PDA

View Full Version : AB 962 - Potential Solution?


bestimmt
08-02-2010, 12:04 PM
I did not see this topic posted in another thread, but this is my first post, so please be kind if I have duplicated this post unknowingly. As I'm sure most of you are, I'm furious by the ammunition restrictions placed on us by AB 962. I buy all of my ammo online because its cheaper and more convenient, and I do not want to lose this resource. I know there are a number of lawsuits in the works, and I commend those who brought them. I'm an attorney myself, and would love to donate some of my time to these suits if it would be of use.

Given that the efforts to repeal AB 962 legislatively seem to have stalled, I wonder if anyone has given the initiative system any thought? What about a proposition to repeal the law? We could use the opportunity to amend the California constitution and go "over the legislature's head," so to speak. Does anyone know how to get an inititative going? How much does it cost to get a proposition on the ballot (not including the inevitible campaign funds that would be required to defeat the anti-gunners out there)?

GrizzlyGuy
08-02-2010, 12:07 PM
See here (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=326231), AB962 is soon to be toast. :)

wash
08-02-2010, 12:15 PM
I've heard the cost is quite high.

I'm not sure if it's accurate but I heard its about $1,000,000.00 to have a chance...

I'm not sure about a lot of the voters in this state either.

All of the right people seem confident that one of the three legal challenges will stick and AB962 will never go in to effect.

But $1,000,000 is at least 2,000 billable hours from a top flight firearms lawyer. That's a lot of lawsuits, with the chance to get the money back. Also effective lobbying could have nipped it in the bud but our political machine doesn't have quite that much power yet.

We could do lots of things to throw away money but that would leave us vulnerable to the next bad law.

berto
08-02-2010, 12:33 PM
How much money ya got?

What happens if you lose?

The lawsuit route is cheaper and more effective.

bestimmt
08-02-2010, 12:55 PM
I'm not sure litigation is cheaper (only if the lawyers are donating their time - litigation can easily cost $5 million to $10 million to see through to conclusion). I'm also not sure it stands a better chance. The Eastern District is a much better place to have to case heard than, say, the Northern or Central Districts, but there is still that sticky little problem of the Ninth Circuit.

Bhobbs
08-02-2010, 12:56 PM
Build an AR15 chambered for every pistol round in use and then mark every box of the ammo as "for use in AR15 only".

Then it is no longer pistol ammo.

berto
08-02-2010, 1:58 PM
I'm not sure litigation is cheaper (only if the lawyers are donating their time - litigation can easily cost $5 million to $10 million to see through to conclusion). I'm also not sure it stands a better chance. The Eastern District is a much better place to have to case heard than, say, the Northern or Central Districts, but there is still that sticky little problem of the Ninth Circuit.

An initiative requires professional signature gatherers. They aren't cheap, $1-$3 per signature puts us over $1 million just to make the ballot.

It requires an ad campaign with buys in major markets designed to win over a large portion of an electorate that isn't invested in gun issues. Why should Joe Not-a-gunnie care about a mail order ammo ban? Can he be convinced in 30 seconds and will his new found conviction remain after the opposition's 30 seconds of carnage?

Can we even count on our own people to show up? Too many gunnies won't vote in the first place or take the time to call Sac. and voice their opposition to bad bills.

Where does the money come from?

We're winning in court right now. The $10mm to see a suit through isn't even the starting point for an initiative.

(there are threads discussing initiatives for various 2A issues, search will show them)

advocatusdiaboli
08-02-2010, 2:20 PM
I prefer litigation--then it doesn't require we persuade the majority in an anti-gun progressive state to vote in our interests. It takes only a small team in the right to win litigation and the result is not only just as powerful, but faster acting--no election to wait for.

Wherryj
08-02-2010, 2:35 PM
I've heard the cost is quite high.

I'm not sure if it's accurate but I heard its about $1,000,000.00 to have a chance...

I'm not sure about a lot of the voters in this state either.

All of the right people seem confident that one of the three legal challenges will stick and AB962 will never go in to effect.

But $1,000,000 is at least 2,000 billable hours from a top flight firearms lawyer. That's a lot of lawsuits, with the chance to get the money back. Also effective lobbying could have nipped it in the bud but our political machine doesn't have quite that much power yet.

We could do lots of things to throw away money but that would leave us vulnerable to the next bad law.

You also can't count on the fact that the real story gets portrayed during an election. It seems to be perfectly acceptable for those for or against a cadidtate or initiative to lie outright to try to advance their agenda.

