Latest news with #SenateBill53
Yahoo
07-05-2025
- Yahoo
3-year-old critical after getting shot in Hanford. A man was arrested, police say
A 3-year-old girl is in critical condition after she was shot inside a home in Hanford, according to police. Hanford police on Monday described the shooting as 'accidental' and said the gun was fired Saturday morning by one of four other children at the home. The ages of the other children range from 6 to 10 years. A 29-year-old man tried fleeing the residence with the discharged handgun, police said. He has since been arrested on suspicion of multiple charges, including criminal storage of a firearm. Under California laws, it is a crime to carelessly store a firearm on property if it's known or should be known that anyone younger than 18 years old is likely to gain access to it without parental permission. With a child seriously injured in this case, the suspect, whose relation to the child was not immediately known, could face the harshest of three levels of punishment for criminal storage of a firearm. That's a felony that could result in 16 months to three years in jail and a fine of up to $10,000. The Bee is not naming the suspect to protect the identity of the children. Should the suspect face a lesser misdemeanor charge, he could get up to one year in jail and a fine up to $1,000. That's for the reckless gun storage violation. The shooting happened early Saturday at a home in the 1900 block of Emma Lee Lane, where officers found the 3-year-old girl shot in her abdomen. Detectives also located the mother of the 3-year-old, as well as the four other children, along with a 20-year-old. Investigators determined the children had gotten up early and found the gun unsecured in the kitchen. As the children were handling the firearm, one of them accidentally shot the 3-year-old, Hanford police said. Police said the man who was arrested entered the room after the shooting occurred, grabbed the gun and fled the home. Hanford Police Street Crimes Unit investigators tracked him down and arrested him Monday. He was booked into Kings County Jail and faces additional charges of destruction of evidence, prohibited person in possession of a firearm and felony child endangerment. Just last month in Northern California, a 3-year-old boy died from a self-inflicted gunshot wound, and his grandfather was charged with felony first-degree criminal storage of a firearm. Starting in January 2026, Senate Bill 53 goes into effect and requires a person who possesses a firearm in a residence to keep the firearm securely stored when the firearm is not being carried or readily controlled by the person or another lawful authorized user. SB 53 also requires gun owners to properly store their firearms whether or not it's known a child could obtain access to the firearms and cause injury.
Yahoo
06-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Businesses could claim damages for protest vandalism under this Ohio bill
COLUMBUS, Ohio (WCMH) — A Statehouse legislator has again proposed a bill that would establish civil penalties for protestors, allowing Ohio businesses to collect damages if their building is vandalized during a protest. Senate Bill 53, introduced in February by Sen. Tim Schaffer (R-Lancaster), would allow any person who suffered injury or loss due to protest vandalism, like a business owner, to pursue a civil court action against a protestor and recover compensatory damages. The person or business owner would be required to prove that the accused protestor is the one who caused the damage to their property. Jim Tressel on his interest in running for Ohio governor in 2026 The legislation, which is similar to past bills Schaffer has introduced, would also create civil liability for those who give out 'destructive materials,' like frozen water bottles or a pallet of bricks, to other protestors to damage a building. Compensatory damages for such actions could include damages for emotional distress, court costs and other fees related to the civil court action. Schaffer argues the bill would demonstrate that 'this sort of behavior should not be tolerated and should be prosecuted,' which he said is needed given the 2020 protests in Ohio cities after George Floyd was killed by former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin. The lawmaker cited a Columbus Dispatch report that found at least 115 businesses, nonprofits and government offices were affected by the protests in Columbus. Watch a 2020 NBC4 report on the George Floyd protests in the video player above. 'Over the past several years, we have seen how violence has taken a toll on communities and the damage riots have caused,' said Schaffer during the bill's first hearing on Feb. 19. 'We need to hold accountable those who act to harm or damage property and ensure that they are the ones paying for these actions, not the local taxpayers and businesses.' The proposal would also prohibit government officials from limiting or restricting the authority of police officers 'to take action to quell, arrest, or detain individuals involved in a riot.' However, Sen. Paula Hicks-Hudson (R-Toledo) expressed concern during the hearing for this provision and asked if it's the bill's intent to possibly curb a mayor from directing their police chief to take certain action during a protest. Ohio leaders turn to Intel promises after President Donald Trump's call to repeal CHIPS Act Schaffer said that type of scenario was 'the prime example,' and argued that police at the scene of a protest should make those decisions, not an official like a mayor. The lawmaker said, 'officers on the ground, officers at the events, trying to restore peace have the best judgement of anybody as to what actions they should take.' In his testimony, Schaffer argued that S.B. 53 wouldn't discourage or violate Ohioans' First Amendment right to peacefully protest. Rather, the bill is 'designed to hold those who turn violent and destructive accountable for their actions.' S.B. 53 has been assigned to the Senate Judiciary Committee, where it could receive additional hearings open for public testimony. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
