Rep DeSaulnier’s outrage

Many of us received a recent email (below) from Congressman Mark DeSaulnier (D-Concord), with the single-world subject line of… “Outrage”.

Rep DeSaulnier is outraged you haven't set him a campaign contribution recently. Maybe mass murder will scare you into it.
Rep DeSaulnier is outraged you haven’t set him a campaign contribution recently. Maybe mass murder will scare you into it.
In his Jeremiad, Rep DeSaulnier laments that, “We should be outraged. How many lives should be lost,” due to gun violence. Why? Because of inaction by Republicans in the U.S. Senate who, in thrall to the NRA and Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, refuse to make our communities safer from gun violence by criminals and terrorists.

Like clockwork, former Democratic Speaker Rep. Nancy Pelosi has ginned up a three-ring circus of faux outrage about gun violence and the need to take guns away from law abiding citizens. This is nothing more than shameless, self-serving politicization of an American tragedy of the recent Orlando Mass shooting by a self-professed, radical Islamic terrorist, with a hard-on to make gays pay for their collective affront to the Prophet (Bless his name) and Allah (Allahu Akbar).

Obviously Pelosi and Democrats, including junior members like Rep DeSaulnier, would rather demonize law-abiding gun owners than address, or even name, radical Islamic terrorism, the growth of home-grown extremists, a non-existent border that allows illegal fence jumping and criminal elements to enter the nation willy-nilly, not to mention the influx—if Hillary Rodham Clinton has her way—an increase of over 500,000+ new, unscreened refugees on top of the flood President Obama has already sanctioned despite a Federal Court restraining order pending a Supreme Court decision any day now.

No, shaming the GOP, NRA, and the Second Amendment is much easier.

Rep DeSaulnier does present the usual sound bite statistics citing that majorities of Americans favor background checks that would screen criminals, and mentally disturbed from purchasing guns.There has already been an “assault weapon” ban, especially directed at the ever-popular AR-15 semi-automatic rifle. New proposed nostrums (sans nuance) come prepackaged now with catchy names like, “No Fly No Buy”, or registration for ammunition purchase. He even breathlessly cites the Supreme Court passing on a challenge of a State gun ban as if this were huge news. But you don’t know, do you. Rep DeSaulnier just said so.

The general public thinks the AR-15 is an automatic military grade "assault weapon that can fire 3,000 rounds per second.
The general public thinks the AR-15 is an automatic military grade “assault weapon” that can fire 3,000 rounds per second.

Meanwhile, heavily market-researched names like “assault weapon”—which is code for the popular, semi-automatic AR-15 rifle— are the enemy; not hand guns, knives, or nunchucks (ouch). Why, because an AR-15 looks much more dangerous and can be lied about due to plain ignorance. Stringing up AR-15s is much easier than reckoning with the fact that most gun violence in metropolitan areas are drug and gang related. Like Rep DeSaulnier’s ban of AR-15s is going to put a halt to the violent drug culture in cities like Richmond, Oakland, San Francisco, Los Angeles, along the Rio Grande, St Louis, Detroit, Flint, Chicago, New Orleans, D.C., Baltimore, NYC, and Boston…all Democratic Party strongholds with employment crushed by NAFTA and the Left’s third-base romance with Globalism.

Significantly the Outrage email arrived just days before today’s sit-in by House Democrats (including Rep DeSaulnier standing off to the side when allowed to be on camera) giving impassioned, fist-shaking speeches interspersed with calls for silence to remember the thousands killed by Republicans and the NRA. The crocodile tears were backed up by by chants of “no bill, no break” (#nobillnobreak)…as if.

No bill? Give me a break!

A photo shot and tweeted from the floor of the House by U.S. House Rep. John Yarmuth shows Democratic members of the U.S. House of Representatives, including Rep. Joe Courtney (L) and Rep. John Lewis (C) staging a sit-in on the House floor “to demand action on common sense gun legislation” on Capitol Hill in Washington, United States, June 22, 2016. REUTERS/U.S. Rep. John Yarmuth/Handout
We’re pretty sure Rep DeSaulnier knows (we’re not so sure about Nancy Pelosi) that gun legislation never has and never will keep “assault weapons” out of the hands of criminals and those seeking to do harm to their spouse, neighbor, business, place of worship, or country. The legislation for which Democrats beat the drum is only to keep law abiding citizens from buying guns for sport-shooting, hunting, and home and personal defense and like it.

Alas, Rep DeSaulnier’s the bottom line solution to gun violence is for you, the hipster gal or guy who thinks AR-15s shoot bullets at 3K/sec to send his campaign, $100, $50, $25, or even $5. For that is the only solution to gun violence Democrats and Rep Desaulnier; to hijack tragedy to play on fears and ignorance as a ploy to raise campaign cash for themselves.

The outrage.

desaulnier outrage pretend


Terrorism in San Bernardino not about gun control

As if things could not be get worse, and act of terrorism in San Bernardino that left 14 dead and numerous other victims last week, California’s Lt. Governor Gavin Newsome sent out an email that stated:

There’s still a lot we don’t know about the tragic shooting in San Bernardino. But one thing is obvious: We’ve got a problem. So far in 2015, there have been more mass shootings than days. In fact, the BBC opened yesterday’s broadcast, saying, “Just another day “Just another day in the United States of America… “We’re becoming defined by our inability to act.

fashionable empty suit
Gavin Newsome’s positions blandishments fit like an empty suit.

Even just yesterday, in the wake of this tragedy, Congress caved to the NRA again and refused to act. But we are not bystanders. We can do better. In the past 48 hours, I’ve heard from thousands of people who want to know: In the face of congressional inaction, what can we do? Well, in California, we can pass the Safety for All Act – a historic ballot initiative that would require things like background checks on ammunition purchases and a ban on the possession of high-capacity magazines (the type of magazines that contain 20, 30, even 40 bullets, allowing the shooter to inflict maximum damage without having to reload).

Following this rant, Newsome left a link to the anti-gun ballot initiative he is sponsoring for next fall’s election to leave money to finance its passage.

In this discussion nowhere was the mention that the horrendous atrocities like Paris or terroorism in San Bernardino were the act of Islamic Terrorists. By not stating this, Newsome implied that if stricter gun control laws and background checks were in place, these shooting deaths of innocent people could have been avoided.

With this pretzel logic we are to believe the terrorists would not been able to assemble their arsenal of weapons including pipe bombs because they would have been prohibited by law from doing so.

Of course this notion is ridiculous. Newsome and other liberals including Hilary Clinton and President Obama are blaming Republicans and the NRA for perpetuating atrocities carried out by individuals who are dedicated to destroying the United States. On a similar vein, it is believed by them those ghetto gang banger killings in Chicago, Baltimore, Ferguson, Oakland, and other metropolitan areas could be prevented with stricter gun control laws.

Again, we are asked to buy into a “leap of faith” mechanism used in fiction to suspend reality. In this case the public is supposed to think that drug dealers, who obtain firearms illegally, would stop shooting each other if guns and bullets were unavailable to them because of more stringent background checks

U.S. President Barack Obama speaks about counter-terrorism and the United States fight against Islamic State during an address to the nation from the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, December 6, 2015. REUTERS/Saul Loeb/Pool
U.S. President Barack Obama speaks about counter-terrorism and the United States fight against Islamic State during an address to the nation from the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, December 6, 2015. REUTERS/Saul Loeb/Pool

By taking a tragedy such as terrorism in San Bernardino to push forward plans for more government regulations on firearms, Gavin Newsome and his Progressive coherts are taking advantage of an act of terrorism to push forward their political agenda. Note that in their narratives of what has transpired, Islam, Isis, El Qaida, and Middle East are somehow absent from their vocabularies.

Being disgusted by these actions this does not make me a supporter of the so called gun lobby and a blind defender of the 2nd Amendment allowing unrestricted sales of firearms. Quite the contrary I am very concerned about some of the weaponry that is available legally and in the black market that is far beyond what one needs to defend his or her family.

As an individual who has seldom fired a gun and has no intention of ever owning one, it is difficult for me to understand why anyone needs to pocess an AK-47 with clips holding 40 bullets to feel safe. In a similar vein I don’t think ordinary citizens should own hand grenades, pipe bombs, Molotov cocktails, or rocket launchers to order to defend their households.

