-
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.
-
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.
Alert - AB144 - FINAL vote in the State Assembly Expected Tomorrow (May 12)
- Thread starter ConditionThree
- Start date
Ca Patriot
Regular Member
I didnt call any of my CA reps. I called my realtor in Montana to find out if the home inspection went okay today.
EXTREMEOPS1
Campaign Veteran
Called everyone and got a resounding....
I'm afraid representative xyz hasn't decided how he or she will vote tomorrow 5/12. So I am gonna call 'em all again tomorrow and will post details if anything changes. Is there a live link to the house to actually watch what is going on there tomorrow ? I have usually been able to watch a live feed of all these legislations in the past
It'll be live at http://calchannel.com/
March Hare
Regular Member
Watching with great interest and hoping for the best.
Good luck CA!
-MH
Good luck CA!
-MH
March Hare
Regular Member
They sure went past that one quickly!
Does that mean that it's going to be mulled over some more?
-MH
Does that mean that it's going to be mulled over some more?
-MH
ConditionThree
State Pioneer
The author of the bill is allowed to ask permission to pass and retain a bill to be considered without penalty- AB144 will be heard tomorrow- Friday May 13th.
This pause is an opportunity to call the legislators that do not have a publically known position on this proposed law. The following legislators should be contacted with your concerns as their constituent. If your legislator is not listed here, it is because they are already on record as being anti-gun or already voted in favor of AB1934 in the prior legislative session.
Republicans
25 Kristin Olsen
29 Linda Halderman
30 David Valadao
32 Shannon Grove
33 K.H. Achadjian
59 Tim Donnelly
63 Mike Morrell
68 Allan Mansoor
70 Donald Wagner
Democrats
5 Richard Pan
7 Michael Allen
9 Roger Dickinson
11 Susan Bonilla
28 Luis Alejo
31 Henry Perea
35 Das Williams
47 Holly Mitchell
50 Ricardo Lara
53 Betsy Butler
69 Jose Solorio
76 Toni Atkins
79 Ben Hueso
This pause is an opportunity to call the legislators that do not have a publically known position on this proposed law. The following legislators should be contacted with your concerns as their constituent. If your legislator is not listed here, it is because they are already on record as being anti-gun or already voted in favor of AB1934 in the prior legislative session.
Republicans
25 Kristin Olsen
29 Linda Halderman
30 David Valadao
32 Shannon Grove
33 K.H. Achadjian
59 Tim Donnelly
63 Mike Morrell
68 Allan Mansoor
70 Donald Wagner
Democrats
5 Richard Pan
7 Michael Allen
9 Roger Dickinson
11 Susan Bonilla
28 Luis Alejo
31 Henry Perea
35 Das Williams
47 Holly Mitchell
50 Ricardo Lara
53 Betsy Butler
69 Jose Solorio
76 Toni Atkins
79 Ben Hueso
March Hare
Regular Member
Well, here's hoping that Friday the 13th is a very unlucky day for them!
-MH
-MH
ConditionThree
State Pioneer
As it turns out, Friday the 13th is a little lucky for us. The assembly has adjourned until Monday.
EXTREMEOPS1
Campaign Veteran
puppy8agun
Regular Member
Bill update
Sorry I forgot to update this group and my blogger account is not updating due to a site error.
AB 144 could be heard on Monday but Mike who is handling the bill doubts it. SB 427 will be heard in Senate Appropriations Monday so I will be there either way. Portantino was not in on Thursday which he did not even notify staff until the night before. So far staff has been polite enough to let us know what is going on and whether it will be presented. I should be presented prior to Thursday of next week.
Good news is it will give me over the weekend to come up with arguments against AB 144 for the Republicans to argue on our behalf. There are aspects that people generally do not think of when it comes to this bill like the shift in funds and diversion of scarce resources away from prosecutions of more serious crimes. Victims rights groups should be opposed since it could allow offenders to go free. DA and Public Defender offices should be opposed due to difficulty in prosecution and the current shortages in staff already leading to a 2-3 times added cost to the state for private attorneys handling overflow cases which this will only aggravate. Everybody has a right to a speedy trial and firearms cases are long and frequently dropped. County supervisors should be opposed due to the shifts in funds away from schools and cities to handle any additional cases and of course police departments should be opposed because currently they do not dispatch for most open carry cases but when it becomes a crime there will be mandated dispatch due to open carry is a crime. This would include accidental exposures by CCW holders, people hunting crossing into prohibited areas and many others.
The list of why to opposed is numerous and we will continue to fight. This will allow us extra days to draft up added areas. If anybody knows of non-lawsuit costs we could use these emailed to us. If you have stances of opposition that have not been mentioned or is such that we could use them to help lobby members away from voting on these bills we will take all added suggestions. You can email me or if you are more comfortable post to Gun Owners of Ca legislation page and we will pick it up from there. Thanks for your help and support and stay safe and carry on.
Remember anybody can lobby the capitol offices, set up appointments and go in and try to be nice and convince them to vote no. Please be polite.
Sorry I forgot to update this group and my blogger account is not updating due to a site error.
AB 144 could be heard on Monday but Mike who is handling the bill doubts it. SB 427 will be heard in Senate Appropriations Monday so I will be there either way. Portantino was not in on Thursday which he did not even notify staff until the night before. So far staff has been polite enough to let us know what is going on and whether it will be presented. I should be presented prior to Thursday of next week.
Good news is it will give me over the weekend to come up with arguments against AB 144 for the Republicans to argue on our behalf. There are aspects that people generally do not think of when it comes to this bill like the shift in funds and diversion of scarce resources away from prosecutions of more serious crimes. Victims rights groups should be opposed since it could allow offenders to go free. DA and Public Defender offices should be opposed due to difficulty in prosecution and the current shortages in staff already leading to a 2-3 times added cost to the state for private attorneys handling overflow cases which this will only aggravate. Everybody has a right to a speedy trial and firearms cases are long and frequently dropped. County supervisors should be opposed due to the shifts in funds away from schools and cities to handle any additional cases and of course police departments should be opposed because currently they do not dispatch for most open carry cases but when it becomes a crime there will be mandated dispatch due to open carry is a crime. This would include accidental exposures by CCW holders, people hunting crossing into prohibited areas and many others.
The list of why to opposed is numerous and we will continue to fight. This will allow us extra days to draft up added areas. If anybody knows of non-lawsuit costs we could use these emailed to us. If you have stances of opposition that have not been mentioned or is such that we could use them to help lobby members away from voting on these bills we will take all added suggestions. You can email me or if you are more comfortable post to Gun Owners of Ca legislation page and we will pick it up from there. Thanks for your help and support and stay safe and carry on.
Remember anybody can lobby the capitol offices, set up appointments and go in and try to be nice and convince them to vote no. Please be polite.
Michigander
Regular Member
I said it last time this came up, and now I'll say it again. Why don't you guys and gals lobby to get this passed? Unloaded carry with nonsensical no carry zones is a sick, sick joke which was never funny. It's a moronic and bastardized "right" which I can't see a significant reason to be concerned with losing.
As far as I can tell, getting this ban passed, then suing over it is the first step to becoming a shall issue state. Am I wrong?
As far as I can tell, getting this ban passed, then suing over it is the first step to becoming a shall issue state. Am I wrong?
ConditionThree
State Pioneer
While I believe that change will not occur on a grand scale without litigants with standing, I beleive it's at best, an optimistic speculation. Without an affirmed right to carry in California, there is nothing to keep our judiciary from ruling that the ability to transport a firearm in a locked case is not an infringement on the 2A, and that bans on UOC and LOC are reasonable regulations.
Michigander
Regular Member
A valid concern I suppose.
But do keep in mind that the second amendment, now incorporated against the states, has to my knowledge never in federal court been ruled to only apply to those with connections, jobs and private property, as it is in California, and indeed was many other states, except most of those other states are shall issue states now.
Historically speaking, the notion that state sanctioned real carry for common subjects should be limited to the home and businesses is rooted in big business lobbying and racism, starting around the late 1800's. The fact that this was, and in your case still is deeply entrenched in the legal and political system does not give it realistic legal standing when faced with the constitution, and the constitution has proven beyond the slimmest shadow of a doubt to be the PRK's one and only hope.
Certainly I'm not saying a court battle to regain carry rights is a sure thing, but the odds don't strike me as bad, and it's not like you have much, if anything to lose with Unconstitutional Open Carry. Maybe my opinion is slanted, since I have a state sanctioned right to carry openly into almost anywhere I please, but even still, most in Kali seem to acknowledge that unloaded carry is for free speech rather than protection.
Last edited:
puppy8agun
Regular Member
Current cases that are furthering these rights are based on current laws, to make changes now will create issues with current cases and ccw provisions that have already been fixed.
I cannot give you all the details yet but we have been and are suing to become "shall issue". The involvement is huge but it has to be done right, banning open carry is not the right way and what people are thinking about this right now is not accurate even if there are some truthful elements.
If we do not fight this now then take it to court should it pass the courts will ask why we did not try and stop it which could rule against us overturning in the courts.
Michigander
Regular Member
First part sounds good, and I wish you the best in this effort. The second part doesn't make sense to me. Courts don't make rulings based on lobbying actions, or a lack thereof. Only existing laws and other factors such as AG opinions and other case law.
wildhawker
Regular Member
The "banning of UOC" creates real problems for all CA and visiting gun owners, e.g. transport issues. None of the carry cases would be furthered by such an outcome; we either have a right to bear functional arms, or we do not. Additionally, such a ban directly infringes on 1A rights.
-Brandon
Being heard right now in the assembly: http://www.calchannel.com/channel/live/3