PDA

View Full Version : Email from the Mayor of Sunnyvale, Melinda Hamilton


oldrifle
10-02-2011, 7:52 PM
I received the following email today from Mayor Hamilton of Sunnyvale. She asked me to post it to this forum.

Mr. oldrifle,

I heard you are involved in this effort. I sent this email to the admin email at the CalGuns.org webs site this morning and wanted to make you aware of it if you haven't seen it already. Please post it out to your forums. Thank you.

Melinda

To the people at CalGuns:

My name is Melinda Hamilton, and I am the mayor of Sunnyvale, CA. I need to correct the record about something I said at our council meeting last Tuesday night.

We had a land use issue dealing with guns shops and a number of people, some of whom I assume are your members, showed up at our council meeting last Tuesday. During that meeting, one of the speakers mentioned that I was a member of a group called Mayors Against Illegal Guns. I denied being a member and said I would remove my membership.

I was wrong. I did sign up for the group in Jan 2010 (I can forward documentation to prove it if you like) but still requested to have my name removed from the list. While I personally do not support gun ownership, it is inappropriate for me to attach my name as mayor to an organization on which the city does not have an official policy.

I know there has been chatter on the forums about contacting all the other mayors to see if their memberships are valid based on my comments. I would discourage you from doing this because I suspect you will either find that people will simply affirm their membership, or like myself, not recall that they are members. I am equally sure that MAIG can produce documentation proving membership for anyone whose photo is on their web site. In short, you won't be able to achieve the kind of gotcha you're looking for.

Please post this message out to your forums. I do not have access to them. Thank you.

Melinda Hamilton

oldrifle
10-02-2011, 7:52 PM
My thoughts on the letter and MAIG:

1) She said she was wrong about her claim in the meeting of not having signed up for MAIG. I'm not sure whether that means she forgot or "forgot" about becoming a member, but let's please give her the benefit of the doubt.

2) She said that she asked to be removed and I no longer see her listed on the site. That means they do respond to removal requests. That's good news. My guess is they were also tipped off to what we are doing and that motivated them to act quickly to remove her, but that's just speculation.

3) In our research to locate contact information regarding member mayors, we discovered many of those listed are no longer in office. That means the list is very out of date and once cleaned up, will reflect less members.

4) Let's for a moment assume that every single one of the sitting mayors listed on the MAIG site intends to be there. That doesn't mean they know what MAIG is really all about. Once they know, they will likely want to be removed.

5) Project MAIG is still a go. We're almost done collecting contact info for the mayors (but there's still more work to do) and still plan on following through with contacting all of them.

ETA: If anyone else would like to be awesome and join our effort to defeat MAIG, see this thread: http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=483078

Librarian
10-02-2011, 8:41 PM
Folks, please keep in mind the Mayor is not a member here, and cannot readily respond to things posted on Calguns.

G60
10-02-2011, 8:46 PM
Also keep in mind she ended up voting against any new restrictions being placed on FFL's.

thrasherfox
10-02-2011, 8:49 PM
Any time anyone in a politcal position tries to warn someone from doing something, there is typically in my opinion a reason that would not be productive for that politician.

if she does not support gun ownership and if contacting other mayors would not have any positive affect for gun owners, then why would she waste her time telling people not to pursue that avenue.

It drives me nuts to see someone who is in a political office in the United states who does not support constitutional rights.

Fjold
10-02-2011, 8:49 PM
Interesting email. She first denies being a member of MAIG then remembers that she signed up, then asked to be removed because the city doesn't have a policy about guns.

Then tries to discourage Calguns from contacting other mayors about their membership because it won't provide the "gotcha" ?

She seems kind of all over the place there.

Briancnelson
10-02-2011, 8:49 PM
I don't quite get this letter.

How can you sign up for something like that and not remember? Should you be mayor of a city if you can't remember things like that? Doesn't her signing up imply that, whether or not she is a member, she supports their goals?

Why is she defending them and imploring us not to keep looking for more mayors who may or may not be members?

Why does she care how we spend our time? If she's not a member, why does she care if someone "gotchas" them?

The whole letter is just in a word, odd.

It makes me want to immediately call every other mayor on the list and check with them. Just because she told me not to.

robcoe
10-02-2011, 8:52 PM
I know there has been chatter on the forums about contacting all the other mayors to see if their memberships are valid based on my comments. I would discourage you from doing this because I suspect you will either find that people will simply affirm their membership, or like myself, not recall that they are members. I am equally sure that MAIG can produce documentation proving membership for anyone whose photo is on their web site. In short, you won't be able to achieve the kind of gotcha you're looking for

Um, What? She says she supports MAIG, but asked them to remove her name, and wants everyone to ignore this line of questioning in the future with other mayors?

Does this make anyone else here want to find that list and start calling?

With political skills like this, I dont think this mayor is going to get any higher in government, she has definitely reached her level of incompetence.

taperxz
10-02-2011, 8:54 PM
She IS wrong about our ability to call out MAIG in regards to the impact we can have in letting other mayors in the country know what they signed up for.

This is one mayor who admits to being anti gun, and has now refuted and revoked membership from MAIG because of a CGF inquiry!! Let the wheels across the nation begin to turn!!

So Mayor Bloomberg? Whats happening to your "coalition?"

taperxz
10-02-2011, 8:55 PM
Um, What?

Does this make anyone else here want to find that list and start calling?

With political skills like this, I dont think this mayor is going to get any higher in goverment, she has definitly reached her level of incompatince.

We have already started doing this last week:43:

zenaprincess
10-02-2011, 8:56 PM
Folks, please keep in mind the Mayor is not a member here, and cannot readily respond to things posted on Calguns.

I just signed up and it took 2 minutes. She could do the same if she wanted to.

My take on the letter....

She admitts to being anti-gun and opposed to gun ownership but she cant remember signing up and being a member of a group that is nationly known and very prominent ? Hmm. And she signed up for the group only a YEAR ago ? Hmm.

Then when someone from Calguns reminds her of such she tries to throw it back at them as a "gotcha moment" ? Hmm. Then she turns it back around on herself and decides to resign from the group ? Hmmm.

Then she advises Cal Guns members not to contact other mayors about being on the list ? Why not ? If she doesnt think its appropriate for a mayor to be a member of the group if the city doesnt have an official policy then maybe SHE should be contacting other mayors and setting an example.

HowardW56
10-02-2011, 9:01 PM
Two points...


First say hi to the people from MAIG, I'm sure they are reading this thread...

Second, they may be concerned that membership could become a liability for their affiliated mayors seeking reelection...

We all know what politicians are like, if the group causes them any political heat or can cost them votes, they are gone...

The only greater good most politicians are concerned with is their OWN survival & benefit...

taperxz
10-02-2011, 9:08 PM
Um, What? She says she supports MAIG, but asked them to remove her name, and wants everyone to ignore this line of questioning in the future with other mayors?

Does this make anyone else here want to find that list and start calling?

With political skills like this, I dont think this mayor is going to get any higher in goverment, she has definitly reached her level of incompatince.

I would like to add this!!!!! We are currently working on a project to notify all mayors that are signed on with MAIG. I think it would be a great idea to let CGF draw up what needs to be said for maximum affect. There are quite a few mayors in very gun friendly states that will certainly want to flee from MAIG once CGF sends out the right kind of information to them. Lets not all go crazy and lambaste these mayors YET. Some probably signed up to be against "ILLEGAL GUNS" only!

