PDA

View Full Version : Skip the DOJ??


1911 Rookie
05-10-2006, 4:58 PM
Why don't we skip the DOJ and contact our local representatives? Suggest to them that the DOJ has not been doing it's job and that they need to encourage the DOJ to LIST. The DOJ doesn't give a twit about us but maybe some pressure from their kind might help. also it might be tough for a rep to explain how they didn't help solve this problem with existing laws when they are up for re-election.

Just a thought,
Jason

Ford8N
05-10-2006, 5:54 PM
Excellent idea.

And probably the only way.

TKo_Productions
05-10-2006, 6:00 PM
The legislative windfall that could occur from such action could be tremendous.

Would such legislation occur if we never pushed the issue? Without a doubt.

May we end up speeding along such legislation? Perhaps.

However, I agree that this may very well be the only way to force the DOJ to list.

We may want to contact Keith Richman and Claude Parrish (Lockyear’s opponents in the race for Treasurer). Let them know the bang up job that old Bill's doing. Use a little political mudslinging in our favor.

the_quark
05-10-2006, 7:05 PM
Personally speaking I think trying to drum up "anti-gun" support to cause them to list is a serious, serious mistake. We do not need to do their grassroots work for them. Mark my words, if this continues the way it's been going, they will eventually be forced to write a new law. When that happens, it will be sad in the extreme if the "grassroots support" they cite is really pro-gun people trying to drum up support for listing.

"We have met the enemy, and he is us." --Pogo

383green
05-10-2006, 9:46 PM
Personally speaking I think trying to drum up "anti-gun" support to cause them to list is a serious, serious mistake. We do not need to do their grassroots work for them. Mark my words, if this continues the way it's been going, they will eventually be forced to write a new law. When that happens, it will be sad in the extreme if the "grassroots support" they cite is really pro-gun people trying to drum up support for listing.

I don't think that forcing "them" to write up a new law is necessarily a bad thing. I don't see how they can make the Evil Black Rifles any more illegal without a blanket ban of semi-auto rifles, and that might just piss off enough gun owners to get some folks kicked out of office and/or spark a big ol' court battle. Trying to maintain the status quo is no good; the status quo is already an unacceptable situation. I think it's time to force the "anti's" to play their hand, so that they either overstep what they can get away with and get spanked, or get what they want and remove any doubt about whether California is salvagable or not.

chris
05-10-2006, 10:21 PM
i don't think getting the legislature involved will work. remember what party runs it? remember their attitude towards gun ownership. if we get them involved they may like others have said ban all semi-auto rifles. then what? just wait til november and vote their collective *****ess out of office that would work better to our advantage. we are divided as gun owners and we need to come together and vote them out. i have said this before.

i do agree that the message of the DOJ not doing their job needs to be done. but the ballot box is the best way. fire them at election time. it will be tough given the overwhelming democrat voting public in this state.

jonb
05-10-2006, 10:34 PM
The legislative windfall that could occur from such action could be tremendous.

Would such legislation occur if we never pushed the issue? Without a doubt.

May we end up speeding along such legislation? Perhaps.

However, I agree that this may very well be the only way to force the DOJ to list.

We may want to contact Keith Richman and Claude Parrish (Lockyear’s opponents in the race for Treasurer). Let them know the bang up job that old Bill's doing. Use a little political mudslinging in our favor.


If this idea backfires and all the other semi-auto owners think ar owners are responsible for making their lives miserable you won't be able to go to the range with an ar unless you want to be the target of their rage, justified or not. Pryde made no bones about his hostility toward us, he won't be the only one if the fruits of our labor is a total ban on any detachable mags on any c.f. rifle.

I know I'm going to get flamed, but this type of idea, where ar owners (off list ones at that) call on legislators to get firearms banned from coming into Cali leaves me with a bad taste in my mouth. I have several hundred $ invested into o.l.l.'s so I'm not just on the sidelines.

Maybe I'm missing something, but what is wrong with not forcing anyones hand right now?
just my .02

the_quark
05-10-2006, 10:42 PM
I don't think that forcing "them" to write up a new law is necessarily a bad thing. I don't see how they can make the Evil Black Rifles any more illegal without a blanket ban of semi-auto rifles, and that might just piss off enough gun owners to get some folks kicked out of office and/or spark a big ol' court battle.

Don't misunderstand: I agree with you that a new legal round may not be a bad thing. We may be able to either force them to drop AB23 as untenable, or threaten to outlaw so many guns it'll finally make everyone wake up and smell the coffee.

My point is, bearing in mind that a new round of legislation is likely, drumming up false "astroturf" support for banning assault weapons so that Lockyer will update the list of known AR series weapons seems very short-sighted to me. If we do get a new gun-grabbing bill in legislature, I don't want our representatives thinking, "Wow, I'd better vote for this, because CLEARLY the existing bill doesn't work and CLEARLY people are angry about it, because I keep getting all these calls telling me Lockyer isn't doing his job." Trying to blow up the OLLs in the press in order to get the ARs listed is a very short-sighted strategy that could result in a much worse bill actually PASSING. Which, I think none of us want. We want to invalidate SB23 via a thousand cuts, and then defeat the much worse bill, and kill this issue.

Ford8N
05-11-2006, 6:15 AM
If this idea backfires and all the other semi-auto owners think ar owners are responsible for making their lives miserable you won't be able to go to the range with an ar unless you want to be the target of their rage, justified or not. Pryde made no bones about his hostility toward us, he won't be the only one if the fruits of our labor is a total ban on any detachable mags on any c.f. rifle.




If anyone bothers you at the range because you shoot a rifle that looks scary, tell them to "**** ***!" Because THEY are the reason we are losing our Second Amendment rights.

klmmicro
05-11-2006, 6:40 AM
If anyone bothers you at the range because you shoot a rifle that looks scary, tell them to "**** ***!" Because THEY are the reason we are losing our Second Amendment rights.

While I can certainly understand that sentiment, I also see the logic that makes getting this states legislature involved in any firearms related decisions. I am not the reason for rights going down the tubes here, but if suddenly I was forced to move because my M14 is now on the banned list...I would be a tad upset and there would be one less vocal supporter of firearms rights left in the state to help you.

This state is owned lock, stock and barrel by a bunch of gun hating liberals. Sure, they might vacate SB23 as it really is untennable, but they would come back with something more clad and I do not trust the average product of public schooling to not nod their head in agreement that our rifles are evil. Remember, SB23 came about without much opposition. I don't hold out much hope that a second, more sweeping bill would not become law here.

DrjonesUSA
05-11-2006, 9:22 AM
Gun owners lobbying for gun control and registration.....

Only in California.....