BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    







                      SENATE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY
                            Senator Loni Hancock, Chair              S
                             2011-2012 Regular Session               B

                                                                     8
                                                                     1
                                                                     9
          SB 819 (Leno)                                               
          As Amended April 14, 2011 
          Hearing date:  April 26, 2011
          Penal Code
          SM:dl

                          USES OF DEALER RECORD OF SALE FUNDS  

                                       HISTORY

          Source:  Attorney General Kamala D. Harris

          Prior Legislation: AB 302 (Beall) - Chap. 344, Stats. Of 2010
                       AB 161 (Steinberg) - Chap. 754, Stats. of 2003
                       AB 950 (Brulte) - Chap. 944, Stats. of 2001

          Support: Association for Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs; Riverside 
                   Sheriffs' Association; California Chapters of the Brady 
                   Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence; California State 
                   Sheriffs' Association; Statewide Law Enforcement 
                   Association; Legal Community Against Violence

          Opposition:California Association of Firearms Retailers; 
                   California Rifle and Pistol Association; California 
                   Sportsman's Lobby, Inc.; Crossroads of the West; 
                   National Rifle Association; National Shooting Sports 
                   Foundation Inc.; Outdoor Sportsmen's Coalition of 
                   California; Safari Club International



                                         KEY ISSUE
           




                                                                     (More)







                                                              SB 819 (Leno)
                                                                      PageB

          SHOULD THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE BE AUTHORIZED TO USE DEALER RECORD 
          OF SALE FUNDS FOR COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH ITS FIREARMS-RELATED 
          REGULATORY AND ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES REGARDING THE POSSESSION AS 
          WELL AS THE SALE, PURCHASE, LOAN, OR TRANSFER OF FIREARMS, AS 
          SPECIFIED?

                                          

                                       PURPOSE

          The purpose of this bill is to provide that the Department of 
          Justice may use dealer record of sale (DROS) funds for costs 
          associated with its firearms-related regulatory and enforcement 
          activities regarding the possession as well as the sale, 
          purchase, loan, or transfer of firearms, as specified.

           Existing Federal law  states that it shall be unlawful for any 
          person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition 
          to persons if that person is under indictment or has been 
          convicted of specified crimes, is under a restraining order, has 
          been committed to a mental institution, and other specified 
          disqualifying factors.  (18 U.S.C.  922.)

           Existing California law  :

           Requires that persons who sell, lease, or transfer firearms be 
            licensed by California.  (Penal Code  26500 and 26700, et 
            seq.<1>)

           Sets forth a series of requirements to be state licensed by 
            DOJ, which provides that to be recognized as state licensed, 
            a person must be on a centralized list of gun dealers and 
            allows access to the centralized list by authorized persons 
            for various reasons.  (Penal Code  26700.)
          --------------------------
          <1> SB 1080, Chap. 711, Stats. 2010, and SB 1115, Chap. 178, 
          Stats. 2010, recast and renumbered most statutes relating to 
          deadly weapons without any substantive change to those statutes. 
           Those changes will become operative January 1, 2012.  All 
          references to affected code sections will be to the revised 
          version unless otherwise indicated.



                                                                     (More)







                                                              SB 819 (Leno)
                                                                      PageC


           Requires that firearms dealers obtain certain identifying 
            information from firearms purchasers and forward that 
            information, via electronic transfer to DOJ to perform a 
            background check on the purchaser to determine whether he or 
            she is prohibited from possessing a firearm.  The record of 
            applicant information must be transmitted to the Department 
            of Justice in Sacramento by electronic transfer on the date 
            of the application to purchase.  The original of each record 
            of electronic transfer shall be retained by the dealer in 
            consecutive order.  Each original shall become the permanent 
            record of the transaction that shall be retained for not 
            less than three years from the date of the last transaction 
            and shall be provided for the inspection of any peace 
            officer, Department of Justice employee designated by the 
            Attorney General, or agent of the Federal Bureau of Alcohol, 
            Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives upon the presentation of 
            proper identification, but no information shall be compiled 
            therefrom regarding the purchasers or other transferees of 
            firearms that are not pistols, revolvers, or other firearms 
            capable of being concealed upon the person.  (Pen Code  
            28160-28220.)

