PDA

View Full Version : I took the liberty of updating Kevin DeLeon's Wikipedia Page...


CEDaytonaRydr
08-04-2010, 1:23 PM
Let me know what you all think (my updates have been bolded)... :D

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_de_Le%C3%B3n


Supported by Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca and LAPD Police Chief Bratton, De León has authored legislation to require handgun ammunition purchasers to show proof of identification before purchasing ammunition. Sellers of ammunition are also required to record sales in a log and refrain from selling to known gang members and persons under 18 and 21 in some cases.

This legislation states that commencing July 1, 2010, unless specifically excluded, no person shall sell or transfer more than 50 rounds of handgun ammunition in any month unless he or she is registered as a handgun ammunition vendor, as defined. There are no exceptions for relatives. This bill would also legislate that no retail seller of ammunition shall sell, offer for sale, or display for sale, any handgun ammunition in a manner that allows that ammunition to be accessible to a buyer without the assistance of the retailer or employee thereof. All ammunition would have to be locked out of sight of potential customers. The bill would further provide that handgun ammunition may only be purchased in a face-to-face transaction and only if certain conditions exist, which most likely means the elimination of mail order and internet sales.

The legislation was signed into law be Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger on October 12, 2009. It was strongly supported by The Brady Campaign (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brady_Campaign), and gun control advocates. As of yet, no process has been defined to specify what vendors will be required to do in order to become "California approved” ammunition vendors in 2011 (when the law is to take effect). It is certain that this law will increase the cost of ammunition in California and result in people taking their business to out of state vendors in Oregon, Arizona and Nevada. It will also cost the state of California any sales tax revenue that was to be gained for ammunition sales and decrease revenue for California businesses. There is also no evidence that this legislation will prevent crime because of the close working relationship that certain gang elements have between Los Angeles and Las Vegas. Gang members can simply get ammunition in Las Vegas and import it to California, which (under the new law) will not be illegal. This law has been challenged by numerous 2nd Amendment advocacy groups and is expected to be ruled unconstitutional but by the time that ruling is made, the state will have wasted millions of dollars trying to enact a law that will stop no crime and cost the taxpayers more money than it would ever hope to gain for the state. It is also an infringement on the liberty of law abiding gun owners wishing to provide defense for themselves and their family.


It's obviously going to get changed back (as soon as they notice), so feel free to cut and paste my words from here, back into his page if you feel so inclined. Also, I might not be as eloquent as some of you guys, so feel free to modify my words, if you see fit... ;)

Crom
08-04-2010, 1:30 PM
A fine addition indeed. Looks good!

hoffmang
08-04-2010, 1:33 PM
You need to find sources you can cite (like newspaper articles) and then it can't be easily reverted. I suggest you add those cites quickly.

-Gene

FF/EMT Nick
08-04-2010, 1:35 PM
Funny!!!!

:D

CEDaytonaRydr
08-04-2010, 1:42 PM
You need to find sources you can cite (like newspaper articles) and then it can't be easily reverted. I suggest you add those cites quickly.

-Gene

Excellent suggestion. Thanks Gene.... ;)

stitchnicklas
08-04-2010, 1:50 PM
awesome....

BigDogatPlay
08-04-2010, 2:50 PM
It's still there as of 3:45 PM.... :)

A very cogent statement, just needs some sourcing.

CEDaytonaRydr
08-04-2010, 3:21 PM
It's still there as of 3:45 PM.... :)

A very cogent statement, just needs some sourcing.

I've added a few....

I added a link to the actual bill to validate the claim that no process for approving ammo vendors currently exists. For my last sentance, I linked the wikipedia pages to the 2nd Amendment, Heller v D.C. and McDonald v Chicago.

I'm searching for sources for the gang statement (which I've read before somewhere) and a good source for the claims that people will spend money and go to other states. Other than this website, I honestly don't know where to look...

bodger
08-04-2010, 3:23 PM
Well done.

Wherryj
08-04-2010, 3:48 PM
It's still there as of 3:45 PM.... :)

A very cogent statement, just needs some sourcing.

4:53 and still going...

RP1911
08-04-2010, 3:51 PM
I believe during the hearing there were some statistics regarding revenue loss etc.

Rivers
08-04-2010, 3:53 PM
In case someone wants to add the pertinent SCOTUS decision that deLeon missed, it's Rowe v. New Hampshire Motor Transport Association, 9-0 to strike down Maine's law requiring delivery drivers to check the age of delivery recipients to prevent underage interstate cigarette purchases.

http://www.scotuswiki.com/index.php?title=Rowe_v._NH_Motor_Transport

CEDaytonaRydr
08-04-2010, 3:53 PM
I believe during the hearing there were some statistics regarding revenue loss etc.

