• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Did AB1934 pass the Senate last night?

PincheOgro1

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2009
Messages
420
Location
Perris, Ca., California, USA

puppy8agun

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2010
Messages
110
Location
Concord, CA
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/dailyfile/sen/senate_Regular_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!*

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.
 

Gundude

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 30, 2009
Messages
1,691
Location
Sandy Eggo County
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.
 

akulahawk

New member
Joined
Aug 19, 2010
Messages
1
Location
Unincorporated Sacramento County
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.
 

ConditionThree

State Pioneer
Joined
May 22, 2006
Messages
2,231
Location
Shasta County, California, USA
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.
 

bigtoe416

Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter
Joined
Jun 3, 2008
Messages
1,747
Location
Oregon
Bill was amended yesterday, today is scheduled for a third reading (yet again).
 

Tekniqe

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2010
Messages
38
Location
California
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. :p
 

ConditionThree

State Pioneer
Joined
May 22, 2006
Messages
2,231
Location
Shasta County, California, USA
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. :p

The legislation, even if passed, wont go into effect until January 1st. Beyond that date, there are still long guns to carry.
 

Tekniqe

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2010
Messages
38
Location
California
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.
 

john-in-reno

Regular Member
Joined
May 4, 2010
Messages
237
Location
Reno, Nevada, USA
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 :cuss:
 

Tekniqe

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2010
Messages
38
Location
California
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 :cuss:

Yeah, me too. I love California, but things like this just drive me up the wall. =/
 

EXTREMEOPS1

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2010
Messages
248
Location
Escondido CA
"IF" UOC handguns become banned ....Thank Gawd for my AR1

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.
 

Attachments

  • AR1.jpg
    AR1.jpg
    41 KB · Views: 80
Last edited:

JJ

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2009
Messages
213
Location
East Contra Costa County, California, ,
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
 

bigtoe416

Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter
Joined
Jun 3, 2008
Messages
1,747
Location
Oregon
File item 393 was just passed over in the Senate. It'll go to tomorrow.
 

EXTREMEOPS1

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2010
Messages
248
Location
Escondido CA
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!!!!
 
Top