28-02-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
California lawmaker revives AI whistleblower protections concerns in new bill
The California lawmaker who introduced an AI safety protection bill later vetoed by Gov. Gavin Newsom has again introduced legislation to regulate the powerful technology. Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco) has introduced Senate Bill 53, which would protect AI lab whistleblowers from retaliation if they speak out about risks or irresponsible development. The bill would also create a compute cluster—CalCompute—to ensure a broad array of developers can access the compute they need to succeed. Specifically, the bill would prohibit developers of certain artificial intelligence models from enforcing policies that prevent employees from disclosing information or retaliating against those who report concerns. California bill would require insurers to pay full coverage without itemized lists SB 53 defines 'critical risk' as a foreseeable and material risk that the development, storage or deployment of a foundation model could result in the death or serious injury of more than 100 people or cause more than $1 billion in damages. Additionally, developers would be required to establish an internal process allowing employees to report concerns anonymously. 'We are still early in the legislative process, and this bill may evolve as the process continues. I'm closely monitoring the work of the Governor's AI Working Group, as well as developments in the AI field for changes that warrant a legislative response,' Wiener said in a statement. 'California's leadership on AI is more critical than ever as the new federal Administration proceeds with shredding the guardrails meant to keep Americans safe from the known and foreseeable risks that advanced AI systems present.' Last year, when Wiener introduced a similar bill, other lawmakers and tech companies opposed the proposed legislation, saying it was 'ill-informed, will cause more harm than good, and will eventually drive developers away from the state.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
27-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
GPS navigation problems among topics addressed by bills at Nevada Legislature
LAS VEGAS (KLAS) — GPS navigation is handy, but it's not perfect. When road closures or hazards aren't updated, technology isn't helping anyone. Senate Bill 53 (SB53) at the Nevada Legislature seeks to ensure that GPS isn't leading you down a dead end. The bill would allow cities, counties and regional transit agencies to directly update Nevada 511, and work with GPS services to improve the reliability of their services. When apps aren't updated, a $500-a-day fine would apply. 'Not only does the public rely on GPS and accurate information, but so does our public safety departments,' Taylor Allison, Lyon County emergency manager and government affairs director, told the Senate Committee on Growth and Infrastructure. 'In moments of crisis, reliable navigation isn't just helpful, it's essential,' Allison said. The bill is targeting the biggest GPS companies, and won't apply to services that have fewer than 10 million active users per month. A Google representative objected to a 48-hour requirement in the bill and the $500-a-day fine, and said the company would work with lawmakers. A representative of the Nevada Department of Transportation said the bill could end up costing NDOT money to cover more roads. Other bills that received hearings on Wednesday in Carson City: AUTISM SPECTRUM DISORDER: SB174 spells out requirements for public and charter schools in working with children with autism spectrum disorder. The bill mandates school districts and the governing body of each charter school to develop policies on providing certain services to those students. SB174 also revisits the definition of 'volunteer' to ensure requirements for background checks and fingerprinting are performed on anyone who is likely to have unsupervised contact with those students, including private instructional personnel. SB174 is sponsored by Republican Sen. Lisa Krasner and Democratic Sen. James Ohrenschall. ACCEPTING PSYCHOMETRISTS: AB196 removes language in state law that prohibits psychometrists from operating in Nevada in an effort to expand the availability of psychological testing. The bill changes the use of the term 'psychometrist,' which is limited to licensed psychologists under current law. The bill was presented by Megan Cavallaro, a UNR junior serving as an intern for Democratic Assem. Shea Backus. 'Psychometrist means a medical professional who is trained in administering and scoring psychological testing and tests. And this bill also gives the power to the Board of Psychology to create regulations governing the requirements for who can be called a psychometrist,' Cavallaro told the Assembly Committee on Commerce and Labor. AB196 is sponsored by Backus, who represents District 37 in the northwest Las Vegas valley. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
20-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Ohio bill would add new civil liability for property damaged in protests
