BILL ANALYSIS �
SENATE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY
Senator Loni Hancock, Chair S
2011-2012 Regular Session J
R
7
SJR 7 (Padilla)
As Introduced May 23, 2011
Hearing date: June 14, 2011
Resolution Language
SM:mc
LARGE CAPACITY MAGAZINES
HISTORY
Source: Author
Prior Legislation: SB 23 (Perata) - Chap. 129, Statutes of 1999
Support: California Chapters of the Brady Campaign to Prevent
Gun Violence; City of Stockton; Violence Prevention
Coalition of Orange County; Women Against Gun Violence;
Legal Community Against Violence
Opposition:National Rifle Association; California Rifle and
Pistol Association, Inc.
KEY ISSUE
SHOULD A RESOLUTION BE ADOPTED EXPRESSING THE SUPPORT OF THE
CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE FOR H.R. 308 AND S. 32, MEASURES TO BAN THE
IMPORTATION, POSSESSION AND TRANSFER OF MAGAZINES HOLDING MORE THAN
10 ROUNDS OF AMMUNITION?
PURPOSE
(More)
SJR 7 (Padilla)
Page 2
The purpose of this Resolution is to adopt findings and
declarations expressing the support of the California
Legislature for H.R. 308 and S. 32, which would ban large
capacity magazines.
Current law provides that, except as specified, commencing
January 1, 2000, any person in this state who manufactures or
causes to be manufactured, imports into the state, keeps for
sale, or offers or exposes for sale, or who gives, or lends, any
large-capacity magazine is punishable by imprisonment in a
county jail not exceeding one year or in the state prison for 16
months, two or three years. (Penal Code � 32310.)
Current law provides that, upon a showing that good cause
exists, the Department of Justice may issue permits for the
possession, transportation, or sale between a licensed firearms
dealer and an out-of-state client, of large-capacity magazines.
(Penal Code � 32315.)
Current law provides that, except as specified, any
large-capacity magazine is a nuisance and is subject to an
injunction against its possession, manufacture or sale, and is
subject to confiscation and summary destruction. (Penal Code �
32390.)
This Bill would make the following findings and declarations:
WHEREAS, Large capacity ammunition magazines
have been used in numerous mass shootings, including
in Tucson on January 8, 2011, Virginia Tech on April
16, 2007, Fort Hood on November 5, 2009, Columbine
High School on April 20, 1999, San Francisco at 101
California Street on July 1, 1993, and the Long Island
Railroad on December 7, 1993. In total, 91 people
died and 114 were injured in these attacks; and
WHEREAS, According to Tucson law enforcement,
large capacity ammunition magazines increased the
(More)
SJR 7 (Padilla)
Page 3
lethality of the Tucson attack on January 8, 2011. The
shooter was able to rapidly fire at least 30 shots from
one ammunition magazine, hitting 19 people, including
United States Representative Gabrielle Giffords, and
killing six others, including a 9-year-old girl and a
federal judge; and
WHEREAS, The attack was limited to the capacity
of the shooter's ammunition magazine; when it was empty
the shooter was stopped while attempting to reload
another large capacity ammunition magazine. A large
capacity ammunition magazine enabled the shooter to
fire more than three times the rounds of a standard
ammunition magazine; and
WHEREAS, Ammunition magazines containing more
than 10 rounds were banned under the Federal Assault
Weapons Act, which Congress did not renew in 2004; and
WHEREAS, Only six states and the District of
Columbia currently limit the capacity of ammunition
magazines; and
WHEREAS, On January 18, 2011, United States
Representative Carolyn McCarthy introduced H.R. 308,
the Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device Act, and
on January 25, 2011, United States Senator Frank
Lautenberg introduced S. 32, the Large Capacity
Ammunition Feeding Device Act, both of which prohibit
the transfer, possession, and import of large capacity
ammunition magazines; now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the Senate and the Assembly of the
State of California, jointly, That the Legislature of
the State of California hereby supports H.R. 308, the
Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device Act,
introduced by United States Representative Carolyn
McCarthy and S. 32, the Large Capacity Ammunition
Feeding Device Act, introduced by United States
Senator Frank Lautenberg; and be it further
(More)
SJR 7 (Padilla)
Page 4
Resolved, That the Legislature urges the
President and the Congress of the United States to
enact the Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device
Act; and be it further
Resolved, That the Secretary of the Senate
transmit copies of this resolution to the President
and Vice President of the United States, to the
Speaker of the House of Representatives, to each
Senator and Representative from California in the
Congress of the United States, and to the author for
appropriate distribution.
RECEIVERSHIP/OVERCROWDING CRISIS AGGRAVATION
For the last several years, severe overcrowding in California's
prisons has been the focus of evolving and expensive litigation.
As these cases have progressed, prison conditions have
continued to be assailed, and the scrutiny of the federal courts
over California's prisons has intensified.
On June 30, 2005, in a class action lawsuit filed four years
earlier, the United States District Court for the Northern
District of California established a Receivership to take
control of the delivery of medical services to all California
state prisoners confined by the California Department of
Corrections and Rehabilitation ("CDCR"). In December of 2006,
plaintiffs in two federal lawsuits against CDCR sought a
court-ordered limit on the prison population pursuant to the
federal Prison Litigation Reform Act. On January 12, 2010, a
three-judge federal panel issued an order requiring California
to reduce its inmate population to 137.5 percent of design
capacity -- a reduction at that time of roughly 40,000 inmates
-- within two years. The court stayed implementation of its
ruling pending the state's appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.
On May 23, 2011, the United States Supreme Court upheld the
decision of the three-judge panel in its entirety, giving
(More)
SJR 7 (Padilla)
Page 5
California two years from the date of its ruling to reduce its
prison population to 137.5 percent of design capacity, subject
to the right of the state to seek modifications in appropriate
circumstances.
In response to the unresolved prison capacity crisis, in early
2007 the Senate Committee on Public Safety began holding
legislative proposals which could further exacerbate prison
overcrowding through new or expanded felony prosecutions.
This bill does not appear to aggravate the prison overcrowding
crisis described above.
COMMENTS
1. Need for This Bill
According to the author:
California currently bans the manufacture, sale, and
use of large capacity magazines, as well as five other
states, and the District of Columbia. However, a ban
at the federal level is necessary to ensure these
magazines do not come from other states. We should
support the federal efforts to reinstate the
prohibition on large capacity magazines without delay
to protect public safety.
Senate Joint Resolution 7 would formalize California's
support for H.R. 308 and S. 32 "The Large Capacity
Feeding Device Act." The Federal act would ban large
capacity magazines for guns and rifles. In 1994
Congress passed the Violent Crime Control and Law
Enforcement Act, more commonly known as the Federal
Assault Weapons Ban. This Act included a ban on large
magazines. In 2004 however, Congress failed to renew
the Act, which ended the ban on large magazines.
Civilians have no need to own or use large capacity
(More)
SJR 7 (Padilla)
Page 6
magazines; large capacity magazines are not necessary
for hunting or self-defense. Standard hunting rifles
are usually equipped with no more than a five-round
magazine and a standard pistol magazine holds six to
10 rounds. Large capacity magazines enable shooters
to injure or kill many people quickly before
reloading. A well-trained shooter armed with a
semi-automatic pistol and large capacity magazines can
fire at a rate of more than six rounds per second, or
about 30 rounds every five seconds.
On January 8, 2011, in Tucson, Arizona, Jared Lee
Loughner used his Glock pistol equipped with a
30-round large capacity magazine to kill six people,
including a 9-year-old girl and a federal judge.
Nineteen others were injured, including U.S.
Representative Gabrielle Giffords. The shooter used a
large capacity magazine to rapidly fire 31 bullets.
He was only stopped when attempting to reload. The
large magazine enabled Loughner to fire three times
the amount of bullets as a regular magazine.
2. Federal Law on Large Capacity Magazines
The federal assault weapons law (Violent Crime Control and Law
Enforcement Act, H.R. 3355 , Pub.L. 103-322 ), became effective on
September 13, 1994, and banned the possession of "assault
weapons" and "large capacity ammunition feeding devices,"
defined as a magazine capable of holding more than ten rounds of
ammunition, manufactured after that date. That law expired in
2004 and has not been reenacted.
