“California voters continue to show strong support for Proposition 63,” latimes.com reports, “according to a new statewide USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times poll. The initiative is supported by 58% of likely voters, while 35% are opposed.” Proposition 63 outlaws “large-capacity” ammunition magazines, mandates background checks for all bullet sales and transfers (no lending ammo), fines gun owners for failing to report lost or stolen firearms, and creates a new process for confiscating guns from citizens convicted of a felony. Cop carve-outs? Of course!
Click here to read the official full text of the Orwellian Safety for All Act. Its full provisions are deep into TLDR territory. But you don’t have to go far into the document to elevate your outrage. Check out what “The people of the State of California find and declare” as a prelude to the actual changes in the law.
1. Gun violence destroys lives, families and communities. From 2002 to 2013, California lost 38,576 individuals to gun violence. That is more than seven times the number of U.S. soldiers killed in combat during the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan combined. Over this same period, 2,258 children were killed by gunshot injuries in California. The same number of children murdered in the Sandy Hook elementary school massacre are killed by gunfire in this State every 39 days.
2. In 2013, guns were used to kill 2,900 Californians, including 251 children and teens. That year, at least 6,035 others were hospitalized or treated in emergency rooms for non-fatal gunshot wounds, including 1,275 children and teens.
3. Guns are commonly used by criminals. According to the California Department of Justice, in 2014 there were 1,169 firearm murders in California, 13,546 armed robberies involving a firearm, and 15,801 aggravated assaults involving a firearm.
4. This tragic violence imposes significant economic burdens on our society. Researchers conservatively estimate that gun violence costs the economy at least $229 billion every year, or more than $700 per American per year. In 2013 alone, California gun deaths and injuries imposed $83 million in medical costs and $4.24 billion in lost productivity.
5. California can do better. Reasonable, common-sense gun laws reduce gun deaths and injuries, keep guns away from criminals and fight illegal gun trafficking. Although California has led the nation in gun safety laws, those laws still have loopholes that leave communities throughout the state vulnerable to gun violence and mass shootings. We can close these loopholes while still safeguarding the ability of law-abiding, responsible Californians to own guns for self-defense, hunting and recreation.
6. We know background checks work. Federal background checks have already prevented more than 2.4 million gun sales to convicted criminals and other illegal purchasers in America. In 2012 alone, background checks blocked 192,043 sales of firearms to illegal purchasers including 82,000 attempted purchases by felons. That means background checks stopped roughly 225 felons from buying firearms every day. Yet California law only requires background checks for people who purchase firearms, not for people who purchase ammunition. We should close that loophole.
7. Right now, any violent felon or dangerously mentally ill person can walk into a sporting goods store or gun shop in California and buy ammunition, no questions asked. That should change. We should require background checks for ammunition sales just like gun sales, and stop both from getting into the hands of dangerous individuals.
8. Under current law, stores that sell ammunition are not required to report to law enforcement when ammunition is lost or stolen. Stores should have to report lost or stolen ammunition within 48 hours of discovering that it is missing so law enforcement can work to prevent that ammunition from being illegally trafficked into the hands of dangerous individuals.
9. Californians today are not required to report lost or stolen guns to law enforcement. This makes it difficult for law enforcement to investigate crimes committed with stolen guns, break-up gun trafficking rings, and return guns to their lawful owners. We should require gun owners to report their lost or stolen guns to law enforcement.
10. Under current law, people who commit felonies and other serious crimes are prohibited from possessing firearms. Yet existing law provides no clear process for those people to relinquish their guns when they become prohibited at the time of conviction. As a result, in 2014, the Department of Justice identified more than 17,000 people who possess more than 34,000 guns illegally, including more than 1,400 assault weapons. We need to close this dangerous loophole by not only requiring prohibited people to tum in their guns, but also ensuring that it happens.
11. Military-style large-capacity ammunition magazines – some capable of holding more than 100 rounds of ammunition – significantly increase a shooter’s ability to kill a lot of people in a short amount of time. That is why these large capacity ammunition magazines are common in many of America’s most horrific mass shootings, from the killings at 101 California Street in San Francisco in 1993 to Columbine High School in 1999 to the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut in 2012.
12. Today, California law prohibits the manufacture, importation and sale of military-style, large capacity ammunition magazines, but does not prohibit the general public from possessing them. We should close that loophole. No one except trained law enforcement should be able to possess these dangerous ammunition magazines.