InGrAM
10-02-2011, 9:10 PM
Any time anyone in a politcal position tries to warn someone from doing something, there is typically in my opinion a reason that would not be productive for that politician.

if she does not support gun ownership and if contacting other mayors would not have any positive affect for gun owners, then why would she waste her time telling people not to pursue that avenue.

It drives me nuts to see someone who is in a political office in the United states who does not support constitutional rights.

+1. It makes me sick.

HowardW56
10-02-2011, 9:13 PM
It drives me nuts to see someone who is in a political office in the United states who does not support constitutional rights.

She voted against the measure that we opposed...

I just question her motivation for the letter, she could have let that bit of misinformation slide...

Joe
10-02-2011, 9:19 PM
"Do not support gun ownership"

Isn't she sworn to uphold the constitution? Treason.

robcoe
10-02-2011, 9:22 PM
She voted against the measure that we opposed...

I just question her motivation for the letter, she could have let that bit of misinformation slide...

It is a bit odd, it's like she was trying to pirouette away from the(probably unintentional) lie, and ended up crashing into a fruit stand.

hawk1
10-02-2011, 9:22 PM
I received the following email today from Mayor Hamilton of Sunnyvale. She asked me to post it to this forum.

Mr. oldrifle,

I heard you are involved in this effort. I sent this email to the admin email at the CalGuns.org webs site this morning and wanted to make you aware of it if you haven't seen it already. Please post it out to your forums. Thank you.

Melinda

To the people at CalGuns:

My name is Melinda Hamilton, and I am the mayor of Sunnyvale, CA. I need to correct the record about something I said at our council meeting last Tuesday night.

We had a land use issue dealing with guns shops and a number of people, some of whom I assume are your members, showed up at our council meeting last Tuesday. During that meeting, one of the speakers mentioned that I was a member of a group called Mayors Against Illegal Guns. I denied being a member and said I would remove my membership.

I was wrong. I did sign up for the group in Jan 2010 (I can forward documentation to prove it if you like) but still requested to have my name removed from the list. While I personally do not support gun ownership, it is inappropriate for me to attach my name as mayor to an organization on which the city does not have an official policy.

I know there has been chatter on the forums about contacting all the other mayors to see if their memberships are valid based on my comments. I would discourage you from doing this because I suspect you will either find that people will simply affirm their membership, or like myself, not recall that they are members. I am equally sure that MAIG can produce documentation proving membership for anyone whose photo is on their web site. In short, you won't be able to achieve the kind of gotcha you're looking for.

Please post this message out to your forums. I do not have access to them. Thank you.

Melinda Hamilton

That in bold is enough "gotcha" for me...:facepalm:

CycloSteve
10-02-2011, 9:41 PM
Please do not open the can of worms, please. Sorry, but it is our duty as citizens to keep an eye and ear out for what our government is doing, their affiliations, etc. If something smells, well, it will become public. This is one of the things which may help keep some politicians honest.

mag360
10-02-2011, 9:41 PM
I think its great that a mayor is even responding to our slice of the internet here. That in itself proves we are competent, and capable of making things happen!. We should still follow up with all the mayors, even if it's just to let them know that people pay attention to the groups they sign up to be a member of. Taking just a few mayors off that list will get us noticed as a force capable of promoting the 2nd amendment. We are a force to be reckoned with.

oldrifle
10-02-2011, 9:42 PM
Please do not open the can of worms, please. Sorry, but it is our duty as citizens to keep an eye and ear out for what our government is doing, their affiliations, etc. If something smells, well, it will become public. This is one of the things which may help keep some politicians honest.

Sorry, not really sure what you're getting at.

taperxz
10-02-2011, 9:43 PM
Please do not open the can of worms, please. Sorry, but it is our duty as citizens to keep an eye and ear out for what our government is doing, their affiliations, etc. If something smells, well, it will become public. This is one of the things which may help keep some politicians honest.

What can of worms are you talking about? A public official asked to have her statement and repudiation of the second amendment posted here on CG.

bruss01
10-02-2011, 9:50 PM
I was wrong. I did sign up for the group in Jan 2010 (I can forward documentation to prove it if you like) but still requested to have my name removed from the list. While I personally do not support gun ownership, it is inappropriate for me to attach my name as mayor to an organization on which the city does not have an official policy.

What I believe is that she is saying that her personal beliefs should not affect her conduct or policies as a public official. Such as a gentile Health Inspector checking out a Kosher deli... he doesn't practice kosher dietary law himself, but he can accept that others do and not let his personal beliefs interfere with doing a professional job in terms of health inspection. She wouldn't be the first person to draw a sharp line of demarcation between her personal beliefs and her professional conduct.

There are probably more than a few people on the MAIG list who, on a busy day, signed up for it just so they would get the newsletter and then promptly forgot about it when other business took center stage. I buy her story about not remembering... hell, if you asked me to account for every "newsletter" or professional group I ever signed up for, there are way more than one or two I wouldn't recall.

BUT... I do think that we should keep getting the message out that MAIG is a disreputable group with a bad agenda that is out of step with the mainstream views of the courts and civil libertarians on firearms rights. Keep getting mayors to drop their membership, and MAIG will eventually realize their irrelevancy.

Briancnelson
10-02-2011, 10:02 PM
I buy her story about not remembering... hell, if you asked me to account for every "newsletter" or professional group I ever signed up for, there are way more than one or two I wouldn't recall.


Umm, no. This isn't a newsletter. This is a high profile group dedicated to a specific cause. It would be like me forgetting I signed up for the Los Angeles Bar Association, or the ABA.

I don't buy it. I buy that she wants to disassociate herself with it after finding out their membership has 3x more felons per capita than the US average, just counting former mayors of D.C., but I don't buy she never knew she signed up.

zenaprincess
10-02-2011, 10:07 PM
Okay I just checked out the groups website and how you join. A thought just occured to me.....how about we ALL join ? Maybe it could be funny ? What if 35,000 gun rights membrs joined ?

http://www.mayorsagainstillegalguns.org/html/contact/contact.shtml

FastFinger
10-02-2011, 10:07 PM
Please do not open the can of worms, please. Sorry, but it is our duty as citizens to keep an eye and ear out for what our government is doing, their affiliations, etc. If something smells, well, it will become public. This is one of the things which may help keep some politicians honest.

My guess is that CycloSteve was not chastising CGN for opening a can of worms, but rather he was paraphrasing what Melinda Hamilton wrote, and then adding his retort. As in...


Dear Mr. oldrifle:

Please do not open the can of worms, please.

Regard,

Melinda Hamilton

Dear Mayor Hamilton:

Sorry, but it is our duty as citizens to keep an eye and ear out for what our government is doing, their affiliations, etc. If something smells, well, it will become public. This is one of the things which may help keep some politicians (such as yourself) honest.

But then my paraphrasing CycloSteve paraphrasing Hamilton may be way off.

oldrifle
10-02-2011, 10:16 PM
Okay I just checked out the groups website and how you join. A thought just occured to me.....how about we ALL join ? Maybe it could be funny ? What if 35,000 gun rights membrs joined ?

http://www.mayorsagainstillegalguns.org/html/contact/contact.shtml

That's kind of hard seeing as how we aren't mayors...

zenaprincess
10-02-2011, 10:23 PM
did you read the link ? you dont have to be a mayor

oldrifle
10-02-2011, 10:28 PM
did you read the link ? you dont have to be a mayor

I am a mayor and would like to join the Coalition.
I am a member of the media.
I am a member of a mayor's staff.
I am a member of the public.

The other options don't say anything about membership. It's just a contact form.

It's MAYORS Against Illegal Guns.