Was there a transcript?

That would be awesome....

thayne
08-04-2010, 4:07 PM
Also the bolded parts were changed/removed

This legislation states that commencing July 1, 2010, unless specifically excluded, no person shall sell or transfer more than 50 rounds of handgun ammunition in any month unless he or she is registered as a handgun ammunition vendor, as defined. There are no exceptions for relatives. This bill would also legislate that no retail seller of ammunition shall sell, offer for sale, or display for sale, any handgun ammunition in a manner that allows that ammunition to be accessible to a buyer without the assistance of the retailer or employee thereof. All ammunition would have to be locked out of sight of potential customers. The bill would further provide that handgun ammunition may only be purchased in a face-to-face transaction and only if certain conditions exist, which most likely means the elimination of mail order and internet sales.

Wherryj
08-04-2010, 4:10 PM
I've added a few....

I added a link to the actual bill to validate the claim that no process for approving ammo vendors currently exists. For my last sentance, I linked the wikipedia pages to the 2nd Amendment, Heller v D.C. and McDonald v Chicago.

I'm searching for sources for the gang statement (which I've read before somewhere) and a good source for the claims that people will spend money and go to other states. Other than this website, I honestly don't know where to look...

http://www.cathyscott.com/artcls/California%20exports%20gang%20violence.html
http://www.streetgangs.com/topics/tupac/100296arrest.html

CEDaytonaRydr
08-04-2010, 4:16 PM
http://www.cathyscott.com/artcls/California%20exports%20gang%20violence.html

Thanks man... I owe you a cold one... :cheers2:

CEDaytonaRydr
08-04-2010, 4:21 PM
Also the bolded parts were changed/removed


I haven't been keeping up with the bill that closely...

Are you saying the requirement to become a "licensed" (for lack of a better term) ammo vendor is not part of AB962 anymore?

thayne
08-04-2010, 4:23 PM
no the 50 round part was removed

CEDaytonaRydr
08-04-2010, 4:28 PM
no the 50 round part was removed

So, even if it's 1 round, the rules apply?

Good to know... ;)

thayne
08-04-2010, 4:31 PM
So, even if it's 1 round, the rules apply?

Good to know... ;)

No the 50 round per month limit was removed. As it stands you still have to buy in a face to face transaction from a licensed vendor and give your ID and a thumb print, but you can buy as much as you want

Davidoff
08-04-2010, 4:41 PM
Well done!! That is highly amusing.

You do need better cites though if we want to see that stay for a bit.

Here's a few for the current lawsuits against AB962:

OOIDA v. Lindley (http://ia360709.us.archive.org/23/items/gov.uscourts.caed.211363/gov.uscourts.caed.211363.1.0.pdf)

State Ammunition v. Lindley (https://docs.google.com/fileview?id=0B265PzaPpihQYTlhYWIxNTktYjExNy00YTdiL Tk5MjUtZGRhMTJkYzNjMzIz&hl=en&pli=1)

RP1911
08-04-2010, 4:41 PM
re economic impact:

page 6 has per state data.

http://www.nssf.org/PDF/2010EconomicImpact.pdf

CaliforniaLiberal
08-04-2010, 5:17 PM
Nicely done!

A good example of Wikipedia writing.

curtisfong
08-04-2010, 5:20 PM
Guess he didn't like this change much

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kevin_de_Le%C3%B3n&action=historysubmit&diff=354477931&oldid=351928782

Reverted by Kevin himself.

IIRC there are WP policies against this.

RP1911
08-04-2010, 5:24 PM
Here is more info on CA economic impact:

http://www.gunownersca.com/news/display/?id=606

This was part of the testimony I believe.

curtisfong
08-04-2010, 5:27 PM
Guys, current incarnation will NOT last on WP, regardless of the number of cites you add. It has way too much POV slant. It really has to be rewritten :(

pat038536
08-04-2010, 5:50 PM
still there as of 18:49

HowardW56
08-04-2010, 6:12 PM
Good work!

Shotgun Man
08-04-2010, 6:26 PM
You keep it up, you're gonna get banned from the internet!:)

Lone_Gunman
08-04-2010, 9:20 PM
I was gonna upload this photo on the page but you gotta have an account to do it.

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/attachment.php?attachmentid=64263&stc=1&d=1280985621

bodger
08-04-2010, 9:40 PM
Take a shot at Mike Feuer next.

CEDaytonaRydr
08-04-2010, 9:42 PM
Guys, current incarnation will NOT last on WP, regardless of the number of cites you add. It has way too much POV slant. It really has to be rewritten :(

Well, that's where you guys come in! you can cut and paste it back in there, if I don't get to it in time... :D

curtisfong
08-04-2010, 9:46 PM
Well, that's where you guys come in! you can cut and paste it back in there, if I don't get to it in time... :D

Not worth the trouble. You'll just get a bunch of people blocked for vandalism, when what they COULD do is write a non-POV article that does the job....

jdberger
08-04-2010, 10:20 PM
You need to find sources you can cite (like newspaper articles) and then it can't be easily reverted. I suggest you add those cites quickly.

-Gene

Sources referencing the pending litigation should be easy to find. I'd cite straight into the Complaints.

jdberger
08-04-2010, 11:10 PM
I'm betting that he was told that his Wiki page was changed. We've lots of visitors to the 2A forum these days.

FWIW - he has quite the war chest.

Donations to:
Kevin Deleon Believing In A Better California Ballot Measure Committee - $25,000
Deleon For Senate 2010, Kevin - $3,900
Kevin Deleon Believing In A Better California - $5,000
Deleon For Assembly 2010 - $2,500
Kevin Deleon For Assembly 2010 - $3,900
Kevin Deleon For Assembly 2010 - $1,000
Deleon For Assembly 2010, Kevin - $2,000
Kevin Deleon For Senate 2010 - $3,900
Kevin Deleon For Senate 2010 - $1,500
Kevin Deleon For Assembly 2010 - $1,000
Kevin Deleon For Senate 2010 - $2,000
Kevin Deleon For Senate 2010 - $1,000
Deleon For Senate 2010, Kevin - $400
Deleon For Senate 2010, Kevin - $1,000
Deleon For Senate 2010, Kevin - $2,000
Deleon For Assembly 2010, Kevin - $1,000
Deleon For Assembly 2010, Kevin - $1,000
Kevin Deleon For Assembly 2010 - $1,000

and he isn't afraid to spend it...

Kevin Deleon For Assembly 2008: $3,600 to Hill For State Assembly, Jerry (06/11/08)
Kevin Deleon For Assembly 2008: $3,600 to Wolk For Senate '08 (12/31/07)
Friends Of Kevin Deleon: $3,600 to Furutani For Assembly (10/26/07)

xr650r
08-04-2010, 11:43 PM
Someday, I hope Mr de Leon gets to live in the real world, not just the glad-handing Democratic political one he resides in now.

Davidoff
08-04-2010, 11:47 PM
The bastard supported Wolk? She doesn't even respond to my emails about opposing new gun laws.

RT13
08-05-2010, 1:11 AM
Very nice! Good job OP!

CEDaytonaRydr
08-05-2010, 7:55 AM
The bastard supported Wolk? She doesn't even respond to my emails about opposing new gun laws.

Well, ever since he was walking around during his campaign and found a shell casing... :nopity:

While walking neighborhoods during his first campaign De León stumbled across bullet casing on side walks just feet where children were playing and has ever since been determined to the get handgun ammunition that fuels this violence out of the hands of criminals and gang-bangers.

:rolleyes:

That is some of the sappiest, corniest bunch of B.S. I've ever heard a politician try to pander to voters with...

Wherryj
08-05-2010, 9:45 AM
You keep it up, you're gonna get banned from the internet!:)

I don't think that De Leon has that kind of power. Only Al Gore (owns the internet) and President Obama (owns the US) have that kind of power.

Rekrab
08-05-2010, 9:56 AM
The Forty-Fifth Assembly District has been plagued by gang violence. While walking neighborhoods during his first campaign De León claims he stumbled across bullet casing on side walks just feet from where children were playing and has ever since been determined to the get handgun ammunition that he believes fuels this violence out of the hands of criminals, gang-bangers, and legitimate citizens.

Made a few changes to this section myself. I like it a lot better.

Window_Seat
08-05-2010, 10:20 AM
The Forty-Fifth Assembly District has been plagued by gang violence. While walking neighborhoods during his first campaign De León claims he stumbled across bullet casing on side walks just feet from where children were playing and has ever since been determined to the get handgun ammunition that he believes fuels this violence out of the hands of criminals, gang-bangers, and legitimate citizens into the hands of criminals, gang-bangers, and out of the hands of legitimate citizens. Made a few changes to this section myself. I like it a lot better.

fixed it for ya!:cool:

Erik.

Lancear15
08-05-2010, 10:37 AM
I found a 5.56 and a .40 brass in my driveway and gutter the other day. Does that mean I live in a crime ridden neighborhood and some gang banger did a drive by? Or did I just drop em when I was unloading my truck after a range trip? Hmm not sure :confused:

CEDaytonaRydr
08-10-2010, 3:43 PM
Still up and running!!! :D

KylaGWolf
08-10-2010, 11:59 PM
Although I believe the 50 round part was struck out of the ending legislation.

Glock22Fan
08-11-2010, 8:43 AM
My contribution, in bold.


The bill would further provide that handgun ammunition may only be purchased in a face-to-face transaction and only if certain conditions exist, which most likely means the elimination of mail order and internet sales. Ammunition is available in a wide range of manufacturers, bullet weights, constructions, materials and calibers. As sound business reasons make it impractical for any local supplier to stock more than a small sample of commonly requested items, legitimate purchasers requiring specialist items (such as lead-free ammunition for hunting, or ammunition in rare or unusual calibers) may have to drive hundreds of miles, or even fly right across the United States, to satisfy their needs from mail order and internet suppliers who are unable (under this legislation) to ship to California.

glockman19
08-11-2010, 9:13 AM
How do they expect to enforce this?

I'll continue to order out of state depriving CA of sales taxes in addition to having it mailed UPS to my house.

Let them violate the interstate commerce clause. This will quickly go to a federal court where it will be found an "infringement" of a basic right. you couldn't take away paper and ink or one's voice and not violate the first amendment.

As for Kevin DeLeon...He's a tool..along with Mike Feuer. They have a socialist "we will take care of you" mentality that no longer works for a majority of Californians. Feuer attempted to make Non-lethal forms of self defense, felonys last session...can you believe that. He wanted to make mace, pepper spray and tasers a felony on college campuses. Crazy.

What we need to do is find someone in the district we can support to help Kevin back to his roots as a "community organizer" and lobbyist for the destructive California Teachers Association.

BigDogatPlay
08-11-2010, 9:52 AM
As for Kevin DeLeon...He's a tool..along with Mike Feuer. They have a socialist "we will take care of you" mentality that no longer works for a majority of Californians.

I would submit their mentality does indeed work for a majority of Californians.... the ones who vote, anyway. Otherwise why would they, and others who think as they do, keep being returned to office cycle after cycle after cycle.

Or is your point that the average California voter is really, really obtuse? :)

Glock22Fan
08-11-2010, 10:18 AM
How do they expect to enforce this?

I'll continue to order out of state depriving CA of sales taxes in addition to having it mailed UPS to my house.



The later part of your post (where you expect a lawsuit to take care of things eventually) may well be correct. In the meantime, they expect to enforce it the same way that they have persuaded many suppliers not to send all sorts of gun-related items to California. Just look at the CTD catalog, for one example: "Not shipped to California" all over it.

Have you tried ordering a 15 round magazine from out of state lately?

Shotgun Man
08-11-2010, 5:08 PM
Although I believe the 50 round part was struck out of the ending legislation.

You are right. Someone should remove that, as it undermines the credibility of the article.

This legislation states that commencing July 1, 2010, unless specifically excluded, no person shall sell or transfer more than 50 rounds of handgun ammunition in any month unless he or she is registered as a handgun ammunition vendor, as defined.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_de_Le%C3%B3n

WeekendWarrior
08-11-2010, 5:32 PM
I'll buy from Cabellas in Reno considering I make about 20 tahoe trips per year to the North end of the lake

advocatusdiaboli
08-11-2010, 8:10 PM
I don't think that De Leon has that kind of power. Only Al Gore (owns the internet) and President Obama (owns the US) have that kind of power.

Obama doesn't own the US--Goldman-Sachs and the rest of the banking industry does and they own Obama and Congress too.

glockman19
08-11-2010, 8:48 PM
I would submit their mentality does indeed work for a majority of Californians.... the ones who vote, anyway. Otherwise why would they, and others who think as they do, keep being returned to office cycle after cycle after cycle.

Or is your point that the average California voter is really, really obtuse? :)

Yep. Great adjective. Other great Synonyms: Philistine, asinine, blundering, boorish, bovine, churlish, dense, doltish, gross, indelicate, inelegant, loutish, lowbrow, lumpish, oafish, raw, rough, rude, stupid, uncouth, unrefined, vulgar, witless

Shotgun Man
08-11-2010, 8:58 PM
You are right. Someone should remove that, as it undermines the credibility of the article.

Sorry to quote my own post, but I deleted the 50-round text as it undermined the crediblity of the additions. I also clarified the AB 962 reference which surprisingly was not initially expressly mentioned.

greasemonkey
08-11-2010, 10:24 PM
huh, that's weird, looks like all the references to handguns are similar to Mayor Daley's hundgun roster. :43:

Tarn_Helm
08-12-2010, 5:10 AM
My contribution, in bold.

"impractable" is not a word.

Gryff
08-12-2010, 8:26 AM
Obama doesn't own the US--Goldman-Sachs and the rest of the banking industry does and they own Obama and Congress too.

