SB 293 — Firearms: owner-authorized handguns.
Last action — From Assembly without further action.
No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.
-
✓Introduced
-
✓In Committee
-
3Passed Senate
-
4Passed Assembly
-
5To Executive
-
6Enacted
This bill died with 2013-2014 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Senate” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis. It would have to be reintroduced in the current session to move again.
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 Text
- Amended 05/24/13 - Amended Senate Current pdf May 24, 2013
- Introduced 02/14/13 - Introduced pdf February 14, 2013
- SB293 View text html
Action History
-
From Assembly without further action.
-
From committee without further action.
-
Set, second hearing. Held in committee and under submission.
-
Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. suspense file.
-
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 5. Noes 2.) (July 2). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
-
Referred to Com. on PUB. S.
-
In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk.
-
Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 22. Noes 14. Page 1158.) Ordered to the Assembly.
-
Read second time and amended. Ordered to third reading.
-
From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 5. Noes 2. Page 1010.) (May 23).
-
Set for hearing May 23.
-
Placed on APPR. suspense file.
-
Set for hearing April 29.
-
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.
-
Set for hearing April 16.
-
Referred to Com. on PUB. S.
-
From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 17.
-
Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.
Sponsors
- DeSaulnier · Primary
- Holden · Cosponsor
Sponsorship breakdown
Export CSV (upgrade) →1 sponsors · 1 co-sponsors · 120 not signed on · 2 voted No
Sponsors (1)
- DeSaulnier
Co-sponsors (1)
- Holden
Not signed on (120)
120 members have not signed on to this bill.
Show all 120 →"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.
Votes
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 5 | 2 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 5 | 2 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 71% | 29% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (7)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Ammiano | — | Yea |
| Jones-Sawyer | — | Yea |
| Skinner | — | Yea |
| Mitchell | — | Yea |
| Melendez | — | Nay |
| Quirk | — | Yea |
| Waldron | — | Nay |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 19 | 14 | 0 | 3 |
| Democratic | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 22 | 14 | 0 | 3 |
| % of votes cast | 56% | 36% | 0% | 8% |
How each member voted (39)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Anderson | — | Nay |
| Hill | — | Yea |
| Leno | — | Yea |
| Lieu | — | Not Voting |
| Nielsen | — | Nay |
| Price | — | Yea |
| Steinberg | — | Yea |
| Wright | — | Nay |
| DeSaulnier | — | Yea |
| Hernandez | — | Yea |
| Liu | — | Yea |
| Beall | — | Yea |
| Block | — | Yea |
| Cannella | — | Nay |
| Evans | — | Yea |
| Galgiani | — | Not Voting |
| Hancock | — | Yea |
| Hueso | — | Not Voting |
| Huff | — | Nay |
| Knight | — | Nay |
| Lara | — | Yea |
| Monning | — | Yea |
| Wyland | — | Nay |
| De León | — | Yea |
| Pavley | — | Yea |
| Roth | — | Nay |
| Torres | — | Yea |
| Walters | — | Nay |
| Wolk | — | Yea |
| Corbett | — | Yea |
| Emmerson | — | Nay |
| Correa | — | Nay |
| Fuller | — | Nay |
| Yee | — | Yea |
| Beth Gaines | — | Nay |
| Bill Berryhill | — | Nay |
| Calderon, Lisa | Democratic | Yea |
| Jackson, Corey A. | Democratic | Yea |
| Padilla, Stephen C. | Democratic | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 4 | 2 | 0 | 0 |
| Democratic | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 5 | 2 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 71% | 29% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (7)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Lara | — | Yea |
| Steinberg | — | Yea |
| De León | — | Yea |
| Hill | — | Yea |
| Walters | — | Nay |
| Beth Gaines | — | Nay |
| Padilla, Stephen C. | Democratic | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Democratic | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Unaffiliated | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (7)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Steinberg | — | Yea |
| De León | — | Yea |
| Hill | — | Yea |
| Lara | — | Yea |
| Walters | — | Yea |
| Beth Gaines | — | Yea |
| Padilla, Stephen C. | Democratic | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 5 | 2 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 5 | 2 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 71% | 29% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (7)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Anderson | — | Nay |
| Steinberg | — | Yea |
| De León | — | Yea |
| Block | — | Yea |
| Knight | — | Nay |
| Liu | — | Yea |
| Hancock | — | Yea |
Subjects
Frequently asked questions
- What does SB 293 do?
- 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.
- Who sponsors SB 293?
- SB 293 is sponsored by DeSaulnier and Holden.
- What is the current status of SB 293?
- This bill died with 2013-2014 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Senate” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
- Where can I track SB 293?
- Track SB 293 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.
Make your voice heard on SB 293
Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.
Stay ahead of SB 293
Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously
One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.
Track this bill →