BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY
Senator Loni Hancock, Chair S
2013-2014 Regular Session B
9
1
6
SB 916 (Correa)
As Amended: April 24, 2014
Hearing date: April 29, 2014
Penal Code
JRD:sl
FIREARMS
HISTORY
Source: California Association of Firearms Retailers
Prior Legislation: None
Support: National Shooting Sports Foundation
Opposition:None known
KEY ISSUE
SHOULD AMENDMENTS BE MADE TO CALIFORNIA'S "NOT UNSAFE" HANDGUN LAWS?
PURPOSE
The purpose of this bill is to: (1) allow a firearm to be
reinstated on California's "not unsafe" handgun roster if the
firearm fell off the roster for any reason besides the firearm
failing retesting, as specified; and, (2) allow a dealer to sell
firearms that are no longer on California's not unsafe handgun
roster if certain requirements are met.
(More)
SB 916 (Correa)
PageB
Current law defines an unsafe handgun as any pistol, revolver,
or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person,
which lacks various specified safety mechanisms and does not
pass specified safety tests. (Penal Code § 31910.)
Existing law provides that commencing January 1, 2001, no
"unsafe handgun" may be manufactured or sold in California by a
licensed dealer, except as specified, and requires that the
Department of Justice (DOJ) prepare and maintain a roster of
handguns which are determined not to be unsafe handguns.
Private party sales (used or previously owned) and transfers of
handguns through a licensed dealer are exempted from those
restrictions. (Penal Code §§ 27545, 32000, et seq., § 32110.)
Existing law provides that any person in California who
manufactures or causes to be manufactured, imports into the
state for sale, keeps for sale, offers or exposes for sale,
gives, or lends any unsafe handgun shall be punished by
imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year. (Penal
Code § 32000(a).)
Existing law does the following:
Defines "unsafe handgun" as any pistol, revolver, or
other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person,
as specified, which lacks various safety mechanisms,
including a chamber load indicator and magazine disconnect,
and does not pass listed tests, as specified. (Penal Code
§ 31910.)
Requires any concealable firearm manufactured in
California, or intended to be imported for sale, kept for
sale, or offered for sale to be tested within a reasonable
period of time by an independent laboratory, certified by
the state DOJ to determine whether it meets required safety
standards, as specified. (Penal Code § 32010.)
Requires DOJ, on and after January 1, 2001, to compile,
publish, and thereafter maintain a roster listing all of
the pistols, revolvers, and other firearms capable of being
concealed upon the person that have been tested by a
certified testing laboratory, have been determined not to
(More)
SB 916 (Correa)
PageC
be unsafe handguns, and may be sold in this state, as
specified. The roster shall list, for each firearm, the
manufacturer, model number, and model name. (Penal Code §
32015.)
Provides that DOJ may charge every person in California
who is licensed as a manufacturer of firearms, as
specified, and any person in California who manufactures or
causes to be manufactured, imports into California for
sale, keeps for sale, or offers or exposes for sale any
pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being
concealed upon the person in California, an annual fee not
exceeding the costs of preparing, publishing, and
maintaining the roster of firearms determined not to be
unsafe, and the costs of research and development, report
analysis, firearms storage, and other program
infrastructure costs, as specified. (Penal Code § 32015.)
Existing law requires that, commencing January 1, 2010, all
semiautomatic pistols that are not already listed on the roster
be designed and equipped with a microscopic array of characters
that identify the make, model, and serial number of the pistol,
etched or otherwise imprinted in two or more places on the
interior surface or internal working parts of the pistol, and
that are transferred by imprinting on each cartridge case when
the firearm is fired, provided that the DOJ certifies that the
technology used to create the imprint is available to more than
one manufacturer unencumbered by any patent restrictions. On
May 17, 2013, DOJ issued that certification. (Penal Code §
31910(b)(7).)
Existing law allows the Attorney General to annually retest up
to 5 percent of the handgun models that are listed on the
roster. When retesting the Attorney General is required to:
Obtain from retail or wholesale sources, or both,
three samples of the handgun model to be retested;
Select the certified laboratory to be used for the
retesting;
Use the type of ammunition recommended by the
(More)
SB 916 (Correa)
PageD
manufacturer in the user manual for the handgun, as
specified; and,
Conduct the retest in the same manner as the
testing prescribed in Sections 31900 and 31905 (drop
safety and firing requirement for handguns.)
If the handgun model fails retesting, the Attorney General is
required to remove the handgun model from the roster. (Penal
Code § 32020.)
Existing law allows a handgun removed as a result of retesting
to be reinstated on the roster if all of the following are met:
The manufacturer petitions the Attorney General for
reinstatement of the handgun model;
The manufacturer pays the DOJ for all of the costs
related to the reinstatement testing of the handgun model,
including the purchase price of the handguns, prior to
reinstatement testing;
The reinstatement testing of the handguns shall be in
accordance with the provisions of 32020;
Three handgun sample are tested only once for
reinstatement. If the sample fails it may not be retested;
and,
The manufacturer provides the Attorney General with the
complete testing history for the handgun model.
If the handgun model successfully passes testing for
reinstatement, and if the manufacturer of the handgun is
otherwise in compliance, as specified, the Attorney General is
required to reinstate the handgun model on the roster.
(Penal Code § 32025.)
Existing law allows "similar" firearms to be listed on the
roster. Specifically, a firearm is deemed to satisfy the roster
(More)
SB 916 (Correa)
PageE
requirements if another firearm made by the same manufacturer is
already listed and the unlisted firearm differs from the listed
firearm in one or more of the following features:
Finish;
Material from which the grips are made;
The shape or texture of the grips, so long as the
difference in grip shape or texture does not in any way
alter dimensions, material, linkage or function of the
magazine well, the barren, the chamber, or any of the
components of the firing mechanism of the firearm; or,
Any other purely cosmetic changes.
(Penal Code § 32030.)
Existing law requires that a manufacturer, who wants to place a
"similar" on the roster, to provide the DOJ all of the
following:
The model designation of the listed firearm;
The model designation of each firearm that the
manufacturer seeks to have listed; and,
A statement, under oath, that each unlisted firearm
differs from the listed firearms in one or more of the
above listed ways.
The DOJ may require a manufacturer to provide to the DOJ any
model for which listing is sought to determine whether the model
complies with the requirements of this section.
(Penal Code § 32030.)
Existing law specifies that the following are exempt from roster
requirements:
The manufacture in California, or importation into this
state, of any prototype pistol, revolver, or other firearm
(More)
SB 916 (Correa)
PageF
capable of being concealed upon the person when the
manufacture or importation is for the sole purpose of
allowing an independent laboratory certified by DOJ to
conduct an independent test to determine whether that
pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being
concealed upon the person is prohibited, inclusive, and, if
not, allowing the department to add the firearm to the
roster of pistols, revolvers, and other firearms capable of
being concealed upon the person that may be sold in this.
The importation or lending of a pistol, revolver, or
other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person by
employees or authorized agents of entities determining
whether the weapon is prohibited by this section.
Firearms listed as curios or relics, as defined in
federal law.
The sale or purchase of any pistol, revolver, or other
firearm capable of being concealed upon the person, if the
pistol, revolver, or other firearm is sold to, or purchased
by, the DOJ, any police department, any sheriff's official,
any marshal's office, the Youth and Adult Correctional
Agency, the California Highway Patrol, any district
attorney's office, or the military or naval forces of this
state or of the United States for use in the discharge of
their official duties. Nor shall anything in this section
prohibit the sale to, or purchase by, sworn members of
these agencies of any pistol, revolver, or other firearm
capable of being concealed upon the person. (Penal Code §
32000(b).)
Existing law contains numerous additional exemptions to the safe
handgun requirements, including an exemption for any transfer
that is not required to be made through a licensed dealer. This
exemption alone includes within it another approximately 25
exemptions. (Penal Code §§ 32110, 27850, et seq.)
This bill would require that a handgun model removed from the
(More)
SB 916 (Correa)
PageG
roster for any reason not specified in (d) of section 32020,<1>
including failure to pay the annual fee to maintain the firearm
on the roster, to be reinstated on the roster if:
The manufacturer petitions the Attorney General for
reinstatement of the handgun model.
The testing is done in the same manner as the testing
prescribed in sections 31900 and 31905 (drop safety and
firing requirement for handguns).
The manufacturer provides the Attorney General with the
complete testing history of the handgun model.
A handgun model reinstated pursuant to this new provision would
only be required to meet the standards that were in place when
the model was originally placed on the list.
This bill would provide for the sale, loan or transfer of any
pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed
upon a person by a person licensed pursuant to sections 26700 to
26915,<2> if:
The licensee is in lawful possession of the firearm.
The firearm was previously listed on the roster pursuant
to section 32015, but was removed from the roster for any
reason not specified in section 32020.
The licensee possessed the firearm within California
prior to the firearm being removed from the roster.
