793
On Wednesday, a bill that would have strengthened California’s conceal-carry laws failed to pass out of the State Assembly—this bill was in response to the Supreme Court decision expanding rights to carry firearms in public.
The bill failed three times in the State Assembly.
- Aug 25: 51-17 with 12 no votes on record.
- Aug. 30: 52-21 vote with 7 no votes of record,
- Sept. 1: failed for the third time in a 53-23 vote. It failed by 1 vote as an urgency clause was placed on the bill requiring it to pass by 2/3 vote.
Senate Bill 918, authored by Senator Anthony J. Portantino (D – La Cañada Flintridge).
Specifically, SB 918 would address four areas:
- Licensing Regime: requires the licensing authority to determine whether the applicant is qualified based on defined criteria. The bill will provide a mechanism for establishing a standardized CCW application to be used statewide; applicants would be required to list all prior arrests, criminal convictions, restraining or protective orders, as well as references and would be required to attend in-person interviews.
- Age Restrictions: sets the minimum age to obtain a CCW license at 21. The age limit will align the CCW licensing process with other gun safety laws, such as the minimum age to purchase a handgun.
- Gun Storage & Training: imposes new gun storage and training requirements for anyone who obtains or renews a permit to carry a firearm in public. The bill will limit all CCW licensees to carrying no more than two firearms at any given time in public.
- Sensitive Places: limits the places in which CCW licensees will be authorized to carry firearms in public. Under the bill, certain sensitive places will be designated as off-limits for firearms, including school grounds, community colleges, colleges, or university grounds, government and judicial buildings, medical facilities, public transportation, any place where alcohol is sold and consumed, public parks and playgrounds, or special events that require a permit (such as demonstrations). These restrictions are consistent with the Supreme Court’s decision in Bruen, which recognized that states may limit the carrying of firearms in certain sensitive places.
How they voted on Sept. 1:
- Yes: Aguiar-Curry, Alvarez, Bauer-Kahan, Bennett, Berman, Bloom, Boerner Horvath, Mia Bonta, Bryan, Calderon, Carrillo, Cervantes, Daly, Mike Fong, Friedman, Gabriel, Cristina Garcia, Eduardo Garcia, Gipson, Grayson, Haney, Holden, Irwin, Jones-Sawyer, Kalra, Lee, Levine, Low, Maienschein, McCarty, McKinnor, Medina, Mullin, Muratsuchi, Nazarian, Petrie-Norris, Quirk, Quirk-Silva, Reyes, Luz Rivas, Robert Rivas, Rodriguez, Blanca Rubio, Santiago, Stone, Ting, Villapudua, Ward, Akilah Weber, Wicks, Wilson, Wood, Rendon
- No: Bigelow, Chen, Choi, Cooley, Cunningham, Megan Dahle, Davies, Flora, Fong, Gallagher, Gray, Kiley, Lackey, Mathis, Mayes, Nguyen, Patterson, Salas, Seyarto, Smith, Valladares, Voepel, Waldron
- No Vote on Record: Arambula, Cooper, O’Donnell, Ramos
In July, Portantino’s said California needed to lead on gun safety and reform after the Supreme Court’s decision.
“In the wake of the Texas tragedy and the continued threat of mass shootings, it’s a moral imperative that California leads on the issue of gun safety and reform,” stated Senator Portantino. “I am proud to be working with Attorney General Bonta and Governor Newsom on SB 918 and greatly appreciate the support this morning from Senator Feinstein and Senator Padilla. This is critical legislation to strengthen our existing concealed carry laws and ensure every Californian is safe from gun violence. We must be diligent in addressing the gun violence epidemic in our country and concealed carry laws are a key component of this effort.”
The Supreme Court in the New York Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen recently decided that licensing schemes requiring an applicant for a concealed carry license to show good cause (or something similar) to carry firearms are unconstitutional. SB 918 is California’s legislative response to the court’s ruling and would establish a more uniform and effective licensing process throughout the state.
Attorney General Bonta reminds Californians that carrying a loaded firearm (whether openly or concealed) in most public places is generally prohibited unless a person has been issued a license obtained by applying through local law enforcement.
In the June opinion, the Court held that New York’s law requiring an applicant for a concealed weapon (CCW) license to show “proper cause” in order to secure a license violates the Second Amendment. California similarly requires applicants for licenses to carry firearms in public to show “good cause,” and is likely unconstitutional under Bruen. But other requirements remain intact. Individuals may obtain a permit through a sheriff or chief of police after: a successful background check, the completion of a firearms safety course, and proof of residency, employment, or business in the county or city within the county. These laws were created and passed with the unique needs of Californians in mind.
