New Political Coalition - California Common Ground Coalition

[Jimi Jah]

Let's clarify a couple of things. Entering the US illegally is a Federal misdemeanor. Other Federal misdemeanors include: DUI and Traffic Violations on federal parkways, Drug Possession - Simple possession of small quantities of controlled substances, Disorderly Conduct - Creating public disturbances or fighting on federal property, etc.

Unlawful Presence: Simply being in the U.S. without valid documentation (such as overstaying a visa) is generally a civil violation, not a criminal offense. Penalties for civil violations include deportation and fines but not federal prison time.

Many, many undocumented people are not being repatriated to their home countries, but that is irrelevant to the topic of the discussion.

I'm not interested in what other countries do. Other countries torture prisoners, should we do that here just because they do?

Undocumented people, as a whole, produce a net positive effect on our economy. If we are going to allow employers to get away with employing them and collecting and remitting taxes to the treasury without receiving any kind of benefits then we as a state and a nation can afford to provide medical care for sick and or injured human beings. I can't speak for you but when someone shows up at my door hungry, I feed them and when they are sick, I try to take care of them. It's the decent, compassionate thing to do. Many Americans have lost sight of decency instead, they seem to focus on making billionaires wealthier and kicking the unfortunate to the curb. It's an ass-backwards way of thinking and running a country.

Yes, first illegal entry is a civil violation. However, deportation is the specified punishment. 2nd illegal entry is a felony with a two year stint in the federal pen. Many are in that category, whether they were deported or "visited" their home town and then came back. It is rarely enforced, hence the guys with 5 or more re-entries.

As to costs, illegals get more in bennies than they pay in sales or income taxes. California spends around $20,000 per child, per year for K-12 education. Hispanic tend to have large families so multiply that figure accordingly.

Medical costs are covered by California Medicaid. What Californians don't cover for that the federal government pays the rest. That was one of the issues during the failed government shutdown. If an illegal worker pulls in $50,000 per year basic math tells us someone else has to make up the difference.

It is illegal to hire an illegal alien. Employers are rarely charged. That is because of republicans and their big biz lobby. In order to become employed you need a TIN, available to anyone, a major loophole. One also needs a valid Social Security number. Since an illegal can't get one they must steal a valid number, known as identity theft. That is a crime.

We currently have a severe housing shortage. This was intensified by Biden bringing in millions of illegals without any ability to absorb them. Quickly increase the supply of people you get a shortage of available housing units. Deport the estimated 30~40 million illegals here and we would have a housing surplus. Rents would also drop to entice prospective renters.

About 1/3 of our state prison population is composed of illegal alien criminals. They should not be there. That is the reason we have prison overcrowding and why Newsom released thousands of felons back on to the streets rather than have those unneeded and unwanted illegal alien criminals deported. We have enough home grown criminals without needing to import more.

Many industries are now dominated by illegal workers. That cuts wages and hurts Americans that can't survive with such a decreased income. Big Ag relies on that cheap labor. That is the reason why Ag worker wages don't keep up with the cost of living. That is also why many growers have resisted automating their farms with modern machinery that can replace human labor. Other advanced countries like Japan have done that years ago.

I remember being envious of some friends in the 1970's that did home construction. The dry wall guys got paid $25 and hour in 1974. That was very good pay for that time. By 1980 they were all out of business from illegal workers getting 5 bucks an hour.

Sure, it's noble to take care of the less fortunate. When our social safety net gets strained by adding millions of foreign nationals to that service, American citizens will suffer as a result. 2 billion would come here tomorrow if they could. When someone supports illegal aliens staying in our country I always have to ask, "how many"?

Then I ask, " how many is too many"? That tells the rest of the story.

 

[Hamburger Monster]

For fans of capitalism, the economy as it is today requires growth. Growth requires new members. New members requires immigration. Lack of immigration requires more government intervention and control on the economy. See: Japan.