The licensee notified the DOJ of the number of firearms
meeting this cratering within 30 days of the firearm being
removed from the roster.
This bill would allow a firearm to be considered "similar" if it
differs from the listed firearm because it has a minor feature
---------------------------
<1> Penal Code 32020(d) requires the Attorney General to remove
a handgun model from the roster if it fails retesting.
<2> Sections 26700 to 26915 relate to firearms dealer licensing
requirements.
(More)
SB 916 (Correa)
PageH
that does not in any way alter the dimensions, material,
linkage, or functioning of the magazine well, the barrel, the
chamber, or any of the components of the firing mechanism of the
firearm.
This bill makes a number of uncodified legislative 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
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 that 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.
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 requiring the state to reduce its prison
population to 137.5 percent of design capacity. The State
submitted that the, ". . . population in the State's 33 prisons
has been reduced by over 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
(More)
SB 916 (Correa)
PageI
42,000 inmates since 2006 . . . ." Plaintiffs opposed the
state's motion, arguing 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 % inmate population cap by December 31,
2013.
The Three-Judge Court then ordered, on April 11, 2013, 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." On September 16, 2013, the State asked the
Court to extend that deadline to December 31, 2016. In
response, the Court extended the deadline first to January 27,
2014 and then February 24, 2014, and ordered the parties to
enter into a meet-and-confer process to "explore how defendants
can comply with this Court's June 20, 2013 Order, including
means and dates by which such compliance can be expedited or
accomplished and how this Court can ensure a durable solution to
the prison crowding problem."
The parties were not able to reach an agreement during the
meet-and-confer process. As a result, the Court ordered
briefing on the State's requested extension and, on February 10,
2014, issued an order extending the deadline to reduce the
in-state adult institution population to 137.5% design capacity
to February 28, 2016. The order requires the state to meet the
following interim and final population reduction benchmarks:
143% of design bed capacity by June 30, 2014;
141.5% of design bed capacity by February 28, 2015; and,
137.5% of design bed capacity by February 28, 2016.
If a benchmark is missed the Compliance Officer (a position
created by the February 10, 2016 order) can order the release of
inmates to bring the State into compliance with that benchmark.
In a status report to the Court dated February 18, 2014, the
state reported that as of February 12, 2014, California's 33
(More)
SB 916 (Correa)
PageJ
prisons were at 144.3 percent capacity, with 117,686 inmates.
8,768 inmates were housed in out-of-state facilities.
The ongoing prison overcrowding litigation indicates that prison
capacity and related issues concerning conditions of confinement
remain unresolved. While real gains in reducing the prison
population have been made, even greater reductions may be
required to meet the orders of the federal court. Therefore,
the Committee's consideration of ROCA bills -bills that may
impact the prison population - will be informed by the following
questions:
Whether a measure erodes realignment and impacts the
prison population;
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.
COMMENTS
1. Need for This Bill
The author states, in part:
The bill will also allow manufacturers whose handguns
fell off the Roster for reasons other than failing to
pass safety certifications to have these firearms
placed back on the Roster. These handguns will be
subject to retesting and must meet the requirements of
(More)
SB 916 (Correa)
PageK
the law at the time the handgun was originally
submitted for testing. . .
Manufacturers do not renew the Roster listings for
existing handgun models for a number of reasons.
Unfortunately, dealers are often unaware that a
manufacturer will not renew a model's Roster listing
until the handgun has already fallen off the Roster.
Once a handgun is no longer listed on the Roster, it
cannot be lawfully sold to the public. As a result,
when firearms fall off the Roster, California firearm
dealers are often left with inventory they cannot
sell. These handguns are unchanged, no different and
no less safe than the previous day when handgun was
listed on the Roster. Nevertheless, California dealers
in possession of these safety-approved handguns are
not able to sell their remaining inventory.
This bill resolves this issue by allowing dealers to
sell off the remaining handguns they have in their
inventory after that model handgun falls off the
Roster for any reason other than failing to pass the
required safety testing.
2. " Not Unsafe" Handgun Law and the Effect of This Bill
SB 15 (Polanco), Chapter 248, Statutes of 1999, made it a
misdemeanor for any person in California to manufacture, import
for sale, offer for sale, give, or lend any unsafe handgun, as
defined, with certain specific exceptions. SB 15 defined an
"unsafe handgun" as follows: (a) does not have a requisite
safety device; (b) does not meet specified firing tests; and,
(c) does not meet a specified drop safety test.
