Gun Control - Is Kalifornia Gov. Davis playing politics?

Elker_43

New member
Just out, from the LA TIMES....

Davis Urges Timeout on New Gun Bills Weapons: In vetoing three measures, governor suggests a one-year delay to allow the public and police to adjust to several recently approved laws. By CARL INGRAM, MARK GLADSTONE, Times Staff Writers
SACRAMENTO--Calling for a moratorium on new gun control bills for at least a year, Gov. Gray Davis on Thursday asked lawmakers to hold their fire on any more legislation until the public and law enforcement agencies adjust to the heavy load of weapons laws already approved. After a session that produced the most sweeping firearms legislation in a decade--keeping California in the vanguard of the national gun control movement--Davis signaled that the Legislature should step back. State and local law enforcement officials "must have time to absorb and enforce the major revisions enacted into law this year," he said. "Accordingly," Davis wrote, explaining why he vetoed three relatively inconsequential gun bills Thursday, "I urge the Legislature to withhold passage of any additional significant firearms-related legislation during the balance of this [1999-2000] session until the impact of the laws recently enacted can be measured and analyzed."

The governor issued his extraordinary appeal on the same day a legislative hearing was being set for Dec. 2 on one of the most controversial gun issues of all: licensing of handgun owners in California. His action could have implications for next year's presidential campaign in the state, especially if he is able to avoid a divisive debate over the volatile issue of licensing.

The National Rifle Assn. and other gun-owner lobbies opposed many of the bills this year and have been girding for a battle over licensing next year. By vetoing the three smaller gun bills, Davis was also sending a message to gun owners that he is not an extremist on gun control. In identical messages attached to the three bills, Davis noted that in the past few weeks he had signed five substantial gun control bills, including a strengthening of the state's law against assault weapons and a prohibition
against unsafe handguns called Saturday night specials. "Taken together, this legislation provides California with the toughest gun control laws in the nation--much stronger than federal law," the Democratic governor said, asserting that he had kept his promise as a candidate for governor to make California safer from guns.

His statement drew mixed reaction from legislative leaders, the National Rifle Assn., county prosecutors and a rank-and-file peace officer organization.
Assembly Speaker Antonio Villaraigosa (D-Los Angeles) and Senate President Pro Tem John Burton (D-San Francisco) voiced support for not overloading law enforcement, but indicated that gun control will remain a priority for lawmakers next year. Villaraigosa said he intends to work with Davis on the issue, but "we're not finished looking at gun legislation," including the licensing issue. "We intend to continue to be a bellwether state on the issue of gun control," he said. "I don't consider it any big deal," Burton said of Davis' statement. "If there is a bill that has merit, it will move through the legislative process. I
don't think the governor should tell us what to pass and we should not tell him what to sign." Grover Trask, district attorney of Riverside County and president of the California District Attorneys Assn., and Steve Craig, president of the Peace Officers Research Assn. of California, a labor organization, applauded Davis.

"You come to a point where you get saturated with so many new laws that it almost has a negative impact," Trask said, adding that Davis' proposed moratorium on gun laws allows "us to be able to take some time to handle the changes that are coming forward."
"I think it is an excellent stance now to not overload the system," said Craig. But Steve Helsley, California lobbyist for the National Rifle Assn., said he believes the governor's declaration may be a "shot over the bow" on legislation next year that would require prospective handgun owners to be licensed by the state Department of Justice.
Similar bills have been proposed, and killed, in the past. But gun control advocates claim that in the wake of several highly publicized mass shootings in the past year, the time is right for California to pass such a requirement.

The December hearing, set by the Assembly Public Safety Committee chaired by Jack Scott (D-Pasadena), will be held in Glendale. "At the very time the governor is saying he doesn't want any more bills, the gun control zealots in the Legislature are raising the bar," said Helsley. He said the NRA was "very glad" that Davis had taken such an action, but said the governor may have avoided "some of the pain" in implementing the complexities and contradictions of some of the new laws if he had agreed to discuss the bills with the NRA as they moved toward his desk. Helsley said the attitude of the governor's aides on gun control was:"Move these bills out. No amendments. Thank you very much." Assemblyman Scott, whose son was killed in a gun accident, said he understands the governor's appeal, but "I wouldn't want it to be an absolute ban on any gun legislation in the next year. We may discover that . . . we may need to take some additional steps." Scott said he will not cancel the committee hearing. The bills passed by the Legislature in 1999, in addition to the assault gun and unsafe pistols bills, included limiting purchases of handguns to one a month, mandating trigger locks on all firearms sold in California, and toughened regulation of gun shows. But Helsley said the assault gun and unsafe handgun bills were so poorly drafted and rushed that police and prosecutors will have great difficulty implementing them.

The Measures That Were Vetoed The gun-related bills Davis vetoed Thursday were:
* AB 1040 by Assemblyman Rod Wright (D-Los Angeles), which would have required gun owners seeking to renew a concealed weapons permit to complete a training class every four years, instead of every two years.
* SB 29 by Sen. Steve Peace (D-El Cajon) would have made a series of complex but technical changes to the handgun sales registry administered by the attorney general.
* AB 1142 by Assemblywoman Nell Soto (D-Pomona) would have stiffened the penalties for failing to properly store a firearm accessible to a child under 18.
Davis did sign two firearms measures by Scott, including a bill (AB 491) that allows law enforcement authorities to bring misdemeanor or felony charges against someone who illegally conceals an unregistered firearm. Currently, the penalty is a misdemeanor.
A second Scott bill (AB 1587) makes clear that a person released from a "mental hold" can seek a hearing and be exempted from a five-year ban on possessing a gun.
* * *
Times staff writer Amy Pyle contributed to this report. Copyright Los Angeles Times
http://www.latimes.com/HOME/NEWS/POLITICS/CALPOL/t000087892.html

I believe that is just the calm before the storm next year. All of those vetoed were inconsequental anyway because most damage has been done to date. This is just another "BIG" headline indicating that "RED DAVIS IS A GOOD GUY AND PATRIOTIC FRIEND OF US ALL" No one will read the stories anyway. What garbage.
What do you think?



------------------
To own firearms is to affirm that freedom and liberty are not gifts from the state.

[This message has been edited by Elker_43 (edited October 01, 1999).]

[This message has been edited by Elker_43 (edited October 01, 1999).]
 
Elker,

I think if he is playing politics, he is pulling a Klinton. He plays both sides by vetoing both pro and anti gun bills. How did the bill requiring concealed weapons permit holders to be retrained every four years instead of every two ever pass in California anyway?

Joe
 
Yeah, I can't wait for the analysis easier. Let's see, they now proudly proclaim to have the strictest gun-control laws in the country. So it follows that this time next year they will have the lowest rate of gun-involved crime in the country, or at least the largest drop in such crime of any state. Like I say, I can't wait.
 
I still can't get over the Glock be legislatively declared "unsafe", via the definition of that term. So many police are being issued unsafe weapons - this is as ludicrous as it gets.
 
Did you notice that he signed bill AB491 .

"Davis did sign two firearms measures by Scott, including a bill (AB 491) that allows law enforcement authorities to bring misdemeanor or felony charges against someone who illegally conceals an unregistered firearm. Currently, the penalty is a misdemeanor. "

Let me see stiffen penalties for not registering a firearm just in time for the failed sks buy back. Raising it from a misdemeaner to a felony. Now if you get charged you'll lose your gun rights for ever. Lets see how many people are now motivated to turn in their guns.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>
...Davis was also sending a message to gun owners that he is not an extremist on gun control...
[/quote]

Bwahahahahahahahahaha, what a friggen joke, just like the kind of governor he is.

Sorry, but someone had to say it.

------------------
Don LeHue

Salad isn't food. Salad is what food eats.
 
He's not an extremist. He just wants to destroy all of them that aren't carried by himself, Feinstein, Perata, or the Securitate.

------------------
"America needs additional gun laws like a giraffe needs snow tires."
--Rabbi Mermelstein, JPFO
 
Yep...
I'd settle for Gov. Moonbeam instead of Davis...which is kinda funny if you recall Davis as Vice Gov under Moonbeam, Davis used to be pro-gun and sound almost like an old time Republican.

------------------
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes" RKBA!
 
Maybe Ah-nold is letting the leaks out of his camp in preparations for the special election dealing with the recall of Gov. Davis...?

As far as I'm concerned, Davis is the worst thing that ever happened to this state, and he needs to be removed from office ... Along with Perata, and others. Then we can get to repealing these laws, and get on with our lives.
 
WooHoo!

I don't care what you folks say, its working!!!! We have been writing letters, calling, emailing, and faxing till we are blue-in-the-face. I get unsolicited calls now from my reps' staffers telling me what is going on in Sacramento AND Washington and how my reps' voted (example):

"Mr. Hamnilton, Congressman Thompson called from Washington and wanted me to call you to say that he voted for the censure of President Clinton on the FALN clemancy."

This happens regularly! Be cogent, polite and articulate and they will take note. Even Feinstein's and Boxer's staffers talk to me now (they didn't three months ago).

Keep it up! They will...

------------------
It is far better to dare mighty things, though riddled with failure, than to live in the dull grey of mediocrity.

[This message has been edited by Mendocino (edited October 02, 1999).]
 
Do you wash your ears out, and disinfect your phone after those calls from Boxer and Fienstien? I know I would.

How many calls/letter/emails did you have to write to begin to get this "special" treatment?
 
Read my .sig in my previous post, and in the words of Churchill: "Never, never, never give up!" (or words to that affect).
 
Back
Top