We have more jobs than citizens because that's how it's designed. I don't think anyone reasonable would argue that we should have open borders and just not know who is coming in. But the programs to facilitate legal immigration don't touch the surface of the actual need for labor that we have. In California alone we are talking 2 million workers. People think 2 million workers that work for the lowest wages of anyone, do the dirtiest jobs there are, for the longest hours are somehow a net drain on society? I promise you the people that think that contribute far less than the average immigrant.

It is possible for citizens to have children. We don't have to import everyone

And those 2 million in California, they are all in Texas and Florida now. If the California government wouldn't be so hard on it's citizens and wasn't so corrupt, we wouldn't have this shortage.

 

[Hamburger Monster]

Copied from another site

"In 1972 you could mail order everything from pistols to automatic rifles in a catalog.

Firearm education was taught in many schools across the country as part of curriculum.

Little to no paperwork required to purchase. Thank you.

How many school shootings were there in 1972?

None.

Guns aren’t the problem"

This reinforce my and others idea that it's medications, video games, lack of consequence, fatherless homes, etc that is the real problem

 

[couragewolf]

By this logic is Marjorie Taylor Green all of a sudden a t for wanting ACA subsidies to continue? Is Massie a war dove for not wanting war in Venezuela? You'd be surprised how well paid family leave polls on both sides. Also, shouldn't we as gun owners advocate for access to things like mental healthcare?

The people responding in this thread don’t understand that 90% including the entire White House team currently are all liberals.

Most of them have no idea what liberal values are but simultaneously subscribe heavily to them so long as a certain set of outcomes associated with this values are being proposed.

I’d go as far as to say I can make a pretty strong argument that Trump is the most liberal president in American history. He’s just liberal in ways all of these “conservatives” agree with neoliberalism.

Confusing liberalism with leftism is already a clear sign of uniquely American Fox cnn msnbc brain worms.

A simple primer:
Liberal - anyone that’s gone to Epsteins island and wants to take your tax money to build the government as much as possible to protect you from yourselves.

: a blue haired librarian protestor who is obviously incapable of harming anyone but simultaneously so dangerous we need to all grant complete and total surveillance powers to the FBI, ATF and authorize domestic military actions to protect us from.

 

[gorgothmog]

The people responding in this thread don’t understand that 90% including the entire White House team currently are all liberals.

Most of them have no idea what liberal values are but simultaneously subscribe heavily to them so long as a certain set of outcomes associated with this values are being proposed.

I’d go as far as to say I can make a pretty strong argument that Trump is the most liberal president in American history. He’s just liberal in ways all of these “conservatives” agree with neoliberalism.

Confusing liberalism with leftism is already a clear sign of uniquely American Fox cnn msnbc brain worms.

A simple primer:
Liberal - anyone that’s gone to Epsteins island and wants to take your tax money to build the government as much as possible to protect you from yourselves.

: a blue haired librarian protestor who is obviously incapable of harming anyone but simultaneously so dangerous we need to all grant complete and total surveillance powers to the FBI, ATF and authorize domestic military actions to protect us from.

Not 100% with you, but you've got rock solid and principled takes.

 

[BigBossman]

Yes, first illegal entry is a civil violation. However, deportation is the specified punishment. 2nd illegal entry is a felony with a two year stint in the federal pen. Many are in that category, whether they were deported or "visited" their home town and then came back. It is rarely enforced, hence the guys with 5 or more re-entries.

As to costs, illegals get more in bennies than they pay in sales or income taxes. California spends around $20,000 per child, per year for K-12 education. Hispanic tend to have large families so multiply that figure accordingly.

Medical costs are covered by California Medicaid. What Californians don't cover for that the federal government pays the rest. That was one of the issues during the failed government shutdown. If an illegal worker pulls in $50,000 per year basic math tells us someone else has to make up the difference.

It is illegal to hire an illegal alien. Employers are rarely charged. That is because of republicans and their big biz lobby. In order to become employed you need a TIN, available to anyone, a major loophole. One also needs a valid Social Security number. Since an illegal can't get one they must steal a valid number, known as identity theft. That is a crime.

We currently have a severe housing shortage. This was intensified by Biden bringing in millions of illegals without any ability to absorb them. Quickly increase the supply of people you get a shortage of available housing units. Deport the estimated 30~40 million illegals here and we would have a housing surplus. Rents would also drop to entice prospective renters.

About 1/3 of our state prison population is composed of illegal alien criminals. They should not be there. That is the reason we have prison overcrowding and why Newsom released thousands of felons back on to the streets rather than have those unneeded and unwanted illegal alien criminals deported. We have enough home grown criminals without needing to import more.

Many industries are now dominated by illegal workers. That cuts wages and hurts Americans that can't survive with such a decreased income. Big Ag relies on that cheap labor. That is the reason why Ag worker wages don't keep up with the cost of living. That is also why many growers have resisted automating their farms with modern machinery that can replace human labor. Other advanced countries like Japan have done that years ago.

I remember being envious of some friends in the 1970's that did home construction. The dry wall guys got paid $25 and hour in 1974. That was very good pay for that time. By 1980 they were all out of business from illegal workers getting 5 bucks an hour.

Sure, it's noble to take care of the less fortunate. When our social safety net gets strained by adding millions of foreign nationals to that service, American citizens will suffer as a result. 2 billion would come here tomorrow if they could. When someone supports illegal aliens staying in our country I always have to ask, "how many"?

Then I ask, " how many is too many"? That tells the rest of the story.

Stop making sense.

 

[Deleted member 31158]

The people responding in this thread don’t understand that 90% including the entire White House team currently are all liberals.

Most of them have no idea what liberal values are but simultaneously subscribe heavily to them so long as a certain set of outcomes associated with this values are being proposed.

I’d go as far as to say I can make a pretty strong argument that Trump is the most liberal president in American history. He’s just liberal in ways all of these “conservatives” agree with neoliberalism.

Confusing liberalism with leftism is already a clear sign of uniquely American Fox cnn msnbc brain worms.

A simple primer:
Liberal - anyone that’s gone to Epsteins island and wants to take your tax money to build the government as much as possible to protect you from yourselves.

: a blue haired librarian protestor who is obviously incapable of harming anyone but simultaneously so dangerous we need to all grant complete and total surveillance powers to the FBI, ATF and authorize domestic military actions to protect us from.

I just finished with both a CA politics class, and a US Government class this past semester. That said: Liberals as the dictionary describes them are not the problem. It’s the PROGRESSIVES that are the problem. Liberals and Conservatives actually have a lot in common, not just here, but around the world too. They’re both pro smaller government, they both believe in the rule of law, and for the most part, they both support constitutional limits on government. People correlate Liberalism with Progressivism, much like they correlate Conservatism with Populism, and while they can both be a sub category of the larger movement, they’re not the same, both Progressivism and Populism are more ‘direct’ (for lack of a better term). People get so emotional and heated that they never bother to actually LOOK AT THE DIFFERENCES and just toss ‘liberal’ and ‘conservative’ around as insults, and frankly, it’s really a sign of how our education system has failed as a whole. As for the CA side of things: again, it’s the Progressives that are causing the majority of the problems within the state, not the true Liberals. If we’re going to blame someone, blame the Progressive idiots in the Assembly and Senate, and the people who voted for them.

 

[gorgothmog]

Hey everyone. After doing some focus grouping here and across other platforms I think I've reached an area where to apply the most immediate pressure, and to push the the right sub population of gun owners. I will be focusing my messaging on rational firearms regulation by targeting the outsourcing of California firearm lawmaking to out of state ideological entities like Every Town. The group most suited for this is the Dems, s, libs, and Neolibs. We will need to take responsibility and bring our wing to heel. My solution will be using the FFL03, COE, FSC to facilitate a rational licensing system, and trying to open up the DES into a modern administrative framework for external read only API calls to CFARS, etc. I know our brethren here will say "shall not be infringed," but that's not the reality we live in. We need to to demand rational law, not outsourced law.