I thought Richard Daley owned Obama?

Glock22Fan
08-12-2010, 8:41 AM
"impractable" is not a word.

Thank you. I was having a creative moment.

Wherryj
08-12-2010, 9:11 AM
Obama doesn't own the US--Goldman-Sachs and the rest of the banking industry does and they own Obama and Congress too.

That WAS meant in jest, but if you want to be correct, CHINA owns the US.

motorhead
08-12-2010, 10:23 AM
I was gonna upload this photo on the page but you gotta have an account to do it.

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/attachment.php?attachmentid=64263&stc=1&d=1280985621
cool! i did a similar one of our beloved first primate.
http://i268.photobucket.com/albums/jj22/neon_tony/th_odevil.jpg (http://i268.photobucket.com/albums/jj22/neon_tony/odevil.jpg)
forgot to make the eyes red though.

freonr22
08-21-2010, 9:47 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_de_Le%C3%B3n

[quote] The Forty-Fifth Assembly District has been plagued by gang violence. While walking neighborhoods during his first campaign De León claims he stumbled across bullet casings on side walks just feet from where children were playing and has ever since been determined to get hundgun ammunition that he believes fuels this violence out of the hands of criminals, gang-bangers, and legitimate citizens. Supported by Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca and LAPD Police Chief Bratton, De León has authored legislation (AB 962) to require hundgun ammunition purchasers to show proof of identification before purchasing ammunition. Sellers of ammunition are also required to record sales in a log and refrain from selling to known gang members and persons under 18 and 21 in some cases.
AB 962 also legislated that no retail seller of ammunition shall sell, offer for sale, or display for sale, any hundgun ammunition in a manner that allows that ammunition to be accessible to a buyer without the assistance of the retailer or employee thereof. All ammunition would have to be locked out of sight of potential customers. The bill would further provide that hundgun ammunition may only be purchased in a face-to-face transaction and only if certain conditions exist, which most likely means the elimination of mail order and internet sales. Ammunition is available in a wide range of manufacturers, bullet weights, constructions, materials and calibers. As sound business reasons make it impractical for any local supplier to stock more than a small sample of commonly requested items, legitimate purchasers requiring specialist items (such as lead-free ammunition for hunting, or ammunition in rare or unusual calibers) may have to drive hundreds of miles, or even fly right across the United States, to satisfy their needs from mail order and internet suppliers who are unable (under this legislation) to ship to California.
The legislation was signed into law be Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger on October 12, 2009. It was strongly supported by The Brady Campaign (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brady_Campaign), and gun control advocates. As of yet, no process has been defined to specify what vendors will be required to do in order to become "California approved” ammunition vendors in 2011 (when the law is to take effect).[1] (http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/09-10/bill/asm/ab_0951-1000/ab_962_bill_20090226_introduced.pdf) It is almost certain that this law will increase the cost of ammunition in California (due to additional fees required by the state) and result in people taking their business to out of state vendors in Oregon, Arizona and Nevada. [2] (http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/09-10/bill/asm/ab_0951-1000/ab_962_bill_20090226_introduced.pdf) It will also cost the state of California any sales tax revenue that was to be gained for ammunition sales and decrease revenue for California businesses. There is also no evidence that this legislation will prevent crime because of the close working relationship that certain gang elements have between Los Angeles and Las Vegas. [3] (http://www.cathyscott.com/artcls/California%20exports%20gang%20violence.html) Gang members can simply get ammunition in Las Vegas and import it to California, which (under the new law) will not be illegal. Neither will it be illegal or tracable should they send their sister or girlfriend into the nearest local store to buy whatever ammunition happens to be available. AWESOME! This law has been challenged by numerous 2nd Amendment advocacy groups and is expected to be ruled unconstitutional but by the time that ruling is made, the state will have wasted millions of dollars trying to enact a law that will stop no crime and cost the taxpayers more money than it would ever hope to gain for the state. It is also an infringement on the liberty and constitutional rights of law abiding gun owners wishing to provide defense for themselves and their family.[\quote]

just looked today mispellings on purpose?

greasemonkey
08-21-2010, 10:49 AM
They're in reference to Chicago's roster.
II. ROSTER OF UNSAFE HUNDGUNS AS DESIGNATED BY THE
SUPERINTENDENT
a. Where a model or type is not specifically referenced, all models from the
listed manufacturer are deemed unsafe.

just looked today mispellings on purpose?

Flogger23m
08-21-2010, 11:15 AM
Gang members can simply get ammunition in Las Vegas and import it to California, which (under the new law) will not be illegal...

I suggest you remove this part before they get the idea that they should make it illegal for people to legally buy ammo in other states.

Of course, if they did that, it won't stop the gang members from getting ammo anyways. :rolleyes:

Scratch705
08-21-2010, 2:43 PM
I suggest you remove this part before they get the idea that they should make it illegal for people to legally buy ammo in other states.

Of course, if they did that, it won't stop the gang members from getting ammo anyways. :rolleyes:

hard to track/enforce if they banned interstate travel with legally purchased ammunition. then they will really be f'ing with the interstate commerce clause.

they would have to prop up "check stations" at every road leading in and out of CA and I doubt this state has that much money. plus then all someone has to do is take a backroad that crosses statelines (which i'm sure there are plenty of) and just get back on the highways where the check stations are located after you pass them.

triaged
08-22-2010, 10:54 PM
IIRC The law doesn't define "handgun ammo". Someone want to add that?

CEDaytonaRydr
11-29-2010, 3:03 PM
Looks like he FINALLY got around to updating his wikipedia page... :rolleyes:

jdberger
11-29-2010, 3:19 PM
It's gone back to being a political puff piece.

CEDaytonaRydr
11-29-2010, 3:23 PM
It's gone back to being a political puff piece.

Yeah...

God forbid the truth gets told. ;)

BKinzey
11-29-2010, 3:31 PM
He missed one!:D:D

...determined to get handgun ammunition that he believes fuels this violence out of the hands of criminals, gang-bangers, and legitimate citizens.

N6ATF
11-29-2010, 5:43 PM
Great now he'll know what to fix...

10-54
11-29-2010, 8:10 PM
You keep it up, you're gonna get banned from the internet!:)

^^^HAHAHAHA

Great Work Brosef:D

CEDaytonaRydr
11-30-2010, 9:05 PM
It looks like any mention of the ammo ban has been taken down... :confused:

One of you guys? :chris:

;)

greasemonkey
11-30-2010, 9:14 PM
Has anyone updated the page with any of the three lawsuits brought against DeLeon's pet project ammo ban and how much his disregard for Federal Law and the Constitution is going to cost taxpayers in litigating this on 3 different fronts?

cineski
12-01-2010, 5:46 AM
No matter how much I agree, this is still an opinion and opinions are what's wrong with Wiki.

CRACKERJACK
12-01-2010, 12:12 PM
Has anyone updated the page with any of the three lawsuits brought against DeLeon's pet project ammo ban and how much his disregard for Federal Law and the Constitution is going to cost taxpayers in litigating this on 3 different fronts?

Somebody should do three quick write ups on the cases. Then create a controversy section in his and link to the cases. Pretty sure that would withhold. I'd try but my wikifoo is next to nothing, maybe I'll build it up after finals.:cool2:

curtisfong
12-01-2010, 1:36 PM
I'd try but my wikifoo is next to nothing, maybe I'll build it up after finals.:cool2:

You have to know all the right Wiki incantations to navigate the politics there. Use lots of acronyms, like "BLP-EDIT" and "AGF", and above all, pretend to be unbiased. If you do it right, and you get the right allies, you can make just about anything you want stick.

If in doubt, take the nuclear option, and just have his page removed altogether. BLPs are quite easy to get removed if you know how to play the game.

CEDaytonaRydr
12-02-2010, 2:12 PM
Somebody should do three quick write ups on the cases. Then create a controversy section in his and link to the cases. Pretty sure that would withhold. I'd try but my wikifoo is next to nothing, maybe I'll build it up after finals.:cool2:

I like this idea... ;)

joefreas
01-27-2011, 2:58 PM
His Wiki needs to be updated again!

12voltguy
01-27-2011, 3:52 PM
His Wiki needs to be updated again!

done;)

N6ATF
01-27-2011, 4:01 PM
A bit out of date...

CEDaytonaRydr
01-28-2011, 9:06 AM
It's weird; all mention of AB962 has been deleted. Hmmm... :confused:

Maestro Pistolero
01-28-2011, 9:12 AM
It's weird; all mention of AB962 has been deleted. Hmmm... :confused:

Is it possible to fix that historical omission?

GP3
01-28-2011, 9:16 AM
The current AB692 paragraphs are surely to be removed.

The info that was up there a week ago was perfect.

j-rod
01-28-2011, 9:31 AM
Guys, current incarnation will NOT last on WP, regardless of the number of cites you add. It has way too much POV slant. It really has to be rewritten :(

Yep. I completely agree with the OP but that was not a neutral POV as is the standard for any encyclopedic work. Though we have no love for De Leon, our counter arguments to the bill should be on a page talking about AB962. Best to leave the mudslinging (even slight) to the other side. Clean hands make for better handshakes.

DisgruntledReaper
01-28-2011, 10:18 AM
Yep. I completely agree with the OP but that was not a neutral POV as is the standard for any encyclopedic work. Though we have no love for De Leon, our counter arguments to the bill should be on a page talking about AB962. Best to leave the mudslinging (even slight) to the other side. Clean hands make for better handshakes.-AND A BETTER GRIP ON THE BICHSLAP STICK IF NEEDED!

----there added it for you!!:p:chris::D

j-rod
01-28-2011, 11:01 AM
----there added it for you!!:p:chris::D

Exactly! :D

CEDaytonaRydr
01-28-2011, 12:12 PM
Yep. I completely agree with the OP but that was not a neutral POV as is the standard for any encyclopedic work. Though we have no love for De Leon, our counter arguments to the bill should be on a page talking about AB962. Best to leave the mudslinging (even slight) to the other side. Clean hands make for better handshakes.

If what we had previously written was somehow "untrue", I would agree. However, we cited our sources and worded everything very professionally... (at least, I did :D )

I think it's important to know where a politician stands on the issues. Other politician's pages on WP include their stance on key issues. Why can't DeLeon's?

In DeLeon's case, it needs to be said that he drafted a law that was deemed unconsitutional and overturned because it was poorly written. That's not opinion-based, that's historically factual! It's a testament to his incompetence and his willingness to waste taxpayer dollars on his own, personal "crusade" against guns. Regardless of the issues and where he stands on them, it needs to be shown that he's an ineffective legislator who (if nothing else) is wasting the CA Assembly's time, writting sub-standard law.

His Brady campaign contributions should also be noted... (does anyone know how much the Brady campaign has paid this crook? :confused:)

gatdammit
01-28-2011, 12:31 PM
Next time someone updates the site, post it here, so when it gets deleted again, we can copy and paste it back! lol

Dovii4ever
01-28-2011, 2:27 PM
I would put under his Bio information "Kevin DeLeon a worthless piece of gun grabbing filth from the great state of California"

j-rod
01-28-2011, 2:38 PM
...And there it goes... locked down due to 'NPOV vadalism' (Neutral point of view).

CEDaytonaRydr
02-14-2011, 9:44 AM
Just checked it again. Appears to be back up...

I love the picture they chose for Kevin. He just looks sooooo sad... :(

:tt2:





http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_de_Le%C3%B3n

Merc1138
02-14-2011, 10:14 AM
If you guys want the info to stay up, you need to make a page about ab962, and then put a blurb on deleon's page about it linking to the ab962 page. You can't just keep posting how the guy is a stinky doody head and how his bill is anti 2a etc. on his main page. Wikipedia simply doesn't work that way(and showing an obvious bias is a quick way to get things taken down).

CEDaytonaRydr
02-14-2011, 10:34 AM
If you guys want the info to stay up, you need to make a page about ab962, and then put a blurb on deleon's page about it linking to the ab962 page. You can't just keep posting how the guy is a stinky doody head and how his bill is anti 2a etc. on his main page. Wikipedia simply doesn't work that way(and showing an obvious bias is a quick way to get things taken down).

There already is:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Assembly_Bill_962_(2009)



Who cares if it gets taken down? It's wikipedia! Everyone knows it's user-updated. No one of reasonable intelligence takes it seriously and it's almost impossible to consider WP a valid source of information.

Try referencing it on a college paper and see what your professor says. For all anyone knows, you personally made the update to wikipedia yourself and referenced your own "source".

We can keep it as "factual", as we did in the beginning but they'll just change it back.

Merc1138
02-14-2011, 11:10 AM
Well obviously someone cares if it gets taken down, or did you not notice the people in this thread keep re-posting it, and getting the page locked from editing?

Glock22Fan
02-14-2011, 11:17 AM
There already is:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Assembly_Bill_962_(2009)



Who cares if it gets taken down? It's wikipedia! Everyone knows it's user-updated. No one of reasonable intelligence takes it seriously and it's almost impossible to consider WP a valid source of information.

Try referencing it on a college paper and see what your professor says. For all anyone knows, you personally made the update to wikipedia yourself and referenced your own "source".

We can keep it as "factual", as we did in the beginning but they'll just change it back.

Bad link. Do you mean this one (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Assembly_Bill_962_(2009))?

Veggie
02-14-2011, 11:19 AM
You can report to wikipedia someone taking down factual information I believe.

joefreas
02-14-2011, 12:36 PM
It is probably DeLeon himself. Sitting in his office continually updating his own Wikipedia- :yes:

CEDaytonaRydr
02-14-2011, 12:41 PM
It is probably DeLeon himself. Sitting in his office continually updating his own Wikipedia- :yes:

Prolly...

He's wasted enough of the taxpayer's time and money with poorly written legislation, so it wouldn't surprise me if he was wasting more of it trying to save what face he has left... :rolleyes:

cmaynes
02-14-2011, 2:12 PM
outstanding effort.... just outstanding....:party:

Veggie
02-14-2011, 2:14 PM
It is probably DeLeon himself. Sitting in his office continually updating his own Wikipedia- :yes:

He probably used tax payer money to hire a Wikipedia Liaison. LOL

CalBear
02-14-2011, 2:22 PM
Guys, it's a bit irregular to put so much information regarding some legislation under the author's wiki article when there is already an article where most of that information exists or belongs. It would probably fit in more with the wiki standards if his page only contained a mention that he wrote the bill, along with the link to the article.

CEDaytonaRydr
02-14-2011, 3:14 PM
Guys, it's a bit irregular to put so much information regarding some legislation under the author's wiki article when there is already an article where most of that information exists or belongs. It would probably fit in more with the wiki standards if his page only contained a mention that he wrote the bill, along with the link to the article.

You don't think it's noteworthy to mention that is was deemed unconstitutionally vauge and was thrown out on that basis? That is a factual piece of information; Not biased or one-sided at all.

Dreaded Claymore
02-14-2011, 7:30 PM
Who cares if it gets taken down? It's wikipedia! Everyone knows it's user-updated. No one of reasonable intelligence takes it seriously and it's almost impossible to consider WP a valid source of information.

Try referencing it on a college paper and see what your professor says. For all anyone knows, you personally made the update to wikipedia yourself and referenced your own "source"

Sure I wouldn't cite it as a source if I was writing something, but you're really selling Wikipedia short here. It's a wonderful resource for familiarizing yourself with something you don't know anything about. I'm of reasonable intelligence and I refer to it all the time.

CEDaytonaRydr
02-14-2011, 7:36 PM
Sure I wouldn't cite it as a source if I was writing something, but you're really selling Wikipedia short here. It's a wonderful resource for familiarizing yourself with something you don't know anything about. I'm of reasonable intelligence and I refer to it all the time.

Yeah, you "refer" to it. That's fine. So do I.

However, you know full well that it's community updated and you know that it's content is not always 100% accurate. So, if we post facts pertinent to his effort against guns, why shouldn't it be left up there?

That's all I'm saying... ;)

N6ATF
02-14-2011, 7:58 PM
You don't think it's noteworthy to mention that is was deemed unconstitutionally vauge and was thrown out on that basis? That is a factual piece of information; Not biased or one-sided at all.

The facts about civil gun rights are not welcome on Wikipedia.

CEDaytonaRydr
02-14-2011, 8:00 PM
The facts about civil gun rights are not welcome on Wikipedia.

So I'm discovering... ;)

CalBear
02-14-2011, 8:18 PM
You don't think it's noteworthy to mention that is was deemed unconstitutionally vauge and was thrown out on that basis? That is a factual piece of information; Not biased or one-sided at all.
It's absolutely noteworthy. That's why I wrote the article on AB 962 and mentioned it:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Assembly_Bill_962_(2009)

What's irregular is repeating so much information on De Leon's page. The information about AB 962 page is on the AB 962 page. Mentions of AB 962 on De Leon's page should be limited to a brief snippet and a link to the AB 962 article.

CEDaytonaRydr
06-22-2012, 11:23 AM
Well, it's been a while since my last revision. I figure I'd give it another "update". :43:


In his official capacity, De León focuses his efforts on circumventing the second amendment of the U.S. Constitution by proposing gun control and ammunition control legislation. California Assembly Bill 962 would have required ammunition retailers to register with the state and would require buyers to be fingerprinted upon purchasing ammunition. This bill was struck down by the California Superior Court as being "constitutionally vauge".

RazzB7
06-22-2012, 11:24 AM
You misspelled "vague"

CEDaytonaRydr
06-22-2012, 11:38 AM
You misspelled "vague"

So I did... :o

Fixed it! Thanks.

eville
06-22-2012, 12:28 PM
Love it.
You should go to work on Yee
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leland_Yee

CEDaytonaRydr
06-22-2012, 1:03 PM
Love it.
You should go to work on Yee
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leland_Yee

De Leon is a bit closer to home for me, but yeah! ...feel free to update his page as well. Give em hell, boys!!!

alfred1222
06-22-2012, 11:23 PM
Nice job!!!

lrdchivalry
06-23-2012, 11:41 AM
Isn't DeLeon also responsible for introducing an even worse bill that would have included rifle ammo and also sought to ban all ammo by changing the definition of armor piercing ammo to basically include all ammo since it can pierce metal?