Everyone Please Read this on AB2714 Status!

[Hunter]

I hope this is not violating any rules here at Calnet as I'm pasting my email alert from CRPA on this matter. Guys please do as this says by writing, faxing and emailing. I took their example letter below, added a few words of my own and then mailed a copy to my Senator. I also took the same letter and I sent it via Fax and email. So they will now get this three times from me.
If you guys/gals would do the same, we may just have some impact.
Thanks
Hunter

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
CRPA ACTION ALERT - June 1, 2006


This is an update on AB 2714 (Torrico), which requires that any purchaser of ammunition personally (i.e., in person) provide proof of identity and age prior to completing the transaction.

STATUS
AB 2714 passed out of the Assembly yesterday after THREE readings on the floor and heavy amendment. Every single hunting and firearms organization in California, and many law enforcement organizations oppose this bill despite its exemption provisions for law enforcement personnel. The bill is now in the State Senate awaiting a vote.

WHY SHOULD YOU CARE?
The current form of the bill applies only handgun ammunition, with rimfire, rifle, and shotgun ammunition exempted. For the hunting community, this is a favorable development because it means difficult-to-locate rifle ammunition (particularly in African calibers) and shotgun ammunition (particularly for waterfowl hunting) would still be available from out-of-state supply houses. For the shotgun community, this is a favorable development because it means that specialized target loads would still be available from out-of-state vendors. The carve-outs for rimfire, rifle, and shotgun ammunition came about after the hunting and target shooting community objected to earlier versions of the bill that would have applied to ALL forms of ammunition. If you have any doubt about the original intent of the bill, let that fact sink in. Your ability to shoot your gun -- any gun -- is suddenly at risk of legislative whim.

The most pernicious effect of this bill would be its nullification of your ability to buy ammunition by mail order, over the phone, or online/via the internet because when purchasing through these media you are unable to personally (i.e., in person) provide proof of your identity and age. Despite the recent amendments, this bill still affects hunters since many hunters own handguns and carry them as backup when hunting, in addition to any recreational shooting they may do.

AB 2714 IS ANTI-CONSUMER
More particularly, if you are a handgun hunter who uses such calibers as .44 Remington Magnum, .454 Casull, .460 Smith and Wesson, .475 Linebaugh, .500 Linebaugh, .500 Smith and Wesson and the like, you will be subject to the provisions of this law. If you have tried to find a sporting goods store in California lately that stocks a meaningful variety of ammunition in calibers like these, you will recognize that this law could soon make it very difficult for you to procure ammunition for your weapon. Your option would be to custom order through your local dealer or to go out of state and bring it home with you, both of which would result in effectively higher prices. This bill should be opposed because it is unfriendly to the consumer and stifles price competition. Ammunition prices will rise if this bill passes.

AB 2714 IS REDUNDANT
This bill should also be opposed because it duplicates key provisions of federal law that already make it illegal for a vendor to ship ammunition to an out-of-state customer without proof of his/her identity and age. This is usually handled with a photocopy or fax copy of the driver's license. In addition, ammunition shipments require adult signature upon delivery, and the signer must be the purchaser or a member of his/her immediate family (same last name). Simply put, this bill is unnecessary, and it adds to the already-suffocating legal and regulatory burdens that citizens of California must bear in a wide variety of areas.

AB 2714 DIVIDES THE SHOOTING FRATERNITY IN ORDER TO CONQUER
In responding to the concerns of the hunting and target shooting community, legislators resorted to one of the oldest gun control tricks around: They divided the hunters and target shooters from the handgunners. Rifle and shotgun ammunition may still be available from out of state (at least, until a future legislative session decides to revert to the original intent of the bill and ends the exemption for long gun ammunition), but Assemblymember Torrico and the rest of the Democratic Caucus forced the hunting and shooting community to sell out their handgunning brethren. Aside from the obvious distastefulness of being forced to accept this Faustian trade, it raises a wider Constitutional question since the 2nd Amendment makes no distinction between handguns and long guns.

WHAT YOU SHOULD DO NOW
We are asking that all recipients of this email immediate contact their State Senator asking him/her to OPPOSE AB 2714. Note that your State Senator is NOT Barbara Boxer or Dianne Feinstein, both of whom serve at the federal level.

You can look up your State Senator by going to: http://www.senate.ca.gov/%7Enewsen/senators/districtmaps.HTP and clicking on your county. You can then drill down into your district.

Alternatively, you can go to:http://www.assembly.ca.gov/defaulttext.asp and click on the second link from the top on the left side of the page, called "Find My District." You can then type in your street address, city, and zip code, and the screen will return both your Assemblymember's and your State Senator's contact information.
Please take the time both to call your State Senator AND either send a letter or a fax OPPOSING AB 2714. Lawmakers reckon that one phone call represents 5 votes, and an email represents 25 votes. A fax or a letter, however, represents 125 votes, and therefore has the most impact. For your convenience, we have attached a sample letter below, which you can simply cut and paste into your word processor, making any changes you deem necessary.
In closing, remember the words of Benjamin Franklin, who upon signing the Declaration of Independence said, "Gentlemen, we must all hang together or we shall assuredly all hang separately." Please contact your State Senator today.


Dear Senator,
I am writing to ask that you join me OPPOSING AB 2714 (Torrico). This bill would have the effect of banning the sale of handgun ammunition over the internet or by mail order. Although the bill was recently amended to exempt rifle and shotgun ammunition, I am still OPPOSED. Many competitive shooters and hunters who use handguns require specialized ammunition and calibers that are not commonly stocked in retail sporting goods outlets, necessitating purchase from out of state vendors. This bill would cut off their supply of ammunition for their firearms.

Additionally, many target shooters, especially those who participate in Cowboy Action Shooting, use rifles that are chambered in what are commonly thought of as "handgun" calibers like .44 Magnum and .45 Long Colt. For shooters such as these, the bill will reduce price competition, resulting in higher prices. This is a consumer-unfriendly bill, and on this basis alone, it should be opposed.

Equally important, however, this bill is unnecessary because federal law already stipulates that when a buyer purchases ammunition by mail order or internet, s/he must provide proof of identity and age (typically, a copy of the driver's license) to the vendor prior to shipment. In addition, the ammunition must be shipped with ADULT signature required for delivery. Consequently, the provisions of this bill that necessitate proof of identity and age are redundant as they are already covered by existing federal statute. California has enough complex and confusing laws and regulations covering almost every imaginable area of life. Please join me in OPPOSING AB 2714.

Sincerely yours,

[CALI-gula]

The moderator should put a sticky on this along with the similar posts by Mike Haas.

.

[chris]

like i have said before send the letters now. we have couple thousand members here. imagine the senat getting flooded with letters opposing this bill. i think they may be overwhelmed by this. also it could show them that their tatice of divide and conquer is not working. this is a bill i think we can defeat send the letters.

[chunger]

woo hoo. . . mailed senator Perata again today. . . I don't think it's going to do much to sway his vote, but I try.

[joe4702]

Even with the exemptions, some mail order vendors may just quit selling ammo altogether to California residents for fear of violating some provision or grey area of the law. And, how does the law define "handgun ammunition"? TC Encore and Contender pistol barrels are available in most any rifle caliber.

[phish]

Hunter has nailed it right on the head: divide and conquer.

It worked effectively back in 1999 by dividing the AW enthusiasts from the duck and deer hunters.

[Santa Cruz Armory]

I sent emails to the Govenator, Joe Simitian, and John Laird...I hope it helps:confused:

[chris]

I for one remember the AW ban in 99. of course it was about divide and conquer it has always been about that. the ban in 89 was about too. i do not inend to hijake this thread from it's original intent. but there are gun owners in this state that think their weapons are safe. well we know they are not safe. we must unite ALL gun owners need to step up NOW. if we stick together we can win. also I have said this before all outdoor loving people need to speak out and vote. but sadly this is not the case.

but now is the time to write call and send letters to the senate and the governor that WE gun owners are watching this very closely and there will be consiquences. in closing good work guys on calling the lawmakers keep it up. and remember to VOTE this november.

Hunter has nailed it right on the head: divide and conquer.

It worked effectively back in 1999 by dividing the AW enthusiasts from the duck and deer hunters.

[mikehaas]

I'm actually surprised to see ANYTHING out of CRPA. Has anyone else seen any legislative reports out of them? Anything on any other bills? If so, please let me know as NRA will want to know.

I don't wish to break anyone's bubble about CRPA, but last I heard, the CRPA lobbyist was no longer the CRPA lobbyist and was now working under contract for the dealer's association contract lobbyist. This is the group that caused AB 2111 to be amended to be more beneficial for manufacturers, less so for you and I. (NRA wanted guns that were approved for safety testing to stay approved forever. This group fought that because gun makers want to be able to kill their old models when they bring out new ones and they are taking advantage of CA's gun control laws for this purpose. They simply won't pay the fee to keep your favorite gun on the list and don;t want to lose that control. It seems the former CRPA lobbyist and the gun makers *LIKE* SB 15.)

So as far as I know, CRPA has no lobbyist anymore.

Mike

[Scatch Maroo]

Just raised the flag on my mail box to my state senator Perata (hehe, he's going to listen :D).

Scatch Maroo

[xenophobe]

Is this post to be read as an official statement of the NRA, saying things about the CRPA? Mike Haas does very much act here as if he were an authorized representative of the NRA. I would be more than a little bit surprised if the NRA were to officially make such a negative and disparaging comment about the CRPA.


Wait, Mike Hass IS an NRA staffer, isn't he?

[Talkin2u2]

Wait, Mike Hass IS an NRA staffer, isn't he?


I have just done some research and found that mikehass signs many of his postings with the following:

Mike Haas
NRA Benefactor Member, volunteering as...
Electronic Communications Director, NRA Members' Councils of California
http://NRAMembersCouncils.com/ - aka http://calnra.com/
President, NRA Members' Council of West Contra Costa County
ILA EVC, CA Congressional District 7
Webmaster, Fifty Caliber Institute, http://fiftycal.org/
Owner and Author, http://AmmoGuide.com/
Co-founder, http://E-GovMail.com/
Co-founder, http://ProjectBoreSnake.org/ (PLEASE SUPPORT OUR TROOPS!)
------------------------------------
You may enjoy some of my personal web sites...
------------------------------------
http://NRAWinningTeam.com/
http://PatriotBoxers.com/
http://NRAMembersCouncils.com/lifeclock/

I also called the NRA and they informed me that he is indeed "a volunteer that spends a tremendous amount of time and effort helping the NRA and the Second Amendment."

I performed a search and found that he has NEVER claimed to be on NRA's staff. I hope you aren't trying to attack NRA by attacking mikehaas. I think such an action would be a very low blow and beneath most people's dignity.

Ricki Stevens

[6172crew]

I have just done some research and found that mikehass signs many of his postings with the following:

Mike Haas
NRA Benefactor Member, volunteering as...
Electronic Communications Director, NRA Members' Councils of California
http://NRAMembersCouncils.com/ - aka http://calnra.com/
President, NRA Members' Council of West Contra Costa County
ILA EVC, CA Congressional District 7
Webmaster, Fifty Caliber Institute, http://fiftycal.org/
Owner and Author, http://AmmoGuide.com/
Co-founder, http://E-GovMail.com/
Co-founder, http://ProjectBoreSnake.org/ (PLEASE SUPPORT OUR TROOPS!)
------------------------------------
You may enjoy some of my personal web sites...
------------------------------------
http://NRAWinningTeam.com/
http://PatriotBoxers.com/
http://NRAMembersCouncils.com/lifeclock/

I also called the NRA and they informed me that he is indeed "a volunteer that spends a tremendous amount of time and effort helping the NRA and the Second Amendment."

I performed a search and found that he has NEVER claimed to be on NRA's staff. I hope you aren't trying to attack NRA by attacking mikehaas. I think such an action would be a very low blow and beneath most people's dignity.

Ricki Stevens

Indeed:cool: I think Mike was giving us some inside into what he thinks and I will take it as that.

On a more important note my rep has a email from me.;)

[xenophobe]

I hope you aren't trying to attack NRA by attacking mikehaas.

I wasn't the one calling around checking up on him...

And by your own report, he has every right to hold the stance he does.

[chunger]

Cool. . . Perata's getting 2 letters. I think I can con my roommate into sending a letter too. . . then, it'll be 3.

[pilotimb]

Mailed and faxed.

Torrico is one of my representatives and I also sent him a letter voicing my displeasure.

[Talkin2u2]

I wasn't the one calling around checking up on him...


No, you are absolutely correct about this. I was the one who verified my facts before posting them on the Internet.

Ricki Stevens

[Hunter]

I'm actually surprised to see ANYTHING out of CRPA. Has anyone else seen any legislative reports out of them? Anything on any other bills? If so, please let me know as NRA will want to know.
..............
So as far as I know, CRPA has no lobbyist anymore.

Mike
On the alerts, yes I get them from the CRPA on such critical bills. To bad the NRA here in CA doesn't do the same. I know I can look at the website to get some updates, but it has been a very long time since I got one from the NRA via email, and I'm an NRA Endowment member. Now once in a great while I will get a phone call around election time.

On this particular bill, I did find the NRA site to be way behind on keeping up on the bill's status compared to the alerts being posted by CRPA. The CRPA alerts were very timely and very current.

Now on this comment on the lobbyist being paid by someone else, well it sounds like this needs to be checked on. As the official membership rules state very clearly that they have a fulltime lobbist as one of the benifits of having a membership. I quote from the membership page:
The only California based gun owner's rights organization with a full-time, salaried legislative advocate in Sacramento

Even on the overall general website it states the following:
The CRPA is an organization of sportsmen dedicated
to the preservation of our American heritage.
Founded way back in 1875, the California Rifle and Pistol Association is now over 65,000 strong and growing.

In this age of constant political attacks on the rights of law-abiding citizens to own and use firearms for legitimate purposes, the California Rifle and Pistol Association is the state organization dedicated to protecting firearm freedoms and promoting shooting sports.

Through its full-time salaried legislative advocate (lobbyist) in Sacramento, the CRPA fights adverse firearms legislation and advances laws that will protect your rights.

So if we have indeed "lost" our lobbyist to others, then the membership would have to have been officially notified. Seems like a call is in order here.

Thanks

[223-Sniper]

Faxes sent to Senator and assemblyman hope it helps some. the govanator is next.

[223-Sniper]

The Govanator contact info

http://www.govmail.ca.gov/success.html

[mikehaas]

I'd like to point out an error in CRPA's recommended action.

We are asking that all recipients of this email immediate contact their State Senator asking him/her to OPPOSE AB 2714
This may seem like a good idea, but it's "last century" style lobbying tactics - in all likelihood, your state senator is probably NOT on the Senate Public Safety Committee - where we have to fight this bill first. There only 7 senators on that committee...
http://calnra.com/legs/senpubsafety.shtml

If your state senator is not in that list, it probably does very little good to contact that office regarding AB 2714 at this time. They have limited attention spans, y'know? (VERY limited.)

That's why, at http://calnra.com/legs.shtml#contact info, we try to point you to EXACTLY where your efforts are needed.

If you do as CRPA asks above, your efforts will likely be wasted at this time. Please focus on the Senate Public Safety Committee - EVERYONE!

Here's the real deal on AB 2714...
http://calnra.com/legs.shtml?summary=ab2714

Mike

[johnny_22]

I also signed up for the California Legislature alerts for the bills. With those two, and Cal Guns/NRA discussions, I keep up with the bills.

When you send emails faxes, mail and calls to the individual committee members, you either get the reply "you are not in my district", or no reply. Not sure it helps to send, but, I'll keep doing it.

[mikehaas]

When you send emails faxes, mail and calls to the individual committee members, you either get the reply "you are not in my district", or no reply. Not sure it helps to send, but, I'll keep doing it.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR EFFORTS! Then reply back and tell them the lawmaker in question is on a COMMITTEE and politely insist the COMMITTEE consider your input despite your district, since you are a California resident. It's ridiculous to suggest that only citizens from lawmakers districts be heard on committee issues.

And even if the issue is on the floor, contact as many lawmakers as possible. Let the fact that you're not in a given district be THEIR problem, not yours. We have no obligation to make it easy on these people.

It's like your NRA lobbyist tells those at the capitol who complain about all the contacting going on - "I don't control these guys, you do. No bill, no calls. Kill the bill and the calls, emails and faxes will stop."

The ONE-CLICK system at...
http://calnra.com/legs.shtml#contactinfo
...is an excellent and easy way to broadcast your comments TO THE RIGHT LEGISLATIVE BODY - all members (as many as possible).

We don't simply point you to somebody else's website to simply look up your lawmaker - someone who may not even be voting on AB 2714 yet. That's "last century" tactics.

Nobody does grassroots like the CA NRA Members' Councils. In fact, compared to us, NOBODY DOES GRASSROOTS AT ALL. We don't call ourselves the CA NRA Members' Councils for nothing. (And we don't fundraise!)

We ARE grassroots. 100% volunteers, directed by NRA's top staff in the state. And we mean business. If you want to become part of a working team, visit this site to identify your local "MC" and their monthly meeting location and date/time:
http://calnra.com/volunteer/
(Real opportunites for real leaders!)

Mike

[mikehaas]

The Govanator contact info

http://www.govmail.ca.gov/success.html

Thanks for your efforts in enabling CA gun-owners to contact government officials. However, it is too early to contact the governor. AB 2714 is not on his desk and the attention span of government officials is never that long. :-)

And the other side of the same coin - CA gun-owners efforts are MUCH better spent targeting the specific legislative body that is working on the bill. (Only one committee or body is focused on a given bill at a given time. Passing a bill is a 100% SERIAL process. From start to finish, there is always a specific group one can target in lobbying a bill.)

Another reason this is not the best advice is that AB 2714 may never pass the legislature and the governor will never even see it. See why it's better to accurately target the correct body?

And currently for AB 2714, the correct body is the Senate Public Safety Committee...
http://calnra.com/legs.shtml?summary=ab2714

(The contact tools available on that page will always target the correct legislative body.)

Thanks for all you do! (NRA tells me to thank you calguns.net guys & gals too, and I frequently forget. Sorry. They really do appreciate your efforts.)

Mike

[Hunter]

Thanks for your efforts in enabling CA gun-owners to contact government officials. However, it is too early to contact the governor. AB 2714 is not on his desk and the attention span of government officials is never that long. :-).........


Mike,
Any news on the proposed admendments by Torric? If they are indeed added by Torric the bill needs to go back to the Assembly for another vote, correct?

[vonsmith]

I just addressed my email to: Dear Senate Public Safety Committee Member

Then I signed with my name and "Lifetime California Resident"

I hope that gets the point across even if I'm not in their district. Anyway email doesn't cost a thing and I emailed all 7 members of the committee.

I'm keeping my fingers crossed.


=vonsmith=

[Talkin2u2]

I just addressed my email to: Dear Senate Public Safety Committee Member

Then I signed with my name and "Lifetime California Resident"

I hope that gets the point across even if I'm not in their district. Anyway email doesn't cost a thing and I emailed all 7 members of the committee.

I'm keeping my fingers crossed.


=vonsmith=


PERFECTION OBTAINED!!!! :D

Seriously, this is an example of the PERFECT way to contact the "legislative body" that is being focused on.

I recently contacted an NRA employee that is based in California, and during our conversation he said something that made a lot of sense to me. We he is told by other legislators that he should contact his own district's legislator, he responds back with When your vote affects me, I will contact you. As long as you are voting on legislation that affects me, you will continue to hear from me.

I thought that response is great, and I think the way you address and sign your emails are great too.

Ricki Stevens

[mikehaas]

Mike,
Any news on the proposed admendments by Torric? If they are indeed added by Torric the bill needs to go back to the Assembly for another vote, correct?
Correct. I reference this at...
http://calnra.com/legs.shtml?summary=ab2714.1
('More Detail' mode)

...and see the new 'Note 2' I recently added under the 'LATEST CHANGES' section at...
http://calnra.com/legs.shtml
(just scroll down a bit)

Unless Torrico welches on promises made in the Assembly to effect passage (specifically to tough pro-gun Assemblyman Jay La Suer), AB 2714 will undergo more amendments in the Senate. So yes, we should get another crack at the bill in the Assembly, where we have a better chance of affecting/stopping it.

