Calguns.net  

Home My iTrader Join the NRA Donate to CGSSA Sponsors CGN Google Search
CA Semiauto Ban(AW)ID Flowchart CA Handgun Ban ID Flowchart CA Shotgun Ban ID Flowchart
Go Back   Calguns.net > POLITICS, LITIGATION AND ACTIVISM > California 2nd Amend. Political Discussion & Activism
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

California 2nd Amend. Political Discussion & Activism Discuss gun rights activism and 2A related political topics here. All advice given is NOT legal counsel.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #81  
Old 04-17-2010, 8:42 PM
OleCuss OleCuss is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Kalifornia
Posts: 5,951
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gravedigger View Post
There are 49 other states, or at least 57 if you believe Obama. I'm moving to one of them ASAP.
You might want to stick around and watch some of the stupidity get disassembled! It will be kinda slow but it should be quite entertaining when seen up close!
Reply With Quote
  #82  
Old 04-17-2010, 9:09 PM
hasserl's Avatar
hasserl hasserl is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,877
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by k1dude View Post
The number one issue for California is the economy. ...
So I ask you, who will do the best job with the economy?
It sure as hell is not Brown

Quote:
Originally Posted by OleCuss View Post
OK, my 2 cents on this one.

1. From what I've seen and read over the years, Jerry Brown actually respects the Constitution and the rule of law...
Oh? What about property rights? What Brown respects is not the rule of law, but the use of law by the ruling class to force his agenda on others.

Quote:
Originally Posted by f33dback View Post
What has being a Democrat got to do with being anti gun? My entire family is Democrat and we are all pro gun...hell I got my first pellet gun at 12 and my first shotgun at 13.
All of the restrictions on 2A rights now are courtesy of the Dem controlled legislature. The Democrat party has screwed this state up so bad, it's just about to go belly up. Imagine, the first state to have to declare bankruptcy. This state is screwed up worse than a wooden carburetor.
Reply With Quote
  #83  
Old 04-17-2010, 9:12 PM
hoffmang hoffmang is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Peninsula, Bay Area
Posts: 18,485
iTrader: 14 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hasserl View Post
All of the restrictions on 2A rights now are courtesy of the Dem controlled legislature. The Democrat party has screwed this state up so bad, it's just about to go belly up. Imagine, the first state to have to declare bankruptcy. This state is screwed up worse than a wooden carburetor.
And recently its been a Republican governor signing the anti-gun bills...

Party blinds people to the actual issues...

-Gene
__________________
Gene Hoffman
Chairman, The Calguns Foundation

DONATE NOW
to support the rights of California gun owners. Follow @CalgunsFdn on Twitter.
Opinions posted in this account are my own and not the approved position of any organization.
I read PMs. But, if you need a response, include an email address or email me directly!


"The problem with being a gun rights supporter is that the left hates guns and the right hates rights." -Anon
Reply With Quote
  #84  
Old 04-17-2010, 10:53 PM
sarge1572 sarge1572 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: 90631
Posts: 1,090
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default brown

Quote:
Originally Posted by f33dback View Post
What has being a Democrat got to do with being anti gun? My entire family is Democrat and we are all pro gun...hell I got my first pellet gun at 12 and my first shotgun at 13.
Let me know what political office you're running for.

Brown has SO many problems and will create so many more that his stance on the second amendment is WAY down on my list.

Maybe it's time to start looking at 3rd party candidates????? (Serious candidates, not like Gary Coleman or the porn star...)

Jeff
Reply With Quote
  #85  
Old 04-17-2010, 11:58 PM
bigstick61 bigstick61 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 2,590
iTrader: 9 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alaric View Post
A leftist libertarian is not a contradiction inherently. It means that they support all freedoms, including the ones Republicans choose to ignore (gay rights, reproductive rights, medical marijuana, etc.) and Democrats choose to ignore (gun rights, tobacco rights, etc.). It usually refers to their leaning left on social issues (keep the government out of my bedroom) and right on economic issues (keep the government out of my wallet).

In this way a leftist libertarian is a supreme individualist, the very antithesis of a socialist. In the bipolar world of 2 party politics this can be hard to understand as it doesn't mesh well into the current mainstream political paradigm. They would fit right about smack dab in the bottom center of this chart:

As for who to support, I personally like Poizner due to his stance not only on 2A topics, but because of his stance on illegals and other issues. However, he's not likely to be the candidate that rapidly fading bastion of irrelevancy once known as the Republican Party will put on the ballot. So I'm supporting Brown instead.
When was this about parties, Republican or otherwise? From a philosophical perspective, leftism is incompatible with what we in the U.S. call libertarianism. A leftist cannot be an individualist; the two concepts are mutually exclusive. Collectivism and statism are among the most defining characteristics of all leftist ideology, and they are the opposite of individualism. It is also interesting you characterize leaning left as being the equivalent of supporting freedom when this is anything but the case in reality.

And those dual-axis political compasses are terrible, conceptually speaking. They try to simplify things into social and economic aspects to define ideaology, when this actually makes no sense given the main defining characteristics of the Left and the Right and the ideologies thereof and the amount of criteria there are to determine how to categorize an ideology. Phrases like "social conservative" and "fiscal liberal" are nothing other than political buzzwords with little real meaning.
Reply With Quote
  #86  
Old 04-18-2010, 12:52 AM
Alaric's Avatar
Alaric Alaric is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Midcoast Maine
Posts: 3,213
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigstick61 View Post
When was this about parties, Republican or otherwise? From a philosophical perspective, leftism is incompatible with what we in the U.S. call libertarianism. A leftist cannot be an individualist; the two concepts are mutually exclusive. Collectivism and statism are among the most defining characteristics of all leftist ideology, and they are the opposite of individualism. It is also interesting you characterize leaning left as being the equivalent of supporting freedom when this is anything but the case in reality.

