PDA

View Full Version : Is the CRPA Still Relevant??????


ElvenSoul
01-08-2013, 12:47 PM
Thinking of joining again.

berto
01-08-2013, 12:57 PM
:popcorn:

ptoguy2002
01-08-2013, 1:01 PM
Short answer is.....no.

taperxz
01-08-2013, 1:06 PM
You could ask them in the CRPA forum of CGN but the thread will either get locked or deleted by the moderator of their part of the forum most likely.

It would be nice to see them in SAC making waves with our state politicians.

Kestryll
01-08-2013, 1:52 PM
I would say 'yes' and 'not near as much as they should be'.

'Yes' in that they have the only full time 2A lobbyist who works on CA gun rights issues directly with the NRA's full time lobbyist.
This is a valuable asset and both Ed Worley and Tom Pederson are good guys.
In this alone the CRPA is still relevant.
As a side note, California is the only State in the Union where the NRA employs a full time lobbyist.

'Not as much as they should be' in that CRPA has a large focus on competition shooting as required to maintain their status as the recognized NRA State Affiliate. This is a good thing but it can also cause tunnel vision.
There is much more that the CRPA can and should be doing, some of it feasible some not.
Ideally CRPA would be much more active politically in ways other than lobbying however there is a catch. The same legislators that one might want to act against today will be the ones your lobbyist has to persuade tomorrow.
The NRA can get away with this because with so many members nationwide even if you don't like them as a politician you also know they carry an awful lot of weight behind them.
CRPA, simply by the nature of a State sized org, doesn't have that membership battering ram behind them.
They could and should though.

There are efforts underway to make CRPA a leaner, more efficient and more member involved/driven org. It'll be interesting to see where the CRPA is in a couple of months.

ElvenSoul
01-08-2013, 1:55 PM
Thanks Kes!

I would say 'yes' and 'not near as much as they should be'.

'Yes' in that they have the only full time 2A lobbyist who works on CA gun rights issues directly with the NRA's full time lobbyist.
This is a valuable asset and both Ed Worley and Tom Pederson are good guys.
In this alone the CRPA is still relevant.
As a side note, California is the only State in the Union where the NRA employs a full time lobbyist.

'Not as much as they should be' in that CRPA has a large focus on competition shooting as required to maintain their status as the recognized NRA State Affiliate. This is a good thing but it can also cause tunnel vision.
There is much more that the CRPA can and should be doing, some of it feasible some not.
Ideally CRPA would be much more active politically in ways other than lobbying however there is a catch. The same legislators that one might want to act against today will be the ones your lobbyist has to persuade tomorrow.
The NRA can get away with this because with so many members nationwide even if you don't like them as a politician you also know they carry an awful lot of weight behind them.
CRPA, simply by the nature of a State sized org, doesn't have that membership battering ram behind them.
They could and should though.

There are efforts underway to make CRPA a leaner, more efficient and more member involved/driven org. It'll be interesting to see where the CRPA is in a couple of months.

ptoguy2002
01-08-2013, 2:08 PM
Thanks Kes!

Keep in mind he is a CRPA board member...not exactly an objective point of view.

DVSmith
01-08-2013, 2:12 PM
Keep in mind he is a CRPA board member...not exactly an objective point of view.

His point of view is well informed.

ptoguy2002
01-08-2013, 2:15 PM
His point of view is well informed.
Granted, yes, but still not objective.

MudCamper
01-08-2013, 2:18 PM
No. Not really.

DVSmith
01-08-2013, 2:19 PM
Granted, yes, but still not objective.

Yours is?

ElvenSoul
01-08-2013, 2:26 PM
Well as Kes said they have a important stake in shooting sports. This ban is going to hurt shooting sports.

Kestryll
01-08-2013, 2:29 PM
Granted, yes, but still not objective.

Just curious, which part do you find to be subjective?

The discussion of the lobbyists?

The part where the CRPA has to administer competitions to maintain it's NRA Affiliate status?

The part where there is much more that they could be doing?

The part where they would be better served by being more active politically in ways other than lobbying?

Or the part where they aren't as able to pull off certain things because they lack the NRA's size and membership?



ETA: Actually almost nothing in life can be said to by objective when humans are involved, let's try a more realistic word.
Which of those do you consider to be improperly influenced by bias?

taperxz
01-08-2013, 2:40 PM
This link may help you out. However, i don't think the project is active any longer. http://www.savecrpa.org/

In fairness here is a reply from CRPA on the the actions above
http://blog.crpa.org/?p=2038

It can be a little tough to decide what is what IMHO As usual, the orgs. that fight for our rights are mostly at odds with each other.

Scarecrow Repair
01-08-2013, 2:50 PM
CRPA has a lobbying side and a shooting support side.

If you want objective, you must only be interested in the shooting support side. Listen to nobody on here, and investigate on your own whether their shooting support matches your needs.

But I'm guessing you are in the 2A legal forum because you care about the lobbying side. You will get no objective opinions on this by definition.

Anyone who complains about Kes not being objective might as well say don't ask the weatherman which way the wind is blowing.

Anyone who can't differentiate Kes the hardass janitor and bottle washer from Kes the honest gun rights nut is so opinionated they have no opinions.

Krak
01-08-2013, 2:50 PM
As a side note, California is the only State in the Union where the NRA employs a full time lobbyist.


And what good has that done us? :shrug:

taperxz
01-08-2013, 3:07 PM
And what good has that done us? :shrug:

Probably more than you realize. Those lobbyists do go knocking on the doors of the politicians directly and make it into their offices for one on ones. Even if a bad bill passes, these guys certainly have been able to get those bill tampered down to something at least winable in court. Or at very least, cases that won't take the national debt to fund in order to get it overturned in court.

pennys dad
01-08-2013, 3:08 PM
And what good has that done us? :shrug:

Here is a list of some of the 2012 bills worked on by our NRA and CRPA Lobbyist.
If there effort had done us no good, then all the negative bills would have been signed. So for 2012 they did you that much good. Since our NRA and CRPA Lobbyist need our support to stop bills or get them dropped by a committee (SB249 as example) then I would suggest that some of the problem lies within our own California shooting community in the form of lethargy.

Follow this link to see past and current NRA efforts (http://nramemberscouncils.com/legs.shtml)

State Issues
Issue Description Author Support?


AB 606 HUNTING
Gatto
Watch
Details



AB 613 REPEAL AMMO REGISTRATION LAW
Hagman
Support
Details



AB 829 CCW REFORM FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT
Knight
Watch
Details



AB 1046 RIGHT TO HUNT
Berryhill
Support
Details



AB 1162 HUNTING
Chesbro
Watch
Details



AB 1527 LONGGUN OPEN CARRY RESTRICTIONS SIGNED
Portantino
Oppose
Details



AB 1559 CFLC REQUIREMENTS FOR FFL HOLDERS
Portantino
Watch
Details



AB 2182 AIRPORT FIREARMS RESTRICTIONS
Torres
Oppose
Details



AB 2333 BB GUNS/SAFE STORAGE VETOED
Solario
Oppose
Details



AB 2376 CCW FOR HATE CRIMES VICTIMS
Halderman
Support
Details



AB 2460 BAN ON LEO "UNSAFE" TRANSFERS VETOED
Dickinson
Oppose
Details



AB 2512 TRACK AMMO SALES/BAN MAG. PARTS
Skinner
Oppose
Details



AB 2549 LEO "ASSAULT WEAPONS" REGISTRATION
Hall
Oppose
Details



AJR 45 FEDERAL "ASSAULT WEAPONS" BAN RESOLUTION
Feuer
Oppose
Details



SB 124 REDEFINE "HANDGUN AMMUNITION"
DeLeon
Oppose
Details



SB 249 ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN
Yee
Oppose
Details



SB 269 AUDIT OF THE DROS ACCOUNT
LaMalfa
Support
Details



SB 313 SB15 REFORM, ALLOW USED HANDGUN SALES BY DEALERS
Correa
Support
Details



SB 404 VETERAN'S HSC EXEMPTION
Anderson
Support
Details



SB 661 SCHOOL ZONES
Lieu
Watch
Details



SB 752 HUNTING
Berryhill
Watch
Details



SB 798 BB DEVICE COLORATION/BAN
DeLeon
Oppose
Details



SB 1110 PRAR RESTRICTIONS
Rubio
Oppose
Details



SB 1116 FISH & GAME
Berryhill
Support
Details



SB 1221 BAN DOG HUNTING OF BEARS/BOBCATS SIGNED
Lieu
Oppose
Details



SB 1315 BB GUN PREEMPTION REPEAL (LA COUNTY) SIGNED
De Leon
Oppose
Details



SB 1358 FISH & GAME WARDENS
Waters
Support
Details



SB 1366 REPORTING LOST/STOLEN FIREARMS VETOED
DeSaulnier
Oppose
Details



SB 1367 ARCHERY HUNTING/CONCEALED CARRY SIGNED
Fuller
Support
Details



SB 1422 HSC FOR VETERANS
Anderson
Support
Details



SB 1567 INSTANT NICS FOR CCW HOLDERS
La Malfa
Support
Details



SB 1569 WAITING PERIOD REDUCTION
Fuller
Support
Details

ptoguy2002
01-08-2013, 3:15 PM
Just curious, which part do you find to be subjective?

The discussion of the lobbyists?

The part where the CRPA has to administer competitions to maintain it's NRA Affiliate status?

The part where there is much more that they could be doing?

The part where they would be better served by being more active politically in ways other than lobbying?

Or the part where they aren't as able to pull off certain things because they lack the NRA's size and membership?



ETA: Actually almost nothing in life can be said to by objective when humans are involved, let's try a more realistic word.
Which of those do you consider to be improperly influenced by bias?

My comment was simply that as a board member, an insider, your point of view is not completely objective, or in other words, to be take with a grain of salt. That CRPA is still "relevant" is a subjective comment (in the 2A realm anyway, not considering shooting sports). You admit yourself that there is more that they could be doing. That goes directly towards them not being relevant. You state only that they have a full time lobbyist. That doesn't mean that they are relevant. Show me where that lobbyist has done anything to help us. All we get are new laws every year.
And as a general rule, any insider who is physically and emotionally involved in any organization, is not in a position to "objectively" evaluate it.

I don't doubt that you have inside information, and know what is going on better within the CRPA and their 2A efforts than everybody else, but I haven't seen the CRPA do s*** in the last few years. (from a 2A angle).

Now YOU on the other hand, as part of Calguns, have. And for that I thank you.

pennys dad
01-08-2013, 3:24 PM
Back to OP question: Is the CRPA Still Relevant??????
I am also a board member of the CRPA btw.

What is your baseline for relevance?
Are you looking for an official NRA affiliate that runs official NRA shoots?
Are you looking for someone to lead the 2a fight this year?
What kind of champion are you looking for?

My opinion only:
If you are looking for a champion for the 2a fight, get behind the NRA.
If you are looking for a state champion for the 2a fight, stay informed being here on CGN and when one of the many 2a groups need your time and energy and the post it here, jump in and donate your time and energy and be that champion.

If you are looking for a group to join and say you have a membership, join the NRA Members Council or one of the CGN/CGSSA Chapters and get involved.

One very important thing you have here on CGN is options for you to exercise. It is like having a choice between a .357 with 125 grn rounds or 158 grn or snake shot or other. Find the one that best fits you and get involved.

I think the CRPA is only as relevant as it's members are active. If the members are not active then the board will be stale, if the members tell CRPA what they want and get active and vocal, then the board will by force be active.

ptoguy2002
01-08-2013, 3:28 PM
Yours is?Touche

taperxz
01-08-2013, 3:28 PM
My comment was simply that as a board member, an insider, your point of view is not completely objective, or in other words, to be take with a grain of salt. That CRPA is still "relevant" is a subjective comment (in the 2A realm anyway, not considering shooting sports). You admit yourself that there is more that they could be doing. That goes directly towards them not being relevant. You state only that they have a full time lobbyist. That doesn't mean that they are relevant. Show me where that lobbyist has done anything to help us. All we get are new laws every year.
And as a general rule, any insider who is physically and emotionally involved in any organization, is not in a position to "objectively" evaluate it.

