California 2019-2020 Regular Session

California Assembly Bill AB1297

Introduced
2/22/19  
Introduced
2/22/19  
Refer
3/11/19  
Report Pass
4/2/19  
Report Pass
4/2/19  
Engrossed
5/13/19  
Engrossed
5/13/19  
Refer
5/14/19  
Refer
5/22/19  
Report Pass
7/2/19  
Enrolled
9/9/19  
Enrolled
9/9/19  
Chaptered
10/11/19  
Chaptered
10/11/19  

Caption

Firearms: concealed carry license.

Impact

The passage of AB 1297 has significant implications for local law enforcement agencies managing concealed carry licenses. By requiring local jurisdictions to set fees based on actual costs, the bill aims to ensure that the enforcement of license regulations is adequately funded. This change could lead to higher fees for applicants, which may impact access for some individuals seeking to obtain or renew a concealed carry license. The bill could also lead to variations in fees across different jurisdictions, which may impact the accessibility of concealed carry permits based on a locality's resource availability.

Summary

Assembly Bill 1297, introduced by Assemblymember McCarty, amends Section 26190 of the California Penal Code concerning concealed carry licenses. The bill modifies the structure of fees associated with obtaining a concealed carry license, shifting from a permissive fee system to a requirement for local authorities to charge fees that accurately reflect the costs incurred for processing applications. Previously, local jurisdictions could not charge more than $100 as an additional fee, but this limitation has been removed, allowing for fees to be set at levels necessary to cover application processing, issuance, and enforcement costs.

Sentiment

Reactions to AB 1297 have been mixed, reflecting broader debates over gun control and public safety. Supporters argue that the bill provides necessary resources for local authorities, ensuring thorough background checks and compliance with regulations. Conversely, some critics perceive the removal of the $100 cap as a potential barrier to legal firearm ownership, fearing that higher fees may disproportionately affect low-income individuals. The sentiments expressed during discussions indicate an ongoing contention regarding the balance between public safety and individual rights.

Contention

During deliberations, key points of contention included the implications of varying fees across different regions, as some lawmakers worried that excessive fees could hinder law-abiding citizens from exercising their right to carry concealed firearms. Opponents of the bill have raised concerns that it could lead to a fragmented, inequitable system of licensing where individuals in wealthier areas face fewer barriers than those in economically disadvantaged regions. This debate underscores a fundamental tension in gun policy discussions—striking a balance between regulating firearms effectively while maintaining access for lawful gun owners.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

CA AB3261

Cannabis.

CA SB918

Firearms.

CA SB2

Firearms.

CA AB107

Licensure: veterans and military spouses.

CA AB2549

Department of Consumer Affairs: temporary licenses.

CA AB1078

Firearms.

CA SB823

Public health: omnibus bill.

CA SB815

Healing arts.