Repealing CA Gun Laws with a Vote?

[CaliforniaLiberal]

Are you ASSuming that's the point I'm trying to make? I can see some people on here don't see what I'm trying to get at.

As liberal as California is, the Marijuana law should of passed.

Prop 8 wasn't popular, legal, etc but yet it still managed to squeak by, gun rights aren't very popular, end result? See where this is going?

If prop 8 passed and wasn't popular why couldn't a vote on gun rights pass?


Atleast somebody here gets it.

I like this idea very much. How can we get started?

Prop 8 passed with Millions and Millions of Dollars. 44 Million For, 39 Million Against

http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Prop-8-battle-draws-in-46-million-3266288.php

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-moneymap,0,2198220.htmlstory

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_8

Thousands of volunteers manning the phone banks, going door to door, Ministers in churches telling their congregations that God wanted them to vote for Prop 8.


Where you going to come up with even 1% of that kind of money?

I am with you in spirit. I like this idea very much too. I would love to see something like this pass in California. A big ol magic wand to take away all the crap anti-gun laws that infringe on the 2nd Amendment.

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=156804

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/archive/index.php/t-384753.html

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/archive/index.php/t-221483.html

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?p=10652160

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/archive/index.php/t-599487.html

Use the "CGN Google Search" button at the top of the page. I put in "Proposition" and "Initiative"

[Librarian]

There's a thread proponents need to read - http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...d.php?t=713867

Will you step up?

[G60]

Lets also petition that makes it illegal and punishible by imprisonment for a reporter or the medai to report anything but actual FACT.

What part of "congress shall make no law..." do you not understand?

[1EasyTarget]

What part of "congress shall make no law..." do you not understand?

I would not like to see the 1st Amendment trampled any more than I want to see the 2nd messed with. However, it would be nice to have at least some small percentage of reporters actually following the code of journalistic ethics.

http://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp

By the same token what part of "shall not be infringed" is unclear?

[spruce3311]

Let's play the gun grabbers game:

Petition for Common Sense Gun Regulation
1. California becomes a Constitutional Carry state.
2. Standard capacity magazines are legal (30 rds)
3. No more bullet buttons, lists, etc.


other names?
Petition to end gun violence (includes above plus new punishments for criminals, programs to help at risk youth)
Petition to Tell California Politician to FOAD (don't think it will get enough signatures, not enough immature college students out there).

[nick2788]

People keep saying our best chance is the "courts". "We will win and we are winning in the courts."

Really? Then how come we still have all these asinine laws still in place years later?

Why are we still limited to 10 rounds?

Why do we still have an AW ban?

Of course I understand that you have to take it one step at a time. But to think that the appellate or supreme court of CA is going to uphold the constitution is insanity at best.

I don't have any faith in the "JustUs" system.

[Librarian]

People keep saying our best chance is the "courts". "We will win and we are winning in the courts."

Really? Then how come we still have all these asinine laws still in place years later?

Why are we still limited to 10 rounds?

Why do we still have an AW ban?

Of course I understand that you have to take it one step at a time. But to think that the appellate or supreme court of CA is going to uphold the constitution is insanity at best.

I don't have any faith in the "JustUs" system.

Please read the bottom lines of my signature.

Federal courts are relatively sane - but they don't run on internet time. There has been a theoretical, court-supported right to private gun ownership for less than three years.

[rexblaine]

Lets just lawfully take over a small county government in CA and make it a shall issue CCW place for anyone with an address there? One form, $10 filing fee, PO Box, boom... Exemption from the CCW denial disease you get anywhere else.

[readysetgo]

You proponents aren't listening to Librarian! And you're putting the cart before the horse. Run a test, see if you would even come close to getting needed sigs for petition, THEN we can have this discussion.

If none of you would even attempt a test run, what does that say about the likelihood of this?

Until then, I call cough bullcrap cough wishfull thinking cough cough.

ETA: and btw, you NEED to be "terribly familiar with CA political system" to be successful with a massive undertaking such is being suggested here.

[nicki]

A frontal assault for gun rights won't work in this state.

It is highly unlikely we will get any openly "pro-gun" propositions passed in this state simply because the media and many politicians will be against it.

On any proposition, anywhere from 2 to 5 percent of people will automatically vote "NO" because it is easier not to rock the boat.

Now, if we run propositions that are protect "civil rights" such as "due process", "property rights", "equality under the law" etc. etc, we may have a chance.

A proposition requiring "cost benefit analysis" of all new laws, a stated objective and intent of the law and how the law proposes to actually do what is intended would create problems.

