BILL ANALYSIS
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 202|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 445-6614 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 202
Author: Knox (D), et al
Amended: 4/6/99 in Assembly
Vote: 21
SENATE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE : 5-1, 6/8/99
AYES: Vasconcellos, Burton, Johnston, McPherson, Polanco
NOES: Rainey
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 9-4, 6/28/99
AYES: Johnston, Alpert, Bowen, Burton, Escutia, Karnette,
McPherson,
Perata, Vasconcellos
NOES: Johnson, Kelley, Leslie, Mountjoy
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 42-30, 4/22/99 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Handgun purchases - limit to one per individual
per 30-day
period
SOURCE : Author
DIGEST : This bill generally limits purchases of handguns
from licensed firearms dealers in California to no more
than one per person per month, as specified.
ANALYSIS : Existing law governs the sale and purchase of
firearms in California. Various restrictions are placed on
the purchase of firearms, including a pistol, revolver, or
firearm capable of being concealed upon the person, such as
CONTINUED
AB 202
Page
2
a background check, a waiting period, and generally the
presentation of a basic firearm safety certificate.
Transactions between private parties are subject to those
restrictions as well and must be made through a licensed
dealer or a law enforcement agency in smaller counties.
Persons in prohibited categories may not purchase or
possess firearms at all. (Penal Code sections 12070 --
12086)
This bill prohibits any person from applying to purchase
more than one concealable firearm from a licensed firearms
dealer within a 30-day period and provides that no delivery
shall be made to any person who has made an application to
purchase more than one concealable firearm within 30 days,
as follows:
1.Provides that no person shall make an application to
purchase more than one pistol, revolver or other firearm
capable of being concealed on the person from a licensed
firearms dealer within any 30-day period. Exempts
private party transactions (which must be made through a
licensed firearms dealer or a sheriff's office in smaller
counties); law enforcement; entertainment/theatrical
companies; licensed collectors; and the exchange,
replacement or return of a concealable firearm under
specified conditions.
2.Provides the following penalties for making an
application for more than one concealable firearm in any
30-day period:
A. A first violation is an infraction punishable by a
fine of $50;
B. A second violation is an infraction punishable by a
fine of $100; and,
C. A third or subsequent violation is a misdemeanor
(punishable in the county jail up to six months, or by
a fine not greater than $1,000, or both, pursuant to
Penal Code section 19).
3. Provides that each application to purchase a
concealable firearm in violation of these provisions
AB 202
Page
3
shall be deemed a separate offense.
4. Prohibits delivery of such firearms by a licensed
dealer to any person who has made an application to
purchase more than one pistol, revolver, or other firearm
capable of being concealed on the person within any
30-day period when the dealer is notified by the
Department of Justice that a person has made more than
one application to purchase such firearms within that
time period (punishable as a misdemeanor/felony).
5. Makes related changes and additions to law, including a
requirement that licensed firearms dealers must post a
notice about the provisions of this bill.
Existing Law Pertaining to Firearms Purchases
The sale, loan or transfer of a firearm must generally be
conducted by or through a state licensed firearms dealer or
through a local sheriff's department in counties of less
than 200,000 persons. As part of this process, the 10-day
waiting period/background check/handgun safety certificate
are required prior to delivery of the firearm. In
addition, handguns are centrally registered with DOJ as
part of this process.
A violation of these provisions as to handguns is an
alternate felony/misdemeanor punishable by up to one year
in the county jail or by imprisonment in the state prison
punishable by 16 months, two or three years.
Bulk purchase limits are aimed at so-called "straw
transactions". A straw transaction usually involves "A"
buying the gun for "B" because "B" may not legally buy the
gun. These types of transactions may occur in various
circumstances. Typically, they occur because the true
purchaser is under age 21, has a specified prior
conviction, has a mental disorder, or is not a resident.
Straw transactions violate state law
Straw transactions also violate federal law. It is
reported that people travel to a state with weaker gun
laws, acquire guns in that state, and then transport them
AB 202
Page
4
back into their state of residency.
The federal Gun Control Act is designed to, among other
provisions, require residents of a state to acquire
firearms in their own state of residence. It does so by
two means. First, a person cannot acquire a firearm in one
state and then personally transport it into his/her own
state of residency. He or she cannot receive the gun
unless the gun is being processed through a federal
firearms dealer in that state, who must follow state law on
gun deliveries.
