BILL ANALYSIS
SB 130
Page 1
Date of Hearing: August 16, 1999
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Carole Migden, Chairwoman
SB 130 (Hayden) - As Amended: June 24, 1999
Policy Committee: Public
SafetyVote: 6-0
Urgency: No State Mandated Local
Program:YesReimbursable: No
SUMMARY :
This bill, tombstoned the Aroner/Scott/Hayden Firearms Safety
Act, requires the Attorney General (AG) to implement safety
standards for gun safety devices and requires that all guns
manufactured, sold or transferred by a licensed gun dealer in
California include an approved gun safety device and a safety
warning label. Specifically, this bill:
1)Requires, effective January 1, 2002, all guns sold or
transferred in California by a licensed gun dealer, including
private transfers through a dealer, to be accompanied by a
safety device approved by the AG and a warning label that
states:
"WARNING - Children are attracted to and can operate firearms
that can cause severe injuries or death. Prevent child access
by always keeping guns locked away when not in use. If you
keep a loaded firearm where a child obtains and improperly
uses it, you may be fined or sent to prison."
2)Requires the AG, by January 1, 2000, to begin developing
regulations to implement minimum safety standards for gun
safety devices and gun safes to reduce the risk of gun-related
injuries. Requires the AG to adopt and issue regulations and
standards for safety devices and report to the Legislature by
January 1, 2001. The standards are to take effect January 1,
2002.
3)Requires the Department of Justice (DOJ) to certify
laboratories to test gun safety devices to verify
compliance and to compile and publish a roster of approved
SB 130
Page 2
safety devices that meet DOJ standards. The DOJ is authorized
to charge a fee to any participating laboratory to cover
certification costs.
4)Requires the DOJ to compile, publish, and maintain a roster of
all safety devices and gun safes certified as meeting the DOJ
standards. Authorizes the AG, after January 1, 2002, to order
recall and replacement of any safety device that does not
conform to the standards and warnings required by this bill.
5)Requires law enforcement investigating an incident to report
to the Department of Health Services (DHS) any incident in
which a child suffered an unintentional or self-inflicted
gunshot wound.
6)Makes a violation of this bill punishable by a fine of $1,000;
a second violation is punishable by a fine of $1,000 and a
30-day sales and manufacturing suspension; and a third
violation results in a permanent loss of the ability to sell
or manufacture guns.
FISCAL EFFECT :
1)Significant costs - at least $250,000 - to the DOJ for the
cost of developing and implementing gun safety device
regulations and standards, reporting to the Legislature, and
compiling, publishing and maintaining a roster of certified
safety devices meeting DOJ standards.
The DOJ states that these costs will be covered by the $1 gun
transaction fee authorized in this measure.
2)Potentially state-reimbursable costs for requiring local law
enforcement agencies to report to the DHS, any incident in
which a child suffered an unintentional or self-inflicted
gunshot wound.
3)Unknown significant costs for the certification of labs, fully
offset by fees paid by participating labs.
4)The cost for testing the safety devices would be borne by the
gun manufacturer or dealer.
5)Indeterminable indirect state and local savings to the extent
SB 130
Page 3
safety devices reduce medical and law enforcement costs. The
authors contend that the average hospitalization cost for a
gunshot victim is in the range of $20,000 and the average cost
of investigating a gunshot injury is about $1,000.
COMMENTS :
1)Rationale . According to the authors, by preventing injuries,
gun safety devices would save millions of dollars via reduced
medical costs.
2)Is the local report to the DHS necessary ? Requiring local law
enforcement to report gunshot wounds to the DHS will create
local costs. The goal of the report is not clear.
3)Should DOJ be required to certify labs biennially? The bill
does not provide for updating certification.
4)Prior Legislation . AB 1124 (Aroner), of the 1997-98
Legislative Session, required a person licensed to sell guns
to provide each buyer a trigger lock. SB 1550 (Hayden), of the
1997-98 Legislative Session, required gun dealers to offer
use-limitation devices to gun purchasers. Both bills were
vetoed.
5)Opposition . The California Rifle and Pistol Association
contends that "AB 106 is too complex in its provisions, and
would be much simpler, and no doubt equally as effective, to
just require that firearms sold by a dealer be accompanied by
a device that is reliable in preventing the firearm for which
it was intended from being discharged by an unauthorized
user."
PORAC states that "?making the dealer purchase a lock and
provide it with the firearm does not guarantee the purchaser
of the firearm is going to use the device."
Analysis Prepared by : Geoff Long / APPR. / (916)319-2081