What Constitution? We’re CALIFORNIA!
“We go ahead and make laws because we’re California and WE DO IT ANYWAYS…”
Well, aren’t we SPECIAL! At least that’s what Assembly Public Safety Committee Chair Reginald Jones-Sawyer says – so if you’ve ever wondered what the politicians at the Capitol think about you – and the Constitution – his comments pretty much sum it up.
In testimony before the committee on March 15, GOC’s Executive Director Sam Paredes brought up the constitutionality of AB 1695** (Bonta-D) and Jones Sawyer arrogantly dismissed the issue as if it were an annoying little fly. Jones-Sawyer proclaimed “the Legislature sometimes ignores whether or not it’s constitutional or not – we go ahead and make laws because we’re California and we do it anyways….”
We think someone’s gotten a little too big for his britches.
The frightening part is that he isn’t alone. Many members of the Legislature seem to have forgotten that when they take the oath of office, they swear to uphold the Constitution. Rather than a priceless document that protects all Americans, they treat it as something to be discarded. Kinda like used toilet paper. Sadly, Jones-Sawyer’s remarks are pretty much echoed by his liberal colleagues who run the place, which is evidenced by the bills which passed – and which failed.
The following proposals passed out of Public Safety, in spite of solid arguments against them:
AB 1673 (Gipson-D): Expands the definition of “firearm” to include the frame or receive of the weapon. This bill will create significant confusion if someone were in possession of a perfectly legal unfinished receiver (pre-bill passage), they would be in immediate violation of the law post-passage, even if a full firearm had not been constructed.
AB 1695 (Bonta-D): Creates a 10-year prohibition on firearms possession for making a false report to law enforcement. GOC believes such a prohibition should be reserved for violent misdemeanor convictions.
Assemblywoman Melendez’ AB 2478 – which mandates imprisonment for certain firearms offenses unfortunately did not pass. Reasonable individuals would think that even the most liberal Democrat would want to increase penalties for firearms offenses. Permitting the law abiding to own guns with a standard capacity magazine that holds more than ten rounds is just too permissive, but according to the legislative Democrats, stealing guns just isn’t that big of a deal.
In other legislative news, Senator Lois Wolk’s politically-driven SB 1006 – which would establish the Firearms Violence Research Center at the University of California, was passed by the Senate Education Committee on a party-line vote. Senator Bob Huff (R-Diamond Bar) wasted no time, however, in pointing out that “victims of gun violence” is an arbitrary and highly subjective term, and that there is no guarantee that the liberal-leaning UC would be impartial and independent with respect to the gathering of data. Senator Wolk bristled at the very insinuation that the UC might be biased.
Hmmm. Surely, she was being facetious.
It’s time to be armed and informed. Join GOC in the fight!
** Voisine v. US is currently before the Supreme Court. One of the questions asked in oral arguments by Justice Clarence Thomas pertained to how many other Constitutional rights are voided by a misdemeanor conviction. The Solicitor General responded “None…”