In addition, a person who is not a federal firearms
licensee cannot deliver a firearm to a resident of another
state who is not federally licensed. The only way that
such a transaction can occur is if the transaction is
brokered through a federal firearms licensee in the
recipient's state of residence.
The 1994 federal crime bill made it an enhanced criminal
offense for an individual to go into another state to
acquire firearms and then return to his or her own state
and sell those firearms. (See 18 USC 923(m).)
Assumptions about Limits on Purchases of Handguns
The State of Virginia enacted a "one-handgun-a-month" law
in 1993 (before the Federal Brady Bill, which required at
least a five day waiting period plus a background check for
states without such requirements). That state had weak
restrictions on handgun sales and it has been stated that
gun traffickers from New York City routinely traveled to
Virginia to purchase quantities of weapons to take back for
illegal sale in other states. Purchases of more than one
handgun per 30-day period in Virginia is allowed upon
completion of an "enhanced" background check when the
purchase is for lawful business or personal use, for
purposes of collectors, bulk sales and purchases from
estates, to replace a lost or stolen weapon, and similar
situations.
Supporters of limits on purchases of handguns assume that
the Virginia limits and the limits in this bill would only
affect a very small proportion of legitimate handgun
AB 202
Page
5
purchasers. A family of two adults could still purchase 24
handguns a year under the provisions of both this bill and
the Virginia law.
Multiple Handgun Purchases in California
Information provided by the Department of Justice indicates
that in 1998, there were 141,823 lawful handgun purchases
in California which involved one transferee and one handgun
in a single calendar month. There were 12,989 transactions
involving one tranferee who obtained two handguns in single
calendar month; 2,282 involved three handguns in a single
month transferred to the same individual; and 91 transfers
which involved one transferee and more than 10 handguns in
a single calendar month. Other multiple handgun
transactions include one person in July of 1998 who
obtained 41 to 80 handguns.
Those figures include persons who would be exempted by this
bill, such as a licensed collector, and transactions
between private parties which were lawfully made through a
licensed dealer or a sheriff's office.
Previous information for the Department of Justice provided
to this Committee indicated that in 1992 there were 2,784
persons who purchased five or more handguns and in 1993
there were 2,877 persons who purchased five or more
handguns.
Since this bill would allow twelve handgun purchases a
year, it would appear that this bill would have affected a
relatively small number of purchasers in any given year.
It could, of course, inconvenience some of those purchasers
if their desire is to purchase all twelve handguns at one
time.
The DOJ figures also indicate that in 1993, 245 individuals
purchased 12 or more handguns. The number of persons who
purchased 20 or more handguns dwindles rapidly with only 83
purchasing more than 20 handguns in 1993. However, one
person did purchase 84 handguns that year.
Local Ordinances Limiting Handgun Purchases
AB 202
Page
6
Some local ordinances limiting handgun purchases in local
areas have been enacted in California. For example,
background provided by the author includes a copy of Los
Angeles Municipal Code Section 55.14 on which is
handwritten "1/27/99 LA Council approved." That ordinance
is very similar to AB 202 as currently amended, although
the LA ordinance does contain an exemption for "collector's
series or a bulk purchase from an estate" and the penalty
dealer violations is assumed to be a misdemeanor. AB 202
does not contain that exemption and the penalty for dealer
violations in the bill is an alternate misdemeanor/felony.
Government Code section 53071 declares the ". . . intention
of the Legislature to occupy the whole field of regulation
of the registration or licensing of commercially
manufactured firearms as encompassed by the provisions of
the Penal Code, and such provisions shall be exclusive of
all local regulations, relating to registration or
licensing of commercially manufactured firearms . . ."
which would indicate that AB 202 would preempt such local
ordinances. The City of Los Angeles is in support of AB
202, presumably because a local ordinance would not stop
city residents from purchasing handguns outside of the city
or any other city which individually has adopted such a
restriction.
Prior legislation :
SB 513 (Hayden) passed the Senate 21-16 on 5/27/97 -
provisions subsequently deleted in the Assembly.
AB 532 (Knox) - died on Assembly Floor inactive file
(1997-98).
