HOW TO WIN ELECTIONS - FOR OUR CIVIL RIGHTS - IN 2012!! (Part One)

[swilson]

Yes, and I think in CA, the easiest way to tell if a politician is brave and forward thinking is whether they support our carry rights.

I've been accused of being a one issue voter before for my concern of candidates' stance on the 2nd Amendment, but when a politician is pro-gun it says a lot about their trust for the population to make responsible choices.

Trust, or rather a lack thereof, is an important idea that I believe is one of the three main reasons that the government has grown so large and oppressive (the other two are greed and malice). Because politicians largely feel that the polulation doesn't make good choices in many aspects of everyday life, they pass legislation and create agencies and programs to corral us in the "correct" direction. Occasionally this is a good thing because it keeps your neighbor from opening a medical waste depository next door, however often times this backfires and leads to a violation of liberty, a hungry bureaucracy, anger, division, and less trust from all sides.

If a politician doesn't trust me enough to make choices about my own personal safety, then they have absolutely no business in public office.

[OleCuss]

.
.
.
Can you show some survey statistics that shows CA voters have all of a sudden made a 180 and care about gun regulations -- let alone loosening them? Last time I checked voters here are disinterested at best.

I don't think anyone can say that there has been a 180 degree turn on anything. What I don't think has been exploited, however, is that there is a sort of almost counter-culture anti-big undercurrent in California. People seem to me to like the concept of small government and small business while not liking the general idea of big government and big business.

Don't get me wrong, they vote for big-government stuff, but if you ask them if they want a government which is big and is running their lives and such - they profess not to like that.

But in California, no one exploits that.

The Democrat bigwigs are tied to the unions and the unions do want big government and big business - so they won't tout small.

The Republican bigwigs want to be Democrats so they won't push smallness too much either. And because the national Republican party doesn't think there is a prayer of winning in California they don't spend any money here.

Net effect is that the only significant voices in politics in California are not promoting a mode of thought which is friendly to our civil rights.

The way to fix that is for us all to get involved in politics. Show up, volunteer, donate, vote, or whatever for those who are more friendly to our civil rights than is their opponent. This could begin to shift the political situation.

And if pro-RKBAers donated $30 million to CRPA, we'd likely be telling Sacramento how they are going to vote.

Looking at the last couple years of legislation my view is we're barely staying afloat in the legislature. All the real action is in court. Sure, judges are elected officials too, and if you can point at which judges are pro-gun I'll gladly vote for them. I haven't had good success determining a judicial candidates 2A-ness.

Not sure we're doing all that badly in the legislature. We really had more strategic positives out of the last session than negatives. Oh, anti-RKBA legislation may have predominated, but that doesn't mean we won't exploit what happened to further our rights in court. Remember that the legislature gave a huge boost to the Peruta case by passing the UOC ban?



We're actually making decent progress in this state. And I don't think California is quite as leftist as many think - a bit of investment of political energy and money might pay off far better than conventional wisdom would suggest.

[ArtP88]

I appreciate your motivation and devotion to this cause. But no matter how many times you state that you know what you're talking about... I just think this is completely disconnected from reality.

Can you show some survey statistics that shows CA voters have all of a sudden made a 180 and care about gun regulations -- let alone loosening them? Last time I checked voters here are disinterested at best.

Looking at the last couple years of legislation my view is we're barely staying afloat in the legislature. All the real action is in court. Sure, judges are elected officials too, and if you can point at which judges are pro-gun I'll gladly vote for them. I haven't had good success determining a judicial candidates 2A-ness.

I completely agree with this ^^ and would like to add to it...

IMHO the reality is, any entity elevating a secondary political issue (2A for example) to the forefront, with little regard for primary political issues (the economy for example) is viewed by the masses as insane with a questionable agenda. Simply put, people don't trust politicians who champion causes which aren't mainstream, which is why some politicians have a hard time defining their stance on issues or raising issues that aren't fashionable.

