Help Design DROS' Replacement!

[gorgothmog]

ASSOCIATE GOVERNMENTAL PROGRAM ANALYST

Looking to make a difference? Join our strong and mighty workforce. We offer benefits and growth opportunities and impact the lives of millions of Californians.

calcareers.ca.gov

This has WIDE ranging implications for everyone! If you are an FFL, now is the time to become a stakeholder in the new system's rollout!

 

[Hit Factor]

If at first you don’t succeed, try, try again?

G

Feedback  Thread 'We MIGHT Have An Opportunity To Influence DROS' Replacement'

Dec 28, 2025

Every year we eat legislative sandwiches because our law making is outsourced to billionaire interest groups like Everytown. These laws are designed to be vague, overbroad, and in the spirit of bad governance. AB 1263 is the latest sandwich we are all munching on, and no one has a good way to find compliance safe harbors, and therefore we see vendors exiting the market until they are defined through litigation or agency clarification. However, I did stumble upon something very interesting... an IT project that the Cal DoJ is hiring for right now. They want to find a modern...

• gorgothmog
• Replies: 7
• Forum: General Discussion

How many threads are you going to start on this?

 

[ikeo1]

If at first you don’t succeed, try, try again?

G

Feedback  Thread 'We MIGHT Have An Opportunity To Influence DROS' Replacement'

Dec 28, 2025

Every year we eat legislative sandwiches because our law making is outsourced to billionaire interest groups like Everytown. These laws are designed to be vague, overbroad, and in the spirit of bad governance. AB 1263 is the latest sandwich we are all munching on, and no one has a good way to find compliance safe harbors, and therefore we see vendors exiting the market until they are defined through litigation or agency clarification. However, I did stumble upon something very interesting... an IT project that the Cal DoJ is hiring for right now. They want to find a modern...

• gorgothmog
• Replies: 7
• Forum: General Discussion

How many threads are you going to start on this?

View attachment 130255

I don’t get it. This is the way to make changes to the system. This is a different position serving a different purpose in CA.

If you want to really change the process you have to be part of the process to advocate. No different than $POTUS, draining the swamp.

I don’t get what the alternative is. We did have someone who tried to do it through making threats to politicians but that won’t work and something we can’t support. If you have no voice inside, the voice outside doesn’t matter.

 

[gorgothmog]

If at first you don’t succeed, try, try again?

G

Feedback  Thread 'We MIGHT Have An Opportunity To Influence DROS' Replacement'

Dec 28, 2025

Every year we eat legislative sandwiches because our law making is outsourced to billionaire interest groups like Everytown. These laws are designed to be vague, overbroad, and in the spirit of bad governance. AB 1263 is the latest sandwich we are all munching on, and no one has a good way to find compliance safe harbors, and therefore we see vendors exiting the market until they are defined through litigation or agency clarification. However, I did stumble upon something very interesting... an IT project that the Cal DoJ is hiring for right now. They want to find a modern...

• gorgothmog
• Replies: 7
• Forum: General Discussion

How many threads are you going to start on this?

View attachment 130255

Summarize this for me, and tell me about its implications concerning California Firearm legislation. Use AI if you have to. https://bcp.dof.ca.gov/2526/FY2526_ORG0820_BCP7733.pdf

 

[Hit Factor]

I don’t get it. This is the way to make changes to the system. This is a different position serving a different purpose in CA.

If you want to really change the process you have to be part of the process to advocate. No different than $POTUS, draining the swamp.

I don’t get what the alternative is. We did have someone who tried to do it through making threats to politicians but that won’t work and something we can’t support. If you have no voice inside, the voice outside doesn’t matter.

You don’t have to acquiesce in an unconstitutional scheme. To participate in the process is to legitimize it. If the plan was to redesign a system of segregation, would you participate in that in an effort to “make changes” from the inside? Or would you stand up, reject it in its entirety, and fight against it in the courts? I know what I would do, and I will continue to take the same approach in regard to this state’s unconstitutional infringements on our right to keep and bear arms.

 

[ikeo1]

You don’t have to acquiesce in an unconstitutional scheme. To participate in the process is to legitimize it. If the plan was to redesign a system of segregation, would you participate in that in an effort to “make changes” from the inside? Or would you stand up, reject it in its entirety, and fight against it in the courts? I know what I would do, and I will continue to take the same approach in regard to this state’s unconstitutional infringements on our right to keep and bear arms.

This is a single take and not enough to make changes. I take it you don’t believe in a multi pronged approach? The more advocates you have from multiple places would at least be a way to stop the bleeding.

How successful would you rate your current strategy? You can still do the way you want to do things but should considers others trying to reverse the course as an alternative strategy.

Outright rejecting it isn’t the way to go and not participating at all but it is another approach, but hoping for SCOTUS to change things or the state to flip red isn’t going to stop much.

We’re very grassroots here and try to contribute in a positive way. We can and should go about it in different ways IMHO, to see what works. Imagining if we didn’t have St. Benitez as a Sr. Ranking Judge

 

[gorgothmog]

I don’t get it. This is the way to make changes to the system. This is a different position serving a different purpose in CA.

If you want to really change the process you have to be part of the process to advocate. No different than $POTUS, draining the swamp.

I don’t get what the alternative is. We did have someone who tried to do it through making threats to politicians but that won’t work and something we can’t support. If you have no voice inside, the voice outside doesn’t matter.

It doesn't get more frustrating than listening to ignorance like this when such a latent opportunity is staring all of us in the face. The Cal DoJ is admitting defeat, and right now is the time for FFLs and compliance departments to come in as stakeholders before Every Town has a monopoly. Cal DoJ is saying they can't operationally sustain the outsourced malignant legislative layering Every Town gives us with the current technology that DROS is based on.

 

[gorgothmog]

You don’t have to acquiesce in an unconstitutional scheme. To participate in the process is to legitimize it. If the plan was to redesign a system of segregation, would you participate in that in an effort to “make changes” from the inside? Or would you stand up, reject it in its entirety, and fight against it in the courts? I know what I would do, and I will continue to take the same approach in regard to this state’s unconstitutional infringements on our right to keep and bear arms.

You can certainly continue to do that, and hopefully the combined message across all fronts is that the Dems are pushing to far.

 

[ikeo1]

Cal DoJ is saying they can't operationally sustain the outsourced malignant legislative layering Every Town gives us with the current technology that DROS is based on.

To his point though. We’d be helping to build it. They want a more flexible system to build more limitations or ways to restrict things. A lot of this will lead to waste because of the overall complexity of the things they keep adding

 

[Hit Factor]

This is a single take and not enough to make changes. I take it you don’t believe in a multi pronged approach? The more advocates you have from multiple places would at least be a way to stop the bleeding.

How successful would you rate your current strategy? You can still do the way you want to do things but should considers others trying to reverse the course as an alternative strategy.

Outright rejecting it isn’t the way to go and not participating at all but it is another approach, but hoping for SCOTUS to change things or the state to flip red isn’t going to stop much.

We’re very grassroots here and try to contribute in a positive way. We can and should go about it in different ways IMHO, to see what works. Imagining if we didn’t have St. Benitez as a Sr. Ranking Judge

Realistically, the only way to make changes in this state in regard to gun rights is to stop voting blue. I know the Democrats and the social-ists here don’t want to hear that, but the reality is that the Democrat-controlled legislature is solely responsible for the continued assault on our rights. If the liberal faction here could somehow get their liberal lawmakers to cease and even reverse their efforts to disarm law-abiding citizens, that would go a long way towards effecting change. Short of that, our resources, time, and efforts are best spent in litigation. If you’re a gun owner in California and you’re not already a member of the CRPA, you need to join, donate, and volunteer wherever and whenever you can.

 

[gorgothmog]

Realistically, the only way to make changes in this state in regard to gun rights is to stop voting blue. I know the Democrats and the social-ists here don’t want to hear that, but the reality is that the Democrat-controlled legislature is solely responsible for the continued assault on our rights. If the liberal faction here could somehow get their liberal lawmakers to cease and desist their efforts to disarm law-abiding citizens, that would go a long way towards effecting change. Short of that, our resources, time, and efforts are best spent in litigation. If you’re a gun owner in California and you’re not already a member of the CRPA, you need to join, donate, and volunteer wherever and whenever you can.

I'll vote Republican for my Senate and Reps to break the supermajority, and for a Schwarzenegger style Republican governor. Even a Republican AG would be fine. Seriously, I'm not above compromising on that level, and neither should anybody be.

 

[bbp00]

This has WIDE ranging implications for everyone!

Probably for the worse.

I don't see anything but the usual government IT project, at high cost to taxpayer that may turn to be better (from IT viewpoint), or possibly turn out to be worse. Think of "Next Generation 911", that after $450 million of wasteful spending was scrapped.

As to the 'be a stakeholder'. Well, that's like helping cannibal improve on recipe on how he'll prepare and cook me.

 

[Hit Factor]

As to the 'be a stakeholder'. Well, that's like helping cannibal improve on recipe on how he'll prepare and cook me.

Exactly.

 

[ikeo1]

As to the 'be a stakeholder'. Well, that's like helping cannibal improve on recipe on how he'll prepare and cook me.

We live in his house though.. You're not outside, you're inside.

 

[gorgothmog]

These are the uninformative and narrow arguments about ideologies that will get nowhere. I won't have them. This is about reality, and yelling "shall not be infringed" at the supermajority will only make it more stubborn. Arguing for cold, boring, fair, and efficient regulation based on objective standards, NOT arbitrary ones, is how you defeat bad legislation that is designed to be frictional and vague. The Cal DoJ itself is a victim of decades of theatrical legislation that it can't enforce! It F-ing says so in the PDF.

 

[Deleted member 16735]

Realistically, the only way to make changes in this state in regard to gun rights is to stop voting blue. I know the Democrats and the social-ists here don’t want to hear that, but the reality is that the Democrat-controlled legislature is solely responsible for the continued assault on our rights. If the liberal faction here could somehow get their liberal lawmakers to cease and even reverse their efforts to disarm law-abiding citizens, that would go a long way towards effecting change. Short of that, our resources, time, and efforts are best spent in litigation. If you’re a gun owner in California and you’re not already a member of the CRPA, you need to join, donate, and volunteer wherever and whenever you can.

The last republican governor we had which was only in 2011 was responsible for magazine disconnects and microstamping. It seems way more naive to think that you could turn the legislature, which is 75% democrat in both houses, to a republican majority that would also be amenable to repealing the gun laws. Several republicans voted for the stuff that passed this year. If you can't come up with convincing reasons to educated people why you should have more bullets in your gun and semi automatic rifles then..... why do you think you deserve it? I'm certainly not convinced that voting for people that would ban abortion or books with gay people in them or teaching creationism in school instead of science or the myriad other things that come with the GOP platform is a worthwhile trade off for maybe getting the roster repealed or maybe getting more bullets in the magazines you can buy in the state.

 

[bbp00]

We live in his house though.. You're not outside, you're inside.

Still, it's all hypothetical because DOJ is not asking us for help, feedback, or be a "stakeholder". They're asking for more money to modernize their systems.
That means, if they get proposed budget approved and projects is successful, backend may work better, may tie better into other systems and perhaps user interface will be more user friendly (may benefit FFLs).
For us gun buyers, there will be no changes except (most likely) higher DROS fees.
That's all there is to it.
I don't know where OP got the idea that we can steer DOJ in any way.

 

[gorgothmog]

Still, it's all hypothetical because DOJ is not asking us for help, feedback, or be a "stakeholder". They're asking for more money to modernize their systems.
That means, if they get proposed budget approved and projects is successful, backend may work better, may tie better into other systems and perhaps user interface will be more user friendly (may benefit FFLs).
For us gun buyers, there will be no changes except (most likely) higher DROS fees.
That's all there is to it.
I don't know where OP got the idea that we can steer DOJ in any way.

Thank you for the feedback. This is actually very useful. The budget document specifically calls for the hiring of business workflow analysts to investigate the ways guns are purchased/transferred now, and reengineer that into a "better" workflow. You're right, this is theoretical, but there are ways to find out...