BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 1663
Page 1
Date of Hearing: March 1, 2016
Counsel: Gabriel Caswell
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY
Bill Quirk, Chair
AB
1663 (Chiu) - As Introduced January 14, 2016
SUMMARY: Amends the definition of an assault weapon as it
pertains to rifles and defines "detachable magazines" and "fixed
magazines". Specifies that rifles which are not assault weapons
have fixed magazines. Specifically, this bill:
1)Classifies a semiautomatic centerfire rifle that does not have
a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept no more than 10
rounds as an assault weapon. Eliminates the following
characteristics from the definition of what constitutes an
assault weapon, a semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has the
capacity to accept a detachable magazine and has at least one
of the following:
a) a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the
action of the weapon;
b) a thumbhole stock;
c) a vertical handgrip;
d) a folding or telescoping stock;
e) a grenade launcher or flare launcher;
AB 1663
Page 2
f) a flash suppressor; or,
a) a forward handgrip.
2)Requires registration with the Department of Justice (DOJ) of
any assault weapon that does not have a fixed magazine and was
lawfully possessed between January 1, 2001, and December 31,
2016, including those weapons with an ammunition feeding
device that can be removed readily from the firearm with the
use of a tool, and who, on or after January 1, 2017, lawfully
possesses that firearm. Registration of the firearm must
occur by July 1, 2018.
EXISTING LAW:
1)Contains legislative findings and declarations that the
proliferation and use of assault and .50 BMG rifles poses a
threat to the health, safety, and security of all citizens of
California. (Pen. Code § 30505.)
2)States legislative intent to place restrictions on the use of
assault weapons and .50 BMG rifles and to establish a
registration and permit procedure for their lawful sale and
possession. (Pen. Code § 30505.)
3)Defines an "assault weapon" as one of certain specified rifles
and pistols (Penal Code Section 30510) or as (Pen. Code §
30515):
a) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has the capacity
to accept a detachable magazine and has at least one of the
following:
i) A pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath
the action of the weapon;
ii) A thumbhole stock;
iii) A vertical handgrip;
AB 1663
Page 3
iv) A folding or telescoping stock;
v) A grenade launcher or flare launcher;
vi) A flash suppressor; or,
vii) A forward handgrip.
b) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has a fixed
magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds;
c) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has an overall
length of less than 30 inches;
d) A semiautomatic pistol that has the capacity to accept a
detachable magazine and has at least one of the following:
i) A threaded barrel, capable of accepting a flash
suppressor, forward handgrip, or silencer;
ii) A second handgrip;
iii) A shroud that is attached to, or partially or
completely encircles, the barrel that allows the bearer
to fire the weapon without burning his or her hand,
excepting a slide that encloses the barrel; or,
iv) The capacity to accept a detachable magazine at some
location outside of the pistol grip.
e) A semiautomatic pistol with a fixed magazine that has
the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds;
f) A semiautomatic shotgun that has both of the following:
i) A folding or telescoping stock; and,
ii) A pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath
the action of the weapon, thumbhole stock, or vertical
handgrip.
g) A semiautomatic shotgun that has the ability to accept a
AB 1663
Page 4
detachable magazine; and
h) Any shotgun that has a revolving cylinder.
4)Defines a "detachable magazine" as any ammunition feeding
device that can be removed readily from the firearm with
neither disassembly of the firearm action nor use of a tool
being required. A bullet or ammunition cartridge is
considered a tool. Ammunition feeding device includes any
belted or linked ammunition, but does not include clips, en
bloc clips, or stripper clips that load cartridges into the
magazine. (11 California Code of Regulations § 5469.)
5)Provides that unlawful possession of an assault weapon is an
alternate felony-misdemeanor and shall be punished by
imprisonment in a county jail for a period not exceeding one
year, or by imprisonment pursuant to Penal Code Section
1170(h) (16 months, two or three years). Notwithstanding the
above, a first violation of these provisions is punishable by
a fine not exceeding $500 if the person was found in
possession of no more than two firearms and certain specified
conditions are met. (Pen. Code § 30605.)
6)Provides that any person who within California manufactures,
imports into California, offers for sale, or who gives or
lends any assault weapon with specified exceptions is guilty
of a felony punishable by imprisonment in state prison for
four, six, or eight years. (Pen. Code § 30600.)
7)Exempts the DOJ, law enforcement agencies, military forces,
and other specified agencies from the prohibition against
sales to, purchase by, importation of, or possession of
assault weapons or .50 BMG rifles. (Pen. Code § 30625.)
8)Requires that any person who lawfully possesses an assault
weapon, as specified, must register the firearm with DOJ, as
specified. (Pen. Code § 30900 et. seq.)
FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown
COMMENTS:
AB 1663
Page 5
1)Author's Statement: According to the author, "This debate is
not new to this Legislature or to the state at large. Just
three years ago, loopholes and limitations in the state's
assault weapons ban were examined in the wake of the tragic
2012 shooting rampage at Sandy Hook Elementary School where 20
children were shot dead. Now again in 2016 the state is
returning to this issue in the aftermath of the San Bernardino
shooting last December. Since 2013 the number of shootings has
only increased and by some measures, the nation is facing a
mass shooting every day. Only one factor in all these
situations has not changed: the choice of these shooters to
use weapons with the ability to detach a magazine and rapidly
reload. Clearly the limitations in the state's assault weapons
ban are only getting worse, and it is only a question of when
will the next mass shooting occur in California given the
current abilityto purchase legally a firearm that functions as
an assault weapon.
"Despite the express intent of the California Roberti-Roos
Assault Weapons Control Act (AWCA), originally adopted in
1989, gun manufacturers have repeatedly modified the firearms
they produce to evade the law and continue the sale of
so-called 'California compliant' weapons. In 1999, the
Legislature broadened the original statute in response to
technological developments in the manufacturing of
semiautomatic weapons. However, in recent years, the gun
industry has developed another workaround of the state ban
with the creation of the "bullet button," which allows for
magazines to be detached and replaced just as easily as with
illegal assault weapons. Because a device or tool is needed
to detach the magazine, such firearms are legal under the
current language of the state's assault weapons ban. The
ability to rapidly reload these weapons dramatically increases
their lethality during a mass shooting. One of the two
semiautomatic rifles used in San Bernardino had a bullet
button.
"AB 1663 addresses the heart of the limitations in the AWCA
and fulfills its original intent: to prohibit firearms that
have the ability to detach a magazine and rapidly reload
resulting in what ultimately is the power of the shooter to
AB 1663
Page 6
have virtually unlimited killing capacity. This bill prohibits
the future sale, purchase, manufacture, importation, or
transfer in California of semi-automatic rifles that can
accept detachable magazines. Requiring truly fixed magazines
will reduce the potential of these firearms to seriously kill
and maim people in a short amount of time. The loophole that
allows guns meant for war zones to proliferate in our cities,
our neighborhoods, and our schools will be closed. The bullet
button and any other gun industry manufacturing tricks that
undermine the AWCA will be rendered irrelevant. With a goal of
saving countless lives, AB 1663 will take assault weapons that
are legal in name only out of our communities."
2)California's Assault Weapons Ban: The origin of and
subsequent modifications to the assault weapons ban in
California are described by the federal Court of Appeal in the
following extended excerpt from Silveira v. Lockyer, 312 F.3d
1052 (9th Cir. 2002) (as amend. Jan. 27, 2003).
In response to a proliferation of shootings involving
semi-automatic weapons, the California Legislature passed the
Roberti-Roos Assault Weapons Control Act (AWCA) in 1989. The
immediate cause of the AWCA's enactment was a random shooting
earlier that year at the Cleveland Elementary School in
Stockton, California. An individual armed with an AK-47
semi-automatic weapon opened fire on the schoolyard, where 300
pupils were enjoying their morning recess. Five children ages
six to nine were killed, and one teacher and 29 children were
wounded.
The California Assembly met soon thereafter in an
extraordinary session called for the purpose of enacting a
response to the Stockton shooting. The legislation that
followed, the AWCA, was the first legislative restriction on
assault weapons in the nation, and was the model for a similar
federal statute enacted in 1994. The AWCA renders it a felony
offense to manufacture in California any of the semi-automatic
weapons specified in the statute, or to possess, sell,
transfer, or import into the state such weapons without a
permit. The statute contains a grandfather clause that
permits the ownership of assault weapons by individuals who
AB 1663
Page 7
lawfully purchased them before the statute's enactment, so
long as the owners register the weapons with DOJ. The
grandfather clause, however, imposes significant restrictions
on the use of weapons that are registered pursuant to its
provisions. Approximately 40 models of firearms are listed in
the statute as subject to its restrictions. The specified
weapons include "civilian" models of military weapons that
feature slightly less firepower than the military-issue
versions, such as the Uzi, an Israeli-made military rifle; the
AR-15, a semi-automatic version of the United States
military's standard-issue machine gun, the M-16; and the
AK-47, a Russian-designed and Chinese-produced military rifle.