I am as disgusted as anyone with the needless killings that go on using firearms. With this being said I also know that the reasons people (especially gangs) are so violent is because of their feelings of hopelessness in their lives. Government programs and entitlements no matter how well intended have not broken the cycle of poverty which has continued unabated since many manufacturing jobs started dried up following World War II.

Thinking that free lunches, more police training, better education, and additional entitlements will reduce violence is the height of absurdity. The only thing that will reduce crime are jobs and the stability that only a nuclear family can provide. Until these basic needs are taken care of,  gun violence will continue no matter how many new laws are enacted.

Instead of politicizing everyday events to influence the next election cycle, lets place what could be termed  “meaningful dialogue” where it belongs

An act of ISIS terrorism in San Bernardino killed 14
An act of ISIS terrorism in San Bernardino killed 14

Terrorism in San Bernardino has nothing to do with gun laws. They are about Islamic Terrorists that have been recently been killing innocent victims from California to Paris, Mali, and elsewhere. How can we stop these people? How much and what type of surveillance is needed to do so? What new steps need to be taken by local police, the FBI, CIA, NSA, and the Armed Forces to deal with radical Islamic factions?

This is what we should be talking about ; not trying to divert attention to  non-sequitur political agendas.

We need to distinguish between gun control laws and terrorist activities. Both are topics that are important and have to be dealt with separately. For now the best way to do this is through the ballot box in 2016, especially with the election of the President.

Do we want a continuation of President Obama’s policies of ” leading from behind” telegraphing our intentions to advisories, no boots on the ground, and be reluctant to take on the United States historic role of being leader of the free world? If this is the case the next President should make this clear and let the chips fall as they may.

As a counter to this isolationist approach does America want a military fixing problems in the Middle East and elsewhere spending a great deal of the country’s economic resources in doing so? Would this make us safer and prevent terrorists from carrying outtheir horrible work?

As with most questions pertaining to military and political strategies, the truth is somewhere in the middle. The best way to get there is to elect non-doctrinaire leaders who know the difference between a gang related shooting and a terrorist act. Whether they are Republicans or Democrats should make no difference as our countries future is in the balance.


Chabot Gun Club face off with East Bay regional parks and anti-gun agitators, Nov 3

Chabot Gun Club faces unreasonable opposition from East Bay Parks and outsider anti-gun and environmental activists in public hearing for renewal of license


Chabot Gun Club Has Risen to the Challenge!

Now it’s your turn:

East Bay Regional Park District Board Meeting, Tuesday, Nov. 3rd, @ 2:00 pm. Please be there!

The Chabot Gun Club has operated the Chabot Regional Marksmanship Range and provides target practice plus lessons and safety training for all ages
The Chabot Gun Club has operated the Chabot Regional Marksmanship Range and provides target practice plus lessons and safety training for all ages
In the last lease update, we painted a pretty bleak picture of our current relationship with the East Bay Regional Park District. To make matters even more interesting, we have it on good authority that people from various out-of-area groups, plus the Unitarian Church, the Golden Gate Audubon Society, and even a local park anti-expansion group have been pulled into the mix of those opposed to Chabot Gun Club operating the Anthony Chabot Marksmanship Range.

Doesn’t really surprise us. We expected outside agitators to join people with legitimate concerns to take this up as the cause du jour. Fortunately, the National Rifle Association, the California Rifle and Pistol Association and the Diablo Rod and Gun Club have stepped in with donations and other assistance. Our counsel, C.D. Michel & Associates, a well-known firearms legal firm, is bending over backwards to help us rise to these challenges. Thousands of other individuals are also finding ways to assist us.

Our Compliance Recapped
First off, in our haste to get the last lease update out, where we discussed our areas of compliance with the regulators, we forgot to include some of the other areas in which we are, even according to the EBRPD, already compliant with regulations concerning the environment:

Things we learned during the Board Operations Committee on September 24:The water in Lake Chabot has been tested in the upper strata and no lead has been found. No testing of the lower strata in the lake was done because of the years of lead fishing weights that had been deposited there. Lead has been found somewhere upstream of the lake but the EBRPD does not know where it came from. (With the East Bay hills’ history of military firearms ranges and missile sites is that really surprising?)
The fish in Lake Chabot have been tested and are free of lead.

So Let’s Summarize:
Chabot Gun Club is legally compliant on our sound signature, specifically on the type of sound that gunfire makes.

Chabot Gun Club is compliant on our stormwater signature. There were some earlier ‘spikes’ caused by mitigation measures improperly forced upon us. (Like one of Alameda County’s regulators told us, “Sometimes we tend to over-regulate a little.”)

Chabot Gun Club is compliant on our lead reclamation projects, even though interrupted by the aforementioned mitigation measures.

Chabot Gun Club will continue to be compliant as we have already brought in a nationally recognized lead reclamation firm to help us re-vamp
the range.

Chabot Gun Club is compliant with our environmental stewardship as we are not causing a discharge of lead into Lake Chabot.

Chabot Gun Club compliant with our environmental stewardship as we have no impact on the fish in Lake Chabot.

Chabot Gun Club is compliant with the EBRPD’s requirement that we retain a stormwater scientist by retaining Dr. Tim Bauters, a nationally recognized stormwater expert.

The only place that Chabot Gun Club is not compliant is in this:

We were told that while we could protest (what we believed were unnecessary, expensive and potentially irresponsible) proposals that the EBRPD and its consultants were pushing upon us, in the end, we have to do what we are told.

Well, it is not quite that simple. Chabot Gun Club will endeavor to continue to do what is right, especially where safety and the environment are concerned.

Here are a few examples:

Even though the EBRPD has been trying to hide discharge points from the regulators and the public, we will sample wherever we deem necessary and report our findings to the authorities.

Even though the EBRPD has prevented us from implementing reasonable and effective Best Management Practices (BMPs) and required us to engage in practices that could damage the environment, we will continue to work to ensure that only clean water leaves our facility.

Even though the EBRPD has taken funds away from their intended purpose in order to facilitate our closure, we will bring those funds to light in an effort to have the EBRPD reassign them to the long term benefit of the mass of shooters in the Bay Area and the environment that the EBRPD professes to desire to preserve.

What can you do?
First send an email to the EBRPD Directors, individually, as soon as possible. Tell them how and why you think Chabot Gun Club is an important asset to the San Francisco Bay Area. Share your experiences here and at other outdoor ranges. Here are their email addresses:

Whitney Dotson
Ward 1 Board Member

John Sutter
Ward 2 Board Member

Dennis Waespi
Ward 3 Board Member (Chabot Gun Club’s Director)

Doug Siden
Ward 4 Board Member
Vice President

Ayn Wieskamp
Ward 5 Board Member

Beverly Lane
Ward 6 Board Member

Diane Burgis
Ward 7 Board Member

Then, come to the EBRPD General Board Meeting at 2:00 pm on Tuesday, November 3rd, 2015. I would suggest you get there at least half an hour early, as I expect the opposition to show up in large numbers.

The opposition will have signs. We should all wear something BLUE, the Club’s main color. If you plan to speak, you will need to fill out a speaker card when you get there or email me at KEEP THE RANGE OPEN I will send you one to finish filling out. We are agenda item C.2.a., Chabot Gun Club.

Since this will be an informational meeting, no vote will be taken (at least that is what EBRPDs staff has told us). The senior staff will probably present a very biased, negative report on Chabot Gun Club, as they have in the Board Operations Committee and the Park Advisory Committee.

Speak if you can. Numbers will matter.

If you can’t get in, due to the number of people, hang around the building. The media will undoubtedly will be there.
No guns! No foul language! Please be very polite. There are a lot of people working in the EBRPD that quietly support us. If they are against us, do like Reagan did: try to never turn an adversary into an enemy.

The address to come to the meeting is:
East Bay Regional Park District (EBRPD)
2950 Peralta Oaks Court
Oakland, CA 94605-0381

See you there.

John Maunder
Chabot Gun Club
Range Master


Challenge to Pleasant Hill gun law heats up

Pleasant Hill City Council consider their defense of its Pleasant Hill gun law challenged by City Arms East, LLC, and The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF)


city-arms-gun-store-zoning-lawsOn Tuesday, August 11 the Pleasant Hill City Council met in closed session to discuss the lawsuit filed last year challenging the Pleasant Hill law that regulates the city’s gun stores. City officials must consider next steps in defense of the suit filed by City Arms East, LLC, and The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF). The case resides in Contra Costa County Superior Court, CASE No. MSN13-1922.

gun-sales-regulations-pleasant-hillIn July the plaintiffs filed a summary judgment motion with the court. A summary judgment motion asks the judge to find in the plaintiffs’ favor based upon the law and the facts. Such motions commonly are used to resolve a case quickly or narrow the issues that will proceed to trial.

