California bill would require 'warnings' update on guns

With the new year comes changes to California's existing gun laws.

The Assembly Appropriations committee approved a measure on Wednesday that would require a warnings update on the packaging of guns, including specific statements related to risks of guns and signs displayed in stores.

The votes were 12-5 in favor of Assembly Bill 1525.

AB 1525 was introduced in February by Assembly Member Catharine Baker (R-San Ramon), with the coauthors of the bill Autumn Burke (D-Inglewood) and Marc Levine (D-San Rafael)

It initially made it through its first voting process on April 4 at the Assembly of Public Safety, who voted 7-0 in favor of the measure.

Language about the bill and when it would go into effect states that:

"This bill, on and after January 1, 2018, would require a specified statement relating to the risks of firearms and the laws regulating firearms to be included in the warnings on the packaging of firearms and descriptive materials that accompany firearms and in the instructional manual developed by the department. The bill, on and after January 1, 2019, would also require additional specified warnings to be included at the premises of a licensed firearms dealer."

The law as it currently stands requires "prescribed warnings" on all gun packaging and descriptive material that goes along with guns sold or transferred in California by licensed manufacturers or dealers. The law requires similar warnings to be posted within the businesses' premises.

Also, the Department of Justice (DOJ) develops an instructional manual that's made accessible for licensed dealers - required to be made available for consumers.

The fiscal effect, if the bill becomes law, would increase costs around $70,000, which would come from the California's Firearms Safety account.

DOJ would need to print about 1.3 million new warning labels, send out 2,000 packages of warning labels and also approximately 40 hours of overtime needed to finish the workload.

The Firearms Policy Coalition, who's in opposition of the bill, believes that the mandates required does not provide any benefit or value to any of the parties involved. 

© 2017 KXTV-TV


JOIN THE CONVERSATION

To find out more about Facebook commenting please read the
Conversation Guidelines and FAQs

Leave a Comment