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: Yes
Fiscal Impact (in thousands)
Major Provisions 1999-2000 2000-01
2001-02 Fund
Misdemeanor Unknown increased mandated, non-
Local
AB 202
Page
7
Reimbursable costs for county
jail
And probation
Felony Unknown increased costs, probably
General
Less than $150 annually, for
incarcer-
ation in state prison
SUPPORT : (Verified 6/29/99)
City of Oakland
Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors
League of California Cities
California Teachers Association
City of West Hollywood
Handgun Control
City of Los Angeles
Los Angeles Police Department
California Nurses Association
California Peace Officers' Association
California Police Chiefs' Association
ACLU
Legal Community Against Violence
Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office
Attorney General's Office
California Church IMPACT
California Child, Youth and Family Coalition
Violence Prevention Coalition of Greater Los Angeles
Trauma Foundation
Orange County Citizens for the Prevention of Gun Violence
California District, American Academy of Pediatrics
Mayor, City of Hayward
Gray Panthers of Northern California
City of Alameda
Women Against Gun Violence
Physicians for a Violence-free Society
Individual letters
OPPOSITION : (Verified 6/29/99)
California Shooting Sports Association
California Rifle and Pistol Association
National Rifle Association
AB 202
Page
8
Gun Owners of California
Gun/Truth Association
Peace Officers Research Association of California
Individual letters
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the author, there is
no limit on the number of handguns that may be purchased
from a dealer. This makes it easy for straw purchasers to
acquire guns for another person or for street dealers to
acquire guns legitimately. Handguns make up an
overwhelming share of crime guns and a significant number
are traceable to dealer transactions. AB 202 will curtail
the illegal gun market, disarm criminals, and save lives by
preventing multiple purchases of handguns through
legitimate channels. Preventing multiple purchases takes
the profit out of black market sales and puts gun
traffickers and straw purchasers out of business.
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION : The National Rifle Association
opposition to this bill includes:
[AB 32] proposes that no person could "take title" to
more than one handgun during a 30-day period.
However, [AB 32] would also exempt a daunting list of
people, agencies, firearms and specific types of
transactions from that restriction. The underlying
notions that drive AB 32 are:
- The existing background check, registration and
waiting period for handguns is ineffective and/or
- Law enforcement makes little or no effort to
investigate "straw" sales.
Once again the rationale for a new gun control bill is
the "failure of the old".
The NRA goes on to ask why so many peace officers,
including for example "a county water district security
officer (830.34 Penal Code)" who collects guns should be
able to purchase unlimited handguns while a concealed
weapons permit holder or a retired peace officer could not.
The NRA has also suggested that if "straw" sales are of
AB 202
Page
9
concern, multiple purchases of handguns could involve a
20-day waiting period, a set time and date for transfer,
and notification to local law enforcement about when the
transfer is scheduled to take place.
The presumption is that a purchaser buying more than one
relatively expensive handgun is not as likely to be engaged
in straw sales as a purchaser of relatively inexpensive
handguns.
The California Rifle and Pistol Association asserts that
existing penalties are already sufficient to deter illegal
sales in general.
ASSEMBLY FLOOR :
AYES: Alquist, Aroner, Bock, Calderon, Cardenas, Cedillo,
Corbett, Correa, Davis, Dutra, Firebaugh, Floyd,
Gallegos, Hertzberg, Honda, Jackson, Keeley, Knox, Kuehl,
Lempert, Longville, Lowenthal, Mazzoni, Migden, Nakano,
Papan, Reyes, Romero, Scott, Shelley, Soto, Steinberg,
Strom-Martin, Thomson, Torlakson, Vincent, Washington,
Wayne, Wesson, Wiggins, Wildman, Villaraigosa
NOES: Aanestad, Ackerman, Ashburn, Baldwin, Bates, Battin,
Baugh, Briggs, Campbell, Cardoza, Cox, Dickerson, Florez,
Frusetta, Granlund, Havice, House, Kaloogian, Leonard,
Maldonado, Margett, McClintock, Olberg, Oller, Robert
Pacheco, Runner, Strickland, Thompson, Wright, Zettel
NOT VOTING: Brewer, Cunneen, Ducheny, Leach, Machado,
Maddox, Rod Pacheco, Pescetti
RJG:jk 6/30/99 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****