PDA

View Full Version : NRA now moving FIVE Pro-Gun Bills in California


mikehaas
03-21-2006, 7:18 PM
NRA is now moving FIVE Pro-Gun Bills in California!

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

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

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

GUN LAW STUDY - SB 1192 - Added today
http://calnra.com/legs.shtml?summary=sb1192

PRIVACY PROTECTION - SB 1239 - Added today
http://calnra.com/legs.shtml?summary=sb1239

Also, a new ANTI-GUN bill was added to our list today:

AMMO SALES - AB 2714 - Added today
http://calnra.com/legs.shtml?summary=ab2714

Latest Information has been posted at:
http://calnra.com/legs.shtml

Contact Tools are available at:
http://calnra.com/legs.shtml#contactinfo

YOUR SUPPORT WILL BE NEEDED
----------------------------------------------
NRA Members' Councils of California
http://calnra.com/

bwiese
03-21-2006, 7:40 PM
QUOTE=mikehaas]NRA is now moving FIVE Pro-Gun Bills in California!

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

Nice, but dead on arrival. Won't make it out of committee. Too much opposition from business - even when this is in gun-friendly states like Okla.

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

Might be OK and get out of committee under the safety bandwagon. Would be really nice if updated so that purchase of gun safe would be tax-deductible against income (i.e., top-line reduction).

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

Of some use for inheritance issues and maybe C&R folks with a COE could scoot in on this. If promoted as a technical update/clarification, a small chance this law could pass. Likely won't make it outta committee.

GUN LAW STUDY - SB 1192 - Added todayhttp://calnra.com/legs.shtml?summary=sb1192

Useful in a limited sense. May even pass. Likely won't matter - new gun laws will be written with all sortsa broad statements about evilness of certain guns and how they are not designed to hurt 'ordinary' gun owners (read the preamble material in PC 12275 about AWs to see what cr*p misstatements a lawmaker can get into law).

PRIVACY PROTECTION - SB 1239 - Added todayhttp://calnra.com/legs.shtml?summary=sb1239

Useful, may pass (or at least get out of committee) as this can be couched as a privacy law.

Also, a new ANTI-GUN bill was added to our list today:

AMMO SALES - AB 2174 - Added today
http://calnra.com/legs.shtml?summary=ab2174

A typo somewhere - link may need to be '....2714'... yes, a bad bill.

shopkeep
03-21-2006, 7:58 PM
If AB2714 passes you can forget about ANYONE selling ammo to Californians over the internet anymore :(! Man do things EVER get better in this state :eek: ?

6172crew
03-21-2006, 8:07 PM
Thanks for the updates Mike, I will call the commie in my area and let him know.

mikehaas
03-21-2006, 9:35 PM
QUOTE=mikehaas]NRA is now moving FIVE Pro-Gun Bills in California!

A typo somewhere - link may need to be '....2714'... yes, a bad bill.

Thanks! Corrected above and here:
http://calnra.com/legs.shtml?summary=ab2714

Dang, it's only March and I've made a mistake already... :-)

Mike

taloft
03-21-2006, 9:59 PM
Who is going to verify the accuracy of the data used in the study? I can make any study show any outcome if I manipulate the data correctly.

grammaton76
03-22-2006, 12:13 AM
ASSAULT WEAPONS - AB 2131
http://calnra.com/legs.shtml?summary=ab2131

If this stands any real chance of passing, then it would behoove us to put in for our COE's ASAP. The reason being, should this pass, one can expect that the COE will become as tough to get as a CCW in short order...

filefish
03-22-2006, 1:19 AM
If this stands any real chance of passing, then it would behoove us to put in for our COE's ASAP. The reason being, should this pass, one can expect that the COE will become as tough to get as a CCW in short order...
what is a COE?

grammaton76
03-22-2006, 2:21 AM
what is a COE?

Certificate of Eligibility. It's currently only used for handguns, however the proposed law seems to say that COE holders should be able to buy and register AW's if they so desire...

shecky
03-22-2006, 7:48 PM
Somehow they left a right to carry bill off the list... must be a typo. :rolleyes:

Considering the viability of many of these bills, they may as well have put up a right to carry bill, as well as rkba.

mikehaas
03-23-2006, 1:08 AM
Considering the viability of many of these bills, they may as well have put up a right to carry bill, as well as rkba.

Sometimes, these guys will surprise you.
http://nramemberscouncils.com/gfx/2003-2005.gif

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

Considering how weak (30%) the other "major" party is in Sacramento, for every victory above, NRA has had to get quite a bit of Democrat support. No victories are possible without it. Convincing elected Democrats that gun control is bad and freedom is good is DEFINITELY a good thing.

Mike

crs1
03-23-2006, 8:18 AM
If AB2714 passes you can forget about ANYONE selling ammo to Californians over the internet anymore :(! Man do things EVER get better in this state :eek: ?


Several places I have ordered from require you to fax a copy of your DL. I am assuming this would suffice, yes?

Can'thavenuthingood
03-23-2006, 11:21 AM
"NRA has had to get quite a bit of Democrat support."

Until reapportionment is corrected, all you are going to get from Sacramento is the occasional crumb. Redistricting (Prop 77) needed broad support, it didn't get it.

In the 2004 election, not one of California's 173 Assembly, state Senate and congressional seats switched parties, and only a handful were even at risk. In the 53 congressional races, for example, only three of the winners received less than 60 percent of the vote.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/08/26/BAG46EDCNJ1.DTL&hw=incumbents+team+up+to+oppose&sn=001&sc=1000

I suspect the Ammo bill will be used to gain repub support for "other" liberal programs.

Vick

CowtownBallin
03-23-2006, 11:40 AM
For that assault-weapons/C&R/COE thing, what could you buy with that? Most "assault weapons" are not C&R.

MrTuffPaws
03-23-2006, 1:19 PM
Why all of the hubbub over AB 2714? Legal gun owners have nothing to fear:D

rips31
03-23-2006, 1:24 PM
There still is no 'instant check' system in place like the rest of the nation.
not true. there is nics here, they just keep your gun an additional 239 hours to make sure you aren't a kali-criminal. :D

grammaton76
03-23-2006, 2:24 PM
For that assault-weapons/C&R/COE thing, what could you buy with that? Most "assault weapons" are not C&R.

SKS-M and SKS-D, for one thing. Those're the SKSes which natively accept AK mags.

And are some of the earlier FALs coming up on C&R eligibility? Of course, if they're select-fire in their original configuration, then it's probably a no-go...

mikehaas
03-23-2006, 2:46 PM
"NRA has had to get quite a bit of Democrat support."

Until reapportionment is corrected, all you are going to get from Sacramento is the occasional crumb. Redistricting (Prop 77) needed broad support, it didn't get it...

Vick

It's understandable that, as a strong supporter, you'de be disappointed in the special election result. But if you're looking to NRA for support for non-gun issues, I'm afraid you're in store for added disappointment. They are single issue and believe it or not, not "conservative" or "liberal", so those who place expectations on them that they will fall one way or another on non-gun issues - that just isn't going to happen.

NRA will support or oppose candidates based on a gun record, and an issue if gun-related. About the most I've seen them veer was the strong opposition to McCain-Feingold, and that was because it directly affected their ability to campaign effectively.

Redistricting is the worst of party politics and the courts often get involved. Really, don't you want an NRA that's more focused than that? I do. I don't want them trying to prop up any party, I want NRA to work effectively with as many elected officials as possible. I hear it often enough - "It doesn't stand for (N)ational (R)epublican (A)ssociation...". I wouldn't want any party thinking they own NRA, either. Big-tent, that's what moves gun-rights foward, IMO. I say more power to anyone that wants to exercise their gun-rights, even Democrats. :-)

Can'thavenuthingood
03-23-2006, 6:09 PM
Mike, your comments are exactly what I was alluding to, the quote is yours from prior post.

Like RKBA, the redistricting isn't going to happen until a majority of the voters regardless of race, creed, color, sex, religion or party affiliation decides it's time for action and votes for it.

The RKBA movement should not be aligned with any organizations EXCEPT for the RKBA.

Vick

DSA_FAL
03-24-2006, 11:28 AM
As long as the NRA keeps lobbying the socialist controlled legislature for pro-gun legislation, they will be wasting our money. The vast majority of pro-gun bills that the legislature has passed recently are of very little consequence to the vast majority of gun owning Californians. It boggles my mind that they keep ignoring the potential power of the initiative process. Californians have shown themselves willing to vote for laws that are far to the right of what the legislature comes up with (props. 187, 209, 13, 22 etc.). If the NRA was really serious about gun rights in California, then they would sponsor initiatives to be placed on the ballot.

Can'thavenuthingood
03-24-2006, 3:25 PM
And yet another valid point is made.

Of course the opposing argument is that its a waste of time since it will end up in court anyway if it wins.

My thinking is that if RKBA wins, its a huge step forward. The dems will be on their heels, not us.

Vick

mikehaas
03-25-2006, 8:25 AM
It boggles my mind that they (NRA) keep ignoring the potential power of the initiative process.

I understand - I'm just as frustrated by CA laws as anybody else. Unfortunately, CA is the worst state to forward a gun initiative (or any initiative). Too expensive. 14 million voters. Do the math - how much to send just one brochure to the electorate? Now figure in radio, tv...

The "power" of the initiative is $$$ power, not people power. It's the most important consideration - even before the substance of the issue, and it's the factor that is NEVER addressed by grassroots folks. Getting an initiative qualified is the EASY PART.

The Indian Gaming Initiative took $110 million, and a gun inittitive promises to be AT LEAST that controvesial. NRA is about a $250 million/year corporation, and that money is fully consumed year-to-year. Every election cycle cleans NRA out.

So, should we put NRA itself up at risk to pass a CA initiative? Forget about New Jersey, New York, Illinois, Hawaii...??? Forget about elections, legislative efforts? Because an initiative would use all the money that normally supports those things. That and more. Remember - NRA's money that is contributed for training, hunter services, etc. - that cannot be used for this kind of thing due to Campaign Finance Laws. That's "NRA Foundation" money (Friends of NRA, etc), not NRA "Political Victory Fund" (PVF) money. Only PVF money can be used for politcal purposes.

Would you take your mortgage payments for 6 months and go chance it all in Las Vegas? AFter all... you could win!

And should we spend NRA's legislative budget for a year just for a chance... no, a guarrentee... to end up in California court? There goes another couple million. (Hmmm... and it's attorneys who want to pass the RKBA Initiative, isn't it? :-)

And - what if it loses? To have RKBA dealt that blow in our state? Bad enough in court - but what if it loses at the polls? Then the voter has spoken - Californians don't want guns period! Want to give that to the California legislature to work with? I bet Ahhnold wouldn't mind a bit.

My fellow gun-owners, we must consider the generations of Californians coming after us. Their freedoms are in our hands. You may be frustrated, you may be sick and tired of this sh--, but that's not the important thing. What's important is that, whether it takes 5 years, 10 years, 50 years - we must not suffer that kind of defeat - EVER.

The antis tried an initiative in 1982 - Prop 15 - a state-wide gun ban. They lost in a huge defeat and set their movement back 10 years. But when they came back, they had gotten smart. Chip, chip, chip. That's how we lost "assault weapons", got the "safety drop tests", etc - by the antis being satisfied to gain incremental victories. Patience. The legislature never goes away. They will be there next year and 100 years from now. He who deals with the legislature best is the winner. (And NRA has been doing a great job in recent years!)

Reapportionment? That's party-line politics. NRA must be effective dealing with both parties and we are. I don't want NRA fixing the mess that the Republicans have gotten themselves into. That's not why I give NRA money. You may not remember, but less than 10 years ago, the GOP HELD A MAJORITY IN THE ASSEBMLY AND OWNEDTHE GOVERNOR SEAT (kept re-electing GOP governors). They screwed that up themselves. (Now they are well under 50%, or even 40%!)

Besides, the Republicans AGREED TO REAPPORTIONMENT. Now someone thinks an initiative is going to straighten that mess out?

Think "anti-gunners", not "Democrats". The most devout pro-gunner I know WAS a Democrat Assemblyman (until term limits forced him out). I knew the man to push anti-gun staffers against walls with the strong comment "Don't you mess with my gun bill...". (Yeah, term limits - another GENIUS idea that has done nothing but hurt gun-rights.)

I want NRA focused like a laser on gun-rights. And in a sensible way, not doing risky things. Too much is at stake.

Mike

mow
03-25-2006, 8:58 AM
Mike you have made your POV and the NRA's POV abundantly clear.

