AB 1263: Economic Warfare Disguised as Compliance

[Warpspeed]

Moderators are people and we all make mistakes, even the mods here make mistakes.

I beg your pardon ?

 

[gorgothmog]

California keeps arguing about guns while ignoring the conditions that actually produce violence. Performative gun laws get passed, challenged in court, and overturned, burning public money while nothing changes on the ground. The Second Amendment makes these fights legally predictable, which means groups like the CRPA will keep winning and lawmakers will keep posturing. Meanwhile economic instability, untreated mental illness, housing insecurity, and hopelessness keep driving harm in every community. If we want real reductions in violence, we need to stop wasting time on symbolic restrictions and start fixing the material conditions people live under.

That is why I am arguing for a California focused voting bloc and coalition built around common ground economic policy, including universal mental healthcare. Call it the California Common Ground Coalition, a space where liberal and conservative gun owners agree that stability beats symbolism. The first step is electing an Attorney General who prioritizes economic policy and public well being over headline chasing lawsuits. This approach attracts the middle because it does not ask people to give up rights, it asks the state to do its job. If lawmakers are serious about safety, they should stop passing laws they know will lose in court and start investing in people instead.

 

[gorgothmog]

We need to wake the F- up and elect an AG.

 

[Deleted member 16735]

California keeps arguing about guns while ignoring the conditions that actually produce violence. Performative gun laws get passed, challenged in court, and overturned, burning public money while nothing changes on the ground. The Second Amendment makes these fights legally predictable, which means groups like the CRPA will keep winning and lawmakers will keep posturing. Meanwhile economic instability, untreated mental illness, housing insecurity, and hopelessness keep driving harm in every community. If we want real reductions in violence, we need to stop wasting time on symbolic restrictions and start fixing the material conditions people live under.

That is why I am arguing for a California focused voting bloc and coalition built around common ground economic policy, including universal mental healthcare. Call it the California Common Ground Coalition, a space where liberal and conservative gun owners agree that stability beats symbolism. The first step is electing an Attorney General who prioritizes economic policy and public well being over headline chasing lawsuits. This approach attracts the middle because it does not ask people to give up rights, it asks the state to do its job. If lawmakers are serious about safety, they should stop passing laws they know will lose in court and start investing in people instead.

Unfortunately not quite predictable enough, But I do agree with your idea about a coalition. One of the big things I've been thinking about recently is that the gun regs are actually worse than performative. We have a situation here where Glock only made gen 3 guns for here because of the fact that the roster was frozen until only a few years ago and opened only because of a court action (because microstamping was literally impossible). Then of course they recently have to ban Glocks because they can be converted to an "automatic weapon" readily and easily, and they are being used in mass shootings like the one in downtown Sacramento.

I'm a guy that believes in regulations, it's what I do for a living. I've written them, enforced them etc. for the state of CA. Laws and regs have to be dynamic otherwise they are stupid and oppressive and even dangerous. In any other industry you have the stakeholders at the table when these rules are put in place. Except for gun laws in CA, the stakeholders at the table are anti gun lobby, not gun owners. So what do we need to do to actually have a seat with equal footing?

It's not a backroom conspiracy that many people want there to be less guns. In some ways I understand that way of thinking, they probably aren't wrong that if you could get rid of guns completely that there would be less gun violence, less opportunity for mass shootings etc. But we have the 2nd so even in a state like this guns aren't going away.

For this reason it's important that people have the freedom to practice their skill, anyone that has taken their ccw qualification has seen people woefully unqualified just barely put their five shots on paper at 3 yards. It's F-ed up, the regulations are there to stop them and yet they still pass because the instructor isn't going to fail them after they pay 300 bucks and sit in class for 16 hours. But every law that passes makes it harder to practice, everything is more expensive, it's now harder to fix your guns etc.

Anyway, I think there's a very meaningful argument that CA gun laws are actually working against public safety. A very good case to be made would be a victim of a Glock switch that was made easier by the CA gun roster. Finding people with standing is the hardest part though obviously. Historically these laws don't get tossed out just based on them making things annoying. But I digress...

 

[GoldensRule]

You're right Sir. I will message them

Edit: I messaged them it was not a mistake. To help with the analogy - If I cancelled an order on a customer without speaking to them first on why I cancelled it, then I would deserve to be put on blast publicly. In this case, I gave them the benefit of the doubt and did as you suggested - but it proved what we knew all along - they are poor leaders of that community.

So, what was the exact explanation they gave you?

 

[GoldensRule]

I beg your pardon ?

Present company excepted, of course...... ;-)