3. Proposed Federal Legislation: H.R. 308 and S. 32
H.R. 308 and S. 32, its companion measure introduced in the
Senate, would provide that importation, possession or transfer
of a large capacity ammunition feeding device would be
punishable by up to 10 years in prison, a fine of up to
$250,000, or both. A large capacity magazine is defined as "a
(More)
SJR 7 (Padilla)
Page 7
magazine, belt, drum, feed strip, or similar device that has a
capacity of, or that can be readily restored or converted to
accept, more than 10 rounds of ammunition; but does not include
an attached tubular device designed to accept, and capable of
operating only with, .22 caliber rimfire ammunition."
4. Effects of the Federal Ban on Assault Weapons and Large
Capacity Magazines
A 2004 report by the University of Pennsylvania on the effects
of the federal assault weapons ban stated, "The few available
studies suggest that attacks with semiautomatics - including AWs
(assault weapons) and other semiautomatics equipped with LCMs
(large capacity magazines) - result in more shots fired, more
persons hit, and more wounds inflicted per victim than do
attacks with other firearms." (An Updated Assessment of the
Federal Assault Weapons Ban: Impacts on Gun Markets and Gun
Violence, 1994-2003, Woods, Roth, Jerry Lee Center of
Criminology University of Pennsylvania (2004).) That same
report found:
LCMs are used in crime much more often than AWs and
accounted for 14% to 26% of guns used in crime prior to
the ban;
AWs and other guns equipped with LCMs tend to
account for a higher share of guns used in murders of
police and mass public shootings, though such incidents
are very rare.
�T]he decline in AW use was offset throughout at
least the late 1990s by steady or rising use of other
guns equipped with LCMs in jurisdictions studied
(Baltimore, Milwaukee, Louisville, and Anchorage). The
failure to reduce LCM use has likely been due to the
immense stock of exempted pre-ban magazines, which has
been enhanced by recent imports.
Because the ban has not yet reduced the use of LCMs
in crime, we cannot clearly credit the ban with any of
(More)
SJR 7 (Padilla)
Page 8
the nation's recent drop in gun violence. However, the
ban's exemption of millions of pre-ban AWs and LCMs
ensured that the effects of the law would occur only
gradually. Those effects are still unfolding and may
not be fully felt for several years into the future,
particularly if foreign, pre-ban LCMs continue to be
imported into the U.S. in large numbers. (Id.)
(More)
5. Mass Killings Involving Large Capacity Magazines
(List compiled by the Violence Policy Center, Washington, D.C.
http://www.vpc.org/fact_sht/VPCshootinglist.pdf )
SHOULD THIS RESOLUTION BE ADOPTED?
6. Argument in Opposition
The National Rifle Association states:
H.R. 308/S. 32 would severely violate the fundamental,
individual right to keep and bear arms for
self-defense. It would also put honest Americans at
risk of prosecution:
" The Supreme Court has ruled that the Second
Amendment protects the fundamental, individual right
to keep and bear arms for self-defense, especially
arms that are commonly owned.4 Firearms designed to
use magazines that hold more than 10 rounds are among
the most commonly owned self-defense firearms today.
For example, 40 percent of self-defense uses of
firearms are accomplished with semi-automatic
handguns. Most semi-automatic handguns are able to
use magazines that hold more than 10 rounds; many are
designed specifically to use such magazines.
" Private citizens choose magazines that hold more
than 10 rounds for the same reason police officers do:
to improve their odds in defensive situations.
One-third of aggravated assault and robbery victims
are attacked by multiple offenders, according to the
Department of Justice. Sometimes, criminal
attackers-particularly those who are under the
(More)
SJR 7 (Padilla)
Page 10
influence of drugs or alcohol, or who are heavily
clothed-do not stop when struck by a single bullet.
And many shots fired at criminals miss their mark.
For example, in gunfights with criminals, the police
miss more often than they hit.
" H.R. 308 would put tens of millions of Americans at
risk of prosecution. Because virtually no existing
magazines bear any markings that show when they were
made, H.R. 308 would require that magazines made after
the ban be marked to distinguish them from pre-ban
magazines. However, the bill's "grandfather clause"
for possession of pre-ban magazines would only create
an affirmative defense-forcing defendants to prove
that they possessed the magazines before the ban.
This nearly impossible requirement is a major
difference from the 1994 ban, which put the burden of
proof on the government.
***************