Results 1 to 20 of 20

Thread: CALNRA: AB 357 (CCW) Hearing Tuesday, Jan 12

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    82

    Post imported post

    NRA Members' Councils of California

    CALNRA: AB 357 (CCW) Hearing Tuesday, Jan 12
    01/05/2010 2:30 PM - PLEASE DISTRIBUTE WIDELY


    AB 357 (CONCEALED FIREARMS LICENSE)
    (Knight) will will be heard in Assembly Public Safety on Tuesday, January 12th, 2010. Please contact the members of the Assembly Public Safety committee and urge support for the bill.


    ONE-CLICK links and other contact tools as well as the bill abstract is available here:
    http://calnra.com/legs.shtml?year=2010&summary=ab357

    For the latest info on this and other California legislative issues, please visit:
    http://calnra.com/legs.shtml

  2. #2
    Regular Member coolusername2007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Temecula, California, USA
    Posts
    1,660

    Post imported post

    Based on how AB962 went, this bill doesn't have a prayer (at least in a pre-2A incorporation world). But call in anyway, they still need to hear our voices on it.


    "Why should judicial precedent bind the nation if the Constitution itself does not?" -- Mark Levin

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    34

    Post imported post

    coolusername2007 wrote:
    Based on how AB962 went, this bill doesn't have a prayer (at least in a pre-2A incorporation world). But call in anyway, they still need to hear our voices on it.

    Probably right.I looked up the bill's history. The one and only Republican on the committee voted in favor. The rest of the committee (ALL DEMOCRATS) voted against it. Public Safety Committee member Fiona Ma is also the Assembly Majority Whip. She will NEVER vote for it, and probably because of her, neither will any of the other Democrats on the committee. (Whythe majority in this state even needs a Whip is beyond me.)

    (What do you think? Do I come across too angry?)

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Northern California, USA
    Posts
    109

    Post imported post

    Actually the first time around it went like this...


    3 Republicans..

    1 Vote For

    1 Vote Abstain

    1 Vote Against.


    Great work California GOP

  5. #5
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Greensboro, North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    1,052

    Post imported post

    onedavetoomany wrote:
    Actually the first time around it went like this...


    3 Republicans..

    1 Vote For

    1 Vote Abstain

    1 Vote Against.


    Great work California GOP
    Bwahaaahahaa

  6. #6
    Newbie cato's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    2,335

    Post imported post

    Support this bill. It's a baby step in the right direction. Things will come together after incorp.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    150

    Post imported post

    take 10 minutes out of your day. copy and paste this letter with ur info and mail it out. 3 bucks for stamps. what have you got to lose? Hell, EMAIL IT! its free!


    California State Assembly Committee on Public Safety

    Re: AB 357

    To the Members of the State Safety Committee:

    As a voting Californian, please vote 'yes' on AB 357, the Concealed Carry Weapons (CCW) reform bill.

    You should support this bill because:
    1. It fixes a system which is broken, unfair and highly discriminatory
    2. It helps California's public safety at no cost
    3. It brings California into compliance with the rest of the country
    4. It directly protects the safety of retired police officers

    This bill will finally bring equal protection under the law to the citizens of California who were previously subject to the personal whims and moods of 58 separate county Sheriffs and hundreds of city Police Chiefs.

    California's current statutory requirement to show “good cause” [which is currently undefined by the statute] has been grossly misused and abused by various county Sheriffs and Police Chiefs for too many years, and the current system is flawed to the point of being useless.

    For 58 separate county Sheriffs to make determinations that certain citizens are more deserving of the right to protect and defend themselves because they hold a particular job, are in a particular income range, are of a certain race or sexual orientation or have donated to a re-election campaign is the height of hubris and reeks of an attitude of Aristocracy.

    While I do not have a personal relationship with our Sheriff or contribute to their re-election campaign, carry large sums of cash, or transport briefcases full of diamond jewelry, I do have one irreplaceable and highly-valuable commodity: my life and those of my family and friends. To be told that a merchant’s daily deposits are more worthy of protection and defense than the lives of my loved ones is a personal insult- one which is remembered at the voting booth.

    Assembly Bill 357 will allow law abiding citizens the fundamental right to self defense that has thus far been denied by the State of California. The Supreme Court recently ruled that the police have no constitutional duty to protect- please do not continue to hinder our fundamental and constitutional right to protect ourselves by failing to pass AB 357.

    Over the past 20 years 38 states have passed "Shall Issue" CCW laws which none have since repealed; all experienced a decrease in violent crime rates after passage, a goal we should all strive for here in California.

    Pass this bill.

