PDA

View Full Version : Many CA Gun Bills Before Committee on April 24


mikehaas
04-18-2007, 7:30 PM
NRA Members' Councils of California
http://www.nramemberscouncils.com/skin/mclogoclr2.gif (http://calnra.com)
Many CA Gun Bills Before Committee on April 24
7:30 PM, 4/18/2007

CalNRA.com Legislative Info (http://calnra.com/) has been updated to reflect the many bills appearing before committee on April 24, 2007. NRA requests you contact the appropriate legislative bodies and urge the appropriate vote. ONE-CLICK service has been established for these issues to make this easy at:
http://calnra.com/legs.shtml#oneclick

Please send a ONE-CLICK Email to the:

ASSEMBLY against MANDATORY LOSS/THEFT REPORTING (http://calnra.com/legs.shtml?summary=ab334&year=2007) (AB 334)

ASSEMBLY APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE against AMMO SALES (http://calnra.com/legs.shtml?summary=ab362&year=2007) (AB 362)

ASSEMBLY WATER, PARKS & WILDLIFE COMMITTEE in support of HUNTING PROTECTION (http://calnra.com/legs.shtml?summary=ab815&year=2007) (AB 815)

ASSEMBLY PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE in support of PUBLICATIONS (http://calnra.com/legs.shtml?summary=ab854&year=2007) (AB 854)

ASSEMBLY WATER, PARKS & WILDLIFE COMMITTEE in support of MENTORED HUNTING (http://calnra.com/legs.shtml?summary=ab912&year=2007) (AB 912)

ASSEMBLY PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE in support of USED HANDGUN SALES (http://calnra.com/legs.shtml?summary=ab1218&year=2007) (AB 1218)

ASSEMBLY PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE in support of HUNTER SAFETY CERTIFICATE EXEMPTION RESTORATION (http://calnra.com/legs.shtml?summary=ab1357&year=2007) (AB 1357)

ASSEMBLY PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE against MICROSTAMPING (http://calnra.com/legs.shtml?summary=ab1471&year=2007) (AB 1471)

The following items had been posted earlier and also need your attention:

ASSEMBLY APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE against LEAD AMMO BAN (http://calnra.com/legs.shtml?summary=ab821&year=2007) (AB 821)

DEPT. OF FISH & GAME against LEAD AMMO BAN (http://calnra.com/legs.shtml?summary=leadammoban&year=2007)

SACRAMENTO CITY COUNCIL against SAC. LOSS/THEFT REPORTING (http://calnra.com/legs.shtml?summary=saclosstheft&year=2007)

SACRAMENTO CITY COUNCIL against SAC. AMMO SALES REPORTING (http://calnra.com/legs.shtml?summary=sacammosales&year=2007)

THOUSAND OAKS CITY COUNCIL against THOUSAND OAKS LOSS/THEFT REPORTING (http://calnra.com/legs.shtml?summary=tolosstheft&year=2007)

Mike

chunger
04-18-2007, 7:34 PM
Thanks again for the updates and action points. . . I've got some writing to do!

6172crew
04-18-2007, 7:44 PM
The mother load.:( I guess they figure now is the chance to take away our rights...they cant wait a week after VT before jumping on a gun grabbing ban wagon.

6172crew
04-18-2007, 7:49 PM
Now that I look at this list it appears we are on the offensive with a few of these bills.:) I will have plenty to do in the morning.

Directshot
04-18-2007, 7:54 PM
Thanks. Looks like homework time.

Pthfndr
04-18-2007, 9:12 PM
Thanks for the heads up Mike

DrjonesUSA
04-18-2007, 9:24 PM
Thanks again for the update, Mike!!

sorensen440
04-18-2007, 9:32 PM
Thanks for the heads up Mike
Ditto !!

Can'thavenuthingood
04-18-2007, 9:49 PM
One click done on AB 334.

While reading this Analysis, http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/07-08/bill/asm/ab_0301-0350/ab_334_cfa_20070417_145915_asm_comm.html

Can anyone explain how the bold text part here is relevant to the intent of this bill? Its way out of context.
And while I'm here, that 500,000 guns stolen per year equates to 10,000 guns per state taken from private citizens. Is that an accurate figure? Sure smells odd to me.

Vick
------------------------
1)Rationale . Proponents contend stolen handguns are a
significant source of arms for criminals and that the lack of
a mandatory reporting law in California hinders tracking and
prosecution. (Currently only Michigan, New York and Rhode
Island, and the cities of Oakland and Berkeley, require
AB 334
Page 2

reports on lost or stolen guns.) A 2003 report by the Johns
Hopkins Center for Gun Policy and Research, which addresses
the role of gun theft in arming criminals and the importance
of mandatory theft reporting policies, cites surveys of gun
owners that suggest some 500,000 guns are stolen annually from
private citizens nationwide. Data from a 1997 national survey
of incarcerated criminals indicate the prominent role theft
plays in arming criminals. When asked how they obtained a gun,
almost 20% reported stealing it or buying it from a fence.

According to the author, "This bill seeks to limit the ability
of straw purchasers to supply guns to criminals who cannot
legally own firearms. Often, criminals who are not eligible to
own a gun contact a 'straw purchaser' who can legally purchase
a firearm. This straw purchaser buys a gun, and then sells the
gun on the black market to the person who cannot legally own a
gun."

2)Opponents , primarily gun-related organizations, contend this
bill places an undue burden on those who have suffered the
loss or theft of a gun.

Ford8N
04-19-2007, 6:31 AM
One click done on AB 334.

While reading this Analysis, http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/07-08/bill/asm/ab_0301-0350/ab_334_cfa_20070417_145915_asm_comm.html

Can anyone explain how the bold text part here is relevant to the intent of this bill? Its way out of context.
And while I'm here, that 500,000 guns stolen per year equates to 10,000 guns per state taken from private citizens. Is that an accurate figure? Sure smells odd to me.

Vick
------------------------
1)Rationale . Proponents contend stolen handguns are a
significant source of arms for criminals and that the lack of
a mandatory reporting law in California hinders tracking and
prosecution. (Currently only Michigan, New York and Rhode
Island, and the cities of Oakland and Berkeley, require
AB 334
Page 2

reports on lost or stolen guns.) A 2003 report by the Johns
Hopkins Center for Gun Policy and Research, which addresses
the role of gun theft in arming criminals and the importance
of mandatory theft reporting policies, cites surveys of gun
owners that suggest some 500,000 guns are stolen annually from
private citizens nationwide. Data from a 1997 national survey
of incarcerated criminals indicate the prominent role theft
plays in arming criminals. When asked how they obtained a gun,
almost 20% reported stealing it or buying it from a fence.

According to the author, "This bill seeks to limit the ability
of straw purchasers to supply guns to criminals who cannot
legally own firearms. Often, criminals who are not eligible to
own a gun contact a 'straw purchaser' who can legally purchase
a firearm. This straw purchaser buys a gun, and then sells the
gun on the black market to the person who cannot legally own a
gun."

2)Opponents , primarily gun-related organizations, contend this
bill places an undue burden on those who have suffered the
loss or theft of a gun.



What has been happening is that a lot of the time, guns recovered from criminals that are from "straw purchases", the "straw man" tell the cops they threw the gun in the trash. So there is nothing the cops can do, it's not against the law to buy a gun then toss it in the trash. Criminal scum sit all day in jail figuring out angles to get around the law.

mikehaas
04-19-2007, 9:29 AM
Thank you all for the response and great letters!

Keep in mind if you're short on time (there ARE a few ONE-CLICK to send, eh?) that capitol staff do not need a detailed message. Their eyes will probably glaze and they'de collapse on the spot if you folks unleashed your full knowledge on them!

The most important thing to say is "Please vote NO on (whatever)" or "Please vote YES on (whatever)" - that is what they are looking for: support or opposition. They should be able to glean your position easily from your message.

If they have to look too hard to determine that, your message will probably be discarded, no matter how detailed and expert your dissertation.

Tear 'em up!

Mike

Can'thavenuthingood
04-19-2007, 10:22 AM
Well on just the AB 334 one click I've received 24 separate emails from Assembly members auto responders.

Most all have improved their individual response text with further contact information of pertinent staff and offers of meetings as well as phone numbers.

A couple have the disclaimer of spam, phishing and sales etc as an excuse to disable the email account (Loni Hancock) and many refer me to their public website for email handling.

Most all assure me that ALL email is read but unless I live in their district they will not respond. Thats okay with me as the response I want is on the Assembly floor vote.

I put the "No AB-334" in the subject line.

Back to reading and writing and clicking:D

Vick

tmuller
04-19-2007, 11:20 AM
informative and simple...keep up the good work. Thanks again!!

mikehaas
04-19-2007, 12:43 PM
Just received this "status report" from another NRA Members' Council officer about AB 1471 - Microstamping, thought calgunners would be interested:
-----
I pulled up the contact info for the 7 people listed on the Public Safety Committee who will hear this next Tuesday the 24th.

I contacted the local office of Greg Aghazarian. The woman told me they'd taken about 50 calls on this bill. She said more were against it than for it - maybe 30/20.

I called Jose A's office - the local number. The man told me he'd been in a conference call just last week on this bill and he is voting against it.

I called Mark Leno's office - the local office but they gave no info.

I called A. Portantino's Sacto office and spoke to a man there who said I was the first call of the day. He was not sure where A.P. stood on this bill, and would make up his mind after discussion on the floor. He checked and said they had not received many calls.
-----

Mike

mikehaas
04-19-2007, 1:00 PM
Well on just the AB 334 one click I've received 24 separate emails from Assembly members auto responders...
THANK YOU! Yes, the ONE-CLICK system sends your single personally-written message to all email-available members of the targeted committee or body - in this case for AB 334, almost 80 Assembly members!

You don't even have to know which committee or body. I don't know how to make it any easier.

And every email is legitimate - the personal message of a California gun-owner. No form letters, every email is unique. That's proof to Sacramento that they are not being generated by a computer or campaign but originated by real humans that care deeply about these issues.

Please tell others!

Mike

Can'thavenuthingood
04-19-2007, 3:47 PM
IRT AB 334 again.
Where did they get the 500,000 stolen guns figure from?

The text says surveys of gun owners suggest that many are stolen but I'd think if that was so we'd here alot more about that on every media outlet out there.

Also how many does 20% of surveyed criminals represent? How many did they survey?
Where can I take a look or have access to this data the writers of this bill are using?

Still clicking,

Vick

Bad Voodoo
04-19-2007, 3:59 PM
Did my part!

-voodoo

Can'thavenuthingood
04-19-2007, 4:30 PM
This is pretty much what most all the auto responders are sending regarding my one click emails.

I just type the YES or NO on AB-*** in the subject line.
In the body a repeat with a please.
My name and city for sign off.

Hello, and thank you for your email. If you were writing about a bill in the California State Legislature, your support or opposition will be tallied. Your opinions are noted and very much appreciated.
Due to the volume of email that I receive, I am only able to respond to messages that contain a postal address within the following counties

This is quite easy and no brain strain.

Vick

AfricanHunter
04-19-2007, 4:43 PM
All sent.

WokMaster1
04-19-2007, 4:46 PM
All done here!:)

joe_sun
04-19-2007, 8:36 PM
That was a lot of typing.

But

DONE!

:D

Thanks for the heads up!

Jon

chunger
04-19-2007, 11:33 PM
Emails sent. . . some of mine are pretty sparse though. . .

Working on faxes for the I'm a bit more aprehensive about. it would be helpful to get a couple of bullet points for writing about each of these issues. Some of them I am very unfamiliar with.

Can'thavenuthingood
04-20-2007, 7:28 AM
bullet points for writing about each of these issues. Some of them I am very unfamiliar with.

Which ones?

Some of these you have to wonder how they come up with this crap to justify even writing the bill let alone presenting it for passage. Logic doesn't necessarily apply.

I think Brady/VPC etc. writes this stuff and then gives it to the Assembly member for sponsoring.

Then again you don't want them too wordy on a one click as they just make a tally of yes/no columns. As I understand it anyway. Mike or someone else closer to the beast can explain the process better than me.

Vick

JOEKILLA
04-20-2007, 1:42 PM
Whew....done did it, now my email's flooded by their auto response.

Next time I will do the one-click as soon as a new one pops out. :D

Dont Tread on Me
04-20-2007, 3:55 PM
If you doubt the importance of these one-clicks go to stopthenra.com and sign up. I've been getting e-mails from the Brady Bunch all day telling me how important it is to one-click and get these bills passed. Apparently it is time to "stop hurting" and pass "sensible gun laws."

I quote:
We have a dedicated sponsor of the legislation, Assemblyman Mike Feuer (D-42), a former Los Angeles City Councilmember who has long been an advocate for sensible gun laws. He is depending on our support to pass this legislation this year.

Please one-click to stop the Brady Bunch

mikehaas
04-21-2007, 5:20 AM
Remember, it's not necessary to explain anything about the legislation (but you can if you wish). That's not your job. LET *THEM* EXPLAIN WHY THEY MIGHT SUPPORT OR OPPOSE A BILL. (Big secret: most are too arrogant to pay much attention to your explanations anyway.)

Lawmakers care ONLY whether you support or oppose the bill. That's all you need to say. They want to get reelected.

And don't worry about them trying to get you to provide an address. Let them worry if you are in their district or not. If they receive hundreds of emails without addresses, you better believe it will still have an effect. And don't forget to call!

Besides, it's RIDICULOUS to suggest that just because you aren't in a lawmakers district, they will ignore your input - THAT'S *BS* AND YOU SHOULD NOT LET THAT STAND. These committees ALL have only a few legislators sitting on them. So if your Assemblyman isn't on a committee, you should just pipe down and SHUT UP? I don't think so.

Remember folks, at our level, politics basically boils down to a system of "pain" and "pain avoidence". Whoever convinces Sacramento they can create the most "pain" gets their way. That can be in the form of not getting elected or even "My God! We are getting flooded with comments!" When you keep them hopping, they don't like that - those staffers would rather be "working" these bills than spending time fielding emails, phone calls, faxes and letters.

Let's show them what they can expect ANYTIME THEY TAKE UP GUN CONTROL!

Mike

Dont Tread on Me
04-21-2007, 6:06 AM
I just wrote "I support/oppose this bill #####". Took about ten mins.

Do you really want to wake up to a 2nd Amen. forum where we discuss how to retrofit our guns for microstamping with lead free ammo? Please please just take the ten mins and get this done.

The Brady Bunch smell blood as they think the CA law makers will pass some gun control laws just to get headlines in light of the VT shooting. You would be amazed at the e-mails they are sending out to their members.

chunger
04-21-2007, 11:45 AM
Just made another pass with wife's email with her permission :) Let's light 'em up. This is way more important than the silly online polls we've been voting on!

AfricanHunter
04-21-2007, 8:04 PM
bump

chunger
04-22-2007, 5:47 PM
Bump. . . we let's keep the pressure on. . . seems phone calls are in order now.

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=55819

Can'thavenuthingood
04-24-2007, 10:50 AM
Today is the 24th

Did everyone get there one clicks in?

Vick

glockk9mm
04-24-2007, 5:26 PM
Today is the 24th

Did everyone get there one clicks in?

Vick

I did.

chunger
04-24-2007, 5:51 PM
How'd we do today?

caliboy1321
04-24-2007, 6:18 PM
Anybody with results?

Anthonysmanifesto
04-24-2007, 9:24 PM
Anybody with results?

One anti gun bill and one pro gun bill passed in the same commitee.. go figure.
.

Can'thavenuthingood
04-24-2007, 9:26 PM
This is Mike's update from thread he started.
Fights still on, call, fax an mail as well as one click.

Vick


-------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=56096
NRA Members' Councils of California

Updated Bill Schedules, 4/24/2007
11:40 AM, 04/24/2007

Some of the previous bill schedule information published at...
http://calnra.com/legs.shtml
...has been updated or corrected as follows:

AB334: Previously, we reported that AB 334 would next appear before the Assembly, date unknown. The state schedule now reflects that AB 334 will appear before the Assembly Appropriations Committee on Wednesday, April 25, 2007. Please contact the committee members and urge a NO vote on AB 362. More information is available at:
http://calnra.com/legs.shtml?year=2007&summary=ab334

AB362: Previously, we reported that AB 362 would appear before the Assembly Appropiations Committee on Tuesday, April 24, 2007, but the hearing is actually scheduled for Wednesday, April 25, 2007. Please continue to contact the committee members and urge a NO vote on AB 362. More information is available at:
http://calnra.com/legs.shtml?year=2007&summary=ab362

AB821: AB 821 will appear before the Assembly Appropriations Committee on Wednesday, April 25, 2007. Please contact the committee members and urge a NO vote against AB 821. More information is available at:
http://calnra.com/legs.shtml?year=2007&summary=ab821

ONE-CLICK service has been established for these issues at:
http://calnra.com/legs.shtml#oneclick

Mike