Legislative Committees to Consider Presence Restriction Bills

Two state legislative committees will soon consider bills that would allow, but not require, cities and counties to adopt “presence restrictions”. On April 28, the Senate Public Safety Committee will consider SB 267 at 9:30 a.m. in Room 3191. ***** Please note the change of date for SB 267 *******

“The Senate Governance and Finance Committee approved SB 267 on April 15 and if the bill is also approve by the Senate Public Safety Committee, it will move to the Senate floor for a vote,” stated California RSOL president Janice Bellucci. “This bill must be stopped.”

On April 29, the Assembly Local Government Committee will hear AB 201 at 1:30 p.m. in Room 447. This is the first consideration of the bill by an Assembly Committee. The Assembly bill is broader than the Senate bill because it would also authorize cities and counties to adopt residency restrictions.

“Senate and Assembly hearings are open to the public. Registered citizens as well as their loved ones are encouraged to attend the hearings on April 28 and 29,” stated California RSOL vice president Chance Oberstein.

 

Related posts

Subscribe
Notify of

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...

 

  1. Submissions must be in English
  2. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  3. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  4. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t and a**
  5. Please avoid the use of derogatory labels.  Always use person-first language.
  6. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  7. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  8. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  9. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  10. We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address that are not personally identifiable.
  11. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  12. Please do not post in all Caps.
  13. If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links. Posts that include a URL may take considerably longer to be approved.
  14. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  15. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  16. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people.  Do not use your real name.
  17. Please do not solicit funds
  18. No discussions about weapons
  19. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), Person Forced to Register (PFR) or any others, the first time you use it in a thread, please expand it for new people to better understand.
  20. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  21. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  22. We no longer post articles about arrests or accusations, only selected convictions. If your comment contains a link to an arrest or accusation article we will not approve your comment.
  23. If addressing another commenter, please address them by exactly their full display name, do not modify their name. 
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  
 

54 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

so i’m a danger to children, because my girlfriends were 3-4 years younger than me?

is there a “murderer registry”? IMO, murderers are dangerous to EVERYONE, how come there is no such registry to tell me where a murderer lives!? (sarcasm. i dont really care)

These probozos again reproduces the the many deprivations and burdens of jail/prison.

Pray these don’t pass. I will be ostracized from my community.

The post by MS (above) is extremely rational. I hope our legislators see it that way and follow through.

If such laws have been ruled unconstitutional at the state level, how can they be legal at the local level?

Hmmm, mother beheads 3-month old daughter:

http://cincinnati.suntimes.com/cin-news/7/102/143571/mother-pleads-guilty-beheading-daughter/

And WE’RE A THREAT??
Will there be Price Club legislation named after that baby? Of course not.

The best analogy I can come up with is if the California legislature allowed every town, city and county to create their own driving regulations…. Drive on the left side in L.A. County, but the right side in Orange County, 45 mph speed limit in Anaheim, but 60 mph in San Diego, etc. But that would still only affect one aspects of our lives: driving motor vehicles. This proposed legal insanity will affect where we live, where we eat, where we spend our leisure time (parks, movie theaters, bowling alleys, shopping malls), education (colleges/universities), possibly our religious rights (places of worship off limits). In fact, it difficult to note one aspect of our lives that WON’T be affected.