Firearms: owner-authorized handguns.
Summary
Existing law establishes criteria for determining if a handgun is unsafe. Existing law generally requires manufacturers to submit samples of new handgun models for testing to determine if they are unsafe or may be approved for sale, as specified. Existing law requires the Department of Justice to compile a roster listing all of the handguns that have been tested and determined not to be unsafe. Other provisions of existing law, subject to exceptions, generally make it an offense to manufacture or sell a handgun that is not safe. This bill would define an owner-authorized handgun as a handgun that has a permanent feature that renders the handgun incapable of being fired except when activated by the lawful owner or owners of the handgun. The bill would specify requirements that an owner-authorized handgun would be required to meet, and would require a manufacturer that has developed an owner-authorized handgun meeting those requirements to submit the handgun for testing, at the manufacturer's expense, before the handgun may be placed on the roster of handguns determined not to be unsafe. If two owner-authorized handguns have been placed on the roster, the bill would, commencing two years from the date that the second handgun was placed on the roster, prohibit the Department of Justice from placing a handgun on the roster that is not an owner-authorized handgun. By expanding the application of provisions of law that define a criminal offense, 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.
Bill status
failed
3 of 5 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2013
Committee Review
Aug 2013
Senate Passage
May 2013
Assembly Passage
Governor
Introduced Feb 14, 2013
Last action Nov 30, 2014
Floor votes · Senate May 29, 2013
How they voted
20–12
Passed · 3 other
Total votes 35
May 29, 2013
D
Democratic26
76% Yea
R
Republican9
100% Nay
Vote distribution
All Yea
All Nay
Mixed
No data
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
19
Key actions
5
Committee
7
Aug 30, 2013
Lower · Passed
Set, second hearing. Held in committee and under submission.
lower
Aug 14, 2013
Committee
Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. suspense file.
lower
Jul 3, 2013
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 5. Noes 2.) (July 2). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
lower
Jun 17, 2013
Committee
Referred to Com. on PUB. S.
lower
May 29, 2013
Senate · Passed
Senate Vote: pass (20-12-3)
senate
May 23, 2013
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 5. Noes 2. Page 1010.) (May 23).
upper
Apr 17, 2013
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 5. Noes 2. Page 568.) (April 16). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
upper
Feb 28, 2013
Committee
Referred to Com. on PUB. S.
upper
1 primary · 1 co-sponsor
Sponsors
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about SB 293
Scope: CA
Hi! I can help you understand SB 293. What would you like to know?
Try one of these
i
Maddy answers using official bill text and legislative records. Always verify before sharing.
Sources cited inline