Prop 63 – Ammopalousa, GunGhazi and Second Amendmenting

by on October 12, 2016 · 4 comments

in California, Culture, Election, Environment, Health, History, Politics

gun-on-bibleIn some states, candidates fight to see who can pose with the largest gun. In California, they fight to see who can craft the toughest regulations on guns and ammo.

By Doug Porter

This measure is Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom’s baby. Prop 63 requires a background check to purchase ammo, bans possession of large capacity ammo clips, sets up a way to remove guns from felons, and requires reporting of stolen firearms/ammo.

This is all good stuff and there no denying it’s part of Newsom’s image building in the lead up to the 2018 gubernatorial contest.

Senate President Pro Tem Kevin de León (D-Los Angeles) also has political ambitions. He’s been feuding with Newsom over who is the true leader on gun control, In July, the legislature approved bills requiring background checks for ammunition purchasers and outlaw magazines that hold more than 10 bullets.

Bang! Bang! Another Day, and Another 80 Dead

With 300 Americans Second-Amendmenting themselves and other people daily, and 32,000 lives annually being lost to gun violence, the US stands head and shoulders above other developed countries, according to the American Journal of Medicine.

From CBS News:

Even though it has half the population of the other 22 nations combined, the United States accounted for 82 percent of all gun deaths. The United States also accounted for 90 percent of all women killed by guns, the study found. Ninety-one percent of children under 14 who died by gun violence were in the United States. And 92 percent of young people between ages 15 and 24 killed by guns were in the United States, the study found.

Gun violence is a national health crisis. Thanks to the efforts of the gun lobby, we don’t know much about the “why” of this daily disaster in this country. The NRA and their ilk have blocked funding for research on gun violence by the Center on Disease Control for nearly two decades.

Prop 63 supporters include the California Democratic Party, Amnesty International, the California Medical Association, the California American College of Physicians, and the California American Academy of Preventative Medicine.

The Yes on 63’s page on 10 Gun Lobby Myths vs. Facts has a good rundown of the typical arguments you can expect to see on this issue.

It’s None of Your Damn Business

Prop 63

Via Truth or Gospel

Nothing brings the paranoid element in politics out like a measure intended to regulate or limit the use of firearms, and Proposition 63 is no exception. Among the claims made by the opposition Coalition for Civil Liberties:

Prop 63 will criminalize gun owners, render millions of your firearms unusable and force you to give up your private property.

The perennial arguments against gun regulation and safety, namely that criminals (and now terrorists) will be the ultimate winners if new laws are enacted, are also being made. The old fear of bad guys is always good for few scary commercials.

At the base of all these arguments made by the gun fetish set (as opposed to ordinary Americans who happen to own firearms), is the fantasy of needing and being able to use guns to fight a repressive state. Yes indeedy, folks, these types are ready to take one for the team in the fight against Obamacare and gay marriage.

The “reasonable” gun nuts in the NRA leadership have decided to offer only token support for the No on 63 coalition; they’re busy funding ads in support of Donald Trump.

The opposition encompasses the National Rifle Association’s official state affiliate, the California Rifle and Pistol Association, the California Republican Party, the California Libertarian Party, and several law enforcement associations, including the California Police Chief’s Association.

For More Information

Ballot Language: FIREARMS. AMMUNITION SALES. INITIATIVE STATUTE.

Requires background check and Department of Justice authorization to purchase ammunition. Prohibits possession of large–capacity ammunition magazines. Establishes procedures for enforcing laws prohibiting firearm possession by specified persons. Requires Department of Justice’s participation in federal National Instant Criminal Background Check System. Fiscal Impact: Increased state and local court and law enforcement costs, potentially in the tens of millions of dollars annually, related to a new court process for removing firearms from prohibited persons after they are convicted.

A YES Vote means: a new court process would be created for the removal of firearms from individuals upon conviction of certain crimes. New requirements related to the selling or purchasing of ammunition would be implemented.

A NO Vote means: No new firearm– or ammunition–related requirements would be implemented.

Yes on 63 Website
Yes on 63 Facebook
Yes on 63 Twitter

No on 63 Website
No on 63 Facebook
No on 63 Twitter

Ballotpedia Page

Most Recent Polling: A USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times poll at the beginning of September showed broad support (64%) for Prop 63. Opposed likely voters came in a 28%, with 8% undecided.

***

End Notes: Our endorsements will be included in our General Election Progressive Voter Guide, published shortly after mail-in ballots are delivered in October.


An excerpt from Doug Porter’s column at our associated San Diego Free Press.

{ 4 comments… read them below or add one }

Christo October 12, 2016 at 2:13 pm

Prop 63 bans possession of large capacity ammo clips.

In other words: Prop 63 will criminalize gun owners and force you to give up your private property.

Reply

Chris October 12, 2016 at 6:42 pm

It wouldn’t apply to people who already legally own these clips.

Reply

Frank Gormlie Frank Gormlie October 13, 2016 at 9:22 am

Christo, there was some kind of weird thing in your last comment that made all the comments go haywire; I believe it was the link to some yes on 63 site. So we had to delete it. Feel free to make another comment but without a link.

Reply

Christo October 13, 2016 at 9:46 am

Prop 63 does in fact confiscate magazines 10 rounds and over (Which have been illegal to purchase in California for over a decade).

From the Yes on 63 Website Frank lists above. Click on “Learn More”.
Scroll down to bottom and open the “What Prop 63 Does and Why it’s important”.
Go to Page 3, # 5 and you will see:

“Prop 63 will require individuals to sell their LCMs to a gun dealer, transfer them to law enforcement, or otherwise remove them from the state.

Reply

Leave a Comment

Older Article:

Newer Article: