Existing law regulates the sale, carrying, and control of firearms, including assault weapons, and requires assault weapons to be registered with the Department of Justice. Violation of these provisions is a crime. Existing law defines a semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and other specified features and a semiautomatic weapon that has a fixed magazine with a capacity to accept 10 or more rounds as an assault weapon.

This bill would, instead, classify a semiautomatic centerfire rifle that does not have a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept no more than 10 rounds as an assault weapon. The bill would require a person who, between January 1, 2001, and December 31, 2016, inclusive, lawfully possessed an assault weapon that does not have a fixed magazine, including those weapons with an ammunition feeding device that can be removed readily from the firearm with the use of a tool, and who, on or after January 1, 2017, possesses that firearm, to register the firearm by July 1, 2018. By expanding the definition of a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Date of Hearing: April 13, 2016

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Lorena Gonzalez, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 1663

Author:(Chiu) – As Introduced Ver:January 14, 2016

Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: Yes Reimbursable: No

SUMMARY:

This bill amends the definition of an assault weapon as it pertains to rifles and defines "detachable magazines" and "fixed magazines". Specifically, this bill:

1. Classifies a semiautomatic centerfire rifle which does not have a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept no more than 10 rounds, as an assault weapon.
2. Eliminates specific characteristics from the definition of what constitutes an assault weapon; thus expanding the universe of firearms that qualify as assault weapons.
3. Requires registration with the Department of Justice (DOJ) of any assault weapon that does not have a fixed magazine and was lawfully possessed between January 1, 2001, and December 31, 2016, including those weapons with an ammunition feeding device that can be removed readily from the firearm with the use of a tool, and by the person who, on or after January 1, 2017, lawfully possesses that firearm. Registration of the firearm must occur by July 1, 2018.
4. All other existing prohibitions on possession, sale or manufacture of assault weapons apply to firearms redefined as assault weapons.

FISCAL EFFECT:

1. Significant cost to DOJ (Dealers’ Record of Sale Account), $1.8 million in 2016-17, $2.7 million in 2017-18, and $1.3 million annually thereafter. DOJ estimates two million assault weapons will be registered to 500,000 different owners. These costs include additional staff, adoption of regulations, and one-time information technology development to implement a public-facing application that allows the public to register firearms classified as assault weapons. AB 1663 allows DOJ to charge a fee of up to $15 per person.
2. The use of a “new” assault weapon by an individual in the commission of a crime may result in additional time served in state prison or county jail. Failure to register an assault weapon is a misdemeanor. This cost may be moderate, however, difficult to quantify:
3. According to the California Department of Corrections (CDCR), the contracted out-of-state bed rate is $29,000. If every year, two individuals serve four additional years in state prison, the first-year cost would be $58,000, $116,000 the second, $174,000 the third, and $232,000 every year thereafter.
4. Local costs for incarceration are nonreimbursable, but are offset to a degree by fine revenue.

COMMENTS:

1. Background. In response to a proliferation of shootings involving semi-automatic weapons, the California Legislature passed the Roberti-Roos Assault Weapons Control Act (AWCA) in 1989. The immediate cause of the AWCA's enactment was a random shooting earlier that year at the Cleveland Elementary School in Stockton, California. An individual armed with an AK-47 semi-automatic weapon opened fire on the schoolyard, where 300 pupils were enjoying their morning recess. Five children ages six to nine were killed, and one teacher and 29 children were wounded. In 1999, the Legislature amended the AWCA in order to broaden its coverage and to render it more flexible in response to technological developments in the manufacture of semiautomatic weapons.

Current law defines an “assault weapon” as one of certain specified rifles and pistols, including a semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and has at least one of the following:

1. A pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon;
2. A thumbhole stock;
3. A vertical handgrip;
4. A folding or telescoping stock;
5. A grenade launcher or flare launcher;
6. A flash suppressor; or,
7. A forward handgrip.

Current law defines a “detachable magazine” as any ammunition feeding device that can be removed readily from the firearm with neither disassembly of the firearm action nor use of a tool being required. A bullet or ammunition cartridge is considered a tool. Ammunition feeding device includes any belted or linked ammunition, but does not include clips, en bloc clips, or stripper clips that load cartridges into the magazine.

