Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Candidates' stances on gun issues emerge (Cal Recall)
Sacramento Bee | 3 September 2003 | Herbert A. Sample

Posted on 09/03/2003 11:15:54 AM PDT by 45Auto

It is certainly no secret that the characters portrayed by movie actor Arnold Schwarzenegger, the leading Republican candidate in the gubernatorial recall election, have an affinity for guns.

Big guns. Powerful guns. Futuristic guns. A lot of guns of all types used in nearly every conceivable way to terminate, with extreme prejudice, human beings, aliens and a robot or two.

To some Californians, that make-believe violenc e places a special responsibility on Schwarzenegger to clearly spell out his views on regulating the availability of real guns to real people -- something he began to do last week. Meanwhile, groups advocating more gun-control laws and those opposed to additional restrictions are more than a little interested in whether Gov. Gray Davis retains his office -- and if not, who will succeed him.

"We would definitely prefer a governor who is clear on his position, either in support for the Second Amendment (to the U.S. Constitution) or in opposition to the Second Amendment and what it means constitutionally," said Sam Paredes, executive director of Gun Owners of California.

California's gun laws have become much stricter in the last decade, largely due to Davis' signature on a host of new statutes. His predecessor, Pete Wilson, also approved several.

But more are in the pipeline. Davis or the next governor could soon face a bill -- a top priority of gun-control groups -- to require that most semiautomatic pistols include a device to disable the gun if its ammunition clip is disengaged. Another proposal, postponed until next year, would institute a 10-cent-per-bullet fee to finance emergency health care.

And a governor could use his or her budget powers to strengthen or derail some current laws, such as a state Department of Justice program designed to take guns from people who once were eligible to own firearms but who have since violated a law or court order.

Davis this year approved a $3.4 million expenditure for the effort. The California Rifle and Pistol Association supported the bill establishing the program but has since voiced concerns that it is being applied too broadly.

But just as gun control is a staple of Davis' social policies, gun violence has been ubiquitous in Schwarzenegger movies during the last 20 years. These include the "Terminator" series, "Predator" in 1987, "True Lies" in 1994, and "The 6th Day" three years ago.

But there are nuances to that record. Long before becoming a politician, Schwarzenegger was quoted as saying he directed Sony Pictures, whose Columbia Pictures unit distributed "The 6th Day," to remove the depiction of guns from a marketing poster.

Similarly, he has said he told toy maker Mattel to remove fake guns from a doll the firm wanted to sell in conjunction with 1993's "Last Action Hero." Neither Mattel nor Columbia could verify or contradict those claims.

And in last year's "Collateral Damage," Schwarzenegger's character does not even touch a gun, though he kills several people with his hands and an ax.

The picture's co-writer, David Griffiths, said that before Schwarzenegger became involved in the project, the script was written so the lead character, a firefighter bent on applying vigilante justice to terrorists, uses other means to kill.

Schwarzenegger later embraced the concept.

"One of the attractions to him was that the character, the protagonist, didn't use a gun," Griffiths said in an interview.

Before last week, what was known about the actor's views was sketchy. He and his campaign had refused to detail his positions, leaving observers to assess old quotes.

For example, Schwarzenegger told Playboy magazine in a 1988 interview that "outlawing guns is not the right method of eliminating the problem.

"If you outlaw guns, people will still have them illegally," he said. "In Europe, they're outlawed everywhere. They have very strict gun control in Italy. Yet the pope was shot. They have very strict gun control in Germany. Yet you see pimps shooting one another. Politicians have been shot in Sweden and Holland, where guns are outlawed.

"I don't know how you handle this. I'm no expert."

But in an interview with Berkeley's Youth Radio last year, Schwarzenegger said he wants kids to understand the difference between movies and real life.

"In reality, I'm for gun control," he said. "I'm a peace-loving guy. I hate violence amongst the young kids."

He went further on Aug. 27, telling a Los Angeles radio audience that he supports the federal Brady Bill's background checks on gun buyers, trigger locks, the assault rifle ban and restrictions on gun show purchases.

Whatever the case, Luis Tolley, spokesman for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, said he wants more specifics because Schwarzenegger, in his recent radio interview, voiced support for federal laws that are weaker than the state's rules.

"I support the Brady Bill, too," Tolley said. "But I don't want the Brady Bill to become law in California because we already have something stronger than that."

State law mandates a 10-day waiting period for gun purchases, while checks done in other states that operate under the Brady Bill can take just a few minutes, Tolley explained.

Whether Schwarzenegger "likes it or not, he is a role model for kids," Tolley added. "And as a role model, he has probably glorified gun violence more than anyone else. I think that gives him a special responsibility to talk about the difference between movies and real life."

But Schwarzenegger spokesman Sean Walsh disagreed, saying that adults have the freedom to choose entertainment with varying levels of violence.

"That said," Walsh added, "we have restrictions on content for underage children, and those restrictions should be enforced at home and at the movie theaters."

Except for Schwarzenegger and state Sen. Tom McClintock, most major candidates support gun-control measures already signed by Davis or pending in the Legislature, according to answers on questionnaires submitted by The Bee. The campaign of Republican Peter Ueberroth did not provide a policy statement on gun control.

McClintock last week won an endorsement from Gun Owners of California based on his long pro-gun voting record and his support for an interpretation of the Second Amendment that recognizes a right of individuals to own firearms.

"He's been tried and true," Paredes said.

As for Davis, he has been both a favorite of gun-control advocates and a target of their criticism. After signing an assault weapons ban into law in 1999, the governor said he favored a pause in further restrictions.

"It's been tough to get Gray Davis to get interested in issues we are interested in," said Ann Reiss Lane, founder of Women Against Gun Violence, citing a proposal to ban .50-caliber military-style sniper rifles on which Davis has not taken a position.

But Tolley said the governor "has been quite good for us." He cited Davis' approval of bills to repeal the immunity gun manufacturers once had to civil lawsuits and to mandate stricter training for handgun buyers. Tolley's group opposes the recall but has not decided to back a replacement candidate.

On the other hand, the California Rifle and Pistol Association wants Davis out precisely because he ventured beyond the assault weapon ban. "The man broke his word," said the group's spokesman, Chuck Michel.

But neither Michel's organization nor the National Rifle Association has endorsed a replacement candidate yet.

Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante, the leading Democrat in the contest to replace Davis, had a strong record of supporting gun control during his five years in the Assembly, according to Tolley. During that period, Bustamante voted to both shorten waiting periods for gun buyers and to ban cheap handguns.

One of the most progressive candidates in the race, independent Arianna Huffington, also backs further gun restrictions.

"People with power need to use that power responsibly and accountably," said a spokesman, Van Jones. "Picking up a gun gives you a whole lot of power in that moment. We need to make sure that people with access to that power have been properly vetted, have proper training and can be held accountable for their actions."

Green Party nominee Peter Camejo said that despite his party's support for strict gun-control laws, he has his doubts.

"The right to bear arms is a tradition," Camejo said, noting that he agrees with the individual-right interpretation of the Second Amendment. "I don't think we should abolish the right to own firearms.

"But we should limit it, regulate it and control it to minimize social damage."


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; US: California
KEYWORDS: banglist; rkba; schwarzenrino; tyrants
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-23 next last
Regulating the ownership of firearms is beyond the authority of government; all gun control laws are unconstitutional. Nearly all politicians are merely tyrants-in-waiting.
1 posted on 09/03/2003 11:15:54 AM PDT by 45Auto
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: 45Auto
As Oakland logs its 87th murder this year, its clear that all the gun control nonsense that Davis has signed has done NOTHING to reduce the criminal use of guns. Still, the idiots persist, even in the face of staggering evidence that their stupid laws do nothing to lower the incidence of crime; indeed, a good case could be made that as gun laws have been tightened, crime has gone steadily upward. That leaves us with only one conclusion: most politicians have another agenda in mind when they stubbornly pursue more and more gun laws: TYRANNY.
2 posted on 09/03/2003 11:20:25 AM PDT by 45Auto (Big holes are (almost) always better.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 45Auto
Might as well as said: "We need to make sure that politicians with access to that power have been properly vetted, have proper training and can be held accountable for their actions." That sure as hell leaves her out in the cold.
3 posted on 09/03/2003 11:22:11 AM PDT by 45Auto (Big holes are (almost) always better.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 45Auto
From the article:

