Randy

SaveCalifornia.com Blog//

Archives for the ‘Culture’ Category

The 10 stupidest new laws of the Democrats

Friday, December 30, 2016, 3:52 pm | Randy Thomasson

stupidestnewlaws_441x240
A new year means new California state laws you have to live under. Here’s a column by my friend Tim Donnelly, which appeared December 29 in Breitbart

I’m not in the habit of complaining at the outset of a column, but I’ve taken on a nearly impossible task — figuring out which, of the hundreds of new California laws about to go into effect, are the stupidest.

Don’t laugh. I’m serious.

It’s really, really hard to keep the list at 10 with hundreds of hare-brained schemes that became real laws.

After all, for far too long, the California legislature has been a “conservative-free zone” — even though there were a handful of “Republicans” occupying seats and taking up space.

I’m going to list the new laws in order of their egregiousness to me, but I’m open to additions or wholesale re-ordering if you care to comment.

Given that Californians are facing 898 new laws going into effect on January 1st, 2017, there’s plenty to hate.

Prop. 63: “2nd Amendment Nullification” Act. Although various portions go into effect in various years — yes, they staggered implementation of this “critically needed reform,” some out to 2019 — this is the most sweeping assault on our long-cherished, God-given natural right as Americans to protect our lives and our freedom. It requires you to pass a background check and pay for a permit to buy ammunition for the gun you may have just passed a background check to buy. Yeah, that’ll stop criminals — who buy their guns and ammo in parking lots from other criminals. WooHoo! Next, it makes high-capacity magazine (any magazine that holds more than 10 rounds) illegal to possess — even if you bought it prior to the current ban and ownership was previously considered grandfathered. This law should make it clear that the goal of the left is not “safety” — it’s control.

SB 880: “Bullet Button Ban.” For years, California Democrats have sought to ban a made-up classification of semi-auto rifles with “evil features” that they re-named “assault weapons” for propaganda purposes. Every year, California Democrats attempt to increase control over this “hated group” of guns — until they finally outright ban all semi-automatics. This law will not do a single thing to further public safety, as the San Bernardino terrorist attack illustrated — determined mass murderers will simply ignore and work around all gun control laws — as if they are just words on paper. One last bit of irony: in a previous legislative session, this same bill was sponsored by none other than disgraced State Senator Leland Yee. If that name sounds familiar, you’re right. Leland Yee wanted to “protect” Californians from “assault weapons” on our streets — that is, until he was arrested for trafficking fully automatic weapons and rocket-propelled grenades in exchange for campaign contributions. He’s currently serving a five-year prison sentence.

SB 3: Minimum Wage Hike to $15/hour by 2020. As a result of a strong socialist push by unions and complicit governments — such as the union-controlled California legislature—businesses are looking to eliminate as many jobs as possible, investing in automation instead. When you combine this with unchecked illegal immigration — where you have an unlimited labor pool willing to work for subpar wages under the table — the future for entry-level jobs and small business owners in California is bleak.

AB 1785: The “Hands Free” Law. This is another example of government gone wild. AB1785 prescribes driver behavior so severely that in and of itself, I believe it will cause more accidents — and more deaths. Not only must the phone be dash mounted — meaning you’ll have a permanent distraction right in front of you — but you may not text, take photos or video, or enter GPS destinations while driving. Fat chance of stopping those activities with a mere $20 fine. The bill does stipulate that “the only time a driver is allowed to touch the device is when he or she is activating or deactivating a “feature or function.” However, that process should only involve a “single swipe or tap of the driver’s finger,” according to the bill,” mynewsla.com reports. How about “hands off” my phone instead of an unenforceable “hands free” law?

AB 1732: Single-User Restrooms. If you’ve ever had to go so badly that you used the opposite sex restroom at a gas station or Starbucks, then perhaps you think this law is needed. But do we really need another law regulating bathrooms? Some businesses have already put signs on their single-use restrooms designating use by either sex. And sometimes people just take it upon themselves. I can’t help but think this law is unnecessary and diminishes us as a society a little.

SB 1383: Controlling Cow Flatulence. Not making this up. In spite of the fact that 53 California dairy farmers went bankrupt, moved out of state, or just closed down this year, the Marxist-Progressives are back at it again. Capture cow farts or suffer heavy fines. CARB (CA Air Resources Board) suggests inserting a tube into the cow’s digestive system and venting into a backpack. Even liberals admit that laws like this, where government tries to control the uncontrollable, can have undesirable economic consequences. Lost jobs, lost industries, lost revenue. Stupid law.

AB 857: Ghost Gun Ban. Even if you manufacture your own gun — starting with an 80% receiver — that requires you to have special skills and tools to complete the machining, you must now register it and obtain a serial number from the California Department of Justice. The purpose of this law is simply to record your name and your firearm on a list for eventual confiscation. Once again, control — not public safety — is the goal.

SB 1322: Legalizing Child Prostitution. This law bars law enforcement from arresting sex workers who are under the age of 18 for soliciting or engaging in prostitution, or loitering with intent to do so. So teenage girls (and boys) in California will soon be free to have sex in exchange for money without fear of arrest or prosecution. Now that is nuts. I understand the idea of trying to not punish the victim, but certainly granting judges discretion is better than legalizing and therefor “green-lighting” behavior that is so harmful to the individual child.

Prop. 57: Early Release for so-called Non-Violent Criminals. This was Governor Jerry Brown’s baby — the crown jewel of his prison reform initiatives. Among those offenses he considers “non-violent”: rape of an unconscious person; human trafficking involving sex acts with minors; and assault with a deadly weapon. Blogger Felicia Wilson summed it up well (original emphasis): “…Call me crazy, but shouldn’t a crime that includes the word rape or assault be considered, I don’t know… violent?”

AB 2466: Felons Voting. Low-Level felons serving sentences outside of state prison get to keep their right to vote. Hmm. Wonder which party this could possibly help? Just like the “illegal alien vote,” Democrats will have the felon vote locked down. This is simply about protecting their power and making it permanent.

When California Democrats promised to take to the streets to defend the rights of convicted felons, illegal aliens and welfare recipients, they weren’t kidding. If only they were as serious about cracking down on immigration cheats and violent criminals as they are about penalizing law-abiding citizens and gun owners, California would have more jobs, less crime — and might be a place people want to come to instead of fleeing.

This post has been updated.

Tim Donnelly is a Former California State Assemblyman. FaceBook: https://www.facebook.com/tim.donnelly.12/ Twitter: @PatriotNotPol

Will ‘men’ and ‘women’ restroom signs be torn down?

Monday, August 22, 2016, 8:43 pm | Randy Thomasson

Scroll down for your sample letter to urge a veto of AB 1732

AB1732finalpassageAssemblyfloor082216

The foolish favoritism that the ruling Democrats (and some Republicans) in the California Legislature give to a segment of transsexual activists, who want to abolish male/female differences wherever they can, may result in the elimination of “men,” “women,” “boys,” and “girls” single-user restrooms up and down California.

genderneutralrestroomsignOn August 22, the California State Assembly gave final approval to AB 1732, which requires the removal of male- and female-designated single-user restrooms in all California businesses (including home businesses) and all religious schools and colleges, senior centers, and day care centers.

This radical bill that has no religious exemption passed the California State Assembly with the “yes” votes of most of the Democrats and 5 Republicans. This came after 25 Democrats and 3 Republicans in the State Senate passed it. See who voted yes and no.

This year, SaveCalifornia.com was the only organization opposing AB 1732 at the State Capitol. No business organizations spoke out like their counterparts did in other states where similar bills were defeated. No other pro-family organizations fought it either (one pro-family leader even publicly said AB 1732 “makes a lot of sense” for how it’s “sensitive to many transgendered people”).

Now AB 1732 can only be stopped by Jerry Brown. There is no legislation in the nation like this that has gotten this far. It is time for every pro-family business owner to mail and fax their veto letter to Gov. Brown, on business letterhead. Brown’s fax is 916-558-3160.

SAMPLE LETTER FOR SMALL BUSINESS OWNERS TO EDIT AND SIGN AND PRINT ON LETTERHEAD TO MAIL AND FAX TO CALIFORNIA’S GOVERNOR JERRY BROWN

DATE

Governor Jerry Brown
State Capitol, Suite 1173
Sacramento, CA 95814

RE: AB 1732 Veto Request

Dear Governor Brown,

As a small business owner, I am writing to urge you to veto AB 1732.
This bill is unnecessary. We’ve never had a problem, incident, or complaint. Anyone who identifies as male uses the men’s room; anyone who identifies as female uses the women’s room.

Yet AB 1732 would force me to buy and install new door signs and possibly also install a men’s urinal in the women’s room. Subsection (c) of the bill defines “single-user toilet facility” as “a toilet facility with no more than one water closet and one urinal with a locking mechanism controlled by the user.” This is poorly drafted at the least. I don’t want to be forced to pay for plumbing, drywall, and masonry work to install a men’s urinal in the women’s room.

