BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SB 396
Page 1
Date of Hearing: August 21, 2013
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Mike Gatto, Chair
SB 396 (Hancock) - As Amended: May 15, 2013
Policy Committee: Public
SafetyVote:5-2
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
Yes Reimbursable: No
SUMMARY
This bill prohibits possession of high capacity ammunition
magazines, with specified exemptions for law enforcement,
armored trucks and movie props. Specifically, this bill:
1)Makes it illegal, effective July 1, 2014, to possess a high
capacity magazine capable of holding more than 10 rounds, as
specified, regardless of the date the magazine was acquired.
The offense is punishable by imprisonment in a county jail not
exceeding one year and a fine of up to $1,000, or by 16
months, two, or three years and a fine of up to $10,000,
pursuant to correctional realignment. (If a person has a prior
serious or violent felony, this offense would be a strike,
resulting in a doubling of the penalty and a state prison
commitment.)
2)Provides that any person who, prior to July 1, 2014, legally
possessed a high capacity magazine shall dispose of that
magazine by any of the following means:
a) Removing the magazine from the state.
b) Prior to July 1, 2014, selling the magazine to a
licensed gun dealer.
c) Destroying the magazine.
d) Providing the magazine to a law enforcement agency for
destruction.
FISCAL EFFECT
1)Unknown, potentially significant annual GF costs for state
prison commitments for possession of a high-capacity magazine.
SB 396
Page 2
DOJ indicates more than 500 arrests for manufacturing or sales
of high capacity magazines in 2012. For every 10 persons with
a prior serious or violent felony conviction who are convicted
of possession of a high capacity magazine, the annual GF cost
would be about $1 million in four years, assuming an average
term of four years.
2)Unknown, potentially moderate annual local incarceration costs
for local jail commitments. For every 10 persons sentenced to
county jail pursuant to correctional realignment, the annual
costs would be in the range of $250,000, assuming an average
term of 12 months.
3)Minor absorbable costs to local law enforcement to destroy
high capacity magazines turned in pursuant to this bill.
COMMENTS
Rationale . The author's goal is to prohibit possession of high
capacity magazines, not just the manufacture and sale.
According to the author, "High capacity magazines are not
designed for hunting or target shooting. High capacity
magazines are military designed devices. They are designed for
one purpose only - to allow a shooter to fire a large number
of bullets in a short period of time.
"This bill will make clear that possession of these
'mega-magazines' is also prohibited. Law enforcement officers
have told us that, because the Penal Code currently fails to
specifically prohibit possession, the law is very difficult to
enforce. This needs to be fixed and this measure addresses
that by prohibiting the possession."
1)Background. Many guns use a detachable ammunition magazine
that can accept a high capacity magazine that can hold more
than 10 rounds of ammunition. Attaching a high capacity
magazine allows a shooter to fire as many rounds as the
magazine holds, as fast as the shooter can pull the trigger. A
high capacity magazine often holds 30 rounds but some hold up
to 100 rounds. Since January 1, 2000, California has banned
the importation, manufacture or sale of high capacity
magazines.
SB 396
Page 3
The Department of Justice states that sellers circumvent the
ban on sale of these magazines by selling all the parts
necessary to construct them as repair kits, which are then
easily assembled in a matter of minutes. Because possession
is not prohibited, once the magazine is assembled, law
enforcement cannot to take action unless they can prove the
magazine was manufactured, imported or sold after the January
1, 2000 date.
2)Current Law .
a) Makes it illegal to manufacture, import, keep for sale,
offer for sale, give, or lend, a large-capacity magazine
capable of accepting more than 10 rounds, with specified
exceptions. The offense is punishable by up to one year in
a county jail, or 16 months, two, or three years pursuant
to correctional realignment. (If a person has a prior
serious or violent felony, this offense would be a strike,
resulting in a doubling of the penalty and a state prison
commitment.)
b) The federal assault weapons law, effective September 13,
1994, banned possession of assault weapons and high
capacity magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds
of ammunition, manufactured after that date. The federal
assault weapons law expired in 2004 and has not been
reenacted.
3)Fifth Amendment Takings Issues. (See policy committee
analysis.) Government has the authority to take private
property when necessary for government activities. But there
are limits on this power. If the takings issue in this bill
(no grandfathering of high capacity magazines lawfully
possessed prior to the effective date of this bill) were
litigated, the state could argue the prohibitions in this bill
do not require just compensation because it is a valid
exercise of police powers. For example, in 1979 a D.C.
district court ruled that a ban on dangerous weapons is a
valid exercise of police powers. In Fesjian v. Jefferson,
plaintiffs challenged a D.C. statute that banned the
registration of new handguns and machine guns. Any handguns or
machine guns that could not be registered had to be
surrendered to the chief of police, lawfully removed from the
District, or lawfully disposed. The court held such a taking
SB 396
Page 4
was a leegitimate exercise of legislative police power to
prevent a perceived harm, not an exercise of eminent domain
for public use.
Ultimately, however, it is difficult to predict how state
courts might rule on takings issues.
4)Support includes a lengthy and varied list of anti-gun
violence organizations, law enforcement (Alameda D.A. and
Police Department, Burbank PD, LA Sheriff's Department, Santa
Barbara D.A. and Police Department), the CA Medical
Association, The CA Federation of Teachers, the CA PTA, and
many others.
According to the LA County Sheriff's Department, "High
capacity ammunition magazines can hold upwards of 100 rounds
of ammunition and allow a shooter to rapidly fire without
reloading. The ability to fire a large number of bullets in a
short period of time escalates the number of victims and
lethality in any shooting incident. As demonstrated in 2011
when Jared Lee Loughner killed six people and wounded 13
others, including U.S. representative Gabrielle Giffords in
Arizona, bystanders were able to intervene when the gunman
stopped to reload. Likewise, eleven children were able to
escape from one of the classrooms at Sandy Hook Elementary
last December when the shooter stopped to reload.
"California has prohibited the importation, manufacture and
sale of large capacity ammunition magazines since the year
2000. This law is difficult to enforce since the date of
acquisition is nearly impossible to prove. Magazines acquired
before the ban, or illegally purchased in other states since
the ban, are usually indistinguishable. A ban on the
possession of high capacity magazines will help address this
issue."
5)Opposition includes a list of gun and sport organizations and
law enforcement (CA State Sheriffs Association).
According to the California Association of Federal Firearms
Licensees, "Most firearms sold in America today, and certainly
the highest by volume sold, such as AR-15s and semi-automatic
handguns, come standard from the factory with magazines that
hold more than ten rounds?.
SB 396
Page 5
"SB 396 is simply an unconstitutional taking of personal
property and an express infringement on the fundamental civil
rights of all Californians. The measure creates significant
criminal liability for items currently - and lawfully -
possessed by hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of
Californians."
6)Related Legislation .
a) AB 48 (Skinner) expands provisions limiting
large-capacity magazines by revising the definition of
large-capacity magazine to include conversion kits. AB 48
is pending in Senate Appropriations.
b) SB 776 (Hancock), 2009, prohibited the possession of
high capacity magazines, with exceptions. SB 776 was never
heard in the Senate.
Analysis Prepared by : Geoff Long / APPR. / (916) 319-2081