PDA

View Full Version : Pro-Gun Legislation


Tiberius
05-23-2012, 9:13 AM
It seems that as California gun-owners, we are constantly on the defensive as proposals such as ammo-stamping, bullet-button-banning get floated and incite all sorts of worry.

Are there no pro-gun legislators to draft pieces such as 1) repeal of "the roster" (as an ineffective and costly restraint of trade that affects California tax revenue); 2) repeal of the California "assault weapons ban" as accomplishing nothing, and so on? There are many other possibilities.

If our backs are to the goal line constantly, every now and then we're going to give up a score. We need to get some offense going. Not every member of legislature is an urbanite whose fear of guns is based on a profound misunderstanding; there are plenty of hunters, shooters, and military vets in the Legislature.

I have no idea who these folks are, but I'm sure some people here do. We need to put together some proposed or draft legislation and get it to the right people. If anyone can point me in the right direction - and perhaps the Calguns Foundation (I think that's it) is already on this. But I'm in to help.

T

the86d
05-23-2012, 9:16 AM
They only care to get reelected, and the ignorance of city-fied overeducated, and undereducated will vote for them again if they saw their name somewhere protecting them against EBRs, not protecting everyone's rights...

Capybara
05-23-2012, 11:04 AM
You forget this is the PRK, the state ruled by tyranny. There are very few pro gun politicians in this state and even fewer who would step up and do this as it is political suicide. Politicians tend to care about only one thing, getting re-elected.

We are the state of Boxer, Feinstein and Pelosi. California has not been and probably never will be a pro gun state, we will always have to fight for our lives here. We only have our limited gun rights because of some smart lawyers and organizations who acted quickly to preserve our rights by challenge.

Bhobbs
05-23-2012, 11:05 AM
If I remember right, there was a bill last year that was trying to remove an anti gun law from the books that was ruled unconstitutional by the courts but it never came close to passing.

The CA state gov will never pass a pro gun bill. Especially one that over turns the roster or AW ban.

Tiberius
05-23-2012, 11:10 AM
I don't think the representatives from San Francisco will support 2A rights. But there must be reps from Shasta, Modoc, Placer, and many other non-urban counties that do support them. It seems like the only folks who are proposing bills are a few vehemently anti-gun legislators. There must be some from more rural areas that might even enjoy getting behind a cause that would be popular in their district.

The Calguns Foundation is doing incredible work in the courts. I just wonder whether another front could be opened in the state legislature. The bills that come out are incredibly one-sided; even if a bill to abandon the 10 day wait for those who already own guns, or to abandon the roster, or the AWB, didn't pass, it might still be beneficial, if it points out the ludicrous nature of our laws and how out of step California is with the rest of the country.

winnre
05-23-2012, 11:24 AM
"Pro gun" and "legislation" ought never be put together. That infers we have no rights unless they are doled out by our leaders.

berto
05-23-2012, 11:28 AM
I don't think the representatives from San Francisco will support 2A rights. But there must be reps from Shasta, Modoc, Placer, and many other non-urban counties that do support them. It seems like the only folks who are proposing bills are a few vehemently anti-gun legislators. There must be some from more rural areas that might even enjoy getting behind a cause that would be popular in their district.

The Calguns Foundation is doing incredible work in the courts. I just wonder whether another front could be opened in the state legislature. The bills that come out are incredibly one-sided; even if a bill to abandon the 10 day wait for those who already own guns, or to abandon the roster, or the AWB, didn't pass, it might still be beneficial, if it points out the ludicrous nature of our laws and how out of step California is with the rest of the country.

Look at how the legislature's committees are structured (a dysfunctional and irrelevant GOP traded safe seats for the ability to do little except hold up the budget) and you'll see the votes aren't there to move anything out of committee let alone through both houses and to the gov. Look at the games that get played when a legislator steps out of line and crosses the party head (staff and office cut etc) and you'll see folks intent on protecting their careers over doing what they were elected to do. The rural guys and pro-gun guys don't have a chance.

motorhead
05-23-2012, 11:29 AM
not in the cards, YET.
http://i268.photobucket.com/albums/jj22/neon_tony/kool-server.jpg

Librarian
05-23-2012, 11:30 AM
Despite some individual exceptions, the Democrat leadership of the Legislature seems to find an anti-gun position to their advantage.

Since the Legislature is dominated by Democrats, the committees are all Democrat-majority. Even slightly pro-gun bills generally are killed in committee, with party line votes.

Changing the anti-gun position from an advantage to a neutral or a disadvantage is the goal we need to achieve.

ETA berto said much the same thing, as I was typing.

Patermagnus
05-23-2012, 12:37 PM
With Gavin Newsome looking to put himself in the governor's seat, gun advocates need to sort something out.

Part of the problem is the common stereotype of gun owners. We're generally depicted as undereducated, ignorant, bible-banging, beer-swilling sister-f@#$rs. When we're not painted as rednecks, we're painted as paranoid conspiracy theorists, neo-Nazis or militia members. While some folks fit the negative stereotypes, many of us do not. Honestly, when was the last time a TV show presented the audience with an example of a responsible, gun-owning private citizen?

That said, the face of CA gun owners needs a makeover, and we need to educate the general public in regards to the benefits of responsible gun ownership, hunting, etc. The only folks I'm aware of that are really pushing this kind of education are the NRA, and they are too closely linked to the GOP to crack the closed minds on the Left. We need a more moderate approach that won't immediately raise the hackles of the Left.

How do we go about doing this?

Don29palms
05-23-2012, 12:50 PM
"Pro gun" and "legislation" ought never be put together. That infers we have no rights unless they are doled out by our leaders.

Where have you been? For years now we have had no rights. Only privileges that the government allows us to have.

We use to have the Constitution and The Bill of Rights. Now we have Constitutional Guidelines and the Bill of Privileges. We don't even have those here in the USSK!

LikeAllGuns
05-23-2012, 12:53 PM
It seems that as California gun-owners, we are constantly on the defensive as proposals such as ammo-stamping, bullet-button-banning get floated and incite all sorts of worry.

Are there no pro-gun legislators to draft pieces such as 1) repeal of "the roster" (as an ineffective and costly restraint of trade that affects California tax revenue); 2) repeal of the California "assault weapons ban" as accomplishing nothing, and so on? There are many other possibilities.

If our backs are to the goal line constantly, every now and then we're going to give up a score. We need to get some offense going. Not every member of legislature is an urbanite whose fear of guns is based on a profound misunderstanding; there are plenty of hunters, shooters, and military vets in the Legislature.

I have no idea who these folks are, but I'm sure some people here do. We need to put together some proposed or draft legislation and get it to the right people. If anyone can point me in the right direction - and perhaps the Calguns Foundation (I think that's it) is already on this. But I'm in to help.

T

I AGREE ^^^^

SilverTauron
05-23-2012, 1:01 PM
It seems that as California gun-owners, we are constantly on the defensive as proposals such as ammo-stamping, bullet-button-banning get floated and incite all sorts of worry.

Are there no pro-gun legislators to draft pieces such as 1) repeal of "the roster" (as an ineffective and costly restraint of trade that affects California tax revenue); 2) repeal of the California "assault weapons ban" as accomplishing nothing, and so on? There are many other possibilities.

If our backs are to the goal line constantly, every now and then we're going to give up a score. We need to get some offense going. Not every member of legislature is an urbanite whose fear of guns is based on a profound misunderstanding; there are plenty of hunters, shooters, and military vets in the Legislature.

I have no idea who these folks are, but I'm sure some people here do. We need to put together some proposed or draft legislation and get it to the right people. If anyone can point me in the right direction - and perhaps the Calguns Foundation (I think that's it) is already on this. But I'm in to help.

T

The problem you guys face is the same one in Illinois. To use your soccer analogy, the pro-rights team has 3 tired players . The other side has 3 shifts of 20 guys who are all expert runners and shooters. Playing offense isn't an option when the other side can shut you down at will. The only thing keeping the 3 players from being totally overrun is a referee (which represents the courts).

As an example of that point, a bill recently came up to reduce the waiting period from 10 days to 3 days for people with carry permits. As demonstrated by the total lack of violent crime sprees in states without them, waiting periods only serve as obstacles to legal gun ownership. Yet, when the bill hit the floor for a vote it got massively shot down in the California legislature.

Remember, this isn't a bill proposing shall-issue concealed carry or removal of the roster. This was a measure to reduce the waiting period for the subset of the state population which has a permit to carry-and it was sent to the rubbish bin at the speed of light.

ICONIC
05-23-2012, 1:09 PM
I think with the June 5th elections coming up, Calguns should take a play out of the NRA playbook and give our elected officals grades based upon their views towards hunting and 2A issues. (Not sure if they already do this or not.)

Secondly, with as much whining and crying that goes on in their forums, forum members need to go out and vote. That is the only way things will ever change in this state.

curtisfong
05-23-2012, 1:13 PM
Stop insisting it is a partisan issue, and it won't be a partisan issue.


Changing the anti-gun position from an advantage [for Democrat politicians] to a neutral or a disadvantage is the goal we need to achieve.


I have no idea why this simple idea is so difficult for people to understand.

Librarian
05-23-2012, 1:23 PM
Stop insisting it is a partisan issue, and it won't be a partisan issue.



I have no idea why this simple idea is so difficult for people to understand.

I made a point of mentioning some exceptions. That does not change the fact that the proposed 'pro gun' bills ordinarily are killed in committee along party-line votes.

I made no assertion regarding the individual members' opinions on the merits. I suspect a few of those votes were in obedience to instructions from the party leadership. Failure to go along leads to Some Problems With One's Bills, which leads to nothing to point to as 'See, I was effective!' proof, which sometimes leads to difficulties getting reelected.

Would the Republican party leadership make such demands on Republican members, if they had the majority? Difficult to say, since they haven't been the majority for so long. (That is, of course they would demand party loyalty, or again Some Problems With One's Bills, but would it be anti-gun?)

NytWolf
05-23-2012, 1:42 PM
The problem you guys face is the same one in Illinois. To use your soccer analogy, the pro-rights team has 3 tired players . The other side has 3 shifts of 20 guys who are all expert runners and shooters. Playing offense isn't an option when the other side can shut you down at will. The only thing keeping the 3 players from being totally overrun is a referee (which represents the courts).

You forget ... there is a grandstand of fans who are obviously one-sided. Any time the 3 players gain any momentum, the fans yell out, "hey, you can't do that!" or they just get boo-ed. Any of 20 guys can get red-flagged by the referee, but the fans will just toss in a replacement.

Tiberius
05-23-2012, 2:11 PM
I had no idea that a bill to reduce the waiting period to 3 days for permit holders had come up recently (and been summarily shot down, slightly more recently).

From the gist of all the above, the legislature is a dead end. Which leaves the courts and . .. the initiative process.

bwiese
05-23-2012, 2:21 PM
Many CA Republican pols (that still exist) are skittish about guns even though they try to "talk the talk".
And we have tons of GOP Sheriffs that are violating laws about CCW issuance. [Hutchens, Laurie Smith,
etc.] Even the 'good' ones still are subjective and don't follow laws.
.
The CA GOP platform has a pro-2A plank but it's pretty useless and it'd be almost worth getting rid of the
plank the way they dishonor it.

few new Reeps get elected due to CA GOP failures on various social issues, and there's
a risk theyll go under 1/3 soon;
.
some Reeps just want self-aggrandizement w/"big" bills that have little or no chance of
passage - as opposed to quietly running achievable, incremental bills.

.
Our CA NRA & CRPA legislative liaisons [these are great guys who work in difficult conditions] in fact had
better luck last running bills with Dems - moderate Dem Lou Correa and very pro-gun Dem Rod Wright
helped carry SB610 CCW bill.
.
CA GOP feels it doesn't have to run more than a few gun bills (other than showpieces) to keep us
placated, because they still think "gun rights == right wing" instead of "gun rights == civil rights",
and that they 'own' the issue.

But CA GOP is now butt-hurt, with gunnies using Dems to run gun bills - the CA GOP still wants to
'own' the issue even though they're generally POSes on the matter and don't realize they're losers.

Notable exceptions to this include standouts like Curt Hagman and Doug LaMalfa. Curt pressed like
hell to get an AB962 fixup bill run. Doug LaMalfa has been great and drove the Katrina bill thru.

The problem with even great CA GOP folks running bills now is they're not capable of moving them
thru committee(s).
.
With a state PAC we can start to do something... we can make bad Dems in swing-y districts not want
to have to fight extra cash, and extra cash to a pro-gun Reep may help him stay in. The converse is
true too - I'd have NO problem throwing money to a pro-gun Dem to displace/prevent a GOPer getting
in. That's called "single-issue swinging your weight."

This requires money and a FUNCTIONAL state organization to back up our lobbying team and getting
structures in place, etc.

[This is why some of us are uncomfortable with CRPA administration protecting itself from moving forward...]
.

Librarian
05-23-2012, 2:32 PM
CA GOP is now butt-hurt with gunnies using Dems to run gun bills - they still wanna 'own' the issue even though they're generally POSes on the matter and don't realize they're losers.

In a rational world - and we know how far California politics is from that ideal - that would be Taken As A Sign and the GOPs would wake up.

bwiese
05-23-2012, 2:37 PM
Which leaves ..{snip}.. the initiative process.

Nope. Got $50+ million?

Initiatives are generally the province of big-money stuff - insurance, unions, Indian gambling....

Initiative process is gonna require $1-$2 Million just to get paid signature gatherers to get enough (plus overage for safety margin) to get the item on the ballot.

It's gonna cost a HUGE amount of ad/air time to even have a remote chance of passage.

And if it fails it can unfortunately modulate some of the efforts in courts.

dfletcher
05-23-2012, 3:44 PM
I think it is useless to try and change the Democratic Party "from the top" and by that I mean trying to change the politicain's point of view. Why should they bother when they keep getting re-elected?

Whether a D or an R these folks have one thing in common and that is they are whores for the vote. Getting in and staying in is their first priority. Imagine how it would change the dynamic at any workplace if every 2 years a boss had to be "re-elected" by his subordinates. Would it make any difference if a guy working for another company told him he ought to behave in a certain way? Or if a next door neighbor told him he ought to promote so and so at work? No. But if the subordinates made mention they'd like the tonic vending machine to be stocked with Moxie over Coke - think he'd pay attention? I think so.

So the challenge, and the problem in CA, is how to get Democratic voters to stop voting for anti-gun politicians, how do we strike a chord with those voters - because that will get Democratic Party politicians to change.

sufferingbastard
05-23-2012, 6:08 PM
The people of California can put legislation on the ballot, get a petition and get it passed start small and work your way up. People do need to vote thats a fact.

Bhobbs
05-23-2012, 6:28 PM
The people of California can put legislation on the ballot, get a petition and get it passed start small and work your way up. People do need to vote thats a fact.

And the people will be lead to believe that any pro gun legislation will lead to blood in the streets, shoot outs over parking spaces and an explosion in crime. They will vote it down and it will be a waste of money.

Tiberius
05-23-2012, 6:43 PM
Despite some hurdles, there is significant cause for hope. The gun rights wars are largely over and . . . guns won. The Heller decision interpreting the 2nd Amendment was huge, and things haven't been this rosy for gun rights in a very long time.

Oddly, while California considers itself the home of the cutting edge and all things avante garde, in terms of gun rights we're retards and way behind the curve. The citizens of Miami, Houston, Jacksonville, Atlanta, and many other big cities and small towns all enjoy rights that California's don't get. This is the message that needs to get out. People are so impressed with the sunshine and real estate prices that they don't know what's being kept from them.

The facts are on our side. When some states starting issuing CCW/LTC permits, there were dire warnings of blood in the streets. It hasn't happened. And cities like Miami and Dallas are as, um, "diverse" as LA and SF. We know, but the general public doesn't, that it can be portrayed as a woman's rights issue. The only way a 100 pound woman can fight off 2 250 guys is with the caliber of her choice.

Getting the message out is key. The legislature isn't protecting its citizens, but leaving them exposed to criminals in a way rejected by the rest of America. And to upend expectations, if calm folks in suits and tie deliver this message, or women in business suits, with no camo, pickup trucks, and open-carried ARs, so much the better.

SilverTauron
05-24-2012, 6:59 AM
Despite some hurdles, there is significant cause for hope. The gun rights wars are largely over and . . . guns won. The Heller decision interpreting the 2nd Amendment was huge, and things haven't been this rosy for gun rights in a very long time.


False. We have the facts to support our position. But the WAR will never be 'won' .There were people who wanted to disarm the nation in 1776, and the Disarmament Lobby will still be around in 2076.



Oddly, while California considers itself the home of the cutting edge and all things avante garde, in terms of gun rights we're retards and way behind the curve. The citizens of Miami, Houston, Jacksonville, Atlanta, and many other big cities and small towns all enjoy rights that California's don't get. This is the message that needs to get out. People are so impressed with the sunshine and real estate prices that they don't know what's being kept from them.

That is no accident. There is a reason the 1st Amendment is a part of the U.S.C. No tyrannical government can exist in the face of an honest media corps broadcasting its dirty work for all to see.

Regrettably our former media structure has sold itself to the government its supposed to be reporting on. In places like California, Chicago, and the like the mainstream news media essentially is another government department. As such is reports on stories which benefit the powers that are, regardless of the facts in the story.

Put simply the voters in California will NEVER be allowed to know what they are missing out on. News segments calling states like Texas, South Dakota, Wyoming, Montana, etcetera, "reckless" are the establishment's way of keeping the population in the dark about the genuine nature of their rights.If you're born into a world where every layperson, TV talking head, and cop says guns are a social ill that need to be banned you literally won't know any other side to the story.

Changing this requires airing pro gun media on statewide TV outlets.This is squarely in Not Gonna Happen territory. Without statewide media campaigns for the 2nd Amendment, no one's mind is changing on gun issues.




The facts are on our side. When some states starting issuing CCW/LTC permits, there were dire warnings of blood in the streets. It hasn't happened. And cities like Miami and Dallas are as, um, "diverse" as LA and SF. We know, but the general public doesn't, that it can be portrayed as a woman's rights issue. The only way a 100 pound woman can fight off 2 250 guys is with the caliber of her choice.

Getting the message out is key. The legislature isn't protecting its citizens, but leaving them exposed to criminals in a way rejected by the rest of America. And to upend expectations, if calm folks in suits and tie deliver this message, or women in business suits, with no camo, pickup trucks, and open-carried ARs, so much the better.

The problem again is one of information distortion. The logic of people in Right Denied areas is that if violence is bad where they are , it must be ten times worse in CCW land. Doubtless a lot of people in New Jersey and Chicago think Florida must be an American Sarajevo by now. With a State-controlled media enterprise in place, the only 'message' voters in anti-gun district will get is the one supporting the status quo.

Unless we all win the lottery and start buying up FCC channel space to air our own news outlet, forget about it.With a corrupt media system there can be no chance of electoral reform. Any pro-gun bills will be promptly slandered into oblivion a "license to murder" law by the left leaning media.

Capybara
05-24-2012, 7:16 AM
Having worked on the media for quite a few decades, I agree with Silver. People are unfortunately swayed by mass media. Mass media is under heavy government and ultra liberal control for the most part.

Few people seek out unbiased forms of media because unbiased media is rare. All you need to do is look at what consistently pulls in the top 10 ratings on television to realize that people are collectively getting dumber and less informed. People do not seem to hunger for the truth so much anymore because the truth is messy, ugly and inconvenient. When I asked my own family if they knew and understood the details of Fast and Furious and Holder's criminal behavior, none of them even knew what i was talking about and I become labeled a "political crazy".

These are all supposedly intelligent, college-educated people, they are just uninformed, uninterested in what their government is doing and more concerned about playing around on Facebook, Words with Friends and watching those moronic top 10 television shows. Our government almost has Carte blanche now to do whatever they want because the media anesthetized public lets them.