And women and girls don’t want to use a urine-stained toilet seat, which I’ve seen too many times. Also, while my restrooms shut and lock properly, I am concerned for the privacy and security of women and girls in restrooms that don’t shut or lock properly, since under an “all-gender” restroom mandate, a man or boy could surprise a woman or girl who is on the toilet.

I am also concerned this bill could result in less access. Under AB 1732, small businesses — especially businesses that start up or move — that wish to save time and money can go from two single-user restrooms (one for men and one for women) to only one restroom (“all gender”). They could easily be motivated to save costs on installation, repair, supplies, cleaning, water, electricity, and inspection. For AB 1732 is silent on whether there must be “two restrooms.”

Furthermore, AB 1732 is inconsistent with laws requiring separate restrooms for males and females. At restaurants, public and private school cafeterias, etc.: California Health and Safety Code, Section 114276 requires that “a food facility with more than 20,000 square feet of floor space shall provide at least one separate toilet facility for men and one separate toilet facility for women.” At gas stations: Business and Professions Code, Section 13651 mandates urban and suburban service stations to “include separate facilities for men and women.” At construction sites: Cal/OSHA Title 8 regulations (Subchapter 4. Construction Safety Orders, Article 3, Section 1526) reads “A minimum of one separate toilet facility shall be provided for each 20 employees or fraction thereof of each sex.” At government buildings and offices: Health and Safety Code, Section 118500 says public agencies must provide restrooms “for each sex.”

Governor Brown, AB 1732 is not only unnecessary, it’s poorly drafted and it’s intrusive. As a small business owner, I would appreciate your veto of AB 1732.

Sincerely,

SIGNATURE
NAME
TITLE
BUSINESS NAME


chromosomesdetermingmaleorfemale

Mothers always pass an X chromosome on to their children. Whether your father passes on his X chromosome (leading to a pair of X chromosomes) or his Y chromosome (making a mixed set) determines your sex.
“The X and Y Chromosomes Determine Your Sex”, 23andme.com

51 Democrats + 4 Republicans attack ‘men,’ ‘women,’ ‘boys’ and ‘girls’

Monday, May 9, 2016, 6:26 pm | Randy Thomasson

 

gender-neutral-bathroom
(This post was updated on May 12 when the final vote changes had been tallied and reported on the Legislature’s bill tracking site.)

I have very bad news to report. The California Assembly has voted to tear down “men,” “women,” “boys,” and “girls” signs at all single-user restrooms statewide. The State Senate votes next.

In the 80-member Assembly, the May 9 passage of AB 1732 was 55 to 19. But the inside story is Democrat bullies and scaredy-cat Republicans. Get this — only 1 Republican, James Gallagher of Yuba City, cared enough to speak on the floor against this tyrannical, anti-family bill.

hearitstopitListen to the all-too-quick
Assembly floor “debate”on AB 1732

What’s the real goal of AB 1732? A decade of “all gender” single-user restrooms will be enough to desensitize young people to support “all gender” multi-person restrooms!

And the dozen or more Democrats who had refused to support AB 1732 for four straight floor sessions? They were bullied into submission. And of course, there were the four Republicans who voted against family values and religious freedom when they voted yes on AB 1732. Why do they call themselves “conservative”?

Thank you to EVERYONE who calls and sent emails in the weeks leading up to the Assembly vote. You did well, and you have my appreciation and admiration! But where were the churches, church schools and pro-family California businesses? SaveCalifornia.com’s intense lobbying effectively delayed a vote for two weeks, and helped change 2 Republicans from yes to no or abstain. And now, I ask you to act on your anger and concern on behalf of all that is good and right:

PLEASE RESPOND RIGHT NOW: Call to thank Assemblyman James Gallagher at 916-319-2003 for his gallant effort to stop AB 1732 by speaking against it on th floor. And call the 4 Republicans who voted yes and tell them they have voted anti-family: Catherine Baker, Ling Ling Chang, Young Kim, and Brian Maienschein. Every other assemblymember who claims to be pro-family, tell them how disappointed you are that they didn’t speak up and fight (and don’t accept any excuses). And yes, you can leave recorded messages after hours. Assembly Republicans | Assembly Democrats

If needed, use our talking points against AB 1732: 1 | 23 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10

Here’s the news release SaveCalifornia.com issued after the Assembly voted

genderconfusion