Current law also provides that unlawful possession of an assault weapon is an alternate felony-misdemeanor and it is punished by imprisonment in a county jail for a period not exceeding one year, or by imprisonment for 16 months, two or three years. However, a first violation of these provisions is punishable by a fine not exceeding $500 if the person was found in possession of no more than two firearms and certain specified conditions are met.

Furthermore, under current law, any person who within California manufactures, imports into California, offers for sale, or who gives or lends any assault weapon with specified exceptions is guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment in state prison for four, six, or eight years.

1. Purpose. According to the author, AB 1663 addresses the heart of the limitations in the AWCA, and fulfills its original intent: to prohibit firearms that provide the ability to detach a magazine and rapidly reload, resulting in what ultimately is the power of the shooter to have virtually unlimited killing capacity. AB 1663 prohibits the future sale, purchase, manufacture, importation, or transfer in California of semi-automatic rifles that can accept detachable magazines.

High-capacity detachable ammunition magazines allow shooters to expel large amounts of ammunition quickly and have no sporting purpose. However, in California an ammunition magazine is not viewed as detachable if a “tool” is required to remove it from the weapon. The “bullet button” is a release button for the ammunition magazine that can be activated with the tip of a bullet. With the tip of the bullet replacing the use of a finger in activating the release, the button can be pushed and the detachable ammunition magazine removed and replaced in seconds.

This bill would do away with the six prohibited features in current law. The argument is that a rifle outfitted with the features that make a gun look like a military-style weapon, e.g., pistol grip, flash suppressor, collapsible stock, etcetera, may be more dangerous than one that lacks these features, but these features may not pose the greatest public safety concern. Conversely, the lack of these features does not make a rifle less lethal than one that has them. Under this bill, even a “featureless” semiautomatic rifle, like the Mini-14, would be required to have a fixed magazine, holding no more than 10 rounds of ammunition.

The use of an assault weapon in the commission of a crime carries additional punishments, and in some cases the sentence is served in state prison instead of county jail. By expanding the universe of assault weapons, this bill will result in additional commitments to county jails and state prison.

1. Support: According to the California Chapters of the Brady Campaign, " the industry has been able to exploit a loophole in the [ACWA] regulations that allows for the continued sale and possession of fully functional assault weapons. Assembly Bill 1663 seeks to definitively close the loopholes in a manner that will prevent the firearm industry from continuing to market these lethal military-style weapons in California.

"Mass shootings perpetrated by unbalanced individuals using assault weapons are reported all too often in the news. As was tragically demonstrated at Sandy Hook School and in the recent San Bernardino shooting, the ability to rapidly reload adds enormously to the carnage. An exchangeable magazine can be reloaded in one second and is the key feature that enables the rapid rate of continuous fire that can kill many people very quickly. Requiring a fixed magazine on future sales or transfers of long guns would, over time, decrease the lethality in future mass shootings.”

1. Opposition: According to the Firearms Policy Coalition, "AB 1663 seeks to vastly expand the Assault Weapons Control Act, regulations that ban (by several methods, including make and model, function, cosmetic features, and caliber) popular, constitutionally-protected firearms that are in common use for lawful purposes across the United States.

"AB 1663 would move the goal posts yet again for the millions of law abiding residents and visitors who have quite reasonably, given the volume, struggled for years to keep up with the frenetic pace of California's ever-increasing firearm regulations…”

1. Related Legislation: SB 1664 (Levine), would redefine what constitutes an assault weapon in order to close the bullet button loophole. SB 1664 would also require registration of weapons which now fall under the new definition but which previously were not prohibited. SB 1664 is also scheduled for hearing in today.
   
2. Prior Legislation:
   
   1. SB 47 (Yee), of the 2013-2014 Legislative Session, would have closed the bullet button loophole by redefining an assault weapon in statute as 'a semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that does not have a fixed magazine' and has any one of several specified features. SB 47 was held on this Committee’s Suspense file.
      