In its motion, City Arms/NSSF asks the court to find the City’s firearms ordinance “invalid and unenforceable” and to repeal it permanently. The motion also asks the court to reimburse plaintiffs’ legal costs.

A hearing on the summary judgment motion is scheduled for October 23rd. The full trial is scheduled to begin on December 4, 2015.


Trump and the Republican problem with women

We need more women in Congress, and GOP leadership in California and across the nation must begin to address the real Republican problem with women.


Many Republicans, hide bound GOP leaders, conservative firebrands, and pious candidates with their myopic supporters are in seemingly meth-inspired rage over perceived sexist comments Donald Trump made at the first presidential debate broadcast by Fox News, August 6.

It’s the sexist pigs like Erick Erickson and mumblers like Jeb Bush and Rick Perry that Republican women and rob babes like Megyn Kelly should rage against, not Donald Trump.

The mainstream media, as well as cable news, has dutifully whipped the controversy into a wicked froth, describing the kerfuffle as a tsunami, and a firestorm, as they herd the idiot sheep toward the cliff.

Trump hurts the Republican brand with women, we are told. The party cannot afford a misogynist insulting 53-percent of the electorate (Bush). Pointing the war on women finger at Trump obfuscates the real issue that is the Republican problem with women, not Trump’s.

Carly Fiorina, a failed Hewlett Packard executive and U.S. Senate candidate with no elected experience is the only woman in a GOP field of 16 candidates. This alone illustrates the Republican problem with women. While men, especially white men, outnumber women in Congress by 3:1, there are just 29 Republican women in Congress (23) and the Senate (3). This borders on 10% in both houses, not 53%, Mr. Bush.

Only one Republican Congresswoman holds a committee chairmanship (Miller R-MI, House Administration). Murkowski (Alaska) and Collins (Maine) are the only two female Republicans in the Senate that hold committee chairs, where the real power is.

According to extensive research by Political Parity, “Republican women and party leaders confirm that the GOP struggles to recruit, coach, and retain women. There’s no significant structure to shepherd female candidates through a primary election. And with little candidate development at the local level or explicit party engagement in primaries, Republicans aren’t establishing a pipeline of future federal officeholders.”

In short, we ought to see blood from the eyes, ears, and “wherever” of the white-haired Bush-poodles and other Republican women as they point their fingers at Republican Party leaders, not the Donald.

Carly Fiorina
That Carly Fioirna is the only Republican female presidential candidate says more about the Republican brand than Donal Trump

The old-boy club and the clowns at Fox holding their cloaks are the ones that need to see the wrath of women in the GOP. While incumbency is a big help or hindrance to entering the field, gender is not the most important issue. Electability, credibility, and ideology are the most important issue when it comes to helping more Republican women get elected.

Locally, in Contra Costa, a very blue California County, Republican women including (but not limited) to Assemblywoman Catharine Baker, and Supervisors Candice Anderson and Mary Nejedly Piepho are great examples of electability, credibility, and even-handed, conservative policy decision making and get-it-done work ethic that represents their districts well. It may sound sexist, but gender had very little to do with their respective elections and service.

We need more of them, and the GOP leadership in California and across the nation must begin to address the real Republican problem with women and begin to recruit and nurture winners.

It’s the sexist pigs like Erick Erickson and mumblers like Jeb Bush and Rick Perry that Republican women and robo babes like Megyn Kelly should rage against, not Donald Trump.



Joy Delepine: GOP candidate from Right Field

On June 3, 2014 Assemblywomen Susan Bonilla (D-Concord), Contra Costa District Attorney Mark Peterson, and Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, had every reason to be confident when they entered the voting booths in their neighborhood polling places. All were running unopposed for re-election.

In these races, the general consensus among political pundits was that the high cost of conducting political campaigns combined with long odds of defeating entrenched incumbents discouraged serious opposition to run against them.