There should be consequences to deceptive election advertising. Without them, that would be a VERY risky way to go about overturning it. The gay marriage situation is a warning. Lose a ballot and your cause may be set back years.

wildhawker
08-02-2010, 3:41 PM
We're pretty familiar both with litigation and the issue of AB962, specifically. Trust that CGF is deeply committed to seeing the case through to a successful outcome, regardless of what it takes to get there. The probability of AB962 falling due to any or all of the 3 lawsuits filed to date is very high.

Your cost estimate is grossly exaggerated.


I'm not sure litigation is cheaper (only if the lawyers are donating their time - litigation can easily cost $5 million to $10 million to see through to conclusion). I'm also not sure it stands a better chance. The Eastern District is a much better place to have to case heard than, say, the Northern or Central Districts, but there is still that sticky little problem of the Ninth Circuit.

LCR38
08-02-2010, 4:35 PM
I sell handgun ammo here in my hardware store as do other dealers I know. The permit fees, registration and fingerprinting required by AB962 appear simple enough now just as FFL firearm registration was when first introduced. Ammo sales will soon become as costly and prohibitive as gun sales are today if we don't stop it. It's another flanking maneuver by anti-gun opponents of our 2nd amendment rights to disarm us. If AB962 is not repealed you will be required to buy your ammo at inflated prices only from a few licenced dealers because the mom & pop stores will not be able to justify the expense and risks of records-keeping errors.

Blackhawk556
08-02-2010, 5:52 PM
Your cost estimate is grossly exaggerated.


yeah, that's what I thought

isn't Gura charging like $2million for D.C.?
and that was a massive case

JasonDavis
08-02-2010, 8:40 PM
I'm not sure litigation is cheaper (only if the lawyers are donating their time - litigation can easily cost $5 million to $10 million to see through to conclusion). I'm also not sure it stands a better chance. The Eastern District is a much better place to have to case heard than, say, the Northern or Central Districts, but there is still that sticky little problem of the Ninth Circuit.

Please let me know where the clients that pay that much are!

pitchbaby
08-02-2010, 9:39 PM
Why not go for the gold and do a ballot measure making the state Shall Issue? I think everyone of us here would be a signature gatherer for that cause!

2009_gunner
08-02-2010, 10:03 PM
Why not go for the gold and do a ballot measure making the state Shall Issue? I think everyone of us here would be a signature gatherer for that cause!

Democracy has already failed in California. We are at the point where the laws of the Republic must correct for democratic deficiencies using the court system. The voters have elected our socialist legislature because the voters are socialist.

pitchbaby
08-02-2010, 10:11 PM
Democracy has already failed in California. We are at the point where the laws of the Republic must correct for democratic deficiencies using the court system. The voters have elected our socialist legislature because the voters are socialist.

Perhaps true, but 2A is not a partisan issue. I have close ties to the media biz. Plenty of Pelosi loving Obamanites, but boy do they love their guns! Many of them don't even try to get carry permits cause they know it's hopeless.

I think we could be surprised if an educated CCW campaign were launched in this state.

2009_gunner
08-02-2010, 10:24 PM
Perhaps true, but 2A is not a partisan issue. I have close ties to the media biz. Plenty of Pelosi loving Obamanites, but boy do they love their guns! Many of them don't even try to get carry permits cause they know it's hopeless.

I think we could be surprised if an educated CCW campaign were launched in this state.

If we were to trust the voters of California to be nonpartisan with important gun rights, then it would first make sense to get some polling data of the voters. I wonder if this has been done?

jdberger
08-02-2010, 10:27 PM
Why not go for the gold and do a ballot measure making the state Shall Issue? I think everyone of us here would be a signature gatherer for that cause!

The thing is, they wouldn't. Unfortunately, most gunnies simply have better things to do than go out and get active (and this is in California where we've a ton of smart, motivated activists).

It's a little sad, actually.

But - since you mentioned it - what are you good at? What do you like doing? Let me put you on the list of potential volunteers! We (all of us) can always use one more person to spread the word, do research, show up at legislative hearings, come to court, make signs, make phone calls, do data entry, design banners, wave a flag or just talk to their neighbors about guns the same way you talk about painting your house.

Send me a PM and I'll point you to the right people. :D

pitchbaby
08-02-2010, 10:32 PM
If we were to trust the voters of California to be nonpartisan with important gun rights, then it would first make sense to get some polling data of the voters. I wonder if this has been done?

Agreed and I second that question.

As for jd's remarks.... I am already trying to compile data on another pro 2A situation started here in Calguns. I would however be happy to do some time at the local Walmart or other similar venue to do polling, or to make calls. Seriously, if we don't want to try to help, then we have little room to complain!

Librarian
08-02-2010, 10:55 PM
Perhaps true, but 2A is not a partisan issue. I have close ties to the media biz. Plenty of Pelosi loving Obamanites, but boy do they love their guns! Many of them don't even try to get carry permits cause they know it's hopeless.

I think we could be surprised if an educated CCW campaign were launched in this state.

We could be badly surprised, too. See this post (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=156804) - serious wet-blanket time.

PsychGuy274
08-02-2010, 11:54 PM
I did not see this topic posted in another thread, but this is my first post, so please be kind if I have duplicated this post unknowingly. As I'm sure most of you are, I'm furious by the ammunition restrictions placed on us by AB 962. I buy all of my ammo online because its cheaper and more convenient, and I do not want to lose this resource. I know there are a number of lawsuits in the works, and I commend those who brought them. I'm an attorney myself, and would love to donate some of my time to these suits if it would be of use.

Given that the efforts to repeal AB 962 legislatively seem to have stalled, I wonder if anyone has given the initiative system any thought? What about a proposition to repeal the law? We could use the opportunity to amend the California constitution and go "over the legislature's head," so to speak. Does anyone know how to get an inititative going? How much does it cost to get a proposition on the ballot (not including the inevitible campaign funds that would be required to defeat the anti-gunners out there)?

Get an 03FFL and a CoE and you will be exempt from AB 962.

bestimmt
08-03-2010, 1:44 PM
Please let me know where the clients that pay that much are!

Well, as I said, I am an attorney, and I bill out at just under $600/hour. I am a fairly junior attorney at this firm, and our most senior partners top out well over $1000/hour. Litigation, particularly large scale litigation, can easily run$500,000/month. The clients are everywhere.

bestimmt
08-03-2010, 1:53 PM
We're pretty familiar both with litigation and the issue of AB962, specifically. Trust that CGF is deeply committed to seeing the case through to a successful outcome, regardless of what it takes to get there. The probability of AB962 falling due to any or all of the 3 lawsuits filed to date is very high.

Your cost estimate is grossly exaggerated.

As I mentioned in the above post, the cost estimate is not exaggerated at all. But I am glad there are smart people working on the issue. I do not share your optimism for the probability of the courts overturning AB962 (particularly when the inevitable appeals go straight to the most liberal tribunal in the nation). But I do share your hope.

wash
08-03-2010, 1:58 PM
Congradulations, you bill at a higher rate than Alan Gura.

How many times have you won at SCOTUS?

gunn
08-03-2010, 2:08 PM
Congradulations, you bill at a higher rate than Alan Gura.

How many times have you won at SCOTUS?

Don't get your panties in a bunch.

bestimmt can charge that much because there are clients willing to pay that much. Simple supply and demand.

Let's face it: there are plenty of legal specialties that pay better than litigating constitutional law. I don't know what area bestimmt works in but I doubt he/she's chasing ambulances or trying to get alkies out of their DUIs.

-g

bestimmt
08-03-2010, 2:10 PM
Congradulations, you bill at a higher rate than Alan Gura.

How many times have you won at SCOTUS?

My firm has actually won before SCOTUS more than any other firm. But the next poster is right, con law is not that lucrative, and it is not what I do.

taperxz
08-03-2010, 2:30 PM
Thats great that you want to help out our gun owners in CA. What is the name of your firm that you work at? Where are you located? What is your field of practicing law? Have you ever been involved in firearm cases? Just asking since you mentioned it and offered assistance.

taperxz
08-03-2010, 2:31 PM
What cases have been brought up before the supreme court? I would have to think that would be a lawyers dream!!

bestimmt
08-03-2010, 2:32 PM
Thats great that you want to help out our gun owners in CA. What is the name of your firm that you work at? Where are you located? What is your field of practicing law? Have you ever been involved in firearm cases? Just asking since you mentioned it and offered assistance.

Thanks. I'd rather not disclose the name of my firm publicly, but it is a major international law firm with offices world-wide. I'm located in the SF bay area. I've never worked on a firearm case, but we have a few attorneys here who are willing to offer what assistance we can (research, brief writing, etc.).

taperxz
08-03-2010, 2:34 PM
You should contact the calguns foundation. They are the brains behind the legal stuff for us and are very professional. GL and hope you can help all of us out

jdberger
08-03-2010, 2:37 PM
Don't get your panties in a bunch.

bestimmt can charge that much because there are clients willing to pay that much. Simple supply and demand.

Let's face it: there are plenty of legal specialties that pay better than litigating constitutional law. I don't know what area bestimmt works in but I doubt he/she's chasing ambulances or trying to get alkies out of their DUIs.

