce to support it: one side bolsters the other). PLCAA backs Heller & derivatives and vice versa.

Not quite; the NRA principle is to always support your friends and keep them elected as a reward for continued good behavior.
Reid's pretty much earned a Lifetime Achievement Award for his shepherding and stewardship of PLCAA.


I point this out only because I find it interesting to see Harry Reid used negatively in this thread to question one person and in another as a positive to someone else.

Definitely intriguing.

Foulball
05-12-2010, 11:07 PM
Definitely intriguing.

This whole damn thread is intriguing...

--

Foulball
05-12-2010, 11:07 PM
I think Wildhawker may have been hinting to you that he didn't complete high school in the usual method.

-Gene

That makes two of us. lol

--

AEC1
05-13-2010, 7:18 AM
I assure you that I did complete high school in the usuall way. I may not be well educated or well spoken (written) but in the school of life I assure you I hold multiple phd's...

missiondude
05-13-2010, 7:37 AM
Wow. This thread has degenerated significantly.

Two things:
1) One of my facts was wrong. Jay LaSuer introduced his “watered down” replacement for the AWB in his last term in the assembly. I stated that he was still “A” rated after authoring this bill and that is not true. My apologies. It was not and is never my intention to mislead.
2) Get off this message board and go help a candidate win! We’ve done enough pontificating. The time to act is NOW. Go find a pro-gun candidate and volunteer. Host a coffee to introduce him to your friends. Give him money. Walk a precinct for him to drop off material. Posting on this board won’t help a single pro-gun candidate get elected.

Listen to the NRA and join your local Members’ Council.


-Michael

Mike posted this response at 10:00 PM last night, right after he got back from the NRA's members council meeting. For all you San Diego guys with so much passion, try attending a meeting... Mike would get you signed up on a political action committee where you could put your passion into action for the candidate of your choice. I doubt there is one for Gore supporters, as there were none present... Both Duffy and Jay have spoken at San Diego NRA members council meetings, and if you can take any pol at face value, there is alot to like with either. Just make sure that we at least get to the runoff election by keeping Gore under 50%.

AEC1
05-13-2010, 7:40 AM
Mike posted this response at 10:00 PM last night, right after he got back from the NRA's members council meeting. For all you San Diego guys with so much passion, try attending a meeting... Mike would get you signed up on a political action committee where you could put your passion into action for the candidate of your choice. I doubt there is one for Gore supporters, as there were none present... Both Duffy and Jay have spoken at San Diego NRA members council meetings, and if you can take any pol at face value, there is alot to like with either. Just make sure that we at least get to the runoff election by keeping Gore under 50%.

This. As long as there is a runoff between Gore and JLS or duffy I am happy. It is scarry to have 2 good canidates and one bad. The 2 good ones split the vote and the bad guy gets in. If we can force the runoff I will 100% support Duffy or JLS. But I prefer JLS.

tango-52
05-13-2010, 8:04 AM
Ideally, we want Duffy vs JLS in November. A win-win for us.

missiondude
05-13-2010, 11:21 AM
Ideally, we want Duffy vs JLS in November. A win-win for us.

With the historical light turnout in the primary elections your WIN/WIN is possible if everyone gets their friends/families etc to get out and vote for anyone but Gore. Lets not bash the two guys who are head and shoulders above Gore when it comes to 2A issues...

CRACKERJACK
05-13-2010, 3:07 PM
First, I'd like to thank windwalker for making this, it was asked of him and he provided.

Secondly, I'd like to point out an issue. It seems the polls make it look like a fair fight between JLS and Duffy. But, from first hand experience, my intuition tells me otherwise. If I drive to the freeway right now, I will see at least 20 JLS and Gore signs. I've only seen one Duffy sign yet to date. I may be wrong but it looked like it was just a marker taken to a poster board, couldn't really tell since the poster board was definitely losing the war against the wind. I have seen JLS and Gore multiple times on T.V. I've seen Duffy once and that was because they were just doing a report on all the candidates. I think the number of people that vote off yard signs and never care to actually look up candidates (the city cough cough) will definitely show when it comes to election time.

Thirdly, I'm happy this was made now, and I would really appreciate all threads made from now on to support whichever runner up be left for just that, support. I hope people can get behind JLS and Duffy and let our voice be heard.

ENVYGREEN
05-13-2010, 4:40 PM
Many people aren't interested in Duffy's union support

The Duke
05-14-2010, 1:49 PM
You're sorely mistaken if you think San Diego County is a red county. As with most of the rest of the urbanized counties in the state, it's about as blue as they come.

What are you talking about?? Their County Board of Supervisors is all REPUBLICAN. City mayor is republican. And just check out the outlying cities - Escondido, Poway, etc. Packed with red. SD isn't nearly as urban as some people believe.

wildhawker
05-14-2010, 2:21 PM
CA SOS voter registration stats (2010, 60 days out): 55561
SD County 2008 General results: http://www.co.san-diego.ca.us/voters/Eng/archive/200811bull.pdf
2008 direct primary results: http://www.co.san-diego.ca.us/voters/Eng/archive/200806bull.pdf

SoCalXD
05-14-2010, 11:54 PM
Ok, folks, time to put up or shut up regarding CCW in San Diego County!

Sheriff Jay LaSuer will unequivocally issue CCW permits to law abiding citizens for personal self defense. He even put it in the official registrar of voters pamphlet summary I just received in the mail, and it's even underlined!:

"Law abiding citizens will receive concealed weapons permits to help protect themselves and their families." :headbang:

San Diego could be the tipping point by being the first major metro area in California to be "Will/Shall Issue"! It could help Sheriff's in other metro area's grow some testicles and loosen up CCW !

Jay LaSuer, when in the legislature, was the primary sponsor of the bill to rescind the "assault weapon" ban. It failed, of course, but hey, that shows that he is a REAL 2nd Amendment supporter!

He will do everything he can to control illegal immigration in San Diego County.

He promises to add resources to track, monitor and intimidate sex offenders.

Here's what you can do to help get Jay into office:

1. Vote for him! Really friends, you REALLY need to vote this time around, no matter what.. just do it!

2. Get your buddies to vote for him! Take the time to post a link to Jay's website on your social networking sites and tweets. Hand your buddies one of Jay's Flyers!

3. Download his Flyer, print out 10 or so, and drop a few off at the reading stacks at waiting rooms at car repair and tire shops, medical offices, or a bulletin boards.

4. Get one of his bumper stickers from a local gun shop and put it on that fine ride of yours!

5. If you live in San Diego, and really want a CCW like me, then you will actually volunteer to do something to get Jay into office! I'm heading to the local gun show next weekend with flyers and talking points. I might even rent a table! email volunteers@sheriffjay.org to see what you can do!

6. If you can spare a Fiver, or more, Paypal it over to him (I'm maxing out at $500... ouch!) The more yard signs he can buy, the better! Paypal info, and his position papers on CCW and Illegal Immigration is on his website:

http://www.sheriffjay.org

Please Help! Spread the word to all your gun owning friends and family!

Oh, did I mention that Duffy is a Socialist Union Stodge?

The Nomadd
05-15-2010, 11:32 AM
Unfortunately, the ordinance did not pass. I was at that council meeting when the vote went 3-2 against Jay's proposed ordinance.

I remember hearing about that when I was in Discount Gun Mart one day. I think that was back in the mid-90's sometime, right? I just remember thinking that would have been really interesting for San Diego County, had it actually passed.

The Nomadd
05-15-2010, 11:52 AM
I think Wildhawker may have been hinting to you that he didn't complete high school in the usual method.

-Gene

So what if he didn't? As far as the whole argument is on this thread is concerned, it's irrelevant anyways as to whether someone completed high school in the tradition way or not, IMHO. And from personal experience, I've known people who've graduated from fairly big name universities, but were still dumber than dirt. I know this thread has become somewhat heated, but can we keep the personal jabs, especially in regards to one's education level, out of it? And no, I'm not taking sides here.

motorhead
05-15-2010, 4:17 PM
the only way i'd vote for duffy is if he could prove he was illegitimate and raised by his mother. sheriff for life, john duffy was an a/h and a tyrant. i truly hatede the man.

motorhead
05-15-2010, 4:47 PM
the only way i'd vote for duffy is if he could prove he was illegitimate and raised by his mother. sheriff for life, john duffy was an a/h and a tyrant. i truly hatede the man.

KylaGWolf
05-16-2010, 11:36 AM
If you drive down to any gun shop in San Diego, you will see who San Diego gun owners believe is THEIR candidate. It is Jay LaSuer. This is from El Cajon Gun Exchange's website http://www.elcajongun.com/:

Jay is THE ONLY candidate that will not put roadblocks between law abiding citizens and a CCW permit. More info and detail on Jay's web site!

Jay has the MOST experience of all the candidates - former Under Sheriff of San Diego County, 30 plus years LE experience! More info and detail on Jay's web site!

Jay has the best CONSERVATIVE TRACK RECORD of all the candidates - La Mesa City Council, former State Assemblyman. More info and detail on Jay's web site!

Jay is the ONLY candidate endorsed by the El cajon Gun Exchange, the California Association fo Firearms Retailers, Sheriff Joe Arpaio, and Gun Owners of California! More info and detail on Jay's web site!

And the American Shooting Center endorses and link's to Jay on their site: http://www.gotammo.com/

I'm sorry to say it but Duffy is a union rep, big government guy. I don't doubt that he'll do a great job protecting deputies, getting them good equipment, defending their retirement benefits, etc, but he is NOT the most conservative candidate and he DOES NOT have 2A credentials. I would of course prefer Duffy to Gore but La Suer is our only true candidate.