A slight deviation occured in Assembly District 14. Republican write-in candidate Joy Delepine garnered 366 votes. This represented less than 1% of the 44,644 cast for three times elected Susan Bonilla. Even by the standards of what might be expected on election day in the old Soviet Union, this result could be considered a landslide.

Joy DelepineDespite these staggering figures, by virtue of State law, Delepine earned the right to place her name on the November ballot to provide a conservative alternative to the Progressive Susan Bonilla to represent constituents in Sacramento.

Meet Joy Delepine for whom few people are familar with. She has never run for public office having lived a quiet life in Concord for the past 30 years as a businesswomen, suburban housewife who raised 3 kids along with 60 foster children her family helped raise..

Why then would a person like this ever want to be in the California Legislature? Delepine explains, “I’ve worked as a real estate associate and a small business owner for many years. I’ve always felt an obligation to give back to my community and have served on many boards including my home owners association, Mt. Diablo Hospital, and as founder of the North Concord BART Action Committee.”

Delepine went on to say, “When I discovered my opponent would be running unopposed on the ballot, I made the decision to stand up and provide voters an alternative to the status quo.”

I caught up with Joy a couple weeks ago when she was holding court at a fundraiser to inject needed cash into her campaign. She quietly introduced herself to small group of friends, neighbors, and Republican Women at the home of conservative activist Liz Froelich in Concord.

While her opponent Susan Bonilla, conducts megabucks events to which corporations, labor unions, lobbyists, and others generously contribute, Delepine sets more modest goals. She asks the group at Froelich’s house for enough money to pay for 300 lawn signs to sprinkle among the 13 municipalities that make up the 14th Assembly District.

After the crowd had settled in, Delepine delivers her stump speech which outlines her views which include:

  • As an individual who home schooled her children, she opposes the Common Core curriculum favored by her opponent Susan Bonilla. Delepine says Common Core is “Trying to dumb down our children with propaganda that teaches them what to think instead of how to think for themselves,”
  • “I’ll work tirelessly to end The One Bay Area Plan with an agenda that promotes public transportation as an ultimate goal so they can tell us where to go and at what time we can.
  • Delepine also opposes regional planning agencies like ABAG and the MTC, which she claims “infringes on property rights and tries to eliminate rural and suburban living in favor of high density developments with no back yards or privacy,”
  • Delepine is a strong believer in the U.S. Constitution, holds pro-life values, is against gun control, opposes the bullet train and other wasteful government programs
  • If elected Delepine wants to enact tax cuts, reduce the size of government and promote job growth in the private sector.

After listening to her platform I asked the Republican Assembly candidate if she was a member of the Tea Party? Delepine responded by stating, “The organization is not a political party in itself as it is composed of individuals of differing backgrounds.” She went on to say “Most followers of the Tea Party are patriots and so am I.”

At the conclusion of the event I was told after the hat was passed, enough money was raised to at least pay for signs and a few other items needed for the campaign. The fundraiser from Delepine’s perspective was a success.

Leaving this function I couldn’t help but to reflect on the disparities which exist in California politics today. The rich seem to be getting richer and those who oppose them have virtually no chance to equitably present their views. If what I witnessed that night were Republican Fat Cats in action, where are the infamous Koch Brothers when you need them?

This is not to say that if Delepline’s ultra conservative message were known to all the voters, she would be victorious in November. It just makes me sad that there are so few mechanisms readily available in the body politic that allow for more choices to be made by voters on election day.

I wish Joy Delepine all the best in her political campaign in the 14th district race. This is not because of her right leaning views on abortion, gun control, education and tax policies, but rather her courage to run for political office against all odds as she opposes such a well funded opponent.

Shame on the Contra Costa Republican Party for ignoring its obligation to find suitable candidates to run for all elected posts. It should not have to depend on an individual such as Joy Delepine to bail out the party and give the electorate what conservative writer Phyllis Schlafly once called, “A Choice Not An Echo.”

Delepine has done Democrats, Republicans, Independents, Greens, Libertarians, and all others a great service by adding her name to the ballot.  At the end of the day, those at the farthest exremes of the political spectrum should applaud Delepine’s bravery in trying to make a difference.

Isn’t that what American democracy is supposed to be all about?