SAN FRANCISCO – Thursday, Attorney General Kamala D. Harris and Assemblymember David Chiu announced legislation to close the “bullet button” loophole. This loophole enables a firearm owner to use a bullet or other pointed object to quickly detach and replace a weapon’s ammunition magazine, converting a rifle into a semi-automatic assault weapon. An individual can switch magazines on a gun with a bullet button within seconds. This bill would expand the classification of assault weapons to include semi-automatic center fire rifles, which are capable of accepting detachable magazines.
“The devastation wrought by gun violence on innocent victims, children and families in this country is an international embarrassment,” said Attorney General Harris. “This is a common sense solution that closes a dangerous loophole in California’s assault weapons ban. We simply must do everything we can to keep dangerous, high capacity firearms off of our streets and out of our communities.”
Assembly Bill 1663 will broaden the classification of restricted firearms to include dangerous assault weapons that are currently easy to purchase and manufacture. In 1989, passage of the Roberti-Roos Assault Weapons Control Act (the AWCA) made it a felony to manufacture any of the assault weapons listed in the statute. In 1999, the Legislature expanded the AWCA to include more technologically advanced semiautomatic weapons, including firearms with a “fixed magazine” and/or firearms with “the capacity to accept a detachable magazine.” Under current law, manufacturers have been able to create firearms with detachable magazines that evade classification as assault weapons that are prohibited from being possessed, sold, transferred or imported into the state without a permit. “Bullet buttons” require the tip of a bullet or tool to release a magazine and insert a new one. Because a device is needed to eject the magazine, bullet button firearms are not restricted under the AWCA statute.
“We must close the loopholes in our assault weapons ban so that guns like the ones used in San Bernardino, Newtown, and Aurora cannot be bought legally in our state,” said Assemblymember David Chiu (D-San Francisco), who first worked on gun legislation as a United States Senate aide in the mid-1990s. “Detachable magazines cost lives, and it is more important to save lives during future mass shootings than to be able to reload assault weapons in the blink of an eye. I appreciate the sponsorship by Attorney General Harris and look forward to working this year with my colleagues and the Governor’s office on this and other efforts to prevent gun violence.”
Attorney General Harris has made the implementation of effective gun safety measures a priority. Since November 2013, Attorney General Harris has brought the number of individuals in the Armed Prohibited Persons System (APPS) database to a historic low of 12,691—effectively removing 20,573 prohibited individuals. Over the last two years, the California Department of Justice has also doubled the average number of guns seized annually and increased the number of investigations per month by nearly 300 percent.
In 2011, Attorney General Harris sponsored SB 819 (Leno) to allow the Department of Justice to use existing regulatory fees collected by gun dealers (“DROS fees”) for purposes of regulatory and enforcement activities related to firearms, including management of APPS.
This went into effect January 2012. In 2013, Attorney General Harris sponsored SB 140 (Leno) to appropriate $24 million in funding from the DROS Account to help support the APPS program; this urgency legislation went into effect immediately in May 2013. In 2013, Attorney General Harris convened a Leadership Group of California’s district attorneys to collaboratively develop recommendations to reduce gun violence through enforcement of existing laws and prevention efforts.
Earlier this month, Attorney General Harris issued a statement in support of President Obama’s executive actions to reduce gun violence through enhanced background checks, increased mental heath treatment and improved gun safety technology.
7 comments
This will stop the folks that are law abiding citizens, but does nothing to stop the ones that want to cause harm. Waste of time.
As usual the mentally deficient liberals who rode into the State Capitol on their unicorns with an even better idea to deny the rights of law abiding citizens by making thousands and thousands of, legal, semi-auto rifles assault weapons; that is about half of my rifles, many that I use for hunting and sport shooting. Their logic is that of a naive 10 year old-that is to say the criminals, who can’t legally possess firearms anyway, always get them without a background check. The only thing AB1663 will do is make millions of law abiding California citizens criminals. Thanks Ass-embly Chiu and Attorney-moron-Harris.
Wow, he’s pushed hard on legislation for years AND looks forward to working the next year on AB 1663…? I’m sure that will fix things right up for everyone. LOL, not!
I’m sure his intentions are good, but looking at reality & listening to the liberals own statements about the rise in gun violence tells you that IT ISNT WORKING! Criminals haven’t & won’t obey the laws concerning purchasing & owning guns, effectively leaving all this legislation as a hinderence to those of us who do try to abide by the law.
Spending so much time and effort to re-classify assault weapons over such minor details is a waste of OUR lawmakers time and OUR taxpayers money! Like so many bills before it, AB 1663 will show NO results in reducing violent criminal behavior…because criminals don’t care!
Go figure.
First of all, the public needs to understand that more people are killed with hammers than all rifles combined, rifles are used in a very small percentage of shootings. Second, this bill would classify many common hunting rifles as assault weapons.
Why are politicians trying to scare people into banning these guns that are only used in a small fraction of all shootings instead of going after the one thing common in all shootings, the criminal that commits them?
What is an “assault weapon?” Is it that person behind the wheel of an automobile which mows down people intentionally? Is it that person who is mad at his neighbor and uses his kids baseball bat to take a swing and a hit on his neighbor? Or perhaps someone is attacking you with a pencil? We all know (except Harris and Chiu as well as other dumbass’) what ever object that can cause bodily harm or death with the intention to cause bodily harm or death, is then considered an “assault weapon”. I wonder if someone was to throw a cow pie at our STATE OFFICIALS, how they would classify that? I personally believe this whole thing is a bunch of crap.
Who dreamed up the monicker “assault rifle?” In the Marine Corps we were introduced to our best friend- the M16A1 as a “gas operated, rotating bolt, magazine fed shoulder weapon”. We were trained to assault an enemy position using fire and maneuver and making use of cover and concealment. Assault is what you did, not what you carried. Stupid politicians.
The bill will have one inevitable, predictable result whether or not it passes: An increase in sales of firearms of all types. The complete lack of exemptions for rifles that have “traditionally” been exempted from assault weapon status, such as the Ruger Mini 14 and the historic US M1 Carbine, ensure that sales of detachable-magazine semiautomatic rifles of all types will skyrocket.
The stated intent is to ban AR-15s and other rifles that have been equipped with a bullet button mechanism to make them compliant with state law, but the legislation does not say that such a rifle, once registered, can’t be reconfigured with a standard magazine release. And every attempt by the legislature to impose design limits on firearms has resulted in innovative ways to comply with the law and still sell firearms.
This is a poorly written bill that is guaranteed to have exactly the opposite of the intended effect.
Comments are closed.