PDA

View Full Version : Will Jerry veto what Arnold wouldn't?


huck
01-18-2011, 3:11 PM
Now that AB962 never happened, will Jerry veto a new bill that's less vague?

Since he's buddy-buddy with the asshats that make these laws, I think in the interest of saving California money, he should tell them not to bother.

Freebird
01-18-2011, 3:14 PM
What should happen and what does arn't ever exactly similar.

J.D.Allen
01-18-2011, 3:15 PM
Will be interesting to see...

CalBear
01-18-2011, 3:15 PM
Jerry is more likely to veto it, IMO. He is fairly independent-minded, and he wrote an amicus brief for McDonald. Arnold was clearly a RINO. He falls somewhere between Stallone and Helmke on gun issues.

sholling
01-18-2011, 3:21 PM
I think Arnold and Jerry are clones on guns. His priority right now is political payback to the unions and not guns or the constitution.

wash
01-18-2011, 3:24 PM
Jerry is also a lawyer, he was CA AG, etc.

He can veto a bill and say "I'm not going to sign a bill that's destined to be overturned in the courts."

He can do that without loosing face in the Democrat party.

Lets just hope he does.

Stonewalker
01-18-2011, 3:28 PM
My hope is that he will not be seeking re-election, so he won't be worried about leaving office with friends. Now that he is elected he doesn't need to worry about being a democrat in CA and looking bad for fighting for gun rights.

This is my hope...

Jack L
01-18-2011, 3:31 PM
Now that AB962 never happened, will Jerry veto a new bill that's less vague?

Since he's buddy-buddy with the asshats that make these laws, I think in the interest of saving California money, he should tell them not to bother.

Jerry is so over his head with the CA budget I can't see him going after gun law that will just erode his base more and waste time and money which is in short supply in this state. It appears he is really going to be cutting a lot of programs. He's coming out swinging. His people will be really busy with lawsuits by those who do not want their program cut. And there will be dozens of those.

There are already way too many gun laws in this state. It takes a degree in Gun Law to understand all of them.

BAGunner
01-18-2011, 3:32 PM
I wouldn't count on it (Jerry Brown vetoing a new bill banning 9mm/.45/.38 mail-order), as you can tell from his budget proposal, he's in bed with the unions. What's the last time you see any union backing gun rights?

wash
01-18-2011, 3:33 PM
Jerry can seek re-ellection either way.

The democrat party will support an incumbent unless he is incredibly unpopular and they have a real winner they can put on the ballot.

I don't think Jerry will be unpopular among the dems.

Mstrty
01-18-2011, 3:37 PM
Jerry gets his marching orders from the labor unions. Yes, he will sign most any anti-ammo or anti-gun bill that runs across his desk.

Please quote this so I can use it later. :)

Stonewalker
01-18-2011, 3:41 PM
Jerry can seek re-ellection either way.

The democrat party will support an incumbent unless he is incredibly unpopular and they have a real winner they can put on the ballot.

I don't think Jerry will be unpopular among the dems.

Don't forget, he's already 72. I don't think he's gona go for another run at gov.

wash
01-18-2011, 3:43 PM
Jerry gets his marching orders from the labor unions. Yes, he will sign most any anti-ammo or anti-gun bill that runs across his desk.

Please quote this so I can use it later. :)
Didn't I hear that the unions had struck a deal with Meg and she had their endorsement?

OleCuss
01-18-2011, 3:49 PM
Didn't I hear that the unions had struck a deal with Meg and she had their endorsement?

There might have been one or two unions who liked Meg - but they'd be the exception rather than the rule. IIRC, the all-powerful governmental unions (not including CSLEA) hated Meg with a passion.

Mstrty
01-18-2011, 3:50 PM
Didn't I hear that the unions had struck a deal with Meg and she had their endorsement?

Thanks for the quote: Ill use it for the "I told you so" post coming soon.

wash
01-18-2011, 3:52 PM
Good luck with that.

Rock6.3
01-18-2011, 3:59 PM
Jerry is the same person who threw LEO's under the bus on his last day in office as California AG. Jerry is not a friend of the 2nd Amendment, nor is he a friend of California Gun Owners.

But I would very much like to see history prove me wrong.

ALSystems
01-18-2011, 4:02 PM
Add a poll. The results would be interesting.

Stonewalker
01-18-2011, 4:05 PM
Jerry is the same person who threw LEO's under the bus on his last day in office as California AG. Jerry is not a friend of the 2nd Amendment, nor is he a friend of California Gun Owners.

But I would very much like to see history prove me wrong.

You are incorrectly understanding his motive for issuing that opinion on Dec 31 2010. Ok, I admit I don't know for fact what his motive was but that opinion is going to be valuable to us, both from a strategic point of view and from a Bill of Rights point of view.

vantec08
01-18-2011, 4:05 PM
The biggest unions, SEIU and AFSMCE were rabidly anti meg. Moonbeam will roll over on us in a heartbeat as the "trade."

Rock6.3
01-18-2011, 4:12 PM
You are incorrectly understanding his motive for issuing that opinion on Dec 31 2010. Ok, I admit I don't know for fact what his motive was but that opinion is going to be valuable to us, both from a strategic point of view and from a Bill of Rights point of view.

You may be correct that JB's 12/31/10 opinion could be beneficial to us in the long term, however it was not done for our benefit, it was a slap in the face of retired law enforcement.

I don't trust Jerry.

Uriah02
01-18-2011, 4:15 PM
If it gets to his desk, I think he would veto it. I doubt the new attempt will make it through.

Stonewalker
01-18-2011, 4:17 PM
You may be correct that JB's 12/31/10 opinion could be beneficial to us in the long term, however it was not done for our benefit, it was a slap in the face of retired law enforcement.

I don't trust Jerry.

Retired LEO are citizens just like you and I. Any special privileges in the form of fundamental rights are patently unconstitutional because of the Equal Protections clause in the 14th amendment.

Hopefully this get's retired LEO on our side for the fight, because now they are affected by the AWB.

hoffmang
01-18-2011, 4:21 PM
On balance I believe Brown is more likely to veto a next incarnation of this bill. The major problem with the bill is that, to work, it really has to create a whole new licensing scheme at CA DOJ. That's a non starter based on budgeting though. It wouldn't surprise me if Brown vetoed whatever the repair bill becomes on fiscal grounds.

-Gene

loather
01-18-2011, 4:27 PM
The biggest unions, SEIU and AFSMCE were rabidly anti meg. Moonbeam will roll over on us in a heartbeat as the "trade."

Except you forget the fact that he's gone on record saying the unions are a big part of the problem in California's budget crisis and has vowed to go after them.

I'm remaining hopefully optimisitic.

OleCuss
01-18-2011, 4:30 PM
On balance I believe Brown is more likely to veto a next incarnation of this bill. The major problem with the bill is that, to work, it really has to create a whole new licensing scheme at CA DOJ. That's a non starter based on budgeting though. It wouldn't surprise me if Brown vetoed whatever the repair bill becomes on fiscal grounds.

-Gene

That's a nice analysis. Thank you.

Quser.619
01-18-2011, 4:45 PM
Gene,

I hope you're right, but then again we are talking about a professional politician. Who would've expected the most recent pro-2A Governor to be Brown?

huck
01-18-2011, 4:45 PM
On balance I believe Brown is more likely to veto a next incarnation of this bill. The major problem with the bill is that, to work, it really has to create a whole new licensing scheme at CA DOJ. That's a non starter based on budgeting though. It wouldn't surprise me if Brown vetoed whatever the repair bill becomes on fiscal grounds.

-Gene

Perhaps he'll warn the aforementioned legislature (asshats) to make sure the bill is budget neutral.

Then, they'll do the clean-up bill and it'll include a 1 cent per round tax on all purchases to cover the additional DOJ costs.

He needs to object to it on 2-A merits. They can beat the fiscal issue.

otteray
01-18-2011, 4:53 PM
On balance I believe Brown is more likely to veto a next incarnation of this bill. The major problem with the bill is that, to work, it really has to create a whole new licensing scheme at CA DOJ. That's a non starter based on budgeting though. It wouldn't surprise me if Brown vetoed whatever the repair bill becomes on fiscal grounds.

-Gene
Thanks, that answers the same question I had in another thread here:

Topic: Question regarding the extent of the AB962 ruling.

