BILL ANALYSIS
SB 15
Page 1
Date of Hearing: June 23, 1999
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Carole Migden, Chairwoman
SB 15 (Polanco) - As Amended: June 16, 1999
Policy Committee: Public
SafetyVote: 5-2
Urgency: No State Mandated Local
Program:YesReimbursable: No
SUMMARY :
This bill:
1)Makes it a misdemeanor, effective 1/1/01, to manufacture,
sell, give, or lend any handgun that is deemed an "unsafe
handgun," as defined, with specified exceptions.
2)Defines "unsafe handguns" as handguns that fail specified
firing and drop safety tests and do not have a specified
safety device.
3)Requires licensed gun manufacturers and every person who sells
guns, to certify under penalty of perjury, that the
concealable guns they sell are not unsafe handguns, as
defined. (Perjury is punishable by 2, 3, or 4 years in state
prison.)
4)Requires independent laboratories to conduct the safety tests
and requires the Department of Justice (DOJ) to certify these
laboratories and maintain a roster of guns that pass the
tests.
5)Authorizes the DOJ to charge gun dealers an annual fee to
generate revenue not exceeding the costs of maintaining the
roster and states intent that the DOJ pursue an internal loan
from special fund revenues to cover start-up costs, to be
repaid with the fee proceeds within six months.
FISCAL EFFECT
1) Moderate annual costs - fully offset by fees charged to
SB 15
Page 2
labs and manufacturers - for the DOJ to certify laboratories
and compile and maintain a roster of handguns. The DOJ
estimates these costs at $507,000 for 1999-00; $322,000 for
2000-01; and $250,000 in out-years.
2) Indeterminable, probably minor, annual GF costs for
increased state incarceration for perjury violations.
3) Unknown, potentially significant nonreimbursable local
incarceration costs.
COMMENT
1)Suggested amendments . The Attorney General, who supports this
measure, suggests three technical amendments:
a) Expanding the fee imposed on gun dealers to cover the
full range of costs to the DOJ, including gun storage,
specified research and development, and report analysis.
b) Extending the deadline for testing lab certification,
from July 1, 2000 to October 1, 2000, to provide additional
time for the adoption of regulations and for laboratories
to submit applications.
c) Recasting the curios and relics exemption provisions,
which would save the DOJ considerable one-time data
processing costs.
1)Rationale. Proponents contend that California should not
manufacture guns that do not meet safety standards set by the
federal government. Statistics from the Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco and Firearms show these guns account for four of five
guns traced by law enforcement in criminal acts.
According to the author, "SB 15 is a common sense, responsible
gun law. It requires that weapons be a certain size, that
they fire when they are supposed to, and that they not fire
when dropped. The size requirements are based on federal
import standards, the drop test is based on U.S. Department of
Justice quality standards for law enforcement weapons, and the
misfire test is a slightly more lenient standard than
currently used by law enforcement agencies."
1)Federal law bans the import of firearms that do not meet
SB 15
Page 3
specified requirements (primarily barrel and frame size), and
are not suitable for sporting purposes. Federal law, however,
does not ban these firearms if they are manufactured
domestically.
1)Related legislation . SB 1500 (Polanco, 1998), almost identical
to this bill, was vetoed by Gov. Wilson.
AB 505 (Wright), pending a hearing in the Senate Public Safety
Committee, provides that, effective July 1, 2001, every
concealed gun effective July 1, 2000, manufactured in
California or imported into California for sale, meet
specified minimum safety standards. AB 505 applies only to
guns manufactured or imported into California after the
effective date of the bill.
1)Proponents . Handgun Control, Inc., states, "There are no
federal quality or safety standards for domestically
manufactured handguns. Guns are the only product in America
exempt from regulation by the Consumer Product Safety
Commission or by any other agency. The gun lobby has
repeatedly pressured Congress to continue to exempt
domestically made handguns from the safety standards that have
applied to imported handguns for more than 30 years."
1)Opponents . The California Sporting Goods Association states,
"No firearm, when used correctly, has ever harmed the user.
Firearms are made to exacting standards. Requiring a series of
additional tests to prove how well they are made will do
nothing to improve their safety and reliability? Requiring
out-of-production firearms to meet abstract performance tests
will place an onerous burden on anyone trying to buy or sell
one. If the product is no longer made, how can samples be
provided for testing? Further, if owners of discontinued
models can no longer sell them lawfully, there will be a great
temptation to dispose of them on the illicit market."
Analysis Prepared by : Geoff Long / APPR. / (916)319-2081