Gov. Jerry Brown signs California gun restriction

[Judi Lynn]

Source: Associated Press

Gov. Jerry Brown signs California gun restriction
By DON THOMPSON, Associated Press | September 30, 2014 | Updated: September 30, 2014 10:55pm

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California will become the first state that allows family members to ask a judge to remove firearms from a relative who appears to pose a threat, under legislation Gov. Jerry Brown said Tuesday he had signed.

The bill was proposed by several Democrats and responds to a deadly rampage in May near the University of California, Santa Barbara.

Relatives of the victims and other supporters of the bill said the parents of 22-year-old Elliot Rodger were thwarted in their attempts to seek help for their troubled son before the rampage.

Supporters had said such a measure could have prevented the attacks, winning out over critics who said it would erode gun rights.


Read more: http://www.chron.com/news/crime/article/Gov-Jerry-Brown-signs-California-gun-restriction-5791466.php

[NYC_SKP]

1. It's as good a law as each judge who makes a determination.

There are a lot of cases in which, if the observations made and reasons provided are legitimate, that this would be a good thing.

Such cases include a person suffering from dementia, an abusive spouse or partner, and other cases.

But there are cases where it could be abused, as well, and there needs to be a way for people to appeal such judgements.

[Tikki]

2. Yeah, I'll err on the side of the safety of a life or 2 or 6...

Tikki

[Hoyt]

3. Seems to me that drugs with the caution "do not operate machinery" is reason enough

to take gunz away if the gun owner does not voluntarily relinquish them. Lots of drugs, including OTC, come with that warning.

in any event, should be interesting watching grumpy old men -- like Reeves and Dunn -- appealing court decisions to confiscate their gunz.

[NutmegYankee]

5. The warning is "do not operate heavy machinery until you know the effects of this drug".

It is meant for operation of automobiles and such, yet we do not take people's car keys or suspend their licenses. The justice system isn't going to send officers to remove a gun from a person taking a pain med for surgery or taking a sleeping medicine like NyQuil. This is one of the most absurd things I've read on DU.

[Hoyt]

14. Heck, there are millions of supposedly responsible gun owners on drugs that alter judgement.

Doesn't sound responsible to me. People hooked on gunz aren't going to give them up voluntarily.

[NutmegYankee]

46. You don't understand responsibility.

I had a serious injury that required me to take muscle relaxers for a few weeks, which carry the warning you identified. Guess what, I didn't go shooting and I kept my driving down to times when I wasn't using a full dose.

I can't understand why you think the Government needs to track my medications and make a house visit to remove property when I myself can determine what is safe for me. Hell, MILLIONS of people are on drugs that alter judgement or impair motor skills. The warning means make sure you understand the effects before operating machinery. And MILLIONS have done so safely every day! I reiterate the complete absurdity of your position.

[Hoyt]

47. Because, gunners won't do it. Millions of people on meds with gunz are a threat,

Zman is the obvious example, as are a bunch of the mass shooters.

[NutmegYankee]

48. And none of your examples had to do with meds.

Zimmerman was a racist and if most mass shooters HAD been on meds, the mass shootings probably would NOT have happened.

I again reiterate both the illogical rationale and absurdity of your position. A gun owner doesn't have to give up the gun. They just don't use it. It's no different than not driving when drunk. Millions of people drink at home and don't need to have the car confiscated to prevent them from driving. Sure, a tiny percentage may drink and drive, but never enough to warrant such a draconian policy.

[Hoyt]

52. Sorry, but a very large percentage of those arming up are also racists, Bundy ranch militia

types, those who would shoot people in a disaster like an Ebola epidemic, etc. That's the main issue with gunz, and meds make it worse.

I realize those who covet guns won't admit it because the next question would be, "WTF don't we put a brake on this crud?"

[NutmegYankee]

54. Statistics would demonstrate that to be false.

The majority of gun owners are just regular working class citizens. Polls show that 30-40% of Democrats alone are gun owners, and 22% of liberals such as myself own them.