The AWCA also includes a mechanism for the Attorney General
to seek a judicial declaration in certain California superior
courts that weapons identical to the listed firearms are also
subject to the statutory restrictions.
The AWCA includes a provision that codifies the legislative
findings and expresses the legislature's reasons for passing
the law: "The Legislature hereby finds and declares that the
proliferation and use of assault weapons poses a threat to the
health, safety, and security of all citizens of this state.
The Legislature has restricted the assault weapons specified
in [the statute] based upon finding that each firearm has such
a high rate of fire and capacity for firepower that its
function as a legitimate sports or recreational firearm is
substantially outweighed by the danger that it can be used to
kill and injure human beings. It is the intent of the
Legislature in enacting this chapter to place restrictions on
the use of assault weapons and to establish a registration and
permit procedure for their lawful sale and possession. It is
not, however, the intent of the Legislature by this chapter to
place restrictions on the use of those weapons which are
primarily designed and intended for hunting, target practice,
or other legitimate sports or recreational activities."
In 1999, the Legislature amended the AWCA in order to broaden
its coverage and to render it more flexible in response to
technological developments in the manufacture of semiautomatic
weapons. The amended AWCA retains both the original list of
AB 1663
Page 8
models of restricted weapons, and the judicial declaration
procedure by which models may be added to the list. The 1999
amendments to the AWCA statute add a third method of defining
the class of restricted weapons: the amendments provide that
a weapon constitutes a restricted assault weapon if it
possesses certain generic characteristics listed in the
statute. Examples of the types of weapons restricted by the
revised AWCA include a "semiautomatic, center-fire rifle that
has a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10
rounds," and a semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has the
capacity to accept a detachable magazine and also features a
flash suppressor, a grenade launcher, or a flare launcher.
The amended AWCA also restricts assault weapons equipped with
"barrel shrouds," which protect the user's hands from the
intense heat created by the rapid firing of the weapon, as
well as semiautomatic weapons equipped with silencers.
3)Changes This Bill Makes to the AWCA: As the Court explained,
in 1999 the assault weapons ban was amended to expand the
definition of an assault weapon to include a definition by the
generic characteristics, specifically, to include a
"semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has the capacity to
accept a detachable magazine" in addition to one of several
specified characteristics, such as a grenade launcher or flash
suppressor. [SB 23 (Perata) Statutes of 1999, Chapter 129,
Section 7 et seq.] SB 23 was enacted in response to the
marketing of so-called "copycat" weapons - firearms that were
substantially similar to weapons on the prohibited list but
differed in some insignificant way, perhaps only the name of
the weapon, thereby defeating the intent of the ban.
SB 23's generic definition of an assault weapon was intended
to close the loophole in the law created by its definition of
assault weapons as only those specified by make and model.
Regulations promulgated after the enactment of SB 23 define a
detachable magazine as any ammunition feeding device that can
be removed readily from the firearm with neither disassembly
of the firearm action nor use of a tool being required. A
bullet or ammunition cartridge is considered a tool. In
response to this definition, a new feature has been developed
by firearms manufacturers to make military-style,
AB 1663
Page 9
high-powered, semi-automatic rifles "California compliant,"
the bullet button.
In 2012, researchers at the nonprofit Violence Policy Center
in Washington, D.C. released a paper describing the phenomenon
of the bullet button and its effect on California's assault
weapons ban:
The "Bullet Button"-Assault Weapon Manufacturers'
Gateway to the California Market
Catalogs and websites from America's leading assault
rifle manufacturers are full of newly designed
"California compliant" assault weapons. Number one and
two assault weapon manufacturers Bushmaster and DPMS,
joined by ArmaLite, Colt, Sig Sauer, Smith & Wesson,
and others are all introducing new rifles designed to
circumvent California's assault weapons ban and are
actively targeting the state in an effort to lift
now-sagging sales of this class of weapon. They are
accomplishing this with the addition of a minor design
change to their military-style weapons made possible
by a definitional loophole: the "bullet button."