3. SB 374 (Steinberg), of the 2013-2014 Legislative Session, would have closed the bullet button loophole by redefining an assault weapon as it pertains to rifles and defines "detachable magazines" and "fixed magazines." Specifies that rifles which are not assault weapons have fixed magazines. SB 347 was vetoed by the Governor. SB 347 was vetoed by the Governor. In his veto message, the Governor stated, in part:

“The State of California already has some of the strictest gun laws in the country, including bans on military-style assault rifles and high-capacity ammunition magazines.

“Moreover, hundreds of thousands of current gun owners would have to register their rifles as assault weapons and would be banned from selling or transferring them in the future.

“I don't believe that this bill's blanket ban on semi-automatic rifles would reduce criminal activity or enhance public safety enough to warrant this infringement on gun owners' rights.”

1. SB 249 (Yee), of the 2011-12 Legislative Session, would have prohibited any person from importing, making, selling, loaning, transferring or possessing any conversion kit designed to convert certain firearms with a fixed magazine into firearms with a detachable magazine. SB 249 was held on this Committee’s Suspense file.

Analysis Prepared by: Pedro Reyes / APPR. / (916) 319-2081

Date of Hearing:

Counsel: Gabriel Caswell

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY

Bill Quirk, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 1663

Author:(Chiu) – As Introduced Ver:January 14, 2016

SUMMARY:

Amends the definition of an assault weapon as it pertains to rifles and defines "detachable magazines" and "fixed magazines". Specifies that rifles which are not assault weapons have fixed magazines. Specifically, this bill:

1. Classifies a semiautomatic centerfire rifle that does not have a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept no more than 10 rounds as an assault weapon. Eliminates the following characteristics from the definition of what constitutes an assault weapon, a semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and has at least one of the following:
   
   1. a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon;
      
   2. a thumbhole stock;
      
   3. a vertical handgrip;
      
   4. a folding or telescoping stock;
      
   5. a grenade launcher or flare launcher;
      
   6. a flash suppressor; or,
      
   7. a forward handgrip.
      
2. Requires registration with the Department of Justice (DOJ) of any assault weapon that does not have a fixed magazine and was lawfully possessed between January 1, 2001, and December 31, 2016, including those weapons with an ammunition feeding device that can be removed readily from the firearm with the use of a tool, and who, on or after January 1, 2017, lawfully possesses that firearm. Registration of the firearm must occur by July 1, 2018.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Contains legislative findings and declarations that the proliferation and use of assault and .50 BMG rifles poses a threat to the health, safety, and security of all citizens of California. (Pen. Code § 30505.)
   
2. States legislative intent to place restrictions on the use of assault weapons and .50 BMG rifles and to establish a registration and permit procedure for their lawful sale and possession. (Pen. Code § 30505.)
   
3. Defines an “assault weapon” as one of certain specified rifles and pistols (Penal Code Section 30510) or as (Pen. Code § 30515):
   1. A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and has at least one of the following:
      
      1. A pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon;
         
      2. A thumbhole stock;
         
      3. A vertical handgrip;
         
      4. A folding or telescoping stock;
         
      5. A grenade launcher or flare launcher;
         
      6. A flash suppressor; or,
         
      7. A forward handgrip.
         
   2. A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds;
      
   3. A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has an overall length of less than 30 inches;
      
   4. A semiautomatic pistol that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and has at least one of the following:
      
      1. A threaded barrel, capable of accepting a flash suppressor, forward handgrip, or silencer;
         
      2. A second handgrip;
         
      3. A shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles, the barrel that allows the bearer to fire the weapon without burning his or her hand, excepting a slide that encloses the barrel; or,
         
      4. The capacity to accept a detachable magazine at some location outside of the pistol grip.
         
   5. A semiautomatic pistol with a fixed magazine that has the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds;
      
   6. A semiautomatic shotgun that has both of the following:
      
      1. A folding or telescoping stock; and,
         
      2. A pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon, thumbhole stock, or vertical handgrip.
         
   7. A semiautomatic shotgun that has the ability to accept a detachable magazine; and
      
   8. Any shotgun that has a revolving cylinder.
      
4. Defines a “detachable magazine” as any ammunition feeding device that can be removed readily from the firearm with neither disassembly of the firearm action nor use of a tool being required. A bullet or ammunition cartridge is considered a tool. Ammunition feeding device includes any belted or linked ammunition, but does not include clips, en bloc clips, or stripper clips that load cartridges into the magazine. (11 California Code of Regulations § 5469.)
   
