Emergency Regs on Large Capacity Mags

[AC7]

Last day to comment on proposed regulations today at 5 PM.

Have you engaged?

[thepunisher]

Last day to comment on proposed regulations today at 5 PM.

Have you engaged?

Yes and my wife did too

[all-cal]

How does one engage? Please post a link.

[AC7]

Easiest way to comment: go to nraila.org see article on proposed new regs and follow link that will help you contact your "representative".

[JTizel]

Easiest way to comment: go to nraila.org see article on proposed new regs and follow link that will help you contact your "representative".

This. It will ask for your zip and list your reps. I had 3 and off it went.

[OlderThanDirt]

CRPA has links to the appropriate DOJ and OAL email addresses where comments must be sent to be included in the administrative record. This is important for any subsequent legal challenges.

The time to contact your "representatives" has long passed and is a waste of time. These pieces of **** are not involved in the rulemaking process at this point. DOJ and OAL need to receive your comments directly and CRPA needs to be copied so they can keep the DOJ and OAL honest.

Five Day Comment Period on Proposed "Emergency" Regulations Regarding Magazines Capable of Holding More than 10 Rounds Ends Tomorrow!

As previously reported last week, the California Department of Justice provided notice of proposed regulations relating to magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds - Just days before the holidays, when they think no one will be watching.

DOJ submitted the regulations under California's emergency rulemaking process which shortens the time frame for public view to just 5 days. DOJ announced today that the comment period has been opened, meaning any public comment must be submitted by 5:00pm on December 28, 2016. DOJ stated that the regulations will take effect January 2, 2017.

Fortunately, you need not sit idly by while the DOJ attempts to enact ineffective and confusing regulations during the holiday season that will only ensnare otherwise law-abiding gun owners. NRA and CRPA's team of attorneys have reviewed the proposed regulations and crafted a detailed analysis of their effect.

We encourage ALL OF OUR MEMBERS to review the analysis and to participate in the rulemaking process by submitting their own comments during the 5-day public comment period.

Within the analysis, there is a template email that you can copy and send to the DOJ, along with the proper contact information for submitting comments to DOJ officials. Of course you are free to submit your own concerns, but we hope this template will make the process easier during this busy time of year.

We also ask that you copy CRPA when sending any emails at contact@crpa.org so we can monitor the response.

To ensure that your voice is heard, please send your comments to ALL of the following individuals:

Jacqueline Dosch
regulations@doj.ca.gov

Melan Noble
melan.noble@doj.ca.gov

OAL Reference Attorney
staff@oal.ca.gov

[ironpegasus]

Didn't they change who it needed to go to shortly after the period opened? Was that something they did or was it CRPA that had bad info? IOTW, if it was the state who changed it, how many comments did the DoJ "invalidate" because of sneaky, underhanded tactics?

[cyborg]

How does one engage? Please post a link.

Here's the other thread:

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=1285328

[OlderThanDirt]

Didn't they change who it needed to go to shortly after the period opened? Was that something they did or was it CRPA that had bad info? IOTW, if it was the state who changed it, how many comments did the DoJ "invalidate" because of sneaky, underhanded tactics?

The stuff I posted was of the CRPA website as of today, so it should be accurate. As for the sneaky, underhanded tactics, I let them have it in my comment letter. Ironically, in some of the work that I used to do, the DOJ would rip us a new one if we tried anything even close to a short review over a holiday period and would demand an extended review period.

[ironpegasus]

The stuff I posted was of the CRPA website as of today, so it should be accurate. As for the sneaky, underhanded tactics, I let them have it in my comment letter. Ironically, in some of the work that I used to do, the DOJ would rip us a new one if we tried anything even close to a short review over a holiday period and would demand an extended review period.

Wasn't saying it was still inaccurate - I believe it currently is. But I got a notification from CRPA that the contacts had changed about 10 minutes after I submitted my initial opposition notice on Saturday afternoon. If indeed the DoJ attorneys were playing games with the contacts in addition to everything else, that seems like something that the state bar association ought to take quite seriously. Unless there's a separate, lower, standard for government lawyers that is significantly less than that for regular ones.

[OlderThanDirt]

Wasn't saying it was still inaccurate - I believe it currently is. But I got a notification from CRPA that the contacts had changed about 10 minutes after I submitted my initial opposition notice on Saturday afternoon. If indeed the DoJ attorneys were playing games with the contacts in addition to everything else, that seems like something that the state bar association ought to take quite seriously. Unless there's a separate, lower, standard for government lawyers that is significantly less than that for regular ones.

Google California State Bar Association if you want to read a good joke. There is no honor among thieves.