California 2025-2026 Regular Session

California Assembly Bill AB1078

Introduced
2/20/25  
Refer
3/10/25  
Report Pass
4/1/25  
Refer
4/2/25  
Report Pass
4/9/25  
Refer
4/9/25  
Refer
4/30/25  
Report Pass
5/23/25  
Engrossed
6/2/25  
Refer
6/3/25  
Refer
6/11/25  
Report Pass
6/26/25  
Refer
6/26/25  
Report Pass
7/8/25  
Refer
7/8/25  
Refer
8/18/25  
Report Pass
8/29/25  

Caption

Firearms.

Impact

The implications of this legislation on state law are significant, introducing stricter criteria for firearm licensing and enhancing the overall scrutiny of applicants. Local licensing authorities will now be charged with implementing these additional review processes, potentially leading to a decrease in the number of licenses issued as they navigate the more rigorous requirements. The bill's sponsors argue that these measures will contribute to reduced gun violence by ensuring that only individuals who meet certain safety standards receive the right to carry firearms. However, the costs associated with implementing these new requirements pose questions about their feasibility for local governments.

Summary

Assembly Bill 1078, introduced by Assembly Member Berman, seeks to amend various sections of the Penal Code related to firearms regulation in California. The bill primarily aims to tighten the conditions under which a license for carrying concealed firearms may be issued. Specifically, it extends the timeframe for which an applicant is disqualified from obtaining a license if they have been subject to a restraining order or have committed certain offenses, aligning local regulations more closely with public safety considerations. Moreover, the bill mandates additional reviews of applicants’ backgrounds, including checks against the California Restraining and Protective Order System, which will assess an applicant's risk to themselves or others.

Sentiment

Sentiment around AB 1078 has been notably polarized. Proponents praise it as a necessary advancement in public safety measures, aiming to protect communities from potentially dangerous individuals gaining access to firearms. Conversely, opponents criticize the bill for potentially infringing on Second Amendment rights and creating burdensome regulations for responsible gun owners. This debate reflects larger national conversations about gun control and public safety, positioning AB 1078 squarely at the nexus of these discussions.

Contention

Notable points of contention raised during discussions centered on the balance between ensuring public safety and protecting individual rights. While many advocates emphasize the importance of stringent measures to prevent gun violence, others warn that further restrictions may inadvertently penalize lawful gun owners and complicate the licensing process. The debate around AB 1078 illustrates a fundamental conflict within legislative discussions on whether the state should prioritize individual liberties or communal safety regarding firearms.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Previously Filed As

CA SB2

Firearms.

CA SB899

Protective orders: firearms.

CA AB851

Firearms: Urban gun free zone pilot program.

CA SB368

Firearms: requirements for licensed dealers.

CA AB3064

Firearms.

CA SB377

Firearms.

CA AB2907

Firearms: restrained persons.

CA SB1002

Firearms: prohibited persons.

CA AB574

Firearms: dealer records of sale.

CA AB1133

Firearms: concealed carry licenses.

Similar Bills

CA SB2

Firearms.

CA SB918

Firearms.

CA SB53

Firearms: storage.

CA AB1621

Firearms: unserialized firearms.

CA SB118

Public safety.

CA AB88

Public safety.

CA SB670

Form preparers: immigration.

CA AB173

Public Safety.