He went further on Aug. 27, telling a Los Angeles radio audience that he supports the federal Brady Bill's background checks on gun buyers, trigger locks, the assault rifle ban and restrictions on gun show purchases.

California no longer has a so-called "gun show loophole". Restrictions on all private sales were put in place by a law enacted either last year or possibly the year before.

4 posted on 09/03/2003 11:27:58 AM PDT by Bob (http://www.TomMcClintock.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 45Auto
"Gun control" is and has always been about PEOPLE CONTROL. Once the peopel are disarmed, it is much easier to round them up and send them off to be "re-educated". Just like they did in Germany, Poland, France, China, Russia, Ukraine, ad naseum.
5 posted on 09/03/2003 11:29:03 AM PDT by Blood of Tyrants (Even if the government took all your earnings, you wouldn’t be, in its eyes, a slave.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: 45Auto
Welcome to Massachusetts.
6 posted on 09/03/2003 11:37:47 AM PDT by pabianice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 45Auto
Politicians have been shot in Sweden and Holland, where guns are outlawed.

And, in Vermont ANYONE can have a gun and I don't recall the last time a mass shooting took place there, if ever.

They don't want a gun, fine. But don't tell me I CAN'T have mine.

Keep up the good fight .45!

7 posted on 09/03/2003 11:42:32 AM PDT by Puppage (You may disagree with what I have to say, but I will defend to your death my right to say it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 45Auto
"In reality, I'm for gun control," he said. "I'm a peace-loving guy. I hate violence amongst the young kids." He went further on Aug. 27, telling a Los Angeles radio audience that he supports the federal Brady Bill's background checks on gun buyers, trigger locks, the assault rifle ban and restrictions on gun show purchases.

Arnold's anti-gun agenda doesn't leave much out.

8 posted on 09/03/2003 11:44:25 AM PDT by Roscoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bob
California no longer has a so-called "gun show loophole".

His handlers aren't going to let facts get in the way of their talking points.

9 posted on 09/03/2003 11:45:51 AM PDT by Roscoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: 45Auto
And in last year's "Collateral Damage," Schwarzenegger's character does not even touch a gun, though he kills several people with his hands and an ax.

Something about this struck me as amusing.

It's as if the writer of the article is suggesting that it is better that people are killed without a gun.

10 posted on 09/03/2003 11:48:59 AM PDT by B Knotts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: *bang_list

Note please: The *bang_list is a collection of articles pertaining to the Second Amendment and related Civil Rights, Firearms, and Firearm Related Subjects in general. It is not a ping list. Please do not ask me to include you. There is no one to notify you of new posts. The *bang_list, like others, is a collection of like-subject articles placed by anyone who believes an article belongs and can be read anytime. You can read the list here. You can bookmark the list on your FR homepage here. You can add an article to the list by posting a reply and sending it to *bang_list as in this post.


11 posted on 09/03/2003 11:49:49 AM PDT by kAcknor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Puppage
Its very clear who the enemies of freedom are; just about anyone associated with the RAT party; about half to two thirds of the RINO/Repubo leadership; the entire commie left parties, i.e. the Greens; the entire judicary with a few minor exceptions; the American Bar Association; the AMA; the list goes on and on. I think in the long run the RKBA is doomed.

Yes, 38 states have adopted "shall issue" CCW. Still, the number of new state gun laws put in place every year shows that the overall trend is toward the total ban on gun transfers, the outlawing of private gun ownership and possibly a confiscation plan. I have no doubt the the Brady Boob and company already have such a plan outlined just waiting to find some dupe of a politician with the stupidity to grab it. The penultimate law will ban all but so-called smart guns; that will nearly be the final nail in the coffin of the once great Free Republic.