I don't doubt that you have inside information, and know what is going on better within the CRPA and their 2A efforts than everybody else, but I haven't seen the CRPA do s*** in the last few years. (from a 2A angle).

Now YOU on the other hand, as part of Calguns, have. And for that I thank you.

I can guarantee you that you will not find one board member on CGF that thinks the CRPA foundation lobbyist Tom Pederson is an irrelevant factor in CA in regards to our gun rights. He is well thought of.

pennys dad
01-08-2013, 3:29 PM
Refer to post #18

Here is a list of some of the 2012 bills worked on by our NRA and CRPA Lobbyist.
If there effort had done us no good, then all the negative bills would have been signed. So for 2012 they did you that much good. Since our NRA and CRPA Lobbyist need our support to stop bills or get them dropped by a committee (SB249 as example) then I would suggest that some of the problem lies within our own California shooting community in the form of lethargy.

My comment was simply that as a board member, an insider, your point of view is not completely objective, or in other words, to be take with a grain of salt. That CRPA is still "relevant" is a subjective comment (in the 2A realm anyway, not considering shooting sports). You admit yourself that there is more that they could be doing. That goes directly towards them not being relevant. You state only that they have a full time lobbyist. That doesn't mean that they are relevant. Show me where that lobbyist has done anything to help us. All we get are new laws every year.
And as a general rule, any insider who is physically and emotionally involved in any organization, is not in a position to "objectively" evaluate it.

I don't doubt that you have inside information, and know what is going on better within the CRPA and their 2A efforts than everybody else, but I haven't seen the CRPA do s*** in the last few years. (from a 2A angle).

Now YOU on the other hand, as part of Calguns, have. And for that I thank you.

Barney Fife
01-08-2013, 3:31 PM
Thank for the objective info on what the NRA and CRPA are doing Jacob!
Always nice when you can clearly state what an organization is doing.

As for not seeing anything, well you still have guns don't you? Don't think for a second things would not be much worse long ago without their efforts.

ptoguy2002
01-08-2013, 3:37 PM
I think the CRPA is only as relevant as it's members are active. If the members are not active then the board will be stale, if the members tell CRPA what they want and get active and vocal, then the board will by force be active.

Very good point. So where the F was the CRPA on the last SB249 go around? I remember Calguns people were doing a lot, calguns.net doing a lot, and other orgs like calffl and others were making flyers and petitions, and actually organizing people. What did the CRPA do?

pennys dad
01-08-2013, 3:45 PM
BTW: I will be here on Thursday of this week: SGV NRA Members Council meeting (http://www.nramcsgv.org/meetings.html)

CALGUNS Sport Shooting Association

Will have or already had monthly shoots:

IE - Jan 4
LA - Jan 9
Burbank TBD
OC - Jan 11
Sac - Jan 27
SGV - Jan 27
Ventura TBD
A new monthly is starting up in Stanton, SD, Manteca and HB
And a shoot on the 19th

Jump in, the water is warming up; but no skinny dipping allowed ;-)

taperxz
01-08-2013, 3:50 PM
Very good point. So where the F was the CRPA on the last SB249 go around? I remember Calguns people were doing a lot, calguns.net doing a lot, and other orgs like calffl and others were making flyers and petitions, and actually organizing people. What did the CRPA do?

CRPA did not do much other than make their membership aware of the bill.

CRPA foundation was busy working behind the scenes as that is what lobbyists do.

pennys dad
01-08-2013, 3:54 PM
Very good point. So where the F was the CRPA on the last SB249 go around? I remember Calguns people were doing a lot, calguns.net doing a lot, and other orgs like calffl and others were making flyers and petitions, and actually organizing people. What did the CRPA do?

CRPA lobbyist was hard at work fighting hand and hand with NRA lobbyist.

Well technically, CRPA was working hard, since Paul and I and a few other Calgunners are Calgunners and CRPA members and we believe that truly our effort goes towards the greater good of the CA 2a fight, then (I) we as organizers for both organizations rallied CRPA members here on CGN as well as Calgunners to the fight.

CRPA was here with Calgunners and it was fighting and it fought hard!

wildhawker
01-08-2013, 3:55 PM
CRPA did not do much other than make their membership aware of the bill.

CRPA foundation was busy working behind the scenes as that is what lobbyists do.

CRPA Foundation, as a 501(c)3, does not lobby.

-Brandon

ptoguy2002
01-08-2013, 3:58 PM
I'm tired of all these new laws year after year, and proposed laws year after year. Its stressful.
I need a sammich and a nap.

taperxz
01-08-2013, 4:03 PM
CRPA Foundation, as a 501(c)3, does not lobby.

-Brandon

I thought it was the CRPA FOUNDATION that did the lobby work. Does he actually work for CRPA?

jnojr
01-08-2013, 4:07 PM
Short answer: no.

The CRPA surrendered all legitimacy a very long time ago. For a short time, it looked like it was reforming... and then they went right back to their old tricks. I re-joined to give them a chance, they blew it, I'm done with them.

I'll stick with the NRA and SAF and be prepared to move again. CA is a lost cause.

wildhawker
01-08-2013, 4:10 PM
I thought it was the CRPA FOUNDATION that did the lobby work. Does he actually work for CRPA?

Tom Pederson works for CRPA.

-Brandon

taperxz
01-08-2013, 4:14 PM
Tom Pederson works for CRPA.

-Brandon

Boy did i misunderstand that. Thanks i will have to remember that. Time to google the difference and the connections between the two.


I have not paid much attention to CRPA since i left them and had not researched their structure.

NoJoke
01-08-2013, 4:16 PM
Dear OP,

Follow your heart. There is no right or wrong answer to your question.

DVSmith
01-08-2013, 4:17 PM
I thought it was the CRPA FOUNDATION that did the lobby work. Does he actually work for CRPA?

From CRPA's website:

The CRPA Foundation
PLANNED GIVING FOR THE CRPA FOUNDATION

The purpose of The CRPA Foundation is to support a wide range of charitable, educational, legal, and scientific, firearms-related public interest activities that support and defend the Second Amendment right sof all law-abiding Americans.

The CRPA Foundation's objectives are to promote firearms litigation and hunting safety, to enhance marksmanship skills of those participating in shooting sports, and to educate the public about firearms in their historic, technological, and aesthetic context.

Funding for The CRPA Foundation comes from individuals and organizations through tax deductible gifts, donations, appreciated stocks, wills, and living trusts in support of the objectives of The CRPA Foundation.

Funds granted by The CRPA Foundation benefit a wide variety of constituencies throughout California, including youth, women, gun collectors, hunters, and law enforcement.

The CRPA Foundation is a 501 (c)(3) corporation. Contributions are tax-deductible to the full extent allowed by law. The CRPA Foundation Tax ID number is #73-1719822.

ElvenSoul
01-08-2013, 4:17 PM
Only $27 to join

Sent in the form and check

taperxz
01-08-2013, 4:30 PM
From CRPA's website:

Yep thanks, just saw the same thing. Basically the same type of Org as CGF (structure and purpose) I didn't say effectiveness!

I did notice they have hunting into their works though. CGF does not get involved in anything "hunting" It would be a nice add to their agenda someday. Hunters like orgs that support them. Could help with funds. But, what do i know?

wildhawker
01-08-2013, 4:37 PM
Serious question: are there strictly firearms-related civil rights policy matters that affect only a 'hunter' subset?

-Brandon

H Paul Payne
01-08-2013, 4:43 PM
Very good point. So where the F was the CRPA on the last SB249 go around? I remember Calguns people were doing a lot, calguns.net doing a lot, and other orgs like calffl and others were making flyers and petitions, and actually organizing people. What did the CRPA do?
CRPA did not do much other than make their membership aware of the bill.

CRPA foundation was busy working behind the scenes as that is what lobbyists do.

Just an FYI folks regarding SB249 and the CRPA. I'm not taking sides or going to become involved in a protracted argument about "who did what" and "rah-rah for our side" etc. I will not give opinions, just the facts that I have personally known to be true. And, I'm not going to address any other issues (such as hunting/lead ammo/ccw/civil rights/firearms sales/etc.) that CRPA works with the NRA on.

** Tom Pedersen is the CRPA lobbyist. I don't think the CRPA Foundation has a lobbyist.

** The CRPA was side-by-side with the NRA throughout the entire process to help defeat SB249. I personally witnessed Tom Pedersen accompany NRA's Ed Worley to meetings with key individuals that were indispensable in the defeat of SB249.

** I personally participated in several conversations where strategic and tactical decisions were discussed and made. Tom Pedersen was included in many of them. Let's not forget that long-time NRA Board Member and RKBA activist Joel Friedman (also a CRPA Board Member) is the Chairman of CRPA's Legislative Policy Committee.

** Tom Pedersen's history as a former chief law-enforcement official for the Dept. of Fish & Game lent a tremendous amount of credibility to the combined efforts of the NRA and CRPA. Several doors were opened that we had not been able to access previously, thanks to CRPA's Tom Petersen.

** On the legislative page (http://nramemberscouncils.com/legs.shtml?summary=sb249.1&year=2012) for the NRA Members' Councils of California, you will notice that the CRPA is listed in opposition to SB249, the same as the NRA.

** When the NRA used our mailing/email/phone lists in opposition to SB249, we coordinated our efforts in a way that would not waste either group's resources. It's called coordination and it frequently works very well.

I will not go too deeply into NRA's strategy and tactics, because the anti-firearms folks read this too. ;) Let's just leave it at the fact that SB249 is dead, but it's zombie counterpart (the constant ''un-dead" legislation) will be back and we will all need to fight it even harder than before.

BTW, I'm NOT a CRPA Board Member or employee. However, I am a CRPA Life Member and an employee of the NRA. I was also as heavily involved with the effort to defeat SB249 as anyone in the RKBA movement and I have a lot of admiration for both Ed and Tom --- and, of course, Joel Friedman.


Is the CRPA Still Relevant??????

I guess that's a choice you must make on your own.

Paul

DVSmith
01-08-2013, 5:11 PM
Serious question: are there strictly firearms-related civil rights policy matters that affect only a 'hunter' subset?

-Brandon

I think you could look at it the other way around also. Are there hunting related issues that have an affect on civil rights policy matters? I would argue that the ban on lead bullets would fall into that category. Even though it was aimed at hunting, it may have an effect on the marketplace such as cost and availability of lead bullets for all 2A supporters.

tetris
01-08-2013, 5:23 PM
Observation: As a dedicated state gun sports / rights / lobbying organization, I don't think CRPA can afford to be as vocal and shrill as the NRAs and the JFPOs of the world. I imagine they work quietly and efficiently behind the scenes to build relationships with legislators across the spectrum.

That said, just because gun rights in CA sucks, doesn't mean they are ineffective. Things could be much worse. After all, you can still own a gun in CA.

taperxz
01-08-2013, 5:29 PM
Serious question: are there strictly firearms-related civil rights policy matters that affect only a 'hunter' subset?

-Brandon

Depends how and when you look at the situation.

Historically i would have to say yes it could be considered a civil rights policy. If you consider that hunting is a means of survival for food and take the supermarkets out of the equation.

If you decide to NOT take the supermarkets out of the equation, would it then be fair to say that IF the government provided armed security on every street corner there would be no need for private gun ownership?

Our rights to hunt (provide food) has in fact been so heavily regulated that one no longer considers it a right. Thats how far removed it has become from everyday society. Thats why they call it sport hunting and thats why the antis have no problem with using the term "sport rifles" and hunting rifles are all OK. BECAUSE AS LONG AS ITS A SPORT, THEY CAN REGULATE IT. :D

taperxz
01-08-2013, 7:16 PM
After a little more thought Brandon i will leave you with this too.

You want to talk civil rights, THE BOTTOM LINE FOR HUMAN SURVIVAL is about hunting and gathering. Without hunting and gathering the human race does not exist. All politics was founded on one thing, the ability to let those that need, to eat and drink and protect themselves from the elements.

If you can't understand that this IS the most basic right, you don't understand civil rights. Drinking water, eating flesh and picking fruits/veggies is the ultimate civil right for survival.

wildhawker
01-08-2013, 9:20 PM
I think you could look at it the other way around also. Are there hunting related issues that have an affect on civil rights policy matters? I would argue that the ban on lead bullets would fall into that category. Even though it was aimed at hunting, it may have an effect on the marketplace such as cost and availability of lead bullets for all 2A supporters.

I framed the question specifically to include by implication such things as you described, which would certainly be within the scope of things that matter to core 2A rights.

-Brandon

wildhawker
01-08-2013, 9:24 PM
What you're arguing I don't disagree with. The question for the purposes of this analysis is if that understanding will be protected under 2A such as you might desire.

After a little more thought Brandon i will leave you with this too.

You want to talk civil rights, THE BOTTOM LINE FOR HUMAN SURVIVAL is about hunting and gathering. Without hunting and gathering the human race does not exist. All politics was founded on one thing, the ability to let those that need, to eat and drink and protect themselves from the elements.

If you can't understand that this IS the most basic right, you don't understand civil rights. Drinking water, eating flesh and picking fruits/veggies is the ultimate civil right for survival.

taperxz
01-08-2013, 9:44 PM
What you're arguing I don't disagree with. The question for the purposes of this analysis is if that understanding will be protected under 2A such as you might desire.

And i understand your point and your desire of 2A for all. My take on this would be, "it should be" LOL The problem is Safeway and Lucky.

The human race in this country has lost site of what things really mean.

In todays society, you're right! But doesn't make the right less important.

pdq_wizzard
01-08-2013, 9:47 PM
wow, how we can eat our own.

yes CRPA is relevant, in CA we need all the help we can get.

I think Gene put it this way "I would vote for a gay donkey if he was pro 2A" (that I'm sure is a paraphrase but you get the point)

taperxz
01-08-2013, 9:58 PM
wow, how we can eat our own.

yes CRPA is relevant, in CA we need all the help we can get.

I think Gene put it this way "I would vote for a gay donkey if he was pro 2A" (that I'm sure is a paraphrase but you get the point)

Having been around farm animals most of my life, i would not vote for a pro 2A gay donkey. Some people have scrupples and some don't. LOL

ptoguy2002
01-09-2013, 9:38 AM
.... just the facts that I have personally known to be true.....



Thank you Paul.
From my point of view, all I see are new laws passed every couple years, its hard to see that anything positive is happening. I'm getting pretty pessimistic about it all, especially lately. We seem to be always going backwards. But if there is more going on behind the scenes, then I apologize.

H Paul Payne
01-09-2013, 9:49 AM
Off-topic but in my mind important:


Paul: Could you please use a normal font for your posts? The font you use is being rendered in about 2/3 the size of the default font, and becomes virtually unreadable for those with less than perfect youthful eyesight. I've seen this in several of your posts.

I presume that you wish people to actually read your posts.

I'm sorry. And yes, I will take more care in the future.

My eyes are becoming a bit chronologically challenged too. :D

I thought I could try out a new font so that I could see it better on my Samsung Galaxy Tab and Samsung Galaxy Note II while outside in the sunshine. It never occurred to me that doing so would cause problems to others. :o

I just figured that if I could more easily see things, I would be able to check-in with CGN more often. Since I travel so much, I have not been able to log-on much the past several months. And I have a feeling that I will be on-the-road much of this year, at least during the legislative session.

Again, my apologies.

Paul

paul0660
01-09-2013, 10:14 AM
It is a great acronym. Their website has lost the misinformation regarding firearms and ammo transport, as has Michels. Very good things.

No idea why anything needs almost 50 board members. Thank God for the internet, otherwise that would be a lot of steaks 4x a year.

I will join.

aileron
01-12-2013, 7:09 PM
Just rejoined for 5 years.