Gun violence remains a growing threat to public safety throughout the nation. On average, there are over 110 gun deaths each day and nearly 41,000 each year in the U.S. Guns are the leading cause of death among children and adolescents; with U.S. children being more likely to die from gun violence than in any other comparable country.
California continues its efforts to advance laws and policies that save lives and prevent gun deaths. In 2021, California saw a 37% lower gun death rate than the national average. According to the CDC, California’s gun death rate was the 44th lowest in the nation, with 8.5 gun deaths per 100,000 people – compared to 13.7 deaths per 100,000 nationally, 28.6 in Mississippi, 20.7 in Oklahoma, and 14.2 in Texas. California’s gun death rate for children is also lower than other states, and is 58% lower than the national average.
Attorney General Bonta stands with partners throughout the state to continue preventing gun violence strategically and aggressively by:
- Advocating for commonsense gun laws including by sponsoring Assembly Bill 1594 to increase accountability for the firearm industry, working to strengthen federal laws to protect the public from ghost guns, and successfully defending California’s laws to prevent gun violence;
- Seizing guns from prohibited persons in the Armed and Prohibited Persons System, and through multiagency sweeps in the Bay Area and Los Angeles County, conducting operations targeting individuals attempting to illegally purchase guns, and collaborating with local law enforcement partners;
- Ending the sale of illegal firearms through litigation against ghost gun retailers, and by putting a stop to the sale of illegal assault weapons in Orange County; and
- Improving transparency by expanding gun violence-related data the California Department of Justice releases to researchers.
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL’S DIGEST
SB 918, as amended, Portantino. Firearms.
Existing law prohibits a person from carrying a concealed firearm or carrying a loaded firearm in public.
Existing law authorizes a licensing authority, as specified, if good cause exists for the issuance, and subject to certain other criteria including, among other things, the applicant is of good moral character and has completed a specified course of training, to issue a license to carry a concealed handgun or to carry a loaded and exposed handgun, as specified. Under existing law, the required course of training for an applicant is no more than 16 hours and covers firearm safety and laws regarding the permissible use of a firearm.
This bill would require the licensing authority to issue or renew a license if the applicant is a qualified person for the license and the applicant is at least 21 years of age. The bill would remove the good character and good cause requirements from the issuance criteria. Under the bill, the applicant would not be a qualified person if they, among other things, are reasonably likely to be a danger to self, others, or the community at large, as specified. This bill would add the requirement that the applicant be the recorded owner, with the Department of Justice, of the pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person. This bill would change the training requirement to be no less than 16 hours in length and would add additional subjects to the course including, among other things, the safe storage and legal transportation of firearms. The bill would require an issuing authority, prior to that issuance, renewal, or amendment to a license, if it has direct access to the designated department system to determine if the applicant is the recorded owner of the pistol, revolver, or other firearm. The bill would require an issuing authority without access to that system to confirm the ownership with the sheriff of the county in which the agency is located. By requiring local agencies to issue licenses for concealed firearms, this bill would create a state-mandated local program.
The bill would require a licensing authority to provide the applicant notice if a new license or license renewal is denied or revoked. If an application is denied or a license is revoked, revoked based on a determination that the applicant is not a qualified person, the bill would permit the applicant to request a hearing to challenge the license denial or revocation. revocation, and require the licensing authority to inform the applicant of the ability to seek a hearing. If a new license or license renewal is denied or revoked, revoked for any other reason, the bill would authorize the applicant to seek a writ of mandate from a superior court within 30 days of receipt of notice of denial or revocation, and require the licensing authority to inform the applicant of the ability to seek a writ of mandate. By imposing new duties on local licensing authorities, this bill would create a state-mandated local program.
Existing law requires an agency issuing a license described above to set forth specified information on the license, including, among other things, the licensee’s name, occupation, and reason for desiring a license to carry the weapon.
This bill would revise that information to include, among other things, the licensee’s driver’s license or identification number, fingerprints, and information relating to the date of expiration of the license, and would remove the requirement that the license detail the reason for desiring a license to carry the weapon.
Existing law requires an applicant for a license described above to provide fingerprints, as specified.
Existing law exempts an applicant from this requirement if they have previously applied to the same licensing authority and the applicant’s fingerprints have previously been forwarded to the department, as specified, and instead requires that authority to note data that would provide positive identification in the files of the department, on the copy of any subsequent license submitted to the department.
This bill would require the department to notify the licensing authority if the department is unable to ascertain, among other things, the final disposition of an arrest or criminal charge under state or federal law that would prohibit the person from possessing, receiving, owning, or purchasing a firearm. The bill would require the licensing authority to instead collect the applicant’s fingerprint that would provide that positive identification in the files of the department, as specified. This bill would prohibit a license from being issued or renewed unless the department reports to a licensing authority that the applicant is eligible to possess, receive, own, or purchase a firearm.
Existing law requires a licensing authority to charge an additional fee in an amount equal to reasonable processing costs for a new license. Existing law also prohibits a licensing authority from imposing, among other things, a requirement or condition that an applicant pay additional funds or obtain liability insurance.
This bill would authorize a licensing authority to charge the additional processing cost fee for a license renewal and would permit the licensing authority to collect the first 50% of the fee upon filing of the application. The bill also removes the prohibition on licensing authority requirements for additional fees or liability insurance.
Existing law requires that licenses and applications for licenses be uniform throughout the state, and to be submitted upon forms prescribed by the Attorney General. When revising the standard application form for licenses, existing law requires the Attorney General to convene a committee to review and revise the existing application form. Existing law requires the Attorney General to develop a uniform license that may be used as indicia of proof of licensure throughout the state. Existing law also requires the committee to convene to review and revise the design standard for a uniform license.
This bill would authorize the Attorney General to revise the standard form for licenses and the design standard if the committees do committee does not revise the form or issue a design standard by October 31, 2022.
Under existing law, it is a crime to bring a firearm into a state or local building or building, and makes it a crime to bring a loaded firearm into, or upon the grounds of, any residence of the Governor, any other constitutional officer, or Member of the Legislature. Existing law exempts a licensee from that prohibition if, among other things, the licensee has a valid license to carry the firearm.
This bill would remove those exemptions, except as specified. The bill would make it a crime to bring an unloaded firearm into, or upon the grounds of, any residence of the Governor, any other constitutional officer, or Member of the Legislature. The bill would also prohibit a licensee from carrying a firearm to specified locations, including, among other places, a building designated for a court proceeding and a place of worship, as defined, with specific exceptions. By expanding the scope of an existing crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.
Existing law prohibits a person from knowingly possessing a firearm in a sterile area of an airport, passenger vessel terminal, or public transit facility, as defined.
This bill would additionally prohibit a person from knowingly possessing a firearm in any building, real property, or parking area under the control of an airport or passenger vessel terminal, as specified. By expanding the scope of an existing crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.
Existing law, the Gun-Free School Zone Act of 1995, makes it a crime to possess a firearm in a place that the person knows, or reasonably should know, is a school zone. Existing law defines a school zone as an area in, or on the grounds of, a public or private school providing instruction in kindergarten or grades 1 to 12, inclusive, or within a distance of 1,000 feet from the grounds of the public or private school. Existing law provides exceptions to that crime, including if a person with a valid concealed carry license who is carrying the firearm described in the license in an area that is not in, or on the grounds of, a public or private school and when a firearm is an unloaded pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed on the person and is in a locked container or within the locked trunk of a motor vehicle.
This bill would revise the exception for a person who has a valid concealed carry license to permit them to carry a specified firearm in an area that is not within any building, real property, or parking area under the control of a public or private school, or on a street or sidewalk immediately adjacent to a building, real property, or parking area under the control of that public or private school, as specified.
Existing law requires a licensing authority to revoke a license to carry a firearm if the licensing authority is notified by the department or the licensing authority determines that a licensee is prohibited from possessing, receiving, owning, or purchasing a firearm under state or federal law.
This bill would also require a licensing authority to revoke a license if, among other things, a licensee has provided inaccurate or incomplete information on their application for a new license or license renewal.
Existing law authorizes a licensing authority to impose reasonable restrictions on the time, place, manner, and circumstances when a licensee may carry a firearm capable of being concealed.
While carrying a firearm, this bill would prohibit a licensee from, among other things, consuming an alcoholic beverage or controlled substance and falsely represent from falsely representing that the licensee is a peace officer.
The bill would authorize the department to adopt emergency regulations to implement the concealed firearm licensing system, as specified.
This bill would make conforming changes.
The bill would additionally make various findings and declarations of the Legislature.
The bill would state that its provisions are severable.
This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 29805 of the Penal Code proposed by AB 2239 to be operative only if this bill and AB 2239 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
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 with regard to certain mandates no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
With regard to any other mandates, this bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs so mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