12 posted on 09/03/2003 11:50:48 AM PDT by 45Auto (Big holes are (almost) always better.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: 45Auto

13 posted on 09/03/2003 11:54:06 AM PDT by ambrose (If You're Not Outraged, You're Not Paying Attention...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 45Auto
SIGNED BY DAVIS IN 2001

? SB 52 and AB 35: Requires Californians who attempt to buy a handgun to complete a two-part exam at the place of purchase to prove they can safely handle and operate the firearm.

? SB 950: Requires the state Department of Justice to check handgun purchase records back to 1991 on every person who falls into a prohibited class (such as felons) to determine whether they had previously purchased handguns. The agency and local law enforcement can take action to determine the status of the weapon and take it off the street.


SIGNED BY DAVIS IN 2002

? SB 682 and AB 496: Overturned a 1983 law that immunized manufacturers against certain liability claims when their weapons cause harm.


BILLS PENDING IN THE LEGISLATURE

? SB 489 (Load Indicator and Magazine Safety Disconnect, by Sen. Jack Scott): Would require most semiautomatic pistols that are newly designed after Jan. 1, 2006, to have a clearly understood load indicator or a magazine safety disconnect. By Jan. 1, 2007, most newly designed pistols would have to have both devices. Handguns that are already approved for sale in California (on the roster before Jan. 1, 2005) would be exempt until/unless they were redesigned.

? AB 50 (Ban .50-Caliber Sniper Rifles, by Assemblyman Paul Koretz): Current law restricts certain "assault weapons" that have specific military features and specific models, such as the AK-47 series. But there is no general restriction on the sale of armor-piercing, .50-caliber military sniper rifles. AB 50 would ban these rifles. People who own them would be required to register them and could not transfer them without a special license from the state Department of Justice.

? SB 35 (Ballistic Fingerprinting Bullet Collection by Sen. Jack Scott): The federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives maintains a ballistic fingerprint database of crime guns and bullets or cartridges recovered at crime scenes. The database is not allowed to include non-crime gun data (such as ballistic fingerprints of guns before they are sold). SB 35 would require, before a gun is sold, that bullet and cartridge samples be sent to the California Department of Justice. The samples would be available for entry into a future database. SB 35 would set deadlines for the gun industry to develop an automatic ballistic fingerprint collection processes on new firearms.

Note: Peter Ueberroth's campaign was unable to answer the questionnaire by deadline.

Source: Bee research

Sacramento Bee/Olivia Nguyen
14 posted on 09/03/2003 11:54:36 AM PDT by ambrose (If You're Not Outraged, You're Not Paying Attention...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: B Knotts
Does killing people with your hands or an ax make them less dead?
15 posted on 09/03/2003 11:56:09 AM PDT by CFW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: CFW
I get the impression that some people think that a murder victim would be almost happy to be killed with hands or an ax, as opposed to a gun.
16 posted on 09/03/2003 12:01:00 PM PDT by B Knotts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: 45Auto
2 States have no restrictions.
33 States have "Shall Issue".
9 States have "May Issue".
6 States have Rights Denied.
17 posted on 09/03/2003 12:30:00 PM PDT by Shooter 2.5 (Don't punch holes in the lifeboat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

Comment #18 Removed by Moderator

To: 45Auto
PING!

Your One Stop Resource For All The California Recall News!

Want on our daily or major news ping lists? Freepmail DoctorZin.

19 posted on 09/03/2003 12:53:19 PM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 45Auto
Californians elected two Senators who are strongly anti-gun.

Senator Feinstein said on national TV that if she had 51 votes in the Senate, " It would be - Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them in."

No one has publicly told her that such an action would violate the U.S. Constitution.

20 posted on 09/03/2003 1:12:46 PM PDT by gatex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-23 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson