EAST BAY CITIZEN. EVERYWHERE SINCE 2009

Friday, October 11, 2013

Skinner’s High-Capacity Gun Clips Ban Signed; Oakland Gun Control Bill Vetoed

LEGISLATURE//GUN CONTROL | Gov. Jerry Brown signed two gun control bills authored by East Bay Assemblymember Nancy Skinner Friday, while vetoing another that would have given Oakland the ability to further strengthen state gun registration and licensing laws.

“Large-capacity magazines have no place on our streets," said Skinner in a statement. “California has some of the toughest gun laws in the nation, but our laws are easily undermined by these blatant loopholes. I applaud Gov. Brown for signing this legislation to protect our communities ravaged by gun violence.”

The new law now makes it a crime not only to sell large-capacity magazines, but also to buy them. In addition, kits that allow gun owners to convert their firearms into assault-style weapons will become illegal starting Jan. 1, 2014.

Another gun-related bill by Skinner establishing a five-year waiting period on owning or purchasing a firearm for those who make credible and specific threats to themselves or others to a licensed mental health expert, was also signed Friday. The previous law only provided a six-month prohibition.

Another much-publicized gun control bill that would have given the Oakland City Council the opportunity to enact stronger licensing and registration laws than the rest of the state was vetoed by Brown. The bill, offered by Oakland Assemblymember Rob Bonta, was designed to give the city a unique tool for fighting its continuing problems with violent crime.

Brown, as a former mayor of Oakland, was mindful of the city’s struggles with gun violence, “but this is not the right solution,” he said in a veto message.

Ironically, Brown's rationale for not signing the legislation mirrored an argument proffered by the gun lobby and conservatives who argued against the bill on the Assembly floor. “The State of California has among the strictest gun laws in the country," said Brown. "Allowing individual cities to enact their own more restrictive firearms regulations will sow confusion and uncertainty.”

A legislative analysis published last May included a similar refrain from the National Rifle Association. "The repeal of state preemption would lead to an unpredictable patchwork of local laws. American citizens have right to travel from one jurisdiction to another in California without the fear of violating locally politically motivated ordinances."

Firebrand Republican Assemblymember Tim Donnelly was also a frequent critic of Bonta’s bill. During a floor speech last May, Donnelly said, “Just because people live in a certain zip code, I do not believe we should pass a law to deny them a fundamental, God-giving, Constitutional right to defend their lives and their families and their businesses.”

78 comments :

Bonta got his shoved up his ass. In other words, where the sun don't shine! Score one in favor of common sense and gun rights.

Hey Anonymous, lose the disturbing fascination with the Assemblyman's ass and go fuck yourself.

Hey Mikey, get with the program, have yourself a good butt-fuck, and then play ball in the middle of the next Oakland gang war!

Many roblems with the Bonta bill with regard to Oakland's violence, for example: 1. Local gun registration cannot be effective where guns used on the street come from outside Oakland. That's where our street guns come from. Illegal acts, like murder and armed robbery, are perpetrated by people who don't obey laws. Somebody please explain why I might be wrong here. 2. Local gun registration would register guns owned legally by mostly responsible Oakland citizens who can use them for self-defense on their own property. I don't think these folks are the problem in Oakland, are they? Again, I would like an explanation if the situation is otherwise. 3. Oakland has fundamental problems with law enforcement generally due to too few cops, an under-resourced police department and city officials who just don't get it about municipal responsibility. Nothing like throwing a few more laws out there which cannot possibly be enforced.

Just because the NRA or other gun-lobby groups say something which is commonsensical, or heaven forbid, even demonstrably true, doesn't mean the statement is false. So I accept that asking people who are prone to shoot others (illegally) to go through all the hoops of legally registering their guns (and reregistering them annually a la Bonta) is highly unlikely to be useful.

Bottom line: the Bonta bill, like so many other poorly-conceived laws, becomes a distraction from doing something functional and useful about reducing gun violence in Oakland. Legislators like Bonta and Oakland's elected officials like to pretend that they are doing something to justify their (in their own eyes mostly) celebrity status and their feeding at the public trough. They seem unable to grasp the thought that murdering someone with a gun is already just about as illegal an act as one can perform. Making it more illegal because the gun is unregistered makes is absolute nonsense.

Maybe the correct phrase in Spanish is something more like oye oye or oiga oiga.

No. The poster of Espanol got it right on.

WTF are you guys talking about? Gov. Brown should know better! SHAME ON THE GOVERNOR! He wants Oakland to do it themselves, he wants to stand idly by and watch the city he lead for 8 years die? Then when tools come to his desk that could help - he says NO?!? WTF???

If only we had a functioning city government who would do something, Bonta has to get legislation through committees, the floor - in both houses and the Governor. This is the City's responsibility! Oakland needs more cops! We need them to be trained and armed with the best tools. And they need to be from here! I'm so sick of the Mayor's blah blah here are a couple more white cops from Dublin to walk the beats..Why don't we hire the cops that know the streets they are working on? Gun control? Leave that to the state and the Feds. This City has got to get their shit TOGETHER. A new Oakland, Mayor? Shit, can we first get a safe Oakland?

Thank you Nancy and thank you Rob for trying.

The bill proposed by Bonta and Shaaf is absolute nonsense. Political grandstanding at its best. Can we please find one instance where a gun law has helped to reduce crime in Oakland or anywhere else? Last time I checked robbing and killing people is illegal too but that never stopped anyone who was willing to commit the crime. Stop and frisk would do a helluv a lot more to address crime than this ludicris bil.

I like the bill and will vote for Bonta again.

My name is Bob 'Pander Bear' Bonta. I sponsor crap-ass legislation that is worthless, has no chance of passing just to score points with the ultra-liberals.

Bye, bye, Bob.

You are the same troll that lives in Swalwell's district and Weikowski's district and Quirk's district and now Bonta's district?
Your language gives you away a--hole. You are lying about at least two of the Districts. What a piece of crap you are!

Now we know you don't live in the District where he is very popular. His name is Rob Bonta. What a TROLL!

I live in Oakland and my neighborhood was in favor of Bonta's bill.

My family and I reside in East Oakland where shots ring out every night and we wish the bill was not vetoed.

You need to get a gun and arm yourself, my man. Ain't nobody going to look out for your family but you!

I actually have a shotgun but I am in favor of stricter laws and regulations and if the State won't do it, then the cities have to.

Not happening, my man, as has now been made clear to you.

Get yourself a good Smith and Wesson, keep it loaded and at the ready. You'll thank yourself when the hoodlums come. They don't respect law and order, so no amount of legislation is going to save your family. Remember that. Just like the old 'Only you can prevent forest fires,' adage. Only YOU can save your family and yourself. Motto to live by, especially in the murder capital of the country.

I used to belong to the NRA, but thinking like yours made me quit the organization. You are really a gun nut. In countries where their are strict rules and regulations there is far less murders.

It's your family, man.

Live in your dream world. Whatever.

What comes first, less gun ownership leading to less violence or less violence leading to less gun ownership?

What comes first is OBEYING the law. Common sense, and rule of law being enforced.

The criminals don't legally own guns, so your supposition is null and void. Sorry.

I wish the Hayward Tea Party Troll would mind his own business.
Bonta is not his Assembly person and those of us that live in Alameda and Oakland will continue to support him in large numbers. He is very popular here.

"The criminals don't legally own guns, so your supposition is null and void. Sorry."

I know that criminals usually don't own guns legally. But I don't know what you think my "supposition" is. I was asking a question, yes, really asking.

Your question was answered in the first sentence. Neither 'questions' as you posed them could result in the answer you are hoping.

Laws must be obeyed. Murder can be committed with a gun, knife, automobile, a plastic bag, etc. The laws says murder is illegal. If one doesn't respect it to begin with, then the weapon of choice becomes moot.

It's a lot easier to kill with a gun. Nations with regulated gun laws have fewer murders per % of the population.

I have a weapon to defend my family at home, but I don't need a semi-automatic rifle with detachable magazine and Brown should not have vetoed that bill.

Now I agree with you about the semi-automatic part. Obviously, the whole bill was flawed, which is why he vetoed it.

"Your question was answered in the first sentence. Neither 'questions' as you posed them could result in the answer you are hoping."

I didn't realize I was dealing with a mindreader. A mindreader who doesn't read or understand words.


Laws must be obeyed. Murder can be committed with a gun, knife, automobile, a plastic bag, etc. The laws says murder is illegal. If one doesn't respect it to begin with, then the weapon of choice becomes moot.

I can't dumb it down anymore for you. Either you get it or you don't.

I, however, can dumb it down much more for you. I can get just as dumb as you need.

"Laws must be obeyed."

Except that they are not. It happens every day.

Many laws are not obeyed for lots of reasons, by good people and by bad people. Most laws are obeyed by people generally because they are well-written, well designed and make common sense.

Many gun laws are poorly-written, poorly designed and make little sense. That isn't to say that gun laws generally are bad. Poorly-written, poorly-designed and nonsensical gun laws don't work.

Gun laws can be well-written, thoughtful, common sensical and effective. Rob Bonta's efforts quite simply don't measure up.

Bonta's gun law for Oakland made sense to me because I live in Oakland and believe in regulation to help control the proliferation of guns.

Bonta's packing--in another world. No brains.

He's an attorney, and attorney jokes aside, he's a lot smarter than some of the commentators on this blog.

So smart that he doesn't know his ass from the whole in his head.

That's you 9:03----What a dumb shit. LMFAO at your stupidity!

Rob Bonta is very popular in his district and will get re-elected in his district easily.

Bob Bonta is nothing except the usual pandering union whore. No different than the rest. He'll do his time and then be replaced by the same mold.

I wish the Hayward Tea Party Troll would mind his own business.
Bonta is not his Assembly person and those of us that live in Alameda and Oakland will continue to support him in large numbers. He is very popular here.

Your wish will NOT be granted. Bob Bonta is whoring for the unions, anti-NRA and other whorrible groups.

The people will be reminded of this, you dirty, dirty!

Oh look, it's the Hayward anti-union sexist tea party troll trying to be meaningful outside his mental ward again. We love our assemblyman here in the District and will re-elect him again. If you like it or not--no one cares.

Bob Bonta is nothing except the usual pandering union whore. No different than the rest. He'll do his time and then be replaced by the same mold.

Oh look, it's the Hayward anti-union sexist tea party troll trying to be meaningful outside his mental ward again. We love our assemblyman here in the District and will re-elect him again. If you like it or not--no one cares.

Got to try and stop having the last word, because I won't let you. Time for children to go to bed. Adults will deal with take care of the conservative posts.


Your wish will NOT be granted. Bob Bonta is whoring for the unions, anti-NRA and other whorrible groups.

The people will be reminded of this, you dirty, dirty!

To anon: 4:43---After reading your comments I've concluded you're not looking for meaningful discussion. This is for you.

Oh look, it's the Hayward anti-union, sexist, racist, anti-Bonta, extremist tea party troll trying to be meaningful outside his mental ward again. No one cares what you think--LMAO

Got to try and stop having the last word, because I won't let you. Time for children to go to bed. Adults will deal with take care of the conservative posts.


Your wish will NOT be granted. Bob Bonta is whoring for the unions, anti-NRA and other whorrible groups.

The people will be reminded of this, you dirty, dirty!

To anon:8:04---After reading your comments I've concluded you're not looking for meaningful discussion. This is for you.

Oh look, it's the Hayward anti-union, sexist, racist, anti-Bonta, extremist tea party troll trying to be meaningful outside his mental ward again. No one cares what you think--LMAO

While normal folks are either doing some serious lovemaking, on dates, or in the Space Ho's age demographic, asleep, she who has nothing to do on a Saturday night writes her disparaging statements about our great congressman. Truly pathetic she is.



Got to try and stop having the last word, because I won't let you. Time for children to go to bed. Adults will deal with take care of the conservative posts.


Your wish will NOT be granted. Bob Bonta is whoring for the unions, anti-NRA and other whorrible groups.

The people will be reminded of this, you dirty, dirty!

To anon:above---After reading your comments I've concluded you're not looking for meaningful discussion. This is for you.

Oh look, it's the Hayward anti-union, sexist, racist, anti-Bonta, extremist tea party troll trying to be meaningful outside his mental ward again. No one cares what you think--LMAO

It doesn't matter how we feel, Bonta will be our Assembly person for 12 years.

That might or might not be right. Twelve years is a long time. Another union whore might decide to shove him aside 'just because.' Of course, one would be as disasterous as the other.

While normal folks are either doing some serious lovemaking, on dates, or in the Space Ho's age demographic, asleep, she who has nothing to do on a Saturday night writes her disparaging statements about our great congressman. Truly pathetic she is.



Got to try and stop having the last word, because I won't let you. Time for children to go to bed. Adults will deal with take care of the conservative posts.


Your wish will NOT be granted. Bob Bonta is whoring for the unions, anti-NRA and other whorrible groups.

The people will be reminded of this, you dirty, dirty!

Rob Bonta is very popular in his district and will get re-elected in his district easily.

Oh look, it's the Hayward anti-union, sexist, racist, anti-Bonta, extremist tea party troll trying to be meaningful outside his mental ward again. No one cares what you think--LMAO

Rob Bonta is very popular in his district and will get re-elected in his district easily.

Oh look, it's the Hayward anti-union, sexist, racist, anti-Bonta, extremist tea party troll trying to be meaningful outside his mental ward again. No one cares what you think--LMAO

Rob Bonta is very popular in his district and will get re-elected in his district easily.

Oh look, it's the Hayward anti-union, sexist, racist, anti-Bonta, extremist tea party troll trying to be meaningful outside his mental ward again. No one cares what you think--LMAO

Rob Bonta is very popular in his district and will get re-elected in his district easily.

I like Bonta and Skinner for trying to do the right thing. Thanks to you both. A hunter who is in favor of stricter gun laws.

The right thing is not to pander to the extremists.

As for hunting, that should only be legal for culling a population. No other need. Food is already in the markets, and NEVER for trophies.

Bunto and Skinner are full of their pandering egos.

Oh look, it's the Hayward anti-union, sexist, racist, anti-Bonta, extremist tea party troll trying to be meaningful outside his mental ward again. No one cares what you think--LMAO

Rob Bonta is very popular in his district and will get re-elected in his district easily.

While normal folks are either doing some serious lovemaking, on dates, or in the Space Ho's age demographic, asleep, she who has nothing to do on a Saturday night writes her disparaging statements about our great congressman. Truly pathetic she is.



Got to try and stop having the last word, because I won't let you. Time for children to go to bed. Adults will deal with take care of the conservative posts.


Your wish will NOT be granted. Bob Bonta is whoring for the unions, anti-NRA and other whorrible groups.

The people will be reminded of this, you dirty, dirty!

Bonta and Skinner were responding to what a majority of their constituents wanted them to do. It's called Democracy. If people would stick to the point of this article (gun control) it would be much better. I personally believe there should be better laws and regulations on guns, and the majority of people in their Districts must also otherwise they would not be in office. Let's please stick to the topic.

Bob and Nancy were pandering. They both knew that there was no chance in any lifetime that their ill-conceived legislation would ever make it out of the starting gate. They are what is wrong with our broken political system.

They did get some of their legislation signed. Brown signed some gun legislation this time that was necessary, and will sign more next year. You say pandering and I say doing what their constituents want. That's why they are so popular in their Districts. They will check with Brown, change their legislation to something more acceptable to him, and bring it back next year. That's how it works.

How it works is how it worked. They pandered, and they came out losers. What SOME of their constituents 'want' is irrelevant. The job of any responsible legislator, at any level of government, is to come up with good, sound, solid ideas that are both necessary, not run afoul of the courts, and have a REASONABLE CHANCE to pass muster--make it into law.

These radicals did not do their homework, and never intended to. They simply REACTED to the vocalizations of the few who cried "give us what we want, 'just because.'" We know how that goes, as evidenced by Jerry. They may try again, but if so, it will be along the lines I've posited. If they simply whore again for their vocal, radical, and minority constituency, they will be met again with the same vetoes. That is how it works. Trust me. I've been there as staff, and done the deed.

Bonta and Skinner were responding to what a majority of their constituents wanted them to do. It's called Democracy not pandering. They did get some of their legislation signed. That's why they are so popular in their Districts. They will check with Brown, change their legislation to something more acceptable to him, and he will sign it next year. I'm happy they got some bills through this year and believe they will get more through next year. We do need more gun regulations and will get them little by little. Doing what a majority of your constituents want gets you elected and re-elected. Thats how it works and I've also worked in Sacramento. Note-the Gov. signed more gun bills than he vetoed this year.

Sorry, kid. You're still an apologist for pandering. If you ever worked in Sacramento clearly it wasn't in the legislative arena because you are far too naive, or lacking smarts, to understand the process. It was explained to you very well in 9:37. I've already explained that what a vocal minority of radicals wants will not rule the day.

These two radicals pandered, put bad bills forward, and got their hands slapped, as they deserved to be. Yes, they got some legislation signed, and that's good. When you do the right thing and you don't pander to the crazies, then it tends to bode better for you. If they dump these radical proposals which don't have a tinker's damn of a chance of passage in favor of mainstream ideas that have been tested by the courts and other constituencies, then it will work better for them.

Again, kid, listen to the voice of experience. I have more years and knowledge under my belt than you do.

By the way over-legislation never works, especially with regard to guns. It's always the crazies and criminals who do the damage, and trust me, they have NO respect for any laws. That's a fact that checks out each and every time.

The fact that you call them radicals means you are extremely conservative. Their electorate is not. I am a gun owner(multiple) and believe a semi-automatic rifle with detachable magazine should be banned. The NRA does not speak for me.

No one said that they did. I don't own a gun nor do I belong to the NRA.

As far as the political spectrum goes, they are radicals. If they want to lose the label, then they need to stop the pandering and author and support mainstream leg. that has a chance of passage for the reasons given earlier.

For the record, I oppose all automatic and semi-automatic guns.

Only the Tea Party would call them radicals. In their districts they are moderates and that's why they were elected in races that weren't even close. The liberals would call them conservative-remember where they were elected.

Skinner put in a bill that Brown vetoed that would have banned a semi-automatic rifle with a detachable magazine. Why are you hating on her if your last post was accurate?

Accurate. I don't hate 'on' anybody. She, and definitely him, have gone too far in listening to extreme voices. When they calm down so will I.

We may or may not disagree with them, but what you call extreme is not extreme to most of the people who elected them.

Post a Comment