This is the first time I've gotten to trot out my title in an angry letter to a public official.
Thanks to left cost conservative (http://leftcoastconservative.blogspot.com/2009/05/ab-962-not-new-idea.html) for the info. I think while we both oppose this law, we may take different stances on gun control legislation overall. A similar letter will be sent to my CA senator asking him to oppose the bill.

----------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Assembly Member Ruskins,

I am writing to let you know that as your constituent, your support of AB 962 worries me. Your support of this bill implies that you have not researched effective gun control measures and support implementing costly and useless legislation instead of effective and reasoned measures.

This legislation will not bar criminals from obtaining ammunition. This legislation makes it difficult for women to protect themselves. Furthermore, this legislation has also been shown to be ineffective both at the federal and city level.

I am a lifelong Democrat, but also a gun owner. While I support measures such as 10 day waiting periods and fingerprinting the applications to own guns as crime reduction measures, I do not think that AB 962 will do anything but make it difficult for legal gun owners, like myself, to purchase ammunition.


1. this legislation will not bar criminals from obtaining ammunition.

It is a well known fact in both law enforcement and criminal studies that gangs and other violent groups have well established national and international networks through which illegal goods such as drugs and stolen guns are distributed. This will not stop individuals with illegal guns from purchasing illegal ammunition from the same distributor from which the illegal gun was purchased.

2. This legislation will make it difficult for women who are being stalked and harassed from obtaining personal protection for themselves.

As a female I have been the recipient of attention by an anonymous party. This mild stalking made me aware of how unsafe a person can be (the person knew where I worked and sent messages to me, anonymously, at my work). The owning of handguns and ammunition allow women like myself a means of protection against rape or death in case either the police refuse to respond to our complaints or they arrive too late.

As you may be aware, the police are not required to respond to all reports of a crime. There are too many examples of women who have been in dangerous situations where either the police did not respond to her at all (as in the famous New Mexico case which went to the Supreme Court), or where the police responded too late and a stalker had already entered her house. Owning a gun and having ammunition allows those women who are being stalked or harassed to protect themselves.

3. This legislation is costly and such legislations have already been shown to be ineffective in smaller settings such as the City of Pasadena and at the federal level.

In 1995 the City of Pasadena established such a law. The law was repealed after it was found that all the law did was generate massive amounts of paper records which were not used by police.

Federally, initially the Firearms Owners Protection Act, Appendix I, required that all ammunition purchases be recorded. In 1986, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives testified before Congress that the law was useless for fighting crime and this requirement was repealed.

For the above reasons I am disappointed that you supported AB 962.

Your constituent,

Dr. [my name]

Tags: ca ab 962, gun control
Current Mood: aggravated