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showpost.php?p=5643350&postcount=11
(http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showpost.php?p=5643350&postcount=11)

loather
01-18-2011, 4:57 PM
Then, they'll do the clean-up bill and it'll include a 1 cent per round tax on all purchases to cover the additional DOJ costs.

Don't give them any ideas.

uyoga
01-18-2011, 4:58 PM
Would JB appeal this decision as AG?

nitrofc
01-18-2011, 5:04 PM
Will he?

I seriously doubt it.
But he might throw on an added State Use Tax to generate revenue.

who knows.

tacticalcity
01-18-2011, 5:05 PM
Don't forget, he's already 72. I don't think he's gona go for another run at gov.

Those age numbers don't mean what they used to. Jerry looks, acts, and gets around like he is in his 30s. Don't assume that tomorrow he will suddenly become a sick old man who is no longer capable of running for or holding office. My grandfather did not seem or act even remotely like an old man until he hit 91 when he fell and broke a hip. Right up until that moment none of the usual things you associate with a senior citizen remotely applied to him. Even now his mind is as sharp as it ever was. Just his body is failing on him.

In Jerry's shoes I would continue pursuing office until the day I was laid up in the hospital. He clearly enjoys it more than being retired. It has probably kept him as young seeming as he is. So I would expect him to behave as if he has plans for a continued future in politics. Just because the odds are against him does not mean he will give up on it. After all, NOBODY would have thought it possible he would become Governor again after the job he did the first time around.

Milsurps
01-18-2011, 5:18 PM
Lots of folks here virtually promised last Fall Moonbeam was a friend of the 2nd Amendment.
So of course he'll veto any new version AB962...










:no: :rofl2:

Glock22Fan
01-18-2011, 5:38 PM
Lots of folks here virtually promised last Fall Moonbeam was a friend of the 2nd Amendment.
So of course he'll veto any new version AB962...



Highly simplistic.

The key question (to which we will never reliably know the answer) is would Meg have been more likely to veto it. My guess (and that's all you guys are operating on as well) is "No." Meg was no friend of the 2nd.

Whichever way he leans on this, one swallow does not a summer make.

HondaMasterTech
01-18-2011, 6:36 PM
Jerry Brown supported AB32. When Jerry Brown and Al Gore find and defeat man-bear-pig, you will all see how so super cereal they were.

motorhead
01-18-2011, 7:43 PM
jerry's a unknown quantity until it actually happens. he's made a lot of pro gun noise. i think, on the whole, he'll be better than arnold towards guns. i'm less optimistic regarding environmental and handout legislation. i see the new state motto becoming "will work for food", i wonder if it'll fit on the flag?

jamesob
01-18-2011, 8:04 PM
he could veto but i believe he will sign.

bulgron
01-18-2011, 8:35 PM
I believe Brown will sign any legislation about guns, pro or anti, if it means that by doing so he can swing more votes for whatever budget he wants to pass.

bwiese
01-18-2011, 8:58 PM
You may be correct that JB's 12/31/10 opinion could be beneficial to us in the long term, however it was not done for our benefit, it was a slap in the face of retired law enforcement.

It was legally correct. LE was getting a free pass.

It will have some benefits for all.

Wild Squid
01-18-2011, 9:58 PM
Jerry is the same person who threw LEO's under the bus on his last day in office as California AG. Jerry is not a friend of the 2nd Amendment, nor is he a friend of California Gun Owners.

But I would very much like to see history prove me wrong.


LEO's are not friends of the 2nd Amendment. Jerry has a chance to prove himself yet.

oni.dori
01-18-2011, 10:44 PM
Honestly, I have my doubts about it. I highly doubt he would veto any bill that might make him unpopular with the moronic "sheeple" that occupy a majority of this state. ESPECIALLY in light of recent "unfoldings" in other states that have the antis SCRAMBLING for relevance. The reason for this is mainly as a result of his past record as AG and Governor of this once-great state; couple that with people's current support of him simply based on a few things he wrote/said on a campaign trail that happened to coincide with the current majority popular opinion on the subject of gun control and a recent ruling (which tends to be a VERY Dem. thing to do), and I find it to be quite fickle. I truly think that people are getting their hopes up over nothing. Just keep in mind, actions speak louder than words. ESPECIALLY when those words were spoken/written on a campaign trail.

vantec08
01-19-2011, 8:05 AM
Except you forget the fact that he's gone on record saying the unions are a big part of the problem in California's budget crisis and has vowed to go after them.

I'm remaining hopefully optimisitic.

Except he has done NOTHING to rein in exorbitant union demands and costs.

Mulay El Raisuli
01-19-2011, 4:02 PM
On balance I believe Brown is more likely to veto a next incarnation of this bill. The major problem with the bill is that, to work, it really has to create a whole new licensing scheme at CA DOJ. That's a non starter based on budgeting though. It wouldn't surprise me if Brown vetoed whatever the repair bill becomes on fiscal grounds.

-Gene


From your lips to God's ears.


I believe Brown will sign any legislation about guns, pro or anti, if it means that by doing so he can swing more votes for whatever budget he wants to pass.


I think not. The budget is a whole 'nother can o' worms. Dems & GOPers are going to be screaming for/against whatever JB offers & their beliefs on guns just ain't gonna be a factor. Their beliefs in re the pet projects getting screwed/saved is all they're going to care about.


The Raisuli

Joe
01-19-2011, 4:08 PM
My prediction: Jerry will pass all antigun legislation put in front of him.

chris
01-19-2011, 4:28 PM
Except you forget the fact that he's gone on record saying the unions are a big part of the problem in California's budget crisis and has vowed to go after them.

I'm remaining hopefully optimisitic.

Except he has done NOTHING to rein in exorbitant union demands and costs.

the Unions bank rolled his campaign. i doubt he will do anything to the Unions no matter how much they sink this state into further financial ruin. they help get him elected and he has to pay them back from our wallets of course.

pitchbaby
01-19-2011, 5:54 PM
I have to admit... I am totally OK with assault weapon ownership being limited to on duty LEO's if the rest of us can't have them. Retirement from law enforcement comes with other perks... so I don't think the retiree's have a whole lot to complain about.

N6ATF
01-19-2011, 5:57 PM
Until the victim disarming term "assault weapon" is defined as anything other than a 2-shot, .22 revolver.

mzimmers
01-19-2011, 6:17 PM
Jerry is so over his head with the CA budget I can't see him going after gun law that will just erode his base more and waste time and money which is in short supply in this state.

Except that he wouldn't have to "go after" anything. He can sit back, let the antis do all the work and then merely sign it. If he's as preoccupied with other matters as you indicate (and I agree), he'd be most likely to take the path of least resistance on issues he considers non-key.

OleCuss
01-19-2011, 7:17 PM
the Unions bank rolled his campaign. i doubt he will do anything to the Unions no matter how much they sink this state into further financial ruin. they help get him elected and he has to pay them back from our wallets of course.

I think the JB might actually see this differently. He may see the unions as his base. As long as the base is secure he has tremendous political clout that he can use to (as he sees it) make the needed changes in the state in order to rescue it. So he has to secure that base so that he can do what is necessary.

Right now I don't think the political calculations are set in stone which means that I don't think that we can predict JB RKBA behavior - and we certainly cannot rely upon it.

You must also remember that JB is going to view his responsibility as governor very differently than he did as the AG. This could result in a RKBA stance which could be either more pro- or more anti-.

One other thing which I really think could be more critical than virtually all the others? What does his wife think. I'm not sure it would be correct to suggest that she controls him - but I'm not sure that there isn't an element of influence which would surprise us if we understood the full extent.

FWIW.

mzimmers
01-19-2011, 7:30 PM
I think the JB might actually see this differently. He may see the unions as his base. As long as the base is secure he has tremendous political clout that he can use to (as he sees it) make the needed changes in the state in order to rescue it. So he has to secure that base so that he can do what is necessary.

This is a good point. If (and I realize this is a big "if") JB is truly a shrewd politician, he'll have the sense to realize that he can probably do a few things that the unions won't like without losing their support.

I mean come on...the unions supporting a GOP candidate? Hah!

yellowfin
01-20-2011, 7:41 AM
What's the last time you see any union backing gun rights?

We have that problem in NY as well. What I'm having a problem is reconciling that fact with: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_KgGvSjw7Ng

Glock22Fan
01-20-2011, 8:10 AM
Except that he wouldn't have to "go after" anything. He can sit back, let the antis do all the work and then merely sign it. If he's as preoccupied with other matters as you indicate (and I agree), he'd be most likely to take the path of least resistance on issues he considers non-key.


A bit like Meg would have done then?

mzimmers
01-20-2011, 8:42 AM
A bit like Meg would have done then?

Possibly, but irrelevant. The OP is about what Brown would do/will do. We're never ever going to have to wonder that about Meg.

jnojr
01-20-2011, 9:04 AM
I think a lot of people are going to get a very rude awakening with Jerry Brown.

Glock22Fan
01-20-2011, 9:12 AM
Possibly, but irrelevant. The OP is about what Brown would do/will do. We're never ever going to have to wonder that about Meg.

I think we need to wonder what Meg would have done every time (pretty well every day at present) someone gets emotional about all us poor suckers that were deluded into voting for "Moonbeam."

People seem to forget that Meg might have been just as bad, or even worse.


I think a lot of people are going to get a very rude awakening with Jerry Brown.


Maybe, maybe not. I'm sure he's going to sign a lot of bills I don't like. Really, the question I would put back to you is "how do you know that people would not have had a rude awakening if Meg had won?"

On the present record (0:0), what has convinced so many people that he's even worse than we thought before?

mzimmers
01-20-2011, 9:17 AM
I think we need to wonder what Meg would have done every time (pretty well every day at present) someone gets emotional about all us poor suckers that were deluded into voting for "Moonbeam."

People seem to forget that Meg might have been just as bad, or even worse.

Perhaps, but I was taking the OP at face value, which I thought was speculation on what Uncle Jerry might do. Meg is now a thing of the past, and discussing her just bores me. Actually...I hope Jerry bores me, too.

Bhobbs
01-20-2011, 9:27 AM
I'm not going to hope for an CA politician to do anything to protect our 2A rights. I will wait for court victories to turn over what these idiots will continue to do.

OleCuss
01-20-2011, 10:41 AM
Personally, because of the constituency to whom she would answer, I think Meg would have been better than JB.

But that's old history because Meg will never be the governor of California and JB is.

The key is to behave as though JB will sign every anti-RKBA bill that comes to his desk - because he just might do that. If he won't sign away our rights then so much the better - but counting on it would be foolish. We need to try to stop bad bills before they ever get near his desk.

Glock22Fan
01-20-2011, 10:45 AM
Personally, because of the constituency to whom she would answer, I think Meg would have been better than JB.

But that's old history because Meg will never be the governor of California and JB is.

The key is to behave as though JB will sign every anti-RKBA bill that comes to his desk - because he just might do that. If he won't sign away our rights then so much the better - but counting on it would be foolish. We need to try to stop bad bills before they ever get near his desk.

Absolutely agree with all but the first sentence. Flood his desk with letters. Tie up his phone with calls. Just as you (hopefully) did with Arnie or would do with Meg.

Make no assumptions.

huck
01-20-2011, 11:21 AM
Meg who?

OleCuss
01-20-2011, 12:26 PM
Meg who?

Meg is a character in the animated TV series "Family Guy". She is highly ignored by one and all and generally fades into insignificance. ;)

While I did the above in jest, the character description isn't all that far off where Meg Whitman is today. . .

huck
01-20-2011, 12:56 PM
Meg is a character in the animated TV series "Family Guy". She is highly ignored by one and all and generally fades into insignificance. ;)

While I did the above in jest, the character description isn't all that far off where Meg Whitman is today. . .

Oh. That's what I thought.

usmcchet9296
01-20-2011, 2:10 PM
I have to admit... I am totally OK with assault weapon ownership being limited to on duty LEO's if the rest of us can't have them. Retirement from law enforcement comes with other perks... so I don't think the retiree's have a whole lot to complain about.
The problem is nothing you can get at the local gun store is an assault rifle
The M16 A2 I carried in the corps was an assault rifle
The pre ban Bushmaster XM 16 I own is not
Just because it looks like one doesn't mean it is

Legasat
01-20-2011, 2:40 PM
I hope all the Jerry-lovers from last fall are right.

For my part, I remain skeptical until I see it.

N6ATF
01-21-2011, 12:31 AM
Personally, because of the constituency to whom she would answer, I think Meg would have been better than JB.

Meg's constituency is criminals. She loves disarming their victims for them. eBay & PayPal are prime examples. "The law abiding shall not arm themselves for self-defense on my watch!"