 

[couragewolf]

I just finished with both a CA politics class, and a US Government class this past semester. That said: Liberals as the dictionary describes them are not the problem. It’s the PROGRESSIVES that are the problem. Liberals and Conservatives actually have a lot in common, not just here, but around the world too. They’re both pro smaller government, they both believe in the rule of law, and for the most part, they both support constitutional limits on government. People correlate Liberalism with Progressivism, much like they correlate Conservatism with Populism, and while they can both be a sub category of the larger movement, they’re not the same, both Progressivism and Populism are more ‘direct’ (for lack of a better term). People get so emotional and heated that they never both to actually LOOK AT THE DIFFERENCES and just toss ‘liberal’ and ‘conservative’ around as insults, and frankly, it’s really a sign of how our education system has failed as a whole. As for the CA side of things: again, it’s the Progressives that are causing the majority of the problems within the state, not the true Liberals. If we’re going to blame someone, blame the Progressive idiots in the Assembly and Senate, and the people who voted for them.

College told you democrats and republicans are both pro smaller government? The same democrats and republicans that just increased discretionary spending as a result of the largest “cut spending and services” exercise in all of US history?

Great civics classes they’re teaching nowadays guess the critical analysis of argument is no longer a required course.

 

[Deleted member 31158]

College told you democrats and republicans are both pro smaller government? The same democrats and republicans that just increased discretionary spending as a result of the largest “cut spending and services” exercise in all of US history?

Great civics classes they’re teaching nowadays guess the critical analysis of argument is no longer a required course.

“While often seen as opposites, liberalism and conservatism both generally value
individual liberty, support constitutional limits on government, believe in the importance of rule of law, and recognize the benefits of free markets, though they differ significantly in how much government intervention they support for achieving these goals, with liberals often favoring more social safety nets and conservatives emphasizing less regulation and individual responsibility.”

I’m not talking about Democrats and Republicans, I’m talking about CONSERVATIVES and LIBERALS. The D and R are a sub category that only exists within the US. Just because you either didn’t go to college, or haven’t gone to school in 50 years doesn’t automatically mean everything that doesn’t align with your beliefs is automatically wrong. There is a larger picture believe it or not.

 

[cali_jazz]

Hey everyone. After doing some focus grouping here and across other platforms I think I've reached an area where to apply the most immediate pressure, and to push the the right sub population of gun owners. I will be focusing my messaging on rational firearms regulation by targeting the outsourcing of California firearm lawmaking to out of state ideological entities like Every Town. The group most suited for this is the Dems, s, libs, and Neolibs. We will need to take responsibility and bring our wing to heel. My solution will be using the FFL03, COE, FSC to facilitate a rational licensing system, and trying to open up the DES into a modern administrative framework for external read only API calls to CFARS, etc. I know our brethren here will say "shall not be infringed," but that's not the reality we live in. We need to to demand rational law, not outsourced law.

You might consider reaching out to Rick Travis of CPRA, he is always talking about not enough gun owners actually advocating and lobbying for 2A issues.

You'll want to ensure you're not working cross-purpose and in-concert with the CA advocacy groups and have the authority & credibility to act on behalf of CA gun owners before engaging with those well-funded and highly organized anti-gun groups.

I follow their YouTube channel: CPRA TV https://www.youtube.com/@CRPATV/


P: (714) 992-2772
E: contact@crpa.org

 

[couragewolf]

“While often seen as opposites, liberalism and conservatism both generally value
individual liberty, support constitutional limits on government, believe in the importance of rule of law, and recognize the benefits of free markets, though they differ significantly in how much government intervention they support for achieving these goals, with liberals often favoring more social safety nets and conservatives emphasizing less regulation and individual responsibility.”

I’m not talking about Democrats and Republicans, I’m talking about CONSERVATIVES and LIBERALS. The D and R are a sub category that only exists within the US. Just because you either didn’t go to college, or haven’t gone to school in 50 years doesn’t automatically mean everything that doesn’t align with your beliefs is automatically wrong. There is a larger picture believe it or not.

I think conservatives and liberals are a fantasy. No one who proclaims they are conservative actually acts in such a way other than when it’s directly individually convenient, and likewise with liberals.