5. Provides that unlawful possession of an assault weapon is an alternate felony-misdemeanor and shall be punished by imprisonment in a county jail for a period not exceeding one year, or by imprisonment pursuant to Penal Code Section 1170(h) (16 months, two or three years). Notwithstanding the above, a first violation of these provisions is punishable by a fine not exceeding $500 if the person was found in possession of no more than two firearms and certain specified conditions are met. (Pen. Code § 30605.)
   
6. Provides that any person who within California manufactures, imports into California, offers for sale, or who gives or lends any assault weapon with specified exceptions is guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment in state prison for four, six, or eight years. (Pen. Code § 30600.)
   
7. Exempts the DOJ, law enforcement agencies, military forces, and other specified agencies from the prohibition against sales to, purchase by, importation of, or possession of assault weapons or .50 BMG rifles. (Pen. Code § 30625.)
   
8. Requires that any person who lawfully possesses an assault weapon, as specified, must register the firearm with DOJ, as specified. (Pen. Code § 30900 et. seq.)

FISCAL EFFECT:

Unknown

COMMENTS:

1. Author's Statement: According to the author, "This debate is not new to this Legislature or to the state at large. Just three years ago, loopholes and limitations in the state’s assault weapons ban were examined in the wake of the tragic 2012 shooting rampage at Sandy Hook Elementary School where 20 children were shot dead. Now again in 2016 the state is returning to this issue in the aftermath of the San Bernardino shooting last December. Since 2013 the number of shootings has only increased and by some measures, the nation is facing a mass shooting every day. Only one factor in all these situations has not changed: the choice of these shooters to use weapons with the ability to detach a magazine and rapidly reload. Clearly the limitations in the state’s assault weapons ban are only getting worse, and it is only a question of when will the next mass shooting occur in California given the current abilityto purchase legally a firearm that functions as an assault weapon.

"Despite the express intent of the California Roberti-Roos Assault Weapons Control Act (AWCA), originally adopted in 1989, gun manufacturers have repeatedly modified the firearms they produce to evade the law and continue the sale of so-called 'California compliant' weapons. In 1999, the Legislature broadened the original statute in response to technological developments in the manufacturing of semiautomatic weapons. However, in recent years, the gun industry has developed another workaround of the state ban with the creation of the “bullet button,” which allows for magazines to be detached and replaced just as easily as with illegal assault weapons. Because a device or tool is needed to detach the magazine, such firearms are legal under the current language of the state’s assault weapons ban. The ability to rapidly reload these weapons dramatically increases their lethality during a mass shooting. One of the two semiautomatic rifles used in San Bernardino had a bullet button.

"AB 1663 addresses the heart of the limitations in the AWCA and fulfills its original intent: to prohibit firearms that have the ability to detach a magazine and rapidly reload resulting in what ultimately is the power of the shooter to have virtually unlimited killing capacity. This bill prohibits the future sale, purchase, manufacture, importation, or transfer in California of semi-automatic rifles that can accept detachable magazines. Requiring truly fixed magazines will reduce the potential of these firearms to seriously kill and maim people in a short amount of time. The loophole that allows guns meant for war zones to proliferate in our cities, our neighborhoods, and our schools will be closed. The bullet button and any other gun industry manufacturing tricks that undermine the AWCA will be rendered irrelevant. With a goal of saving countless lives, AB 1663 will take assault weapons that are legal in name only out of our communities."

1. California's Assault Weapons Ban: The origin of and subsequent modifications to the assault weapons ban in California are described by the federal Court of Appeal in the following extended excerpt from Silveira v. Lockyer, 312 F.3d 1052 (9th Cir. 2002) (as amend. Jan. 27, 2003).

In response to a proliferation of shootings involving semi-automatic weapons, the California Legislature passed the Roberti-Roos Assault Weapons Control Act (AWCA) in 1989. The immediate cause of the AWCA's enactment was a random shooting earlier that year at the Cleveland Elementary School in Stockton, California. An individual armed with an AK-47 semi-automatic weapon opened fire on the schoolyard, where 300 pupils were enjoying their morning recess. Five children ages six to nine were killed, and one teacher and 29 children were wounded.

