Calguns.net  

Home My iTrader Join the NRA Donate to CGSSA Sponsors CGN Google Search
CA Semiauto Ban(AW)ID Flowchart CA Handgun Ban ID Flowchart CA Shotgun Ban ID Flowchart
Go Back   Calguns.net > POLITICS, LITIGATION AND ACTIVISM > California 2nd Amend. Political Discussion & Activism
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

California 2nd Amend. Political Discussion & Activism Discuss gun rights activism and 2A related political topics here. All advice given is NOT legal counsel.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-03-2018, 9:57 AM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
Vendor/Retailer
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 15,696
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Arrow 2019 CA Legislation Quick-Reference & Statuses (Updated 2/4)

(Web browser users) Click here to subscribe to updates for this thread.
(Tapatalk users) Click the "bookmark" icon in the top right to subscribe, but be aware that this thread is best viewed on a computer web browser.

For the community to be able to help keep this information up-to-date, this thread is "open" for you to post in. However, for the sake of keeping the thread clean and concise, please adhere to the rules below.

Feel free to post:
  • Information about new firearm-related bills not yet listed here.
  • Updates/movement with bills that are listed here.
  • Suggested corrections to the content of this thread.
  • Questions or comments about how the legislative process works, terminology, etc.
Please DO NOT post:
  • Questions or commentary about specific bills. Most bills already have a dedicated discussion thread, with links provided here. If it doesn't, feel free to make one and I'll add the link to this page.
  • "Tagged", "subscribed", etc. There is a handy link at the top of this page for subscribing to this thread - use that please.
Periodically, any posts that are no longer necessary or relevant, or that don't follow the above rules, will be cleared out - don't take it personally, I clear out even many of my own posts.



Basic Overview of the Legislative Process:
  • 2019 is the first year of the two-year 2019/20 legislative session.
  • The last day for the legislature to introduce new bills is 2/22. However, any bill can be, and often is, "amended" (partially or entirely) all the way until 9/6.
  • For a bill to become law, it must be passed by both legislative Houses: the 40-member Senate (29 Democrats, 11 Republicans) and the 80-member Assembly (61 Democrats, 19 Republicans).
  • Generally, each bill requires over 50% approval to be passed (a simple majority), unless noted otherwise in the bill's description. Some rare exceptions include bills with tax implications, urgency clauses, or amendments to the State Constitution which all require a two-thirds (66.67%) vote in both Houses, and certain other bills which require 55% in both houses. A two-thirds vote in both Houses is also required for a bill to be eligible for veto-overriding (however the CA legislature virtually never exercises that ability, even when they can - it's been over 40 years since the last time they did).
  • In the House of the bill's origin, before it is eligible for a floor vote, gun-related bills are typically assigned to two Committees, where they can be amended, passed through, or failed.
  • Committee compositions are decided by each House's leadership shortly before the start of each two-year session.
  • Firearm-related bills are typically assigned to one or both of the committees listed below, but in some cases depending on the content of the bill, may be assigned to other committees.
    Typical Senate Committees: The 7-member Public Safety Committee "SPSC" (5 Democrats, 2 Republicans), and the 7-member Appropriations Committee "SAC" (5 Democrats, 2 Republicans).
    Typical Assembly Committees: The 8-member Public Safety Committee "APSC" (6 Democrats, 2 Republicans) and the 17-member Appropriations Committee "AAC" (12 Democrats, 5 Republicans).
  • If the committees pass the bill by 5/17, it goes to a House floor vote where it must be passed by 5/31.
  • The bill then goes to the other House, where that House's committees must pass the bill by 8/30, after which that House floor must pass the bill by 9/13.
  • If the second House amended the bill at all, then it must have a concurrence vote in the House of origin, also by 9/13.
  • Passed bills are sent to the governor, who has until 10/13 to issue a veto. If not vetoed, the bill becomes law as of the Governor's signing or 10/14 (whichever comes first), and takes effect on 1/1/2020, or later if otherwise specified, or immediately if the bill has an urgency clause (bills cannot take effect before 1/1/2020 without an urgency clause).
  • For a more thorough explanation of the legislative process, see this thread.
  • And finally, what can WE do to help good bills pass and bad bills fail? See post #2 for information.