Dave A
10-02-2011, 10:29 PM
I applaud the Mayor for owning up to her error in commenting on membership during the meeting. Anyone can make a mistake, so give them the benefit of the doubt. I agree with another poster that she is simply stating that her personal beliefs will not necessarily spill over into city business and policies.

zenaprincess
10-02-2011, 10:50 PM
I am a mayor and would like to join the Coalition.
I am a member of the media.
I am a member of a mayor's staff.
I am a member of the public.

The other options don't say anything about membership. It's just a contact form.

It's MAYORS Against Illegal Guns.

then we should all say we are mayors.....of Constitutionville, America

oldrifle
10-02-2011, 11:04 PM
then we should all say we are mayors.....of Constitutionville, America

Cool story. :rolleyes:

zenaprincess
10-02-2011, 11:05 PM
Cool story. :rolleyes:

awww, someone has a crush on miss hamilton, how cute :)

Anchors
10-02-2011, 11:06 PM
Hmm...









The use of the word "gotcha" kind of makes me feel like I'm being scolded at a high school student council meeting...

oldrifle
10-02-2011, 11:08 PM
awww, someone has a crush on miss hamilton, how cute :)

OK, who let the troll in? :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm:

Goosebrown
10-02-2011, 11:10 PM
"Then tries to discourage Calguns from contacting other mayors about their membership because it won't provide the "gotcha" ?"

Well kudos to her for posting (as best she could) However why would we EVER want NOT to put pressure on politicians that don't support our cause? At the least them getting calls from us stating how we feel and noting that we will be working against them in upcoming elections has to have some impact. 99% of the people never get enough steam up to even call. If there are lots of calls then that is going to register at least somewhere.

taperxz
10-02-2011, 11:11 PM
OK, who let the troll in? :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm:

Looks like someone learned how to gain membership here to see whats happening. lol

taperxz
10-02-2011, 11:13 PM
"Then tries to discourage Calguns from contacting other mayors about their membership because it won't provide the "gotcha" ?"

Well kudos to her for posting (as best she could) However why would we EVER want NOT to put pressure on politicians that don't support our cause? At the least them getting calls from us stating how we feel and noting that we will be working against them in upcoming elections has to have some impact. 99% of the people never get enough steam up to even call. If there are lots of calls then that is going to register at least somewhere.

Just remember the beauty of the web is that anyone at anytime can go to any city web site and find the person they want to contact and send them a message on how they feel about their performance and policies. Even the media does this to find out what and why a politician is doing something;)

Goosebrown
10-02-2011, 11:15 PM
"Umm, no. This isn't a newsletter. This is a high profile group dedicated to a specific cause. It would be like me forgetting I signed up for the Los Angeles Bar Association, or the ABA. "

Well I don't buy that. For US it looks like she had to make an affirmative decision to join, but I have been involved in things at conferences and these political types go to all sorts of conferences and boondogles, where you list some interests or mention something to someone else and they simply put you on a list or worse tell you it is something it isn't... "Hey Mayor Jones, do you support slaughter of innocents in the street with illegally obtained hand guns?"... "um... no... ".... "Great! You're in!"

I wouldn't worry about her per se, but we should be putting pressure on the mayors that DO really belong.

At the least it could be pointed out that some mayors, like the mayor of Sunnyvale, believe that they should not be part of an organization where their city doesn't have an official policy.

dantodd
10-02-2011, 11:33 PM
First of all, I appreciate that the mayor chose to proactively notify us, as interested parties of her misstatement. She didn't have to do that.

I am slightly troubled by her "I personally do not support gun ownership" statement.

Contrast that with Griffith's statement which is essentially I don't like guns but I know that it is a constitutionally protected right.

To analogize this statement with past civil rights fights it is the difference between saying"I don't want to marry someone of a different race but support those who do" and saying"I don't support inter-racial relations." As another example saying "I don't want to have an abortion" vs. "I don't support abortion rights.". They are not subtle differences.

Also, while the mayor voted against the first motion she also voted against dropping the issue without action. Since she never made a motion I do not know what portions of the proposed restrictions and regulations she supported and which parts she opposed.

Finally, the mayor is a perfect case study in why the audit of MAIG's public membership and notification of mayors exactly what they've signed up for needs to be done. If no one had brought up her membship she would still be a member today. While we need to treat city leaders etc. as potential advocates or at least not actively trying to take our rights. MAIG and other groups do not deserve the same benefit of our trust nor for us to try and work with them at this time. Anything we can do to minimize the power and membership of those who would actively work to take our rights we should pursue.

dantodd
10-02-2011, 11:39 PM
then we should all say we are mayors.....of Constitutionville, America

No, we should all behave above-board and with the expectation that every post here is part of our public face.

We are on the right side of history. We are winning. We need to always be on the high road.

zenaprincess
10-02-2011, 11:47 PM
We are winning.

where are my high caps ? where is my ccw ? can i buy more than 1 handgun a month ? can i get a semi-auto 50 cal ?

a1c
10-02-2011, 11:47 PM
My dad used to be the mayor of his town.

Once he signed a petition for some cause about an issue he didn't really feel that strongly about, but I suppose he wanted to get the people off his back.

His name ended up being attached to the cause, as well as that of hundreds of other mayors. He had no idea what he had gotten into.

So I would give her the benefit of the doubt.

puppy8a9
10-02-2011, 11:48 PM
Do you think she knew that I did a PRA and have copies of the items she admitted? City Attorney probably told her to come clean.

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/s720x720/309281_2400213134191_1516920629_2608666_2002634888 _n.jpg

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/s720x720/305840_2400213614203_1516920629_2608667_1568951131 _n.jpg

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/s720x720/311014_2400214414223_1516920629_2608669_1379328390 _n.jpg

oldrifle
10-02-2011, 11:50 PM
No, we should all behave above-board and with the expectation that every post here is part of our public face.

We are on the right side of history. We are winning. We need to always be on the high road.

Dan, please don't feed the troll. With luck it will be gone in the morning.

unusedusername
10-02-2011, 11:50 PM
What I believe is that she is saying that her personal beliefs should not affect her conduct or policies as a public official. Such as a gentile Health Inspector checking out a Kosher deli... he doesn't practice kosher dietary law himself, but he can accept that others do and not let his personal beliefs interfere with doing a professional job in terms of health inspection. She wouldn't be the first person to draw a sharp line of demarcation between her personal beliefs and her professional conduct.



+1. If anything I think this makes me respect her more.

Despite any persional feelings she has on the issue, she voted to not have the modified regulations proposed by Mr. Moylan. Despite her personal dislike of firearms, she did not feel tht more regulations are the right thing for her town.

I find this extremely professional, which is very rare in politics.

Now, her personal feelings on firearms may change if she were to have some non-hollywood non-crime-scene exposure to them. Remember that most people in politics only hear about guns from the Chief of Public Safety when someone uses them badly. They don't get weekly reports on the legal uses.

I offer to take her to an all expenses paid trip to the sunnyvale shooting range, if she so desires, where I can show her the ropes. I am a certified pistol instructor so I know enough of the basics I think.

If the Honorable Mayor is reading this you can reach me by my email which is unusedusername at gmail dot com.

CycloSteve
10-02-2011, 11:52 PM
What can of worms are you talking about? A public official asked to have her statement and repudiation of the second amendment posted here on CG.

MAIG has mayors on their list who may not still be mayors, and likely more than a few mayors who truly do not endorse nor fully understand the MAIG position on gun ownership and the 2nd Amendment. The mayor of Sunnyvale asked the members of CalGuns to NOT pursue this any further. My point is when we are told to not look there, we should absolutely go there. If we make more and more politicians aware that MAIG is not about illegal guns, but rather removing all private gun ownership, we may have more than a few mayors pull their names from the list.