As for meds with heavy machinery warnings, most have that warning because they make people drowsy. You have not once explained how that makes them more likely to commit a crime. A sleepy gun owner will do what a sleepy non-gun owner does - go to bed.

[Hoyt]

55. The majority of gun owners, particulary those who have more than a hunting rifle and

pistol, are right wingers. If you think they are just average people, go to a gun show, gun store, or gunz in public rally.

[NutmegYankee]

57. A gun store or show is hardly in the same category as a guns in public rally.

As for shows and stores, I've been in them many times. Shows are good for ammo and parts, stores for general cleaning supplies and ammo. Looked like regular dressed regular acting people to me. To be fair, I haven't been to a show since about early 2008. Finding parts for the antiques I own got easier on the Web. Been to the gun store recently though for cleaning supplies.

[beevul]

78. So what?

Guns should be taken away based on political affiliation?


Whats next, no free speech for right wingers too?


Imagine how the other side will like those precedents when they take power.

You might try...not being so short sighted and blind to the consequences of the things you propose.

Then again, I doubt it.

[Adrahil]

65. Hmmmm I was on a bunch of pain killers after a surgery...

... should the cops have come and seized my guns?

Yeah... no.

We need to hold people responsible for their decisions. Not prevent them form making any.

[Hoyt]

67. If you were a responsible gun owner, you would have locked them up and given key to someone else.

Almost everyone who uses a gun irresponsiblely, considered themselves responsible right up until the pulled the trigger. Even NRA Prez Keene's son -- brought up in the gun culture -- was imprisoned for shooting an innocent motorist. I'm sure he and his daddy thought they were responsible gun owners. The son wasn't, and daddy did a poor job.

Maybe next time before under the influence of such drugs, you or a family member will do the responsible thing.

[Adrahil]

68. I didn't need to. I'm not an idiot. I locked them up and didn't use them.

I locked up even my "self defense" guns because I didn't want to grab them by accident in the middle of the night. Though I had little fear of that. Those guns are kept in small safes requiring a finger print and code.

In the same way, I didn't lock up my car keys. I can make reasonable decisions, and the drugs I was on weren't THAT mind altering (in fact, I noticed little to no effect).

There's dangerous crap around us every day. It's a part of life.

[Hoyt]

69. Sounds good. Hopefully, you'll find over time that you really don't need all those gunz. Good luck

and hope you don't have any more surgeries.

[Adrahil]

70. Thanks much, I hope so too!

But I'm not really a "home protection nut." I do have self defense guns, but I treat them the same way I do my tornado kit.... I'll very likely never need them. But when I need them, I NEED them. I keep then in the aforementioned locked containers, and although I do keep a loaded magazine with them, the magazine is not in the gun and the chamber is empty. I'd have to make a very deliberate choice to load the weapon, reducing the chance of an accident. I've carried a gun with some moderate anticipation I'd need it exactly twice. Once when a friend was being stalked by her crazy ex-husband (who had beat her), I went over to pick her up and take her to a safe place. The cops wouldn't escort her, so I went and got her. Fortunately, her ex didn't try to approach when he saw she was escorted. The second time was when the court ordered him to move all his stuff out and she wanted someone there with her while he got his crap (again, the cops would not do it). Again, I didn't need it.


I mainly own guns because I enjoy shooting them at the range. I do have a carry permit, but I do not carry on a daily basis (in fact, other than the times mentioned above.... never). In my view, the chances of an accident outweigh the tiny chance I'd actually need it. Having said that, I don't think that's true for everyone.

Lastly, most of my guns are antiques. Probably half my collection is pre-1898 and not even legally a firearm. I don't even own any ammo for a good portion of them.

[Hoyt]

74. Oh, I can appreciate antiques. My dad had a few. Enjoyed selling some like a 1870s Evans Repeater,

Colt pistol, Springfield Trapdoor, Winchester, Sharps, civil war muskets, an Enfield used in Boar War period with a canon like bore, etc. But, glad they are gone, much prefer guitars, banjos, and mandolins.

Take care.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

9. Don't you know guns and beer are as American as,...well,...guns and whiskey?

[hack89]

12. Do we presently take away their car keys? nt

[Hoyt]

15. Old folks, yes. We should take guns from anyone on drugs that alter judgement.

[hack89]

16. Why do we let younger people on judgement altering drugs keep their car keys? nt

[Hoyt]

17. I think you will find that drugs like Prozac, Paxil, muscle relaxants, sleep aids, etc., may impact

pilot's license, why not walking around with a gun?

[hack89]

18. We were talking about "operating machinery"

for the vast majority of us that means driving cars. If we don't automatically take away car keys for people taking such drugs, why should we automatically take away guns?

Pilot licenses is a red herring. There are stricter standards on pilots for obvious reason.

[Hoyt]

21. You have a greater chance of getting killed by some yahoo with a Carry Permit, than an airplane.

[hack89]

22. So driving cars while taking those drugs is perfectly safe?

really?

[Hoyt]

24. At same time we take their gunz, we should take their keys.

[hack89]

27. And we should take away the keys of people without guns, correct?

any person taking a drug with an operating machinery warning can't drive while taking the drug.

[friendly_iconoclast]

34. Your interlocutor is avoiding the question...

[hack89]

35. He realizes what a ridiculous idea it is.

he just couldn't resist another reason to take away gunz.

[NutmegYankee]

45. And impose police state controls on OTC medications.

Anyone taking a medication that could alter judgement or impair motor skills would have to be tracked to enforce such a provision. The government would have to track all medications dispensed. And then there is alcohol...


It just goes back to the simple observation that everyone who supports extreme gun control supports police state policies and no privacy for people.

[CreekDog]

40. because your car keys aren't a car

[hack89]

41. So we disable their cars so they can't be driven.

slap a boot on one of the wheels.

Do you think that anyone taking a drug with a warning about operating machinery should have their guns taken away?

[Duckhunter935]

58. Got mighty quiet when called out and has no answer

[Oktober]

49. How about a mandatory big bouncy hamster ball for every human on earth...

... and no one can ever get hurt ever again and you'll be so so safe...

[Hoyt]

53. I wish we could convince gun nuts their fear of the boogeyman is irrational.

[Oktober]

56. All the fear I hear about is coming from the anti-2nd side of the house...

That and an inability to do basic statistics...

[Hoyt]

59. No, it's concern for the callous, often racist, bunch that are into gunz like the Bundy

ranchers, George Zimmerman, NRA board member teddy Nugent, those who think they are prepared for Ebola outbreak because they are armed, etc. Without meds they are a danger, with meds . . . . . .

[Oktober]

62. Corner?

[Hoyt]

63. Sorry, typo exacerbated by auto-correct.

[Adrahil]

66. Frankly, I don't think that's up to you. NT

[beevul]

79. Yeah but those don't effect ownershop of an aircraft.N/T

[lurch2]

28. Out of curiosity

Do you believe that people taking those medications should have their cars impounded?

[Hoyt]

36. I am most concerned about folks like this carrying gunz while on such meds.

[hollowdweller]

37. The Nugent One Is Classic

Nothing says Peckerwood like the stars and bars and an AR15.

[Hoyt]

38. +1. LMAO. And he's an NRA board member helping make policy.

Last edited Wed Oct 1, 2014, 07:29 PM - Edit history (1)

[lurch2]

64. You didn't answer the question

Do you support impounding the cars of people on these medications?

[friendly_iconoclast]

75. Showing off your segregated photo collection again, Hoyt?

That's rather racist, you know. Let me help you with that:

[Hoyt]

76. Gun nuts are rather racist. Check out NRA board members, attendees at gun shows, gun stores, etc.

Gungeoneers here.

And domestic terrorists like Bundy Ranch Militia and those below.

[friendly_iconoclast]

77. You seem not have noticed a common characteristic of the "gun nuts" I showed

Look again, think reeealy hard, and it might just come to you. Also:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=909847

76.Gun nuts are rather racist. Check out NRA board members, attendees at gun shows, gun stores, etc.
Gungeoneers here.

Name one of these Gungeoneers, then. A $100 donation to the gun control organization of your choice says you can't (or won't) name a one. I suspect that, once again, you're...

[friendly_iconoclast]

80. My interlocutor seems to have gone missing. Imagine my surprise...

[cui bono]

4. I posted about this earlier this evening.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1172154326

[Kablooie]

6. I wonder if someone will challenge it up to SCOTUS?

[BrotherIvan]

7. California makes headlines every day for liberal progress

I hope information about this law gets circulated so people know they don't have to live in fear of their psycho with a gun. Not only could this have helped Rodger's parents, it also could have worked on someone named Zimmerman if he was in California.

I'm loving these hard working Democrats. I do believe it would make a very convincing argument in the upcoming elections.

[calimary]

29. Well, there's the old saying - "as California goes, so goes the nation."

Sadly, that was certainly true with both reagan and the miserably conceived and idiotically worshipped extreme-tax-cutting Prop 13.

So we've got some distance to go - to start making up for that, imo. Glad to see this!

[BrotherIvan]

31. We have not been living up to our potential

California could very well lead the nation. Except for the coastal republicans who vote that way because they hate taxes and the fundies in the interior, we're never going to be anything but blue. But we do get a lot of money to defeat bills or push abominations such as prop 8. Now we need to work on DINOs like DiFi and the rest of the money/power brokers in the party; then we'll really start making progress.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

8. Gun nuts are gonna flip out,....thus proving they're nuts.

[beemer27]

11. You would be surprised

There are many of us "gun nuts" who think that a law like this is long overdue. If it takes firearms out of the hands of unbalanced people it is good for the rest of gun owners. Crimes and shooting sprees are not good for anyone(pro or anti gun). If there is a fair hearing in front of a judge, and some kind of real evidence, this seems to be a fair and beneficial law. There should also be an appeal process where the firearms are held in safe keeping while the accused appeals the ruling. If he loses, the firearms are kept, if he wins the appeal, it will be because he presented a logical argument why his rights should not be limited. If this law is used intelligently, it will be good for everyone.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

23. "If this law is used intelligently"

Face it. People are going to be turning in their crazy uncle.

This country is FILLED with crazy uncles.

[BrotherIvan]

32. This is a good response

Most gunner's first response is to show why any restrictions are bad, impossible, and foolish--all while claiming they support control measures. If gun owners would accept necessary control measures instead of always fighting them, we would be having a very different conversation. An abusive bully should not have a gun because he will use it.

[hollowdweller]

39. I don't see anything wrong with it.

As a gun owner I think crazy people with guns are a threat to my right to own a gun.

Every time some nut shoots up some place and kills people he's doing way more to shift public opinion toward restrictive gun control than Bloomburg or Brady.

The problem is a lot of gun owners have the gun equivalent of Obama delusional syndrome and are unable to truly discern what might prevent their long term ability to engage in their hobby like mass shootings.

[BrotherIvan]

43. Exactly

Gun owners should be working with gun control groups to make sure dangerous people can't have guns.

[aikoaiko]

10. As long as there is due process, a chance to rebut, and a restoration process, I'm good.

Does anyone have a link to the details of this law?

[petronius]

19. This, I think, is what the laws will look like when AB1014 goes into effect Jan 2016:

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml

I haven't read all the way through it, but there does appear to be an appeal process, a false petition is a misdemeanor, and the list of things judges are supposed to consider extends beyond mere hearsay...

[hack89]

13. Looks like a reasonable law. nt

[samsingh]

20. a good bill for a change.

[lurch2]

25. Not a bad law

Not a bad law, but much like regular TRO's, it could easily be abused. Hopefully judges will do the due dilligence and the bill contains harsh penalties for abuse.

