URGENT - CA RKBA amendment initiative moving forward!

[jnojr]

Updated information is now appearing on the official web site http://www.tacr.us/

The Unofficial web site, http://rkba.members.sonic.net/ will be updated soon.

The official web site reflects that signature gathering might begin around
November 21, 2005 with a goal of qualifying the Initiative to
appear on the ballot for the general election in November, 2006.
Signatures can be gathered for 150 days during the drive.

NO SIGNATURE GATHERING can take place before the proper start date.
Also, DO NOT GATHER SIGNATURES until we have verified that the petition
forms are properly worded and formatted. I will provide further guidance
on this point as soon as possible.

There are actions to take RIGHT NOW.

1) WE NEED VOLUNTEERS! We need "County Coordinators" for most counties, and we need volunteer signature gatherers in all counties! Sign up on the unofficial site for now.

2) Identify the major places where signature gathering will take place.
Gun stores, firing ranges, sporting goods stores, etc. Encourage them
to have their employees gather signatures and/or allow
YOUR volunteers to gather signatures. Contact gun clubs or other
organizations. Encourage them to enlist a member to work with you.
My experience is that having a volunteer at a business gathering
signatures results in about FOUR TIMES as many signatures as relying
on busy employees. If a business is willing to be listed as a location
for petitions on the Unofficial web site, let me know and I will add it.

3) Acquaint yourself with the "Instructions for Gathering Signatures"
on the Unofficial web site. We don't want to lose valuable signatures
through mishandling of petition forms.

If you have questions, don't hesitate to ask. The more successful of
prior drives have only fallen short by about 15% of signatures required.
We can easily make up for that by getting off to a fast start.

 

[tube_ee]

Has the NRA given any support?

In California, there are a number of companies that will gaurantee that any meassure will get on the ballot, or they will refund their fee. It takes a couple of million dollars to do it, so some deep pockets will be needed. I would think that the opportunity for a big win in California would have groups like the NRA salivating.

For those who don't live here, it's not really true that Californians are, as a majority, anti-gun. Yes, this is a liberal state, but liberal != anti-gun, for most of us. It's just that most Californians are pretty gun-neutral, so when CA Democratic legislators go off on wierd anti-gun crusades, they're not punished for it come election time. It's just not on the radar screen for most CA Democratic voters.

An initiative is different. They tend to bring out those who are passionate on both sides of an issue, and the associated interest groups. I'm betting that there are more people here who are passionately pro-gun than anti. The vast group who don't care either way can be moved to vote for this intiative by a carefully planned advertising campaign. Again, deep pockets are needed.

Have the backers of this intiative enlisted the help of any national, well-funded gun rights groups for this fight? You're gonna need 'em, cuz money talks in CA politics. Also, it's better to have all your resources together before you start gathering signatures. It's better to wait to fight when your ready to win than to mount a mono-buttocked effort and lose.

--Shannon

 

[jnojr]

I've made those points, Shannon! AFAIK, right now, there is no real organization per se, and no money. I'm having a difficult time convincing people that a good spirit isn't enough to make this happen. From what I'm told, NRA and CRPA just aren't interested... one thing that you can count on in California gun politics is complete and total apathy. Heck, this might be a lost cause. I don't care... I'm going for it, and I'll drag along anyone I can grab ahold of

 

[mvpel]

Shannon,

The last two go-arounds, the NRA and other major national organizations have refrained from backing the effort, because in their view it would take tens of millions of dollars worth of paid signatures and direct mail publicity to get it on the ballot, and millions more to get it passed, money they weren't willing to part with given the chance of failure, and, presumably, their now-dashed hopes for the Bush reconstruction of the US Supreme Court and resolution of the Circuit conflict on the meaning of the Second Amendment.

Unless something has changed in the gun rights landscape, I would expect that they'd trot out the same excuses in spite of the evidence to the contrary.

In one of the first attempts grassroots volunteers on a shoestring budget gathered over half a million signatures, falling short of the threshold by a very narrow margin, and history has shown that when conservative questions are put to the entire State of California, instead of to the gerrymandered legislature, they tend to pass handily.

Regardless of the stance of the national gun rights groups, this amendment is the ONLY avenue left for gun rights advocates in California to attempt to restore their rights without a clear and compelling US Supreme Court decision which they continue to dodge rendering. California gun owners have been shot down in every other legal avenue they've pursued.

JNO - please convey greetings from Michael Pelletier to Don the next time you talk to him, from the Free State of New Hampshire.

 

[tube_ee]

Shannon,

The last two go-arounds, the NRA and other major national organizations have refrained from backing the effort, because in their view it would take tens of millions of dollars worth of paid signatures and direct mail publicity to get it on the ballot, and millions more to get it passed, money they weren't willing to part with given the chance of failure....

Sorry, NRA, but that just the way the system works. Look at the recall of Gray Davis. Though he was pretty darned unpopular, the recall went nowhere until Issa put up a couple of million bucks, and then "Arnie" got involved.

Without big money, especially in a sate as populous as this one, you lose. No matter how "right" your cause may be. It's not that money = success, a lot of well-funded initiatives don't pass, but no money = failure every time.