13. Although the State of California conducts background checks on gun buyers who live in California, we have to rely on other states and the FBI to conduct background checks on gun buyers who live elsewhere. We should make background checks outside of California more effective by consistently requiring the State to report who is prohibited from possessing firearms to the federal background check system.
14. The theft of a gun is a serious and potentially violent crime. We should clarify that such crimes can be charged as felonies, and prevent people who are convicted of such crimes from possessing firearms.
We could fisk every one of these findings and declarations. We’ve done it for years. But if the above video is any indication, Golden State voters are incapable of comprehending rational arguments. So…it’s stupid! OK?
When Prop 63 passes, America’s most populous state will be lost to the cause of firearms freedom, as it continues its slide down socialism’s slippery slope.
Why don’t they just have California go to a FOID card and be done with it. Oh I know, they just want to make owning a gun crazy expensive.
I’m not a big fan of the Illinois model, but we have “universal” background checks for private sales with NO FFL or any registration. We have “universal” background checks for ammo with no cost other than the 30 day wait and $10 for 10 years for the FOID card. A FOID card will do everything they want with way less burden on firearms owners.
Of course it has no impact on firearms violence, if anything, it probably helps the gangs because they can get their clean members or friends pre-approved before even stepping foot in the gun store.
Each and every one of the things you mentioned is a blatant violation of the right to keep and bear arms as protected by the Second Amendment, regardless of what state proposes or enacts the legislation.
OK, so you are a fan of never good enough, well I hate to tell you this, but it doesn’t work. But if you feel that way, please become a test case for the Safe Schools Act. I’m sure if you started a fund, you might actually get the money necessary for all the lawyer fees.
My opinion is we should do whatever we can to lower the burden of firearms ownership, so we have more firearms owners, and thus our rights will be far more secure than any dead tree with scribbles on it from 200 years ago can provide.
I guess Ill just keep praying on that Earthquake.
Screw all these tyrannical control schemes.
Agreed. Overall though it’s proof they want the system to be intrusive and cumbersome as possible in order to make it as hard to buy firearms and ammunition as plausible. Pretty soon they’ll have an ammo quota as well.
They need to close that ammunition ‘loophole’ with a reasonable, common-sense gun law that requires a background check on each round of ammunition purchased…
First, California requires a background check for every firearms transfer, has for years. It does its own background check in addition to running names through NICS. Then on top of that there is a ten day wait for every firearm–and a recheck before the firearm is released.
Under this proposition, each purchaser must obtain an ammunition purchase permit, which costs $50, requires a background check, and is good for four years. And there is an additional requirement for a NICS check for every ammunition purchase, even though, presumably, the buyer has already passed a background check to buy the weapon the ammunition fits in and has passed a background check to get the ammunition purchase permit. Further, the proposition requires that the seller be separately licensed as an ammunition vendor (being an FFL is not enough) and is required to obtain the buyer’s name, address and I believe a thumb print in addition to the background check in a face-to-face transaction. Finally, the vendor must report the sale of all ammunition, with the buyer’s identifying information, the State DOJ at least weekly through an electronic portal. (The DOJ has neither the employees nor the computers to run such a portal. The estimated cost to develop such a system–which will have questionable benefits–is over $100 million. Paid for by gun owners, of course.) This adds to the cost of every purchase. Last but not least, internet sales are not “banned” per se, but the seller must ship the ammo to a California licensed ammunition vendor to do the required data keeping and background check, at a fee not to exceed $10. I rather suspect that there will be few licensed vendors willing to “sell” someone else’s ammo, collect state sales tax, and run the paper work for $10 a transaction, so the effect is to largely eliminate internet sales. (This last provision may constitute a violation of the interstate commerce clause, but that has yet to be determined.)
Are we having fun yet?
The ban on high capacity magazines is “cute.” No one has been allowed to purchase “high capacity magazines” in this state for 16 years. What this provision does is to outlaw those mags purchased prior to the ban and grandfathered in. Which accomplishes nothing, since such mags are readily available in all neighboring states and easily “smuggled” in. ]
There is already a law on the books that requires “prohibited persons” to turn in their guns. Many do not, according to the bill, but what the bill fails to state is that the state DOJ has a program in place to send investigators arund to collect those weapons, a program that conveniently transferred $5 million in excess DROS fees (overcharges) that are to be used, by statute, only to support the background system, to the program to collect guns. That program has been a failure. Most of the people on the list are felons, but the investigators usually go after the low hanging fruit–persons who have been involuntarily committed to a mental institution or are convicted of DV. The program has had a massive turnover, as agents trained are quite apt to leave that program and get a higher paying job in another department, having been trained at the expense of gun owners. So this portion of the bill is simply duplicative of existing law.
The purpose of this bill is simply to increase the cost of gun ownership–and to get Gavin Newsome elected as the next governor two years from now when Brown terms out.
Those opposed to the ban should, in 2018, vote en masse against Newsome in the democrat primary, supporting whoever is second in the polling, regardless of their positions on any issues.
Wont matter. The roughly 1/3 of all CA voters who are independent or republican have been disenfranchised for years by a democrat supermajority in the state Congress, and a Democrat Governor.
There was a chance a couple years ago to undo the blatant gerrymandering that kept something like 95% of all races safe for incumbents, but the Democrats got to the independent judiciary commission that appointed the districting board and filled it with Democrats or faux independents, leaving the districts carved out pretty much the same way- heavily favoring democrats in the process.
So, expect CA to look like Detroit in a decade or so. Middle class dual income workers and retirees are moving out in droves, leaving the welfare class behind, to serve the rich behind their gated communities.
3. Guns are commonly used by criminals. According to the California Department of Justice, in 2014 there were 1,169 firearm murders in California, 13,546 armed robberies involving a firearm, and 15,801 aggravated assaults involving a firearm.
This sounds more like and argument in favor of personally owned defensive firearms.
BTW, dare we ask how many of those “children” killed or wounded by firearms are actually mid to late teenage gangbangers?
Uber liberal “Slate” stated that in 2013 there were 194 child shooting deaths in the United States. The initiative claims 251 child deaths just in California. Huh?
The reason is that Slate counted a child as 12 or under. The initiative counts “children and teens.” Clearly, the California numbers are mainly teenagers. That is age 13 to 19.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/crime/2013/12/10/child_shootings_mother_jones_194_child_shooting_deaths_in_2013_show_that.html
None of this should come as a surprise to anyone. I’m expecting the result of the ammo background check requirement to severely reduce the in-state ammo sales and number of locations that ammo can be purchased – both of which are likely the intended result. Since a background check can take anywhere from a few minutes to 3 days, neither the seller nor the buyer will wait for it. The mail order ammo suppliers are going to be the only ones who benefit – until they close that loophole too. It won’t do anything to make the state safer, but nobody will ever be able to prove it. Seattle has a similar ammo law, with the same result.
Stock up while you can, folks. The 2A is being chipped away a little at a time and eventually won’t exist for all practical purposes.
Sorry to break the bad news to you, but see my rant above. Interstate sales MUST be processed in a face to face transaction by a California licensed ammunition vendor, and out of state vendors are REQUIRED to ship ONLY to a licensed vendor. Bye bye interstate sales. Stock up NOW.
Oh, and let me make it worse. You are allowed to bring into the sate any ammo you took out of the state–but it is a misdemeanor to bring ammo into the state without complying with the vendor face to face transaction requirements. So if you think you are going to run over to Reno or Needles to buy in bulk, better not park in the seller’s parking lot, and don’t buy at gun shows (where your license plate will be run).
“That is why these [standard] capacity ammunition magazines are common in many of America’s most horrific mass shootings”
Mmhmm, never mind the fact that the homicide rate with MSRs is nearly zero statistically.
Well, the drums used in some of the mass shootings are actually high capacity magazines. They neglect to mention the (Aurora?) Colorado case in which lives were likely saved because the shooter was using a garbage tier drum. Either way, they conflate those with standard capacity magazines for which the firearms were originally designed, so point partially taken.
“California. We have nice weather. That’s about it.”
And some excellent roads, a great concentration of attractive women, great science scene, and some events that could only happen in SF/LA.
That said, the PC was getting oppressive when I left the Bay Area around Y2K. I can only imagine Triggly Puff land now – terrifying.
Was there last year. And the weather is nice. Most of the women were physically attractive. Then you heard them talk. It’s like the Kardashians are cloning themselves. They think they are smart when they actually have no idea what they are talking about and are very condescending.