           Requires handguns to be centrally registered at time of 
            transfer or sale by way of transfer forms centrally compiled 
            by the DOJ.  DOJ is required to keep a registry from data sent 
            to DOJ indicating who owns what handgun by make, model, and 
            serial number and the date thereof.  (Penal Code  11106(a) 
            and (c).)

           Requires that, upon receipt of the purchaser's information, 
            DOJ shall examine its records, as well as those records that 
            it is authorized to request from the State Department of 
            Mental Health pursuant to Section 8104 of the Welfare and 
            Institutions Code, in order to determine if the purchaser is 
            prohibited from purchasing a firearm because of a prior felony 
            conviction or because they had previously purchased a handgun 
            within the last 30 days, or because they had received 
            inpatient treatment for a mental health disorder, as 
            specified.  (Penal Code  28220.) 




                                                                     (More)







                                                              SB 819 (Leno)
                                                                      PageD


           States that, to the extent funding is available, the 
            Department of Justice  may  participate in the National Instant 
            Criminal Background Check System (NICS), as specified, and, if 
            that participation is implemented, shall notify the dealer and 
            the chief of the police department of the city or city and 
            county in which the sale was made, or if the sale was made in 
            a district in which there is no municipal police department, 
            the sheriff of the county in which the sale was made, that the 
            purchaser is a person prohibited from acquiring a firearm 
            under federal law.  (Penal Code  28220.)

           States that if the department determines that the purchaser is 
            prohibited from possessing a firearm, as specified, it shall 
            immediately notify the dealer and the chief of the police 
            department of the city or city and county in which the sale 
            was made, or if the sale was made in a district in which there 
            is no municipal police department, the sheriff of the county 
            in which the sale was made, of that fact.  (Penal Code  
            28220.)

           States that no person who has been taken into custody, found 
            to be a danger to himself, herself, or others, and, as a 
            result, admitted to a specified mental health facility, shall 
            own, possess, control, receive, or purchase, or attempt to 
            own, possess, control, receive, or purchase any firearm for a 
            period of five years after the person is released from the 
            facility, except as specified.  (Welfare and Institutions Code 
             8103(f)(1).)  For each such person, the facility shall 
            immediately, on the date of admission, submit a report to the 
            Department of Justice, on a form prescribed by the Department 
            of Justice, containing information that includes, but is not 
            limited to, the identity of the person and the legal grounds 
            upon which the person was admitted to the facility.  (Welfare 
            and Institutions Code  8103(f)(2)(A).)   

           No person who has been certified for intensive treatment for a 
            mental disorder, as specified, shall own, possess, control, 
            receive, or purchase, or attempt to own, possess, control, 
            receive, or purchase any firearm for a period of five years 




                                                                     (More)







                                                              SB 819 (Leno)
                                                                      PageE

            and relevant treatment facilities shall report the identities 
            of such persons to DOJ, as specified.  (Welfare and 
            Institutions Code  8103(g).)

           The Department of Justice may require the dealer to charge 
            each firearm purchaser a fee not to exceed $14, except that 
            the fee may be increased at a rate not to exceed any increase 
            in the California Consumer Price Index as compiled and 
            reported by the Department of Industrial Relations.  This fee, 
            known as the Dealer Record of Sale or DROS fee, shall be no 
            more than is necessary to fund the following:

                  o         The department for the cost of furnishing this 
                    information.

                  o         The department for the cost of meeting its 
                    obligations to notify specified persons that they are 
                    prohibited from owning firearms due to their receiving 
                    inpatient treatment for a mental disorder.

                  o         Local mental health facilities for 
                    state-mandated local costs resulting from the 
                    specified reporting requirements.

                  o         The State Department of Mental Health for the 
                    costs resulting from the specified requirements 
                    imposed.

                  o         Local mental hospitals, sanitariums, and 
                    institutions for state-mandated local costs resulting 
                    from the specified reporting requirements.

                  o         Local law enforcement agencies for 
                    state-mandated local costs resulting from the 
                    notification requirements regarding service of 
                    restraining orders, as specified.

                  o         Local law enforcement agencies for 
                    state-mandated local costs resulting from the 
                    notification requirements regarding specified persons 




                                                                     (More)







                                                              SB 819 (Leno)
                                                                      PageF

                    prohibited from owning firearms due to their receiving 
                    inpatient treatment for a mental disorder.

                  o         For the actual costs associated with the 
                    electronic or telephonic transfer of information, as 
                    specified.

                  o         The Department of Food and Agriculture for the 
                    costs resulting from the notification provisions 
                    regarding importing firearms into the state, as 
                    specified.

                  o         The department for the costs associated with 
                    public education requirements regarding importation of 
                    firearms into California, as specified.

                  o         The department for the costs associated with 
                    funding Department of Justice firearms-related 
                    regulatory and enforcement activities related to the 
                    sale, purchase, loan, or transfer of firearms pursuant 
                    to any provision listed in Section 16580.