[Please see the Appendix beginning on page six for
2012 catalog copy featuring "California compliant"
assault rifles utilizing a "bullet button" from
leading assault weapon manufacturers.]
California law bans semiautomatic rifles with the
capacity to accept a detachable ammunition magazine
and any one of six enumerated additional assault
weapon characteristics (e.g., folding stock, flash
suppressor, pistol grip, or other military-style
features).
High-capacity detachable ammunition magazines allow
shooters to expel large amounts of ammunition quickly
AB 1663
Page 10
and have no sporting purpose. However, in California
an ammunition magazine is not viewed as detachable if
a "tool" is required to remove it from the weapon. The
"bullet button" is a release button for the ammunition
magazine that can be activated with the tip of a
bullet. With the tip of the bullet replacing the use
of a finger in activating the release, the button can
be pushed and the detachable ammunition magazine
removed and replaced in seconds. Compared to the
release process for a standard detachable ammunition
magazine it is a distinction without a difference.
(Bullet Buttons, The Gun Industry's Attack on
California's Assault Weapons Ban, Violence Policy
Center, Washington D.C., May 2012. )
One approach to this issue, taken by SB 249 (Yee) in 2012 and
SB 47 (Yee) of 2014, as well as AB 1664 (Levine) of this
session, amends the statute to replace the language regarding
detachable magazines to instead prohibit "a semiautomatic,
centerfire rifle that does not have a fixed magazine but has
any one of the existing six prohibited characteristics." AB
1664 also defines a "detachable magazine" as "an ammunition
feeding device that can be removed readily from the firearm
without disassembly of the firearm action, including an
ammunition feeding device that can be removed readily from the
firearm with the use of a tool." In other words, a
semiautomatic rifle could have a detachable magazine, as long
as that rifle did not also have any of the six prohibited
features or that rifle could have the prohibited features as
long as it had a fixed magazine.
This bill would take a different approach. This bill would do
away with the six prohibited features in current law. The
rationale for this is that a rifle outfitted with the features
that make a gun look like a military-style weapon, e.g.,
pistol grip, flash suppressor, collapsible stock, etcetera,
may be more dangerous than one that lacks these features, but
these features may not pose the greatest public safety
concern. Conversely, the lack of these features does not make
a rifle less lethal than one that has them.
AB 1663
Page 11
Proponents argue the feature that makes one semi-automatic
rifle capable of killing or wounding more people in a shorter
amount of time than another is the capacity to rapidly reload
large amounts of ammunition. For example, proponents note
that, in 2011, a man opened fire on teenagers at a summer
youth camp in Norway, killing 69 and wounding another 110,
using a high-powered, semi-automatic rifle, the .223 caliber
Ruger Mini-14. That rifle had none of the features listed in
California's definition of an assault weapon and it is a
perfectly legal weapon in California; supporters of this bill
submit that what made that weapon such an effective tool of
mass murder is the fact that the killer was able to rapidly
reload one magazine after another of ammunition.
Under this bill, even a "featureless" semiautomatic rifle,
like the Mini-14, would be required to have a fixed magazine,
holding no more than 10 rounds of ammunition.
4)Constitutionality: The Constitutionality of California's
assault weapons ban has been upheld by both the California
Supreme Court [Kasler v. Lockyer, 23 Cal. 4th 472 (2000)] and
the federal Court of Appeal. [Silveira v. Lockyer, 312 F.3d
1052 (9th Cir. 2002) (as amend. Jan. 27, 2003).] While the
California Supreme Court rejected allegations that the law
violated equal protection guarantees, the separation of
powers, and failed to provide adequate notice of what was
prohibited under the law, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal
decision in Silveira was based largely on its interpretation
of the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. The
Second Amendment of the Constitution states, "A well regulated
Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the
right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be
infringed." (United States Const. Amend. 2.) The Silveira
Court based its ruling on the widely held interpretation of
the Second Amendment known as the "collective rights" view,
that the right secured by the Second Amendment relates to
firearm ownership only in the context of a "well regulated
militia." [Silveira v. Lockyer, 312 F.3d 1052, 1086 (9th Cir.
