Friday, April 9, 2010

Letter to Jim Beall - Oppose AB 1810

Here is the letter I just sent inquiring as to Mr. Bealls position on AB 1810, addressed to Cris Forsyth, Bealls Chief of Staff:

Mr. Forsyth,

I am writing to inquire on Mr. Bealls position on the up comming AB 1810, proposing that rifles and shotgun transfers go through the DROS  process, effectively introducing long gun registration in the state of California.  If Mr. Beall is consistent in his political philosophy on firearms law, most recently expressed in his support of the onerous AB 962, I would expect him to support AB 1810.

But in so doing, I would like Mr. Beall to explain to his constituents how gun registration  will make citizen safer or help to solve crimes.  Lovelle Mixon was able to obtain firearms in spite of existing laws requiring background checks, prohibiting criminals possessing firearms or ammunition, and punishing those who provide them to criminals.  So, would Mr. Beall support making illegal acts more illegaller?

I myself strongly oppose this legislation, and would oppose the continued tenure of any representative who supports increased firearms restrictions.  I will continue my opposition through all possible channels, including my blog, Left Coast Conservative.
I'll post any reply I might get.  Don't expect much, since Beall supported AB 962.

Constitutional Carry Goes to Governor in Arizona

As reported in this story, and by Of Arms and the Law,  the Arizona legislature has approved a law allowing citizens to carry concealed weapons without a permit.  The bill no goes to the Governor for signature or veto.  The Governor is expected to sign the bill.

I find this to be especially ironic because it is happening as the California legislature begins consideration of AB 1934, a bill that would effectively eliminate the open carry of any handgun in public places in the state.  Open carry of loaded handguns has been illegal for many years in California, while open carry of loaded handguns has been legal for many years.

Can two states that share border be further apart on an issue?  I can just imagine how California anti-gun residents would wail and quake with fear if the same legislation ever came before out Governor.  Arnold would probably veto it.

Thursday, April 8, 2010

AB 1810 - Proposed Long gun Registration for California

And the hits just keep rolling in from the Legislature!

Assembly member Mike Feuer has amended AB 1810, formerly covering vandalism, to institute the requirement that all long gun transfers be treated the same as handgun transfers are treated now, effectively creating a long gun registration scheme in California.

Among the effects of this bill:
  • Private parties would have to use an FFL to transfer long guns.
  • New residents moving into the state would have to register their long guns within 60 days.
  • Existing firearms owned by current residents would NOT have to be registered.
This bill is proposed at a time when Canada is debating the issue of ending their long gun registry as being too expensive and ineffectual at fighting violent crime.  I fail to see how long gun registration in California will be any more effective.

Prediction: this bill will probably pass.  As we have seen this year with AB 962, a good way for a legislator to make points with the anti-gun electorate in California is to heap on another gun control law.

AB 1934 - Legislature Reacts to Unloaded Open Carry Events

Who knew this wasn't going to happen?

Assembly member Lori Saldana amended the text of AB 1934 with the intent of outlawing the open carry of unloaded handguns on public places.  It does this by changing the trext of PC 12025 (f), which reads:


   (f) Firearms carried openly in belt holsters are not concealed
within the meaning of this section.  
So, the way this works is that handguns carried in belt holsters are classified as concealed weapons, requiring a nearly impossible to obtain CCW permit from the state.   Since most of the UOC events that have caused so much anxiety among non-gun owners have taken place in incorporated areas of cities, this proposed change effectively ends that practice.

In addition, a new section, 12037, is added defining the punishments one is liable to for committing the newly defined crime of carrying an unloaded handgun, as well as a long list of exceptions that allow many ordinary handgun activities, such as range sessions and handling guns in gun shops.

Note that this bill should not effect the carrying of concealed or loaded guns while engaged in hunting  or fishing because that activity is an exception to the concealed weapon laws.

This bill is currently in the Assembly Committee on Public Safety, with no hearing date set.


Prediction: This bill will very likely pass, further narrowing the ability of law abiding citizens to exercise their 2nd Amendment rights.  Thanks a lot Open Carry Movement

Thursday, March 18, 2010

President Obama Is A Bald-Faced Liar

Anyone trying to follow the evolution of the so-called health care reform bill would do well to read Health Care Policy and Marketplace  Review.  In a post published today we have the following statement:
Proponents of the Democratic health care bill make the claim that it will make health insurance affordable, improve our deficit outlook, and make our health insurance system sustainable. None of those claims are even close to being true and everyone who knows anything about this debate knows that.
What this means, of course, is that President Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and every other advocate for this steaming pile of shit is a bald-faced, congenital liar.  If this bill passes we will have no end of Hell.

Congressman Joe Wilson was right.

UPDATE: 3/9/2010

Another good summation of the politics of the health care bill in Commentary Magazine:
Why hasn’t the president been able to win over these and the other needed House Democrats? Well, the nature of the bill simply cannot be disguised – it’s a massive new entitlement, a huge tax increase, a whack at Medicare, and set of Rube Goldberg funding gimmicks designed to conceal the true cost. The lawmakers know it, and the public knows it.
Yes, anyone who has been paying attention, and not deluding themselves, knows this bill is a dog, layering another entitlement program on top of massive unfunded mandates in Medicare and Medicaid that threaten to bankrupt the nation.

UPDATE: 3/18/2010

The Boston Herald seems to agree with me:
As liberal Sen. Dick Durbin just admitted, “Anyone who would stand before you and say well, if you pass health care reform next year’s health care premiums are going down, I don’t think is telling the truth.”

And that “anyone” would be the president.
 So, Senator Durbin also thinks President Obama is a liar.  I'll say it again.  If Obamacare passes I predict that middle class taxes will go way up, and middle class health care will be of poorer quality than we have today.  The Democratic Party is telling the Big Lie here.  I hope the American people can prevent them from ramming this thing into law.

Tuesday, March 16, 2010

First Hint of UOC Prohibition Legislation

Who didn't know this was coming?  California State Assemblywoman Lori Saldana has announced that she is considering drafting legislation that will limit or prohibit unloaded open carry of firearms in California.  The text of the bill is not yet available, but it is expected that it will appear as AB 1934, a bill which until now has proposed a minor changes to firearms law.  I will keep an eye on this issue and make another post when the bill text is available.

So, it would seem that the Open Carry movement has provoked a reaction.  But is this the reaction that they hoped to produce?

Tuesday, March 2, 2010

McDonald v. Chicago - Oral Arguments Heard Today

Oral arguments were presented before the Supreme Court today in the case McDonald v. Chicago, a suit challenging Chicago's handgun registration ban.  Initial reports on the arguments at the Volokh Conspiracy and at Of Arms and The Law indicate that the Court will likely incorporate the 2nd Amendment via the 14th Amendment.

Where do we go from here?  Back to court of course!  This article explains that the third step in securing the right is to establish the standard of review that courts will use to determine the constitutionality of gun regulations, which will be accomplished in future court cases.  Keep an eye out on the California courts, because there are several cases that have been pending a decision in McDonald.  Once the decision is announced, several of California's gun laws may change quite quickly.