            (Penal Code  28225(a) - (b).)

           The fee established pursuant to this section shall not exceed 
            the sum of the actual processing costs of the department, the 
            estimated reasonable costs of the local mental health 
            facilities for complying with the reporting requirements 
            imposed as specified, the costs of the State Department of 
            Mental Health for complying with the requirements imposed as 
            specified, the estimated reasonable costs of local mental 
            hospitals, sanitariums, and institutions for complying with 
            the reporting requirements imposed as specified, the estimated 
            reasonable costs of local law enforcement agencies for 
            complying with the notification requirements, as specified, 
            the estimated reasonable costs of local law enforcement 
            agencies for complying with the notification requirements 
            imposed as specified, the estimated reasonable costs of the 
            Department of Food and Agriculture for the costs resulting 
            from the specified notification provisions, the estimated 




                                                                     (More)







                                                              SB 819 (Leno)
                                                                      PageG

            reasonable costs of the department for the costs associated 
            with public education requirements regarding importation of 
            firearms into California, and the estimated reasonable costs 
            of department firearms-related regulatory and enforcement 
            activities related to the sale, purchase, loan, or transfer of 
            firearms pursuant to specified provisions of law pertaining to 
            firearms.  (Penal Code  28225(c).)

           The Department of Justice may charge a fee sufficient to 
            reimburse it for each of the following but not to exceed 
            fourteen dollars ($14), except that the fee may be increased 
            at a rate not to exceed any increase in the California 
            Consumer Price Index as compiled and reported by the 
            Department of Industrial Relations:

             o    For the actual costs associated with the preparation, 
               sale, processing, and filing of forms or reports required 
               or utilized pursuant to any provision listed in subdivision 
               (a) of Section 16585.

             o    For the actual processing costs associated with the 
               submission of a Dealers' Record of Sale to the department.

             o    For the actual costs associated with the preparation, 
               sale, processing, and filing of reports utilized pursuant 
               to Section 26905, 27565, or 28000, or paragraph (1) of 
               subdivision (a) of Section 27560.

             o    For the actual costs associated with the electronic or 
               telephonic transfer of information pursuant to Section 
               28215.

             o    Any costs incurred by the Department of Justice to 
               implement this section shall be reimbursed from fees 
               collected and charged pursuant to this section. No fees 
               shall be charged to the dealer pursuant to Section 28225 
               for implementing this section.

          (Penal Code  28230.)





                                                                     (More)







                                                              SB 819 (Leno)
                                                                      PageH

           All money received by the department pursuant to this article 
            shall be deposited in the Dealers' Record of Sale Special 
            Account of the General Fund, which is hereby created, to be 
            available, upon appropriation by the Legislature, for 
            expenditure by the department to offset the costs incurred 
            pursuant to any of the following:


                  o         This article.

                  o         Annual inspections of permitted destructive 
                    devices.  (See  18910.)

                  o         Regulating firearms transaction between 
                    licensed dealers (See  27555.)

                  o         Conduct public education and notification 
                    programs regarding importation of firearms into the 
                    state.  (See  27560(d) and (e).)

                  o         Maintain a list of federally licensed firearms 
                    dealers in California exempt from the state dealer 
                    licensing requirements, as specified.  (See Article 6 
                    (commencing with Section 28450).

                  o         Inspection of inventory of licensed firearms 
                    dealers.  (See 31110.)

                  o         Public education and notification programs 
                    regarding registration of assault weapons.  (See  
                    31115.)

                  o         Retesting of handguns on the not unsafe 
                    handgun list, as specified.  ( See  32020(a).)

                  o         Inspection of inventories of machine guns held 
                    under permit.  (See  32670.)

                  o         Inspection of inventories of short-barreled 
                    shotguns and rifles held under permit (See  




                                                                     (More)







                                                              SB 819 (Leno)
                                                                      PageI

                    33320.)(Penal Code  28235.)