There are 14 gun-related bills so far:
  • 0 Pro-2a
  • 6 Neutral/Undetermined - 6 active
  • 10 Anti-2a - 10 active

Important info about this list:
  • They are sorted in a multi-level fashion, in this order of priority:
    • From furthest progression to least progression
    • By their effect on gun owners (Green bills are pro-2a, orange bills are neutral or undetermined, and red bills are anti-2a)
    • By their house of origin (Assembly bills first, Senate bills second)
    • By their bill number.
  • Each bill's vote history is written as (Y-N-X, %), where Y = "aye", N = "no", X = "not voting", and % = Y/(Y+N+X).
    "Not voting" members must be present at the hearing; it does not include vacant seats or absent members, and it is treated exactly the same as a "no" vote.
The list of bills starts on Post #3.



This is the 3rd annual "CA Legislation Quick-Reference & Statuses" thread. For those who are curious, here are the previous years.
(Read only - Please refrain from necro-posting in those threads)

Last edited by cockedandglocked; 02-21-2019 at 2:42 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 12-03-2018, 9:57 AM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
Vendor/Retailer
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 15,696
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

What can we do?

It's easy to forget that the legislature is NOT a blind and deaf, self-governing entity. They were hired by us, and they work for us. They get their ideas for bills from people like you and me, and they hear input from their constituents before they vote. Re-election is nearly always priority #1, and if they are facing overwhelming opposition to their ideas or votes, they will change if they want to keep their jobs.


Proposing an idea for a new bill.

This can be done year-round, but it is perhaps most effective to propose bill ideas during the time between legislative sessions, which is roughly Mid-September through the end of the year. February 22nd is the deadline for a legislator to introduce a new bill for that year.

If you do not know who your local Senator and Assembly member are, you can quickly find them here: http://findyourrep.legislature.ca.gov/.

Carefully craft your idea for the bill into a friendly and brief letter, including supporting arguments, and send it to your Senator and/or Assembly member. It may even be worth trying to schedule a phone call or face-to-face meeting with your representative to discuss your idea. You do not need to worry about the precise language for your bill idea - your representative is a lawmaker, so that part is their job.

With a little luck, hopefully your representative likes your idea and introduces a bill for it. If they don't, then thank them for their time and move on, don't harass them about it. They can only introduce so many bills per session and yours may not have fit into their overall legislative plan for the year, or they might simply disagree with your idea - in either case, you may want to submit your ideas to Representatives from other districts.


Voicing your support/concern about an existing bill.

If you want to make your voice be heard, the "what, where, who, and how" all depend on where a particular bill currently stands - making the wrong move at the wrong time or to the wrong people will cause your argument to fall on deaf ears. For example, contacting a Senator about a bill that is in the Assembly would be a misuse of both your and their time. As would contacting the Governor about a bill that is still in policy committee, and so on. The exception to that rule is that it is always a good time to contact a bill's author(s) to either thank them or express your concerns, as they have the ability to amend or withdraw a bill at any time, in any House or committee, before it reaches the Governor.

Each bill in this list shows its current location, and who you should be contacting right now to voice your opinions.

For bills in Committee, the hearings are public events that you can attend in person, to voice your support or concerns. Look at each bill's status page on the Legislature website to find out if a committee hearing for the bill is scheduled (be aware that they often don't have time to discuss every scheduled bill on a given day, so it might get pushed to another day). You may also contact the Committee members online, by mail, or by phone. Committees can amend bills as well, so feel free to propose any ideas for amendments that you may have.

Contact your district representative online, by mail, or by phone, for bills that have passed committee and are ready for a Floor vote.

Contact the Governor's office, for bills that have passed both Houses of the legislature. Phone is the ideal method for reaching the governor's office, since he may act on bills very quickly once they hit his desk.


An important note about contacting our elected officials.

Be polite and courteous when you contact Representatives or the Governor. Whether they are Democrat or Republican should not affect what you say to them.

Nobody likes to be yelled at, belittled, insulted, or harassed. YOU wouldn't be receptive to that, and neither will they. Courtesy can mean the difference between your message being heard or ignored.

Keep your message concise and on-point. Express your concerns or support for the bill, then thank them for their time and consideration. Nothing more really needs to be said beyond that.


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


A reminder about watching what you say on public forums.

DO NOT discuss shortcomings, potential loopholes, etc., in ANY anti-2a bills until after the Governor signs or vetoes it, or 10/13. And in the case of any bills for which agency regulations will need to be written after the law passes, please also continue to avoid discussions of loopholes, shortcomings, etc., until after those regulations are published.

It is well-known that the information posted in these forums often gets back to the legislature, and it absolutely can affect (and probably has affected) the content of anti-2a bills in ways that hurt us.