Unless the NRA is actually happier having California's whacked-out gun laws as a "boogeyman" to scare up donations in other states... Nah...

I'll support this, and vote for it if it makes it onto the ballot, but unless we get some money into the effort, it's not going to happen.

--Shannon

 

[jnojr]

I do tend to agree with you, Shannon. Money is pretty much everything in CA politics. But previous attempts to qualify this initiative failed by about 15%, I'm told, and there was next to no publicity... a very few people gathered signatures in a very few areas. This time, I'm trying to spread the word as much as possible. If we do get enough signatures and get on to the ballot, that's where money becomes indispensible... but I believe that getting the issue on to the ballot will raise awareness, both amongst "the man on the street" here, and nationally.

Another point I would make is that people expressing a willingness to sign is good, but let's face it... adding one more signature isn't going to do much. How about volunteering and make it possible to bring in 10,000 signatures? This doesn't have to mean standing in the rain in front of Vons... If you were to just make a list of gun stores, shooting ranges, clubs, etc. in your area and just visit each with a stack of petitions, you could help to bring in thousands of signatures.

I realize we're facing an uphill battle. It'll be tough to qualify for the ballot, and it'll be a real furball trying to get the measure passed without huge wads of money. Frankly, I think that all of the negative media coverage will beat us at the polls. But getting the measure out in the open is a step forward. And, even if we do fail, it won't be for some lack on my part. I know I won't look back and think "Gee, I wish I'd done something... we were soooo close, and maybe my effort would have tipped the scales"

 

[tube_ee]

I'll certainly help out when the petition is certified, although I'm not sure how much I can do that you're not already doing... We're both in San Diego, I think.

I'll hope that success in putting this on the ballot will shake loose the money to get it passed.

One other thought - Has the petition language been evaluated by lawyers with experience in Constitutional Law, preferably ones who have argued before the California Supreme Court? My reading of it seemed pretty vague, but then, I'm an engineer, not a lawyer. Before putting this before the voters, make sure it does what you intend for it to do. What are the actual, real-world goals? Does the proposed language actually accomplish them?

But, all that said, I'll be more than happy to help.

--Shannon

 

[mvpel]

Many hands make light work. What's the population of San Diego as compared to two activists?

One other thought - Has the petition language been evaluated by lawyers with experience in Constitutional Law, preferably ones who have argued before the California Supreme Court? My reading of it seemed pretty vague, but then, I'm an engineer, not a lawyer. Before putting this before the voters, make sure it does what you intend for it to do. What are the actual, real-world goals? Does the proposed language actually accomplish them?

Actually, the language was drafted and refined by lawyers with experience in Constitutional law, including ones who have argued before both the California and US Supreme Courts. It is worded such that it will do exactly what it is intended - put the burden of proof on the legislators to pass or refuse to repeal new gun laws under the "strict scrutiny" clause, forcefully shut down local gun bans like that coming up in San Francisco, and still be palatable enough to win at the ballot box.

Here's the SoS link to the 2000 attempt: http://traynor.uchastings.edu/cgi-bin/starfinder/14430/calinits.txt

And here's the summary issued by the Secretary of State's office:

RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT. Amends the California Constitution to state Article I, Section 1 includes the right to keep and bear arms in defense of self, family and home. All State regulation of the right to keep and bear arms will be subject to strict scrutiny review. The Amendment and state law preempts all county, city, and local government action on this subject. The Amendment does not limit the State from regulating the acquisition and possession of arms by felons, minors, the mentally incompetent, and persons subject to restraining orders based on their violent conduct. Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local governments: This measure would result in unknown, potential costs to the state and unknown net fiscal effects on local governments.

Since this year's effort is word-for-word identical, they will likely issue the same title and summary. If you compare this summary to some of the other attempts to add a right to arms, you'll see the genius of it - the other attempts had cost estimates of millions to hundreds of millions of dollars because of extra crap thrown in.

For example, there was the 1996 effort, which called for life imprisonment for gun-armed criminals and adult trials of 14 year olds, which moved the LAO to opine:

Would result in state and local government costs of several to tens of millions of dollars annually for processing of weapons permits, offset to an unknown degree by applicant fees. Would also result in state cost of tens of millions of dollars annually for operation of prisons due to longer sentences, with one-time costs of as much as $300 million for new prison construction.

Of course, that wasn't going to go anywhere, even with the prison guard's union support.

The 1989 effort was arguably way too wordy - the amendment took up a full page alone, whereas this one is concise, precise, and easily understood, but with enough legal teeth to do everything that the 1989 amendment tried to do if not more.

 

[jnojr]

Volunteering doesn't need to mean days and days of standing in front of Vons being reviled by soccer moms! If you were to just help get stacks of forms to local gun stores, ranges, clubs, etc. and explain what they're for, be a point of contact to get them more forms, and then help deliver completed forms to the Registrar of Voters, that would be huge. Also, someone is speaking with representatives of gun shows that will be held during the gathering period... volunteers will have the opportunity to get into the show for free for manning the booth for a while.