    Regards,


    Assembly Member Jose Solorio (D-69) - Chair
    (916) 319-2069
    Assemblymember.solorio@assembly.ca.gov

    Assembly Member Curt Hagman (R-60) - Vice Chair
    (916) 319-2060
    Assemblymember.Hagman@assembly.ca.gov

    Assembly Member Warren T. Furutani (D-55)
    (916) 319-2055
    Assemblymember.Furutani@assembly.ca.gov

    Assembly Member Danny D. Gilmore (R-30)
    (916) 319-2030
    Assemblymember.Gilmore@assembly.ca.gov

    Assembly Member Jerry Hill (D-19)
    (916) 319-2019
    Assemblymember.Hill@assembly.ca.gov

    Assembly Member Fiona Ma (D-12)
    (916) 319-2012
    Assemblymember.Ma@assembly.ca.gov

    Assembly Member Nancy Skinner (D-14)
    (916) 319-2014
    Assemblymember.Skinner@assembly.ca.gov

  8. #8
    Regular Member Gundude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Sandy Eggo County
    Posts
    1,691

    Post imported post

    I emailed this to everyone on the list, and got one positive answer from Curt Hagman. He said he was the only one to vote for this bill last time. It don't look good.

    edit: here is the text of his response,

    Thank you for contacting my office to express your support for AB357 which would give Californian’s a license to carry a concealed firearm without having to establish “good cause.” This law would extend the license availability to the majority of California’s law abiding citizens.



    I support this bill and strongly support our Constitutional right to bear arms.As a Vice-Chairman of the Public Safety Committee, I was the only Assemblyman to support this legislation when it was presented to us last year. As AB 357 is reconsidered this session, I will urge my colleagues to send this bill to the floor so that California’s citizens can exercise their right to protect themselves and their families.



    Thank you for giving me this opportunity to serve you.



    Sincerely,

    Assemblyman Curt Hagman
    District 60

    A citizen may not be required to offer a ―good and substantial reason-- why he should be permitted to exercise his rights. The rights existence is all the reason he needs.

  9. #9
    Newbie cato's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    2,335

    Post imported post

    This will probably be a multi year effort. Once a few points of law get ironed out by the Calguns Foundation post McDonald and Sykes you might even seesome jurisdictions calling for this to pass.

    Read Sykes for a better understanding of the issues...

    direct link http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/syk...2009-05-09.pdf


  10. #10
    Regular Member coolusername2007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Temecula, California, USA
    Posts
    1,660

    Post imported post

    On second thought, don't waste your time and energy. This bill has absolutely no chance of passing. The only way this state will get CCW is through the courts, not the assembly. And to play devil's advocate, even if it did pass through by some freak of nature, it will be vetoed by our girly man governor.

    Opposition to AB962 was a huge effort, and it stillpassed and the GMG signed it into law.
    "Why should judicial precedent bind the nation if the Constitution itself does not?" -- Mark Levin

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    34

    Post imported post

    cato wrote:
    This will probably be a multi year effort. Once a few points of law get ironed out by the Calguns Foundation post McDonald and Sykes you might even seesome jurisdictions calling for this to pass.

    Read Sykes for a better understanding of the issues...

    direct link http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/syk...2009-05-09.pdf
    Interesting. The conduct of Davis Police Chief Black isopenly and blatentlyillegal. Pursuant toStatute v. Pitchess,the police chiefMUSTexcersice discretion, and review the application on the merits, and then grant or deny it,OR refer the applicant to county sheriff pursuant to PC 12050 (g), who must review the application on the merits. Noagency can simply refuse to process the application.

    PC 12050(f)(4)(b) says thatan issuing authority may not revokea permit solely because the holder has moved to anothercounty. McGinnus violated this code section.

  12. #12
    Newbie cato's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    2,335

    Post imported post

    coolusername2007 wrote:
    On second thought, don't waste your time and energy. This bill has absolutely no chance of passing. The only way this state will get CCW is through the courts, not the assembly. And to play devil's advocate, even if it did pass through by some freak of nature, it will be vetoed by our girly man governor.

    Opposition to AB962 was a huge effort, and it stillpassed and the GMG signed it into law.
    I disagree. Be the squeaky wheel as often as possible!!! Make them, and their staff,deal with the issue day in and day out.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    82

    Post imported post

    cato wrote:
    coolusername2007 wrote:
    On second thought, don't waste your time and energy. This bill has absolutely no chance of passing. The only way this state will get CCW is through the courts, not the assembly. And to play devil's advocate, even if it did pass through by some freak of nature, it will be vetoed by our girly man governor.

    Opposition to AB962 was a huge effort, and it stillpassed and the GMG signed it into law.
    I disagree. Be the squeaky wheel as often as possible!!! Make them, and their staff,deal with the issue day in and day out.
    Well said.

  14. #14
    Regular Member coolusername2007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Temecula, California, USA
    Posts
    1,660

    Post imported post

    obeygiant wrote:
    cato wrote:
    coolusername2007 wrote:
    On second thought, don't waste your time and energy.* This bill has absolutely no chance of passing.* The only way this state will get CCW is through the courts, not the assembly.* And to play devil's advocate, even if it did pass through by some freak of nature, it will be vetoed by our girly man governor.

