Timing on Arnold signing CA gun bills...

Status
Not open for further replies.
J

Jim March

Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2002
Messages
8,732
Location
SF Bay Area
There is an "enrollment process" for bills passed to the Governor's
desk...it's basically a paperwork issue, it involved a last check for
typos and other such. Nothing to worry about and this year it's a good
thing. The timing is controlled by the governor's staff. They're
making sure there are delays to take them past the GOP convention. In
other words, the bills won't be in a state where Cruz Bustamante can
possibly sign them during the window in which Arnold is in New York :).

So that's ONE worry we don't have to face.

It also means we've got about a week, week and a half tops to flood the
Governor's office with letters on AB50 (50BMG rifle ban), SB1152 (ammo
registration), SB1140 (child gun access beating-of-dead-horse) and
SB1733 (Cow Palace gun show ban).

Write:

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger
State Capitol Building
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: 916-445-2841
Fax: 916-445-4633
 
There is an "enrollment process" for bills passed to the Governor's
Click to expand...

I had kinda hoped that there was such a process to delay bills landing on his desk for a bit. I'll have to make some phone calls. Already emailed, but I'm not too keen on emails. Also I'll see if I can get some faxes through. I was also concerned about the bill granting driver's licenses to illegals - I could envision Bustmante signing it.
 
August 31, 2004
Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger
State Capitol Building
Sacramento, CA 95814

Dear Governor,

I am a former long time California resident, thirty voting and taxpaying years to be exact. I left California last year to become an Idaho resident. I figure I am taking with me about $6,000 to $10,000 in taxes to be spent somewhere besides California. I made this decision because my primary hobby, shooting, is being legislated into oblivion by the California legislature.

In the past fifteen years Sacramento has banned rifles and shotguns because they look “evilâ€, but are functionally the same as “good†rifles and shotguns. I defy you or anyone else to explain why an AR-15 or AK 47 series rifle is more dangerous than a M1A or a Mini-14.

Sacramento has also decided to get involved in the handgun safety business, mandating expensive safety testing for every model of handgun, even if the only difference between one model handgun being tested and another like model is barrel length. Again, I defy you to explain why barrel length makes a difference in handgun functioning and safety. The result of this law is many safe and high quality previously owned handguns cannot be taken in trade by dealers and resold. Again, this means the State Board of Equalization collects fewer sales taxes.

Governor, you have four more gun bills on your desk for your consideration when you return from the Republican National Convention: AB50, SB1152, SB1140, SB1733. These are petty bills, which will have little effect in reducing crime, enhancing safety, etc. However, three of them will probably have the unintended effect of reducing tax revenues.

AB50 bans .50 caliber rifles. Why? I suspect because the “girly-men†in the legislature fear one will assassinate them. The .50 caliber rifles that will be banned weigh close to 30 pounds, are not very concealable, and fire ammunition that costs $2-4 a round. These are hardly the weapons of choice of criminals and gangs. What will happen is another source of tax revenue will be denied. These rifles cost anywhere from $2,500 to $5,000 or more. Your aides can figure the sales tax.

SB1152 will institute ammunition sales registration. Said registration was tried before and found to be a worthless crime fighting measure. President Reagan signed the Firearms Owners Protection Act of 1986, which did away with ammunition sales registration. Again, chartering SB1152 may mean many small retail outlets that sell ammunition may decide it just isn’t worth the bother and will quit selling ammunition. Again, loss in sales tax revenue.

SB1733 will ban gun shows at the Cow Palace. Will this prevent crime? I doubt it. Will it result in reduced tax revenues? I think so.

Finally, if your aides haven’t brought it to your attention, if AB50 is chartered Ronnie Barrett, CEO of Barrett Firearms, has promised he will no longer sell his rifles to law enforcement agencies in California. Plus, he will not support and maintain the rifles already sold to law enforcement agencies in California. Can you imagine what will happen if this catches on with other firearms manufacturers? The state bans a certain make or model and that manufacturer cuts off sales to California agencies. Soon your Highway Patrol will be reduced to patrolling the highways and protecting state property with slingshots.