           The Attorney General shall establish and maintain an online 
            database to be known as the Prohibited Armed Persons File. The 
            purpose of the file is to cross-reference persons who have 
            ownership or possession of a firearm on or after January 1, 
            1991, as indicated by a record in the Consolidated Firearms 
            Information System, and who, subsequent to the date of that 
            ownership or possession of a firearm, fall within a class of 
            persons who are prohibited from owning or possessing a 
            firearm.

           The information contained in the Prohibited Armed Persons File 
            shall only be available to specified entities through the 
            California Law Enforcement Telecommunications System, for the 
            purpose of determining if persons are armed and prohibited 
            from possessing firearms. (Penal Code  30000.)

           This bill  would provide that DOJ may use dealer record of sale 
          (DROS) funds for costs associated with its firearms-related 
          regulatory and enforcement activities regarding the possession 
          as well as the sale, purchase, loan, or transfer of firearms, as 
          specified.

           This bill  would make specified findings and declarations.

                    RECEIVERSHIP/OVERCROWDING CRISIS AGGRAVATION
          
          For the last several years, severe overcrowding in California's 
          prisons has been the focus of evolving and expensive litigation. 
           As these cases have progressed, prison conditions have 
          continued to be assailed, and the scrutiny of the federal courts 
          over California's prisons has intensified.  

          On June 30, 2005, in a class action lawsuit filed four years 
          earlier, the United States District Court for the Northern 
          District of California established a Receivership to take 
          control of the delivery of medical services to all California 
          state prisoners confined by the California Department of 
          Corrections and Rehabilitation ("CDCR").  In December of 2006, 




                                                                     (More)







                                                              SB 819 (Leno)
                                                                      PageJ

          plaintiffs in two federal lawsuits against CDCR sought a 
          court-ordered limit on the prison population pursuant to the 
          federal Prison Litigation Reform Act.  On January 12, 2010, a 
          three-judge federal panel issued an order requiring California 
          to reduce its inmate population to 137.5 percent of design 
          capacity -- a reduction at that time of roughly 40,000 inmates 
          -- within two years.  The court stayed implementation of its 
          ruling pending the state's appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.  

          On Monday, June 14, 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear 
          the state's appeal of this order and, on Tuesday, November 30, 
          2010, the Court heard oral arguments.  A decision is expected as 
          early as this spring.  

          In response to the unresolved prison capacity crisis, in early 
          2007 the Senate Committee on Public Safety began holding 
          legislative proposals which could further exacerbate prison 
          overcrowding through new or expanded felony prosecutions.     

           This bill  does not appear to aggravate the prison overcrowding 
          crisis described above.


                                      COMMENTS

          1.  Need for This Bill  

          According to the author:

               The California Department of Justice (DOJ) maintains 
               APPS, an online database, to cross-reference persons 
               who have ownership or possession of a firearm, and 
               who, subsequent to the date of that ownership or 
               possession of a firearm, fall within a class of 
               persons who are prohibited from having a firearm. 
               Authorized law enforcement agencies have access to 
               APPS.  DOJ populates APPS with all handgun and assault 
               weapon owners across the state and matches them 
               against criminal history records to determine who 
               might fall into a prohibited status.  When a match is 




                                                                     (More)







                                                              SB 819 (Leno)
                                                                      PageK

               found, the system automatically raises a flag.  APPS, 
               further, interfaces with the Automated Firearms System 
               and identifies the 

               handguns and assault<2> weapons in that prohibited 
               individual's possession.  In theory, local agencies 
               and DOJ would then confiscate the weapons.  When local 
               agencies confiscate weapons, notice is sent to DOJ so 
               that the individual can be removed from the list.  

               APPS is currently funded through the general fund.  
               There is, however, an account that holds the fees 
               charged by dealers for each firearm purchase.  This is 
               called the Dealer Record of Sale (DROS) account.  
               Penal Code section 12076 allows the Department of 
               Justice to use this account to fund firearms-related 
               regulatory and enforcement activities related to the 
               sale, purchase, loan, or transfer of firearms pursuant 
               to this chapter.  Penal Code section 12076, however, 
               does not fund DOJ or local agencies to confiscate 
               unlawfully possessed firearms.  

               There are currently more than 18,000 armed prohibited 
               people statewide, including convicted felons.  30 to 
               35 percent of prohibited people have been adjudicated 
               mentally ill.  Armed prohibited people are believed to 
               hold up to 34,101 handguns and 1,590 assault weapons.  
               Every day there are an additional 15 to 20 individuals 
               added to APPS.  Despite their best efforts, local and 
               State law enforcement agencies do not have the funding 
               or resources to keep up with this influx.

          2.  Background - The Prohibited Armed Persons File  

          In 2001, the Legislature created the Prohibited Armed Persons 
          File to ensure otherwise prohibited persons do not continue to 
          possess firearms.  (SB 950 (Brulte), Chapter 944, Statutes of 
          ---------------------------
          <2> Because long guns are not required to be registered, the 
          list of firearms in an armed prohibited person's possession 
              would likely not include long guns. 



                                                                     (More)







                                                              SB 819 (Leno)
                                                                      PageL

          2001.)  The purpose of the file is to cross-reference persons 
          who have ownership or possession of a firearm on or after 
          January 1, 1991, as indicated by a record in the Consolidated 
          Firearm Information System, and who, subsequent to the date of 
          that ownership or possession of a firearm, fall within a class 
          of persons who are prohibited from owning or possessing a 
          firearm.  (Penal Code  30000(a).)  According to DOJ, in July 
          2003, it received funding to build a database of this 
          information - the Armed and Prohibited Persons System - which 
          became operational in 2006 and made fully available to local law 
          enforcement in 2007.  

          SB 950 also mandated that DOJ provide investigative assistance 
          to local law enforcement agencies to better insure the 
          investigation of individuals who continue to possess firearms 
          despite being prohibited from doing so.  (Penal Code  30010.)  
          DOJ states that its special agents have trained approximately 
          500 sworn local law enforcement officials in 196 police 
          departments and 35 sheriff's departments on how to use the 
          database during firearms investigations.  The Department states 
          it has also conducted 50 training sessions on how to use the 
          vehicle-mounted California Law Enforcement Telecommunications 
          System terminals to access the database.


          (  http://ag.ca.gov/newsalerts/release.php?id=1505&year=2007&month=
          12  )

          Recently, the New York Times reported on California's Armed 
          Prohibited Persons File and the problems it seeks to address:

               By law, Roy Perez should not have had a gun three years ago 
               when he shot his mother 16 times in their home in Baldwin 
               Park, Calif., killing her, and then went next door and 
               killed a woman and her 4-year-old daughter. 

               Mr. Perez, who pleaded guilty to three counts of murder and 
               was sentenced last year to life in prison, had a history of 
               mental health issues. As a result, even though in 2004 he 
               legally bought the 9-millimeter Glock 26 handgun he used, 




                                                                     (More)







                                                              SB 819 (Leno)
                                                                      PageM

               at the time of the shootings his name was in a statewide 
               law enforcement database as someone whose gun should be 
               taken away, according to the authorities. 

               The case highlights a serious vulnerability when it comes 
               to keeping guns out of the hands of the mentally unstable 
               and others, not just in California but across the country. 

               In the wake of the Tucson shootings, much attention has 
               been paid to various categories of people who are legally 
               barred from buying handguns - those who have been 
               "adjudicated as a mental defective," have felony 
               convictions, have committed domestic violence misdemeanors 
               and so on. The focus has almost entirely been on gaps in 
               the federal background check system that is supposed to 
               deny guns to these prohibited buyers. 

               There is, however, another major blind spot in the system. 

               Tens of thousands of gun owners, like Mr. Perez, bought 
               their weapons legally but under the law should no longer 
               have them because of subsequent mental health or criminal 
               issues. In Mr. Perez's case, he had been held involuntarily 
               by the authorities several times for psychiatric 
               evaluation, which in California bars a person from 
               possessing a gun for five years. 

               Policing these prohibitions is difficult, however, in most 
               states. The authorities usually have to stumble upon the 
               weapon in, say, a traffic stop or some other encounter, and 
               run the person's name through various record checks. 