Mike

[Outlaw Josey Wales]

MONDAY MORNING MEMORANDUM

By Assemblyman Ray Haynes

June 12, 2006


Quill Pens, Guns, Ink and Bullets



When the Founding Fathers took the initiative to permanently inscribe our natural rights on paper, one can imagine it being done so with a quill pen. The first copies enshrined our liberties in the constitution as the Bill of Rights to include the freedom of religion, freedom of the press and the right to keep and bear arms and were printed with a manual printing press.



This freedom of speech includes our right to express ourselves with every available medium. At no point have we considered that the freedom of speech is limited to expressing oneself with hand presses and quill pens. We freely debate on the internet, television, telephones and other forms of communication.



So why is it that our Second Amendment is not treated the same as the First? The majority party in California, and their anti-civil rights allies, views our natural right to self defense to be limited to the musket and the flintlock.



Since I have been in office, the majority party has found cause to attack small guns, cheap guns, expensive guns, big guns, guns with too many accessories, guns by brand name, ugly guns, and pretty guns. We have a strange testing requirement to purchase a gun reminiscent of poll taxes and literacy tests that were designed to keep oppressed people from voting. We have limited the number of guns someone can purchase in a month. Can you imagine being told how many times you are allowed to attend church in a month?



As you can imagine, this has little impact on true crime or any of the other bogus arguments used to suppress your rights. The majority party claims to believe in several of your rights, and has seen fit to make themselves the arbiters of which ones you are allowed to exercise, how often, and with as many hoops to jump through as possible.



This session in the Legislature, we have defeated bills that would have required anti-gun rhetoric on material distributed with new firearms, a bill that would have required guns and ammunition to have microscopic serial numbers imprinted in them, as if inspired by a late night of watching TV shows like CSI, and a bill that would have banned dogs from chasing rabbits! These bills are sold as crime fighting tools. After a half century of these types of laws, we are no safer. In truth, the criminal element is safer every time we disarm the law abiding population.



Not able to totally ban firearms, the majority party has found a new vehicle to disarm you, banning ammunition.



AB 2714 (Torrico) passed the Assembly last week, and is now in the Senate. This bill will require that all transactions in ammunition require the consumer to meet with the retailer face to face and present ID. With tens of millions of shooters in America, untold millions of rounds of ammunition are sold directly to the public through catalog and internet sales. Hard to find, bulk items, specialty items, discounted rates and convenience are all to be had for the consumer by purchasing on-line. AB 2714 seeks to regulate interstate commerce, ammunition, gun rights, and the internet in one fell swoop by a rabid and illogical anti-gun owner agenda.



To get the bill out of the lower house, the author promised to amend it later. He promised that he wouldn’t seek to ban purchasing ammo anymore. He would instead amend the bill to require you to present identification to the UPS delivery truck that is bringing you your product. I suppose if law enforcement won’t support your unnecessary legislation, you can just deputize the entire UPS and FedEx fleets to do your dirty work. The goal is to make it so uncomfortable to be a gun owner that your kids won’t even bother. The outcome of this bill remains to be seen, but I know that when one right is stolen away the others will follow.



If this oppressive behavior continues, I just may have to send out my weekly opinion pieces on parchment, handwritten with a quill pen.


******************************

[223-Sniper]

Got a reply from the Govanator here goes check it out.

Thank you for writing and sharing your views on AB 2714. I appreciate hearing from Californians who want to improve our State by voicing their opinions on important issues.

When new legislation reaches my desk, I carefully consider all factors, including the thoughts of residents like you, before taking action. This year, the State Legislature has until August 31, 2006, to pass legislation and submit it to me to sign or veto. I typically do not take a position on pending legislation until it reaches my desk because a bill can change drastically from the time it is introduced to when it is passed by the Legislature. I encourage you to follow the progress of this and any other bill at the Official California Legislative Information website at www.leginfo.ca.gov. You can also see the decisions I make on final legislation at www.governor.ca.gov.

Thank you again for writing. An informed and engaged citizenry is vital to good government in our great State.

Sincerely,


Arnold Schwarzenegger

[trinity9]

... on the letter writing campaign. I've yet to see it work. I know you'll drop references seemingly "to the contrary," yet I still live in the most highly legislated, gun-unfriendly state in the nation. How did we get here? Probably writing letters.

trinity9

[mikehaas]

... on the letter writing campaign. I've yet to see it work. I know you'll drop references seemingly "to the contrary," yet I still live in the most highly legislated, gun-unfriendly state in the nation. How did we get here? Probably writing letters.
Now THERE's a new excuse, one I hadn't heard before. Some gun-owners are very creative in finding ways not to help out.

Too bad we can't put in as much energy PULLING TOGETHER.

(Wait till I tell NRA staff about THIS one - Hey guys, a new winning tactic - STOP CONTACTING THE LEGISLATURE... Yeah, you've had it wrong all these years. Just think how far ahead we'd be if we had never contacted our lawmakers! Now why didn't *WE* think of that?)

Mike

[chris]

... on the letter writing campaign. I've yet to see it work. I know you'll drop references seemingly "to the contrary," yet I still live in the most highly legislated, gun-unfriendly state in the nation. How did we get here? Probably writing letters.

trinity9

yeah man that is the way to do it just don't call or write these guys. that attitude is what got us here in the first place. we are here to slam the politicos for crap like Ab2714. the bill was amendened heavily because of us calling and writing to them. did you forget civics class in high school or did they stop teaching how our country works?

anyways guys this lame bill in coming up in the public safety commitie. time to drop the hammer on them. forget what this guy says and put the hurt on their ears over the phone, flood the mailboxes and overload the faxes. if they wonder why their phones are ringing off the hook we'll take the blame with a :) and call them again and again.

[hoffmang]

To those who don't think letter writing works...

I was reading over Ray Haynes' letter and it may simply be co-incidence, but the Commerce Clause issues I mentioned in letters I sent to my reps and posted here seem to have been heard on the floor.

"To get the bill out of the lower house, the author promised to amend it later. He promised that he wouldn't seek to ban purchasing ammo anymore. He would instead amend the bill to require you to present identification to the UPS delivery truck that is bringing you your product. I suppose if law enforcement won't support your unnecessary legislation, you can just deputize the entire UPS and FedEx fleets to do your dirty work. The goal is to make it so uncomfortable to be a gun owner that your kids won't even bother. The outcome of this bill remains to be seen, but I know that when one right is stolen away the others will follow."

I made sure the Commerce Clause issues were outlined in faxes to all the members of the Senate Committee currently hearing the bill.

