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 ****