California State Senator Leland Yee Indicted

Chris_B said:
point taken, but it only damages the agenda in the minds of those who already understand and detest it.
Click to expand...

I disagree. I think there's excellent potential for an issue like this to influence the "silent majority" (people who, generally, don't care about guns, and assume whatever the legislature does / says is OK). I guess it's just a Rorschach test for each of us.

I don't see Yee really facing the music for this malfeasance and treachery. I will be shocked if he's made an example of.
Click to expand...

Probably true, but again, the important thing is that he's done in politics. This guy was, in all likelihood, our next SecState here in CA. That's a lot of power.

The question, perhaps best answered by those in the area he represented, is, "To what degree were his extreme anti-2A views his own, and to what degree was he purely reflecting the will of his constituents?" That area, SF, is certainly generally anti-2A, but to that extreme? I don't know, and that's kind of important, because if the constituents are that rabidly anti-2A, he'll probably be replaced by someone just as rabidly anti-2A.

I would differentiate an "average" anti-2A politician from a "rabidly" anti-2A politician by saying the former will absolutely vote for any anti-2A legislation that happens on his / her desk, while the latter will also work to create anti-2A legislation.
 
speedracer said:
I think there's excellent potential for an issue like this to influence the "silent majority" (people who, generally, don't care about guns, and assume whatever the legislature does / says is OK). I guess it's just a Rorschach test for each of us.
Click to expand...

One of the headlines from ARS Technica: California anti-game-violence legislator arrested on bribery charges [Updated] | Ars Technica

There's a Rorschach test for you. Yee is not anti-gun, he's anti-video game violence!

To be sure, the article mentions the gun thing... But it is focused on a law he helped to pass in 2005 and was struck down by the SCOTUS in 2011 on 1A grounds.
 
I disagree. I think there's excellent potential for an issue like this to influence the "silent majority" (people who, generally, don't care about guns, and assume whatever the legislature does / says is OK). I guess it's just a Rorschach test for each of us.
Click to expand...

Could be, but I think it's a tall order for those people to suddenly start questioning anti-firearms policies because of Yee's malfeasance. On the whole my belief is that it will not affect those people one way or another. One black mark on the record does not a battle win, and for those people, this will be an isolated incident in the vast majority of cases, and those that do look deeper are not inclined to take to the subject as readily as you or I.

In other words, I believe permissive ambivalence will rule the day just as always. I also think what Napoleon once said about rights:

"A man will fight harder for his interests than for his rights". If those people are not interested in 'guns' for the want of a better term to describe the pastime you and I have, what here will make them do anything about their rights?
 
As much as I love the irony, painting the entire movement off one criminal is exactly what we ask people NOT do to us!
 
As much as I love the irony, painting the entire movement off one criminal is exactly what we ask people NOT do to us!
Click to expand...

...but that has never stopped "them" nor has it even slowed them down. Sometimes ya just have to fight fire with fire!
 
steve4102 said:
raimius said:
As much as I love the irony, painting the entire movement off one criminal is exactly what we ask people NOT do to us!
Click to expand...
...but that has never stopped "them" nor has it even slowed them down. Sometimes ya just have to fight fire with fire!
Click to expand...
That's a very bad strategy and it's destined to fail at winning people to our side. I agree completely with raimius. We all need to keep in mind that we're trying to convince the voting public that we're not all crazy gun nuts. How in the world are we going to do that if we use extreme political rhetoric that's just as ignorant as what the other side uses?
 
Could be, but I think it's a tall order for those people to suddenly start questioning anti-firearms policies because of Yee's malfeasance.
Click to expand...
You're right. Any time we bring up Yee as an example, the response will be, "yes, maybe one guy did some bad things, but OMGASSUALTGATS."

The biggest takeaway from this is that a very staunch and effective adversary of ours has been removed from the fray. For Californians, that's a pretty big deal.
 
Could be, but I think it's a tall order for those people to suddenly start questioning anti-firearms policies because of Yee's malfeasance. On the whole my belief is that it will not affect those people one way or another. One black mark on the record does not a battle win, and for those people, this will be an isolated incident in the vast majority of cases, and those that do look deeper are not inclined to take to the subject as readily as you or I.
Click to expand...



I have to agree. When Fast and Furious was uncovered, and the US Justice Dept was gun running to drug cartels, Americans yawned. I can't imagine a state senator doing the same thing having any greater impact.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't think he will get much time

He's been in the game far too long not to be able to take many of his friends in high places down with him. The Democratic party wants to cast him adrift(in the eyes of the public he's poison) but I don't think the political machine will allow him to fall too far or deep.
 
In a December 2012 news release, Yee had this to say:

Laundering money through nonprofits in an attempt to avoid transparency is fundamentally undemocratic. Our democracy should not be bought and sold in shady backroom deals. SB 3 will close this loophole and ensure that Californians are well aware of who is funding campaigns and ballot measures.
Click to expand...

Gun laws weren't the only thing on which he practiced double standards.
 
You would think that a State Senator would Know that we do NOT have Democracy, but a Representative Republic!

Of course not many Citizens in America Know this either.

Our democracy should not be bought and sold in shady backroom deals
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top