Don Kates on the California gubernatorial race

"he filed an influential pro-Second Amendment brief with the US Supreme Court." That remains to be seen. OTOH, earned the sobriquet, "Governor Moonbeam" when he was in office. I know, I was there. Brown strongly opposed the death penalty and vetoed it as Governor, fortunately the legislature overrode his veto. In 1980 he ran for President and his slogan was "Protect the Earth, serve the people, and explore the universe." Three main planks of his platform were a call for a constitutional convention to ratify the Balanced Budget Amendment, a promise to increase funds for the space program, and, in the wake of the 1979 Three Mile Island accident, opposition to nuclear power. Brown screwed up the Norman Hsu affair, as attorney general, and failed to defend the voter approved Proposition 8. While he might be good for the 2nd Amendment, he's a fool or a criminal on everything else. We can do better than this nutjob, I hope. God Almighty, I don't like Meg, but what choice is this?

I am a One Issue Voter and a life-long Republican. Unless Meg Whitman does some serious sucking up, Jerry Brown gets my vote in November.

Though Brown did take a pro-2nd amendment stand in regards to McDonald Vs City of Chicago, as Attorney General he continued the masquerade that is the California Assault Weapon act. When given the chance to expose the fixed magazine faker AR-15 that was invented by his predecessor to try and keep the State within the CMP requirements while banning the AR-15 heavy barrel rifle he instead came up with a new rifle in which it uses a detachable magazine but you have to use a bullet to release the magazine catch.

He has also maintained the fraud of the M-1A rifle with the
California muzzlebrake instead of the Federal muzzlebrake mandated by the CMP. I know all this because I have two CMP grade rifles, both acquired prior to the 1999 ban, and both registered with the State as Assault rifles. I could compete, but anyone who bought a rifle since 1999 cannot meet Federal requirements for arms and not violate the California Assault Weapon Act.

..I'd like to be a one issue voter, but I too lived threough Browns reign and remember Rose Bird and other far left looneys he appointed. It isn't just his views, but the folks he appoints that live with us a judges and administrators long past his term. Brown claims to be a fiscal conservative but a social liberal. That can't be done, as the money spent with his liberal policies makes a mockery of any conservative claims.
..Brown's a cull. Whitman may be too, I don't know enough about her yet to know, but I'll find out. We are in deep do-do again....still.

When Jerry was running for AG, he pulled a .50 BMG round out of his pocket to illustrate why CA's gun laws could not be relaxed, as his opponent thought they should be.

So far as I know, he has never wavered in his support of the CA AWB or one-gun-a-month rule, supports smart gun initiatives and microstamping. I am sure he will keep the coming restrictions on ammo sales.

His speech yesterday to union swells to go out and do his attack work so his hands are clean tells me the structural change (reining in above-market pay and benefits for government workers and getting adequate work out of them) which CA has to have to ever end its continual budget crisis...will not happen. Jerry's first decsion if he wins should be whether to join SEIU, AFSCME or some other union, to make it transparent whose man he is.

Stuck with Whitman, and hoping SCOTUS will go far enough to upset some CA laws.

Brown can win easily without spending another penny.
Here is how.
1) When McDonald is decided our way, he says 'The Supreme Court has spoken clearly on the issue. The following (long list) of California gun laws are
all null, void and unenforceable.
** All gunnies vote for him **
2) Revise his position on CO2. 'The facts have changed. We now know climate is not sensitive to CO2 concentration. I still dislike pollution.'
** All rational people vote for him **

Brown does appear to be good, or at least non-bad,
on the gun issue. Whitman is bad on the gun
issue.

Having spent not a penny to get elected, Brown
can spend all his money buying elections for Assembly. He will end up with the Assembly he
wants.

It is difficult to see what happens after that.

So what's Fiorino's position on the RKBA? Pro, anti, or pee warm.

Brown ran campaign ads with Oakland PD Capt. (now Deputy Chief) David Kozicki where they specifically went after .50 cals.
http://waronguns.blogspot.com/2006/09/police-ethics-capt-david-kozicki-style.html

Per the SF Chronicle, "Whitman said she...believes tough gun laws like assault weapon bans and handgun control are appropriate for California."
http://www.examiner.com/x-1417-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2009m11d18-Why-should-California-gun-owners-care-about-Meg-Whitman

Californians have a choice between a rat and a snake. You can tell yourself there's a lesser of two evils here if you want to, but it is what it is.

I guess if I were forced to choose, I'd figure why reward republicans if Meg and gungrabber Arnhole are the best they can do?

Quite a few people (other than Don Kates and Frank P above) who have expressed their
opinions here do so not on a factual basis - either because they're running on urban legend, don’t understand CA politics, or because they have non-gun-related political axes to grind.

People figuring that the best RKBA candidate (in a complex environment like CA) is the one waving a gun and an NRA card are highly naive. That person they think is good is called a “loser”.

The 50BMG brouhaha was specifically because Brown was stupidly CORNERED by his opponent, Chuck Poochigian.

Poochigian was REPEATEDLY warned by those close to today's CA NRA to "not bring up the subject". AND HE RAISED THE SUBJECT. If you're trying to win an election in CA, why the heck would you intentionally want to inflame the soccer moms? Pooch failed the Big IQ test. As for Brown, when you're in an election, you run the with the ball whenever it's thrown to you. That's far less about 50BMGs than about having the IQ to win when your opponent gives you an issue to exploit.

For those of us “On the Ground” in California with a more fact-based perspective:

- Since JB's taking office as AG, the DOJ Firearms Division was radically downscaled to a Bureau. Funds appear to be moved to real crime fighting in the actual DOJ LE division.

- Several key personages, including DOJ agent Iggy Chinn and former Firearms Division. Director Randy Rossi, who drove a culture of abusive behaviors, etc. either were shown the door or left faster than the proverbial door could slam on their rear ends. Aggressive raids against FFLs for nonviolations and “aggressive compliance” dropped off the map. Certain local DA prosecutions of gun dealers for such noncrimes regarding “off-list” non-assault weapons somehow never seemed to be able to coordinate with somehow-always-busy DOJ Firearms staffers.

- Proposed regulatory changes relating to redefining term 'detachable magazine' as a goal to eliminating black rifle use, were killed. Since 2006, at least ~250K black rifles with only trivial modifications have entered California commerce (that’s somewhere around a QUARTER of a BILLION dollars in new CA gun commerce!) This number is higher by at least 100K than the number of existing registered pre-2000 California assault Weapons. I'm proud of being part of this effort, and believe this will profoundly help black guns be NOT "dangerous and unusual" when that time comes. :-)

- Other DOJ Firearms folks still present are effectively 'bound & gagged' in the basement.

- From what I've heard, aside from the Chicago brief, a DOJ anti-Heller brief was also suppressed - and that may even have been more important than Brown’s amicus support for McDonald.

- For a combination of reasons, microstamping is going nowhere ;)

Poster "James" above is severely misinformed about black rifles. "He" (Brown) did not "come up" with any modifications to black rifles. Brown plays hardly at all in the actual gun field unless the screaming gets too high regarding Firearms Bureau abuses. In fact, the BulletButton device was invented by my colleague Gene Hoffman, Chairman of The Calguns Foundation, as the "Range-Safe Magazine Lock". DOJ efforts to stop this device from being used thru regulatory changes were stopped from somewhere above (even if
we’d ultimately win in the Office of Admin. Law) - probably not by Brown himself but from the upper political chain of DOJ.

The AG is not gonna say that detailed gun laws X and law Y have issues. DOJ is huge, these issues are a tiny sub-sub-fraction of his legal world, etc. It's FAR more strategically useful for us to have his favorable individual rights brief to the Supremes - and taking a high road civil rights stance - than voiding one or two laws that will fall anyway sometime after incorporation.

Furthermore, Brown avoids the political taint of being "an NRA shill" if he maintains a distance, and he can couch his higher-level gunrights support as "fundamental civil rights" and not worry about being bogged down in the details.

Brown has had a 20+ year history of making strongly pro-RKBA statements in a variety of public forums - in the early 90s he was railing against BATF abuses. On his weekly KGO radio news interviews during his stint as Oakland mayor, he's repeatedly insisted that gun ownership is a fundamental right, and in addressing Oakland crime (approximate quote), "it's not NRA members holding up liquor stores at night." Various E. Bay operators of NRA recruiting booths (fairs, etc.) have reported favorable interactions with Brown, and several Calgunners who attended a Brown fundraiser had extended favorable interactions with him ("Hey, we're suing you over the handgun Roster, nothing personal..." ended up with a lot of laughter) - while the glum LCAV/Brady folks huddled in a corner.

The worrisome thing will be when Brown is no longer AG. Given frequent CA Republican party tilt toward biblethumper types – generally rendering themselves unelectable to statewide office (except for the occasional insurance commissioner, wow), the next AG is going to be a Dem unless the moon falls into the ocean.

If SF DA Kamala Harris becomes AG, I’d expect attacks on gunnies to rocket upwards. The bad news is it'll be a fight; the good news is, we'll win for a variety of intermingled reasons (incorporation, technical knowledge, legal knowledge). (We've already recently danced with her on some gun issues and she ran from the dance floor.)

Politically, Brown gets tainted from 70s - but where he inherited a Jimmy Carter "malaise" economy. He grew up a little in the interim since being Governor, and during his term as mayor of Oakland, his administration and mindset were largely indistinguishable from a pro-biz, anti-crime Republican. He had to fight a far, far left Oakland City Council and had good relations with line cops (quite a few NRA and Calgunners in OPD, including several of the four cops that were slaughtered by parolee Lovelle Mixon last year.)

Effective RKBA fights in areas like CA require "reading between the lines" skills and a bit of nuance. Anyone thinking that someone's gonna wave guns and shout "RKBA" at the top of his lungs has no idea about either CA politics or a grasp on practical political survival.

I am writing the above solely as an individual, based on several years' experience in this milieu (and not as founding board member of The Calguns Foundation, which cannot take stands on actual candidates, just issues.)

Bill Wiese
San Jose CA

Los Angeles DA, Republican Steve Cooley has entered the race for California Attorney General.

I'd kinda like to know his position on RKBA given the last 10 years of abuse by the LAPD.

Does the word casuistry mean anything to you Bill?

Yes, RKV it does, and I believe you're using it pejoritavely.

This is practical politics. I care about winning the RKBA fight.

And opinions from folks outside of CA aren't that relevant. Nor are those from folks who have other axes to grind - I'm a gun-rights-first kinda guy.

Bill Wiese
San Jose CA

Right on Bill. You're a big reason why I support Calguns. Isn't Brown a gun owner as well?

Scott

Well said, Bill.

Yes I am using it pejoritively. How else to describe a situation where Brady ranks us as "best." And I am a life-long Californian.

>>>[Scott wrote:]
>>>Isn't Brown a gun owner as well?

Brown has, in the past, noted he (at least) owns his dad's Colt 38 revolver. I believe he owns some kinda ranch up north where there may be some long guns too. His dad, Gov Pat Brown, has also made repeated wisecracks along the lines of "don't mess with people's guns or dogs" so the sentiment is somewhat engrained.

>> [RKV wrote:]
>> Yes I am using it pejoritively. How else to
>> describe a situation where Brady ranks us
>> as "best." And I am a life-long Californian

Then you've seen a lifeless CA Republican party put themselves in a position where it can do nothing other than posture.

And CA is far better than NY/MA/MD on guns in a variety of ways. In CA if you get in a traffic stop and a non-AW gun is found locked/unloaded, and you don't look like a dirtbag, you'll be on your way with your gun in 15 minutes. Other states you'll get the 3rd degree or charged for violating 'specific destination'.

The Bradys have to act like they're doing something, we've shot a bunch of holes in existing law by figuring cool workarounds.

Bill Wiese
San Jose CA

Tried posting this earlier, but spam filter wouldn't let me through. I believe Bill already said much of what needed to be said, but here it is anyways.

@James:

"Though Brown did take a pro-2nd amendment stand in regards to McDonald Vs City of Chicago, as Attorney General he continued the masquerade that is the California Assault Weapon act."

And what, praytell, did you expect him to do about it? The AG can't just nullify laws willy nilly any more than he can make them up. Furthermore, he's obligated by the CA Constitution to defend CA's laws in court.

"When given the chance to expose the fixed magazine faker AR-15 that was invented by his predecessor to try and keep the State within the CMP requirements while banning the AR-15 heavy barrel rifle he instead came up with a new rifle in which it uses a detachable magazine but you have to use a bullet to release the magazine catch."

Huh? What are you talking about? Brown had nothing to do with the invention of the Bullet Button, nor did his predecessor "invent" a fixed magazine AR-15. The Bullet Button and its predecessor the Prince 50 were developed due to the ingenuity of CA gun owners in circumventing the AW ban.

"He has also maintained the fraud of the M-1A rifle with the
California muzzlebrake instead of the Federal muzzlebrake mandated by the CMP. I know all this because I have two CMP grade rifles, both acquired prior to the 1999 ban, and both registered with the State as Assault rifles. I could compete, but anyone who bought a rifle since 1999 cannot meet Federal requirements for arms and not violate the California Assault Weapon Act."

I don't know where you're getting your information, but semi-auto rifles can have muzzle brakes in CA, and it doesn't matter what kind they have as long as it was marketed as a muzzle brake. If it has a bullet button on it or is registered as an AW, it's irrelevant anyways as it can have just about anything.

