Reply from The Governator regarding AB 352 and SB 357

[dasmi]

Same story, I emailed him urging opposition to these two bills, and this is the reply.
He'll be getting a phone call and handwritten letter when the veto deadline gets closer.

Thank you for emailing Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger regarding AB 352 and SB 357. The Governor appreciates you voicing your opinions on proposed legislation affecting our State.

The Governor does not take a position on legislation until a final bill has reached his desk. The Legislature has until September 9, 2005 to pass legislation and the Governor has until October 9, 2005 to sign or veto proposed bills. Should the Governor take action on this bill, the Governor's Office will notify you at that time.

You may continue to follow this and any other bill before the State Legislature at the Official California Legislative Website: www.leginfo.ca.gov. You may also read any legislative messages from the Governor at his website: www.governor.ca.gov.

Again, the Governor appreciates your interest in California's future. An informed and engaged citizenry is important to effective government in our State.

Sincerely,


Office of Constituent Affairs

 

[Standing Wolf]

An informed and engaged citizenry is important to effective government in our State.

Frankly, I think the informed, engaged citizens should take back the government of the People's Republic of California.

I didn't say I'm holding my breath while waiting for them to do so.

 

[PrudentGT]

The Governor does not take a position on legislation until a final bill has reached his desk.

I can't think of any examples to the contrary, but I'm almost certain this is not the case, especially if it's a hotbutton issue that helps the governor maintain his 'friend of the common man, crusader for reform' image. Someone's been reading the 'if you're going to tell a lie, tell a *big* one' playbook...

 

[MrTuffPaws]

Should we start a pool to see if he signs one, both, or neither?

IMO, he will sign both. I just have a gut feeling about it, and after the 50 cal ban, he will sign both.

If he doesn't, then I swear, monkeys will fly out of my butt.

Anyone know the current status of the bills?

 

[DRZinn]

Translation: I can't defend my position in favor of both of these bills or my plans to sign them, so I'll protect myself from criticism by not admitting that I'm in favor until I've signed them and it's too late.

 

[Crosshair]

I'm hoping he is doing the same thing Bush did with the AWB. Say you support it, but do nothing to get it renewed. This case is different though cause there is a good chance this MIGHT get to his desk. Kali gun owners need to get letters flying off to the govenator ASAP. Right now it looks like he is "Testing the wind" right now.

 

[Malone LaVeigh]

My letter to my Assemblyclone:

Dear Ms Wolk,

I have just been made aware of the introduction of AB 352 (Koretz). As a Davisite who enjoys handgun shooting for sport and recreation, and who values handguns as part of my personal and family defense, I find this bill onerous and disturbing. It would mandate a highly dubious technology, making most handguns illegal. Even with grandfather language, it would make entry to this sport unnecessarily difficult and expensive. The vast majority of handgun owners are law-abiding, responsible citizens who support reasonable controls which keep firearms out of the hands of criminals. Punishing us for the misdeeds of a few will not decrease crime or win you any friends in efforts to actually improve the lives of Californians.

Please oppose this bill. I anticipate hearing your position.

Sincerely,

XXX

Hope it helps, but not holding my breath.

 

[perry1963]

Anyone know the current status of the bills?

I think both AB352 and SB357 are awaiting vote by the safety commity and they have until June 28.

 

[Malone LaVeigh]

With a little more time and reflection, I think I did a better job on my message to my Senate creature:

Dear Sen. Machado:

I have just been made aware of the introduction of SB 357 (Dunn). As a Davisite who enjoys handgun shooting for sport and recreation, and who values handguns as part of my personal and family protection, I find this bill onerous and disturbing. The vast majority of handgun owners are law-abiding, responsible citizens who support reasonable controls that already punish criminals for the use of firearms and make it illegal for criminals and other dangerous people to possess firearms. Placing unnecessary, costly burdens like this on manufacturers and consumers will be seen as gratuitiously punitive by most firearms owners. Punishing us for the misdeeds of a few will not decrease crime or win you any friends in your efforts to actually improve the lives of Californians.

Please oppose this bill. I anticipate hearing your position.

Sincerely,

XXX

 

[Zundfolge]

Translation: I can't defend my position in favor of both of these bills or my plans to sign them, so I'll protect myself from criticism by not admitting that I'm in favor until I've signed them and it's too late.

Keep in mind this is California we're talking about so it could just as easily be:

Translation: I can't defend my position in opposition of both of these bills or my plans to veto them, so I'll protect myself from criticism by not admitting that I'm opposed until I've vetoed them and it's too late.


I won't be surprised if he vetoes them ... or signs them.

 

[George S.]

The reply you received simply means that some junior staffer in OCA has read your e-mail and responded in accordance with whatever policy is in effect in the Governor's office. The text is probably a canned response and only edited for the bill numbers and dates

You can bet that Gov Schwarzenegger never read it, much less saw it. While it says he does not take an "official" stance on any legislation, you can bet he is fully aware of the bills and has probably had at least one briefing on them.

Whether or not he chooses to support or oppose them will depend on the next round of hearings and any possible floor vote that comes up in either house.

While I find both interesting and troubling, is there is no real mention of who is going to pay for this boondoggle ( DUH! the people of CA will pay through new taxes or cuts in other services) and the fact that the ammo makers have not really publicly announced their position. One has to believe that Winchester, Remington, and others stand to lose a substantial amount of sales (which means less profit) and they should be saying something at this point. I would also assume that the ammo makers have hired lobbyists to help see this azzinine thing voted down.

Has anyone across any statements from ammomakers regarding what impact this legislation could have?

 

[heypete]

SAAMI (which has as its members nearly all the big gun and ammo manufacturers and distributors in the US) has several informational pages on their site:

http://www.saami.org/

Useful to point out to legislators.