Treat these forums as if they are "open letters to the legislature", because they basically are.

And when a bill is riddled with errors, problems, or omissions, sometimes silence is the best course of action for us to take - let the bill fail on its own merits.

Last edited by cockedandglocked; 12-05-2018 at 9:26 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 12-03-2018, 9:58 AM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
Vendor/Retailer
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 15,696
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

0 Bills That Have Become Law
(Signed by, or not vetoed by, the Governor on or before 10/13/2019)
These bills will take effect on 1/1/2020, unless otherwise specified.

No 2019 bills have passed yet.




0 Bills at Governor's Desk
(Passed by both Houses of the Legislature)
Next deadline for these bills: Governor may veto on or before 10/13/2019, otherwise they become law.

No 2019 bills have reached the Governor's desk yet.




0 Bills Awaiting House of Origin concurrence vote
(Passed by both Houses, but the House of Origin needs to approve the bill as amended by the second House.)
Next deadline for these bills: Floor must vote for concurrence on or before 9/13/2019.

No 2019 bills are awaiting concurrence vote.




0 Bills awaiting second House floor vote
(Passed by the House of origin, and passed by all committees in the second House.)
Next deadline for these bills: Floor must vote for passage on or before 9/13/2019.

No 2019 bills have reached the second House floor yet.




0 Bills in second House committees
(Passed by the House of origin)
Next deadline for these bills: Must pass through all Committees on or before 8/30/2019.

No 2019 bills have reached the second House committees yet.




0 Bills awaiting House of Origin floor vote
(Passed by all committees in the House of origin.)
Next deadline for these bills: Floor must vote for passage on or before 5/31/2019.

No 2019 bills have reached the House of origin floor yet.

Last edited by cockedandglocked; 12-05-2018 at 8:46 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 12-03-2018, 9:58 AM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
Vendor/Retailer
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 15,696
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

26 Bills in House of Origin committees
(Bills that have been introduced, but haven't yet advanced through committee)
Next deadline for these bills: Must pass through all Committees on or before 5/17/2019.

AB-12 (Gun violence and mental health) Link to bill | Calguns discussion
AB-164 (Prohibited persons attempting gun purchases) Link to bill | Calguns discussion
  • Author(s): Cervantes (D) Coauthor(s): N/A
  • Summary: It's already a crime for a person prohibited by a temporary restraining order, an injunction, or a protective order to possess or attempt to purchase a firearm - this bill would clarify/add that it applies to a temporary restraining order, an injunction, or a protective order issued in any jurisdiction.
  • Assembly Vote History: n/a Senate Vote History: n/a
  • Location / Status: 1/24/2018 - In APSC. Contact the committee & its members if you wish to share your support or concern for this bill.

AB-165 (POST training for GVRO's) Link to bill | Calguns discussion
  • Author(s): Gabriel (D) Coauthor(s): N/A
  • Summary: Requires the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training to develop and implement, on or before January 1, 2021, a course of training regarding gun violence restraining orders. For example, situational training to assist officers in identifying when a gun violence restraining order is appropriate.
  • Assembly Vote History: n/a Senate Vote History: n/a
  • Location / Status: 1/24/2018 - In APSC. Contact the committee & its members if you wish to share your support or concern for this bill.

AB-340 (Establish county-level Armed Prohibited Person task forces) Link to bill
AB-425 (Ammo exemption for armed guards) Link to bill | Calguns discussion
SB-37 (Explosives & Destructive Devices) Link to bill

continued below...

Last edited by cockedandglocked; 02-21-2019 at 2:41 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 12-03-2018, 9:58 AM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
Vendor/Retailer
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 15,696
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

...continued from above

AJR-4 (Joint Resolution In support of National Universal Background Checks) Link to bill
  • Author(s): Aguiar-Curry (D) Coauthor(s): Dodd (D), McGuire (D), Grayson (D), Levine (D), Wood (D)
  • Summary: If passed, would send a message to US Congress, urging them to pass HR-8 (universal background checks).
  • Assembly Vote History: n/a Senate Vote History: n/a
  • Location / Status: 1/28/2019 - In APSC. Contact the committee & its members and urge them to vote NO.