A proposition saying that all newly passed state laws will be subject to public commentary and strict scrutiny review if their are constitutional issues would be something that could protect our rights.

Personally I would like a 12 year sunset constitutional amendment so that all laws expire unless they are renewed. Of course with a 12 year sunset, few of the people who voted for the law the first time would be voting on it again.

Nicki

[Gray Peterson]

These same people voted for Prop 8 albeit barely. And they couldn't get the Marijuana law to pass a few years ago. So it's not impossible. Long shot? Sure, but not impossible. Besides, these gun laws are already in place anyways. I'm simply asking to have a vote to repeal them.

Your first mistake here is thinking that a victory for Prop 8 & a defeat of the Marijuana initiative are translatable to pro-gun victories at the ballot box. A review of the demographic data shows otherwise. Proposition 8 would not pass in a 2012 or even a 2014 ballot in California, not when the support for marriage access for gay couples in California currently stands at 61%.

The only reason a Prop 8 repeal hasn't been put on the ballot is because the groups that would spearhead that effort decided to give the Perry v. Hollingsworth case a chance at eliminating it.

The marijuana initiative defeat had to do with infighting by the "medical" users/sellers of pot versus the recreational users of it.

The age of the non-professional signature gather is over. You also need at least 50-60 million dollars in cash to be competitive. Better to spend 1 percent of that supporting organizations with court actions, which has more staying power.

[kalimus]

What part of "congress shall make no law..." do you not understand?

The 1st Amendment doesn't protect against libel and slander, which is "defamation". And in most laws, defamation is generally classified as false statements, which are lies.

Why could Congress not enforce the media outlets to report factual information? They couldn't do anything about opinion shows, or "interpreting" the news, but there sure as hell could be laws that require them to fact check their non-sense before disseminating it throughout the nation.

I don't care what their opinions are... I can just disagree. But when non-factual information is spoken and written... that's the real enemy. Given factual information about firearms (even with a negative opinion), some people could easily say "well that's b***sh**" just like we do. It might wake some voters up when they realize they are being lied to.

[DTOM CA!]

Maybe we should do what the other side does all the time. Propose a $1 tax on all purchases AW's in CA. Have it go to inner city youth violence. Then when they want to try and ban AW's you can say "You don't want to take away funding for our children do you. The Dems get taxes (only 1 dollar) and the low information voters see " tax AW's and help the poor kids" How can you not vote for that.

[CDFingers]

Laws made by people may be un made by people.

CDFingers

[HHGT]

I like this idea very much. How can we get started?

How can we get started?

First, I would say we could start by listing rights which have been eroded over the years and figuring out which ones we could adopt in the proposition to preserve those rights - along with gun rights of course. We could just go down the Bill of Rights and come up with examples. For example: 1st Amendment 'freedom of speech'. "Freedom of speech?" How can you have "free speech ZONES" when the entire country is a free speech zone? So that could be one example included in such a proposition along side restoring/preserving gun rights. I'm sure if we go through the Bill of Rights we can find several examples. Especially in the 4th & 5th Amendments.

Next, I would say we could all come up with examples on how the wording of the proposition should look like. Some people would say to hire a legal person. But that is not required and for what its worth, in my opinion, a proposition such as this would probably look better coming from a grassroots movement. After we are satisfied with the language then we follow the instructions I posted below.

http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/ballot-measures/initiative-guide.htm

Statewide Initiative Guide


Chapter I - The Initiative Process

Step One - Writing the Initiative Measure (Text of the Law)www.legislativecounsel.ca.gov





Step Two - Request for Title and Summary

I, __________, delcare under penalty of perjury that I am a citizen of
the United States, 18 years of age or older, and a resident of
__________county, California.

I, __________, acknowledge that it is a misdemeanor under state
law (Section 18650 of the Elections Code) to knowingly or willfully
allow the signatures on an initiative petition to be used for any
purpose other than qualification of the proposed measure for the
ballot. I certify that I will not knowingly or willfully allow the
signatures for this initiative to be used for any purpose other than
qualification of the measure for the ballot.

________________________
(Signature of Proponent)

Dated this ______ day of
____________, 20_____

Step Four – Circulating Petitions and Gathering Signatures

CalendarCirculation PeriodRequired Number of Signatures

In order to qualify for the ballot, the initiative measure must be signed by a specified number of registered voters depending on the type of initiative measure submitted.

Initiative Statute:Initiative Constitutional Amendment:http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/ball...tive-guide.htm