    Opposition to AB962 was a huge effort, and it still*passed and the GMG signed it into law.
    I disagree.* Be the squeaky wheel as often as possible!!!* Make them, and their staff,*deal with the issue day in and day out.
    Well said.
    Wrong. You will be put on auto-disregard. The courts are the only way in this state. I rather they see my quietly holstered sidearm than tune out and ignore my well thought out rational comments. Besides my reps are pro 2a...no convincing needed.
    "Why should judicial precedent bind the nation if the Constitution itself does not?" -- Mark Levin

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    82

    Post imported post

    coolusername2007 wrote:
    obeygiant wrote:
    cato wrote:
    coolusername2007 wrote:
    On second thought, don't waste your time and energy. This bill has absolutely no chance of passing. The only way this state will get CCW is through the courts, not the assembly. And to play devil's advocate, even if it did pass through by some freak of nature, it will be vetoed by our girly man governor.

    Opposition to AB962 was a huge effort, and it stillpassed and the GMG signed it into law.
    I disagree. Be the squeaky wheel as often as possible!!! Make them, and their staff,deal with the issue day in and day out.
    Well said.
    Wrong. You will be put on auto-disregard. The courts are the only way in this state. I rather they see my quietly holstered sidearm than tune out and ignore my well thought out rational comments. Besides my reps are pro 2a...no convincing needed.
    I agree with you in that much will be accomplished through the courts but considering that Assembly Member Kevin Jeffries does not sit on the Public Safety Committee it may be difficult to convince those that are with your quietly holstered sidearm.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Escondido, California, USA
    Posts
    1,140

    Post imported post

    coolusername2007 wrote:
    obeygiant wrote:
    cato wrote:
    coolusername2007 wrote:
    On second thought, don't waste your time and energy. This bill has absolutely no chance of passing. The only way this state will get CCW is through the courts, not the assembly. And to play devil's advocate, even if it did pass through by some freak of nature, it will be vetoed by our girly man governor.

    Opposition to AB962 was a huge effort, and it stillpassed and the GMG signed it into law.
    I disagree. Be the squeaky wheel as often as possible!!! Make them, and their staff,deal with the issue day in and day out.
    Well said.
    Wrong. You will be put on auto-disregard. The courts are the only way in this state. I rather they see my quietly holstered sidearm than tune out and ignore my well thought out rational comments. Besides my reps are pro 2a...no convincing needed.
    Damn dude, who got urea in your cheerios this morning?

  17. #17
    Regular Member coolusername2007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Temecula, California, USA
    Posts
    1,660

    Post imported post

    Nobody. But the fact is we don't need to be sugar coating anything and not wasting time, energy, and money on the tactics that don't work.
    "Why should judicial precedent bind the nation if the Constitution itself does not?" -- Mark Levin

  18. #18
    Regular Member coolusername2007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Temecula, California, USA
    Posts
    1,660

    Post imported post

    obeygiant wrote:
    coolusername2007 wrote:
    obeygiant wrote:
    cato wrote:
    coolusername2007 wrote:
    On second thought, don't waste your time and energy.* This bill has absolutely no chance of passing.* The only way this state will get CCW is through the courts, not the assembly.* And to play devil's advocate, even if it did pass through by some freak of nature, it will be vetoed by our girly man governor.

    Opposition to AB962 was a huge effort, and it still*passed and the GMG signed it into law.
    I disagree.* Be the squeaky wheel as often as possible!!!* Make them, and their staff,*deal with the issue day in and day out.
    Well said.
    Wrong. You will be put on auto-disregard. The courts are the only way in this state. I rather they see my quietly holstered sidearm than tune out and ignore my well thought out rational comments. Besides my reps are pro 2a...no convincing needed.
    I agree with you in that much will be accomplished through the courts but considering that Assembly Member Kevin Jeffries does not sit on the Public Safety Committee it may be difficult to convince those that are with your quietly holstered sidearm.
    Those on the safety committee will likely never be convinced. That's where the courts come in. My quietly holstered sidearm isn't for them, its for me and those whom I love.
    "Why should judicial precedent bind the nation if the Constitution itself does not?" -- Mark Levin

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Northern California, USA
    Posts
    109

    Post imported post

    A.B 357 failed to pass out of the committee. The vote count was 1-4-1. Curt Hagman was the lone supporter and Danny Gilmore abstained....again..

  20. #20
    Regular Member coolusername2007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Temecula, California, USA
    Posts
    1,660

    Post imported post

    Sad. Pathetic.
    "Why should judicial precedent bind the nation if the Constitution itself does not?" -- Mark Levin

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •