Handgun Ban passes in San Francisco

Status
Not open for further replies.
L

Len_in_Phoenix

Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2003
Messages
117
Location
Phoenix, AZ
San Fran Gun Ban - results coming in

The results from today's election are starting to come in. Unofficial early results are available at http://www.sfgov.org/site/uploadedfiles/election/results.htm

I find it fascinating that the results as of 8:04 pm PST show the total ballots cast at 9,907, yet 21,147 "yes" votes and 14,899 "no" have been recorded on Proposition H. :confused: Is this another example of "new math?"

Len in PHoenix
 
There are 744,000 residents in San Fransisco and only 36,000 votes counted?

It also says 0 out of 578 precincts counted.

What the heck is going on?
 
Len_in_Phoenix said:
The results from today's election are starting to come in. Unofficial early results are available at http://www.sfgov.org/site/uploadedfiles/election/results.htm

I find it fascinating that the results as of 8:04 pm PST show the total ballots cast at 9,907, yet 21,147 "yes" votes and 14,899 "no" have been recorded on Proposition H. :confused: Is this another example of "new math?"
Click to expand...

The 9,907 ballots seem to refer only to the first two positions: ASSESSOR/RECORDER and TREASURER.

Maybe someone from SanFran can shed some light on this?
 
Yes - Simply amazing, but not surprising

Firearm Ban
PROPOSITION H
Shall the City ban the manufacture, distribution, sale and transfer of firearms and ammunition within San Francisco, and ban City residents from possessing handguns within San Francisco?
Digest
by the Ballot Simplification Committee

THE WAY IT IS NOW: State law regulates the manufacture, distribution, transport, import, sale, purchase, possession and concealment of firearms within California. The City and County of San Francisco further regulates the sale of firearms and prohibits the sale or transfer of certain types of firearms within San Francisco.

THE PROPOSAL: Proposition H is an ordinance that would ban the manufacture, distribution, sale and transfer of firearms and ammunition within San Francisco.

Proposition H also would prohibit San Francisco residents from possessing handguns within San Francisco. An exception would allow residents to possess handguns if it is required for specific professional purposes. For example, San Francisco residents who are security guards, peace officers or active members of the U.S. armed forces would be permitted to possess handguns.

The Board of Supervisors would be required to enact penalties for violation of this ordinance.

Proposition H would take effect January 1, 2006. Until April 1, 2006, residents could surrender their handguns to any district station of the San Francisco Police Department or the San Francisco Sheriff's Department without penalty.

The Board of Supervisors could amend this ordinance by a two-thirds vote (66.7%) if it determined that its amendment would further reduce handgun violence.

A “YES” VOTE MEANS: If you vote “yes,” you want to ban the manufacture, distribution, sale and transfer of firearms and ammunition within San Francisco, and you want to prohibit—with limited exceptions—San Francisco residents from possessing handguns within San Francisco.

A “NO” VOTE MEANS: If you vote “no,” you do not want to ban the manufacture, distribution, sale and transfer of firearms and ammunition within San Francisco, and you do not want to prohibit—with limited exceptions—San Francisco residents from possessing handguns within San Francisco.
 
Len_in_Phoenix said:
I find it fascinating that the results as of 8:04 pm PST show the total ballots cast at 9,907, yet 21,147 "yes" votes and 14,899 "no" have been recorded on Proposition H. :confused: Is this another example of "new math?"
Click to expand...
You don't have to vote on every race and measure. Just sounds like many people didn't have an opinion on the subject.
 
Somehow I knew it was going to come up that way in SF.

I voted this morning and helped make Texas the 19th state to ban gay marriage in the state constitution. :D

Now the liberals have 2 good reasons to get the hell out of Texas and stay out. No gay marriage here and they can move to SF and enjoy their crime ridden guncontrol sodomy capital of the world.
 
They seem to be catching up with themselves....as of 9:19pm they show total ballots at 121,980 with 112,788 votes cast on Prop H. Votes for the ban are still ahead 64,676 (57.34%) to 48,112 (42.66%) against.

Len in PHoenix
 
The bittersweet part of this is that it can always be pointed to as a clear-cut case describing how Democrats + Registration can never be trusted.
 
Even if this measure is passed, it will ultimately be a win for us in the long run.

How? Simple. Assuming this survives the court system, in a few years we'll see that San Fran has turned into DC's younger brother.
 
The question is how will the SFPD know who has handguns or not? I don't know if the state is going to cooperate with them. Second, most of the FFLs in the city are now gone, if not all of them. So how they are going to know who has handguns or not is beyond me. The state might have this power, but I am guessing the city is going to have a harder time at it.
 
DOJ has DROS information saved don't they? FFL's retain documentation but I thought every time you DROS, handgun specifics are saved, along with rifle purchasers but no specifics.

I believe the DOJ has the addresses of every firarm purchased in California. If not, a simple door-to-door would suffice, commissar.
 
The results will trickle in all night...heck, for days in many cases, because absentee ballots mailed on election day but not recieved for a day or two are still legal.

That part is quite normal under any voting system. Also note that California allows absentee ballots for "general convenience" versus requiring a need (illness, travel, etc.) in other states. So California's absentee rates usually top 20% and can exceed 50%, although in SF it won't be that high.

Now as to rigging it: ummm...I would rather doubt this would be a rig-target. Vote rigging is dangerous. It wouldn't happen unless there's money involved or a major candidate. Just my opinion. I'm not saying it's impossible, just very unlikely.

The numbers so far sound about right for SF. This WILL get shot to pieces in the courts.
 
I'm inclined to avoid spending any money in SF ever again, no matter what it costs me.
 
Now let's talk repercussions.

If Cal-DOJ is stupid enough to give data out of the state databases to allow SFPD to perform the "roundup", it will permanently present an argument for zero registration.
 
wow, I can't believe it looks like it's going to pass. SF is really messed up. I'm really steaming about the Prop 77.

"I think, therefore I am republican."
 
it will pass..

no, it hurts us because DC hasn't put an end to the ban we are just looking at.

after all, if the people vote for it, how can you blame them? it's democracy, they wanted it. let them have it.
 
Its as good as passed, 90+ % precinct reporting in.

This is just the first step.

The Democrats will retake the Govenor position in the next election, Arnold is at an all time low.

They will use this power to pass a state-wide ban on handguns (Democrats should control all parts of Government after Arnold is voted out), I predict by end of the next Govenor's 4 year term, handguns will be banned STATEWIDE.

Good job San Francisco, you just handed the city keys to the criminals, and IMO have given all law abiding citizens a "bullseye" marked on them.
 
DelayedReaction said:
Even if this measure is passed, it will ultimately be a win for us in the long run.

How? Simple. Assuming this survives the court system, in a few years we'll see that San Fran has turned into DC's younger brother.
Click to expand...


So far it's not helping DC any, or Chicago for that matter. The possibility of the 2nd Amendment being recognized in both of those cities still looks very remote to me.
 
No, just because they voted for it doesn't mean they can have it. I'm sure many bigots out there would like to vote out freedom of religion, or speech. But we can't let them do that, it's against the constitution. Our forefathers have set up these undeniable rights. It's the basis of this country.

Warren Beatty is just retarded. He spews nothing but lies and passes them off as fact.

What really gets me about this state is nobody is really informed. Nobody does their own research, they get their information from smear ads. Why the heck do I care what Judge Wapner has to say about Prop 77? I found it laugh out loud funny that he was doing that commercial. And what's sad, is I'm sure people listened to him.

I'm completely disgusted with the uneducated people of California. :banghead:
 
Surefire said:
Its as good as passed, 90+ % precinct reporting in.

This is just the first step.

The Democrats will retake the Govenor position in the next election, Arnold is at an all time low.

They will use this power to pass a state-wide ban on handguns (Democrats should control all parts of Government after Arnold is voted out), I predict by end of the next Govenor's 4 year term, handguns will be banned STATEWIDE.

Good job San Francisco, you just handed the city keys to the criminals, and IMO have given all law abiding citizens a "bullseye" marked on them.
Click to expand...


If that's true, I'm out of this state.
But I don't think that would happen.
 
If Cal-DOJ is stupid enough to give data out of the state databases to allow SFPD to perform the "roundup", it will permanently present an argument for zero registration.
Click to expand...

Didn't that exact thing happen when they first called for registration, then the banning of, then the confiscation of, SKS rifles in California?

Or am I not understanding that incident correctly?
 
Justang said:
If that's true, I'm out of this state.
But I don't think that would happen.
Click to expand...

This state is getting worst each year IMO. Why are things going to change? IMO, California is a cesspool for the extreme left.

I agree on one thing, if a STATEWIDE ban is the next step, I will have nothing to do with this state anymore.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

T
  • Locked
San Francisco handgun ban shut down
Replies
7
Views
677
brighamr
B
D
  • Locked
Proposed San Francisco Gun Ban a Bad Idea
Replies
3
Views
404
Standing Wolf
S
D
  • Locked
San Francisco to Vote on Handgun Ban in Nov.
2
Replies
31
Views
988
Logistics
L
A
  • Locked
On San Francisco election results
Replies
3
Views
364
Henry Bowman
H
M
  • Locked
Appeals court rules San Francisco gun ban null and void.
2
Replies
46
Views
2K
alan
A
Back
Top