Well Rick the objective of the new bill is to remove all the revolvers on the approved list that have been on there since the conception of the list. Just letting you know in case you can't figure out their end game.
So thought about this over night, this sounds like a retaliation for challenging the microstamping. They know they are going to loose the case and looking for a way get "back" at the people for challenging them.
I searched the internet and also Sacramento.ca.gov to read Assembly Bill 847 (AB-847) ..No can find. The only results that came up relates the: Mental Health Services Act, an initiative measure enacted by the voters as Proposition 63 at the November 2, 2004, statewide general election. Perhaps someone at CRPA should recheck that assembly bill number again.
There doing what New York did. if the Supreme Court take up the micro stamping law and makes it unconstitutional. With new bill We will have to start all over again! Not a lawyer but maybe that would also make 2ed bill unconstitutional 🤞
I can't tell you how annoyed I am that CRPA can't bother to even include a link to the Bill Text (leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201920200AB2847) but can include a link to Tactical Legislative Advocacy (crpa.org/programs/legislative-advocacy/tactical-legislative-advocacy/). That page has absolutely zero information which could be used when contacting legislators. Where is the template that describes the issue and links to legislator lookup info? I have seen those many times in the past from NRA. Yes, legislators may not respond as favorably to a form letter, but it is still better than NO LETTER.
Sacramento hasn't lost it's mind, they know exactly what they're doing. This is what you get with one party rule, absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Proud member of CRPA !!
So am I Brother.
Wow, Travis is on fire today! Boom shakalaka! We are with you brother.
Once again thank you for the continuous updates. This Sucks.
🐢🇺🇸🐢🇺🇸🐢🇺🇸
Well Rick the objective of the new bill is to remove all the revolvers on the approved list that have been on there since the conception of the list. Just letting you know in case you can't figure out their end game.
So thought about this over night, this sounds like a retaliation for challenging the microstamping. They know they are going to loose the case and looking for a way get "back" at the people for challenging them.
I searched the internet and also Sacramento.ca.gov to read Assembly Bill 847 (AB-847) ..No can find. The only results that came up relates the: Mental Health Services Act, an initiative
measure enacted by the voters as Proposition 63 at the November 2, 2004, statewide general election.
Perhaps someone at CRPA should recheck that assembly bill number again.
AB2847... ya missed a 2... 8-)
The ridiculous ideas never stop.
Lobbyists maybe can go to the legislature, but I’ll bet the food delivery, etc. can.
That's why they call it the Crapatol!
There doing what New York did. if the Supreme Court take up the micro stamping law and makes it unconstitutional. With new bill We will have to start all over again! Not a lawyer but maybe that would also make 2ed bill unconstitutional 🤞
I can't tell you how annoyed I am that CRPA can't bother to even include a link to the Bill Text (leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201920200AB2847) but can include a link to Tactical Legislative Advocacy (crpa.org/programs/legislative-advocacy/tactical-legislative-advocacy/). That page has absolutely zero information which could be used when contacting legislators. Where is the template that describes the issue and links to legislator lookup info? I have seen those many times in the past from NRA.
Yes, legislators may not respond as favorably to a form letter, but it is still better than NO LETTER.