The California Assembly met soon thereafter in an extraordinary session called for the purpose of enacting a response to the Stockton shooting. The legislation that followed, the AWCA, was the first legislative restriction on assault weapons in the nation, and was the model for a similar federal statute enacted in 1994. The AWCA renders it a felony offense to manufacture in California any of the semi-automatic weapons specified in the statute, or to possess, sell, transfer, or import into the state such weapons without a permit. The statute contains a grandfather clause that permits the ownership of assault weapons by individuals who lawfully purchased them before the statute's enactment, so long as the owners register the weapons with DOJ. The grandfather clause, however, imposes significant restrictions on the use of weapons that are registered pursuant to its provisions. Approximately 40 models of firearms are listed in the statute as subject to its restrictions. The specified weapons include “civilian” models of military weapons that feature slightly less firepower than the military-issue versions, such as the Uzi, an Israeli-made military rifle; the AR-15, a semi-automatic version of the United States military's standard-issue machine gun, the M-16; and the AK-47, a Russian-designed and Chinese-produced military rifle. The AWCA also includes a mechanism for the Attorney General to seek a judicial declaration in certain California superior courts that weapons identical to the listed firearms are also subject to the statutory restrictions.

The AWCA includes a provision that codifies the legislative findings and expresses the legislature's reasons for passing the law: "The Legislature hereby finds and declares that the proliferation and use of assault weapons poses a threat to the health, safety, and security of all citizens of this state. The Legislature has restricted the assault weapons specified in [the statute] based upon finding that each firearm has such a high rate of fire and capacity for firepower that its function as a legitimate sports or recreational firearm is substantially outweighed by the danger that it can be used to kill and injure human beings. It is the intent of the Legislature in enacting this chapter to place restrictions on the use of assault weapons and to establish a registration and permit procedure for their lawful sale and possession. It is not, however, the intent of the Legislature by this chapter to place restrictions on the use of those weapons which are primarily designed and intended for hunting, target practice, or other legitimate sports or recreational activities."

In 1999, the Legislature amended the AWCA in order to broaden its coverage and to render it more flexible in response to technological developments in the manufacture of semiautomatic weapons. The amended AWCA retains both the original list of models of restricted weapons, and the judicial declaration procedure by which models may be added to the list. The 1999 amendments to the AWCA statute add a third method of defining the class of restricted weapons: the amendments provide that a weapon constitutes a restricted assault weapon if it possesses certain generic characteristics listed in the statute. Examples of the types of weapons restricted by the revised AWCA include a “semiautomatic, center-fire rifle that has a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds,” and a semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and also features a flash suppressor, a grenade launcher, or a flare launcher. The amended AWCA also restricts assault weapons equipped with “barrel shrouds,” which protect the user's hands from the intense heat created by the rapid firing of the weapon, as well as semiautomatic weapons equipped with silencers.

1. Changes This Bill Makes to the AWCA: As the Court explained, in 1999 the assault weapons ban was amended to expand the definition of an assault weapon to include a definition by the generic characteristics, specifically, to include a “semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine” in addition to one of several specified characteristics, such as a grenade launcher or flash suppressor. [SB 23 (Perata) Statutes of 1999, Chapter 129, Section 7 et seq.] SB 23 was enacted in response to the marketing of so-called “copycat” weapons - firearms that were substantially similar to weapons on the prohibited list but differed in some insignificant way, perhaps only the name of the weapon, thereby defeating the intent of the ban.

SB 23’s generic definition of an assault weapon was intended to close the loophole in the law created by its definition of assault weapons as only those specified by make and model. Regulations promulgated after the enactment of SB 23 define a detachable magazine as any ammunition feeding device that can be removed readily from the firearm with neither disassembly of the firearm action nor use of a tool being required. A bullet or ammunition cartridge is considered a tool. In response to this definition, a new feature has been developed by firearms manufacturers to make military-style, high-powered, semi-automatic rifles “California compliant,” the bullet button.

In 2012, researchers at the nonprofit Violence Policy Center in Washington, D.C. released a paper describing the phenomenon of the bullet button and its effect on California’s assault weapons ban:

The “Bullet Button”–Assault Weapon Manufacturers’ Gateway to the California Market

Catalogs and websites from America’s leading assault rifle manufacturers are full of newly designed “California compliant” assault weapons. Number one and two assault weapon manufacturers Bushmaster and DPMS, joined by ArmaLite, Colt, Sig Sauer, Smith & Wesson, and others are all introducing new rifles designed to circumvent California’s assault weapons ban and are actively targeting the state in an effort to lift now-sagging sales of this class of weapon. They are accomplishing this with the addition of a minor design change to their military-style weapons made possible by a definitional loophole: the “bullet button.” [Please see the Appendix beginning on page six for 2012 catalog copy featuring “California compliant” assault rifles utilizing a “bullet button” from leading assault weapon manufacturers.]

California law bans semiautomatic rifles with the capacity to accept a detachable ammunition magazine and any one of six enumerated additional assault weapon characteristics (e.g., folding stock, flash suppressor, pistol grip, or other military-style features).

High-capacity detachable ammunition magazines allow shooters to expel large amounts of ammunition quickly and have no sporting purpose. However, in California an ammunition magazine is not viewed as detachable if a “tool” is required to remove it from the weapon. The “bullet button” is a release button for the ammunition magazine that can be activated with the tip of a bullet. With the tip of the bullet replacing the use of a finger in activating the release, the button can be pushed and the detachable ammunition magazine removed and replaced in seconds. Compared to the release process for a standard detachable ammunition magazine it is a distinction without a difference. (Bullet Buttons, The Gun Industry’s Attack on California’s Assault Weapons Ban, Violence Policy Center, Washington D.C., May 2012. )

One approach to this issue, taken by SB 249 (Yee) in 2012 and SB 47 (Yee) of 2014, as well as AB 1664 (Levine) of this session, amends the statute to replace the language regarding detachable magazines to instead prohibit “a semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that does not have a fixed magazine but has any one of the existing six prohibited characteristics." AB 1664 also defines a "detachable magazine" as "an ammunition feeding device that can be removed readily from the firearm without disassembly of the firearm action, including an ammunition feeding device that can be removed readily from the firearm with the use of a tool." In other words, a semiautomatic rifle could have a detachable magazine, as long as that rifle did not also have any of the six prohibited features or that rifle could have the prohibited features as long as it had a fixed magazine.

This bill would take a different approach. This bill would do away with the six prohibited features in current law. The rationale for this is that a rifle outfitted with the features that make a gun look like a military-style weapon, e.g., pistol grip, flash suppressor, collapsible stock, etcetera, may be more dangerous than one that lacks these features, but these features may not pose the greatest public safety concern. Conversely, the lack of these features does not make a rifle less lethal than one that has them.

Proponents argue the feature that makes one semi-automatic rifle capable of killing or wounding more people in a shorter amount of time than another is the capacity to rapidly reload large amounts of ammunition. For example, proponents note that, in 2011, a man opened fire on teenagers at a summer youth camp in Norway, killing 69 and wounding another 110, using a high-powered, semi-automatic rifle, the .223 caliber Ruger Mini-14. That rifle had none of the features listed in California’s definition of an assault weapon and it is a perfectly legal weapon in California; supporters of this bill submit that what made that weapon such an effective tool of mass murder is the fact that the killer was able to rapidly reload one magazine after another of ammunition.

Under this bill, even a “featureless” semiautomatic rifle, like the Mini-14, would be required to have a fixed magazine, holding no more than 10 rounds of ammunition.

1. Constitutionality: The Constitutionality of California’s assault weapons ban has been upheld by both the California Supreme Court [Kasler v. Lockyer, 23 Cal. 4th 472 (2000)] and the federal Court of Appeal. [Silveira v. Lockyer, 312 F.3d 1052 (9th Cir. 2002) (as amend. Jan. 27, 2003).] While the California Supreme Court rejected allegations that the law violated equal protection guarantees, the separation of powers, and failed to provide adequate notice of what was prohibited under the law, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal decision in Silveira was based largely on its interpretation of the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. The Second Amendment of the Constitution states, “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” (United States Const. Amend. 2.) The Silveira Court based its ruling on the widely held interpretation of the Second Amendment known as the “collective rights” view, that the right secured by the Second Amendment relates to firearm ownership only in the context of a “well regulated militia.” [Silveira v. Lockyer, 312 F.3d 1052, 1086 (9th Cir. Cal. 2002).]

The Silveira Court’s interpretation of the meaning of the Second Amendment has since been squarely rejected by the U.S. Supreme Court in District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008) and McDonald v. City of Chicago, 130 S. Ct. 3020 (2010). Whether the Heller and McDonald cases mean that California’s assault weapons ban violates the Second Amendment and is, therefore, unconstitutional is a different matter.

In Heller, the Supreme Court rejected the “collective rights” view of the Second Amendment and, instead, endorsed the “individual rights” interpretation, that the Second Amendment protects the right of each citizen to firearm ownership. After adopting this reading of the Second Amendment, the Supreme Court held that federal law may not prevent citizens from owning a handgun in their home. (District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570, 683-684.) In the McDonald case, the Supreme Court extended this ruling to apply to laws passed by the 50 states. (McDonald v. City of Chicago, 130 S. Ct. 3020, 3050.)

In deciding that the Second Amendment guaranteed the right to own a handgun in the home for self-defense, the Supreme Court stated that this ruling has its limitations:

"Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited. From Blackstone through the 19th-century cases, commentators and courts routinely explained that the right was not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose. For example, the majority of the 19th-century courts to consider the question held that prohibitions on carrying concealed weapons were lawful under the Second Amendment or state analogues. Although we do not undertake an exhaustive historical analysis today of the full scope of the Second Amendment, nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms."

1. Governor's Veto Message of 2013's SB 374 (Steinberg): Governor Brown vetoed very similar legislation in 2013 with the following veto message:

"I am returning Senate Bill 374 without my signature.

"The State of California already has some of the strictest gun laws in the country, including bans on military-style assault rifles and high-capacity ammunition magazines.

"While the author's intent is to strengthen these restrictions, this bill goes much farther by banning any semi-automatic rifle with a detachable magazine. This ban covers low-capacity rifles that are commonly used for hunting, firearms training, and marksmanship practice, as well as some historical and collectible firearms. Moreover, hundreds of thousands of current gun owners would have to register their rifles as assault weapons and would be banned from selling or transferring them in the future.

"Today I signed a number of bills that strengthen California's gun laws, including AB 48, which closes a loophole in the existing ban on dangerous high-capacity magazines. I also signed AB 1131 and SB 127, which restrict the ability of mentally unstable people to purchase or possess guns.

"I don't believe that this bill's blanket ban on semi-automatic rifles would reduce criminal activity or enhance public safety enough to warrant this infringement on gun owners' rights."

1. Argument in Support: According to the California Chapters of the Brady Campaign, "The California Legislature has struggled with an assault weapons ban since the Stockton school yard shootings in 1989. The Roberti-Roos Act was passed that year, but minor changes to the named assault weapons allowed the firearm industry to easily evade the intent of the law. The assault weapon law was expanded in 1991 and again in 1999, when the Legislature updated the law by banning weapons with detachable magazines and one or more military-style features. However, once again the industry has been able to exploit a loophole in the regulations that allows for the continued sale and possession of fully functional assault weapons. Assembly Bill 1663 seeks to definitively close the loopholes in a manner that will prevent the firearm industry from continuing to market these lethal military-style weapons in California.

"Specifically, AB 1663 will prohibit the future sale or transfer in California of specified semi-automatic rifles that can accept detachable magazines, including those with “bullet-button” or other features that allow the rapid reload of the weapon. The bill will amend the current definition of illegal “assault weapon” to include a semiautomatic centerfire rifle that does not have a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept no more than ten rounds.