               California is unique in the country, gun control advocates 
               say, because of its computerized database, the Armed 
               Prohibited Persons System. It was created, in part, to 
               enable law enforcement officials to handle the issue 
               pre-emptively, actively identifying people who legally 
               bought handguns, or registered assault weapons, but are now 
               prohibited from having them. 





                                                                     (More)







                                                              SB 819 (Leno)
                                                                      PageN


               The list had 18,374 names on it as of the beginning of this 
               month - 15 to 20 are added a day - swamping law 
               enforcement's ability to keep up. Some police departments 
               admitted that they had not even tried. 

                                     * * * * * * * *
               The state Justice Department's firearms bureau does have a 
               small unit, with 20 agents, that tracks down people on the 
               list. Last year, it investigated 1,717 people and seized 
               1,224 firearms. 

               The list is growing far faster, however, than names are 
               being removed. "We're just not a very big bureau," Mr. 
               Lindley said. "We do the best we can with the personnel 
               that we have." 

               The bureau is planning a sweep this spring focused on 
               people on the list for mental health reasons. Last summer, 
               a man from the Fresno area who had recently been released 
               from a mental health facility was found to possess 73 guns, 
               including 17 unregistered assault rifles. 

               In the case of Mr. Perez, Lieutenant Cowan, of Baldwin 
               Park, said he learned that state agents had been scheduled 
               to visit Mr. Perez to confiscate his weapon - two weeks 
               after the rampage took place. 

          (States Struggle to Disarm People Who've Lost Right to Own Guns, 
          By Ed Connolly and Michael Luo, New York Times, Feb. 5, 2011,) 
          http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/06/us/06guns.html?_r=1

          3.  What This Bill Would Do
           
          As noted above, current law establishes a mechanism whereby DOJ 
          cross-references persons who are prohibited from possessing a 
          firearm with records of persons who have purchased firearms, and 
          any "prohibited person" who is listed as a firearm owner goes in 
          the Prohibited Armed Persons File.  DOJ and local law 
          enforcement agencies can utilize that list to investigate 




                                                                     (More)







                                                              SB 819 (Leno)
                                                                      PageO

          firearms violations and seize firearms from prohibited persons.  


          Current law provides that DOJ may require licensed firearms 
          dealers to charge a fee, as specified, in connection with 
          firearm sales.  These fees are deposited in the Dealer 
          Record of Sale (DROS) Special Account.  DROS funds may be 
          used to reimburse DOJ for the costs associated with funding 
          DOJ firearms-related regulatory and enforcement activities 
          related to the sale, purchase, loan, or transfer of 
          firearms, as specified.  (Penal code  28225, 28230, 
          28235.)  It is somewhat unclear under current law whether 
          DROS funds could be used to reimburse DOJ for its 
          enforcement efforts related to the Armed Prohibited Persons 
          File.  SB 819 would state that DROS funds may be used by 
          DOJ for 


          enforcement activities related to the possession as well as 
          the sale, purchase, loan, or transfer of firearms..0  This 
          would clarify that DOJ is permitted to use DROS funds to 
          pay for its efforts to retrieve unlawfully possessed 
          firearms and prosecute individuals who possess those 
          firearms despite being prohibited by law from doing so.

          SHOULD IT BE SPECIFIED THAT DROS FUNDS MAY BE USED TO FINANCE 
          DOJ'S ENFORCEMENT OF LAWS REGARDING THE UNLAWFUL POSSESSION OF 
          FIREARMS?

          4.  Argument in Support
           
          The California Chapters of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun 
          Violence states:

               The Dealers' Record of Sale (DROS) fee is charged by 
               the California Department of Justice (DOJ) for most 
               firearm transfers.  The fees reimburse DOJ for 
               expenses incurred related to the DROS process, 
               including conducting the background check of 
               prospective firearm purchasers.  The DROS fees are 




                                                                     (More)







                                                              SB 819 (Leno)
                                                                      PageP

               deposited in the DROS Special Account of the General 
               Fund and are available, upon appropriation by the 
               Legislature, for expenditure by DOJ to offset 
               specified costs.  