The message of "move on, nothing to see" to me means delve further, you will find out more than they bargained nor ever wished for you to see.

taperxz
10-02-2011, 11:52 PM
Do you think she knew that I did a PRA and have copies of the items she admitted? City Attorney probably told her to come clean.

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/s720x720/309281_2400213134191_1516920629_2608666_2002634888 _n.jpg

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/s720x720/305840_2400213614203_1516920629_2608667_1568951131 _n.jpg

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/s720x720/311014_2400214414223_1516920629_2608669_1379328390 _n.jpg

LMAO!!! She may be one of those people that just sign anything without reading???:facepalm:

oldrifle
10-02-2011, 11:53 PM
So she knew that her cover was about to be blown? I feel so used. :eek:

Do you think she knew that I did a PRA and have copies of the items she admitted? City Attorney probably told her to come clean.

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/s720x720/309281_2400213134191_1516920629_2608666_2002634888 _n.jpg

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/s720x720/305840_2400213614203_1516920629_2608667_1568951131 _n.jpg

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/s720x720/311014_2400214414223_1516920629_2608669_1379328390 _n.jpg

taperxz
10-02-2011, 11:58 PM
So she knew that her cover was about to be blown? I feel so used. :eek:

:D Now get to work.

unusedusername
10-02-2011, 11:59 PM
Good job with the records search puppy.

I can see this as a "I joined what"? moment.

She probably had a big stack-o-forms on her desk when she was sworn in, and this was probably one of them since the prior Mayor had also joined. On a reading of the admission form, all it says is basically "we don't like illegal guns and want to reduce crime", who wouldn't like that?

Without quite a bit of research it would be hard to realize what they are really trying to accomplish, and since the prior Mayor was a member its likely that the research was assumed to have been done by the prior administration.

Her leaving their ranks when she found out who they really are is the "right thing" to do though, both from our standpoint and from the standpoint of her town, so I congratulate her on that decision.

puppy8a9
10-03-2011, 12:02 AM
https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-snc7/s720x720/293319_2400233654704_1516920629_2608673_1844201488 _n.jpg

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/s720x720/293442_2400233974712_1516920629_2608674_1988736975 _n.jpg

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/s720x720/298236_2400234174717_1516920629_2608675_1124278448 _n.jpg

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-snc7/s720x720/320936_2400233334696_1516920629_2608672_2083134778 _n.jpg

Freedom is not fee, we all have to fight for this stuff. Better to keep lawyers free for the stuff that sneaks by us. Wish I had more time money and power to help. God speed

taperxz
10-03-2011, 12:02 AM
What about where it says "oppose all federal efforts to restrict cities.........

conanobrennan
10-03-2011, 12:07 AM
can you guys cite some news articles, or link me to a thread that does, citing their behavior to ban all guns? All i've seen so far leads me to believe they just want to enforce the laws on the books. :rolleyes:

also, if they're monitoring this site you guys need to be more discreet about mag cap stuff. at least in cali.

dantodd
10-03-2011, 12:21 AM
Good job with the records search puppy.

I can see this as a "I joined what"? moment.

She probably had a big stack-o-forms on her desk when she was sworn in, and this was probably one of them since the prior Mayor had also joined. On a reading of the admission form, all it says is basically "we don't like illegal guns and want to reduce crime", who wouldn't like that?

Without quite a bit of research it would be hard to realize what they are really trying to accomplish, and since the prior Mayor was a member its likely that the research was assumed to have been done by the prior administration.

Her leaving their ranks when she found out who they really are is the "right thing" to do though, both from our standpoint and from the standpoint of her town, so I congratulate her on that decision.

Actions speak louder than words. While her saying specifically that she doesn't support gun rights is troubling her refusal to support Padilla's pointless "joint resolution" is very positive. For whatever reason, the mayor chose not to take inactive stance in a law designed to restrict gun rights.

unusedusername
10-03-2011, 12:23 AM
Puppy: the second set of documents confirms what she said during the meeting, that MAIG mails her sometimes and she does not respond to them. When pushed to respond, she responded directly with "no response".

I wonder why one of her staff members seemed to be pushing her to respond though? Maybe that is the normal workflow for information requests from NGOs?

You are the research Queen though. I wouldn't know how to get that kind of stuff out of a government.

puppy8a9
10-03-2011, 12:23 AM
Some place and somewhere the bad guys will get our talks about gun related stuff that affects us we want changed, might as well be here.

I have a way, a plan and a direction if I can find time and motivation to press the undo on city regulation or items they have no jurisdiction over. Powers granted to cities are "LIMITED" even if they feel like they may regulate by content they cannot, regulate type of businesses, they cannot. Now we need reviews to happen but each of the reviews take time. I would have to research but I believe that jurisdictions over delivery of ammo in cities that are happening cannot happen cause again they are "limited". We need more people, teams and power.

I could change all past city issues but the people it affects are the public and retailers in small numbers and not large enough to care. Each of these regulations that make it past us are used as examples of well "Palo Alto" did "A, B, C" and they have not been sued so it must be legal.

These items do not take attorneys just usually attorneys are the only ones that understand the governing rules and powers enough. We do not need to sue necessarily. Thanks you for helping us stop this (All CG Members).

Word of mouth training and regulation is what damages our rights. It is large enough that is causes issues now.

dantodd
10-03-2011, 12:24 AM
can you guys cite some news articles, or link me to a thread that does, citing their behavior to ban all guns? All i've seen so far leads me to believe they just want to enforce the laws on the books. :rolleyes:


I'm not sure what the eye roll is for. But MAIG has been known to hire PI's and use NYC cops to go outside their jurisdiction and to entrap (and where that failed to deceive) dealers into breaking the law.

bulgron
10-03-2011, 12:31 AM
With political skills like this, I dont think this mayor is going to get any higher in goverment, she has definitly reached her level of incompatince.

There's a certain amount of irony in that sentence. If you can't see what it is, I won't bother pointing it out.

Mayor Hamilton is term-limiting out this year. While I have no idea if she has political ambitions beyond Sunnyvale, it certainly appears that she's done as an elected politician in Sunnyvale as of this fall.

I just don't see any reason to take her email for anything other than what it was: an attempt to set the record straight.

Occam's razor, as usual.

email
10-03-2011, 12:35 AM
If she doesn't support gun ownership, maybe she should join "mayors against all guns"

jdberger
10-03-2011, 12:50 AM
Since I'm pretty sure she reads CGN now:

Thank you, Mayor Hamilton, for treating us fairly when we cane to discuss the issue in front of you and the Council. Also, thank you for taking the time to correspond with some of our membership. And finally, despite your antipathy toward gun ownership, thanks for resigning your membership at MAIG.

As far as the MAIG project, we're going to continue to drive forward. What Mayor Bloomberg is doing is dishonest.

On another note, it was mentioned to me that Councilmembers NOT voting against guns might fear for their seats come election time as Sunnyvale is a majority "progressive" city. This is a common misperception. Vice Mayor Griffith understood that this was a civil rights issue, not a Left or Right issue. I believe that voters will understand that, too. If need be, I'd be happy to walk neighborhoods to help explain that to them.

tcd511
10-03-2011, 5:07 AM
Any time anyone in a politcal position tries to warn someone from doing something, there is typically in my opinion a reason that would not be productive for that politician.

if she does not support gun ownership and if contacting other mayors would not have any positive affect for gun owners, then why would she waste her time telling people not to pursue that avenue.