And those dual-axis political compasses are terrible, conceptually speaking. They try to simplify things into social and economic aspects to define ideaology, when this actually makes no sense given the main defining characteristics of the Left and the Right and the ideologies thereof and the amount of criteria there are to determine how to categorize an ideology. Phrases like "social conservative" and "fiscal liberal" are nothing other than political buzzwords with little real meaning.
Statism is not a defining characteristic of the left. It can belong to either the left or the right. Take the concepts of "corporatism", "ultranationalism", or "fascism". All were used interchangeably to describe countries like fascist Italy, all were extremely "right wing" and all statist. Like it or not, there are those on the left who value and love freedom. They just tend to love freedoms that tick off conservatives, like reproductive rights, the right to get high, and the right to pick up a hooker without getting hassled by the man, man.

Rightists would use the concept of freedom to protect gun rights, property rights and the made up family values right.

Leftists would use the concept of freedom to protect their herb from the pigs. After that, they forgot what else they wanted. Oh yeah, something about loving the earth, yeah.

But the point is, each "side" in this dystopian bipolar myopiaplex would use the government to inflict grievous harm on the others' most cherished rights. Both sides play the victim, while simultaneously letting loose with a barrage of legislative cannonade on their opponents as soon as they become empowered to do so (the so-called culture war). There are things both sides agree on. They both love the Patriot Act for example. In other words, they both love statism. It's like a mad race to see who can implement their grand plan for the subjugation of Americans first and crown their totalitarian emperor first. Right now the Dems are winning, but that should not mean we must support the Reps.

So, since our apparent choices are for the statist left wing party that wants to let illegals in, run up taxes and take away our guns.... Or, the statist right wing party that loves any freedom enumerated in the New Testament or prophesied by a corporate lobbyist, I think I'll choose option #3. I will define my own political epistemology and call it whatever I want. Like liberal libertarianism.

Anyone know where to find a 3 or 4 axis political compass? I think Bigstick is right about a 2 axis compass being insufficient.
__________________
Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our own defense?

-Patrick Henry

Last edited by Alaric; 04-18-2010 at 12:55 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #87  
Old 04-18-2010, 1:01 AM
a1c's Avatar
a1c a1c is offline
CGSSA Coordinator
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Lake County, CA
Posts: 9,083
iTrader: 23 / 100%
Default

Wow. There are people who neatly categorize others into 5 distinct ideological categories. And some who believe that a party affiliation is all they need to support or dismiss a candidate, or to assume what their stance is or will be on 2A rights. That's pretty sad.
Reply With Quote
  #88  
Old 04-18-2010, 1:16 AM
Alaric's Avatar
Alaric Alaric is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Midcoast Maine
Posts: 3,213
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by a1c View Post
Wow. There are people who neatly categorize others into 5 distinct ideological categories. And some who believe that a party affiliation is all they need to support or dismiss a candidate, or to assume what their stance is or will be on 2A rights. That's pretty sad.
Actually I think the purpose of a political compass (if that's what you're referring to) isn't to categorize someone into just one of 5 distinct ideological categories, it's to find where they generally fit (usually by means of a multiquestion poll) within the spectrum. A person could easily be described with any combination of neighboring category combinations (center right or center left for example) and the category names themselves have many analogues, splinters, sub-groups and offshoots. It's a stark generalization, but a starting point.
__________________
Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our own defense?

-Patrick Henry
Reply With Quote
  #89  
Old 04-18-2010, 2:52 AM
ErikTheRed's Avatar
ErikTheRed ErikTheRed is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Hitler's Germa..... er, I mean CA
Posts: 1,623
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Stop paying attention to party tags and vote for the person who most closely represents your views and opinions. For me, Jerry Brown is a big ol' huge NO WAY. But so is Whitman. So in the primary, my vote will go to either Poizner or Naritelli. I haven't fully decided yet but I'm leaning towards Naritelli. And I don't care to hear any "but he can't win" crap, because he certainly can't win if everyone just expects him not to and votes for someone else on that premise.

If it comes down to Whitman and Brown in November, I'm writing myself in. I will not be partly responsible for what happens to this state if either of those two clowns get elected, and if I vote for either one, I'm partly responsible.
__________________
Proudly nestled all snugly and warm in Hillary's basket. She even made room for my bibles and guns!


I've committed $10 a month to the CalGuns Foundation. Have you??? Join us and donate here!
Reply With Quote
  #90  
Old 04-18-2010, 9:49 AM
bwiese's Avatar
bwiese bwiese is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Jose
Posts: 26,989
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

I'm writing quickly, on way to gunshow...

The reasons gunowners don't have more strength is perfectly exhibited by many ideologues this thread.

Pet owners, gays, union types, etc. all seem to vote their primary cause first.

Yet gun owners bring a pack of other ideology with their vote and wonder why their gunrights get diluted.

Many of the key votes, BTW, for antigun laws in CA (esp Roberti-Roos etc) were brought by various Republican POSes.

For the first time in a long time, we are gonna have a tight race (Brown's numbers/voter registration/natural advantage of Dem vote in CA vs. Meg's wildly distributed ad money) where gunnies can be a key swing vote.

And politicians understand risk vs. reward and reward those who helped them in situations like this.

It politically behooves us to reward Brown for his significant pro-gun acts.

We have some opportunity to show some muscle and cause "political displancement due to gunnies".

Neither JB nor Meg Whitman (eliminating Poizner, he's toast - all his pro staff has left, usu for Whitman campaign) will be able to do much for CA. That's up to legislature. Meg is nuts if she thinks she can run CA "like a business" - Arnie tried that. I do have significant fears Meg will sign gun bills "for the children". I have fair confidence JB will NOT sign bad gun bills, and can use the budget and his overall natural cheapskateness as cover.

It's amazing that people on a gun board like this worry about things other than guns.

It's pretty f**king hard to roll back a bad gun bill - and even when possible it takes time & money. Why make our lives harder?


[BTW: Just because I'm a CGF board member does not mean I surrender my right to free speech as an individual. CGF in fact is suing DOJ/AG on various matters as part of its march forward.

But do remember the line in the Godfather: "Nothing personal, it's just business."]
__________________

Bill Wiese
San Jose, CA

CGF Board Member / NRA Benefactor Life Member / CRPA life member

No postings of mine here, unless otherwise specifically noted, are
to be construed as formal or informal positions of the Calguns.Net
ownership, The Calguns Foundation, Inc. ("CGF"), the NRA, or my
employer. No posts of mine on Calguns are to be construed as
legal advice, which can only be given by a lawyer.
Reply With Quote
  #91  
Old 04-18-2010, 10:28 AM
k1dude's Avatar
k1dude k1dude is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: la Republika Popular de Kalifornistan
Posts: 8,097
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alaric View Post
Statism is not a defining characteristic of the left. It can belong to either the left or the right. Take the concepts of "corporatism", "ultranationalism", or "fascism". All were used interchangeably to describe countries like fascist Italy, all were extremely "right wing" and all statist. Like it or not, there are those on the left who value and love freedom. They just tend to love freedoms that tick off conservatives, like reproductive rights, the right to get high, and the right to pick up a hooker without getting hassled by the man, man.

Rightists would use the concept of freedom to protect gun rights, property rights and the made up family values right.

Leftists would use the concept of freedom to protect their herb from the pigs. After that, they forgot what else they wanted. Oh yeah, something about loving the earth, yeah.

But the point is, each "side" in this dystopian bipolar myopiaplex would use the government to inflict grievous harm on the others' most cherished rights. Both sides play the victim, while simultaneously letting loose with a barrage of legislative cannonade on their opponents as soon as they become empowered to do so (the so-called culture war). There are things both sides agree on. They both love the Patriot Act for example. In other words, they both love statism. It's like a mad race to see who can implement their grand plan for the subjugation of Americans first and crown their totalitarian emperor first. Right now the Dems are winning, but that should not mean we must support the Reps.

So, since our apparent choices are for the statist left wing party that wants to let illegals in, run up taxes and take away our guns.... Or, the statist right wing party that loves any freedom enumerated in the New Testament or prophesied by a corporate lobbyist, I think I'll choose option #3. I will define my own political epistemology and call it whatever I want. Like liberal libertarianism.

Anyone know where to find a 3 or 4 axis political compass? I think Bigstick is right about a 2 axis compass being insufficient.
Fascism is a product of the left. It was a progressive socialist movement. Mussolini and Hilter were big socialists from the progressive movement. Fascism is an offshoot of socialism. It was, is, and always will be a product of the left. Despite 50 years of attempts at revisionist history, the left still hasn't managed to change that universal truth.

Leftists love freedom? They may like only a very select few social freedoms (ie. gay marriage, drug legalization, leftist speech, abortion) of their choosing, but are against most freedoms (ie. conservative speech, tobacco, christianity and firearms). I will take the freedoms offered by the right over those offered by the left. Some freedoms are far more important than the others. Some strengthen the country, some weaken the country. But even most conservatives agree what you do in your home is your business.

I will agree with you that both sides have targeted some freedoms as the greatest offenders to their philosophy. But I will say that the vast majority of conservatives have migrated away from religious dogma to guide their way. The religious right has far less influence than they once had. And the egregious excesses of corporations have opened the eyes of many conservatives. The abuses of the private sector can no longer be ignored. Yet I see no softening of the lefts agenda. In fact, Obama's election seems to have galvanized and engrained the far left's philosophy permanently into party doctorine.

It seems conservatives have migrated away from the religious right, but liberals have migrated towards the extreme left. JFK wouldn't recognize his party.
Reply With Quote
  #92  
Old 04-18-2010, 10:41 AM
a1c's Avatar
a1c a1c is offline
CGSSA Coordinator
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Lake County, CA
Posts: 9,083
iTrader: 23 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by k1dude View Post
Fascism is a product of the left. It was a progressive socialist movement. Mussolini and Hilter were big socialists from the progressive movement. Fascism is an offshoot of socialism. It was, is, and always will be a product of the left. Despite 50 years of attempts at revisionist history, the left still hasn't managed to change that universal truth.
Fascism has as much in common with the far left as it does with the far right. Anybody who's passed Poli Sci 101 knows about that much. The rest - like your rant - is pure ideology.
Reply With Quote
  #93  
Old 04-18-2010, 11:00 AM
k1dude's Avatar
k1dude k1dude is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: la Republika Popular de Kalifornistan
Posts: 8,097
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by a1c View Post
Fascism has as much in common with the far left as it does with the far right. Anybody who's passed Poli Sci 101 knows about that much. The rest - like your rant - is pure ideology.
Sorry, history is history. And yeah, I passed poli-sci 101 and there was nothing of the sort in the class.

Ideology? Yeah, and your post wasn't. Sure.
Reply With Quote
  #94  
Old 04-18-2010, 11:09 AM
a1c's Avatar
a1c a1c is offline
CGSSA Coordinator
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Lake County, CA
Posts: 9,083
iTrader: 23 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by k1dude View Post
Sorry, history is history. And yeah, I passed poli-sci 101 and there was nothing of the sort in the class.

