SACRAMENTO, CA (September 5, 2017) — Senate Bill 464, which would drastically increase the cost of business for California firearms retailers passed it’s final legislative vote in the State Senate and is now on it’s way to the desk of Governor Jerry Brown.
SB 464 by Sen. Jerry Hill (D – San Mateo) mandates that Federal Firearms Licensees (FFL) add expensive new security measures to protect their inventory, including, in some cases, the installation of concrete or hardened steel pillars for stopping a vehicle.
“SB 464 ignores the plethora of security regulations with which FFLs are already required to comply with at the federal, state and local levels,” said Craig DeLuz, Spokesman for the Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC). “Even worse, it overlooks the fact that many local municipalities and commercial property owners often do not allow such property modifications.”
For example, the City of Rocklin recently forced a firearms retailer, Sacramento Black Rifle, to relocate to another city when the business attempted to voluntarily add steel bollards to the front of the store. This type of modification violated city policy and was not permitted by the property owner. SB 464 provides no pre-emption to address local ordinances or property owner objections.
DeLuz also noted, “SB 464 represents a solution looking for a problem. It adds to the ever-increasing number of unnecessary laws and regulations that restrict how and where firearms retailers are able to engage in business, facilitating the exercise of a constitutionally enumerated right.”
Data from the Federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (BATFE) show that while 70,000 firearms have been lost or stolen in California since 2011, only a fraction of them were stolen from gun stores (797, representing about 1%). In fact, recent reports have shown that a firearm in the hands of law enforcement officers and agencies is more likely to come up missing than a firearm in the possession of licensed firearms retailers.
“California offers tax incentives to entice investment in technologies like solar energy and to promote film production in our state. Why not consider the same sort of carrot approach in this case?” notes DeLuz. “Rather than offer punitive and costly regulations, we would ask the author to consider offering incentives to FFLs to make it easier for them to increase security measures.”
Firearms Policy Coalition (www.firearmspolicy.org) is a 501(c)4 grassroots nonprofit organization. FPC’s mission is to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States, especially the fundamental, individual Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.