"Mass shootings perpetrated by unbalanced individuals using assault weapons are reported all too often in the news. As was tragically demonstrated at Sandy Hook School and in the recent San Bernardino shooting, the ability to rapidly reload adds enormously to the carnage. An exchangeable magazine can be reloaded in one second and is the key feature that enables the rapid rate of continuous fire that can kill many people very quickly. Requiring a fixed magazine on future sales or transfers of long guns would, over time, decrease the lethality in future mass shootings.

"California has tried to ban assault weapons for over twenty-five years and gun manufacturers will undoubtedly continue to look for ways to exploit or evade the intent of the law. AB 1663 will finally control this situation with a clear, simplified, and strengthened assault weapons law. Current owners of semiautomatic centerfire rifles with detachable magazines will be able to keep their weapons and law abiding hunters and sport shooters will be minimally impacted.

"Assembly Bill 1663 requires any person who lawfully acquired an assault weapon as defined in the bill between January 1, 2001 and December 31, 2016 and still possesses the firearm to register the weapon by July 1, 2018 with the California Department of Justice. These records will significantly increase the data in the Armed Prohibited Persons System (APPS) program and enhance public safety. Additionally, the records will assist law enforcement efforts to trace firearms and solve gun crime. In 2009, of the over 22,000 guns that were used in crime and recovered, the Department reports that 31 percent were long guns. Furthermore, the Department has found that half the illegal firearms recovered from prohibited person in the APPS program are long guns, many of which would be considered assault weapons.

"Rifles with detachable magazines present an unacceptable risk of a high body count in any shooting incident. Prohibiting future sale and transfer of these rifles and capturing ownership records is clearly in the interest of public safety and would not impact the ability to defend oneself or to go hunting. Thank you again for carrying this measure."

1. Argument in Opposition: According to the Firearms Policy Coalition, "AB 1663 seeks to vastly expand the Assault Weapons Control Act, regulations that ban (by several methods, including make and model, unction, cosmetic features, and caliber) popular, constitutionally-protected firearms that are in common use for lawful purposes across the United States.

"AB 1663 would move the goal posts yet again for the millions of law abiding residents and visitors who have quite reasonably, given the volume struggled for years to keep up with the frenetic pace of California's ever-increasing firearm regulations…

"And, while we fully acknowledge that protecting constitutional rights has never been the Legislature's primary concern (at least when it is concerned with rights it does not like), we would be remiss if we did not note that, should AB 1663 be passed and approved by the governor, it will undoubtedly be challenged on Second and Fifth Amendment grounds."

1. Related Legislation: SB 1664 (Levine), would redefine what constitutes an assault weapon in order to close the bullet button loophole. SB 1664 would also require registration of weapons which now fall under the new definition but which previously were not prohibited. SB 1664 is scheduled for hearing in Assembly Public Safety today.
   
2. Prior Legislation:
   
   1. SB 47 (Yee), of the 2013-2014 Legislative Session, would have closed the bullet button loophole by redefining an assault weapon in statute as 'a semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that does not have a fixed magazine' and has any one of several specified features. SB 47 was held on the Assembly Appropriations Committee suspense file.
      
   2. SB 374 (Steinberg), of the 2013-2014LlegislativeSsession, would have closed the bullet button loophole by redefining an assault weapon as it pertains to rifles and defines "detachable magazines" and "fixed magazines." Specifies that rifles which are not assault weapons have fixed magazines. SB 347 was vetoed by the Governor.
      
   3. SB 249 (Yee), of the 2011-12 Legislative Session, would have prohibited any person from importing, making, selling, loaning, transferring or possessing any conversion kit designed to convert certain firearms with a fixed magazine into firearms with a detachable magazine. SB 249 was held in the Assembly Appropriations Committee suspense file.

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

California Attorney General (Sponsor)

California Chapters of the Brady Campaign

California Lieutenant Governor Gavin Newsom

Coalition Against Gun Violence

Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence

Physicians for Social Responsibility

United States Senator Dianne Feinstein

Youth Alive

Opposition

California Sportsman's Lobby

California State Sheriffs' Association

Crossroads of the West

Firearms Policy Coalition

National Rifle Association

National Shooting Sports Foundation

Outdoor Sportsmen's Coalition of California

Safari Club International

2 private individuals

Analysis Prepared by:

Gabriel Caswell / PUB. S. / (916) 319-3744