Ideology? Yeah, and your post wasn't. Sure.
Sounds like you have your mind made up. Or your teacher had some sort of agenda. You didn't learn much.

Back to Jerry Brown now. Is he a fascist, or some sort of crypto-fascist because he's a Dem, and therefore somewhat on the left of the political spectrum? Was that your point?
Reply With Quote
  #95  
Old 04-18-2010, 11:30 AM
k1dude's Avatar
k1dude k1dude is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: la Republika Popular de Kalifornistan
Posts: 8,097
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by a1c View Post
Sounds like you have your mind made up. Or your teacher had some sort of agenda. You didn't learn much.

Back to Jerry Brown now. Is he a fascist, or some sort of crypto-fascist because he's a Dem, and therefore somewhat on the left of the political spectrum? Was that your point?
Why did my professor have the agenda? Your lefty professor had the agenda. As I said, despite the left's attempt to revise history, they have failed. If your professor taught a leftist version of history, he had the agenda.

Who said anything about democrats? Show me where I said anything about democrats or Jerry Brown. I never mentioned or implied anything about either. On top of taking poli sci 101 over again, you need to take reading comprehension 101 over again too. But perhaps that's the root of your problem.
Reply With Quote
  #96  
Old 04-18-2010, 11:39 AM
a1c's Avatar
a1c a1c is offline
CGSSA Coordinator
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Lake County, CA
Posts: 9,083
iTrader: 23 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by k1dude View Post
Why did my professor have the agenda? Your lefty professor had the agenda.
Actually I had several professors, including a Vietnam vet who was a registered Republican and big Reagan fan. Not exactly the UC Berkeley vegan peacenik stereotype.

Quote:
Originally Posted by k1dude View Post
As I said, despite the left's attempt to revise history, they have failed. If your professor taught a leftist version of history, he had the agenda.
What leftist attempts to revise history? Who and what are you talking about here? I studied poli sci and neither Noam Chomsky nor Howard Zinn were among my required readings (although I did read some of their work later on, among others). Please enlighten me. What was that leftist agenda that apparently permeated and revised history? I'm dying to know the specifics - you know, names, books, movements, etc.

Quote:
Originally Posted by k1dude View Post
Who said anything about democrats? Show me where I said anything about democrats or Jerry Brown. I never mentioned or implied anything about either. On top of taking poli sci 101 over again, you need to take reading comprehension 101 over again too. But perhaps that's the root of your problem.
This thread is about Jerry Brown. I'm still trying to understand how you managed to insert your "fascism is an offshoot of the left" sentence here.
Reply With Quote
  #97  
Old 04-18-2010, 12:28 PM
k1dude's Avatar
k1dude k1dude is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: la Republika Popular de Kalifornistan
Posts: 8,097
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

I'm sorry you had an agenda driven education. It's no surprise. It's been known for about 100 years that academia is leftist. Having a Vietnam vet as a professor means nothing. Read some history.

If it's news to you that the left has distorted the underpinnings of fascism, they you have a LOT of reading to do. It's common knowledge. There is no specific book to recommend. It's in thousands of books from about 1935 on.

I jumped into this thread to contradict your disinformation about fascism. You deviated from the Brown postings and introduced fascism. Don't blame me.
Reply With Quote
  #98  
Old 04-18-2010, 1:11 PM
Kerplow's Avatar
Kerplow Kerplow is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Slumington Beach
Posts: 8,215
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShadyJeff View Post
so what you are saying is that your vote goes to whoever is the most gun friendly?

voters like you scare me
I dont see how anyone who truly believes that 2A is the most intrinsically important amendment to public and personal freedom could cast a vote for someone they knew was not going to be the best choice to protect this most basic of freedoms.

When the people are neutered and defenseless it will be that much easier for government to run amok.
Reply With Quote
  #99  
Old 04-18-2010, 1:18 PM
trashman's Avatar
trashman trashman is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: The Great Valley
Posts: 3,816
iTrader: 37 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bwiese View Post
Pet owners, gays, union types, etc. all seem to vote their primary cause first.

Yet gun owners bring a pack of other ideology with their vote and wonder why their gunrights get diluted.

[...]

It politically behooves us to reward Brown for his significant pro-gun acts.
Bill has it right. Even if you can't stand Brown (and believe me, I have some serious issues with him due to his progressive-'green' stance that is bad for California agriculture), now is the time to put Gun Rights FIRST; in terms of the last 50 years we're on the cusp of some tectonic shifts in California gun-rights thanks to the tremendous (and tremendously coordinated) efforts by NRA, Calguns, Gura, et al within the state and nationally as well.

It's a very good trade, from where I sit, to have a quietly pro-gun Governor help hold the line at this critical juncture even if some of his other politics are distasteful.

If we're serious about gun rights we gotta look beyond the purity of our candidates this go-around. This is an important one.

--Neill
__________________
http://i231.photobucket.com/albums/ee126/northslope/2011__orig.jpg
Reply With Quote
  #100  
Old 04-18-2010, 1:30 PM
tombinghamthegreat's Avatar
tombinghamthegreat tombinghamthegreat is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,786
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by a1c View Post
Fascism has as much in common with the far left as it does with the far right. Anybody who's passed Poli Sci 101 knows about that much. The rest - like your rant - is pure ideology.
In my political science class the far left and the far right end up looking similar. Much like Hitler and Stalin did. But this is off topic and i do not see how Jerry Brown fits in with a fascist movement.
__________________
"Legitimate use of violence can only be that which is required in self-defense." Ron Paul
"The issue today is the same as it has been throughout all history, whether man shall be allowed to govern himself or be ruled by a small elite." - Thomas Jefferson
Quote:
Originally Posted by forumguy View Post
The same way they enforce all the rest of the BS laws. Only criminals are exempt, while the honest obey.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bwiese View Post
Sometimes I think the function of Calguns is half to refute bad info from gunshops and half to refute bad info from DOJ.
Reply With Quote
  #101  
Old 04-18-2010, 1:31 PM
hasserl's Avatar
hasserl hasserl is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,877
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hoffmang View Post
And recently its been a Republican governor signing the anti-gun bills...