Please Governor, examine the crime fighting and safety utility of these bills and realize they are minimal and have no value in California. Veto all of them.




Bruce Stanton
P.O. Box 2246
Hayden, ID 83835-2246
 
try Gun Facts v3.3

Jim (and to all 2nd Amendment supporters),

If the Governor's office wants facts about the .50 caliber rifle and just plain hard firearm facts, try this website:

http://www.gunfacts.info/

Tell them to download and read or read online, pages 7 to 9.

Better yet, FAX and/or MAIL those pages (along with your letters requesting his veto) to the Governor's office!
 
In the past fifteen years Sacramento has banned rifles and shotguns because they look “evilâ€, but are functionally the same as “good†rifles and shotguns. I defy you or anyone else to explain why an AR-15 or AK 47 series rifle is more dangerous than a M1A or a Mini-14
Click to expand...

Careful... "Sir, we've looked into these rifles, and it's true... they're `assault rifles', just without the pistol grip! We need more laws! Oh God won't anyone think of the children???"
 
Careful... "Sir, we've looked into these rifles, and it's true... they're `assault rifles', just without the pistol grip! We need more laws! Oh God won't anyone think of the children???"
Click to expand...

I would rather that they try to do this, since it will impact more people and we will, hopefully, have more people more active.

-Pat
 
My letter to the Govenator went out in this afternoon's mail. Blemishes and all, thunked it up myownself. Wrote it out longhand but decided it was not legible. Typed it out and signed it with a little 'atta boy' at the bottom.
Dog is wise to me so I had to lick the envelope myself, she's no longer any help.

Going to Email copies to friends, neighbors and countrymen for their printing, signing and mailing.

You folks from California maybe interested in this link from the Calif. League of Cities. It's a list of bills they support or at least don't oppose under the public safety category. It's your City Council members doing this stuff.
http://ct2k2.capitoltrack.com/report.asp?rptid=U14706

Ready on the right.

Vick
 
I found some nice arguement letters for AB50 and SB1152, but haven't come across one for SB1140.

My emails, phone calls and faxes are in for the first two. If someone knows a decent SB1140 letter to use to base my letter from, I'd appreciate it.

We're going to visit my folks in Phoenix in mid-September. I'm hoping I can convince my wife to move. She hates the heat, but when I show her what selling our West LA house can buy in Phoenix, I think she'll have some second thoughts....
 
Dear Governor,

SB1140 is a classic case of "beating a dead horse". California's laws on child accessibility of firearms are already among the most stringent in the nation, and among the most confusing.

Florida's entire child access law runs one paragraph and less than 200 words. One of the main anti-self-defense groups (Legal Community Against Violence) has an online summary of our state's current laws in this area, running two dense pages.

SB1140 adds yet more penalties, and worse blurs the line between what is a loaded gun (dangerous weapon) and unloaded gun (paperweight) via an undefined "close proximity" standard.

In short, SB1140 is unnecessary and adds confusion to an area of law that has already been repeatedly altered over the years to a point where it's already a muddled mess.

Please veto SB1140.

Thank you,

concerned gunnie
 
Talking points on SB1140

This comes from the NRA Members Councils' website:

Here is the link.

Talking Points in Opposition to SB1140 (Scott)

CRIMINAL STORAGE - This bill would make criminal storage of a firearm of the 3rd degree punishable by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding 6 months, by a fine not exceeding $1,000, or by both that fine and imprisonment and a ten-year prohibition on possession of firearms.

General Issues:


It is hard to discern whether this bill is intended to address the serious problem of criminal negligence in the storage of firearms or to make it more difficult for law-abiding citizens to legally possess firearms and ammunition for legitimate purposes.

SB1140 should not be supported because it places additional burdens on the ability of the people to lawfully possess firearms and ammunition, absent a compelling reason for its enactment.