-g

It's a pretty rare Senior partner who can command $1000/hr. I'm also suprised at bestimmt's assertion that as a junior in his firm he bills out at $600. Senior associates usually top out at $500/hr - and that's only if they're pretty special.

http://www.swsslaw.com/newsevents/articles/07/102407.pdf

wildhawker
08-03-2010, 2:50 PM
Thanks. I'd rather not disclose the name of my firm publicly, but it is a major international law firm with offices world-wide. I'm located in the SF bay area. I've never worked on a firearm case, but we have a few attorneys here who are willing to offer what assistance we can (research, brief writing, etc.).

PM sent.

bestimmt
08-03-2010, 2:50 PM
It's a pretty rare Senior partner who can command $1000/hr. I'm also suprised at bestimmt's assertion that as a junior in his firm he bills out at $600. Senior associates usually top out at $500/hr - and that's only if they're pretty special.

http://www.swsslaw.com/newsevents/articles/07/102407.pdf

You just don't understand how law firms work. Here is a survey from 2008:

http://www.lawcrossing.com/article/1327/lawfirmrisingbillingrate

berto
08-03-2010, 3:52 PM
You just don't understand how law firms work. Here is a survey from 2008:

http://www.lawcrossing.com/article/1327/lawfirmrisingbillingrate

Funny, you don't know what Josh knows.

The discussion of who bills what where is a side issue. $1k/hr isn't the norm and much of the heavy billing is done by those down the food chain at lower rates. The $5mm-$10mm you quoted for a court challenge to AB962 was entirely too high (even at $1k/hr it takes 5000 hours to hit $5mm). That same amount might be 20% of what we need to even think of mounting an initiative drive.

Please contact CGF and join the fight. You might check whether your firm is part of the LCAV cabal.

wash
08-03-2010, 4:21 PM
My point was that even though our lawyers are very competent, they bill a lot less than you expect.

You should examine the bill that Alan Gura sent to D.C. for Heller.

With that mix of lawyers, you would average under $400 an hour I think, that's 2,500 hours per million. Gura charged about $1,600,000 or about 4,000 hours to go all the way to SCOTUS and win and he even had to fight against the NRA (kind of). He also asked for a 2x fee enhancement because of the outstanding result he obtained for his client so the total bill was over $3,000,000 (but that's D.C.'s price, not ours).

So where is this $5-10,000,000 number coming from?

It just isn't so.

Oh, I've also told Alan that he needs to raise his rates!

I'm sure McDonald vs. Chicago was a less expensive case to litigate, it was faster too. Future cases should be even less expensive as we wash, rinse and repeat and don't have to start from scratch on every time.

bestimmt
08-03-2010, 5:12 PM
Funny, you don't know what Josh knows.

The discussion of who bills what where is a side issue. $1k/hr isn't the norm and much of the heavy billing is done by those down the food chain at lower rates. The $5mm-$10mm you quoted for a court challenge to AB962 was entirely too high (even at $1k/hr it takes 5000 hours to hit $5mm). That same amount might be 20% of what we need to even think of mounting an initiative drive.

Please contact CGF and join the fight. You might check whether your firm is part of the LCAV cabal.

Look, what you're missing is that no lawyer that I know of works on major litigation alone. While it might be right that it takes an attorney billing $1000/hour (and they are more common than you might imagine) 5000 hours to bill $5 million, it takes two attorneys billing $1000/hour only 2500 hours to do so. And so on. Major litigation done right generally includes a team of lawyers of various skill levels and billing rates all working on - and billing to - the same matter.

But I do agree this is just a digression and is really unimportant. I've contacted CalGuns and will be discussing with them donating some my my time (along with some other lawyers at my firm) to the AB962 litigation. If the litigation is unsuccessful, perhaps then it will be time to consider a ballot initiative.

You guys are way too critical of newcomers trying to help.

jb7706
08-03-2010, 8:18 PM
You guys are way too critical of newcomers trying to help.

It's a shark tank around here for sure. Sometimes I think gun owners have been persecuted so well for so long that they can't believe that anyone would actually want to help without some sort of hidden agenda. It takes a while to gain trust. Please don't take it too personally, even the "well loved" around here take their turn as chum.

berto
08-03-2010, 10:00 PM
But I do agree this is just a digression and is really unimportant. I've contacted CalGuns and will be discussing with them donating some my my time (along with some other lawyers at my firm) to the AB962 litigation. If the litigation is unsuccessful, perhaps then it will be time to consider a ballot initiative.

You guys are way too critical of newcomers trying to help.

Welcome aboard and thanks for joining the fight.

Don't take the criticism personally. Many of us have experience with litigation, law firms, etc, and the initiative idea has been beaten to death.

Cos
08-03-2010, 10:39 PM
Build an AR15 chambered for every pistol round in use and then mark every box of the ammo as "for use in AR15 only".

Then it is no longer pistol ammo.

'tis unlikely to work. seems like .22LR is a subject of AB962 no matter what :-(