BILL ANALYSIS Ó
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 140|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: SB 140
Author: Leno (D) and Steinberg (D), et al.
Amended: 3/4/13
Vote: 27 - Urgency
SENATE BUDGET & FISCAL REVIEW COMMITTEE : 14-0, 3/4/13
AYES: Leno, Emmerson, Anderson, Beall, Berryhill, Block,
DeSaulnier, Hancock, Hill, Jackson, Monning, Roth, Wright,
Wyland
NO VOTE RECORDED: Nielsen, Price
SUBJECT : Budget Act of 2012: firearms
SOURCE : Author
DIGEST : This bill appropriates $24 million from the Dealers
Record of Sale (DROS) Special Account to the Department of
Justice (DOJ) for costs associated with regulatory and
enforcement of illegal possession of firearms by prohibited
persons.
ANALYSIS : Existing law authorizes the DOJ to utilize the DROS
fee, which is imposed upon every transfer or sale of a firearm
in California for firearms related regulatory activities,
including enforcement activities related to possession.
This bill:
1. Appropriates $24 million from the DROS Special Account to
the DOJ for costs associated with regulatory and enforcement
CONTINUED
SB 140
Page
2
of illegal possession of firearms by prohibited persons.
2. Requires the DOJ report to the Joint Legislative Budget
Committee no later than March 1, 2015 and no later than March
1, each year thereafter, all of the following:
The degree to which the backlog of weapons has been
reduced or eliminated.
The number of weapons confiscated through Armed
Prohibited Persons System (APPS) enforcement efforts.
The number of agents hired by the DOJ to conduct APPS
enforcement.
The number of individuals cleared off of the APPS list
annually through
March 1, 2015 and March 1, 2019.
The number of individuals added to the APPS list
annually.
Breakdown of why each person on the APPS is prohibited
from possessing a firearm.
Number of contacts made during the APPS enforcement
efforts.
Information regarding task forces or collaboration
with local law enforcement on reducing the APPS backlog.
The reason for the individual to have been included on
the APPS list.
1. Sunsets the above reporting requirements on March 1, 2019.
2. Makes a series of declarations and findings, including:
"California is the first and only state in the nation
to establish an automated system for tracking handgun and
assault weapon owners who might fall into a prohibited
status. The online database, which is currently known as
the Armed Prohibited Persons System (APPS),
cross-references all handgun and assault weapon owners
SB 140
Page
3
across the state against criminal history records to
determine persons who have been, or will become,
prohibited from possessing a firearm subsequent to the
legal acquisition or registration of a firearm or assault
weapon."
"The list of armed prohibited persons in California
grows by about 15 to 20 people per day. There are
currently more than 19,000 armed prohibited persons in
California. Collectively, these individuals are believed
to be in possession of over 34,000 handguns and 1,590
assault weapons. Neither the Department of Justice nor
local law enforcement has sufficient resources to
confiscate the enormous backlog of weapons, nor can they
keep up with the daily influx of newly prohibited
persons."
Prior legislation . SB 819 (Leno), Chapter 743, Statutes of
2011, provided that the DOJ may use dealer record of sale funds
for costs associated with its firearms-related regulatory and
enforcement activities regarding the possession as well as the
sale, purchase, loan, or transfer of firearms, as specified.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: Yes Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: No
According to the Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Committee:
This bill appropriates $24 million from the DROS special account
to the DOJ for firearms-related regulatory and enforcement
activities.
The funding in this bill is intended to supplement, not
supplant, the $22.9 million from the DROS Special Account
included in the 2013-14 Budget Act to be utilized by the DOJ.
This bill does not specify a period that the appropriation shall
be available for encumbrance. In accordance with Government
Code Section 16340, this appropriation is available for three
years after the date upon which it first became available for
encumbrance.
SUPPORT : (Verified 3/6/13)
SB 140
Page
4
Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General
AFSCME
Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence
California Statewide Law Enforcement Association
Chief Probation Officers of California
City of Los Angeles
Coalition Against Gun Violence
County of Los Angeles
Violence Prevention Coalition
Women Against Gun Violence
OPPOSITION : (Verified 3/6/13)
California Association of Firearms Retailers
California Rifle and Pistol Association
California Sportsman's Lobby, Inc.
Crossroads of the West Gun Shows
National Rifle Association of America
National Shooting Sports Foundation
Outdoor Sportsmen's Coalition of California
Safari Club International
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the DOJ:
Because of a lack of resources, there are currently more than
20,000 armed prohibited persons statewide, including dangerous
felons, violent misdemeanor offenders and individuals who have
been adjudicated mentally ill. These individuals are believed
to hold up to 39,140 handguns and 1,679 assault weapons.
Every year there are an additional 3,000 prohibited person
added to the list. Despite their best efforts, local and
state law enforcement agencies do not have the funding or
resources to keep up with this influx.
For the vision of APPS to be fully realized, more resources
are necessary-SB 140 provides those resources. Specifically,
SB 140 will appropriate 24 million dollars in surplus special
fund money (Dealer Record of Sales Account) to DOJ, for the
specific purpose of hiring more staff to go out and take
firearms away from people who cannot legally have them. To
this end, SB 140 will help make communities safer by providing
funding to take the preventative step of removing firearms
from known, dangerous individuals.
SB 140
Page
5
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION : The National Shooting Sports
Foundation, Inc. (NSSF) writes:
While NSSF supports the objective of removing firearms from
possession of those on the Armed Prohibited Persons List, we
strongly oppose the use of the Dealers Record of Sale (DROS)
funds for this purpose.
It is clear that there should be more focus on keeping
firearms and other weapons out of the hands of the mentally
ill, including those with severe emotional problems, persons
taking mind altering prescription drugs, and criminals who are
already prohibited by law from possessing them.
The Department of Justice has stated that it estimates there
are about 19,000 people on the California Armed Prohibited
Persons list that illegally possess a total 40,000 firearms.
It has further estimated that it would take about $25 million,
50 new agents, and about 3 years to disarm the people now on
the prohibited persons list.
There does, in fact, need to be substantive ongoing
improvements in how the prohibited persons list is
administered by the Department if it is to be an effective
tool in keeping firearms out of the hands of those prohibited
from possessing them.
In addition, the criminal justice alignment (AB 109) has
increased the potential for violence, including that involving
the use or possession of a firearm, by allowing the early
release of violent persons back into society and by allowing
the downgrading of penalties for many firearms offenses for
which a person can be incarcerated [Penal Code Section
1170(h)]. This may cause the prohibited persons list backlog
to expand even further.
Although dealing with these issues is important, it should not
be funded by the DROS fees paid by lawful buyers of firearms
for the purpose of funding their own firearms eligibility
background checks.
The behavior of criminals and others that has resulted in them
being placed on the prohibited persons list, and the new
prohibited list problems created by those released early from
SB 140
Page
6
incarceration, or not charged with a serious crime because of
AB 109, should not be made the financial responsibility of
lawful payers of DROS fees.
It would be inappropriate to fund SB 140 by using DROS fees.
Financing the administration of the Armed Prohibited Persons
list is not the purpose of DROS fees.
The fact that the amount of the DROS fees charged to firearms
buyers has been excessive resulting in a surplus does not
provide justification to use the money for SB 140 or other
non-DROS purposes. The Department should have reduced the fee
or refunded the fee surplus long ago.
Given the foregoing, a different source of funding should be
found for SB 140. If a source other than DROS fees is used,
NSSF could support the bill.
JG:k 3/7/13 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****