BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY
Senator Loni Hancock, Chair A
2013-2014 Regular Session B
6
8
5
AB 685 (Achadjian)
As Amended April 2, 2013
Hearing date: May 14, 2013
Penal Code, Public Contract Code
SM:jr
FIREARMS: STATE POLICE OFFICERS KILLED IN THE LINE OF DUTY
HISTORY
Source: California Association of Highway Patrolmen
Prior Legislation: SB 428 (Strickland), (2011-12); similar
provisions amended out of bill
Support: California Association of Federal Firearms Licensees
(if amended); California Correctional Peace Officers
Association; California Rifle and Pistol Association;
California Statewide Law Enforcement Association; Peace
Officers Research Association of California (PORAC);
Association for Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs;
Los Angeles Police Protective League; Riverside
Sheriffs' Association
Opposition:Unknown
Assembly Floor Vote: Ayes 76 - Noes 0
(More)
AB 685 (Achadjian)
Page 2
KEY ISSUE
SHOULD THE SPOUSE OR DOMESTIC PARTNER OF A PEACE OFFICER WHO HAS
BEEN KILLED IN THE LINE OF DUTY BE ALLOWED TO PURCHASE THE
DECEDENT'S STATE-USED HANDGUN, AS SPECIFIED?
PURPOSE
The purpose of this bill is to (1) authorize the department head
of a peace officer, as defined, who was employed by the state
and who died in the line of duty to sell the officer's
state-issued handgun to the spouse or domestic partner of the
deceased officer; (2) require the cost of the handgun to be the
lesser of the fair market value of the handgun as listed in the
annual Blue Book of Gun Values or replacement cost, plus a
charge for handling cost; (3) require the spouse or domestic
partner to request the purchase of the handgun in writing to the
department within 30 calendar days of the peace officer's death;
(4) require the sale of the firearm to be conducted through a
dealer and that the spouse or domestic partner undergo a
background check; and (5) exempt from the firearm dealer license
requirement the delivery of a firearm by a law enforcement
agency to a dealer in order for that dealer to deliver the
firearm to the spouse or domestic partner pursuant to the above
provisions.
Current law prohibits a state employee from acquiring any goods
from the state unless the goods are offered to the general
public in the regular course of the state's business on the same
terms and conditions as those applicable to the employee.
(Public Contracts Code § 10334(a).)
Current law authorizes the department head of a state law
enforcement agency to sell a state-issued handgun to a peace
officer, as defined, who retires after being employed by the
state for more than 120 months or who retires from a
(More)
AB 685 (Achadjian)
Page 3
job-incurred disability not related to a mental or emotional
disorder and has been granted the legal right to carry a
concealed firearm. (Public Contracts Code § 10334(b).)
Current law punishes as a misdemeanor, with specified
exceptions, the sale, lease, or transfer of firearms by a person
unless the person has been issued a license as specified.
(Penal Code § 26500.)
Current law exempts from the firearm dealer license requirement
detailed above the sale, delivery, or transfer of a firearm by a
law enforcement agency to a peace officer as specified. (Penal
Code § 26610.)
Current law requires a local agency to donate the personal
effects, including firearms that are not needed for evidence in
a pending court action or investigation and that have been
rendered inoperable, of any employee police officer or deputy
sheriff who is killed in the line of duty to the family of the
officer upon the family's request. (Government Code §
50081(c).)
This bill authorizes the department head of a peace officer, as
defined, who was employed by the state and who died in the line
of duty to sell the officer's state-issued handgun to the spouse
or domestic partner of the deceased officer.
This bill requires the cost of the handgun to be the lesser of
the fair market value of the handgun as listed in the annual
Blue Book of Gun Values or replacement cost, plus a charge for
handling cost.
This bill requires the spouse or domestic partner to request the
purchase of the handgun in writing to the department within 30
calendar days of the peace officer's death.
This bill requires the sale of the firearm to be conducted
through a dealer and that the spouse or domestic partner undergo
a background check.
(More)
AB 685 (Achadjian)
Page 4
This bill exempts from the firearm dealer license requirement
the delivery of a firearm by a law enforcement agency to a
dealer in order for that dealer to deliver the firearm to the
spouse or domestic partner pursuant to the above provisions.
RECEIVERSHIP/OVERCROWDING CRISIS AGGRAVATION
For the last several years, severe overcrowding in California's
prisons has been the focus of evolving and expensive litigation
relating to conditions of confinement. On May 23, 2011, the
United States Supreme Court ordered California to reduce its
prison population to 137.5 percent of design capacity within two
years from the date of its ruling, subject to the right of the
state to seek modifications in appropriate circumstances.