Cal. 2002).]
AB 1663
Page 12
The Silveira Court's interpretation of the meaning of the
Second Amendment has since been squarely rejected by the U.S.
Supreme Court in District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570
(2008) and McDonald v. City of Chicago, 130 S. Ct. 3020
(2010). Whether the Heller and McDonald cases mean that
California's assault weapons ban violates the Second Amendment
and is, therefore, unconstitutional is a different matter.
In Heller, the Supreme Court rejected the "collective rights"
view of the Second Amendment and, instead, endorsed the
"individual rights" interpretation, that the Second Amendment
protects the right of each citizen to firearm ownership.
After adopting this reading of the Second Amendment, the
Supreme Court held that federal law may not prevent citizens
from owning a handgun in their home. (District of Columbia v.
Heller, 554 U.S. 570, 683-684.) In the McDonald case, the
Supreme Court extended this ruling to apply to laws passed by
the 50 states. (McDonald v. City of Chicago, 130 S. Ct. 3020,
3050.)
In deciding that the Second Amendment guaranteed the right to
own a handgun in the home for self-defense, the Supreme Court
stated that this ruling has its limitations:
"Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment
is not unlimited. From Blackstone through the 19th-century
cases, commentators and courts routinely explained that the
right was not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever
in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose. For
example, the majority of the 19th-century courts to consider
the question held that prohibitions on carrying concealed
weapons were lawful under the Second Amendment or state
analogues. Although we do not undertake an exhaustive
historical analysis today of the full scope of the Second
Amendment, nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast
doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of
AB 1663
Page 13
firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding
the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools
and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and
qualifications on the commercial sale of arms."
5)Governor's Veto Message of 2013's SB 374 (Steinberg):
Governor Brown vetoed very similar legislation in 2013 with
the following veto message:
"I am returning Senate Bill 374 without my signature.
"The State of California already has some of the strictest gun
laws in the country, including bans on military-style assault
rifles and high-capacity ammunition magazines.
"While the author's intent is to strengthen these
restrictions, this bill goes much farther by banning any
semi-automatic rifle with a detachable magazine. This ban
covers low-capacity rifles that are commonly used for hunting,
firearms training, and marksmanship practice, as well as some
historical and collectible firearms. Moreover, hundreds of
thousands of current gun owners would have to register their
rifles as assault weapons and would be banned from selling or
transferring them in the future.
"Today I signed a number of bills that strengthen California's
gun laws, including AB 48, which closes a loophole in the
existing ban on dangerous high-capacity magazines. I also
signed AB 1131 and SB 127, which restrict the ability of
mentally unstable people to purchase or possess guns.
"I don't believe that this bill's blanket ban on
semi-automatic rifles would reduce criminal activity or
enhance public safety enough to warrant this infringement on
gun owners' rights."
6)Argument in Support: According to the California Chapters of
the Brady Campaign, "The California Legislature has struggled
with an assault weapons ban since the Stockton school yard
shootings in 1989. The Roberti-Roos Act was passed that year,
but minor changes to the named assault weapons allowed the
AB 1663
Page 14
firearm industry to easily evade the intent of the law. The
assault weapon law was expanded in 1991 and again in 1999,
when the Legislature updated the law by banning weapons with
detachable magazines and one or more military-style features.
However, once again the industry has been able to exploit a
loophole in the regulations that allows for the continued sale
and possession of fully functional assault weapons. Assembly
Bill 1663 seeks to definitively close the loopholes in a
manner that will prevent the firearm industry from continuing
to market these lethal military-style weapons in California.
"Specifically, AB 1663 will prohibit the future sale or
transfer in California of specified semi-automatic rifles that
can accept detachable magazines, including those with
"bullet-button" or other features that allow the rapid reload
of the weapon. The bill will amend the current definition of
illegal "assault weapon" to include a semiautomatic centerfire
rifle that does not have a fixed magazine with the capacity to
accept no more than ten rounds.
"Mass shootings perpetrated by unbalanced individuals using
assault weapons are reported all too often in the news. As
was tragically demonstrated at Sandy Hook School and in the
recent San Bernardino shooting, the ability to rapidly reload
adds enormously to the carnage. An exchangeable magazine can
be reloaded in one second and is the key feature that enables
the rapid rate of continuous fire that can kill many people
very quickly. Requiring a fixed magazine on future sales or
transfers of long guns would, over time, decrease the
lethality in future mass shootings.