It drives me nuts to see someone who is in a political office in the United states who does not support constitutional rights.

This is the part that gets me. When you join the military you swear to support and defend the constitution of the United States of America from all enemies foreign and domestic. Now I have searched for oaths of office for state held offices with little luck. So my question is do these elected officials also have something similar for the office they hold? And if they do how can they blantantly disregard it. If you swear to support and defend the constitution then your personal views no longer matter!

conanobrennan
10-03-2011, 5:19 AM
I'm not sure what the eye roll is for. But MAIG has been known to hire PI's and use NYC cops to go outside their jurisdiction and to entrap (and where that failed to deceive) dealers into breaking the law.

the eye roll means that while everything seems legit above board i would not be surprised to find a greater purpose at work.

I'm honestly having trouble finding anything about this group at all not through a pro-2a or anti-2a publication.

OleCuss
10-03-2011, 5:36 AM
Mixed on this mayor.

But I'd first like to thank the mayor for correcting her error and attempting to do so in our forum. I really don't see that she benefits much politically or any other way from doing so which suggests to me that she is a generally honest person - all too rare in politics.

I really do understand how someone could sign up for something and not remember having done so. Not too long ago I found that I really did need to sign up for FaceBook after all. In attempting to sign up I discovered I'd done so a year or two earlier. My wife had to sign up for Gmail and discovered she'd done so quite some time earlier.

Important also to realize that the Mayor is obviously not a carefully nuanced person given to great concern about all details? This is evident from her statement in her e-mail that she is against gun ownership. She did not say that she was against private ownership of guns but used a blanket statement - even though I'd bet rather heavily that she is in favor of the police department and/or sheriff's department owning guns.

Net effect is that I appreciate finding an honest streak in a politician even if I wouldn't even dream of voting for them. I must wonder, however, (as did tcd511) as to whether the mayors take an oath to defend the Constitution as I did when I commissioned years ago. Any mayor or other elected official who swore to uphold the constitution and does not do so even at personal cost is beneath contempt.

Edit: I found the oath for Mayor - it is in the California Constitution:

CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION
ARTICLE 20 MISCELLANEOUS SUBJECTS


SEC. 3. Members of the Legislature, and all public officers and employees, executive, legislative, and judicial, except such inferior officers and employees as may be by law exempted, shall, before they enter upon the duties of their respective offices, take and subscribe the following oath or affirmation:


"I, ______, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties upon which I am about to enter.
"And I do further swear (or affirm) that I do not advocate, nor am I a member of any party or organization, political or otherwise, that now advocates the overthrow of the Government of the United States or of the State of California by force or violence or other unlawful means; that within the five years immediately preceding the taking of this oath (or affirmation) I have not been a member of any party or organization, political or other wise, that advocated the overthrow of the Government of the United States or of the State of California by force or violence or other unlawful means except as follows:__________________________________________ ______________________

(If no affiliations, write in the words "No Exceptions")
and that during such time as I hold the office of ______________________________________________ I will not advocate nor become a member of any party or organization, political or otherwise,
that advocates the overthrow of the Government of the United States or of the State of California by force or violence or other unlawful means."




They do swear to uphold the Constitution and must do so no matter what their personal beliefs. Membership in MAIG is a violation of the oath of every mayor in California who has joined that organization - if they have not understood the true nature of that organization their belated resignation from that group may lead to forgiveness but anything less than a resignation and an apology for inadvertently violating their oath is contemptible.

I'd bet also that every state assembly person and every state senator had to take a similar oath and thus voting to ban UOC, voting for ammunition bans, etc. is an oath breaker and deserves only contempt.

Wrangler John
10-03-2011, 6:16 AM
The bottom line is that Cal Guns members and other gun rights activists influenced a city council and mayor to vote against MAIG's attempt to pass a restrictive zoning ordinance.

That an anti-gun mayor voted against the ordinance after the well reasoned testimony of Cal Guns membership is a clear demonstration of Cal Guns effectiveness.

People do not like to be swayed from their ideology, even though it be flawed, to the point where they must publicly repudiate their beliefs. The fact that political and legal realities were the deciding factor stings all the more.

Here we find that an application of facts, truth and reality have resulted in the mayor "confessing" her error, and removing her name from membership in an extremist anti-gun group. Her only problem is that she choked on the kinnikinick when offering the peace pipe. When officials feel it necessary to admit their errors and set the record straight, we have entered a whole new world of political reality.

Cal Guns members that attended the Sunnyvale meetings have had a profound effect that surpasses their expectations. All I see is a tremendous win. Now is the time to be magnanimous toward the mayor and Sunnyvale, for it is better to cultivate allies with magnanimity than widen the gap with maliciousness, contempt and pettiness.

Caladain
10-03-2011, 6:36 AM
where are my high caps ? where is my ccw ? can i buy more than 1 handgun a month ? can i get a semi-auto 50 cal ?

You will be able to "shortly" (with short being defined in court-time, not real life time).

Up till a couple years *you didn't have an established, recognized right*. Now you do. Now the next phase is coming to a close (relatively speaking) which should extend the right and lay the foundation for the next phase.

edit: Also, guys, take the high road. We're better than Brady and the rest..lets not lower ourselves to their level. Also, Mayor and those councilmembers who are reading, please do take the time to recognize that we have our fair share of "trolls" and false flag members here..they will say inflammatory things to try and sully the thread and paint perception. Please see through this.

Sutcliffe
10-03-2011, 6:51 AM
A group she is affiliated with uses strong armed thuggery(not to mention violated federal firearms law) to intimidate and drive small businesses out of business, openly braggs about 'exploring' regulatory methods of circumventing congress on the issue of guns and she urges us not to go ahead and expose them for what they are?

Color me not impressed.

Caladain
10-03-2011, 6:52 AM
A group she is affiliated with uses strong armed thuggery(not to mention violated federal firearms law) to intimidate and drive small businesses out of business, openly braggs about 'exploring' regulatory methods of circumventing congress on the issue of guns and she urges us not to go ahead and expose them for what they are?

Color me not impressed.

She urged us not to go down the membership list and ping each member to see if they actually are a member.

VERY different from the inflammatory stuff you posted. Please Reread her email again.

Briancnelson
10-03-2011, 7:18 AM
So for those of you who believe that somehow she didn't know she'd signed up...

Does that make her an effective mayor or human being? Why is it better that she would sign up for such a thing and forget than sign up and lie about it? It may even be worse, since it implies she just signs any damn thing someone from her staff puts on her desk.

I get you want to make nice because she voted with us, but don't give any politician credit for anything they do, really. Always hold their feet to the fire.

Personally, I assume all politicians are out to get me until they retire. Then I can reassess and give them credit where they are due, because they can't punish me for it by screwing up in the future.

robcoe
10-03-2011, 7:48 AM
There's a certain amount of irony in that sentence. If you can't see what it is, I won't bother pointing it out.

Mayor Hamilton is term-limiting out this year. While I have no idea if she has political ambitions beyond Sunnyvale, it certainly appears that she's done as an elected politician in Sunnyvale as of this fall.

I just don't see any reason to take her email for anything other than what it was: an attempt to set the record straight.

Occam's razor, as usual.

my spelling my suck, but what I was referring to was her insistence that we should not contact other mayors on that list about their membership in MAIG because it would not get us what we wanted, right after it got us what we wanted(her name off the list).

Ubermcoupe
10-03-2011, 8:05 AM
I think it's awesome that she took time to respond to our forum.
I also like that she withdrew her membership because she did not want to attach the city to an organization that the city may or may not endorse.
:thumbsup:

I dont like that she is against gun ownership though :(

tcd511
10-03-2011, 8:11 AM
Mixed on this mayor.

But I'd first like to thank the mayor for correcting her error and attempting to do so in our forum. I really don't see that she benefits much politically or any other way from doing so which suggests to me that she is a generally honest person - all too rare in politics.

I really do understand how someone could sign up for something and not remember having done so. Not too long ago I found that I really did need to sign up for FaceBook after all. In attempting to sign up I discovered I'd done so a year or two earlier. My wife had to sign up for Gmail and discovered she'd done so quite some time earlier.

Important also to realize that the Mayor is obviously not a carefully nuanced person given to great concern about all details? This is evident from her statement in her e-mail that she is against gun ownership. She did not say that she was against private ownership of guns but used a blanket statement - even though I'd bet rather heavily that she is in favor of the police department and/or sheriff's department owning guns.

Net effect is that I appreciate finding an honest streak in a politician even if I wouldn't even dream of voting for them. I must wonder, however, (as did tcd511) as to whether the mayors take an oath to defend the Constitution as I did when I commissioned years ago. Any mayor or other elected official who swore to uphold the constitution and does not do so even at personal cost is beneath contempt.

Edit: I found the oath for Mayor - it is in the California Constitution:

CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION
ARTICLE 20 MISCELLANEOUS SUBJECTS


SEC. 3. Members of the Legislature, and all public officers and employees, executive, legislative, and judicial, except such inferior officers and employees as may be by law exempted, shall, before they enter upon the duties of their respective offices, take and subscribe the following oath or affirmation:


"I, ______, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties upon which I am about to enter.
"And I do further swear (or affirm) that I do not advocate, nor am I a member of any party or organization, political or otherwise, that now advocates the overthrow of the Government of the United States or of the State of California by force or violence or other unlawful means; that within the five years immediately preceding the taking of this oath (or affirmation) I have not been a member of any party or organization, political or other wise, that advocated the overthrow of the Government of the United States or of the State of California by force or violence or other unlawful means except as follows:__________________________________________ ______________________

(If no affiliations, write in the words "No Exceptions")
and that during such time as I hold the office of ______________________________________________ I will not advocate nor become a member of any party or organization, political or otherwise,
that advocates the overthrow of the Government of the United States or of the State of California by force or violence or other unlawful means."




They do swear to uphold the Constitution and must do so no matter what their personal beliefs. Membership in MAIG is a violation of the oath of every mayor in California who has joined that organization - if they have not understood the true nature of that organization their belated resignation from that group may lead to forgiveness but anything less than a resignation and an apology for inadvertently violating their oath is contemptible.

I'd bet also that every state assembly person and every state senator had to take a similar oath and thus voting to ban UOC, voting for ammunition bans, etc. is an oath breaker and deserves only contempt.

Thanks very much for your search on the oath of office and this post. I was almost positive that elected officials swore an oath to uphold the constitution.

Wherryj
10-03-2011, 8:33 AM
Folks, please keep in mind the Mayor is not a member here, and cannot readily respond to things posted on Calguns.

It was made pretty clear that she was not a member based upon this comment:"while I personally do not support gun ownership, it is inappropriate for me to attach my name as mayor to an organization on which the city does not have an official policy. "

It is interesting to note that she didn't just say, "I don't own guns", etc. She made it clear that she doesn't support YOUR ownership of guns either.

I thought that politicians were supposed to support all aspects of the Constitution, whether they like those aspects or not?

"In short, you won't be able to achieve the kind of gotcha you're looking for. "

Actually, it appears precisely the converse to me. The Mayor of Sunnyvale has already supplied her OWN "gotcha". She has admitted IN WRITING that she doesn't support the Constitution. I wonder if any forum members have media contacts locally that could give this issue "legs"? Even anti-2A voters might not like the idea of an elected official personally deciding which parts of the Constitution they will support and which will be discarded.

jdberger
10-03-2011, 8:33 AM
Agreed. In fact, it's pretty juvenile, Supersonic. Try to take the high road.

oldrifle
10-03-2011, 8:35 AM
Agreed. In fact, it's pretty juvenile, Supersonic. Try to take the high road.

Librarian, can you please remove this post and the replies to it? We need to keep this kind of BS out of the conversation.

Supersonic, you can disagree with the letter and comment in a substantive way without stooping to name calling.

Caladain
10-03-2011, 8:35 AM
It was made pretty clear that she was not a member based upon this comment:"while I personally do not support gun ownership, it is inappropriate for me to attach my name as mayor to an organization on which the city does not have an official policy. "

It is interesting to note that she didn't just say, "I don't own guns", etc. She made it clear that she doesn't support YOUR ownership of guns either.

I thought that politicians were supposed to support all aspects of the Constitution, whether they like those aspects or not?

Note: She didn't say she didn't support your ownership of guns. She said "Personally". Nothing about what she supported while wearing her mayor hat.

Her wording could be clearer, but i'm pretty sure she could have written at Gura-level and people would still be finding some way of slamming her, which i'm not sure is the appropriate thing to do.

taperxz
10-03-2011, 8:39 AM
Note: She didn't say she didn't support your ownership of guns. She said "Personally". Nothing about what she supported while wearing her mayor hat.

Her wording could be clearer, but i'm pretty sure she could have written at Gura-level and people would still be finding some way of slamming her, which i'm not sure is the appropriate thing to do.

You don't know the internal sunnyvale politics behind this. I promised not to say. Your statement is incorrect

Sutcliffe
10-03-2011, 8:41 AM
Frankly, she should be embarrassed that she got caught up in MAIG. Does she think she was the ONLY one that somehow got caught up in this? I'm not buying it.

Caladain
10-03-2011, 8:44 AM
You don't know the internal sunnyvale politics behind this. I promised not to say. Your statement is incorrect

Accepting that you have more information than i have, my statements are based not upon your knowledge base but upon the released information.

Obviously if you have more information, it would require a re-evaluation of my position, which could very well change what's been stated or render it moot.

But, going off non-insider information, my statements still stand.

Edit: I also tend to give people the benefit of the doubt, with the exception of Brady and their kin.

taperxz
10-03-2011, 8:46 AM
And you would be wrong

gatesbox
10-03-2011, 9:12 AM
I guess, Xenaprincess was already taken....

Regarding oath of office. While we may disagree with those who are named as founders and key members of MAIG, and this group may include mayors who have pushed for reestrictions that we find unconstitutional, it seemed in the membership letter that the activities outlined was a pledge to uphold the current law, regarding illegal activities. One could easily argue that this in itself is a zealous pledge to uphold the constitution and the laws of federal and state government....

I don't see how membership in itself could be considered unconstitutional or treasonous.

OC-Indian
10-03-2011, 9:21 AM
I guess, Xenaprincess was already taken....

Regarding oath of office. While we may disagree with those who are named as founders and key members of MAIG, and this group may include mayors who have pushed for reestrictions that we find unconstitutional, it seemed in the membership letter that the activities outlined was a pledge to uphold the current law, regarding illegal activities. One could easily argue that this in itself is a zealous pledge to uphold the constitution and the laws of federal and state government....

I don't see how membership in itself could be considered unconstitutional or treasonous.

That depends on one key fact: Are all current gun related legislations constitutional? Seems by the recent decisions that answer is a resounding "NO". So now they are faced with the choice of enforcing an unconstitutional "law" or following the constitution. Their oaths say one thing. Their actions make them all into hypocritical liars

oldrifle
10-03-2011, 9:22 AM
I don't see how membership in itself could be considered unconstitutional or treasonous.