AJR-5 (Joint Resolution for the US to adopt CA gun control laws.) Link to bill
AB-18 (Handgun & Semiauto Rifle Excise Tax) Link to bill | Calguns discussion
  • Author(s): Levine (D), Bonta (D), Nazarian (D) Coauthor(s): Bloom (D), Chiu (D), Gipson (D), Limón (D), McCarty (D), Ting (D)
  • Summary: A placeholder bill that seeks to impose an excise tax on the sales of handguns and semiautomatic rifles (amount to-be-determined, but probably be similar to Chicago's and Seattle's $25/gun tax that the author is using as a model), with the revenue to be used to fund grants through the California Violence Intervention and Prevention Program. Will likely require a 2/3 vote in both Houses for passage.
  • Assembly Vote History: n/a Senate Vote History: n/a
  • Location / Status: 12/3/2018 - Bill introduced, pending committee referral. Contact Assembly member Levine and urge him to withdraw this bill from committee consideration.

AB-61 (Expansion of who can request a GVRO) Link to bill | Calguns discussion
  • Author(s): Ting (D), Muratsuchi (D), Reyes (D) Coauthor(s): McCarty (D)
  • Summary: Authorizes an employer, a coworker, or an employee of a secondary or postsecondary school that the person has attended in the last 6 months to file a petition for an ex parte, one-year, or renewed gun violence restraining order. A substantively identical bill (AB-2888, also authored by Ting) was vetoed by Brown last year.
  • Assembly Vote History: n/a Senate Vote History: n/a
  • Location / Status: 1/17/2019 - In APSC. Contact the committee & its members and urge them to vote NO.

AB-276 (Expanded Firearm storage laws, firearm prohibition for violations) Link to bill | Calguns discussion
AB-339 (LE standardization/procedures for GVRO's) Link to bill | Calguns discussion
  • Author(s): Irwin (D) Coauthor(s): N/A
  • Summary: This bill would require each law enforcement agency to develop and adopt written policies and standards regarding the use of gun violence restraining orders. Would require peace officer instruction to urge officers to consider the use of GVRO's when responding to domestic disturbance calls, or when they believe a person is exhibiting mental health issues.
  • Assembly Vote History: n/a Senate Vote History: n/a
  • Location / Status: 2/1/2018 - Bill introduced. Contact Assembly member Irwin and urge her withdraw this bill from committee consideration.


continued below...

Last edited by cockedandglocked; 02-21-2019 at 2:24 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 12-03-2018, 9:58 AM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
Vendor/Retailer
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 15,696
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

...continued from above

SB-55 (10-year ban for 2+ specified misdemeanor violations in 3 years) Link to bill | Calguns discussion
  • Author(s): Jackson (D) Coauthor(s): N/A
  • Summary: Would cause 2 or more violations of certain misdemeanors within any 3-year period to result in a 10-year firearms prohibition. A violation of the firearms prohibition would be an infraction that carries a $250 fine, and confiscation of any firearms and ammo in possession. These misdemeanors include: DUI, drunk in public, DUI Causing Injury, possession of a controlled substance with intent to sell, and vehicular manslaughter. A nearly identical bill (SB-755) was vetoed by brown in 2013, who said he didn't see a value in a prohibition for violations that are non-felonies, non-violent, and non-firearm-related.
  • Senate Vote History: n/a Assembly Vote History: n/a
  • Location / Status: 1/16/2019 - In SPSC. Contact the committee & its members and urge them to vote NO.

SB-61 (1-in-30 for all gun purchases) Link to bill | Calguns discussion
  • Author(s): Portantino (D) Coauthor(s): Glazer (D), Wiener (D), Bonta (D)
  • Summary: Would apply the "1 in 30" handgun purchase rule to ALL gun purchases. Exempts non-handgun purchases for people with hunting licenses. The same bill was passed by the legislature and vetoed by Brown at least 3 times in recent years (2018 SB-1177, 2017 SB-497, and 2016 AB-1674).
  • Senate Vote History: n/a Assembly Vote History: n/a
  • Location / Status: 1/16/2019 - In SPSC. Contact the committee & its members and urge them to vote NO.

SB-172 (Expanded Firearm storage laws, firearm prohibition for violations) Link to bill | Calguns discussion
  • Author(s): Portantino (D) Coauthor(s): Gabriel(D), Wiener (D), Bonta (D)
  • Summary: Would require ALL firearms in ALL homes to be locked and secured at ALL times while the owner is outside the residence. A violation would result in a prohibition against firearm ownership for 10 years.
  • Senate Vote History: n/a Assembly Vote History: n/a
  • Location / Status: 1/28/2019 - Bill introduced. Contact Portantino and urge him to withdraw this bill from committee consideration.