Both respect the law until you are inconvenienced by it, say your coal mine doesn’t have cheap enough labor, or its exhausts pollute the air in the nearby town, or your ally commits a war crime etc.

These ideals are great on paper but how they relate to reality on the ground is more a marketing campaign than an actual application of values. People desperately cling to the idea they’re apart of some virtuous group but more often than not act entirely hypocritically.

I subscribe to consistent laws of human nature rather than fantasies like liberals and conservatives actually being something other than a convenient shield for people to rally behind when pressed to perform with any sort of integrity.

Yes I went to college and took political science and critical analysis of argument etc. it’s pretty obvious political science is all bull.

 

[Deleted member 16735]

Hey everyone. After doing some focus grouping here and across other platforms I think I've reached an area where to apply the most immediate pressure, and to push the the right sub population of gun owners. I will be focusing my messaging on rational firearms regulation by targeting the outsourcing of California firearm lawmaking to out of state ideological entities like Every Town. The group most suited for this is the Dems, s, libs, and Neolibs. We will need to take responsibility and bring our wing to heel. My solution will be using the FFL03, COE, FSC to facilitate a rational licensing system, and trying to open up the DES into a modern administrative framework for external read only API calls to CFARS, etc. I know our brethren here will say "shall not be infringed," but that's not the reality we live in. We need to to demand rational law, not outsourced law.

We need a "sportsman's exemption" that would allow magazines, off roster pistols and semi automatic rifles with pistol grip use and acquisition.

 

[Hit Factor]

Do you think we could build a California Common Ground Coalition that brings liberal and conservative gun owners together by focusing primarily on economic class issues?

Do you think we could build a California Common Ground Coalition that brings liberal and conservative gun owners together by focusing primarily on gun rights and the elimination of gun control laws that hinder the ability of law-abiding citizens to protect and defend themselves and their families?

 

[Ro-bo]

Do you think we could build a California Common Ground Coalition that brings liberal and conservative gun owners together (snipped for brevity).

There's a lot going on in your post. Feel free to correct me if I'm misreading anything, trying to put all the pieces together. I don't want to parse the thing to death.

To answer the question above and the adjacent one in the poll, I'd have to say no. But it's a qualified no. Letting the 2A become political is what's driven us down the dark road we've been on for several decades. Doing more politics isn't the ticket out of this jam. Further, a coalition of "liberal and conservative gun owners" is still just a coalition of gun owners at the end of the day. That said, gun owners, as I figure it's defined here, means people who are passionate about the 2A, etc. and not just simply those who own a gun/guns. The two are distinct. However, gun owners are completely marginalized and are a very fringe minority bloc of votes no matter how you slice it. That in turn means that the power to influence something big, like a candidate for a high profile state office such as AG, is outside the scope of their abilities.

Lastly, organizing (as in people) is an art. If you take a look at successful social movements, they all tend to flourish when they capture swathes of the population with no vested interest. Same sex marriage is a good example. The tipping point was a broad change of heart throughout the population and that only happened because they forged alliances outside of their own tent. The 2A crowd hasn't done that, and at times have actively discouraged growing the base for various stupid reasons, mostly due to politics.

As for the more specific task of addressing, or just identifying root causes of violence, it's not a novel concept. But it's also a trap because lawmaking may state that such-and-such bill is meant to do just that, but in reality, the disconnect is heavy. That's not on accident either. Framing everything as an attempt to "reduce violence" is just words; the preface of lot's of terrible bills enrolled by the state over many sessions in the legislature. In other words, take those words with a giant grain of salt. For us as 2A advocates to engage that concept, the other side has to first be honest about their intentions, which they aren't.

More to the point here, for a long time the pro-gun community beat the drum of dO-sOMeThINg-AbOUt-mENTaL-hEalTH!!!! as a reaction to various high profile mass murders. The problem is, the other side listened. They listened so well that they came up with things like ERPOs (aka red flag laws) as the answer to that request.

The lesson is, be careful what you wish for.

 

[Nacho_Libre]

Personally I vote for politicians judges and congresspeople based on their values, reliability, and consistency on issues/constitutionalism. I've voted almost ignoring party associations for years on this principle.