It's not unconstitutional or treasonous, it's just WRONG.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/28/al-qaeda-threat-highlighted-gun-control-campaign_n_885852.html

http://dailycaller.com/2011/06/28/mayors-against-illegal-guns-group-releases-terrorist-inspired-video/

http://survivalandprosperity.com/tag/coalition-of-mayors-against-illegal-guns/

Wrangler John
10-03-2011, 9:25 AM
So for those of you who believe that somehow she didn't know she'd signed up...

Does that make her an effective mayor or human being? Why is it better that she would sign up for such a thing and forget than sign up and lie about it? It may even be worse, since it implies she just signs any damn thing someone from her staff puts on her desk.

I get you want to make nice because she voted with us, but don't give any politician credit for anything they do, really. Always hold their feet to the fire.

Personally, I assume all politicians are out to get me until they retire. Then I can reassess and give them credit where they are due, because they can't punish me for it by screwing up in the future.

This concept is just as rigid as the opposition, who, in face of factual data to the contrary, cling to their personal ideological prejudices. Even a horse trainer knows that replacing detrimental instinctual behavior requires a system of desensitization and reward. If we never praise a person for coming to a satisfactory decision, then what incentive have they? If an adversary does the right thing in the face of a personal prejudice, setting aside their heart felt belief in support of their professional responsibility, they have made a tremendous leap in personal growth. Acting out of one's character for the sake of moral or legal principles is evidence of an emerging inherent wisdom. What some would refer to as a breakthrough.

My suggestion is to temper our response, rather than act as would a vengeful battered individual. Give credit where credit is due, to do the opposite is an indictment of our character undeserving of praise.

jdberger
10-03-2011, 9:40 AM
This concept is just as rigid as the opposition, who, in face of factual data to the contrary, cling to their personal ideological prejudices. Even a horse trainer knows that replacing detrimental instinctual behavior requires a system of desensitization and reward. If we never praise a person for coming to a satisfactory decision, then what incentive have they? If an adversary does the right thing in the face of a personal prejudice, setting aside their heart felt belief in support of their professional responsibility, they have made a tremendous leap in personal growth. Acting out of one's character for the sake of moral or legal principles is evidence of an emerging inherent wisdom. What some would refer to as a breakthrough.

My suggestion is to temper our response, rather than act as would a vengeful battered individual. Give credit where credit is due, to do the opposite is an indictment of our character undeserving of praise.

Here! Here!

Put away the pitchforks and torches, folks.

(I wish I could get people this wound up about attending a f*ing City Council meeting)

gatesbox
10-03-2011, 9:42 AM
It's not unconstitutional or treasonous, it's just WRONG.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/28/al-qaeda-threat-highlighted-gun-control-campaign_n_885852.html

http://dailycaller.com/2011/06/28/mayors-against-illegal-guns-group-releases-terrorist-inspired-video/

http://survivalandprosperity.com/tag/coalition-of-mayors-against-illegal-guns/


Thank you for editing....I never said it was right, but the constitution not only establishes rights but establishes the system of creating, amending, and challenging laws. I do not believe that this group is transparent in their true objective, but by their stated objective they are against illegal activity....I don't think it is productive to attack a mayor for membership, on the wacko notion that membership is treason, especially when it would seem in the end she did not support and appropriately has withdrawn the attachment of her city and office to the group. We have so many sound arguments to make. There is no need for crack pot notions of dereliction of the oath of office.

oldrifle
10-03-2011, 9:46 AM
Thank you for editing....I never said it was right, but the constitution not only establishes rights but establishes the system of creating, amending, and challenging laws. I do not believe that this group is transparent in their true objective, but by their stated objective they are against illegal activity....I don't think it is productive to attack a mayor for membership, on the wacko notion that membership is treason, especially when it would seem in the end she did not support and appropriately has withdrawn the attachment of her city and office to the group. We have so many sound arguments to make. There is no need for crack pot notions of dereliction of the oath of office.

We're not going to attack any mayor for being a member because our assertion is still that most of them don't really know what MAIG is all about. What we will do is inform them and hope that most of them make the right decision regarding their continued membership.

Yeah, I agree about the treason thing. That's over the top rhetoric.

supersonic
10-03-2011, 11:06 AM
Agreed. In fact, it's pretty juvenile, Supersonic. Try to take the high road.

Librarian, can you please remove this post and the replies to it? We need to keep this kind of BS out of the conversation.

Supersonic, you can disagree with the letter and comment in a substantive way without stooping to name calling.

Sorry, all. My bad. I was still half asleep and this was a knee-jerk reaction to what I had read about her. In fact, I was on my way to deleting the post since I got back home a couple of hours later and I see that someone already did the right thing for me. I'll take it as a learning experience: I will now wait at least an hour after waking up - for my head to "clear" - before committing anything to post. Again, please excuse me.

wash
10-03-2011, 11:55 AM
Mayor Hamilton is a nice person as far as I can tell.

I don't agree with her personal interpretation of the constitution (and SCOTUS doesn't agree either) but as long as she can't violate my rights we only have a difference of opinion.

Honestly our response to the Sunnyvale situation was disproportionate. We have to be because we needed to make sure they did the right thing.

Mayor Hamilton, how far would you go to defend the first amendment?

I hope you would go pretty far.

Council member Moylan mentioned that he didn't want to talk about slippery slopes but we had LCAV members asking for the proposed buffer zone be enlarged to 1,000 feet before it even passed.

What we do is stop stuff before we start sliding down that slope at all.

But the key is that law abiding gun owners are not a problem in your town or anywhere. We are quite often opinionated and a few of us outspoken but our only interest is preserving our freedom.

If you don't threaten us we will leave you alone (or maybe even help you campaign).

MAIG is a threat to us. A similar program of double checking the status of their members happened a year or two ago, many resigned from the organization.

I can't say I really support the MAIG campaign being organized here but mostly because MAIG has already been outed as a sham. Our time would be better spent cleaning our guns.

My guns are going to remain dirty for a while because I'm going to try to help a friend with an anti-violence program in Oakland where there is a real problem despite the fact that they have no FFL dealers...

Librarian
10-03-2011, 12:11 PM
This concept is just as rigid as the opposition, who, in face of factual data to the contrary, cling to their personal ideological prejudices. Even a horse trainer knows that replacing detrimental instinctual behavior requires a system of desensitization and reward. If we never praise a person for coming to a satisfactory decision, then what incentive have they? If an adversary does the right thing in the face of a personal prejudice, setting aside their heart felt belief in support of their professional responsibility, they have made a tremendous leap in personal growth. Acting out of one's character for the sake of moral or legal principles is evidence of an emerging inherent wisdom. What some would refer to as a breakthrough.

My suggestion is to temper our response, rather than act as would a vengeful battered individual. Give credit where credit is due, to do the opposite is an indictment of our character undeserving of praise.

Let us please work from this starting point.

oldrifle
10-03-2011, 1:10 PM
MAIG is a threat to us. A similar program of double checking the status of their members happened a year or two ago, many resigned from the organization.

I can't say I really support the MAIG campaign being organized here but mostly because MAIG has already been outed as a sham. Our time would be better spent cleaning our guns.

If they're a threat to us, why don't you support our effort?

wash
10-03-2011, 1:37 PM
If you get 75% of MAIG's "membership" to resign, MAIG will just say "Look at all these mayors that reaffirmed their stance against illegal guns."

It's like wrestling with a pig. You just get dirty and they might like it.

I'm not against it, I just can't see it really justifying the effort required.