If anyone here still has the impression that the NRA does not care about CA then they just don't see the big picture IMHO. I was one of these people, I thought the NRA had given up in CA. But after reading the NRA's POV behind not supporting the RKBA I fully understand the LOGIC used... I applaud you and the NRA.

Keep up the good work! Chip away at what we can (gun laws) until there is nothing left to chip away.

The best thing everyone here can do is stick to gether, realize that the NRA and the CRPA are here to progress not hinder firearm rights and vote accordingly.

mikehaas
03-25-2006, 9:29 AM
The vast majority of pro-gun bills that the legislature has passed recently are of very little consequence to the vast majority of gun owning Californians.

Pretty tough room. A few years ago, there were NO pro-gun bills getting passed by the legislature and the anti-gun bills becoming law were really bad ones - but look at what they settled for last year...
http://calnra.com/legs.shtml?year=2005
Very technical laws that don't affect gun-owners - most can't even understand them! (including lawmakers and LEOs). I call that progress.

And to show you how you may not truly understand the scope of some of the pro-gun bills that passed, I'll take one as an example...

In 2003, NRA passed SB255 (Ducheny, a woman Dem, BTW). This is a real landmark "First in the Nation" Background Check Law - even signed by ol' Gray Davis. Still, no other state has this benefit to gun-buyers to my knowledge.

If you answer a question incorrectly on a federal or state form when buying a gun, you are subject to prosecution of 3 felonies. (1) You tried to buy a gun unlawfully. (2) You lied on a federal form and (3) you lied on a state form.

This was happening more frequently than you would think as more state computers came online and tied in. Some plea bargain or similar appears that may have been forgotten about from 20 or 30 years ago (domestic related usually) because it was not a problem until the '90s. Suddenly, this or something like it pops up out of nowhere during the same background check you've gone through umpty-squat times before. But this time...

You have to seek an RKBA attorney to straighten it out. But right up front, it's a $5000 (standard) retainer. The best outcome is you'll be cleared at huge expense. The worst? You know.

Prior to SB 255, you couldn't do a thing about this trap. To this day, gun-buyers in other states can't so anything about it. But because of NRA and SB 255, Californians need never be caught in that trap again. It was a serious problem in this state. But now you can have CADOJ do the same background check WITHOUT BUYING A GUN. If a problem surfaces, it's MUCH cheaper to fix when NOT under threat of felony prosecution. If all ok, it applies to the purchase of a firearm within a time period. That's a "win" that is open to every Californian everytime you buy a gun.

Some of the pro-gun bills have less impact, some more. This year NRA is moving AB2131...
http://calnra.com/legs.shtml?summary=ab2131
...opening a door to AW ownership again. No, not the perfect door. But if passed, a door that gun-owners, through NRA, opened. It's important for gun-owners to have some control in government and that's exactly what that is. NRA is giving us some control again, and in the best place in the state. We passed 4 other pro-gun bills in 2003, 1 in 2004, Return of guns by Law Enforcement, and 1 in 2005, relaxing drop-testing requirements, allowing more guns to be bought. Those affected quite a few gun-owners.

And, having some control at the state legislature level means you can hopefully continue to improve things.

But it seems some gun-owners would rather reject such progress and just let Don Perata and Paul Koretz keep defining the gun laws in California. Because if it's not Vermont-style carry, what good is it?

Personally, I'm proud of the work we did. It just makes no sense to me that any gun-owner would bash it.

Mike

Chaingun
03-25-2006, 3:55 PM
Thanks for the updates Mike, I will call the commie in my area and let him know.

Yea, what a differance that will make:rolleyes:

Bruce
03-26-2006, 8:57 PM
Mike, after reading and re-reading the NRA positon on th RKBA initiative, I can see their point. I realize that it is hard for you, being a volunteer, to see what we out here see. The stupid laws,like the so-called "Safety List" continue to stand and yet the NRA appears to do very little about them. You seem to be quite proud of the five bills the NRA supports. They don't do much for me or, it would seem, very many here.
Please tell me Mike, why is there no attempt this year to get 12125PC modified further? After all, how can firearms made 10, 20, 30 years ago comply with standards that went into effect in 2001? I'd rather be able to buy a S&W Model 19 or a Colt Detective Special rather than get a break on sales-tax for a gun-safe.