Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 42

Thread: Did AB1934 pass the Senate last night?

  1. #1
    Regular Member PincheOgro1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Perris, Ca., California, USA
    Posts
    420

    Did AB1934 pass the Senate last night?

    I thought I saw something on FB stating AB1934 had passed. Tell me it aint so...

  2. #2
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter bigtoe416's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    1,748
    Negative. Today should be the third reading of the bill (which actually entails a clerk reading "AB 1934" intermixed with a million other bills), after the third reading then the bill is available to be voted on.

    http://leginfo.ca.gov/pub/09-10/bill...7_history.html

  3. #3
    Regular Member PincheOgro1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Perris, Ca., California, USA
    Posts
    420
    Quote Originally Posted by bigtoe416 View Post
    Negative. Today should be the third reading of the bill (which actually entails a clerk reading "AB 1934" intermixed with a million other bills), after the third reading then the bill is available to be voted on.

    http://leginfo.ca.gov/pub/09-10/bill...7_history.html

    Thanks for the reply bigtoe. Then it was another FaceBook rumor I read.

  4. #4
    Regular Member puppy8agun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Concord, CA
    Posts
    110

    Exclamation Ab 1934

    I closely track this bill and check daily right now on status either in person or at the capitol. It did not go for vote today and tomorrow it is item 470 for tomorrow. ftp://leginfo.public.ca.gov/pub/dail...ar_Session.pdf

    I have been assured DeSaulnier is not presenting the bill tomorrow. It is not a highly favored bill by either house. We are dealing with a breach of information from Lori Saldana that will hit hard tomorrow very likely where on a copy of this bill provided to one of our members was SSN from elected officials and other information. Below is the press release.

    *Stay active and stay involved!*

    Quote Originally Posted by PincheOgro1 View Post
    I thought I saw something on FB stating AB1934 had passed. Tell me it aint so...
    Press Release
    Sacramento – Wednesday, August 18, 2010

    In another erroneous action, Assemblymember Lori Saldana’s office has released sensitive personal information, including driver’s license data, dates of birth, home addresses, phone numbers, Social Security numbers, spouse’s names, employment history and other data that is protected under Article I, Section 1 of the California State Constitution.

    The Information Practices Act of 1977 states:
    The Legislature declares that the right to privacy is a personal and fundamental right protected by Section 1 of Article I of the Constitution of California and by the United States Constitution and that all individuals have a right of privacy in information pertaining to them. The Legislature further makes the following findings: (a) The right to privacy is being threatened by the indiscriminate collection, maintenance, and dissemination of personal information and the lack of effective laws and legal remedies. (b) The increasing use of computers and other sophisticated information technology has greatly magnified the potential risk to individual privacy that can occur from the maintenance of personal information. (c) In order to protect the privacy of individuals, it is necessary that the maintenance and dissemination of personal information be subject to strict limits.

    Personal information is further protected under CIVIL CODE SECTION 1798.14-1798.23 and CA Senate Bill 1386 (Chaptered 2002)

    We should hold our elected officials to the highest standards when entrusted with our private information. Documentation received on August 17, 2010 by individuals lobbying against AB 1934 included personal information on a number of citizens that is ordinarily protected under both State and Federal law.

    This error is but the latest gaffe in a continuing pattern of carelessness in the handling of official State legislative documentation. Recently, when Assemblymember Lori Saldana’s office had misplaced a number of official opposition letters written on letterhead relating to AB 1934, many political opposition groups throughout California had to scramble to recompile these letters to be included in an amended version of the most current floor analysis. Her office’s handling of official legislative documentation is clearly not in compliance with the strict codes for custody and care required to handle such sensitive information.

    The Responsible Citizens of California would recommend that a full and comprehensive investigation be conducted by appropriate State and Federal agencies to review the official documentation processes and practices that take place in Assemblymember Lori Saldana’s office.

  5. #5
    Regular Member Gundude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Sandy Eggo County
    Posts
    1,691
    Got this at the legal info link. Anyone know what it means?

    THURSDAY, AUGUST 19, 2010 311
    ASSEMBLY BILLS—THIRD READING FILE—Continued
    470
    A.B. No. 1934—Saldana et al. (DeSaulnier)
    An act relating to firearms.
    Vote required: 21
    2010
    Jun. 1—Read third time, passed, and to Senate. (Ayes 46. Noes 30. Page
    5389.)
    Jun. 1—In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment.
    Jun. 10—Referred to Com. on PUB. S. From committee chair, with author’s
    amendments: Amend, and re–refer to committee. Read
    second time, amended, and re–referred to Com. on PUB. S.
    Jun. 22—From committee: Do pass, and re–refer to Com. on APPR. Re–
    referred. (Ayes 4. Noes 3.) (June 22).
    Jun. 30—From committee chair, with author’s amendments: Amend, and
    re–refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re–referred
    to Com. on APPR.
    Aug. 2—From committee: Be placed on second reading file pursuant to
    Senate Rule 28.8.
    Aug. 3—Read second time. To third reading.
    Aug. 16—Read third time. Amended. To second reading.
    Aug. 17—Read second time. To third reading.
    A citizen may not be required to offer a ―good and substantial reason-- why he should be permitted to exercise his rights. The right‘s existence is all the reason he needs.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Unincorporated Sacramento County
    Posts
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Gundude View Post
    Got this at the legal info link. Anyone know what it means?

    THURSDAY, AUGUST 19, 2010 311
    ASSEMBLY BILLS—THIRD READING FILE—Continued
    470
    A.B. No. 1934—Saldana et al. (DeSaulnier)
    An act relating to firearms.
    Vote required: 21
    2010
    Jun. 1—Read third time, passed, and to Senate. (Ayes 46. Noes 30. Page
    5389.)
    Jun. 1—In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment.
    Jun. 10—Referred to Com. on PUB. S. From committee chair, with author’s
    amendments: Amend, and re–refer to committee. Read
    second time, amended, and re–referred to Com. on PUB. S.
    Jun. 22—From committee: Do pass, and re–refer to Com. on APPR. Re–
    referred. (Ayes 4. Noes 3.) (June 22).
    Jun. 30—From committee chair, with author’s amendments: Amend, and
    re–refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re–referred
    to Com. on APPR.
    Aug. 2—From committee: Be placed on second reading file pursuant to
    Senate Rule 28.8.
    Aug. 3—Read second time. To third reading.
    Aug. 16—Read third time. Amended. To second reading.
    Aug. 17—Read second time. To third reading.
    The bill was "read" and then amended. This made the bill unavailable for voting purposes, so it had to be "read" a 2nd time (again) and then put on the calendar for being "read" a third time and made available to be voted upon. However, since it likely differs from the version passed by the Assembly (haven't read the two versions), it will be required to go to a conference committee and returned to both houses for final passage. Failure in either fails the bill. I don't know if there is any mechanism to allow for it to be amended after the conference committee irons out the differences.

  7. #7
    State Pioneer ConditionThree's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Shasta County, California, USA
    Posts
    2,231
    Quote Originally Posted by akulahawk View Post
    The bill was "read" and then amended. This made the bill unavailable for voting purposes, so it had to be "read" a 2nd time (again) and then put on the calendar for being "read" a third time and made available to be voted upon. However, since it likely differs from the version passed by the Assembly (haven't read the two versions), it will be required to go to a conference committee and returned to both houses for final passage. Failure in either fails the bill. I don't know if there is any mechanism to allow for it to be amended after the conference committee irons out the differences.
    Tommorrow (August 20th) is the last day a bill may be amended. If we are to see a vote on this, the good money is on this next week.
    New to OPEN CARRY in California? Click and read this first...

    NA MALE SUBJ ON FOOT, LS NB 3 AGO HAD A HOLSTERED HANDGUN ON HIS RIGHT HIP. WAS NOT BRANDISHING THE WEAPON, BUT RP FOUND SUSPICIOUS.
    CL SUBJ IN COMPLIANCE WITH LAW


    Support the 2A in California - Shop Amazon for any item and up to 15% of all purchases go back to the Calguns Foundation. Enter through either of the following links
    www.calgunsfoundation.org/amazon
    www.shop42a.com

  8. #8
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter bigtoe416's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    1,748
    Bill was amended yesterday, today is scheduled for a third reading (yet again).