Keep this in mind their lobbyist Kathy Lynch supports them so yeah they will do what their mouthpiece asks. Sorry I don't vote on a candidate just because a gun shop says to vote for them. I look at their past history and what they stand for...and not just what the voter pamphlets say....those are nothing more than paid advertisements by the way. I do know I won't vote for Gore. As to who I will vote for I am not sure I can vote for Jay either...sorry his record when he was in the assembly makes me question if he is truly 2A friendly or not. But I will say that I would vote for Duffy over Gore for sure....And no I didn't take the word of those here on what any one candidate is or is not. But look at their records.

GuyW
05-16-2010, 6:47 PM
Folks, I worked the Escondido Street Fair today from 9:30 am - 6 pm.

Not only was the anti-Gore Ruby Ridge information 100% appreciated by everyone with whom I spoke, but

.....the pro-Jay response from a diverse population was 100%.....

....there were no Gore supporters....

....there were no Duffy supporters...

....as well, speaking with Jay, there are great things happening in his campaign....

....to name just one, he is now on a slate-mailer by a statewide anti-tax organization, at a low cost, because ONE OF THE OTHER SHERIFF CANDIDATES DIDN'T HAVE THE $$ TO HONOR THEIR PRIOR COMMITMENT TO PAY.

The momentum for Jay is building - come HELP YOURSELF by helping Jay get into the general election....

GuyW
05-16-2010, 6:52 PM
And no I didn't take the word of those here on what any one candidate is or is not. But look at their records.

So - what do you say about Jay LaSuer's CCW effort in La Mesa?

Jay has been a NRA Life member for many years - his kids and young grandkids are NRA Life Members....

None of that can be factually claimed for Duffy....
.

wildhawker
05-16-2010, 6:55 PM
So - what do you say about Jay LaSuer's CCW effort in La Mesa?

So - what do you say about Jay LaSuer's effort to make thousands of CA gun owners into felons or his attempts to cut a deal with the anti-gunner Torrico on the first AB962/mail order ammo ban?

eaglemike
05-17-2010, 7:00 AM
So - what do you say about Jay LaSuer's effort to make thousands of CA gun owners into felons or his attempts to cut a deal with the anti-gunner Torrico on the first AB962/mail order ammo ban?
Just sayin..... Make your point once..... live in the past, or educate and work with.......
:beatdeadhorse5:

Flintlock Tom
05-17-2010, 7:34 AM
I had the opportunity to talk with Duffy after an NRA Members Council meeting. By his own words, on CCW, he is "may issue". Approving an application will be based upon a personal interview and his impression of the person, sometimes based upon how that person is dressed.

glock_this
05-17-2010, 8:29 AM
finally a thread that gets to the heart of the matter - point by point - for me since I do not have the energy to research it to the level the guys did here.. thanks!

N6ATF
05-17-2010, 9:22 AM
I had the opportunity to talk with Duffy after an NRA Members Council meeting. By his own words, on CCW, he is "may issue". Approving an application will be based upon a personal interview and his impression of the person, sometimes based upon how that person is dressed.

And there we have it.

Gore=oppression
Duffy=oppression
La Suer=written promise to do the opposite of oppress

Pixs
05-18-2010, 9:23 AM
I had the opportunity to talk with Duffy after an NRA Members Council meeting. By his own words, on CCW, he is "may issue". Approving an application will be based upon a personal interview and his impression of the person, sometimes based upon how that person is dressed.

Hi Folks,
Can anyone substantiate this as fact?
Best to all,
Pixs

wildhawker
05-18-2010, 9:47 AM
Here are some on-point quotes on all candidates:

Jim duffy is a candidate in the 2010 San Diego County elections, I a humble voter sent him this via email today.

Mr. Duffy,

As a resident of San Diego County and a veteran of military law enforcement I am bothered by the degree of difficulty in obtaining a permit to exercise what I consider to be a constitutionally guaranteed right. I’m sure you are familiar with the constitution so I won’t insult you by repeating any legal arguments.

Under the current Sheriff’s policy, self defense is not good cause for a concealed firearm permit. I ask you, sir, why not? A firearm is a legitimate form of self defense , statistics show that armed resistance to violent crime is the best way to defend oneself. The police simply cannot be everywhere, and I do not fault them for that. As someone with a taste of law enforcement, I have nothing but respect for those who choose to place themselves in harm’s way for the good of the people. But when confronted with a violent situation seconds count, while the police are at best minutes away.

To solve this problem I suggest that “good cause” not be the critical point concerning the issuance of concealed carry permits, but safety. I propose that if a citizen can demonstrate knowledge of firearm safety and marksmanship skill consistent with that of a regular peace officer, that citizen shall be issued a permit to conceal and carry. It must be made clear that most of us who wish to carry for self defense are not law enforcement, and we recognize a permit to carry is not a license to enforce the law.


Taking firearms out of the holsters of those who would seek to legally carry, does not reduce gun crime. Anybody willing to commit armed robbery with a firearm, is not going to stop simply because he does not hold a permit to carry a firearm, it’s just another law for him to break. Restrictive gun control is backwards thinking. This is again proven statistically, 39 states that have adopted a “shall issue” attitude towards concealed carry. In those states gun crime has decreased. However in New York and Washington DC where gun control is most strict, violent crime involving firearms has increased significantly. I know California is a “may issue” state, as sheriff you would be deciding who you “may” issue to. If elected, what will your stance on concealed carry be? Will you allow me to defend myself should I become the victim of a violent criminal?

Respectfully,

Ryan Clark
Ramona, Ca

Mr Duffy Replied today:

"Hello Mr. Clark,

The short answer to your question is yes. I will accept personal protection to meet the "good cause" requirement of PC 12050. You are correct that we can not always protect you. If you are willing to meet the good character, training and residency requirements, I will issue you a permit.

If I have not adequatly answered your question, please give me a call. (760) 822 5467.

Jim"

AMATO’S TAKE ON THE SHERIFF’S RACE

KCBQ AM-1170 and Washington Times Radio Talk Show Host Rick Amato recently weighed in on a sheriff’s candidate debate held September 12 in El Cajon….

On Saturday, I had the opportunity to sponsor and co-moderate a debate among the San Diego County Sheriff candidates. It followed the East County TEA Party, where an estimated 1500 people attended. Questions were made available for the audience to ask of the candidates. All four candidates participated.

It was a loud, engaged audience with plenty of sparks flying among the candidates themselves. Here are my observations from the debate.
(Candidates in alphabetical order)

Jim Duffy-

Key Endorsement- The Deputy Sheriff’s Assoc.

In college football there are no pre-season games which allow a team to prepare and get an accurate measure of itself, thus teams tend to play “close to the vest” at the start of each new season. This was my impression of Jim Duffy. He began quiet, low key and cautious.

He ended the debate picking up his energy and taking the attack to current-sitting Sheriff Bill Gore.

My take is that Duffy is surveying the landscape and determining where to position himself. La Suer would appear to be the clear-cut choice among conservative voters (see below) with his endorsement by Joe Arpaio. Bill Gore is obviously to the left of La Suer. In my opinion, Duffy is determining whether to position himself to the right or to the left of Bill Gore. In a county which is turning increasingly blue and has a large number of independent and libertarian voters, it could be the difference between winning and losing.

For What It’s Worth-
Jim Duffy seems to have decided to try and make age an issue. In his opening statement he announced that he was 47-years-old. In his closing statement he told us he was 48.

As a guest on my radio show a few weeks back he volunteered to the audience that he was 47. The point is somewhere along the line Duffy has determined his age makes him more electable. It may have worked for President Obama against John McCain in November, but I don’t see it as a big deal here.

Bill Gore

Key Endorsement- Three members of County Board of Supervisors

I have often been told that it is lonely at the top. For Bill Gore–the perceived leader as the current Sheriff of San Diego County–he found out just how lonely it can be. He was on the receiving end of aggressive, calculated attacks by the three other candidates all afternoon and often times drawing loud jeers from the audience to his responses. It could not have been a fun afternoon.

The debate showed the vulnerability of Gore on such issues as: his 9.11 FBI record, the latest flap on his approving the positioning of sonic weapons at Townhall meetings, and his misstatement that Calif. is a “Shall Not Issue” state (right to carry a concealed weapon).
His downtown consulting firm had better prepare their client on how to address these issues more effectively, and do so quickly, before the campaign spins dangerously out of control…a la Francine Busby and the whole “don’t need papers for voting” fiasco.

For What It’s Worth – Al Gore once said that in hindsight as a presidential candidate he had too many consultants and “was never able to truly be himself”. Bill Gore is clearly the candidate surrounded by the most consultants and handlers. The other candidates possess a refreshing grass roots flavor that is missing here. To his credit, he could have chosen to duck this debate but did not.

Jay La Suer

Key Endorsement – Joe Arpaio, Sheriff Maricopa County, AZ

With an endorsement from Joe Arpaio (”America’s Sheriff”) and with scheduled guest appearances by Arpaio in San Diego, La Suer will win the conservative vote. The question is, will that be enough? As pointed out previously, the county is trending more blue and my instincts tell me that many folks in the coastal inland areas (La Jolla, Del Mar, Rancho Santa Fe) “don’t get” the whole Arpaio thing. One thing is certain: liberal voters do not.

La Suer is a steady, even-keeled communicator who exudes trustworthiness. I believe he can win valuable independent and moderate democrat votes. To do so though will test his skills and strategy as a politician.

For What It’s Worth – Since the announcement of Arpaio’s endorsement, La Suer has begun receiving campaign contributions from all over the state and country–unheard of in a local election.

Bruce Ruff
Noteworthy – #2 Vote Getter in Previous Election
Bruce Ruff was animated and on the offensive all day long. Not all candidates enjoy the campaign trail or the spotlight, clearly Ruff enjoys both. In fact he would probably make a good radio talk show host if this whole Sheriff thing doesn’t work out.

He favors concealed weapon permits, said he would “force the federal government to be held accountable” on enforcing illegal immigration law (although I am still unclear how) and was critical of the Sheriff Department’s management of taxpayer money.

For What It’s Worth –
From the outset of his campaign, Ruff said he would not seek endorsements, “because an endorsement is a favor which needs to repaid”. Ruff was also the first candidate to predict that Bill Kohlender would resign in midterm, thus paving the way for the County Board of Supervisors to appoint Bill Gore as Sheriff. That of course is exactly what happened. The big challenge for Ruff will be money.

Winner and Losers-
There was not a clear cut winner, but there was a clear cut loser. As pointed out above, Bill Gore could not have been overjoyed with how things went.

What May Surprise You-
Three of the four candidates (Bill Gore the exception) support CCW (the right of citizens who pass a background check to carry a concealed weapon). That’s good news for NRA supporters and sure to dishearten most liberal voters.

Gore’s explanation for not supporting: His claim that California is a “Shall Not Issue” state, meaning it is illegal and thus out of the hands of the Sheriff Department. All other candidates were surprised at his statement and agreed that California is instead a “May Issue” state.

Illegal Immigration-
All four candidates agreed that border security and illegal immigration were local issues of national security. Duffy and La Suer said they would take advantage of a law permitting the Sheriff’s Department to enforce federal law, thus enforcing illegal immigration law. Gore took exception and said the “catch and release” program (detaining for one hour and waiting for border agents to arrive) is sufficient and effective. La Suer called San Diego a sanctuary county. Duffy and Gore do not believe San Diego is a sanctuary county.

Keep An Eye On-
The sonic weapon story. This one figures to be just getting heated up.
Tying It All Together-
Any candidate who receives 51% or more of the votes in June will be the outright winner. Very unlikely. In which case the top two vote getters advance to a November run off.
Audience Feedback:

“That was the best debate I’ve seen in 20 years. It got real lively.”
John Minto, City Councilman, Santee

You can hear the entire debate at:
http://www.amatotalk.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=blogcategory&id=0&Itemid=138

Rick Amato is a radio talk show host, political commentator and syndicated columnist. His show airs weeknights 9pm-11pm on 1170KCBQ.
You can visit his website at AmatoTalk.com

wildhawker
05-18-2010, 9:47 AM
Another take:


Gun rights advocates demand to be heard at San Diego Sheriff Debate

It should be no surprise that a sheriff's candidate debate hosted by a gun store and preceded by a TEA Party event in the “friendly territory” of the East County of San Diego might draw a few gun rights advocates. It did. What was a bit of surprise was what happened when those advocates felt as though they had been skipped over in the queue for public questions. They got angry, and they let everyone know about it very quickly.

I had lined up early in the public "question line” to insure I could ask the candidates their positions on concealed carry weapon (CCW) permit issuance, which I knew was a hot button issue for my readers. It turns out that numerous individuals had secured pre-arranged cuing for asking questions, none of whom were standing in the public question line. This resulted in only two of the eight people standing in the question line for the first 1.5 hours of the two-hour debate to get their questions asked.

I was "on deck" for submitting my question to the four candidates when it became apparent, due to the announcement that there was only time for two remaining questions, that the five people behind me in line would not be getting to the microphone. I was shortly thereafter surrounded in mass by the remaining question holders and asked respectfully what my question was. I told them "CCW Permits". There was a visible collective sigh of relief and a newly shared excitement among them. They shared with me that they all had that very same question, and were happy that I was going to be able to ask it.

I waited my turn, and it appeared to be about time for me to ask the question, when the debate moderator, Rick Amato, unexpectedly called upon the Disk Jockey, a retired cop, who had been sitting behind his DJ booth, to ask “his” question. A few citizens behind me groaned in protest. I was then shortly thereafter told by Mr. Amato's assistant in a consolatory tone that I was not going to get a chance to ask my question, since the final question was reserved for the co-moderator of the event. The CCW crowd behind me, which had grown by a few additional individuals by now, overhead this. Thus begun the low murmur of discontent that, in retrospect, is a sound that can only be generated by seriously angry men.

The moderator's assistant, noting the crowd's increasing agitation behind him, whispered something to Mr. Amato, who shook his head in approval. The assistant shared with me quietly that Mr. Amato promised to forward the unanswered questions to the candidates. Fair enough I thought. When this was announced on the loud speaker by Mr. Amato, the CCW Crowd went instantly ballistic. One man shouted at the top of his lungs for all within the amphitheater to hear: "That’s not fair! We need to hear it from their mouths right now. There’s a bunch of us here who have the same question!" Another protested, "So the public doesn’t matter?” Another young person, with an empty pistol holster on his belt, added loudly, "It's just a yes or no question, answer our question!" By this time, a shocked silence had spread throughout the entire amphitheater.

