California Gun Rights Act - proposed CA Const. amendment gathering signatures

[tincankilla]

I'm still a newbie to California, but saw this today:

http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2013/12/27/california-gun-rights-advocates-want-state-constitutional-amendment/

Not encouraging that he makes the mag/clip error, but hey, at least he's on our side. that said, does anyone know this group's track record? the NRA's role? as for landscape, i'm sure we all have opinions on likelihood of passage, etc, but do any of you with substantive political experience know enough to chime in?

[Jeff213]

The idiot voters in this state would never approve right to carry in this state.

[Librarian]

http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/ballot-measures/cleared-for-circulation.htm#1619

https://oag.ca.gov/system/files/init...hts%29%29.pdf?)

[CCWFacts]

That's awesome but how can it pass? It can't. If it could pass, we probably wouldn't need it.

[CitaDeL]

I might be prejudging this person, but some part of me suspects that they might belong to the same crowd that assumes that if you do not support, or are dismissive of their effort, that you must be anti-gun.

That being said- I wouldn't approve of restrictions on handguns reserved only for 21+ or restrictions on concealed carry or the lead ammo ban.

And I doubt that the amendment would do an end run on CBS v Block...

[ldsnet]

With the wording on (5) I would NOT sign it. They spell out AW protection in (13) but don't hammer "just cause" and "shall issue" for CCW liceses.

I would also like to see a limited Open carry protection in there.

Not that it matters - we would need Bloomberg's checkbook to get it to a vote and enough coverage to get even a chance to get it to pass (do you have $50,000,000 to loan us for the campaign?)

[Calgunner739]

With the wording on (5) I would NOT sign it. They spell out AW protection in (13) but don't hammer "just cause" and "shall issue" for CCW liceses.

I would also like to see a limited Open carry protection in there.

Not that it matters - we would need Bloomberg's checkbook to get it to a vote and enough coverage to get even a chance to get it to pass (do you have $50,000,000 to loan us for the campaign?)

Yes, it needs clarification on #5.

[CWDraco]

With the wording on (5) I would NOT sign it. They spell out AW protection in (13) but don't hammer "just cause" and "shall issue" for CCW liceses.

I would also like to see a limited Open carry protection in there.

Not that it matters - we would need Bloomberg's checkbook to get it to a vote and enough coverage to get even a chance to get it to pass (do you have $50,000,000 to loan us for the campaign?)

Yes, it needs clarification on #5.

We live under #5 right now and look where it got us.

[cdtx2001]

Hmm, that's all nice I guess but it won't pass, not while the patients run the asylum.

[zhyla]

They should save this kind of crap for April fools.

[microwaveguy]

The best I can see out of this is raising awareness for the non-gun people in this state.......... but the chance of this passing is statically close to zero even if they did manage to get it on the ballot.

[boukca]

Thank you for sharing this link.

[Ford8N]

This has been tried before.

[HogKiller]

This has been tried before.

If at first you don't succeed, try try again. That's why they invented 30 round magazines.

[Hoologan]

SEC 32 a 1 says the state may not pass any laws that infringe on the citizen's right to keep and bear arms per the 2nd Amendment, but then goes on to outline laws that infringe on those rights in the subsequent twelve sections. ?