Like I said, MAIG is already known as a sham organization that can't even be honest about their membership.

oldrifle
10-03-2011, 1:43 PM
If you get 75% of MAIG's "membership" to resign, MAIG will just say "Look at all these mayors that reaffirmed their stance against illegal guns."

It's like wrestling with a pig. You just get dirty and they might like it.

I'm not against it, I just can't see it really justifying the effort required.

Like I said, MAIG is already known as a sham organization that can't even be honest about their membership.

Considering there are nearly 20,000 municipal governments in the US, they're already quite irrelevant. However, 600 is a much more impressive number than 150 and I'm pretty sure that if we took 75% of their members away they'd just pack it in.

This is a crowdsourced effort so the amount of work required is probably a lot less than you think it is. We have a lot of good people helping out, making it very manageable.

KWB977
10-03-2011, 1:50 PM
I love people that pick and choose what rights OTHER people should have....... so Ill play.

"While I personally do not support gun ownership,"

I'm not a fan of equal rights for women, she needs be seen and not heard and get back to the kitchen.

See how absurd it sounds?

Im kidding about the equal rights thing........ just making a point.

wash
10-03-2011, 1:55 PM
Ok but what if you only get 5% to resign?

Remember, people did the same thing a year or two ago, I think most of the fake members and mistaken sign-ups are already gone.

I just can't see a lot of win happening there.

But 600 clean rifles would be awesome.

Like you said, they are irrelevant. But my guess is that the remaining 600 will need more than an email to make them resign.

We would have to make it politically inconvenient for them to remain a member. That takes time and effort.

If you want to do that, look for members that are coming up for election.

hadjin
10-03-2011, 2:08 PM
She doesn't want to be known as the Mayor who's membership denial/but I'll ask to be removed doublespeak was part of a concerted effort to out her fellow Mayors.

I agree with others who observe her motives are self preservation for herself and her comrades opposed to the 2nd Amendment

oldrifle
10-03-2011, 2:14 PM
I understand your point but I don't agree. MAIG is a threat to our rights and I will do what I can, including putting pressure on incumbents who are up for reelection.

I have about as much time for this as I do for cleaning my guns (not much). You'd probably be surprised how streamlined this project is.

Ok but what if you only get 5% to resign?

Remember, people did the same thing a year or two ago, I think most of the fake members and mistaken sign-ups are already gone.

I just can't see a lot of win happening there.

But 600 clean rifles would be awesome.

Like you said, they are irrelevant. But my guess is that the remaining 600 will need more than an email to make them resign.

We would have to make it politically inconvenient for them to remain a member. That takes time and effort.

If you want to do that, look for members that are coming up for election.

Wernher von Browning
10-03-2011, 2:26 PM
Do you think she knew that I did a PRA and have copies of the items she admitted? City Attorney probably told her to come clean.


That's tons better than what I found. Here's an ad by MAIG that lists her.

www.fixgunchecks.org/printad

The Internet Archive Wayback Machine
http://wayback.archive.org/web/20110715000000*/http://www.mayorsagainstillegalguns.org/html/members/members.shtml
has occasional snapshots of their member list, but her name does not appear. I suspect they're not very good about updating.

taperxz
10-03-2011, 2:50 PM
Ok but what if you only get 5% to resign?

Remember, people did the same thing a year or two ago, I think most of the fake members and mistaken sign-ups are already gone.

I just can't see a lot of win happening there.

But 600 clean rifles would be awesome.

Like you said, they are irrelevant. But my guess is that the remaining 600 will need more than an email to make them resign.

We would have to make it politically inconvenient for them to remain a member. That takes time and effort.

If you want to do that, look for members that are coming up for election.

REALLY? Seems like it didn't take much for the Mayor of Sunnyvale to leave the organization.

Grass roots also mean brick by brick. Either building or tearing down barriers, helps any cause. Bloomberg is a PI the A!! In the end, tearing HIS ideologies down is worth every effort we can muster.

If you think that what we are doing is a waste of time, i would hope that you would simply keep your ideas to yourself and allow those working on the project the simple respect of at least silence.

taperxz
10-03-2011, 2:54 PM
I should also ad that with your opinion, the idea of a gun owner taking out a non gun owner to go shooting to show them what we do at either ranges or hunting would also be a huge waste of time. Again, brick by brick.

oldrifle
10-03-2011, 3:05 PM
Everyone has their opinions about where our time is best spent. We have the support of CGF in this. Dan makes valid points but I don't agree with his opinion that our time is best spent cleaning rifles or any such busywork. This is important and we take it seriously.

We will email them, we will send them letters and we will call them on the phone. This isn't just an email campaign. Hell, for local ones we'll meet with them personally.

taperxz
10-03-2011, 3:11 PM
Mayor Hamilton is a nice person as far as I can tell.

I don't agree with her personal interpretation of the constitution (and SCOTUS doesn't agree either) but as long as she can't violate my rights we only have a difference of opinion.

Honestly our response to the Sunnyvale situation was disproportionate. We have to be because we needed to make sure they did the right thing.

Mayor Hamilton, how far would you go to defend the first amendment?

I hope you would go pretty far.

Council member Moylan mentioned that he didn't want to talk about slippery slopes but we had LCAV members asking for the proposed buffer zone be enlarged to 1,000 feet before it even passed.

What we do is stop stuff before we start sliding down that slope at all.

But the key is that law abiding gun owners are not a problem in your town or anywhere. We are quite often opinionated and a few of us outspoken but our only interest is preserving our freedom.

If you don't threaten us we will leave you alone (or maybe even help you campaign).

MAIG is a threat to us. A similar program of double checking the status of their members happened a year or two ago, many resigned from the organization.

I can't say I really support the MAIG campaign being organized here but mostly because MAIG has already been outed as a sham. Our time would be better spent cleaning our guns.

My guns are going to remain dirty for a while because I'm going to try to help a friend with an anti-violence program in Oakland where there is a real problem despite the fact that they have no FFL dealers...

A worthy effort, certainly not in my top 10 things of what i want to do today as their violence and problems stem way beyond 2A rights. I'll stick to the 2A and try to remain focused. Good luck with your project.

wash
10-03-2011, 3:31 PM
That's the whole point of what we are trying to do.

Guns are not the problem in Oakland, it's the destruction of the family that has been caused by interference of people who "know better". Guns are just the scapegoat.

The idea of an Oakland anti-violence program is to fix the real problems so that they don't keep making ineffective anti-gun laws that always fail to help.

taperxz
10-03-2011, 3:39 PM
That's the whole point of what we are trying to do.

Guns are not the problem in Oakland, it's the destruction of the family that has been caused by interference of people who "know better". Guns are just the scapegoat.

The idea of an Oakland anti-violence program is to fix the real problems so that they don't keep making ineffective anti-gun laws that always fail to help.

Oakland is Oakland :) good luck with that.

oldrifle
10-03-2011, 3:40 PM
Alright guys. No need for anybody to question the efforts of anybody else, as long as we're all working towards the same goals.

wash
10-03-2011, 3:41 PM
Yeah, I know.

It's still worth trying.

wash
10-03-2011, 3:56 PM
Alright guys. No need for anybody to question the efforts of anybody else, as long as we're all working towards the same goals.

Exactly.

Maybe it wasn't clear over the Internet but I was speaking about my personal support.

I was also trying to back up Mayor Hamilton's opinion of the MAIG project. I think she's right but I'm sure our reasoning is different.

I just hope that the outcome isn't a surprise for everyone.

There is really only one mayor that we have to worry about in MAIG: Bloomberg. That's the head of the hydra that needs to get cut off.

In California he's just annoying. I'll let the New Yorkers worry about him.