Gov Brown's Newsroom - Check for Vetoes

[Bhobbs]

Who the effe knows. I mean I can see the strategy, and how it is SUPPOSED to play out, everytime a new law is passed though we are set back and set back, we get a slight win, then courts just ignore it, departments ignore it.

Exactly. I don't get why there is anything other than outrage right now. JB is no friend to us and certainly the courts aren't either. Just because AB144 passed doesn't mean they will just hand us shall issue. They will find any new way to keep it from us.

[Flying Sig]

This is good for the Peruta case, yes??

[Caladain]

This is good for the Peruta case, yes??

For many cases, from what i gather, yes.

[OleCuss]

This has gone on 8 more pages since I went to bed last night, anyone tell me what post # actually has the definitive pass/fail....not so interested in all the blah blah blah. Thanks.

AB610 signed. Means carry licensing will be more rational.

AB427 vetoed. Means we don't have to start a new fight on ammo in this state.

The others are all bad legislation which were signed anyway.

[huntercf]

Well, I'm not really happy nor am I overly upset.

AB 144 – I noticed there was no signing statement. This may be significant. What's Brown going to say? By signing this bill into law, he may have taken a major step in the direction of making California a "shall issue" state. I'm certain he realizes what he just did. But, giving the hysterical anti-gun media this bill, at this moment, will allow Brown build some immediate political benefit. By not making any statements at this time, when things get hot in the courts a year or two from now, he may be able to play dumb.

I'll believe LTC when I see it, sorry but CA always seems to come up with something to say they have it but pretty much deny it. For instance, I live in a city that says you can have chickens but then designates you must have quite a bit of land that only a couple residents have, thus they have banned it.

AB 809 – Signing this one is annoying. Don't know how this will do in the courts. We do, however, have until 2014 to work on it. Might be a good idea to get your OLL's now.

This has numerous implications, I can see them using this to create a safe long gun list to effectively deny most long guns including all OLLs plus raising fees.

SB 427 – In my opinion, if we can only have one veto this morning, this is it. SB 427 was nothing more than AB 962 with a few adjustments to make it more resistant to a court challenge. Would this "revised" version of AB 962 have survived another court battle, I really don't know and didn't want to find out. This one was designed to start hurting us real soon (1-1-2012). Many, if not a substantial majority of Internet venders would immediately stop selling ammo to Californians. Also, cities and counties with virulently anti-gun law enforcement agencies would have begun "fishing" through the ammo registration records for whatever they could find. No matter how the law was written, the records would be there and the gun haters would have found a way into them – guaranteed!

Based on JB's veto statement I read that as be patient will rewrite this so it sticks.

SB 819 – The DROS fee is nothing more than an unconstitutional tax on exercising a constitutional right. Ever hear of a "poll tax"? I really don't care what they spend the money on. We need to get this nonsense into court and have it slapped down soon.

This is a way to increase taxes and tax some people out of owning guns.

All things considered, I've had worse nights.

I hope I am wrong but if JB was truly a friend of gun owners he would have vetoed all of these and directed the legisidiots to stop sending crap like this and told them to get a shall issue bill to his desk plus repeal of all the other garbage that has passed in recent years.

[Icarus]

We have three more years of Jerry Brown. We will probably need a back ground check and a 10 day wait to buy a copy of "Guns and Ammo" by then with this clown in office. Never ever vote for a Democrat if you value freedom.

[OleCuss]

This is good for the Peruta case, yes??

Chuck Michel said a while back that AB144 pretty much guarantees Shall Issue carry licensing. He may have meant just for San Diego but I'm not so sure. But the net effect is that AB144 means Peruta will almost have to win - and that means a win for us all.

Looks like it does good things for Richards as well - but I'm not sure it is as pivotal in that case.

[Luieburger]

Several people predicted the "I told you so" responses. Jerry could have vetoed everything but the DROS bill and we'd still be hearing it. I can't blame you really. It's difficult to be an optimist about gun laws in CA when you've been slammed for so many years and the legal battles have a hard time keeping up. I still stand with Jerry.

[mbrown]

Hello All,

I am reading lots of rationalizing regarding Moonbeam and Meg Whitman. Yeah, Meg was not a strict constructionalist, but she was not Jerry's little sister either (Jerry's sister's name is Kathleen--she ran for governor and lost big).

Analogy:

Why do people think that grizzly bears won't act like grizzly bears?

http://www.nps.gov/yell/parknews/11105.htm

Brown was elected by very liberal people whose religion is neo-Marxism. Why did you vote for him thinking that he was not liberal and does not despise the U.S. Constitution? His judicial appointments alone have proved him to be a die-hard leftist.