[trinity9]

Too bad we can't put in as much energy PULLING TOGETHER.

Mike

I get it. That was you "pulling together" when you referenced the CRPA earlier in the thread.

Classic.

trinity9

[trinity9]

yeah man that is the way to do it just don't call or write these guys. that attitude is what got us here in the first place.

I don't get that. So you guys are the first to mount a letter writing campaign?

The system is broken and it's certainly not because I failed to write a letter.

trinity9

[hoffmang]

Trinity9, You're saying its everyone else's fault and you bear no culpability.

Let me translate what others are telling you in basic english.

If you do not help, you do not get to complain.

[trinity9]

Trinity9, You're saying its everyone else's fault and you bear no culpability.

Let me translate what others are telling you in basic english.

If you do not help, you do not get to complain.

Actually no, I wasn't saying that-- not even close. As a matter of fact, I don't think you were correct regarding what others were telling me either. I offered my thought that letter writing was futile, and was rebutted by folks that thought it effective.

You were so busy counting your posts you missed both my observation and their responses.

I'll work on my basic English, you go work on your comprehension.

trinity9

[CalNRA]

alright trinity9, as a sucker I called my rep, emailed him, and called TOrrico's office even though his district is far from mine. I also sent email to the governor.

Since our letter writing obviously doesn't work, what did you do instead?

not trying to flame you, just curious. If you got good ideas we would all like to hear it.

[dmckean44]

It sorta worked, the bill was amended to where all it does it require an adult singnature on mail order handgun ammo. Which is no big deal.

[chris]

the bill needs to be vetoed by the governor. this will let guys that write bills like this will not be tolerated by us.

[jmlivingston]

I was reading over Ray Haynes' letter and it may simply be co-incidence, but the Commerce Clause issues I mentioned in letters I sent to my reps and posted here seem to have been heard on the floor.

<SNIP>

I made sure the Commerce Clause issues were outlined in faxes to all the members of the Senate Committee currently hearing the bill.

I saw those remarks too! You and I and a couple others were debating this a few weeks ago, and I'd included mention of that issue in one or two emails as well. Looks like it had a positive effect on the outcome of this bill! Certainly it's not perfect and should still be vetoed but it's been gutted and isn't near the problem it originally was.

John

[Hunter]

It sorta worked, the bill was amended to where all it does it require an adult singnature on mail order handgun ammo. Which is no big deal.

Whoa. It has been amended to only apply to handgun ammo FOR NOW, otherwords it still bans one from ordering it over the phone and internet.

On the signature requirement, that is still hanging out there as Torrico has not made those changes (only promised) yet. Also the way I read the proposed amendment (if Torrico follows thru) is that the actual buyer (myself) will have to be present to show FedEx/UPS my driver's license and to sign for the package. It will not be released to "any" adult signature such as the wife's. So it is a little more involved than the standard "Adult Signature" requirement that UPS currently has.

And again, this is only a promise by Torrico, he has not actually made the changes yet.

[trinity9]

alright trinity9, as a sucker I called my rep, emailed him, and called TOrrico's office even though his district is far from mine. I also sent email to the governor.

Since our letter writing obviously doesn't work, what did you do instead?

not trying to flame you, just curious. If you got good ideas we would all like to hear it.

My thought, not idea, is that you would be writing letters to diminish the impact of SB2714, to minimize the impact of yet additional legislation on your rights.

Attempting to minimize yet another infringement. Why not ever rolling back the same? Why always on the defensive?

If you're waiting for me to pronounce that I have a more effective, proven approach, then I imagine that I'll fall short. My thought is that your opinion and mine matter little or less to the "elected." I believe that those that work outside or on the fringe of the system are more effective.

By fringe I simply mean to buy a Desert Eagle, a weapon I believe will end up on the "List."

Perhaps buy a Socom, (which should be on the list because it looks very dangerous.)

Perhaps buy Body Armor, which will again inevitably work its way negatively into the public's eye.

Maybe it would be more effective to stockpile ammunition or to invest your time and resources into "infecting" others with an interest in shooting and marksmanship.

Those are my thoughts, and my current activities,

Take care,
trintiy9

[chunger]

My thought, not idea, is that you would be writing letters to diminish the impact of SB2714, to minimize the impact of yet additional legislation on your rights.

Attempting to minimize yet another infringement. Why not ever rolling back the same? Why always on the defensive?

If you're waiting for me to pronounce that I have a more effective, proven approach, then I imagine that I'll fall short. My thought is that your opinion and mine matter little or less to the "elected." I believe that those that work outside or on the fringe of the system are more effective.


I don't think that the fringe activities and letter writing are mutually exclusive. What is left of the 2nd ammendment still serves to protect the 1st ammendment that we excercise by contacting elected representatives, evangelizing gun ownership/self defense, and talking on forums like this to keep up to organize our efforts and stay informed.

I can easily alot a $25 annual budget for stamps, paper, and envelopes and take 30 minutes every once in a while to write a short one paragraph letter and stick it in the mail while at the same time, continue with all the purchases I normally make, and influence other people to become new gun owners.

I've never shot a rifle before in my life, but purchased 2 off-list AR15 lowers early in the game even though prices were inflated because it would send what in my opinion is a powerful message to the DOJ and California legislature.

Writing about AB 2714 is a defensive action, and I think we all agree with you that being on the constant defensive sucks, but it still needs doing. If the train is rolling in the wrong direction, we can put some rocks on the track while at the same time, try to make a course correction. There are other federal bills in the works right now that may open the door for nation-wide CCW. Those bills probably require a slew of positive letter writing. It's a big country, and sometimes it takes some time for it to change course. It quite possibly could take longer than our lifespans to make any significant progress, but we need to keep the pressure on from all sides we are capable of. . . purchasing, evangelizing, writing, lobbying, voting, and excercising the gun rights that are still intact.

We can talk with our letters and our money at the same time; they're both important.

[vonsmith]

+1 chunger

Don't give up and don't give in, never let the bastards win.

Do you think the liberal gun-grabbers on the other side are just trying to play nice? :cool:


=vonsmith=

[JPN6336]

the bill needs to be vetoed by the governor. this will let guys that write bills like this will not be tolerated by us.

The same governor that DIDN't veto the .50 ban? Not flaming you, it would be optimal for him to veto the bill if it gets to him I just don't see it as likely to happen.

[mikehaas]

I get it. That was you "pulling together" when you referenced the CRPA earlier in the thread.

Classic.

trinity9

No, I call it "correcting CRPA's faulty information". And in the interest of "PULLING TOGETHER", I won't expound, but CRPA is making a lot of mistakes these days. They put out posts with faulty info because it's CRPA that doesn't want to "PULL TOGETHER".

For example, CRPA members here should ask your CRPA why they are opposing some of NRA's bills this year behind the scenes.

Oh, excuse me, you CAN'T ask your CRPA - they have no "Contact Us" link on their website (like http://calnra.com/). Know why? They don't want to actually hear from you - I know for a fact they have refused requests to have such a link. Their preferred means of communicating with their members is their MAGAZINE (the "Firing Line") - a medium with a 2 month lag time. Go ahead, try to contact someone at CRPA. (Think fighting gun control is frustrating? :-)

Look, I wish CRPA didn't have as many serious problems as they do, but wishing doesn't make it so. I could spend a lot of time on this, but don't. I wouldn't have posted here at all if CRPA wasn't telling gun-owners to go WASTE their valuable time with last century's lobbying tactics. I'm trying to "PULL TOGETHER" by connecting up calguns.net members with good info, with what NRA is doing and with contact tools that target the right lawmakers at the right time. And NRA thinks it's working out pretty well - they appreciate calguns.net being involved and tell me to let you guys & gals know.

Mike

[vonsmith]

Well...

http://www.crpa.org/contact.asp

California Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc.
271 Imperial Highway, Suite 620
Fullerton, CA 92835
714-992-CRPA (2772)
(714) 992-2996 FAX

I don't know how responsive they are though.

=vonsmith=

[hoffmang]

Trinity9,

You being new here I find it amusing you knock my post count. Did you read the part that about our earlier letter writing campaign having some positive effect already?

Also, don't assume that because many of us here are willing to play defense that we don't or are not playing offense too.

What have you done to either be on the offensive or help the defense? Political contributions? Letter writing? Call your DA about an OLL? Get acquaintances who don't yet have guns into the sport?

I'm not going to take this further in this thread. This is about working on making sure that this bill doesn't get passed.

[trinity9]

Trinity9,

You being new here I find it amusing you knock my post count. Did you read the part that about our earlier letter writing campaign having some positive effect already?



You have no clue whatsoever if your letter writing campaign had any effect-- You never will. The state of politics in California is to seemingly be inclusive, when in fact it is not, regardless of what Mike says.

You can believe your letter mattered, I can believe it did not-- fair enough.

You can continue to write letters hoping to minimize the impact of additional legislation and restrictions on your rights-- I'll pass and wait for legislation that expands gun owners rights.

As to the post count, I'll defer to your having been here for 40 days.

Take care,

trinity9

[choochboost]

Ok...thank you for that. Now on to the business at hand.

[PeteyG]

We have until June 27th to get this bill killed in the public saftey committee.

FROM http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/bill/asm/ab_2701-2750/ab_2714_bill_20060615_status.html

CURRENT BILL STATUS

MEASURE : A.B. No. 2714
AUTHOR(S) : Torrico.
TOPIC : Ammunition.
HOUSE LOCATION : SEN
+LAST AMENDED DATE : 05/30/2006


TYPE OF BILL :
Active
Non-Urgency
Non-Appropriations
Majority Vote Required
State-Mandated Local Program
Fiscal
Non-Tax Levy

LAST HIST. ACT. DATE: 06/15/2006
LAST HIST. ACTION : Referred to Com. on PUB. S.
COMM. LOCATION : SEN PUBLIC SAFETY
HEARING DATE : 06/27/2006

TITLE : An act to add Section 12317 to the Penal Code, relating
to ammunition.

BTW:
Does anybody have a fax number for the Vice Chairman of the Senate Public Safety Commitee, Chuck Poochigian. I want to fax a letter to all of the members of the public saftey committee, and his is the only one not listed.

I can't find email adress's for the public saftey committe members, can anyone help with this?

Pete

[SouthbySouthwest]

For example, CRPA members here should ask your CRPA why they are opposing some of NRA's bills this year behind the scenes.

Oh, excuse me, you CAN'T ask your CRPA - they have no "Contact Us" ....blah,blah,blah..
Mike

Geez Mike, sounds like you have some hard on for CRPA!
If CRPA members are not complaining, why does it bother you? Just move on. Seems like our energy needs to be kept focused on the tasks at hand. Really, is bitching about CRPA really that important to you? Not all of the players (NRA or GOA or SAF or CRPA or CWA or ect..) agree on everything here in California. So why all the wasted energy between you and the CRPA???

Just realize that all the players do not agree on EVERYTHING and move on. Our energies need to be focused on the Legislature. And yes, at times the various groups will take opposing views, that is life and so be it.

[Boomer1961]

You have no clue whatsoever if your letter writing campaign had any effect-- You never will. The state of politics in California is to seemingly be inclusive, when in fact it is not, regardless of what Mike says.

You can believe your letter mattered, I can believe it did not-- fair enough.

You can continue to write letters hoping to minimize the impact of additional legislation and restrictions on your rights-- I'll pass and wait for legislation that expands gun owners rights.

As to the post count, I'll defer to your having been here for 40 days.

Take care,

trinity9


Dang Trinity, save that energy for where it might do some good. Lecturing a member here is like pissing in the wind. It might relieve the pressure for you and give you a good warm feeling but afterwards nothing was accomplished but stinking things up.

Writing to Sacramento, making donations, recruiting new members is where your energy will do some good. Remember many here actually believe in Democracy and have served in the Military to protect your democratic rights to petition their government and having them listen. Being overly critical of others who are at least trying is the actual wasted time/energy/money/anti-gun that I am seeing. Make ammends and donate $100US to any pro-constitutional candidate running against a anti-burn the constituion and stomp on it candidate. That $100 will at least do more good than spending it on beer and hookers.:eek:

Take care everyone!

[CalNRA]

My thought, not idea, is that you would be writing letters to diminish the impact of SB2714, to minimize the impact of yet additional legislation on your rights.

Attempting to minimize yet another infringement. Why not ever rolling back the same? Why always on the defensive?

If you're waiting for me to pronounce that I have a more effective, proven approach, then I imagine that I'll fall short. My thought is that your opinion and mine matter little or less to the "elected." I believe that those that work outside or on the fringe of the system are more effective.

By fringe I simply mean to buy a Desert Eagle, a weapon I believe will end up on the "List."

Perhaps buy a Socom, (which should be on the list because it looks very dangerous.)

Perhaps buy Body Armor, which will again inevitably work its way negatively into the public's eye.

Maybe it would be more effective to stockpile ammunition or to invest your time and resources into "infecting" others with an interest in shooting and marksmanship.

Those are my thoughts, and my current activities,

Take care,
trintiy9

Well, a lot of us already do that. We already take people shooting, get people interested in our sport and get aware of the issues.

On top of that, some of us choose to do whatever we can to help.

I am very confused at your position, so you are saying that we do nothing in sense of contacting the politicians that "represent" us, and just retreat to a corner and shoot and just give up on the legislature?

yet even as you say that you do not have a better plan, you still come here and lecture the people on this board on how our efforts are futile?

Somewhere back in grade school we learned that if you ain't got constructive things to say, than don't say anything at all.

I try to follow that as much as I can, try it and you may feel less frustrated at the people that share a common interest as you.

[trinity9]

I am very confused at your position, so you are saying that we do nothing in sense of contacting the politicians that "represent" us, and just retreat to a corner and shoot and just give up on the legislature?

More like I say that you doing your part has become ineffective-- the politicians have failed to do their part. More along the lines of, "Don't vote, it only encourages them."


yet even as you say that you do not have a better plan, you still come here and lecture the people on this board on how our efforts are futile?


I don't believe I did anything but respond to what I preceived to be an aggressive rebuttal. I don't have to have a better plan-- I think I'm permitted to have a thought contrary to yours, which I offered. I don't know it to factually be a better idea, it was just my thought and hopefully it has a forum here.



Somewhere back in grade school we learned that if you ain't got constructive things to say, than don't say anything at all.


That's old. So you'd prefer no thoughts contrary to your own right? Fair enough, just remember that the one fighting fair is usually the one getting his a** kicked.

All of us living in Kali for the last two decades are getting our a**es kicked. Go ahead and send 'em another letter.

Thank you sir, may I have another.

trinity9

[robrjohnson]

You have no clue whatsoever if your letter writing campaign had any effect-- You never will.

We do know one thing is certain: doing nothing accomplishes nothing.

[Glock22Fan]

We do know one thing is certain: doing nothing accomplishes nothing.

hear, hear.

As for those who suggest "Don't vote, it only encourages them" I'm (nearly) speechless. If you don't vote, you get what you deserve. Nothing.

"Apathy Rules! (snore) "

[johnny_22]

...they add more ammendments. Just listened to the live audio feed of the discussions. Migden was ready to move the bill forward, but, Torrico wants to add one more ammendment.

The "For" s was a Brady rep. The opposition was representatives of the people listed above, but, each said that with the ammendments, they would support it.

[mikehaas]

Well...

http://www.crpa.org/contact.asp

California Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc.
271 Imperial Highway, Suite 620
Fullerton, CA 92835
714-992-CRPA (2772)
(714) 992-2996 FAX

I don't know how responsive they are though.

=vonsmith=

Sorry, I meant no ONLINE contact info - an email address or form... to address member questions, concerns in a TIMELY manner. Their preferred method of communicating with their members is a magazine (the Firing Line) - something with months of lead time.

Most of the lawmakers accept email from constituents. CAL NRA does...
http://calnra.com/msg/
...why not CRPA? There are about 25 NRA Members' Councils across the state...
http://calnra.com/mc/directory/
...and...
http://calnra.com/mccontact/
...Plus there's the CA EVC program and contact tools...
http://calnra.com/evc/

But there's not even email contact for CRPA (sigh). I mean, if CRPA is going to oppose NRA bills, they ought to be available to answer "Why?", shouldn't they?

BTW, just called the above CRPA number, spoke with a nice lady. I politely explained I was an angry gun-owner and what could I do through CRPA to fight CA gun control? The answer was "donate". Ok, that can be important, sure. So I asked what MORE can I do? Are there meetings? Places to go to get more info? Work with others? She said (no kidding) I could send in my personal info and run for the CRPA board. So I thanked the nice lady and said goodbye.

I'm sure she was doing her job the best she could, she just didn't seem equipped to answer gun-owner questions. It would have been good had she then referred me (a potential volunteer asking "What can I do?") to someone else. I suspect there is no one else, at least anyone that actually wants to speak with you or I. There is no CRPA volunteer network that I know of.

Now, I don't want to rag on CRPA, just highlight the difference. There are about 25 NRA Members' Councils all across the state that hold monthly meetings (and we don't fundraise). Every one of them needs as many NRA members attending as possible (have you been to one?) CRPA has a single CONTRACT lobbyist, NRA has it's own office in Sacramento (the only state to have one) a full-time lobbyist who is an employee, a full-time staff administrator for the MC network who is an employee and other supporting staff. Then there's us, the army of volunteers.

BTW, you can join in at:
http://calnra.com/volunteer/

And frankly, when CRPA starts opposing NRA bills, I'd like to know why as well as what THEY are doing besides impinging progress and putting out incorrect info in alerts that causes volunteers to waste time. Despite their alert of June 1st (nearly a month ago), AB 2714 STILL isn't before the full senate, so don't yet bother contacting your senator like they suggest - CONTACT THE SENATE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE (that's only 7 senators, total, who are concerned with AB 2714). That may change tomorrow, but it's been like that for a month.

Contact tools at...
http://calnra.com/legs.shtml?summary=ab2714

Mike

[johnny_22]

The CPRA explains on their web site why they felt this bill was a gun owner registration plan. I guess there are some C&R rifle owners who are not known to the Firearms division.

http://www.crpa.org/showpages.asp?pid=1006

I would like to know if the NRA has changed their mind on AB2714. From what I heard from the committe session, this bill is now supported by the NRA. Did I hear right?

[glockk9mm]

so does anyone know the status of this bill? And am i seeing correct that the nra supports this bill? if so why are they supporting it? Im confused.

[DRH]

This bill started out as a complete mail order ammo ban, but has been reduced to (by amendments) a glorified ID check on mail order ammo delivers for handgun only ammo. It is still not a good bill, but the NRA and CRPA withdrew their opposition at the Senate Public safety committee meeting this morning. Here is the text of the amended bill below. It should be noted that the opposition by all pro gun forces lead to the amendments.
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/bill/asm/ab_2701-2750/ab_2714_bill_20060621_amended_sen.html

[glockk9mm]

Do you guys think ups,fed-ex will still want to deliver ammunition? Or can this have some kind of affect on them delivering it?

[hoffmang]

Fedex and UPS already deliver wine with an ID check. I expect they'll be ok with combining the ID/signature check to their regular ORM-D procedures.

[rush2112]

Do you guys think ups,fed-ex will still want to deliver ammunition? Or can this have some kind of affect on them delivering it?

My opinion is 'yes' since "hand gun ammo" falls under the shipping rubric of "small-arms cartridges". As long as a shipping container is marked accordingly I could not imagine some package jockey at fed-ex tearing into a container to see if it's 300 rounds of 9mm ammo or 8mm surplus ammo etc.

[Silverback]

As I read the changes to AB2714 it appears to me that I must receive the ammo in person. My wife or adult kids can't sign and receive my package.:mad:

"A seller of ammunition may comply with this section
by requiring a carrier to obtain the signature of the purchaser and
view bona fide evidence of identity and that the purchaser is 21
years of age or older before delivering handgun ammunition shipped to
an individual within this state."

I work a 12 and 1/2 hour day with at least a 1 hour commute each way. That kind of limits what I can receive. Boy am I looking to get out of Kalifornia!:mad:

[hoffmang]

DJharris,

Though that may be the letter of the law, I doubt you're going to see that from Fedex and UPS in actuality. They do offer a service that forces the correct person to sign, but at the end of the day I think this measure will be basically moot now.

[Silverback]

DJharris,

Though that may be the letter of the law, I doubt you're going to see that from Fedex and UPS in actuality. They do offer a service that forces the correct person to sign, but at the end of the day I think this measure will be basically moot now.

I certainly hope it will be moot. However if it passes and is signed then the courts can't be trusted to do anythng in favor of gun owners. The politicians in black robes will do what is in the interest of their political agenda.

[Black_Talon]

FWIW:

My parents do the wine-club thing and receive "must be signed for by adult" packages all the time. They also travel a lot and whenever they're not home the UPS leaves a notice saying "this package must be signed for by an adult". The next day when they come back they leave the package whether or not the notice has even been signed, let alone requiring proof that any signature was actually left by an adult.

[glockk9mm]

As I read the changes to AB2714 it appears to me that I must receive the ammo in person. My wife or adult kids can't sign and receive my package.:mad:

"A seller of ammunition may comply with this section
by requiring a carrier to obtain the signature of the purchaser and
view bona fide evidence of identity and that the purchaser is 21
years of age or older before delivering handgun ammunition shipped to
an individual within this state."

I work a 12 and 1/2 hour day with at least a 1 hour commute each way. That kind of limits what I can receive. Boy am I looking to get out of Kalifornia!:mad:



This is the exact problem with me too. Usually anyone in my house receives my ammo, there all adults but now it seems i have to be the one receiving it? Sometimes they deliver early and sometimes late... This realy pisses me off.

[Ratters]

This is the exact problem with me too. Usually anyone in my house receives my ammo, there all adults but now it seems i have to be the one receiving it? Sometimes they deliver early and sometimes late... This realy pisses me off.


Luckily I live near one of the sorting centers. I just have them hold it for me there and pick it up after work. Check around, there's usually one within a city or two.

[mikehaas]

...NRA... withdrew their opposition at the Senate Public safety committee meeting this morning...
NOT TRUE! As webmaster of CalNRA.com (who is normally advised of status changes within MINUTES of their occurence), allow me to correct you...
http://calnra.com/legs.shtml?summary=ab2714

- Note the ONE-CLICK link to the CORRECT committee (Senate Appropriations) - asking people to Please contact the committee members and urge opposition to AB 2714.

- Note the date of that request (2 days after you say we removed our opposition).

- Note the little red "X" next to AB 2714 in our exportable legislative "mini box" (see http://calnra.com/importlegs.shtml).

- Note the large font, in red, at the top of the page...
NRA opposes this bill.

Please let me know if I can make the page any clearer.

Mike

(I suspect you have this confused with AB 2728, which was "gut & amend"-ed about that time. NRA did withdraw their opposition to AB 2728 because that bill was completely replaced with new language. It no longer had to do with DEALER INSPECTIONS, but a whole new issue. NRA's position on AB 2728 at this time is "Watch" and verrrry closely.)

[mikehaas]

Mike, Just for info...not sure if you're aware. I've been trying to send e-mails via the One-Click system for two days. Each time, I get this error message in my e-mail.

Thank you for using the Email Distribution System of the NRA Members'
Councils to send email to the California Legislature in defense of our Right-To-Bear-Arms. However, the email forwarding service you have reached is off-line, and not forwarding emails at this time.

...I received auto-replies from Senators Dutton, Migden, and Hollingsworth about AB352. I suppose they did go through after all.
Sorry about that, I really am and YES, your ONE-CLICK about AB 352 went through fine (THANKS!) When AB 2714 moved from Senate Public Safety to Appropriations, I switched the ONE-CLICK to that committee, but forgot to "enable" the committee in the mail server. So, a few of your excellent pro-gun emails were returned with that message. (The block keeps people from lobbying committees about non-gun issues.)

It's been fixed now for several days and I really apologize for temporarily causing your good effort to not be utilized. If you still have your message, please re-submit it - it will work now.
http://calnra.com/legs.shtml?summary=ab2714

My whole focus is to try to maximize every gun-owner contribution and hate when my dumb mistake wastes anyone's time. It's no excuse, but sometimes I get swamped (we could use a few more "geek" volunteers in the NRA MC system.)

Mike

[arfan66]

Sent emails to Gov. Schwarzenegger and Sen. Debora Ortiz and Assemblyman Nakanishi (he's on the Assembly Appropriations Committee). Hope it isn't too late......

[CGPiper]

AB2714 was amended on June 21st and the amendments look much friendlier than the previous version. How's it look to everyone else??

[phish]

I read LaSuer's changes in this month's Firing Line as well. It looks okay on the surface to me.

Does this mean that carrier's are now on the hook to make sure that the actual person who ordered ammo actually have to sign for it?

I'm worried that this will just open the door for vendors to just go the way of Sportsman's Guide. :mad:

LaSuer does get credit for making this bill more favorable for us, but it would be better if this bill would just go away.

[Creeping Incrementalism]

Does this mean that carrier's are now on the hook to make sure that the actual person who ordered ammo actually have to sign for it?

Actually having to sign for this personally is a major PITA when it comes to ordering ammo. Yes, it's not terrible as it was before, but it still seriously sucks and should be opposed.

[Grakken]

I'd like to point out an error in CRPA's recommended action.


This may seem like a good idea, but it's "last century" style lobbying tactics - in all likelihood, your state senator is probably NOT on the Senate Public Safety Committee - where we have to fight this bill first. There only 7 senators on that committee...
http://calnra.com/legs/senpubsafety.shtml


Mike

Hi Mike, I appreciate all your efforts and will be looking into donating some of my time when i can to the local NRA. Anyways I noticed that 2 of the Gun Grabbers on the link you provided for the comitee dont have an email adresss? Do you have them so I can add them to my "group" email list? or are they chicken <expletive> and simply dont list one?

[blacklisted]

This was just brought up in the Senate...

19-16

[Joe]

^^ what does that mean?

[chiefcrash]

it passed in the assembly too, so on to the governator...

edit: oops, wrong thread. 2714 does not equal 2728...

[Hunter]

2714 up for vote now!!

[MaxQ]

I think 2714 was back in the Assembly for concurrence.

First, Haynes wanted it moved to Judiciary, then he withdrew his motion. Torrico and La Suer spoke, it then went to a vote, 41-29(?) for concurrence with the Senate amendments.

[Hunter]

With all of the last minute vote changes..... after the session was closed... I counted only 39 Ayes for 2714.....Defeated!

[hoffmang]

What I understand the rules to be that they can't change their votes if it impacts the outcome. I think Ab 2714 has passed.