[calimary]

30. Welcome to DU, lurch2!

Glad you're here! This makes me proud to be a Californian. We've gotta start SOMEWHERE with sensible gun restrictions. SOMEWHERE!!!!! I'm sure this will be fought, because the bad guys (and YES. I consider them bad guys. My opinion, but there you are) will fight ANYTHING along these lines that makes sense to the rest of us. I just hope it stands. I think we need more sensible gun restrictions and regulations. NOT fewer. Seems to me that we have the problems we do BECAUSE we don't have enough sensible gun restrictions and regulations on the books.

[marble falls]

26. Even gun owners should have no problem with this. A protection order should disarm the offender.

[BrotherIvan]

33. Even better

There are so few protections for those being abused or stalked as I have learned from two friends who have had their lives ravaged by crazy ex-partners. There needs to be far stronger measures taken because far too often, it ends up in violence. How many of those guys who have walked into a business to shoot their ex-wives could this stop? Now, we just have to work on private sales so psycho guy can't just look on armslist to get another one.

[Big_Mike]

42. My concern on this is just like in divorces, someone makes claims

that are not backed up by facts. Forex, my neighbor's ex claimed that he molested his 13 y.o. daughter. He was shattered. Then, he found out that the ex made the same claim against her first husband, and the by now adult daughter signed an affidavit that the alleged contact never occurred.

My cousin has a FFL and sells weapons for his living. His wife alleged domestic abuse and he was automatically placed on a TRO against all the weapons he had for sale (over $95K of inventory). All his weapons were impounded, and he went out of business. His children testified in court (eight months later) that their mother had told them what to say to the police, and that after the police went away, everything would return to "normal."

So long as the court proceedings are like traffic court, where the individuals do not need lawyers, and the judge helps with points of law, I don't see a real problem with this procedure. But taking the weapon cannot be based on he said/she said by anyone. There must be some kind of witnessed threat (I know, this can be abused, but a witness defines a credible threat) before ownership privileges are revoked. There should also be a maximum amount of time (1-2 business days) between when a court restores the rights and the weapons are returned to the owner, since after all, if they are revoked, the weapons are taken immediately.

[madokie]

44. I'm all for this

[Oktober]

50. What is the confiscation process?

Will the police force entry for non compliance?

[gopiscrap]

51. Doesn't go far enough

[GGJohn]

60. What's your idea of far enough?

How much further should it go?

[gopiscrap]

71. Total gun ban

welcome to DU btw!

[GGJohn]

72. Thanks for the welcome

and thanks for your honesty.

[Corey_Baker08]

61. Thank-You Governor Brown For Taking The First Step In Legislating Gun Control!

Hopefully this legislation will be the begining of legislation for other states to not only follow but to also add to provisions and extend across the country....

[happyslug]

73. Is this constitutional? Ignoring the Second, How about the right of someone to be an adult?

Here we have a law that permits relatives to ask a Judge to take away a right just because they THINK he may be a danger to someone or him or herself?

Under Roman Law, any person was under the authority of the eldest living male in his or her family till they either died OR became that eldest living male. Even the Romans said that rule was Unique to themselves, no one else had such a law, but it was a fundamental Roman Law.

Now women came under the authority of their husbands, and their children were viewed as members of their husband's family not the woman's, but even if married, Roman head of household could order her marriage dissolved.

To get around this rule, when Christianity became the State Religion, if you entered Religious orders (or even the Priesthood) you had to get the eldest living male's permission, through once granted you were viewed as no longer a member of your old family (this is where it is believed the adoption of new names upon entering a religious orders started, through it did NOT become the norm till the late Dark Ages).

Contrary to Roman Law, the English Common law said you became independent of your parents on two conditions, First when you turned 21 years of age, second if your parents by their own actions, were no longer do care, control or supervision over you. There was no bottom age for such emancipation, through the law did say children under age Seven were PRESUMED to be incompetent, and children over 14 were presumed to be Competent (through you could agree to be married WITHOUT your parent's consent at age 12). Between ages Seven and 14, competency was ruled on a case by case basis (And in one case in the early 1700s, it was ruled that a seven year old was competent enough to know that stealing was a crime, and hanged for it, for he was ruled to be competent).