SB-220 (Increased FFL storage and security requirements) Link to bill | Calguns discussion

Last edited by cockedandglocked; 02-21-2019 at 2:40 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 12-03-2018, 9:59 AM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
Vendor/Retailer
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 15,696
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

0 Inactive Bills
(Exceeded a Deadline, or Failed Vote w/ Reconsideration Granted)
These bills failed to pass in 2019, but may be revived in 2020.

No 2019 bills have become inactive yet.




0 Dead Bills
(Gutted, Failed Vote Without Reconsideration Granted, or Vetoed by Governor)
R.I.P. for now. Many of these will be reintroduced, in whole or in part, next year.

No 2019 bills have died yet.

Last edited by cockedandglocked; 02-21-2019 at 2:23 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 12-03-2018, 9:59 AM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
Vendor/Retailer
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 15,696
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

(Reserved)

Last edited by cockedandglocked; 12-05-2018 at 8:49 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 12-03-2018, 9:59 AM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
Vendor/Retailer
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 15,696
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

(Reserved)

Last edited by cockedandglocked; 12-05-2018 at 8:49 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 12-03-2018, 9:59 AM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
Vendor/Retailer
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 15,696
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

(Reserved)

Last edited by cockedandglocked; 12-05-2018 at 8:49 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 12-03-2018, 10:00 AM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
Vendor/Retailer
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 15,696
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

(Reserved)

Last edited by cockedandglocked; 12-05-2018 at 8:49 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 12-03-2018, 10:00 AM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
Vendor/Retailer
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 15,696
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

(Reserved)

Last edited by cockedandglocked; 12-05-2018 at 8:49 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 12-03-2018, 10:51 AM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
Vendor/Retailer
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 15,696
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

(Reserved)

Last edited by cockedandglocked; 12-05-2018 at 8:49 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 12-03-2018, 12:00 PM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
Vendor/Retailer
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 15,696
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Welcome to 2019, colloquially known as "Nineteen Eighty-Four: Chapter 1".

Last year, we had 44 gun-related bills. 14 were Pro-2a (of which 2 passed), 14 were Neutral/Undetermined (of which 6 passed), and 16 were Anti-2a (of which 4 passed).

It wasn't too bad of a year. Brown was Governor, our state Senate was split 25-14, and our state Assembly was split 55-25. Aside from the new "age 21 for all gun purchases", the legislature did very little to trample on our rights.

This year, as you probably already know, is much different.

Newsom is Governor, and the Senate and Assembly are split 29-11 and 60-20 respectively. Our state is bluer than we've ever seen in any of our lifetimes.

As such, more than ever, gun owners in this state need to be proactive to protect our rights. It works - last year, despite the similar presence of a Democrat government trifecta, we had 2 pro-gun bills pass, and defeated 75% of the anti-gun bills, undoubtedly partly because people like us made our voices heard. DO NOT GIVE UP.

Please, if you haven't already, read post #2 to familiarize yourself with how you can act to protect the Second Amendment.

Last edited by cockedandglocked; 12-04-2018 at 6:55 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 12-04-2018, 3:32 AM
Can'thavenuthingood's Avatar
Can'thavenuthingood Can'thavenuthingood is offline
C3 Leader
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Lemoore
Posts: 5,747
iTrader: 141 / 100%
Default

Quote:
And when a bill is riddled with errors, problems, or omissions, sometimes silence is the best course of action for us to take - let the bill fail on its own merits.
Quote:
This.

In their eagerness to pass anti gun legislation, ignorance appears to be dominant.

Vick
__________________


"Nobody ever defended anything successfully, there is only attack and attack and attack some more." (George Patton)

Calguns T-shirts, hats and stickers

CALGUNS.NET logo stickers and patches (3 inch) are here

Picnic Time
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 12-04-2018, 6:34 AM
Markinsac's Avatar
Markinsac Markinsac is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 932
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Three bills already submitted:

AB 12 - https://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/....php?t=1494274

AB 18 - https://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/....php?t=1494275

AB 61 - https://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/....php?t=1494275
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 12-12-2018, 4:08 PM
Sevillju Sevillju is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 6
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Hannah Beth Jackson introduced Senate Bill 55 (currently not public on leg info) to expand the list of 10 year prohibited persons to include those convicted of "serious alcohol related crimes" including vehicular manslaughter and "multiple" dui's.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 12-12-2018, 8:31 PM
REH's Avatar
REH REH is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 1,488
iTrader: 30 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cockedandglocked View Post
I added SB-37 to the list for right now, although I may remove it from the list depending on what it turns into.

For right now, it's just a placeholder bill, with the declared intent of eventually becoming a bill about illegally possessing explosives and destructive devices. It may or may not end up having any 2A relevance, for right now we should just keep an eye on it. The author, Senator Skinner, is a rabid anti-gunner - last session she sponsored SB-1100 (age 21 for all gun sales) and authored SB-1200 (expansion of GVRO laws), both of which were passed and signed by Brown.
I'm sure some how smokeless powder will fall into the mix, For all the reloaders it may be someting to watch.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 12-12-2018, 8:55 PM
Markinsac's Avatar
Markinsac Markinsac is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 932
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

SB 55 is now on the legislative site.

Discussion thread:
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s....php?t=1496246

Legislation:
http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/fa...=201920200SB55
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 12-13-2018, 9:32 AM
robertmneal93 robertmneal93 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: East Bay
Posts: 141
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

I think something very important to mention when contacting these representatives is not only supporting our 2a, general gun rights, and due process, but also bringing up how certain bills can be considered class warfare on the poor and middle class.

"Social Justice" is a huge topic in urban environments these days, so why not show how certain bills goes against those values (even if we don't agree with any, some, or all of them)

AB55 and SB18 specifically will target people who are poor, who are in less than ideal situations, and more likely stripping them of their natural rights of self defense than a similar person in middle or upper class.

Edit: Think to the recently passed law allowing home chefs to sell their own food. It was framed as a social justice issue that specifically took aim with the argument "these restrictions affect the working poor the most"

EDIT:

Here's what I emailed to Marc Levine

Quote:
Hello Assemblyman Levine,

I'm writing you today to express my opposition of AB-18 (Handgun & Semiauto Rifle Excise Tax)

As a decent earning resident of the bay area, and firearm enthusiast, this bill will not affect my purchases much at all. To the point where I don't particularly care if it passes.... For my sake

But, where I do care is how this will affect low income earners state wide.

When buying a rifle or a handgun, California residents already pay a $25 Department Record of Sale fee, sales tax (for me, that is 9.25%), and a dealer fee (face to face transfers are ~$10 dollars) or a transfer fee (set by the licensed 01FFL. A common fee is around $30-$40)

Buying a $200 firearm in California already costs, after taxes and fees, up to $352.75, depending on locality, dealer or 01FFL fee, etc. Another $25 will bring us up to $377.75.

For myself, I'm lucky enough that a $25 addition to any purchase I make is not going to set me back any time, or force myself to give up in other parts of my life.

But for someone who lives at or below the poverty line, as many people in our minority communities do, an extra $25 on a purchase may be the difference between lawful, moral use and ownership of a firearm, as opposed to going without, or worse, turning to illegal purchases which may truly ruin a life.

To support this tax directly works toward stripping the right of self defense and firearm ownership from our already most vulnerable group of citizens.

I ask that you strongly consider withdrawing this bill from the State Assembly.

Thank you!
__________________
Welcome to California; Where the liberals are liberals and the conservatives are too!

Last edited by robertmneal93; 12-13-2018 at 11:00 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 12-24-2018, 5:18 PM
chris's Avatar
chris chris is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: In Texas for now
Posts: 18,788
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cockedandglocked View Post
I added SB-37 to the list for right now, although I may remove it from the list depending on what it turns into.

For right now, it's just a placeholder bill, with the declared intent of eventually becoming a bill about illegally possessing explosives and destructive devices. It may or may not end up having any 2A relevance, for right now we should just keep an eye on it. The author, Senator Skinner, is a rabid anti-gunner - last session she sponsored SB-1100 (age 21 for all gun sales) and authored SB-1200 (expansion of GVRO laws), both of which were passed and signed by Brown.
Quote:
Originally Posted by REH View Post
I'm sure some how smokeless powder will fall into the mix, For all the reloaders it may be someting to watch.
that's the point.

BTW all bills will pass and will be signed with great fan fare by Newsom.
__________________
http://govnews.ca.gov/gov39mail/mail.php

Thank your neighbor and fellow gun owners for passing Prop 63. For that gun control is a winning legislative agenda.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z6Dj8tdSC1A
contact the governor
https://govnews.ca.gov/gov39mail/mail.php
In Memory of Spc Torres May 5th 2006 al-Hillah, Iraq. I will miss you my friend.
NRA Life Member.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 01-04-2019, 8:19 AM
tonyjr tonyjr is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 1,447
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

If I get the 03 , does waiting period still exist ? Would it make cash and carry in Nevada and Oregon?
__________________
life member - CRPA and NRA
All ways listen - after you can say I new that
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 01-04-2019, 8:29 AM
Dirtlaw Dirtlaw is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: OC
Posts: 635
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default SB 37

CockedandGlocked ...


Your take on whether SB-37 impacts reloading. I seem to recall a distinction between explosives and gun powder. Is my recollection correct?
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 01-08-2019, 7:51 AM
Markinsac's Avatar
Markinsac Markinsac is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 932
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

AB 164 - Cervantes - Firearms: prohibited persons

Legislation:
http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/fa...stNav=tracking

Discussion thread:
https://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/....php?t=1502004
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 01-08-2019, 7:57 AM
Markinsac's Avatar
Markinsac Markinsac is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 932
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

AB 165 - Gabriel - Peace officer training: gun violence restraining orders

Legislation:
http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/fa...stNav=tracking

Discussion thread:
https://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/....php?t=1502005

Unknown impact to the community - we need to track it just in case.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 01-17-2019, 9:44 AM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
Vendor/Retailer
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 15,696
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

SB-55 (10-year ban for 2+ specified misdemeanor violations in 3 years)
SB-61 (1-in-30 for all gun purchases)


Both bills were just assigned to the Senate Public Safety Committee. Contact the committee & its members and urge them to vote NO.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 01-22-2019, 8:14 AM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
Vendor/Retailer
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 15,696
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

One more bill assigned to committee:
AB-61 (Expansion of who can request a GVRO) - assigned to Assembly Public Safety Committee.

We also have a new bill:
AJR-4 (Joint Resolution In support of National Universal Background Checks) - as a Joint Resolution bill, this bill would not actually "do" anything, it just represents the CA legislature's support for HR-8 (A Congressional bill for national Universal Background Checks).
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 01-29-2019, 10:15 AM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
Vendor/Retailer
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 15,696
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

The Assembly and Senate both submitted a nearly identical pair of anti-gun bills yesterday, AB-276 and SB-172.

Both bills would require ALL firearms in ALL homes to be locked and secured at ALL times while the owner is outside the residence. A violation would be a jailable misdemeanor and would result in a prohibition against firearm ownership for 10 years. It would apply to everyone, regardless of whether or not a child lives there.

These are perhaps the worst of the 2019 bills we've seen so far. Calguns discussion for both bills here.

Last edited by cockedandglocked; 01-29-2019 at 3:11 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 02-04-2019, 9:33 AM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
Vendor/Retailer
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 15,696
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

3 new bills introduced on Friday:

AB-339 (LE standardization/procedures for GVRO's) - Aside from GVRO's being in general an anti-2a concept, this bill seems relatively neutral so far.

AB-340 (Establish county-level Armed Prohibited Person task forces) - This appears to be an attempt to reduce the backlog of APP cases that DOJ is responsible for, by passing the buck to local agencies. Not clear right now if this bill would have any impact on 2A rights.

AJR-5 (Joint Resolution for the US to adopt CA gun control laws.) - As a "Joint Resolution", this bill doesn't "do" anything, it would merely send a message to US Congress. That message would essentially say, "We think the Federal Government should implement CA's model for gun control."


14 bills so far... and it shouldn't surprise anyone that zero of them so far are pro-2a.

Last edited by cockedandglocked; 02-04-2019 at 11:26 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 02-04-2019, 1:48 PM
BeAuMaN's Avatar
BeAuMaN BeAuMaN is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 826
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cockedandglocked View Post
3 new bills introduced on Friday:

AB-339 (LE standardization/procedures for GVRO's) - Aside from GVRO's being in general an anti-2a concept, this bill seems relatively neutral so far.
Perhaps I'm reading too much into this, but while (d)(1)-(8) are merely standards, (b) is basically moving GVROs from a tool that departments may or may not use (or use rarely), to a tool that every officer must consider using when responding to any domestic disturbance to a firearm registered residence or response with any parties with registered firearms, and that their use be encouraged as well. I imagine this would increase the prevalence of GVROs.

Same with (c) but it's a bit more specific. A LEO on the forums here could probably give a better picture of what this would look like day-to-day. I'm fine with the rest of it, but (b) and (c) would would move it to red I think (if I'm not reading too much into it).
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 02-04-2019, 2:46 PM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
Vendor/Retailer
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 15,696
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BeAuMaN View Post
Perhaps I'm reading too much into this, but while (d)(1)-(8) are merely standards, (b) is basically moving GVROs from a tool that departments may or may not use (or use rarely), to a tool that every officer must consider using when responding to any domestic disturbance to a firearm registered residence or response with any parties with registered firearms, and that their use be encouraged as well. I imagine this would increase the prevalence of GVROs.

Same with (c) but it's a bit more specific. A LEO on the forums here could probably give a better picture of what this would look like day-to-day. I'm fine with the rest of it, but (b) and (c) would would move it to red I think (if I'm not reading too much into it).
Excellent points, I've changed that bill to red because I agree. It seems that perhaps the author is trying to "solve" the low prevalence of GVROs (which, last I heard, there are less than 100 issued every year across the state) by urging LE to issue more of them to the people they interact with.

The fact that GVROs are a top priority for legislators this year (they've already introduced 3 GVRO-related bills this year, and there were 3 more last year, too), combined with the fact that GVROs are almost never actually used, makes me wonder about the ulterior motives behind this GVRO scheme. Why has something that's statistically irrelevant become such a high priority?

Last edited by cockedandglocked; 02-04-2019 at 3:06 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 02-07-2019, 8:53 AM
Markinsac's Avatar
Markinsac Markinsac is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 932
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

2019 AB 392- Weber - Peace officers: deadly force

Legislation:
http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/fa...201920200AB392

Discussion thread:
https://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/....php?t=1509241
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 02-07-2019, 10:35 AM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
Vendor/Retailer
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 15,696
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Markinsac View Post
2019 AB 392- Weber - Peace officers: deadly force

Legislation:
http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/fa...201920200AB392

Discussion thread:
https://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/....php?t=1509241
Thanks - as I posted in the discussion thread, I did some digging around and found that this bill appears to simply make the outdated CA penal code in question (which has never been amended since it was written 147 years ago) match the SCOTUS case law that has been superseding it for the last 34 years. This bill's purpose is likely just a political tool to pander to BLM activists - being able to say "look what we changed!" while not actually changing anything.

I'll add it to my watch list in case it gets amended, but at the moment it doesn't appear to have any 2A effect.

Last edited by cockedandglocked; 02-07-2019 at 10:43 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 02-08-2019, 7:43 AM
Markinsac's Avatar
Markinsac Markinsac is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 932
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

2019 AB 425 - Cooley - Firearms: ammunition sales

Legislation:
http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/fa...201920200AB425

Discussion thread:
https://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/....php?t=1509475
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 02-08-2019, 7:50 AM
Markinsac's Avatar
Markinsac Markinsac is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 932
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

2019 SB 220 - Hill - Firearms dealers: storage and security

Legislation:
http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/fa...201920200SB220

Discussion thread:
https://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/....php?t=1509477
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 02-08-2019, 7:56 AM
Markinsac's Avatar
Markinsac Markinsac is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 932
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

2019 SB 221 - Hill - Firearms: law enforcement agencies: agency firearm accounting

Legislation:
http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/fa...201920200SB221

Discussion thread:
https://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/....php?t=1509480
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 02-08-2019, 8:02 AM
Markinsac's Avatar
Markinsac Markinsac is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 932
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

2019 SB 230 - Caballero - Law enforcement: use of deadly force: training: policies

Legislation:
http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/fa...201920200SB230

Discussion thread:
https://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/....php?t=1509481
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 02-08-2019, 8:05 AM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
Vendor/Retailer
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 15,696
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Thanks, will add those to the list!
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 02-14-2019, 11:35 AM
Markinsac's Avatar
Markinsac Markinsac is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 932
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

2019 AB 503 - Flora - Gun-free school zone

Legislation:
http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/fa...201920200AB503

Discussion thread:
https://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/....php?t=1511007

Last edited by Markinsac; 02-14-2019 at 11:41 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 02-14-2019, 11:40 AM
Markinsac's Avatar
Markinsac Markinsac is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 932
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

2019 AB 521 - Berman - Physician and surgeons: firearms: training

Legislation:
http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/fa...201920200AB521

Discussion thread:
https://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/....php?t=1511008
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 9:01 PM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Proudly hosted by GeoVario the Premier 2A host.
Calguns.net, the 'Calguns' name and all associated variants and logos are ® Trademark and © Copyright 2002-2018, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.
Calguns.net and The Calguns Foundation have no affiliation and are in no way related to each other.
All opinions, statements and remarks made by Calguns.net on this web site and elsewhere are solely attributable to Calguns.net.