SB 489 (Scott), Chapter 500, Statutes of 2003, added to the
unsafe handgun law requirements for semiautomatic pistols that
became effective in 2006 and 2007. The legislation requires
that for a new semiautomatic center-fire pistol firearm to be
added to the roster it has to be equipped with a chamber load
(More)
SB 916 (Correa)
PageL
indicator<3> and a magazine disconnect<4> (if it has a
detachable magazine). The legislation also requires that all
semiautomatic rimfire pistols, with a detachable magazine, have
a magazine disconnect. All firearms that were on the not unsafe
handgun list prior to the effective dates were essentially
grandfathered in. Those who supported SB 489 argued:
It is just common sense that handgun should include a
chamber load indicator that makes it clear whether the
weapon is loaded. Since cheap disposable cameras can
clearly count down the number of pictures left, it is
inexcusable that handguns do not indicate when a
bullet is in the chamber. Magazine safety disconnects
would also greatly reduce the number of unintentional
accidental shootings by ensuring that when the
magazine is removed the gun will not fire.
(http://leginfo.ca.gov/pub/03-04/bill/sen/sb_0451-500/sb_489
_cfa_20030630_ 103204_asm_comm.html.)
AB 1471 (Feuer), Chapter 572, Statutes of 2007, added
"microstamping" as a requirement for a firearm to be placed on
the not unsafe handgun roster beginning January 1, 2010,
"provided that the Department of Justice certifies that the
technology used to create the imprint is available to more than
one manufacturer unencumbered by any patent restrictions." As
discussed above, the Department of Justice issued the
certification on May 17, 2013. Like the other provisions, the
"microstamping" requirement did not apply to firearms already on
the roster. The author of AB 1471 provided the rationale for
the additional requirement,
AB 1471 will help law enforcement identify and
apprehend armed gang members before they inflict more
harm on others, including innocent bystanders. In
----------------------
<3> A chamber load indicator is a device that plainly indicates
that a cartridge is in the firing chamber. (Penal Code §
16380.)
<4> A magazine disconnect is a mechanism that prevents a
semiautomatic pistol from operating when a detachable magazine
is not inserted in the semiautomatic pistol. (Penal Code §
16900.)
(More)
SB 916 (Correa)
PageM
instances of drive-by shootings, where the only
evidence at the crime scene may be a spent cartridge
case, law enforcement could quickly obtain a critical
lead.
(http://leginfo.ca.gov/pub/07-08/bill/asm/ab_1451-1500/ab_14
71_cfa_20070625_ 130933_sen_comm.html.)
This legislation would create two exceptions to the not unsafe
firearms laws. First, it would allow a firearm, that was on the
roster and fell off due to, for example, a lack of payment, to
be added back to the roster if:
The manufacturer petitions the Attorney General for
reinstatement of the handgun model.
It passes the drop safety and firing requirement for
handguns.
The manufacturer provides the Attorney General with the
complete testing history of the handgun model.
A handgun model reinstated under this proposed provision would
only be required to meet the standards that were in place when
the model was originally placed on the list. For example, a
semi-automatic pistol that was placed on the roster in 2002 and
fell of the list in 2013 due to a lack of payment, could be
added back to the roster without a chamber load indicator,
magazine disconnect and microstamping.
(More)
The second exception would apply to instances in which a dealer
has firearms that were on the roster when the dealer purchased
them, but, after the date of purchase, they were removed from
the roster (for any reason except DOJ removing a model because
it fails retesting). Without this provision, dealers would
only be able to sell these firearms to those who are exempt from
the roster, including the DOJ, any police department, any
sheriff's official, any marshal's office, the Youth and Adult
Correctional Agency, the California Highway Patrol, any district
attorney's office, or the military and any sworn members of
those agencies.
This legislation, additionally, would allow a firearm to be
considered a "similar" and be placed on the roster if it differs
from the listed firearm because it has a minor feature that does
not in any way alter the dimensions, material, linkage, or
functioning of the magazine well, the barrel, the chamber, or
any of the components of the firing mechanism of the firearm.
The word "minor" is ambiguous as used in this amendment.
SHOULD ANY FIREARM THAT IS REMOVED FROM THE "NOT UNSAFE" ROSTER
HAVE TO COMPLY WITH ALL CURRENT REQUIREMENTS TO BE PLACED BACK
ON THE ROSTER?
SHOULD FIREARMS DEALERS BE PERMITTED TO SELL FIREARMS THAT WERE
ON THE ROSTER WHEN THEY PURCHASED THEM, BUT SUBSEQUENTLY WERE
REMOVED FROM THE ROSTER?
***************
(More)