Legitimate sporting organizations oppose SB1140 because it is the wrong approach to a complex issue. Education is the proper solution.

Law Enforcement Issues:


California already has a negligent firearms storage law in place.

Laws concerning public endangerment, and child neglect are currently in place and address issues pertaining to unauthorized access of firearms by minors.

Major law-enforcement organizations do not support SB1140.

Fiscal Issues:


SB1140 is an unfunded mandate on both the state and local governments. It does not properly address the costs of prosecuting violators of this new statute.

This bill imposes additional responsibilities on local governments and the Department of Justice without providing proper General Fund appropriations.
 
I am praying for you guys and gals in Cali. that these bills fold and go away.
One thing for sure, you will know where Arnold stands if he signs these things and so will the rest of the country!

Gunsnrovers
It IS hot in Phoenix. What about Flagstaff?
Seemed like a wonderful climate and it get's rural without driving too far?

S-
 
I'll send this out tomorrow any suggestions?

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger,

Congratulations on your fine speech last night at the Republican Convention. I wanted to take a few minutes and write you about my concerns as a gun owner and consumer here in California.

Governor, I feel that many of California’s gun laws serve no other purpose than to harass the firearms industry in general and law abiding gun owners in particular. Legislators tell the public they are fighting crime and concerned about safety but what they are really trying to do is make the buying, selling and ownership of firearms first confusing and unaffordable then, intimidating and ultimately illegal.

Take the new batch of gun legislation that will hit your desk soon.

AB50: This will outlaw a group of high-powered target rifles. A few Californians actually own and enjoy shooting these rifles. The fact that they are big, heavy and very expensive should assure you that they aren’t the weapon of choice among criminals. No Governor, the sole reason this legislation exists is to set the precedent for all high-powered rifles to be declared assault weapons. After all if a handful of $3000 single shot 50 caliber rifles are declared to be an armor piercing threat to public safety, aren’t thousands of affordable, armor piercing hunting rifles even more dangerous? And I guarantee that if you sign this bill you will see legislation to bann deer (sniper) rifles before you term is up. Will the public be any safer?

SB1152: Yet more hoops to jump through for businesses that sell ammunition to California shooters. The result (and intent) of this bill will be for many small businesses to simply quit selling ammunition. California shooters will end up paying much more for ammunition or quit buying it altogether. Will the public be any safer?

SB1140: More Sacramento intimidation of law abiding gun owners. Governor these storage requirements are getting so redundant and Byzantine that many gun owners will simply ignore them. We already have laws requiring locks and secure storage of our firearms. Governor, will SB1140 make the public any safer?

Governor, I voted for you because I think California has been legislated to the brink of ruin and think you have the vision and courage to do the right thing for us. Please veto AB50, SB 1152 and SB 1140.
 
Thanks Jim.

We need all the help and threads on this topic that we can get!!!

I called twice and wrote two letters. :)


Is there any sort of a "public hearing" or anything where the unwashed masses can have an audience with the Governor?
 
The following might prove informative and or of interest to readers. Same was received in the form of a CCRKBA e-mail alert.





CALIFORNIA ALERT
Four anti-gun bills were recently passed by the California legislature and are on their way to Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger's desk. The bills are:

AB50 (.50 caliber BMG rifle ban/registration)


SB1140 (expanded child access restrictions)


SB1152 (ammunition purchase registration/thumbprint)


SB1733 (Cow Palace gun show ban)




California residents must contact the governor's office as soon as possible and politely urge Governor Schwarzenegger to veto all four of the bills.


Write, e-mail, fax or call:


Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger

State Capitol Building

Sacramento, CA 95814


Email: http://www.govmail.ca.gov


Phone: (916) 445-2841

Fax: (916) 445-4633

Re reference to the anti-gun/anti civil rights/anti common sense legislation passed by the state legislature, the following questions come to mind.