Mr. Amato, obviously sensitive to the concerns of his fellow citizens, decided on the spot to allow me to ask my question, limiting the response time to one minute per candidate. The still uncomfortably silent crowd now waited to hear this question with baited breath, which had transformed before my eyes as the question of the “angry dissenters”. In shock, realizing that all eyes were now upon me, I clawed through my pockets, looking for my notepad that had that critical question scribbled upon its pages. For a second, I could not find it, and a wave of embarrassment began welling up in my chest. Thankfully, I soon found it, stepped up to the microphone and asked the question: "If elected Sheriff in 2010, would you consider individual self protection as a sufficient justification for the issue of concealed weapon permits for the citizens of San Diego, including these law abiding citizens sitting in front of you today?” The entire amphitheater erupted in applause and cheers at the question, thankfully breaking the tension that had shockingly appeared like an earthquake and now thankfully subsided just as quickly. It appears this issue was on the minds of more people than I had anticipated.

( From left to right: James Duffy, Bill Gore, Jay LaSuer, Bruce Ruff )

The Candidates’ answers:

Bruce Ruff: "Yes". The Crowd was a bit shocked with this simple answer, so the applause was delayed for a few seconds.

James Duffy: “The answer is yes. There is no other reason to get a CCW permit than to protect yourself. Right now we make you make up excuses about gold bullion or something like that to protect. The really serious answer is you’re getting that permit to protect yourself, your family, your property.” A hearty round of applause followed, with a loud “Yes!” coming from one of the CCW individuals behind me.

Bill Gore: “First of all, I’m a strong believer in the 2nd Amendment myself; I learned to shoot a pistol when I was 14 years old…”at this point he is interrupted by an angry yell from the man with the empty pistol holster:”Yes or No!” Mr. Amato came to Mr. Gore’s defense: “Let him answer, let him answer”. Gore continues: “…and what everybody ignores here is the State law that sheriffs are compelled to comply with. This is a Shall Not Issue State, as opposed to a Shall Issue state. That means that you shall not issue a CCW permit unless there is cause.” Yells from the crowd interrupts him once again: “Self Defense!” Gore continues unfazed, “Other states say that you will issue unless there is cause not to. I’ve talked to the NRA about this; I said we have a business requirement now, or a professional requirement or a personal safety standard that qualifies you for a CCW. I said give me another standard beside “I want one” and I’ll be willing to examine it. I’m compelled to follow State law…” At this point, Sheriff Ruff’s last words are drowned out by angry yells from the crowd, including a reference to Ruby Ridge.

Jay LaSuer: "Short answer, Yes. Follow-up to that answer is this: the Sheriff determines what good cause is, and self-protection is good cause”. The crowd cheered and clapped heartily.

Mr. Amato then stated: "Let me ask Jay LaSuer and Bill Gore is welcome to jump in; you heard Bill Gore say that this is a Shall Not Issue State…” LaSuer replies, “No, this is a May Issue State. It’s not a Shall Issue; it is not a Shall Not Issue.” Bill Gore chimes in “I have (???) my lawyers definitely and I’m surprised that Jay spent six years in the State legislature and didn’t try and change the law.” Smiling, James Duffy interjects by invitation from Mr. Amato: “Three lawyers can’t get it right. Read the penal code section, 12025, “May Issue, the sheriff may issue a permit””. A round of applause follows. Mr. Ruff then chimes in during the applause to re-iterate that the Sheriff is the one who makes the decision, which results in additional cheers from the crowd.

While the co-moderator was reading the final question of the debate, I was overtaken with the realization that all challenger candidates for the position of Sheriff of San Diego County had just committed in unison to a near “Shall Issue” policy of CCW permits if they are elected.

If seen to fruition, this would be the first time in nearly four generations of San Diegans that law-abiding citizens, free from a history of moral turpitude, would once again be trusted by their chief law enforcement officer to maintain the means to protect themselves from deadly criminals in public. Our society’s women, the disabled, and the elderly would no longer be identified by predatory criminals as “easy” targets. Wow, it’s about time.

I will be covering the remained issues discussed at the Sheriff’s debate early next week. I just wanted to share this rather exciting news with the thousands of County residents who would likely take advantage of a re-establishment of this key aspect of their 2nd Amendment rights, as well as enjoy the likely resulting reduction in violent crime in our County.

Alaric
05-18-2010, 1:17 PM
Hi Folks,
Can anyone substantiate this as fact?
Best to all,
Pixs


From Duffy's website (http://www.duffyforsheriff.com/issues/content/2nd_amendment_ccw/):

CCWs and the 2nd Amendment

I believe in the Second Amendment of our Constitution and agree with the US Supreme Court finding that it guarantees the individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation. Having law abiding citizens being able to protect themselves from criminals is a good thing in my book. I want law abiding citizens to have the ability to protect themselves, as law enforcement cannot always be present to do that. It is a fundamental right under the 2nd amendment of our constitution.

I have to make four findings under California law to grant a permit which allows you to carry a concealed firearm in public; good moral character, good cause, completion of required training in lawful use and proficiency, and a resident or employed in San Diego County. My position has always been that good cause for a permit is personal protection. Simply that.

As sheriff, I will accept personal protection as “good cause” for issuance of CCW permits. You will be required to complete a thorough background investigation to determine if you are of “good moral character”, complete a required safety/lawful use/proficiency with a firearm course, and must live or work anywhere in the County of San Diego. Those are the four criteria I am required to find before issuing a permit to carry a concealed weapon under current California law. “Good cause” and “good moral character” are the words the state legislature chose to use in the penal code. They are not defined, but rather the discretion of the sheriff of a county to determine when met. I will use that discretion to make sure that law abiding citizens of this county who want to protect themselves can do so.

You come to me with good moral character, complete the required course and live / work in San Diego; you’ll be issued a permit.

I do not support outlawing open carry of an unloaded firearm as allowed under California law.

I do not support congress re-instating the Federal Assault Rifle ban. It’s ridiculous that a Mini-14 is ok, but an AR-15 is not. Laws restricting possession of weapons do nothing to prevent criminals from having guns, just law abiding citizens.

I will not stand by quietly while useless laws are passed about ammunition that pretend to be about public safety, but are really nothing more than a waste time and resources.

Posted by Jim Duffy

So it sounds like it's true. Duffy may issue, but has built in a large buffer on the basis of his subjective view of an applicant's "good moral character". What that says to me is that if he doesn't like the way you parted your hair that morning, he might decide he doesn't want to issue to you, and you're SOL.

hoffmang
05-18-2010, 8:13 PM
Just sayin..... Make your point once..... live in the past, or educate and work with.......
:beatdeadhorse5:

And I'm just amused that folks here take the prospective words of a politician over the retrospective and actual deeds of same...

Fool me once...

In this case we can document at least twice.

-Gene

eaglemike
05-18-2010, 9:31 PM
And I'm just amused that folks here take the prospective words of a politician over the retrospective and actual deeds of same...

Fool me once...

In this case we can document at least twice.

-Gene
Gene,
I don't don't mind if a new point is made or new information is presented. I do think Brandon's presentation has been tiresome in some instances. I'm a little surprised you don't see that...... ETA here - I have a ton of respect for Brandon and Gene, but I disagree with some stuff in this instance......

It does seem like the "inner circle from up north" is working mighty hard to beat up on JLS - and less so to make sure we get the best possible candidate elected. Maybe you can't see it - but it sure looks like it from this angle.

I still don't see any concrete evidence that Duffy is better than JLS. I've been in San Diego for a while. ETA - it seems like Duffy wants to leave significant "wiggle room."

all the best,
Mike

N6ATF
05-18-2010, 11:51 PM
And I'm just amused that folks here take the prospective words of a politician over the retrospective and actual deeds of same...

Fool me once...

In this case we can document at least twice.

-Gene

Good. Now we have at least twice that JLS has put SI-CCW on the table. Both on the record. Both without any court decisions needed. If he suddenly switches to victim disarmament, he gets recalled by his own campaign volunteers.

Can't say the same for the others... who will likely get away with flouting any and all federal court decisions, just as DC has.

GuyW
05-19-2010, 11:39 AM
NRA-ILA voter education alert out now on GORE's anti-gun stance.....good as far as it goes....
.

Pixs
05-20-2010, 10:39 AM
Howdy again,
Thank you Alaric for answering my question. I've looked and I can't find the reference to W. Gore's appointment as a 3 to 2 vote; anyone know who voted for him? TIA (Thanks in advance)? I'd really hate to vote for them.
Best to all,
Pixs

KylaGWolf
05-20-2010, 11:00 PM
It is a very interesting situation. My shop is down in Barrio Logan. For those not familiar with San Diego, this isn't a terrific part of town, although it is near Petco Park, just off the 5 freeway.

The trolley runs outside my door - and there are 3 JLS signs easily visible here. (no, I didn't put them up). I don't see any Duffy signs........ This might get JLS some votes.

I'm also pretty sure most people in this area aren't really informed. I'm also not sure how many of them vote. :) Fair number of homeless, lots of un-insured drivers, too. (no, I'm not really guessing, got the RT hit by one a few years ago).
all the best,
Mike


Yeah your right your in a not so nice part of town. Then again I go to city college and have to say even that isn't in the best part of town. I live in OB area and am seeing a lot of Gore signs. As to how many are going to vote this year might be more than you think if they think they can get people in that are willing to look the other way to illegal immigration.

