Calguns.net  

Home My iTrader Join the NRA Donate to CGSSA Sponsors CGN Google Search
CA Semiauto Ban(AW)ID Flowchart CA Handgun Ban ID Flowchart CA Shotgun Ban ID Flowchart
Go Back   Calguns.net > POLITICS, LITIGATION AND ACTIVISM > California 2nd Amend. Political Discussion & Activism
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

California 2nd Amend. Political Discussion & Activism Discuss gun rights activism and 2A related political topics here. All advice given is NOT legal counsel.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 08-29-2019, 9:41 AM
Librarian's Avatar
Librarian Librarian is offline
Administrator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Concord
Posts: 39,079
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Blog Entries: 6
Default It's Gut and Amend Season again! 2019 AB 465

My favorite time of year.

For those new to the concept, the CA Legislature has an annoying habit: some member submits a bill, and it gets all the usual procedural attention, and moves along to the next house for consideration - in this case, from the Assembly to the Senate.

Then some Bright Boy or Girl decides Something Really Must Be Done And It Can't Wait. So, like an ichneumon wasp depositing eggs in a spider, the BBorG seizes a bill, rips out the prior content and substitutes new text. (In this case, the G&A actually keeps much of the original bill, making some meaningless changes to the language and adding one sub-sub-section.)

The truly annoying part is the bill gets to keep its place in line. Here, AB 465 has has all the required hearings and votes in the Assembly, with its prior content - something about dual status children - and is now in the Senate.

The new content will need to go to Senate Public Safety and Senate Appropriations - steps not taken in the Assembly for this bill. When this passes the Senate, the Assembly will get a pro forma 'concur in amendments' opportunity, but not the whole set of hearings and votes.

(I'm not saying the Assembly might reject it if it had the chance.)

So here's the bill link: http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/fa...201920200AB465

There are bill text conventions:
NEW TEXT (compared to the last version of the bill) is in blue italic.

DELETIONS are in red strikeout.

Things that are unchanged are left unmodified black.
Here, the bill has a new "Section 1", because originally it had just one section so that declaration was not needed; now it is needed, because a new bill section is required to add a new code section.

Here's most of the new content, as described by the Legislative Analyst
Quote:
This bill would require a court, when issuing a protective order, to determine whether the restrained person has possession or control of a firearm or ammunition in violation of the requirement to relinquish that firearm or ammunition.

The bill would require the court, upon making this determination, to set a review hearing, as specified, to determine whether the person continues to possess or control a firearm or ammunition in violation of the provisions described above.
I think this is the detail that stands out: "This bill would require a court, ... to determine whether the restrained person has possession ... firearm or ammunition ..."

What means will be used to make that determination?
__________________
No one will really understand politics until they understand that politicians are not trying to solve our problems. They are trying to solve their own problems - of which getting elected and re-elected are number one and number two. Whatever is number three is far behind.
- Thomas Sowell
I've been saying that for years ...

There is no value at all complaining or analyzing or reading tea leaves to decide what these bills really mean or actually do; any bill with a chance to pass will be bad for gun owners.

The details only count after the Governor signs the bills.


Gregg Easterbrook’s “Law of Doomsaying”: Predict catastrophe no later than ten years hence but no sooner than five years away — soon enough to terrify people but distant enough that they will not remember that you were wrong.


Not a lawyer, just Some Guy On The Interwebs.



Last edited by Librarian; 08-29-2019 at 10:18 PM..
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 9:47 PM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Proudly hosted by GeoVario the Premier 2A host.
Calguns.net, the 'Calguns' name and all associated variants and logos are ® Trademark and © Copyright 2002-2018, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.
Calguns.net and The Calguns Foundation have no affiliation and are in no way related to each other.
All opinions, statements and remarks made by Calguns.net on this web site and elsewhere are solely attributable to Calguns.net.