Beginning in early 2007, Senate leadership initiated a policy to
hold legislative proposals which could further aggravate the
prison overcrowding crisis through new or expanded felony
prosecutions. Under the resulting policy known as "ROCA" (which
stands for "Receivership/ Overcrowding Crisis Aggravation"), the
Committee held measures which created a new felony, expanded the
scope or penalty of an existing felony, or otherwise increased
the application of a felony in a manner which could exacerbate
the prison overcrowding crisis. Under these principles, ROCA
was applied as a content-neutral, provisional measure necessary
to ensure that the Legislature did not erode progress towards
reducing prison overcrowding by passing legislation which would
increase the prison population. ROCA necessitated many hard and
difficult decisions for the Committee.
In January of 2013, just over a year after the enactment of the
historic Public Safety Realignment Act of 2011, the State of
California filed court documents seeking to vacate or modify the
federal court order issued by the Three-Judge Court three years
earlier to reduce the state's prison population to 137.5 percent
of design capacity. The State submitted in part that the, ". .
. population in the State's 33 prisons has been reduced by over
(More)
AB 685 (Achadjian)
Page 5
24,000 inmates since October 2011 when public safety realignment
went into effect, by more than 36,000 inmates compared to the
2008 population . . . , and by nearly 42,000 inmates since 2006
. . . ." Plaintiffs, who opposed the state's motion, argue in
part that, "California prisons, which currently average 150% of
capacity, and reach as high as 185% of capacity at one prison,
continue to deliver health care that is constitutionally
deficient." In an order dated January 29, 2013, the federal
court granted the state a six-month extension to achieve the
137.5 % prisoner population cap by December 31st of this year.
In an order dated April 11, 2013, the Three-Judge Court denied
the state's motions, and ordered the state of California to
"immediately take all steps necessary to comply with this
Court's . . . Order . . . requiring defendants to reduce overall
prison population to 137.5% design capacity by December 31,
2013."
The ongoing litigation indicates that prison capacity and
related issues concerning conditions of confinement remain
unresolved. However, in light of the real gains in reducing the
prison population that have been made, although even greater
reductions are required by the court, the Committee will review
each ROCA bill with more flexible consideration. The following
questions will inform this consideration:
whether a measure erodes realignment;
whether a measure addresses a crime which is directly
dangerous to the physical safety of others for which there
is no other reasonably appropriate sanction;
whether a bill corrects a constitutional infirmity or
legislative drafting error;
whether a measure proposes penalties which are
proportionate, and cannot be achieved through any other
reasonably appropriate remedy; and
whether a bill addresses a major area of public safety
or criminal activity for which there is no other
reasonable, appropriate remedy.
(More)
COMMENTS
1. Need for the Bill
According to the author:
Under existing law, a peace officer who retires after
serving the State of California for a period of more
than 120 months (or who is retiring because of a
job-incurred disability not related to a mental or
emotional disorder), may be authorized by their
department to purchase their state-issued handgun.
However, there is no system currently in place, when a
peace officer has died in the line of duty, for their
spouse to purchase their state-issued handgun.
Officers often become attached to their handgun; they
rely on them in dangerous situations, carry them on a
daily basis, and may have used them in self-defense.
Regardless the reason, an officer's handgun is
meaningful and holds value for them, and often for
their family. Allowing the widow/widower to purchase
their spouse's handgun back from the state may be a
source of comfort for the surviving spouse.
Unfortunately, this oversight in existing law has
resulted in spouses of peace officers who have died in
the line of duty being denied a chance to purchase an
heirloom for their family.
2. Firearms to Retired State Peace Officers
A person who was a state peace officer who has been duly retired
through a service retirement, or a peace officer retiring from a
job-incurred disability, and who is authorized as a retiree to
carry a concealed firearm has the ability to purchase his or her
state-issued handgun at market value or replacement cost, if
permitted by his or her department head. (Public Contracts Code
(More)
AB 685 (Achadjian)
Page 7
§ 10334(b).) Furthermore, a peace officer employed by the
state, and who is authorized to carry firearms, may purchase his
or her state-issued service firearm at the fair market value in
the officer's department head directs the department to change
its service weapon system. (Public Contracts Code § 10334(c).)
Where existing law allows a peace officer to purchase, upon
approval of his or her department head, the officer's own
state-issued handgun upon retirement or disuse of the firearm by
the department, it seems appropriate that the widow or widower
of a slain state peace officer should also be permitted to
purchase the same firearm if permitted by the officer's
department head.
3. Personal Effects of Slain Local Peace Officers :
If a local police officer or deputy sheriff is killed in the
line of duty, the employing law enforcement agency generally is
required to donate to the family of the slain officer the
personal effects of the officer, including pistols, revolvers,
or other firearms capable of being concealed upon the person
that have been rendered inoperable, and shooting medals if the
family so requests. (Government Code § 50081(c).)
4. Background Checks :
AB 685 requires that the spouse of a state peace officer killed
in the line of duty who is requesting the officer's state-issued
handgun to undergo and pass a background check to ensure that
the spouse is a person permitted to receive and possess the
handgun.
***************
AB 685 (Achadjian)
Page 8