  9. #9
    Regular Member coolusername2007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Temecula, California, USA
    Posts
    1,660
    Quote Originally Posted by bigtoe416 View Post
    Bill was amended yesterday, today is scheduled for a third reading (yet again).

    Sounds good to me. Just keep on amending, and keep on reading. We don't need a vote on this anti-liberty, well settled, incorporated 2A infringing piece of dung anyway.

  10. #10
    Regular Member Tekniqe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    California
    Posts
    38

    Question

    I was curious as to how soon (and late) this bill could pass. It has to be decided either way before September 30th, correct?

    I wanted to know because I'm currently on the second of my ten day waiting period, and wanted to at least open carry once before it is illegal.

  11. #11
    State Pioneer ConditionThree's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Shasta County, California, USA
    Posts
    2,231
    Quote Originally Posted by Tekniqe View Post
    I was curious as to how soon (and late) this bill could pass. It has to be decided either way before September 30th, correct?

    I wanted to know because I'm currently on the second of my ten day waiting period, and wanted to at least open carry once before it is illegal.
    The legislation, even if passed, wont go into effect until January 1st. Beyond that date, there are still long guns to carry.
    New to OPEN CARRY in California? Click and read this first...

    NA MALE SUBJ ON FOOT, LS NB 3 AGO HAD A HOLSTERED HANDGUN ON HIS RIGHT HIP. WAS NOT BRANDISHING THE WEAPON, BUT RP FOUND SUSPICIOUS.
    CL SUBJ IN COMPLIANCE WITH LAW


    Support the 2A in California - Shop Amazon for any item and up to 15% of all purchases go back to the Calguns Foundation. Enter through either of the following links
    www.calgunsfoundation.org/amazon
    www.shop42a.com

  12. #12
    Regular Member Tekniqe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    California
    Posts
    38
    Quote Originally Posted by ConditionThree View Post
    The legislation, even if passed, wont go into effect until January 1st. Beyond that date, there are still long guns to carry.
    I see, thank you! Unfortunately my open carry will be limited to my handgun, until such a time as I purchase a long gun.

  13. #13
    Regular Member john-in-reno's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Reno, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    238
    Quote Originally Posted by Tekniqe View Post
    I wanted to know because I'm currently on the second of my ten day waiting period
    Yuck, 10 day waiting period?

    Went to pawn shop here in Nevada and pick out, Paid and packed my gun all on the same day.

    I really wish that the California law makers would get there heads out of there rectums and pass less restrictive gun laws instead taking all your rights away

  14. #14
    Regular Member Tekniqe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    California
    Posts
    38
    Quote Originally Posted by john-in-reno View Post
    Yuck, 10 day waiting period?

    Went to pawn shop here in Nevada and pick out, Paid and packed my gun all on the same day.

    I really wish that the California law makers would get there heads out of there rectums and pass less restrictive gun laws instead taking all your rights away
    Yeah, me too. I love California, but things like this just drive me up the wall. =/

  15. #15
    Campaign Veteran EXTREMEOPS1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Escondido CA
    Posts
    248

    "IF" UOC handguns become banned ....Thank Gawd for my AR1

    Quote Originally Posted by ConditionThree View Post
    The legislation, even if passed, wont go into effect until January 1st. Beyond that date, there are still long guns to carry.
    I'll just carry my CA DOJ AR1 that should raise some eyebrows and get the "scaredy cats" panicking.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	AR1.jpg 
Views:	73 
Size:	41.0 KB 
ID:	3668  
    Last edited by EXTREMEOPS1; 08-22-2010 at 02:24 PM. Reason: attachment didnt post
    "There is only one tactical principle which is not subject to change. It is to use the means at hand to inflict the maximum amount of wound, death, and destruction on the enemy in the minimum amount of time."

    - General George S. Patton, Jr.

  16. #16
    Regular Member JJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    East Contra Costa County, California, ,
    Posts
    213
    AB 1934 is item #393 in the Senate Daily file for Monday. DeSaulnier is floor jockey for a bunch of other bills. The first bill on the list DeSaulnier is presenting is #33. Sometimes the same senator will present all bills ready at the same time. AB 1934 was amended 8/19

  17. #17
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter bigtoe416's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    1,748
    File item 393 was just passed over in the Senate. It'll go to tomorrow.

  18. #18
    Campaign Veteran EXTREMEOPS1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Escondido CA
    Posts
    248

    Can California afford a lawsuit .....

    The state of the budget can california afford a lawsuit on AB1934 ......that's one of the options available then of course open carrying rifles .....can't wait for the fun and games to begin !!!! What makes anyone think a government entity can actually make a calculated decision ...Pah!!!!
    "There is only one tactical principle which is not subject to change. It is to use the means at hand to inflict the maximum amount of wound, death, and destruction on the enemy in the minimum amount of time."

    - General George S. Patton, Jr.

  19. #19
    Regular Member Gundude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Sandy Eggo County
    Posts
    1,691
    No problema! The legal eagles need another $10 mil.
    A citizen may not be required to offer a ―good and substantial reason-- why he should be permitted to exercise his rights. The right‘s existence is all the reason he needs.

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Escondido, California, USA
    Posts
    1,140
    IIRC, "handgun" in the bill was changed to "firearm"

    This bill may completely prevent carry of any firearm.

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    542
    Quote Originally Posted by pullnshoot25 View Post
    IIRC, "handgun" in the bill was changed to "firearm"

    This bill may completely prevent carry of any firearm.
    *looking* *looking* *looking*

    Not finding it, any source?

  22. #22
    State Pioneer ConditionThree's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Shasta County, California, USA
    Posts
    2,231
    Quote Originally Posted by pullnshoot25 View Post
    IIRC, "handgun" in the bill was changed to "firearm"

    This bill may completely prevent carry of any firearm.
    http://info.sen.ca.gov/pub/09-10/bil...d_asm_v98.html

    Uhm, no. It's just handguns.
    New to OPEN CARRY in California? Click and read this first...

    NA MALE SUBJ ON FOOT, LS NB 3 AGO HAD A HOLSTERED HANDGUN ON HIS RIGHT HIP. WAS NOT BRANDISHING THE WEAPON, BUT RP FOUND SUSPICIOUS.
    CL SUBJ IN COMPLIANCE WITH LAW


    Support the 2A in California - Shop Amazon for any item and up to 15% of all purchases go back to the Calguns Foundation. Enter through either of the following links
    www.calgunsfoundation.org/amazon
    www.shop42a.com

  23. #23
    State Pioneer ConditionThree's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Shasta County, California, USA
    Posts
    2,231
    http://www.sen.ca.gov/ftp/sen/committee/new_sfloor.htm

    AB1934 is marked as 'held at desk".
    New to OPEN CARRY in California? Click and read this first...

    NA MALE SUBJ ON FOOT, LS NB 3 AGO HAD A HOLSTERED HANDGUN ON HIS RIGHT HIP. WAS NOT BRANDISHING THE WEAPON, BUT RP FOUND SUSPICIOUS.
    CL SUBJ IN COMPLIANCE WITH LAW


    Support the 2A in California - Shop Amazon for any item and up to 15% of all purchases go back to the Calguns Foundation. Enter through either of the following links
    www.calgunsfoundation.org/amazon
    www.shop42a.com

  24. #24
    Campaign Veteran EXTREMEOPS1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Escondido CA
    Posts
    248

    Held at desk by who and what for?

    Quote Originally Posted by ConditionThree View Post
    http://www.sen.ca.gov/ftp/sen/committee/new_sfloor.htm

    AB1934 is marked as 'held at desk".
    Just looked it up and its now item 203

    I did watch the floor video before but can't find the link to watch the live screening
    "There is only one tactical principle which is not subject to change. It is to use the means at hand to inflict the maximum amount of wound, death, and destruction on the enemy in the minimum amount of time."

    - General George S. Patton, Jr.

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Escondido, California, USA
    Posts
    1,140

    Take another look

    ConditionThree, you posted an old version of the bill. Below is the newly amended one.

    http://info.sen.ca.gov/pub/09-10/bil...d_sen_v93.html

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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