Anthony Canales is the President of the
San Fernando Valley NRA Member’s Council.
He works as a Quality Control Manager in Glendale, California. He is married with one son.
The opinions expressed in 'News Briefs' belong soley to the author
and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National
Rifle Association of America or the NRA Members' Councils of California.
Hmmm, what does one get from the mind of Mr. Abby Normal himself,
Assemblyman Kevin de Leon (D-Los Angeles), when he decides to combine the
disembodied "brain" of the Department of Justice Firearms Division with the
"body" of the Department of Motor Vehicles in a bid to regulate ammunition
sales?:
Gettin'
"Schwanzstuckered":
One would think that, with the Governor's recent challenge to the
Legislature to get it's collective act together on the budget deficit, the
People's Servants would come up with more practical answers to reducing the
costs of government.
But in the case of AB 2062, Assemblyman Kevin de Leon has come up with what
may be this years most ridiculous conglomeration of bureaucratic body parts
since the California Legislature went "professional" (read that as "full
time") way back when.
In this case, AB 2062 is apparently designed to require that all handgun
ammunition sold or transferred in the Fool's Golden State be subject to the
very same "back-round check" one mandates for firearms sales, and that
purchasers be on a "licensee" registry that has a more than vague similarity
to a Henry Waxman "wish list". With it would come a very real Frankenstein's
monster of a bureaucratic apparatus, one that would be more likely to dance
like the characters in a Bobby Pickett song than in the soft "shoo" stylings
of a Peter Boyle.
Forget whether there is even a server made that could physically handle the
volume of ammunition sales that happens in California on a daily basis. And
forget whether or not Gil Cedillo will ever forgive de Leon for vastly
complicating the driver's-licenses-for-illegal/undocumented immigrants
debate by trying to incorporate additional status data into each and every
driver's license. No, the real trouble here actually belongs to what is
normally the province of the Civil Liberties Wing of the Democrat Party and
the simple little aspect of the amount of otherwise private information that
would be accessible on driver's licenses.
For example, prohibited persons get classified that way for a variety of
reasons, from "VAWA" violations to homicide, all the way up to the most
heinous of today's crimes (Breathing, which increases the carbon footprint
of society to no end).
One of the more troublesome reasons has to do with those that involve one's
medical (read psychiatric) history. While it is possible that the California
Department of Justice can forward such data to the Federal Department of
Justice in a batch manner (as done recently in response to events at
Virginia Tech), it is hard to imagine California's medical community being
so forthcoming as to provide the kinds of "near-realtime" information that
will keep Hollywood's celebrities in compliance with the law (Celebrity
doctors? Go figure.).
What is more, there is no guarantee that the DMV's computers will even be
able to "share" information sets with the DOJ's Firearms Division without a
massive, probably even cost prohibitive, change in both departments
infrastructure, data-handling capabilities, and personnel training costs.
One measly sportsman's club "fun shoot" may result in a crash of both the DOJ's and DMV's
systems, leading to confusion among law enforcement and civil disturbances
at DMV offices from San Ysidro to Redding.
And this does not even begin to address the intrusion into the lives of
legal gun-owners-cum-registered voters, who are apparently expected to simply
buy more Preparation H and quietly submit to the ministrations of the Loony
Left during one of the more interesting election years in recent memory.
Apparently it is now up to interested firearms owners to warm up the old
phone trees and let their elected representatives know that "we care". The
Assembly Public Safety Committee has apparently scheduled a hearing on AB
2062 for March 25, 2008, with a possible vote on the bill in the offing.
Public Safety Committee Members who need a bit of good old-fashioned citizen
input are:
The recent controversies
involving Senator Barack Obama's twenty year association with the
Reverend Jeremiah Wright of Chicago's Trinity Church (United Church of
Christ) appear to be generating a quite a bit of coverage in the
political spectrum. If the latest Rasmussen numbers are any indication
(and Rasmussen has appeared to have more "volatile" numbers this whole
primary season), it means real trouble for the Nation's Most Liberal
Senator in his race for the Democrat Nomination.
But more importantly, it
calls into question the "moral legitimacy" of the United Church of
Christ in it's current add campaigns that speak of open doors, welcoming
parishioners, and imply
condemnation of church goers who may have different (read more literal)
interpretations of the various versions of Christian Holy Scripture.
Some may have noticed the commercial spots run by
the UCC on national television and radio, as well as currently on their
website. Ad spots claiming that other churches have Aryan-appearing
bouncers, much like Hollywood or New York nightclubs, clearly are
intended to convey the impression that said churches are exclusionary of
others of a "different" ethnic, social, or preferential identification.
No where in these "slick" commercials is one
word, one breath, one transcript of some of the vitriol spewed forth by
Reverend Jeremiah Wright. Somehow it just does not seem consistent with
the marketing of an "inclusionary" faith that one of it's ministers is
calling down the literal Wrath of God on a nation that spilled (and
spills today) it's own blood to halt slavery. Nor does it seem
consistent for a Christian minister to apparently carry on a program of
"social justice" ministry that involves the damning of any particular
ethnic group or income class over another, to the point where the
admonition to "...turn the other cheek..." seems to have lost all
meaning.
Of course, nowhere does the UCC spot speak of
it's own exclusionary policies towards firearms ownership, sporting or
otherwise. Nor does UCC deal with the conflicting political positions of
opining in opposition of US policies involving military force in Muslim
Iraq, while actively lobbying for diplomatic and military efforts on
behalf of Christians in Darfur being waged war on by a Muslim Government
in Sudan. Perhaps such questions will be left to those folks at the IRS
tasked with making sure that the separation of church and state stays
that way when it comes to the use of deductions to charitable
organizations. Perhaps a little more activity from these misunderstood
public servants towards political activities from any other
anti-gun National Council of Churches members may just be in order as
well. Then perhaps the playing field, political or otherwise, may
finally be maintained as just and equal for all.