Saturday, January 31, 2015

The California ASSembly looks to circumvent Court decisions ruling further restrictions violate state law

His name is Bill,
And he sponsored a Bill,
and its gonna stink up Capitol Hill....

This grinning idiot is Bill Brough, and he's the sponsor of an upcoming bill that will allow cities and counties throughout California to adopt restrictions beyond the already asinine restrictions imposed by the state. 

This bill is intended to circumvent court rulings that found imposing extra restrictions on Registered Citizens violated state law. This guy puts the ASS in ASSembly. 

Feel like contacting Bill? Here's how:

CAPITOL OFFICE
State Capitol: Room 2174
Mailing Address: State Capitol P.O. Box 942849
Sacramento, CA 94249
Phone: 916-319-2073

DISTRICT OFFICE
Orange County Office:
29122 Rancho Viejo Road, Suite 111,
San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675
Phone: (949) 347-7301
Fax: (949) 347-7302


Assembly Bill Would Authorize Cities, Counties to Adopt Presence Restrictions
Posted On 30 Jan, 2015 - 7 Comments

Assemblyman William P. Brough introduced Assembly Bill 201 on January 29 that, if passed, would authorize cities and counties to pass laws that restrict where registered citizens may be present. Brough is a Republican member of the Assembly from Oange County.

“This bill attempts to reverse decisions of the California Court of Appeal and Supreme Court made in 2014,” stated California RSOL President Janice Bellucci. “The bill would also reverse the positive results of lawsuits filed last year in federal district courts.”

During 2014, a total of 26 lawsuits were filed challenging city and county laws that prohibited registered citizens from visiting public places, including libraries, parks and museums, as well as privately owned places, including movie theaters, bowling alleys and fast food restaurants. Of that total, more than 20 lawsuits have been settled and an additional 51 cities and/or cities have voluntarily repealed their ordinances.

In the past, there have been two failed attempts to provide the same authorization to cities and counties. “We must remain vigilant to keep the victories we have won. California RSOL will fight this bill and all bills that further erode the civil rights of registered citizens and members of their families,” stated California RSOL Vice President Chance Oberstein.


You can read the full text of the bill BY CLICKING HERE.

AB 201, as introduced, Brough. Registered sex offenders: local ordinances.

Existing law, the Sex Offender Registration Act, requires persons convicted of specified sex offenses to register with local authorities for life while residing, located, attending school, or working in California. Existing law, as adopted by the voters by the passage of Proposition 83 at the November 7, 2006, statewide general election, prohibits a person who is required to register as a sex offender from living in specified places, including within 2,000 feet of a school or park where children regularly gather. Existing law authorizes municipal jurisdictions to enact local ordinances that further restrict the residency of the registered sex offender. Existing law makes it a misdemeanor for a person who is on parole for specified sex offenses to enter any park where children regularly gather without express permission from the person’s parole agent.

This bill would state that a local agency is not preempted by state law from enacting and enforcing an ordinance that restricts a registered sex offender from residing or being present at certain locations within the local agency’s jurisdiction. The bill would authorize a local agency to adopt ordinances, rules, or regulations that are more restrictive than state law relating to a registered sex offender’s ability to reside or be present at certain locations within the local agency’s jurisdiction.

1 comment:

  1. http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Horseshoe_theory

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horseshoe_theory


    Anybody heard of Horseshoe Theory?

    The Far Left and Far Right Like to Scapegoat the same group the RSO's
    But it end's up being a war over which mentally ill people pick and choose to die or live.

    ReplyDelete