I'll tell you what Brown HAS done:

• Personally wrote and filed an Amicus brief with SCOTUS in McDonald IN FAVOR of incorporation.
  
• Downsized the DOJ Firearms Division to a Bureau.
  
• Suspiciously poor defense of the CA Handgun Roster in Pena vs. Cid. He's obligated by law to defend it, but nobody said he has to do a good job ;) The handgun roster is going down after McDonald.
  

Though residing outside California I am nevertheless shocked Jerry Brown might even "feint" toward gun owners. From a distance, and I respect those on the ground there, I can only say I hope the best candidate for protection of the 2nd Amendment is elected.

Frankly, if my choice was between Meg Whitman and Jerry Brown... I'd leave the state.

But given a choice, I'd vote for the one I thought would be less of a disaster for the state as a whole... because getting the occasional tidbit of support on gun rights does me no good at all if I've had to sell my guns to pay my taxes, or my mortgage, or to buy food because unemployment is 20% and climbing.

Meg Whitman may make Arnold the Mistake look like Jesse Helms; but from all I know of his history, I somehow doubt that Jerry Brown will do California as a whole a single bit of good.

I appreciate the more informed comments than mine about some sensible things Jerry has done as AG. These are very reassuring because I think it is likely he will win. Whitman is just not convincing me she can deliver what she says or that she is able to govern. Her personal wealth is a problem, to me. Such people (Pelosi, Feinstein and Boxer come to mind) are so insulated from the impact of their actions they really don't know what will work and what sounds cool.

Whitman's business background is attractive, but it is service-oriented, when the state is losing its real tax base because manufacturing is going away. Many seem to think CA can migrate to a pure service economy, so all that grotty manufacturing stuff that pollutes the earth (set aside whether that idea is accurate) and dirties hands is no loss. Ah, no. When heavy industry in the state is changing the batteries in a Prius, there will be a lot fewer opportunities for younger people to enter a profession which can pay well and, for some people, is very satisfying.

I run a little company that makes stuff and part of my satisfaction with life is spending my days working around tangible "stuff". And for a little company to have products on international racing sailboats, send other products to Europe, Asia, the Middle East...those things are actually interesting to the workforce. It brings a flavor to what they do they can't get in other businesses.

Of course, if Brown supports AB32, we may be outlawed in the state or see our costs rise too fast to remain competitive. His protege, Mary Nichols, who runs the CA Air Resources Board is a total econazi. They had a proposed rule floating around (I think it is dead, but who knows) that underinflated tires would get you significant fines and provided for jail time if you were really a bad little person. Flat out crazy.

On the other hand, Brwon needs the public employee union vote and money so much he might as well sign on as a member of SEIU. The unions are the major impediment to getting government spending trimmed down. Jerry signed the law that enabled state employees to unionize.

It is a choice between two poor ones, I think.

Sorry Bill, Ca. politics is not that exotic or complicated that we poor escapees, Uh huh, me, I was born there, I escaped and emigrated to America, cannot understand them.

All we have to do is look at the trainwreck that is Ca. Nothing exotic or complicated about that.

Now you have no choice again.

.. Bill Weiss says Brown " grew up a little bit in the interim since being Governor ". I hope so. Last time he was Governor he decriminalized marijuana, decriminalized homosexuality and redefined it from an illness to a lifestyle. He changed the civil award standards to joint-and-severable which means you can be found 1% wrong in a civil judgement but pay 100% of the judgement against the folks who are 99% in error. As Harry Schell mentioned, Brown bought the public employee unions and sold himself to them by giving them the power to buy and sell the legislature. They did so, and raised their pensions and lowered their retirement age. I was a State employee during Brown governorship. He sold out the State to the Liberal interests.
...He's spoofing you if you think he won't roll over and sell you out. He's done it before. He has a record.

Re: California governor election 2010

I'm surprised no one has addressed the issue of reapportionment.

The real problem in California isn't so much anti-gun governors (though we have had more than our share) as it is an anti-gun legislature.

The California Democratic Party is very anti-gun, and the party has enjoyed a super majority in the State Senate and State Assembly for some time, fueled in great part by gerrymandered districts.

It's so bad that in 2008 a proposition actually passed that takes away the power of the legislature to reapportion districts and gives it to a nonpartisan commission. But the Democratic Party is fighting to kill that reform, so they can continue to keep and misuse the power for themselves.