Projecting your beliefs on a person who has proved himself to be a died-in-the-wool liberal for 40 years is not sane.

Sorry to be so judgemental.

Jerry's signature on three of these bills is all bad.

Good luck getting back-door "shall issue."

markm

Agreed. The man may not be the MOST anti-gun liberal, but that doesn't make him a friend. He will not/has not ensured a similar standard is met in his appointments. Most liberals with whom Brown associates are staunchly anti-gun. All I can think is that people in CA have been browbeaten so much that they can actually look at Brown and his laws as somehow helpful.

[Barabas]

It's either optimism or the kool aid.

The passing of these bills is multiple steps back that will take years and plenty of money to get rid of. It will probably lead to more anti gun bills being passed next session.

At least we don't have Meg, right?

I don't mean to pick on you specifically, but your post really reminded me of a certain sentiment that seems pervasive in our society and amongst a subset of my personal friends.

Freedom isn't gratis.

Everyone likes to talk about MLK Jr.'s speeches and marches when they discuss the Civil Rights era, but they (forgive me) MERELY set the stage for greater public awareness of civil rights abuses. It was the litigation that changed the law. The battle was won in the courtroom, not the public square.

Last time I checked, legal research is expensive and for good reason. The immense value to future generations means they aren't likely remunerated enough! Now isn't the time to loudly take your ball and go home, it's the time to open the pocketbook and make sure your grandchildren can grow up in an America you can be proud of.

The board is set, the pieces are in play. Is the prize worthy of the entry fee?

[REDHORSE]

10-10-2011

http://gov.ca.gov/news.php?id=17276

SACRAMENTO – Governor Edmund G. Brown Jr. announced today that he has signed the following bills:

• AB 144 by Assemblymember Anthony Portantino (D-Pasadena) – Firearms.
• AB 809 by Assemblymember Mike Feuer (D-Los Angeles) – Firearms.

http://gov.ca.gov/docs/AB_809_Signing_Message.pdf

• SB 819 by Senator Mark Leno (D-San Francisco) – Firearms.
• SB 610 by Senator Roderick D. Wright (D-Los Angeles) – Firearms: license to carry concealed firearm.

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

The Governor also announced that he has vetoed the following bills:

http://gov.ca.gov/docs/SB_427_Veto_Message.pdf

[OleCuss]

.
.
.
Based on JB's veto statement I read that as be patient will rewrite this so it sticks.
.
.
.

I read that one very differently. He basically said that there is litigation underway and thus it is premature to amend the law.

Take a look at the context:

1. We already won the case in the lower court.
2. AB427 is effectively an attempt to amend the litigated case.
3. We're likely to win in the higher court(s).
4. If (as expected) we win in the higher court(s) then there is no law to amend and they'd have to do a total rewrite.
5. Since the rewrite would still be a violation of the permanent injunction/case law, almost any law student would be sufficiently competent to haul the state into court with minimal fanfare and kill the rewrite - to the embarrassment of the legislators and governor. Repeated similar episodes could get a court very upset with the state - not sure what the court would do but I don't think the state would like it.

Now, as an aside, since the litigation will likely still be going on at this time next year, JB's signing statement is effectively a promise to veto the same sort of bill next year - and that means that they'll put forth relatively little effort to pass it again in the next fiscal/legislative year.

[uyoga]

So . . . human existence goes on . . . here in the People's Republyik of Kalyphornyia.

Much hopey . . no changey.

[rbetts]

DROS'ing Multiple long guns is going to be a major PITA for dealers and much more expensive for us all.

1. There currently is not a software system in place for DROSING multiple long guns. They will have to build it. Bet they don't want to spend DROS $ improving the antiquated software. Verizon gets to continue their big rip off!

2. Given their current system of tracking handguns, each Gun gets it's own DROS and therefore it's own fee (albeit reduced by 4 dollars for handgun #2 in a PPT). Multiple lowers/longguns purchased now just got a ton more expensive. if this turns out to be the grab!

3. No more DROS before the long gun gets here when you purchase out of state. Now waiting 10 days to pick up you gun starts when the gun arrives at the dealer.

4. With all the extra paperwork and hassle, don't expect dealers to be doing this for the same price for out of state stuff ( or for their own inventory for that matter) Supply and demand may help, but not in the long term. Prices for services will rise.

Lets get the court case to repeal moving now!!!

[Lon Moer]

It's either optimism or the kool aid.

The passing of these bills is multiple steps back that will take years and plenty of money to get rid of. It will probably lead to more anti gun bills being passed next session.

At least we don't have Meg, right?

Its delusion and kool aid.