1. Did Governor Schwartzenegger make any attempt to lobby the legislature in OPPOSITION to enactment of the above mentioned, when he could have done so?
2. Re petitioning his veto of any or all of the above mentioned, assuming that he made no efforts to stop enactment, are such attempts realistic? I'm not saying that they should not be made, obviously they should be. I merely ask if there is a realistic basis for such efforts, based on the governor's past performance and history?
3. The electorate, including gun owners and shooters in California dumped Governor Davis, who was certainly no friend of gun rights. Fair enough, but is what you got any real improvement?
4. This last might be a dumb question, so please bear with me. It's been a very long time since I lived in California, 34 years to be more or less exact, and I might well be really out of touch with things there. Never-the-less, I wonder as to whether the preponderance of anti gun voters is so great as to preclude constructive changes in the make-up of the state legislature, which seems to be the seat of problems regarding guns and gun rights in California.
 
ryoushi

ban has only one n

missing the r in your, same sentence

missing comma after Governor in places

otherwise looks good
 
Let me make a stab at this.

From where I sit out here in the middle of everywhere watching the state Assembly and Senate over the last decade or so. I've gotten more and more the feeling that the legislators pay very little attention to the electorate unless it's time to run for office.

I write them with no results. Emails bounce back as undeliverable. Then suddenly when the yahoo's are running for office my mailboxes are suddenly filled with glad tidings and wonderful things these congress critters are doing for me, my friends and countrymen. Even face to face with them they are preoccupied. I'm not given to long orations or verbal wanderings.

When Arnold took office I expected him to get to Sacramento and start to clean house so to speak. I liked the auditing plan, find out what the immediate state of the state is in, just how deep is that red ink?

I was fairly pleased with the staff he picked out to work for him and us. Scratched my head a few times and figured he was on the scene and I elected him to do it up right. He prioritized things to be done and went about fixing the state. As far as I'm concerned he is doing well. The gun issue is just now coming to a head, which is putting it mildly. I do believe his time in office so far has been management of the crisis and beating back the naysayers and quietly beating the legislature. He uses the bully pulpit and gets his wants accomplished.

The legislature is a sneaky bunch. I think its quite possible that SB 1152 (ammo reg) was an underhanded attempt to get it passed as law while Arnold was out of town and have bustamante sign it as "acting" gov. Look at all the times it supposedly died then at last passed on 27 August 2004, a friday. The legislature is over on the 31st I think and the Gov is in New York.

There's been rumors of Ghost voting going on. If that is so, then it's been happening for years. No one suddenly discovers that technique overnight and goes hog wild the next day. The dems are way to slimey to be caught that quickly. It's no wonder California is in the fiscal shape it's in. I suppose I shouldn't categorize all dems as such, however comma those folks know how they vote and if a vote is suddenly changed, the person with a different vote cast ought to be screaming about it.

Arnold is taking care of business one step at a time. He appears patient and allows things to play out. To lobby this legislature is foolhardy for a new gov. They firmly believe they have all the aces and can do whatever they want. He has used his abilities to gather up the support of the people and push the legislature to action or at least stop some of the crap and pay attention. I'm confident he is going to veto all 4 of these bills.

What we got is a big improvement. Arnold is no crook, not an extortionist and is no phony. He, like President Bush has said nothing about guns, the AWB etc. It's just not yet or wasn't yet time. Let the US Congress figure out what they want to do and take the President's lead for now. The AWB is sunsetting, the anti's are scrambling to maintain something, anything resembling gun control. Thats where we are now in California, awaiting the VETO pen of the Govenator on 4 anti-gun bills. This is going to be a very long week-end coming up. A truthy teller.

After watching Mr. Schwarzenegger give his speech tonight at the Repulican Convention, I have no doubt he will VETO these. If the legislature wants them, they will have to override and Ghost voting ain't gonna achieve the outcome they want. The speech tonight I think won over alot of people here in California.

Of course, that's just my opinion.

Vick
 
I just finished my letter to the gov, and will get it in the mail tomorrow. I will also fax to make sure it gets there. I will also call his office.

It is particularly frustrating to me that the legislature is so willing to pass these laws. They keep voting until the thing passes! What's with THAT? It's useless (but I do it anyway) to call Torlakson's office. He doesn't care what I think - he's running completely unopposed in the election this year. So he's a lock on that office. Four more years. Great. And Loni Hancock in the Assembly - she doesn't care what I think, either. She's got a pretty safe seat, thanks to the fancy redistricting. I know, I know, I'm whining. But I still call and write - at least they need to know that not everyone in their district agrees with their actions.

:banghead:
 
Pilgrim, I used a lot of the body of your letter. I too was a 13 yesr resident of California and had a job offer to return.

I added this.

I would like to relate another story to you of a potential job offer I had in Torrance CA. The job was six figures with a major medical company. At the time I was a licensed volunteer firefighter and a Nationally registered EMT I in Wisconsin. I contacted the LA county Sheriff’s Department Altadena Station to determine if I would be eligible for the Sheriff’s Search and Rescue, that I had prior California S&R experience plus I was heavy rescue and Mountain rescue certified. I was told that they would love to have someone with my experience. They said I was eligible for the Reserve Officers program and I could take the academy training on the weekends. My wife and I were quite excited about returning. Until that is, I downloaded the Assault Weapon regulations from the Attorney Generals website and was surprised to find that even a California Law enforcement officer cannot own what California defines an assault weapon. Of course I declined the position thereby decreasing your tax base. I was not about to relinquish my match rifles and give up my sport in order to relocate there.

The point I am making Governor is that thousands of law-abiding taxpayers have fled your state because of these laws and countless others will not even consider relocation there over laws that only serve to persecute the innocent and reward the criminal.



Hope this helps you folks in California. I loved the state but hated the politics.
 
Last edited:
Thamks for the input spellcheck is great but a second set of eyes is even better. Is it true the Cow Palce bill got shot down?
 
molonlabe:

Having myself, taken positions on matters of principle, I agree with your decision.

Just curious about one aspect of the thing. You had mentioned your contact with the LA county Sheriff’s Department Altadena Station, respecting the qualifications you described, and their reaction to these as well as their interest in the services of a person so qualified. Did you happen to tell them that you had reconsidered, as well as WHY?

One realizes that it's the legislature that makes law, at least in theory, not the Sheriff's Dept. however I expect that there is some "give and take" between legislators and law enforcement, so a word or two might not have been entirely wasted. Such decisions are, of course, up to you.

For whatever it might be worth, I sent an e-mail to the governor's offices, commenting on the ridiculous nature of the bills mentioned in a CCKBRA bulletin I had received. Same measures have been mentioned in a number of threads on this, and other sites.

30 plus years ago, I lived for a while in California, Oakland and Berkley. While my wife and I still visit San Francisco and friends out there now and then, we would not care to repeat living in California again, given the sad state of things there.
 
There is something else happening here that is very interesting, and will (hopefully) weaken the dem's stronghold on this state. It involves our socialist gun grabbing Secretary of State, Kevin Shelley.
http://www.chronwatch.com/content/contentDisplay.asp?aid=9252
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/opinion/9542613.htm?1c

Schwarzenegger has frozen federal funds available to Shelley, and they may remain frozen until after the November election

http://abclocal.go.com/kfsn/news/083104_nw_shelley.html
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

T
  • Locked
AB-50 .50 cal ban in CA - contact info
Replies
15
Views
988
deej
D
C
  • Locked
Californians: call Governor SB 2714 & SB 59
Replies
12
Views
474
Can'thavenuthingood
C
gopguy
  • Locked
Challenges lie before us. We must kill Microstamping now.
Replies
24
Views
2K
Librarian
Librarian
G
  • Locked
ALL NON-CA residents.
2
Replies
27
Views
3K
glockman19
G
S
  • Locked
Ca Goa: Alert! Stop The Ban Of Gun Sales At Cow Palace Gun Shows
Replies
0
Views
1K
shooterx10
S
Back
Top