"California has tried to ban assault weapons for over
twenty-five years and gun manufacturers will undoubtedly
continue to look for ways to exploit or evade the intent of
the law. AB 1663 will finally control this situation with a
clear, simplified, and strengthened assault weapons law.
Current owners of semiautomatic centerfire rifles with
detachable magazines will be able to keep their weapons and
law abiding hunters and sport shooters will be minimally
impacted.
"Assembly Bill 1663 requires any person who lawfully acquired
AB 1663
Page 15
an assault weapon as defined in the bill between January 1,
2001 and December 31, 2016 and still possesses the firearm to
register the weapon by July 1, 2018 with the California
Department of Justice. These records will significantly
increase the data in the Armed Prohibited Persons System
(APPS) program and enhance public safety. Additionally, the
records will assist law enforcement efforts to trace firearms
and solve gun crime. In 2009, of the over 22,000 guns that
were used in crime and recovered, the Department reports that
31 percent were long guns. Furthermore, the Department has
found that half the illegal firearms recovered from prohibited
person in the APPS program are long guns, many of which would
be considered assault weapons.
"Rifles with detachable magazines present an unacceptable risk
of a high body count in any shooting incident. Prohibiting
future sale and transfer of these rifles and capturing
ownership records is clearly in the interest of public safety
and would not impact the ability to defend oneself or to go
hunting. Thank you again for carrying this measure."
7)Argument in Opposition: According to the Firearms Policy
Coalition, "AB 1663 seeks to vastly expand the Assault Weapons
Control Act, regulations that ban (by several methods,
including make and model, unction, cosmetic features, and
caliber) popular, constitutionally-protected firearms that are
in common use for lawful purposes across the United States.
"AB 1663 would move the goal posts yet again for the millions
of law abiding residents and visitors who have quite
reasonably, given the volume struggled for years to keep up
with the frenetic pace of California's ever-increasing firearm
regulations?
"And, while we fully acknowledge that protecting
constitutional rights has never been the Legislature's primary
concern (at least when it is concerned with rights it does not
like), we would be remiss if we did not note that, should AB
1663 be passed and approved by the governor, it will
undoubtedly be challenged on Second and Fifth Amendment
grounds."
AB 1663
Page 16
8)Related Legislation: SB 1664 (Levine), would redefine what
constitutes an assault weapon in order to close the bullet
button loophole. SB 1664 would also require registration of
weapons which now fall under the new definition but which
previously were not prohibited. SB 1664 is scheduled for
hearing in Assembly Public Safety today.
9)Prior Legislation:
a) SB 47 (Yee), of the 2013-2014 Legislative Session, would
have closed the bullet button loophole by redefining an
assault weapon in statute as 'a semiautomatic, centerfire
rifle that does not have a fixed magazine' and has any one
of several specified features. SB 47 was held on the
Assembly Appropriations Committee suspense file.
b) SB 374 (Steinberg), of the
2013-2014LlegislativeSsession, would have closed the bullet
button loophole by redefining an assault weapon as it
pertains to rifles and defines "detachable magazines" and
"fixed magazines." Specifies that rifles which are not
assault weapons have fixed magazines. SB 347 was vetoed by
the Governor.
c) SB 249 (Yee), of the 2011-12 Legislative Session, would
have prohibited any person from importing, making, selling,
loaning, transferring or possessing any conversion kit
designed to convert certain firearms with a fixed magazine
into firearms with a detachable magazine. SB 249 was held
in the Assembly Appropriations Committee suspense file.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:
Support
California Attorney General (Sponsor)
California Chapters of the Brady Campaign
California Lieutenant Governor Gavin Newsom
Coalition Against Gun Violence
Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence
Physicians for Social Responsibility
AB 1663
Page 17
United States Senator Dianne Feinstein
Youth Alive
Opposition
California Sportsman's Lobby
California State Sheriffs' Association
Crossroads of the West
Firearms Policy Coalition
National Rifle Association
National Shooting Sports Foundation
Outdoor Sportsmen's Coalition of California
Safari Club International
2 private individuals
Analysis Prepared
by: Gabriel Caswell / PUB. S. / (916) 319-3744