Party blinds people to the actual issues...

-Gene
At least he did use the power of veto some of the time, correct? In any case, I'm not promoting Arnold or Republicans. I'm merely pointing out the extreme danger of the Democrats and the incredible damage they've already inflicted on this state and will continue to do as long as they remain in control. Giving the Dem state legislature a Dem Governor would be as bad as giving the Dem Congress a Dem President, you've seen the extreme damage they've been able to do in a very short period of time on a national level. Even considering allowing this on the state level is foolish to the point of asinine.

Quote:
Originally Posted by a1c View Post
Wow. There are people who neatly categorize others into 5 distinct ideological categories. And some who believe that a party affiliation is all they need to support or dismiss a candidate, or to assume what their stance is or will be on 2A rights. That's pretty sad.
There is more at stake here than 2A rights. A bankrupt state, with ever increasing state deficit and unfunded liabilities to state workers (that are not absolved by bankruptcy BTW) and increasing levels of unemployment, loss of property rights, ever decreasing energy supplies at ever increasing prices, deplorable school conditions, higher taxes, more regulations, on and on and on; all courtesy of the party of Tax, Spend and Regulate. I may sound like a partisan to you, but I actually do not belong to any political party. I am not fervently Republican, though I am fervently and passionately anti-Democrat. IMO you could not possibly make a worse decision than to vote for Jerry Brown for governor, though at this point I would say the same for ANY Democrat at ANY level of politics. We are at the point where we MUST turn things around or suffer imminent failure. If you think I am exaggerating, you haven't been paying attention.

2A rights? When you're unemployed, the bank account is empty, and so is your belly, all your belongings fit into a car, you're family turns to you to provide for them, you won't be worrying about open carry, wondering which is better, a Glock or a 1911, you won't be worrying about how to make your AR legal, most likely everything you have of any value will be sold off to feed your family; and you can only store so many items in that car you'll be living in anyway.
Reply With Quote
  #102  
Old 04-18-2010, 1:36 PM
wildhawker wildhawker is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: California
Posts: 14,275
iTrader: 84 / 100%
Default

This thread is worthless without... Scratch that, it's just worthless.
Reply With Quote
  #103  
Old 04-18-2010, 1:36 PM
k1dude's Avatar
k1dude k1dude is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: la Republika Popular de Kalifornistan
Posts: 8,097
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by trashman View Post
Bill has it right. Even if you can't stand Brown (and believe me, I have some serious issues with him due to his progressive-'green' stance that is bad for California agriculture), now is the time to put Gun Rights FIRST; in terms of the last 50 years we're on the cusp of some tectonic shifts in California gun-rights thanks to the tremendous (and tremendously coordinated) efforts by NRA, Calguns, Gura, et al within the state and nationally as well.

It's a very good trade, from where I sit, to have a quietly pro-gun Governor help hold the line at this critical juncture even if some of his other politics are distasteful.

If we're serious about gun rights we gotta look beyond the purity of our candidates this go-around. This is an important one.

--Neill
Or will being on the cusp of tectonic shifts in gun rights render Brown irrelevant? If incorporation becomes the law of the land and the rest of the restrictions fall in accordance, why the need for Brown?

I haven't decided one way or the other yet. I have a favorite, but I'm still undecided. So I'm curious if a vote for his 2nd ammemdment stance is moot. Which makes his stance on the rest of the issues more important.
Reply With Quote
  #104  
Old 04-18-2010, 2:10 PM
CaliforniaCarry CaliforniaCarry is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Santa Clarita, CA
Posts: 239
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by k1dude View Post
Or will being on the cusp of tectonic shifts in gun rights render Brown irrelevant? If incorporation becomes the law of the land and the rest of the restrictions fall in accordance, why the need for Brown?

I haven't decided one way or the other yet. I have a favorite, but I'm still undecided. So I'm curious if a vote for his 2nd ammemdment stance is moot. Which makes his stance on the rest of the issues more important.
Incorporation isn't a panacea. Successfully challenging laws takes time. The more anti-gun bills get passed, the more time, effort, and money we must spend to get them thrown out. We would be far better off if we could put those resources into challenging the existing bad laws or getting pro-gun legislation introduced and passed. That's where JB comes in. Do you think Arnold will veto AB 1810? I'm fairly certain JB would. If AB 1810 passes, challenging it is not a slam-dunk win for our side even after incorporation. Better to not let it (or any other anti-gun bills) pass. Sadly, Arnold will probably sign it, but we stop such bills in the future if we have the right governor.

The Governor's veto would be a powerful tool for holding the line, allowing us to focus our resources elsewhere and actually make positive progress toward restoring gun rights.
Reply With Quote
  #105  
Old 04-18-2010, 3:05 PM
k1dude's Avatar
k1dude k1dude is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: la Republika Popular de Kalifornistan
Posts: 8,097
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

But aren't legal challenges up to the attorney general? What comes across the governors desk are legislative bills, not legal briefs.
Reply With Quote
  #106  
Old 04-18-2010, 3:19 PM
trashman's Avatar
trashman trashman is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: The Great Valley
Posts: 3,816
iTrader: 37 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by k1dude View Post
Or will being on the cusp of tectonic shifts in gun rights render Brown irrelevant? If incorporation becomes the law of the land and the rest of the restrictions fall in accordance, why the need for Brown?
Because having an anti-gun Governor like Whitman would ensure that, even if the Second Amendment is incorporated, our State legislature will continue to 'push the envelope' to find what restrictions *are* Constitutional.

Because gunnies are outnumbered in this state, anti-gun legislation tends to be political beneficial for those who get behind it. We need a Governor who can help neutralize the unnecessary anti-gun legislation.

--Neill
__________________
http://i231.photobucket.com/albums/ee126/northslope/2011__orig.jpg
Reply With Quote
  #107  
Old 04-18-2010, 3:24 PM
trashman's Avatar
trashman trashman is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: The Great Valley
Posts: 3,816
iTrader: 37 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by k1dude View Post
But aren't legal challenges up to the attorney general? What comes across the governors desk are legislative bills, not legal briefs.
No. I believe what CaliforniaCarry meant was legal challenges from organizations like the NRA, SAF, CGF.

--Neill
__________________
http://i231.photobucket.com/albums/ee126/northslope/2011__orig.jpg
Reply With Quote
  #108  
Old 04-18-2010, 3:40 PM
a1c's Avatar
a1c a1c is offline
CGSSA Coordinator
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Lake County, CA
Posts: 9,083
iTrader: 23 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hasserl View Post
2A rights? When you're unemployed, the bank account is empty, and so is your belly, all your belongings fit into a car, you're family turns to you to provide for them, you won't be worrying about open carry, wondering which is better, a Glock or a 1911, you won't be worrying about how to make your AR legal, most likely everything you have of any value will be sold off to feed your family; and you can only store so many items in that car you'll be living in anyway.
I am not one of those people who put 2A rights above all else. I lost my job 6 months ago and have been struggling doing contract and freelance gigs left and right. It's not like I only see gun rights at stake in this election.

But I also know that one should vote for the person, not the party. Brown may be a Dem, but he's not your stereotypical tax-and-spend Dem. I also agree with his environmental stance and about many other issues. But it happens that he's also the best candidate to defend gun rights. So to me, he's the better candidate - by far. The other ones are just pandering.

Last edited by a1c; 04-18-2010 at 7:57 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #109  
Old 04-18-2010, 4:14 PM
wellerjohn's Avatar
wellerjohn wellerjohn is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Needville, TX
Posts: 395
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Glock22Fan View Post
I think that you underestimate the number of Jerry supporters here (inluding this diehard Republican), and underestimate the extent to which Jerry has been our friend while he has been A.G.

Of course, some people made up their minds a long time ago and don't want to be confused by the facts.

Jerry is the only viable candidate who is in any way or to any extent on our side. And I never expected to say that about a Democrat.

One amicus brief is one more than any other candidate offered, and that's far from the only thing he has done for us, but (as said above) I'll let Bill explain.
I agree 100% .....at this point in the game.
Reply With Quote
  #110  
Old 04-18-2010, 6:07 PM
Bray556's Avatar
Bray556 Bray556 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: So. California
Posts: 100
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShadyJeff View Post
so what you are saying is that your vote goes to whoever is the most gun friendly?

voters like you scare me
I'm with this guy.
Reply With Quote
  #111  
Old 04-18-2010, 7:55 PM
bwiese's Avatar
bwiese bwiese is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Jose
Posts: 26,989
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Originally Posted by ShadyJeff

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShadyJeff
so what you are saying is that your vote goes to whoever is the most gun friendly?

voters like you scare me


Quote:
Originally Posted by bray556
I'm with this guy

Sell-out gunnies like you scare me. Now I know why my gunrights have been reduced.

Don't sell your freedom down the line for your meal ticket. Get some new skills if you're worried about your job.
__________________

Bill Wiese
San Jose, CA

CGF Board Member / NRA Benefactor Life Member / CRPA life member

No postings of mine here, unless otherwise specifically noted, are
to be construed as formal or informal positions of the Calguns.Net
ownership, The Calguns Foundation, Inc. ("CGF"), the NRA, or my
employer. No posts of mine on Calguns are to be construed as
legal advice, which can only be given by a lawyer.
Reply With Quote
  #112  
Old 04-18-2010, 8:57 PM
thebronze's Avatar
thebronze thebronze is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sack of Tomatoes
Posts: 934
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Good article from the OC Register

Jerry Brown: older, not wiser
Reply With Quote
  #113  
Old 04-18-2010, 9:42 PM
bwiese's Avatar
bwiese bwiese is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Jose
Posts: 26,989
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by k1dude View Post
Or will being on the cusp of tectonic shifts in gun rights render Brown irrelevant? If incorporation becomes the law of the land and the rest of the restrictions fall in accordance, why the need for Brown?
Because you're hoping for instant miracles.

We need to stop more new bad bills from being signed. Why waste/divert dollars that are already targeted now? Why not stop them in their tracks?
__________________

Bill Wiese
San Jose, CA

CGF Board Member / NRA Benefactor Life Member / CRPA life member

No postings of mine here, unless otherwise specifically noted, are
to be construed as formal or informal positions of the Calguns.Net
ownership, The Calguns Foundation, Inc. ("CGF"), the NRA, or my
employer. No posts of mine on Calguns are to be construed as
legal advice, which can only be given by a lawyer.
Reply With Quote
  #114  
Old 04-18-2010, 9:54 PM
vrand's Avatar
vrand vrand is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 428
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bwiese View Post
Because you're hoping for instant miracles.

We need to stop more new bad bills from being signed. Why waste/divert dollars that are already targeted now? Why not stop them in their tracks?
Exactly
__________________
Have a great day

"Opposing secession changes the nature of government "from a voluntary one, in which the people are sovereigns, to a despotism where one part of the people are slaves."--New York Journal of Commerce 1/12/61

"[I]t is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery!"--Patrick Henry

http://www.state-citizen.org/
Reply With Quote
  #115  
Old 04-18-2010, 10:19 PM
rambo's Avatar
rambo rambo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: San Diego
Posts: 278
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sleepy McGee View Post
I think people are overlooking the fact that Whitman has to defeat Poizner in the Republican primary election on June 8 to advance to the final election against Brown. I predict an upset victory for Poizner. No self respecting righty can, in good conscience, ever vote for Whitman (or Brown), that's for sure. I conducted an informal poll in this group a few weeks ago about the Republican primary and Poizner won by a margin of ~5:1 over Whitman.

To enable you to form your own opinion, I've provided the following brief descriptors from the recent poll describing the three candidates stance on issues of concern:

------------------------------------------------------------
Jerry Brown

guns-
Jerry Brown, when running for AG, pulled a .50 BMG round out of his pocket when debating changes to CA guns laws and talked about how access to such equipment was a threat to civil society. He has opposed making CA a shall issue state. He has never wavered on the CA AWB or single gun a month. I have heard nothing about him opposing the coming restrictions on ammo sales. Filed an amicus brief in the Chicago case urging SCOTUS to grant cert and hear the case.

illegals-
LOS ANGELES -- In an interview with Spanish-language daily La Opinión, California Democratic gubernatorial hopeful Jerry Brown said he would not support driver's licenses for undocumented immigrants, but would support immigration reform. "As state attorney general and chief upholder of the law, I can't support licenses, but I would do everything in my power to promote immigration reform," he said. Brown called undocumented immigrants "an important part of our social and economic life." He said he would work closely with the Mexican president on issues such as energy, drugs and arms trafficking, and the fate of tens of thousands of Mexican citizens who are currently incarcerated in California.
source: La Opinión
------------------------------------------------------------------

Meg Whitman

guns -
“I am a strong supporter of the Second Amendment and our clear constitutional right to keep and bear arms. I believe current gun laws need to be enforced but we do not need any new restrictions on gun owners. Second Amendment rights must be rigorously protected.”
source www.megwhitman.com

illegals -
SAN YSIDRO — With the San Ysidro border fence as her backdrop, Republican gubernatorial candidate Meg Whitman spoke out on immigration policy issues yesterday, saying it is “simply not practical” to deport the estimated 12.5 million illegal immigrants living and working in the United States. The candidate said the solution is to find a mechanism that allows them to live here legally. “Can we get a fair program where people stand at the back of the line, they pay a fine, they do some things that would ultimately allow a path to legalization?” she asked.

source http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2...candida/?metro

----------------------------------------------------------------\
Steve Poizner

guns -
Steve is a strong supporter of the Second Amendment and opposes any attempts to chip away at the right that every Californian has to keep and bear arms. Steve believes that the Founders of the Constitution were crystal clear when establishing that people have the right to own guns for both recreational and defensive purposes. Steve opposes any new gun laws and will closely examine existing gun laws. He also opposes California’s recently passed ammunition registration law (AB 962), and will seek its repeal as governor.
source www.stevepoizner.com

illegals -
"California simply cannot continue to ignore the strain that illegal immigration puts on our budget and economy. Illegal aliens cost taxpayers in our state billions of dollars each year. Ten other states, including neighboring Arizona, have passed laws to cut taxpayer-funded benefits for illegal immigrants. We need such legislation too. In this time of fiscal crisis, we can't afford to subsidize the presence of illegal aliens. One taxpayer-funded benefit for illegal aliens that should be stopped is in-state tuition at our public colleges and universities.
"Today, California is one of just 10 states that allow illegal immigrants access to reduced college tuition at taxpayer expense. California must also do its part to help secure the border by deploying the state's National Guard to assist federal authorities. We should also work with other border states to create a multi-state partnership for sharing information, resources and manpower."
source http://articles.latimes.com/2010/mar...er27-2010mar27
Steve sounds great if you can believe him! i know you can not believe Meg or at least I dont. voting for JB has crossed my mind just because it might teach the republicans to run a real conservitive in CA if they want to win. If they keep winning with these rino's there will never be any real hope and we all see what a few liberal states can cause right now. GOD help CA its lose lose. lets just hope we can control the bleeding and at get rid of pelosi boxer....probaly will not happen but pray!
Reply With Quote
  #116  
Old 04-18-2010, 10:31 PM
Sgt Raven's Avatar
Sgt Raven Sgt Raven is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: 85/101
Posts: 2,679
iTrader: 26 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ElToro View Post
Jerry Brown... really ? you think uncle Barry is bad appointing commies to the supreme court? try googleing Rose Bird some time. one of Jerrys finer hour.
Google Meg and Van Jones or Babs Boxer.
__________________

...... you cant have no idea how little I care "

Monte (Tom Selleck) - 'Monte Walsh'

"It's not always being fast or even accurate that counts, it's being willing. I found out early that most men, regardless of cause or need, aren't willing. They blink an eye or draw a breath before they pull the trigger--and I won't."

John Wayne as John Bernard (J. B.) Books in The Shootist
Reply With Quote
  #117  
Old 04-18-2010, 10:36 PM
k1dude's Avatar
k1dude k1dude is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: la Republika Popular de Kalifornistan
Posts: 8,097
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

How about Larry Naritelli?

Larry Naritelli

guns -
"Over the years there have been many cases brought before the Supreme Court that have attempted to weaken or eliminate this right. Each time the Supreme Court has upheld the Second Amendment rights. This right is individually held and it protects "the individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation," including "all instruments that constitute bearable arms. I fully support the Second Amendment right to bear arms and I am a member of the NRA. I also oppose the attempt to over tax and over regulate ammunition as a means to subvert our Second Amendment Rights."
source http://www.larrynaritelli.com/2ndAmendment.html

illegals -
"We must complete the border fence between us and Mexico and enforce our laws to punish those who break them. When I worked in downtown San Diego over the past several years I often saw the lines of legal immigrants wrapped around the block as they waited to be processed for citizenship. They waited patiently as they went through the legal process to become Americans. It is not right to allow illegal immigrants to cut ahead of them. As Governor I will stand firmly behind our sheriffs and border agents who are on the front lines of the fight against illegal immigration. This is a matter of national security as our country and citizens are under attack from those who want to do us harm from areas all over the world. Those who violate our laws must be held accountable."
source http://www.larrynaritelli.com/Immigration.html
Reply With Quote
  #118  
Old 04-18-2010, 10:37 PM
chiselchst's Avatar
chiselchst chiselchst is offline
Very Nice Honey Badger
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Co Co County
Posts: 2,031
iTrader: 32 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CenterX View Post
JB is a pro constitutional lawyer and he supports the 2A. He is a shooter himself. Some Democrats are.
I am leaning that way also, FWIW....(my opinion, what you paid for it).

They all suck, IMO...
__________________
My Opinion - Worth What You Paid For It...

DO NOT Use Amazon Smile! Use Shop42A.com
Quote:
Originally Posted by FremontJames View Post
I guess it depends on what your definition of law breaking is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Librarian View Post
Here, let me Google that for you ... :)

No, no, that would be cruel.
Reply With Quote
  #119  
Old 04-18-2010, 11:20 PM
CaliforniaCarry CaliforniaCarry is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Santa Clarita, CA
Posts: 239
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bwiese View Post
We need to stop more new bad bills from being signed. Why waste/divert dollars that are already targeted now? Why not stop them in their tracks?
This.
Reply With Quote
  #120  
Old 04-19-2010, 12:20 PM
Can'thavenuthingood's Avatar
Can'thavenuthingood Can'thavenuthingood is offline
C3 Leader
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Lemoore
Posts: 5,615
iTrader: 138 / 100%
Default

Here's an older article (31 Oct 09) by Charles Nichols of the LA History Examiner.
Says machine guns are legal in California with a note from the Attorney General, anyone have one?

EXCERPT;
Brown didn't need to propose any new gun control laws as governor. The California legislature and the US Congress had already enacted so many laws he would have been hard pressed to come up with any new ones that hadn't already been enacted by the time he was elected governor. A little known fact to most voters is that machine guns were legal in California up until 1975. Technically, they still are legal but one needs a permit from the California Attorney General to possess one in the state and Jerry Brown, as California's Attorney General, hasn't exactly handed out the permits as if they were candy. Contrast this with the states bordering California; Oregon, Nevada and Arizona were they are relatively easy to obtain.


But Brown can't resist being on both sides of an issue. Much to the chagrin of the government Attorney who recently argued before the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals that the right of an individual to carry loaded guns in public (except for certain "sensitive" places) should not apply to the states as it now applies to the Federal Government. One of the judges, during the oral arguments, pointed out to her point blank that her own attorney general (Jerry Brown) had filed a brief with the US Supreme Court saying that the US Supreme Court Opinion in the District of Columbia v. Heller decision should apply to the states. This elicited a rather dismissive response from her which points to a weakness Brown will have attracting the left wing base of his Democrat Party to the polls to vote for him. There is a price to be paid for being on both sides of an issue as former President Bill Clinton learned.
I read Jerry Brown's brief to the Supreme Court, although he did ask that their Columbia v. Heller decision apply to the states, even here, he has to be on both sides of an issue. He asked that it apply, but only to keeping handguns in the home (the "specific relief" part of the decision sought by Heller). The Heller decision was for more expansive, an individual can only be prohibited from carrying a loaded gun in certain "sensitive areas" like courthouses and schools. Brown also asked that the states be allowed to maintain "reasonable" restrictions such as California's "unsafe" gun act which prohibits the commercial sale of handguns that have not been approved by the state of California. This is akin to saying that we reporters can write what we please under the 1st Amendment to the Bill of Rights so long as the state of California approves its publication.

.........Jerry Brown gave an interview shortly after leaving office to one of the high brow talk show hosts of the time. Brown was asked, given California's history of electing Republican governors, how did he manage to get elected twice? I still recall Brown's answer. His father had taught him that the only way a Democrat can be elected Governor of California is to be for the death penalty and against gun control.


--------------------------------------

Don't know what I am going to vote for, only what I'm against.

We have got to get rid of most all the Assembly & Senate before any Governor will be effective. Until then it's all what the Union's want.


Vick
__________________


"Nobody ever defended anything successfully, there is only attack and attack and attack some more." (George Patton)

Calguns T-shirts, hats and stickers

CALGUNS.NET logo stickers and patches (3 inch) are here

Picnic Time
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 1:53 PM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Proudly hosted by GeoVario the Premier 2A host.
Calguns.net, the 'Calguns' name and all associated variants and logos are ® Trademark and © Copyright 2002-2018, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.
Calguns.net and The Calguns Foundation have no affiliation and are in no way related to each other.
All opinions, statements and remarks made by Calguns.net on this web site and elsewhere are solely attributable to Calguns.net.