State Sen. Tim Schaffer, R-Lancaster, speaks during an Ohio Senate session at the Statehouse in Columbus, Ohio. (Photo by Graham Stokes for Ohio Capital Journal. Republish photo only with original article.) An Ohio senator has offered a measure establishing civil liability for property damage applying to protesters. Instead of simply holding the perpetrator accountable, the proposal would expand liability to those who provide material support for the protest itself. It would also put the onus on the accused to prove they didn't damage the property. Additionally, the bill prohibits local government officials from placing restrictions on how their law enforcement agencies respond to protests. The sponsor, state Sen. Tim Schaffer, R-Lancaster, argued during testimony in committee Wednesday that expanding the scope of liability is an appropriate response to demonstrations that leave behind broken windows and vandalism. And he insisted there are adequate safeguards in place to protect Ohioans' First Amendment right to protest. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX Senate Bill 53 is not Schaffer's first proposal tied to protests or riots. During the last general assembly, he offered a bill effectively identical to SB 53, and the one before that, he proposed a bill requiring people convicted of riot and aggravated riot to pay restitution for property damage and the cost of police response. Explaining the necessity for the changes, Schaffer looked back about as far back in time as his first proposal, pointing to the Columbus Dispatch indicating in reports that property damage from protests in 2020 following the murder of George Floyd cost at least $1.2 million. 'This affected at least 115 businesses, nonprofits and state government offices,' he argued. 'This sort of behavior should not be tolerated and should be prosecuted whenever possible.' Schaffer contends it's not enough to go after those who physically cause damage. Under his bill, he said, 'people who provide destructive materials such as frozen water bottles or pallets of bricks near a riot can be held accountable for their actions as well.' He assured committee members there's a 'guard rail' in place — offenders can show by clear and convincing evidence that they didn't personally cause the damage in question. Still, the bill establishes a presumption that the person accused of causing damage is in fact liable for it. 'I want to make crystal clear that there is nothing in this bill that discourages or violates the First Amendment right to peacefully assemble and protest,' he told committee members. 'This bill is simply designed to hold those who turn violent and destructive accountable for their actions and to deter these actions.' In committee, the only immediate pushback Schaffer heard was from Sen. Paula Hicks-Hudson, D-Toledo, who questioned placing limits on local governments' ability to direct their law enforcement agencies. Schaffer defended the provision, arguing 'the whole point of this provision is to make sure politicians aren't making those calls, but the cops — who we've hired and asked to take an oath — on the scene, are making those calls.' Civil rights organizations, however, are extremely skeptical of Schaffer's bill. Emily Cole, who heads up Ohio Families Unite for Political Action and Change said, 'We strongly oppose Senate Bill 53 and have opposed previous attempts to strip Ohioans of their fundamental right to protest by Sen. Schaffer.' She added that her group opposes the restrictions on government officials directing their police agencies, stating it's against 'any attempt to weaponize law enforcement against communities while simultaneously placing law enforcement above supervision.' Joshua Katz who's on the executive committee of the Ohio National Lawyers Guild explained that state criminal law already holds convicted protesters accountable for property damage. By creating a new civil liability standard, he argued, the measure puts community groups under threat. 'It's intended to have a chilling effect,' he argued. 'It's intended to say to people, to organizations, to community groups: Don't go out there, because if you do, if anything happens, you could be held liable for it.' 'You can paint with a very broad brush,' Katz added. 'All you have to do is come up with some pretext for damages and then this could be used as a weapon to batter community organizing.' ACLU of Ohio chief lobbyist Gary Daniels brought up similar concerns. He argued that the legislative definitions for 'riot' and 'material support' are both extremely broad. As a hypothetical, he offered an anti-war group sharing information about a protest online. If violence breaks out, they could find themselves in court defending themselves against whether that promotion amounted to material support. Even if they're successful in beating back the charges, going to court is time-consuming and expensive. 'If a person or some entity is actually responsible for causing financial harm or losses to another, they can already be sued,' Daniels said. 'There is simply no need to muddy the waters by introducing 'material support' and its murky definitions into this mix.' 'Unless, of course, the end goal is to chill lawful speech and actions,' he added. Of the policing restrictions, he said that the 'worst-case scenario' looks like 'police deliberately violating the constitutional rights of people in response to a riot or vandalism.' Under the bill, police could act unilaterally, and a city's mayor would have little recourse to stop their actions or direct them not to take that approach in the future. Daniels said it raises an important question: Can local elected officials prevent police from deliberately violating peoples' constitutional rights to protest? 'Under the bill's language,' he said. 'The answer appears to be no.' Follow Ohio Capital Journal Reporter Nick Evans on X or on Bluesky. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