If Brown is elected governor, and if the Democrats manage to retain the redistricting power. Then when the districts are reapportioned due to the 2010 census, I very much doubt Democratic Governor Brown would veto a pro-Democratic Party gerrymander sent up to him by a Democratic Majority legislature.

A Republican Governor in office in 2011 is the only hope of preventing such a scenario.

That alone may swing my vote for the Republican candidate for Governor, no matter who that is.

D'oh! That last post was me, I didn't intend to post anonymously.

I was a power seller on e-Bay for several years and I know for a fact that it was under Meg Whitman's watch that ALL gun-related products were officially banned from e-Bay. I think I still have the e-Bay seller's bulletins stating that firearms didn't represent the 'vision' for e-Bay's future. They alklow airsoft accessories and some gun accessories slip through...but e-Bay actively pulled all auctions and listings for weapons related accesories. She is an ultra liberal; I woudl be weary of her.

Dave D wrote:
> Last time he was Governor... decriminalized
> homosexuality and redefined it from an illness
> to a lifestyle.

I believe that actually was the APA or similar entity.

But your sentiments here explains why D's get so much traction in CA - if they see they can vote against stupid anti-freedom views/outlooks like the above.

If CA's Republicans stopped their attacks on others' lifestyles and focused on just taxes and gov't size/effectiveness, they could actually win more than an occasional election in CA. Instead they yammer about "pro-life" (irrelevant at state level - both due to Roe v Wade, plus a blinding pro-choice majority) and attack people for relationships they don't approve of. Talk about self-manufactured losers.

All this helps move the CA Dems further to the left and makes Rs unelectable and deepens gun control.

If there's any chance of getting the CA Dems under control it's gonna be an old-fart Dem since a Republican gov is well-nigh irrelevant.

There's also a bottom-line politics issue that goes beyond gun politics: voting for the person to reward him so that you're still relevant. If someone does you a favor and there's no reward, do you think there'll be a continuation of favorable results?

As evidenced by some of the posts above, including the one I quoted, one of the big problems of gunnies is that they conflate conservative politics and gun rights. We've been used & abused by quite a few sellout CA Republicans who have taken us for granted. We need gunnies to start voting single-issue, gun rights only and not go off on tangents.

Bill Wiese
San Jose CA

Proof of how far Brown will really support gun rights should be much more evident once the decision is handed down on McDonald v Chicago.

Brown will still be attorney general at the time and I bet he will say that McDonald v Chicago doesn't endanger ANY of the anti-gun laws of California. Just as I expect Brown will support another pro-Democrat gerrymander of districts in 2011, as he did the last time he was governor 1982.

Regarding Nick Aceves response on March 19th

And what, praytell, did you expect him to do about it? The AG can't just nullify laws willy nilly any more than he can make them up. Furthermore, he's obligated by the CA Constitution to defend CA's laws in court.

Brown stood against Prop 8, so he could just as easily make a public statement on the Assault Weapon law and the two specific issues I mentioned. Yes, he can't nullify a law but he can publicly state there are unexpected problems with it and or that there has been some unacceptable actions done by his predecessor.

>Huh? What are you talking about? Brown had nothing to do with the invention of the Bullet Button, nor did his predecessor "invent" a fixed magazine AR-15. The Bullet Button and its predecessor the Prince 50 were developed due to the ingenuity of CA gun owners in circumventing the AW ban.

First you denied that Bushmaster built and marketed a top loading AR15. In the process you denied that Browns predecessor, Lockyer, wrote a letter to Bushmaster requesting the manufacture of such a gun. This was to allow the CMP to continue in the State while giving lip service to the AW ban. The letter is a public document, and the lobbying by Lockyer of the CMP board is also public. Unfortunately the MSM will not report this unless the AG office makes an official statement which Lockyer wouldn't do and now Brown won't. As for the bullet button he approved of it in an official note to try and get CMP sanction lifted. As of last check the CMP will not approve for CMP requirements the California legal AR-15s.

>I don't know where you're getting your information, but semi-auto rifles can have muzzle brakes in CA, and it doesn't matter what kind they have as long as it was marketed as a muzzle brake. If it has a bullet button on it or is registered as an AW, it's irrelevant anyways as it can have just about anything.

The M1A was not supposed to be banned by the 1999 AW law. The change from two features to one banned the M1A by virtue of its original military muzzle-brake. Thus, in another letter, Lockyer requested Springfield make a new muzzle-brake which Lockyer would state in a formal document that any gun equipped would not be an Assault Weapon. Again, Lockyer never made a public statement on this and Brown has maintained the silence.