People were very rude. I got assaulted by a crackhead who tried to steal my rental car. That didn’t end well for him. Funny thing is I was threatened with arrest for it.
I will never go back. Seriously something wrong with the people who want to live there. It’s not a utopia. It’s a borderline police state. With all the inherent corruption that goes with it.
California has some of the worst rated roads in America yet the taxes are some of the highest. You could just hop right over to Las Vegas, Nevada and get better roads, less taxes, less traffic, attractive women, and people with overall less attitude. The only thing California has going for it is the weather and beaches.
I thought Nevada hasd lots of “beaches,” just no shorelines. ; )
Dont forget Moonbeam’s proposed road diet…
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/california-717421-road-state.html
I loved SoCal when I was there on business. It’s a shame their gun laws are so backwards. It’s one of the nicest (weather/environment) places I’ve been in the country.
58% of likely voters, while 35% are opposed
Seems the cultural divide in California continues to mirror its racial makeup.
You got a lot of people to agree limit the 1st amendment if it stops flag burning, so don’t be too surprised.
What will they be proposing and saying when crime does not go down after this passes?
Quite a lot of manipulative stats, looks like suicides are of course included in the ‘gun death’ figures (2,900 total gun deaths in 2013) yet there were approx. 1,200 murders (admittedly in 2014), a delta of 1,700. This closely correlates to the national suicide ‘gun death’ rate of about 66% i.e California are lobbing in suicides to inflate the figures.
On to ‘the children’, my bet is that they include some sort of artificially high upper age limit for the term ‘child’. To me, an 18 year old 200lb gang member is not a child. The folks behind the stats want you to think of a cute young Kindergartner in pig tails.
By their own admission, felons use firearms. Nothing they propose will stop the ability of a felon to acquire a firearm.
Once again, by their own admission, many existing laws are currently being broken so they propose more extra double down super laws! This is pure population control, plain and simple. They seem to have no willingness to enforce the laws that are already on the books, maybe that would be a good place to start.
Rant over!
Wow…the entire state is going full Chiraq..you never go full Chiraq.
Anyway, I continue to feel sorry for the 35% stuck in that socialist mess. The tipping point was passed about 10 years ago.
Too bat they don’t have Chiraq’s gun laws. I bet every gun owner in California would love to go fully “Chiraq”
Too bad they don’t have Chiraq’s gun laws. I bet every gun owner in California would love to go fully “Chiraq”
We prosecute our politicians more so than Cali does. And most counties outside of Crook County are pretty gun friendly, State law aside
Fortunately, constitutionally guaranteed civil rights are not subject to popular vote, if they were, there would be no reason to have a Bill of Rights in the first place.
As soon as I saw “Horsey” attached to this LATimes cartoon I didn’t know whether to laugh or cry. He left Seattle -apparently not liberal enough at the time -and headed for LA. You should check out his award winning editorial cartoons. Those he disagrees with are invariably white obese males, often portrayed as lower socioeconomic and lower education knuckledraggers.
He seems to have a thing for drawing young busty women in his politically charged cartoons as well.
LA and Horsey are a match made in an elite statist heaven.
POLICE PANDA BEARS FOR ALL!
Background checks for ammunition? Pray they never get around to one background check per bullet/cartridge.
So when none of this works, they’ll just claim it’s because of Nevada and Arizona.
What you bet a Checkpoint Charliefornia sort of situation then gets proposed?
” AUTHORITARIAN, POLICE SAFETY STATE ! ” —Just say it like it really is…..Nothing to do with crime…It’$ so political corruption can reach new heights! We’ll be the largest 3rd world government on the planet ! Can’t have an armed population, and a NWO ! Every common citizen will be disarmed, or made into criminal ! But, you’ll get a shiny “yes, or no button”. Since , that’s about as far as a common peasant will have in connection to Participation within the government…
Brought to you by demographic replacement due to massive, unrestrained immigration.
We already have “universal background checks” they have been clamoring for including gun shows and what should be private transfers. If they are getting guns anyway something tells me putting more fees and trouble to get ammo isn’t going to effect the intended targets….. ooooh, I see.
Big sigh….So much BS in those numbers but they will keep spewing them until the all the sheeple believe it. Then they’ll say well everybody else is against magazines I’ll vote with them. Save the children!
That’s why I left that place. So nice living in a free state now. California is soon to be lost completely. For the last 25 years I voted, wrote letters, signed petitions. It was a losing battle. Between the biased media and corrupt politicians (like Leland Yee and others) we had no choice but to sell the house and move. Brought my tax dollars to a place where maybe they won’t go to support asshats like Gavin Newsom.
IMO, all you gun owners in Kommiefornistan that can afford to do so, pack up and leave.
It isn’t that far to Arizona.
I have mentioned before that CA is a learning ground for the rest of you. Start building roadblocks for these infringements because they are coming your way. Talk to your politicians and get some initiatives passed to make it harder for future politicians to make these silly laws. It is now up to you and the ball is in your court.
Almost all states have some infringements, its just a matter of degree.
As a full blooded northern New Englander who relocated to California so his wife could take a substantial promotion (better or worse, I suppose) I’ve come to the conclusion that the best way to fight gun control legislation in California is with more gun control legislation.
Bear with me here.
At some point prior to my arrival some sort of gun “safety” legislation established a handgun safety roster that made it so that only certain handguns that met certain safety standards could be sold in California. One of those standards was microstampting, which is way too expensive and involved for most manufacturers to bother with. The result, no new semi-auto handguns can be brought into California excepting, wait for it, for law enforcement officers.
My idea is to get a ballot initiative going with some kind of catchy title that the vapid and narcissistic masses of California will vote for Pavlovian style. Call it something like “The universal firearms safety consistency act of 2018.”
The idea would be to end the law enforcement exemption from microstamping. After all, wouldn’t it make sense in this era when police accountability is a trendy, hot button issue to know, beyond a shadow of a doubt in the aftermath of a police shooting to know what officers fired their weapons and how many rounds they discharged?
The end of other LEO exemptions could be snuck in as well.
This wouldn’t necessarily lead to a relaxation of firearms restrictions on us mere civilian peasants, but it would throw a wrench into the works and act as an exercise in a new set of tactics to try and stem the tide of draconian gun legislation here. If nothing else, maybe it would result in the powers that be making it harder to get initiatives on the ballot (which is dangerously easy in California).
I’m certainly not anti-law enforcement, but I am willing to fight dirty and throw them under the bus politically in order to get what I want. Yelling about rights isn’t working. We have to get ultra Machiavellian here.
Another idea I had was introducing a measure that requires all female CCW permit applicants to be rubber stamped in the affirmative. We could then ask opponents to the measure why they are opposed to women being able to defend themselves.This would capitalize on the hotbutton and trendy gender issues that are always all over the news now.
A further justification for this could be the fact that the police seem to be “losing” guns at the most convenient times possible.
Oh and ‘If it can save just one “child’s” life’
As for removing the law enforcement exemption for the roster of “safe” handguns, I think this is a great idea. I’d be more than happy to sign a petition to get this on the ballot. I bet it wouldn’t be too hard to get it to pass either.
I have had similar ideas. However, law enforcement will carve out an exception for itself even if the law says it can’t. Or they will feign compliance – who is going to check for microstamping on cop guns?
An easier way would be to encourage bankruptcy of local govs (the whole state?). Many are bankrupt already. This would allow for immediate and drastic fiscal realignment – a.k.a. defund police and prosecutors. I would incorporate your idea(s) and create props and bills that have duplicate language to other anti-gun bills & props but also have major overreach (that will surely get struck down) packed in. Furthermore, create pipelines for out of state/country guns to be brought in and sold on Indian reservations in CA (and pay off the right people). Create total confusion w/ weapons laws, flood weapons into the state, and defund cops & lawyers. When everything is illegal nothing is 🙂
“We have to get ultra Machiavellian here.”
You do know that could entail actions such as burning down a constable’s house with him & his fam inside? You know that right? Most people are not willing to go that far and that is part of the problem.
I was thinking politically Machiavellian and not violent. Violence will only further cement the stereotype of gun owners as a bunch of toothless, angry, hateful, ignorant militia types. Regardless of whether or not that stereotype is true, it’s there and it hurts us. Image is absolutely everything these days.
I will gleefully be misleading, manipulative, and conniving to further a cause, but I won’t engage in violence against anyone who isn’t physically threatening myself or my loved ones.
Your recommendations are good, but if there are not already enough people to stop the nonsense, where do you get the majority of voters who will be able to replace all the bad laws?
The idea is to cleverly title the initiative so people will vote yes based on that alone. The bubble people that comprise the California electorate will vote yes based on the word safety alone.
It would be wise to bypass the legislature and aim for a ballot initiative. The process for that is ridiculously easy in California.
The anti-gun mafia are not peopled with unintelligent lawyers. The same anti-gun groups and funders would spend enormous amounts of time and money to analyze any “trick name” initiatives. The essential and central issue is that the number of voters who are anti-gun far outweigh any number of pro-gun people you can round-up in Caliporn. Sad fact, but fact it is.
Still, I wish your ideas would succeed.
Day after day, more people come to L.A.
Don’t you tell anybody, the whole place’s slipping away
Where can we go, when there’s no San Francisco?
Better get ready to tie up the boat in Idaho
— Shango (1969)
Insisting on ending LEO exemptions isn’t playing dirty. It’s simply rational.
Police have authority and can call for backup. We can not. If we don’t need more than 10 rounds per reload, then what possible need do they have for more?
As a mostly happy resident of CA, I can assure you that only 65% of Californians have their heads up their asses. The rest of us are too busy wondering whether our kale chips are gluten free.
If there’s a silver lining to this shitshow, its that the legislature has gone full-retard. The crazier the law, the more likely it is to be struck down. If they had “just” moved to ban standard capacity mags, or “just” required background checks for ammo, there would be no hope. But by trying to eat the whole elephant in one bite, there’s a better chance of choking on it. Bring on the lawyers and the money.
Oh, and go easy on the “you deserve it” rhetoric. We are really all in this together. What happens in CA will soon be coming to a legislature near you!
Actually, if the not crazy people of Californication moved-out, they could bolster another state where the threat of Caliporn couldn’t take root because the population would be strong enough to resist. Enclaves of resisters is the essance of “divide and conquer”.
Your state really needs to Balkanize in the worst way. SoCal’s whims are running your state into the ground.
Like I said, I’m just happy that the legislature and the voters are bat shit crazy. If their laws were less extreme they would be harder to challenge. Any victory we have will come from the courts, not the legislature.
“Guns are commonly used by criminals.”
There’s a fallacy going on here, a failure to tell the whole truth. Guns are far more commonly used by law-abiding citizens.
being stupid and giving up your rights, as stupid as it is, IS their right. so if thats where all the yuppies want to congregate and establish nanny state living quarters, so be it. now i know where NOT to go.
Constitution or not…it takes seriously evil people to previously allow ownership of something then on their own accord decide not to honor a grandfather clause.
People who support gun control need to take a serious, serious, look at what their supporting. Making people criminals over night because they bought their once legal magazine and have every right to not give them up. Hell it’s wrong on so many levels. Its not just crazy gun control its theft by the government. Said person bought something with his hard earned money…now give it back? People of California…the time to have a physical revolution is now.
Fascinating. They continue to give people addicted to illegal drugs free needles and “less lethal” toxins. Yet they continue to take away from peaceful, law-abiding citizens items that are Constitutionally protected.
I’d say it’s about time to cut the stitches out of one of those 50 stars.
The problem with proposition 63 is we are being outspent by a large amount of liberal donors.
The state Democratic Party and wealthy billionaires have financed California Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom’s “Safety for All” voter proposition.
According to figures maintained by California Secretary of State Alex Padilla as of Oct. 13, Newsom’s campaign has raised at least $5,065,019.
Of Newsom’s millions, analysis by Guns.com shows no less than $1.18 million in donations from the state Democratic Party. Newsom’s own campaign for lieutenant governor has forwarded $727,564 in contributions left over from his successful 2014 bid for his current office. And then comes a host of billionaire philanthropists.
Former Facebook president and Napster co-founder Sean Parker — who is also helping to front a ballot measure in Nevada — has chipped in $400,000. Real estate broker George M. Marcus and Hyatt Hotels heir and billionaire Nicholas Pritzker have each given the campaign $250,000. Longtime Democratic Party benefactor San Francisco philanthropist Susie Tompkins Buell has forked over $200,000. Dagmar Dolby and Alexander Soros — son and heir of billionaire George Soros — have each donated $100,000.
What is most disturbing about this is the fact that these people were able to gain their wealth because of the freedoms granted under the U.S. Constitution. With that being said charity is a good thing and it’s great that you can give back. But there are far better causes which include many health related issues such as cancer that affect millions of Americans every day. But to take away someone’s constitutional rights which is how you got to the place you are in the first place is reprehensible.
On a side note I have talked to a number of people including some Democrats that feel this proposition is to overreaching. if you go to Gavin Newsom’s Facebook page anytime he post something about promoting proposition 63 there are tremendous number of people that say they’re going to vote no.
This poll is such BS! When I was contacted by these pollsters and I informed them I was a libertarian with conservative leanings when it came to the bill of rights, I was told I failed to meet the poll’s criteria.
It really looks to me that CA is overdue for a temporary suspension of statehood. It needs to be demoted to territory status until it gets its constitutional ducks in a row.
Ugh, LIB-SPEAK! It BURNS!
I was born in California and have lived in California all my life. I will never consider anywhere else my home. My wife and I have built our business here, and it could not do this level of business in Arizona or Nevada. My hope is that in a few years I’ll be able to buy a home in a free State, but for now, my only goal is a home here.
I am an hour from the forest, forty-five minutes from the beach, an hour and a half from the desert and two hours from snow. Nowhere else do I get the luxury of choosing my climate with such speed. Nowhere else has the roads I’ve driven. Nowhere else puts me within six hours of so many race tracks or as many spectacles of nature’s beauty.
The laws have gotten more onerous, the cities more cancerous. Those on the State’s teat will vote the way the State wants, and certainly don’t mind that the State derives its power from the barrel of that which they rail against.
Do not think those of us who stay are weak- we stay to fight. We stay because this is where we live and this is where we love. We stay because this is our land, and we’ll not give it up.
For those of us who think all Californians complicit- please don’t come here. It’s obvious you’re closed-minded and ignorant and we have enough of that from the left.
Perhaps the issue is that people who do not (or do not want to) live in Californication are becoming weary of complaints out of former Mexico.
Staying and fighting sounds really honorable and principled, but…..the Ol’ South died of a principle. Fractionation of a public into weak and strong voting blocs is the essance of politics.
When I was working with people who were laid-off from a major manufacturer, almost all of them refused to look for work outside the city (“it’s our home”). The had no job prospects, no family that would pay all their expenses, no desire to escape their hopeless situation. They ended-up bankrupt, lost homes and cars and schools and savings, but they held home and extended family more important then their own futures.
There is zero probability that your state will ever become “red”, no matter how stubborn POTG become. Move to where you can add strength to a free state, so that Californication cannot happen in another place.
But, perhaps staying in your “home” is fair trade for relentless erosion of your civil rights.
I’m basically ambivalent on this. Cali is as Cali does. I’ve said before that the state is lost. I don’t think this passing means the state is lost, I think that the fact that the state is lost is why this will likely pass. That is to say this is a symptom not a cause. The video only illustrates what a dipshit your average Californian is.
Also, tangentially related, without the 14th Amendment Incorporation Doctrine nothing in the Bill of Rights would apply to the states unless that state had it in their own Constitution as well. The Bill of Rights, in it’s original form only applied to FedGov. So while we often decry judicial activism it sometimes works out in our favor…
Terrible Prop proposing more terrible gun laws. Given the epic gun sales, I hope the ban becomes as meaningless as enforcing immigration and weed laws. Except immigration should actually be enforced.
I’m hoping for a Trump 2016 victory and a SCOTUS justice like the late great Antonin Scalia can offer some relief. The idiots and proggies (but I repeat myself) outnumber those who care about freedom 2 – 1 in CA.
Better believe other states will try the same BS when this happens.
Well if the derp gets passed CA becomes even more of a decoy state. Softer targets for terrorists.
If the lefty socialists continue to get their way, can reeducation camps for the rest of the populace be far behind?
Wow, that video says it all about who the LA Times thinks the target audience is. What if there were magical unicorns that turned all the guns into beef jerky? What if the pink unicorns could turn ammunition into candy corn? Hard to believe their heads don’t implode from the suck.
Awesome. I’m all for it. The more insane and unconstitutional provisions that slave states impose, the starker the contrast with the free states. A more widely bifurcated America at the state level makes it more difficult to reach “compromises” at the national level. Make the distances too far, the differences too great, then make your haphazard national attempts at covil disarmament. There will be no common ground remaining and free states will come to doubt why we remain in this self-destructive socialist union.
Comments are closed.