Why aren't Calif. politicians afraid of us like national ones are of the NRA?

[Uxi]

Heh, interesting article how the Democrats coopted the redistricting process:

http://www.propublica.org/article/how-democrats-fooled-californias-redistricting-commission

[Gray Peterson]

That's an interesting bit of information. I don't know many Libertarians and those that I do aren't as obviously anti-Democrat so I didn't assume that that was the case here.

Regardless of which party people are a part of it does not invalidate my point about mutual respect and the suggestion to tone down the comments about the "Dems and their liberal agenda."

I have many pro-gun Democrat friends and relatives that would NEVER join the NRA because of the overall attitude about Democrats.

NRA will support a Democrat if they are actually pro-gun and have some chance of winning a particular district (preserving their win/loss ratio).

[Gray Peterson]

Just to translate the party registration numbers:

44 percent are Democrats, 31 percent are Republicans, 20 percent are DTS (decline to state).

[sholling]

Something else that was mentioned and is very true is term limits killed us. No one is in office long enough to be wooed to our side. Combine that with California's anti-free speech campaign finance laws and you have a situation when party bosses control the purse strings and finance the most left wing candidates that they can find.

Campaign finance laws need to be struck and term limits ended if we want the gun grabbing to end.

[Dreaded Claymore]

Just to translate the party registration numbers:

44 percent are Democrats, 31 percent are Republicans, 20 percent are DTS (decline to state).

Are these numbers for all of California, or for California NRA members?

[readysetgo]

Being called a Debbie Downer usually means that the audience didn't like the facts...

-Brandon

Ugh... precisely because I'm not "satisfied" with the "facts". If I liked the facts of our situation I'd be advocating for high speed rail instead or better yet put no effort into anything. If you're saying the fact is we can't answer the OP's question and put political fear into our politicians, I disagree and refuse to have that attitude, and that is exactly what it is an attitude, no fact required.

[wildhawker]

Steve,

I'm entirely ready to hear about how wrong I am and my "attitude" is the issue.

Please, explain it to me.

-Brandon

[Uxi]

Something else that was mentioned and is very true is term limits killed us. No one is in office long enough to be wooed to our side. Combine that with California's anti-free speech campaign finance laws and you have a situation when party bosses control the purse strings and finance the most left wing candidates that they can find.

Campaign finance laws need to be struck and term limits ended if we want the gun grabbing to end.

The larger question is if we want California to be a Republic served by citizens or if we want a pure Democracy with a perpetual Aristocratic/Elected-class to go with the Knighthood of LEO Alpha-bet Soup Agencies that can bear arms. Term limits are just fighting a symptom of a larger problem trying to deal with the latter.

[huntercf]

How about this, why don't CG, CRPA and local NRA, along with the other shooting/hunting organizations form a Super Association for CA?
United We Stand, Divided We Fall!

[wildhawker]

To do *what* with *what money*?

-Brandon

[Wherryj]

I agree with nearly every comment above except the term limits .

I the past we had folks who could poisen a democrat anti gun bill by useing procedural tricks to block lots of bad gun laws .UNFORTUNATELY they are gone because of term limits. (Dick Mountjoy )for one .

Further before cali voters were tricked into term limits ,enough pressure could be placed ,by enough people and he would find his job more important than the agenda .
Roberti-Roos were NOT termed out! They were taken out !

Because of term limits the anti's have no threat of losing their job . attitude is so what IM termed anyway .

Those in favor of forced term limits . Please answer , Hows that working out for you ?

Lets face it cali does not have a gun culture ,many have moved to other states and we are left with so many uneducated gun owners who fall for anything ,including the idea state govt is better by kicking out legislators based on how long they have been in.

I'm in favor of term limits, but the Devil is in the details. The problem is giving the politicians ANY terms. NO terms for politicians! They can do less damage that way.

[readysetgo]

Steve,

I'm entirely ready to hear about how wrong I am and my "attitude" is the issue.

Please, explain it to me.

-Brandon

Me? I'm not Steve btw.

Pit myself against the legendary wildhawker of Calguns fame? Now that would be a losing battle, I surrender!
Seriously, I'm not trying to personalize but it feels like you are, maybe I'm wrong about that, dunno.

My original post was just trying to answer the OP's question of what should we do. After dozens of replies in the negative (we can't win), I offered my opinion. bweise seemed to disagree on certain points and clarified others. I did take a slight dig at the end there to what I feel are naysayers. Difference between realist and downer? Is that the question? We could go at it all night (I won't, it's off topic). I'll only offer a quote I try to adhere to:

"Positive thinking won't let you do anything, but it will let you do everything, better than negative thinking will" -Zig Ziglar

The only thing I'd like to prove wrong is that "Californian politicians will not fear us politically, ever, end of discussion". Call me a fool and be done with it if that's your approach.

Meanwhile I've supported other efforts you're involved in that you ask for support because I agree with the goal and remain optimistic. Candidly, it feels like you're shaking my hand and slapping me with the other.

Would you please tell me though, if you'd agree with my original assumption about "recruit and donate"?

[Gray Peterson]

Are these numbers for all of California, or for California NRA members?

All voters

[sholling]

What? The only reason David Roberti wasn't President Pro Tem longer than 1981-1993 was because he was termed out by Prop 140 which established the Term Limits in 1990. He did lose the reelection, but won the NRA-inspired Recall easily. Lockyer wouldn't have been termed out in 1997, either and would have remained Senate leader for as long as he wanted it. Don Perata was also termed out and would probably still be leader of the Senate, as well, if he wasn't termed out.

Lets not forget that gun control was popular with the country back then. If you'll remember even the Elmer Fudds within the shooting community supported bans on mean looking guns and full cap magazines. It didn't interfere with their bolt action hunting rifles, over-under shotguns, or their revolvers so they were fine with banning anything that didn't effect them as long as they could still hunt. In Sacramento and DC nearly all of the Democrats and a big chunk of RINO party were pro gun control because there was public support for it. Even some so called "conservative" pundits were for bans.

Times have changed and outside of the major population centers within California, Illinois, and New York (and the mainstream media) there isn't any public support for gun control worth mentioning. Term limits and campaign finance control have done nothing but give us political machine politics. The party bosses decide who will run where and sprinkle money on them and no candidate need fear the NRA or businesses because the power lay with the party bosses and unions and the lefty media. The party boss appointed representatives spend their two terms after which the party bosses to anoint them to a new office. They don't have to care about bankrupting the state or the wrath of the NRA because they won't be around that long.

The larger question is if we want California to be a Republic served by citizens or if we want a pure Democracy with a perpetual Aristocratic/Elected-class to go with the Knighthood of LEO Alpha-bet Soup Agencies that can bear arms. Term limits are just fighting a symptom of a larger problem trying to deal with the latter.

The answer isn't term limits or limits on political speech, the answer is going back to a part time legislature that is so poorly paid that morons and serial failures can't afford to take the job. Limit them to 4 uncompensated weeks every 2 years to approve a fully balanced budget and they won't have time or incentive to do mischief.

[wildhawker]

Sorry, my mistake on the name. That's what I get for Posting While On the Phone With An Insurance Company.

I don't think anyone said we can't win. I certainly did not. I am saying that the overly-simplistic "PAC = win" and "org = win" theory has no basis in real data, or reality for that matter.

There is much to be said for Volume (organized constituents, members), Capacity (leadership, resources [including/especially funding]), and Engagement (grassroots dedication, variable energy investment potential). However, Outcomes do not naturally follow these; it takes much more than that to win. For example, if you gave me the keys to a real racecar, I would be lucky to make it around the track in one piece. No one would care. I am not a race car driver. However, a race car in the hands of a real driver can lead to weekend-long celebrations of positive competition, displays of skill, and millions of people being engaged at the track and at home.

This is a multi-generational issue and the win for our cause will follow the culture curve. We have to 'deal with' uncomfortable political positioning in the meantime. See, e.g. NRA in California; maintenance and doing the best they can to block new laws is the name of that game. Mind you, that is $250Mil/year expenditures NRA, not a minor-league startup with unreliable small-ticket funding.

Notwithstanding that it makes some people "feel" better, throwing good money after bad is not how we're going to maximize our efficiency or deliverables. This is an outcome-oriented game (unless you're playing the wrong one).

-Brandon

Me? I'm not Steve btw.

Pit myself against the legendary wildhawker of Calguns fame? Now that would be a losing battle, I surrender!
Seriously, I'm not trying to personalize but it feels like you are, maybe I'm wrong about that, dunno.

My original post was just trying to answer the OP's question of what should we do. After dozens of replies in the negative (we can't win), I offered my opinion. bweise seemed to disagree on certain points and clarified others. I did take a slight dig at the end there to what I feel are naysayers. Difference between realist and downer? Is that the question? We could go at it all night (I won't, it's off topic). I'll only offer a quote I try to adhere to:

"Positive thinking won't let you do anything, but it will let you do everything, better than negative thinking will" -Zig Ziglar

The only thing I'd like to prove wrong is that "Californian politicians will not fear us politically, ever, end of discussion". Call me a fool and be done with it if that's your approach.

Meanwhile I've supported other efforts you're involved in that you ask for support because I agree with the goal and remain optimistic. Candidly, it feels like you're shaking my hand and slapping me with the other.

Would you please tell me though, if you'd agree with my original assumption about "recruit and donate"?