Most people won't trust any political alliance unless it speaks to issues that affect the majority, such as the economy. Odds are your neighbor doesn't care about your gun rights and in fact probably believes your revolver belongs in your nightstand and the only place for your rifle is on a far away hunt. Most people won't identify with our cause.

For the foreseeable future, 2A rights will never be a cause the majority of Californian's will back. I think the only realistic way to protect the rights of the minority (those passionate about 2A) is through court challenges that seek to uphold the constitution.

[OleCuss]

I'd be really interested in seeing how Ron Paul polls here in California.

I suspect (but do not know) that if Ron Paul were the Republican nominee and spent significant money in this state - he could win the California vote. Ron Paul is sort of an anti- big government guy.

If the Republicans adopted a Libertarian stance and really pushed the fiscal and small-government/small-business agenda here in California we just might discover the California voter is not all that leftist. So far they've not had much of a chance to make that clear because the alternative to the Democrat frequently looks like a loon or is trying to look like a Democrat.

If you are a Republican trying to look like a Democrat, I may as well vote for the Democrat.

[NotEnufGarage]

In my opinion, one of the least investigated and reported aspect of elections are the stands and leanings of judges that are up for re-election. Most every ballot I've ever seen lists only their names and whether or not they are an incumbent. No party affiliation is usually listed and the voter information pamplets are glaringly silent on their attitudes and opinions.

It would be extremely helpful if the legal team could produce a list of all judges in the state that are up for re-election each year and where they stand on the issues. This would then provide some input for those of us who know that many of them do not have our best interest at heart so we could vote out the most egregious violators of our civil rights.

Or would this be too large of a project to undertake?

[OleCuss]

There was a list similar to what you are looking for at the last election. I think it was put out by the Tea Party.

[oaklander]

I appreciate your motivation and devotion to this cause. But no matter how many times you state that you know what you're talking about... I just think this is completely disconnected from reality.

Can you show some survey statistics that shows CA voters have all of a sudden made a 180 and care about gun regulations -- let alone loosening them? Last time I checked voters here are disinterested at best.

Looking at the last couple years of legislation my view is we're barely staying afloat in the legislature. All the real action is in court. Sure, judges are elected officials too, and if you can point at which judges are pro-gun I'll gladly vote for them. I haven't had good success determining a judicial candidates 2A-ness.

If you just talk to enough people over time, and do a lot of free work for folks, and don't step on toes, then people let you help them on various projects. Whatever legislation you see is sometimes not even anti-gun, and there are some other subtler things that are happening.

Just talk to the folks who operate businesses that operate in our economic sector: business is booming, and that IS because we are winning back our rights. That is not speculation.

But yes, go to any polling website, and look at the trends on gun control. Even CA is in line with the country. Except for small pockets of lunacy. And those are dimishing.

ALSO, there is another thing that you are missing:

The future is something that the people control. We run our government, and I am saying that as someone who grew up in a trailer park, and now hangs out with Mayors, and gets asked to speak to folks about Civil Rights. If one person can do something small, a bunch of people can do something large.

AND WE HAVE!

AND WE ARE!


Sent from my brain, to yours. . .

[oaklander]

Here is my suggestion....if you care about gun rights, vote in a state that respects them....Never happen in CA this state is too far gone with progressives and welfare people making up the majority of the electorate, CA will never change until it is backed into a corner and forced to change. How that happens is up to debate...I just don't think it will be through the ballot box.

It is always both. One or the other ALONE will never work. Cases won't "stick" if later administrations reject them.

SO, you must ALWAYS HAVE POLITICAL CHANGE WITH ANY MOVEMENT.

We have the manpower now to start to force change in elections. That is all I am saying. This is not to the exclusion of litigation. It is just another nail. And it is a nail that SUPPORTS THE LITIGATION.

Geez, just look at my sig line.

;-)


Sent from my brain, to yours. . .

[zhyla]

Just talk to the folks who operate businesses that operate in our economic sector: business is booming, and that IS because we are winning back our rights. That is not speculation.

Speculation? That's just gibberish. Gun sales are booming across the country, it's got nothing to do with "winning back our rights". By the way, almost nothing has changed legally in California since 2000. The OLL hacks are great and I appreciate them, but we're still selling the same DOJ-approved handguns with 10 round magazines with a waiting period and 1 in 30 rule. People buy guns when the economy tanks, that's just what we do.

But yes, go to any polling website, and look at the trends on gun control. Even CA is in line with the country. Except for small pockets of lunacy. And those are dimishing.

Can you point us at some of those polls? That would be really encouraging if true. I was not able to find any -- I'm not up on polling websites.

Regardless, you have some unfounded optimism if you're seriously claiming we'll win any election we put our hand to. We're a minority in this state and that's why we win in court but lose everywhere else.

[Arisaka]

^^ Gun owners are a minority in California? Or are the anti-gunners more vocal and powerful?

[zhyla]

^^ Gun owners are a minority in California?

We're a minority, according to this 3-year-old data: http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/a.../t-197866.html

Or are the anti-gunners more vocal and powerful?

You're not counting right. There are gun owners (21% as of 2008), most of whom are presumably pro-gun, anti-gunners (probably 20%? no idea), and regular folk who don't own guns and don't care.

It's that gun agnostic group that make 2A issues semi-irrelevant in elections here. Which is why when Oaklander says things like we're going to win any election we put our hand to he's just out in the weeds, it doesn't work that way. I'm not saying it's pointless, just trying to be realistic.

The good news is people are buying guns like no tomorrow, so our ranks are growing.

[oaklander]

Normally, I don't argue numbers with people, but you are kind of irritating.

Have fun:

http://www.pollingreport.com/guns.htm

Note the trends are not flattening out.

WHY would you come in and spread FUD?

I am one of the people who does the work, and I am TELLING you that you are wrong. How COULD you know more than me???

It is not possible.

And why would I lie to you? I have no reason to lie about anything, the truth is wonderful. . .

We're a minority, according to this 3-year-old data: http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/a.../t-197866.html



You're not counting right. There are gun owners (21% as of 2008), most of whom are presumably pro-gun, anti-gunners (probably 20%? no idea), and regular folk who don't own guns and don't care.

It's that gun agnostic group that make 2A issues semi-irrelevant in elections here. Which is why when Oaklander says things like we're going to win any election we put our hand to he's just out in the weeds, it doesn't work that way. I'm not saying it's pointless, just trying to be realistic.

The good news is people are buying guns like no tomorrow, so our ranks are growing.

Why do you think the democrats LOST both houses after 1994? That was payback for the AWB.

Why do you think the AWB was NOT renewed in 2004?

Because politicians remembered 1994. . .

Again, how can you know more than me? It just is not possible. But I don't know, since you are anonymous. You could be a Brady troll, for all we know.

[Uxi]

That's not why they lost EVERY race in both houses. Certainly some in some swing States, but there's a reason Boxer and Feinstein are still on board the coocoo train, just as the Senators from a red State know they can oppose it unilaterally.

[oaklander]

By the way, almost nothing has changed legally in California since 2000.

My friends have put in thousands of unpaid hours on cases all over the state.

They have generally won them. We have stopped DEAD in their tracks, numerous anti-gun laws, both before, and after they have been passed. I know this because I have done this, as part of our team.

We prevented many more from even being considered. . .

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

Why would you say something that is not true???

WHAT is your agenda here, and how do you form your conclusions? On WHAT do you base your conclusions?

Blogs?

USA Today?

Scribbles on the bathroom wall?

What?

Other than not understanding politics and law, you seem to have a good grasp of a subject that is all politics and law. In other words, you have the knowledge of a fly. The civil rights movement is a Mack Truck, traveling at 100 miles per hour, and you are just kind of buzzing around lazily in your self-imposed ignorance.

Please buzz off.

[Uxi]

Right. We woudln't have any OLL's and doubtful we'd have many daring rebuild kits. There'd be a bunch more counties like LA on LTC though not a huge proportion more of California's citizens who are mostly in the Bay area and LA by the numbers.