I do know I won't vote for Gore. If after the primary it comes down to Gore and LeSuer I will vote for Jay but if it comes down to Duffy and Jay I am not sure I can vote for Jay.

GuyW
05-20-2010, 11:06 PM
CCWs in his own words

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h62SER1F3WA

.

GuyW
05-20-2010, 11:07 PM
Another side of Mr. Duffy:

"I was at the debate between all the sheriff candidates, Duffy had about 2-3 union buddies walking the crowd with hidden video cams, he had 2-3 guys on the outside of the public group with cameras as well, documenting everything, and the public crowd.

I realize it is all legal but I got a real creepy feeling like a police state watching those guys in plainclothes hold Duffy signs with cables going down the back of their necks into a shoulder carried satchel. As photographer I am familiar with this type of equipment. Yeah I guess Gore and the others could have been filming the public crowd as well but it was very obvious to those that know what to look for Duffy had about 5-6 union buddies with their signs and hidden cameras.

I think Duffy would be more like Gore in his willingness to install unconstitutional police procedures upon the public."

KylaGWolf
05-21-2010, 10:15 AM
GuyW if that is true yeah then Duffy may not be the good choice. Right now I have the feeling whomever we get as Sheriff here won't be what we need for 2A here in San Diego. I wonder if Jay will backtrack.

Or maybe because I was at a meeting with another so called pro ccw sheriff candidate that then turned around and said he would take out a uoc'er and wouldn't think twice about it...so I might be a bit jaded and leery or anything that comes out of any politicians mouth.

GuyW
05-21-2010, 10:46 AM
GuyW if that is true yeah then Duffy may not be the good choice. Right now I have the feeling whomever we get as Sheriff here won't be what we need for 2A here in San Diego. I wonder if Jay will backtrack.

Or maybe because I was at a meeting with another so called pro ccw sheriff candidate that then turned around and said he would take out a uoc'er and wouldn't think twice about it...so I might be a bit jaded and leery or anything that comes out of any politicians mouth.

Caution and jaded scepticism are generally warranted (hence my Duffy views).

I supported Ruff the previous 2 elections (in a fairly passive way) but it was mostly an anti-Kolender position, bolstered by Ruff's purported pro-CCW position. But I knew we needed a stronger and "better" candidate this time (not to mention one without anger issues). I did not actively assist Ruff nor interact with him other than a couple of face-to-face conversations and exchanged emails.

Having interacted with Jay, I am certain there will NOT be backtracking on CCWs, but I know that you have not experienced what I have.

.

GuyW
05-21-2010, 3:27 PM
"As a councilman, LaSuer introduced an ordinance that would have made La Mesa the only city in the county to issue its own concealed-weapons permits, rather than going through the Sheriff's Department. The 1996 measure was defeated. The same year, when Mayor Art Madrid sought to ban so-called Saturday Night Special handguns, LaSuer was key in defeating that measure."

http://www.voiceofsandiego.org/government/article_17e5af20-647a-11df-882c-001cc4c03286.html

Duffy was agin' it, 'fore he was a-for it:

"(Duffy originally opposed the law but said he later changed his mind and supports it.)

.

SoCalXD
05-21-2010, 10:01 PM
Bwiese, your analysis may be right and it may be wrong. I'm not saying it isn't a well thought out position. But I'm glad you spelled all this out. I consider myself a principled conservative. You make very clear that you want to win, but that you are also neither principled nor conservative.

So when you ring your endorsement of Duffy, I just want all the readers on the fence to know where you're coming from, and if you get your way, what our next generation of leaders...the leaders who grab back power from the Obama democrats, will look like. Enjoy.

+1

You're never going to convince a Democrat from the Bay Area to support a conservative, even if he likes guns. That hatred of religion burns strong in those areas.

I for one am tired of living under Tyranny in San Diego County, unable to defend myself on the street from felons without committing a Felony to enjoy my natural and constitutional right to self defense. Anyone who will put those Tyrant in check, gets my vote. I don't want a progressive-union hack in charge of the Sheriff's department; I want a leader. Jay is the only leader in the pack. The fact that he would retire this decade is a bonus... He will have the moral re-enforcement to do what is right, not what will get him elected for the next 30 years like Duffy will.

Fellow San Diegan's, if you want a CCW as a Christmas present this year, Vote for Jay LaSuer.

Camp906
06-04-2010, 6:09 AM
+1


Fellow San Diegan's, if you want a CCW as a Christmas present this year, Vote for Jay LaSuer.

Duffy had my vote until he became a DEMOCRAT in order to get the endorsement of the Deputy Sheriffs Association. What else will he flip-flop on?
He also has the San Diego SEIU endorsement and they are very anti Second Amendment. Any clues here?

WAKE UP PEOPLE !!!

GuyW
06-04-2010, 9:35 PM
GORE is for the Government
DUFFY is for the Unions
LASUER is for the PEOPLE!

.