               Existing law provides that DROS fees may also be used 
               to fund firearms-related regulatory and enforcement 
               activities related to the sale, purchase, loan, or 
               transfer of firearms.   SB 819 would additionally 
               authorize using the DROS fess for regulatory and 
               enforcement activities related to the possession of 
               firearms.  It is important to note that SB 819 does 
               not create a new class of persons prohibited from 
               purchasing or possessing firearms.  The bill would 
               simply help DOJ better enforce existing firearm laws 
               and ensure that dangerous individuals who have lost 
               their gun rights are not in possession of firearms.  
               SB 819 would not impose a cost to the state general 
               fund, but would allow DROS funds, as approved by the 
               regular budget process, to be used for certain firearm 
               enforcement programs.  

               Specifically, SB 819 seeks to allow a portion of the 
               annual surplus of DROS funds to be expended on DOJ's 
               Armed and Prohibited Persons System (APPS) Program.  
               The APPS database maintained by DOJ contains 
               information on persons who have purchased handguns and 
               subsequently become prohibited by law from purchasing 
               or possessing firearms.  Law enforcement can use this 
               information to disarm persons who may be in the 
               database as a result of a felony or violent 
               misdemeanor conviction, a commitment to a mental 
               health facility, or the result of a domestic violence 
               restraining order for which they failed to surrender 
               their firearm.  

               The California Brady Chapters pushed for full 
               implementation of the APPS program under Attorney 
               General Brown and from July 1, 2007 to September 30, 
               2010, DOJ conducted 5,762 APPS investigations, 




                                                                     (More)







                                                              SB 819 (Leno)
                                                                      PageQ

               resulting in the seizure of 5,985 firearms.  A partial 
               review of investigations by BOF indicates that 
               approximately 40% of all APPS investigations results 
               in the seizure of at least one firearm.<3>
               As of March 3, 2010, there were 17,134 armed and 
               prohibited persons in the APPS database.  This group 
               of prohibited persons was believed to be in possession 
               of 29,358 handguns and 1,514 assault weapons.<4>  By 
               November 1, 2010, the numbers had increased to 18,166 
               prohibited persons in the APPS database, with 33,019 
               handguns and 1,555 assault weapons associated with the 
               prohibited persons.<5>  (There is no data on long guns 
               owned by prohibited persons since long gun records are 
               not maintained in the California database.)  Despite 
               the investigation and seizure of almost six thousand 
               firearms, the number of prohibited persons with 
               firearms in APPS is growing due to the fact that gun 
               owners are becoming prohibited faster than DOJ and 
               local law enforcement agencies can conduct 
               investigations and seizure of the firearms.  

               Local law enforcement agencies are provided monthly 
               information regarding the armed and prohibited persons 
               in the agency's jurisdiction.  However at the present 
               time, many agencies do not have the resources or 
               personnel to work the APPS cases and rely on 
               assistance from DOJ's criminal intelligence 
               specialists and special agents.  In today's 
               environment of shrinking budgets, it is important to 
               find alternative ways to fund the state's important 
               ----------------------
          <3>

             Data provided by the CA DOJ, November 2, 2010

          <4>.
             Data provided by the CA DOJ, March 4, 2010

          <5>.
             Data provided by the CA DOJ, November 2, 2010




                                                                     (More)







                                                              SB 819 (Leno)
                                                                      PageR

               public safety programs. 











































                                                                     (More)











          5.  Argument in Opposition  

          The National Shooting Sports Foundation, Inc. states:

               While NSSF supports keeping firearms out of the hands 
               of persons who are prohibited from possessing 
               firearms, it opposes taking the money to fund this 
               activity from the Dealers Record of Sale (DROS) 
               Special Account of the General Fund.

               The money paid into the DROS fund by a prospective 
               purchaser or other transferee of a firearm, is a fee 
               to pay for the costs of a criminal and mental history 
               background check to determine the person's eligibility 
               to lawfully possess a firearm.  

               The DROS fee is not a regulatory fee, tax license or 
               other form of non-user charge.  NSSF believes that the 
               DROS fund has often been improperly used to fund 
               non-background check activities of the Department of 
               Justice (DOJ).

               Since the use of DROS fees for the purposes of SB 819 
               would be to use them in the same manner as a tax, the 
               bill should require a 2/3's vote of each house of the 
               Legislature for passage.

               If the bill were to be amended to designate a 
               different source of funding, NSSF would remove its 
               opposition and likely support the bill.  NSSF does not 
               support unfunded legislation.
                                   ***************











                                                                     (More)