I don't care what party someone associates with I care whether or not their values reflect mine.

Where do u look to figure out each candidates values and record?

 

[gorgothmog]

There's a lot going on in your post. Feel free to correct me if I'm misreading anything, trying to put all the pieces together. I don't want to parse the thing to death.

To answer the question above and the adjacent one in the poll, I'd have to say no. But it's a qualified no. Letting the 2A become political is what's driven us down the dark road we've been on for several decades. Doing more politics isn't the ticket out of this jam. Further, a coalition of "liberal and conservative gun owners" is still just a coalition of gun owners at the end of the day. That said, gun owners, as I figure it's defined here, means people who are passionate about the 2A, etc. and not just simply those who own a gun/guns. The two are distinct. However, gun owners are completely marginalized and are a very fringe minority bloc of votes no matter how you slice it. That in turn means that the power to influence something big, like a candidate for a high profile state office such as AG, is outside the scope of their abilities.

Lastly, organizing (as in people) is an art. If you take a look at successful social movements, they all tend to flourish when they capture swathes of the population with no vested interest. Same sex marriage is a good example. The tipping point was a broad change of heart throughout the population and that only happened because they forged alliances outside of their own tent. The 2A crowd hasn't done that, and at times have actively discouraged growing the base for various stupid reasons, mostly due to politics.

As for the more specific task of addressing, or just identifying root causes of violence, it's not a novel concept. But it's also a trap because lawmaking may state that such-and-such bill is meant to do just that, but in reality, the disconnect is heavy. That's not on accident either. Framing everything as an attempt to "reduce violence" is just words; the preface of lot's of terrible bills enrolled by the state over many sessions in the legislature. In other words, take those words with a giant grain of salt. For us as 2A advocates to engage that concept, the other side has to first be honest about their intentions, which they aren't.

More to the point here, for a long time the pro-gun community beat the drum of dO-sOMeThINg-AbOUt-mENTaL-hEalTH!!!! as a reaction to various high profile mass murders. The problem is, the other side listened. They listened so well that they came up with things like ERPOs (aka red flag laws) as the answer to that request.

The lesson is, be careful what you wish for.

This is why I've narrowed to good governance and administrative law over ideological outsourcing, alongside building out the permitting structure and opening DES. I think that way you can appeal to the broadest swath of Democratic leaning voters. The Dem leaning gun owners need to own this, and the legislators need to feel the heat from their side. Think they give a damn about hearing it from outside their voting base? Unlikely.

 

[Hamburger Monster]

Where do u look to figure out each candidates values and record?

Ballotpedia

Ballotpedia is the digital encyclopedia of American politics and elections. Our goal is to inform people about politics by providing accurate and objective information about politics at all levels of government.

ballotpedia.org

 

[gorgothmog]

We need a "sportsman's exemption" that would allow magazines, off roster pistols and semi automatic rifles with pistol grip use and acquisition.

THIS IS THE KIND OF THINKING THAT WE NEED. It's creative, and it's doable. I'm not saying your wishes will come true, but it is sensible in the way that Switzerland does it. You see, California has done most of the work for us by creating a state wide system that is extensible. It can be our regulatory friend, or our enemy. We just need to demand good rational regulations, not outsourced ones.

 

[gorgothmog]

You might consider reaching out to Rick Travis of CPRA, he is always talking about not enough gun owners actually advocating and lobbying for 2A issues.

You'll want to ensure you're not working cross-purpose and in-concert with the CA advocacy groups and have the authority & credibility to act on behalf of CA gun owners before engaging with those well-funded and highly organized anti-gun groups.

I follow their YouTube channel: CPRA TV https://www.youtube.com/@CRPATV/


P: (714) 992-2772
E: contact@crpa.org

Thanks for the recommendation, and I fully intend to do so. I think these are actually good ideas, and the backbone is there, it just needs to be implemented. We hate gun registries, we hate regulations that don't make sense, but we need to be real about the state we live in. If we need laws they need to make sense, like they attempt to do most of the time for other industries.... except for firearms regulation....