Now, most states dropped the age of majority to 18 in the early 1970s (Pennsylvania was one state that DID not do that, instead Pennsylvania just dropped all statutes with age limits, except for drinking to 18, thus in Pennsylvania you are still a minor till you turn 21, but for all practical purposes you are of age at 18, except for drinking).

Given this history, under what THEORY of law can people get the court to require an adult NOT to do something that is legal, because the relatives do NOT want that adult to do it???

Think about it. We are dealing with an adult who has NOT committed a crime and who has NOT been shown to be incompetent, yet we are permitting that ADULT's relatives to impose restrictions on him or her.

Now we are dealing with firearms, but the logic behind doing this for firearms may NOT restrict it to firearms, what about Automobiles (mentioned above) or even baseball bats? What about Sex or getting or not getting an abortion? Where do you draw the line, on a constitutional basis, when no crime has been committed and no one is saying the person should be locked up in a mental institution? i.e he or she IS NOT a harm to himself of other (which is the test for locking someone up in a Mental institution).

Again, I am ignoring the Second Amendment/Right to bear arms argument. I am concentrating on the concept of being an Adult that includes the RIGHT to do what you what to do as long as it is legal.

Here is the key section of the new law:

CHAPTER 2. TEMPORARY EMERGENCY GUN VIOLENCE RESTRAINING ORDER

18125. (a) A temporary emergency gun violence restraining order may be issued on an ex parte basis only if a law enforcement officer asserts, and a judicial officer finds, that there is reasonable cause to believe both of the following:

(1) The subject of the petition poses an immediate and present danger of causing personal injury to himself, herself, or another by having in his or her custody or control, owning, purchasing, possessing, or receiving a firearm.

(2) A temporary emergency gun violence restraining order is necessary to prevent personal injury to the subject of the petition or another because less restrictive alternatives either have been tried and found to be ineffective, or have been determined to be inadequate or inappropriate for the circumstances of the subject of the petition.

(b) A temporary emergency gun violence restraining order issued pursuant to this chapter shall prohibit the subject of the petition from having in his or her custody or control, owning, purchasing, possessing, or receiving, or attempting to purchase or receive, a firearm or ammunition, and shall expire 21 days from the date the order is issued.

Thus this is less then a "Clear and present danger to oneself or others" which is the test to commit someone but how much less is "an immediate and present danger of causing personal injury to himself, herself, or another"?

To a degree this is flushed out by the following:

18150. (b)(1)

The subject of the petition poses a significant danger, in the near future, of personal injury to himself, herself, or another by having in his or her custody or control, owning, purchasing, possessing, or receiving a firearm as determined by considering the factors listed in Section 18155.

That leads us to 18155:

18155. (a) (1) The court, before issuing an ex parte gun violence restraining order, shall examine on oath, the petitioner and any witness the petitioner may produce.

(2) In lieu of examining the petitioner and any witness the petitioner may produce, the court may require the petitioner and any witness to submit a written affidavit signed under oath.

(b) (1) In determining whether grounds for a gun violence restraining order exist, the court shall consider all evidence of the following:

(A) A recent threat of violence or act of violence by the subject of the petition directed toward another.

(B) A recent threat of violence or act of violence by the subject of the petition directed toward himself or herself.

(C) A violation of an emergency protective order issued pursuant to Section 646.91 or Part 3 (commencing with Section 6240) of Division 10 of the Family Code that is in effect at the time the court is considering the petition.

(D) A recent violation of an unexpired protective order issued pursuant to Part 4 (commencing with Section 6300) of Division 10 of the Family Code, Section 136.2, Section 527.6 of the Code of Civil Procedure, or Section 213.5 or 15657.03 of the Welfare and Institutions Code.

(E) A conviction for any offense listed in Section 29805.

(F) A pattern of violent acts or violent threats within the past 12 months, including, but not limited to, threats of violence or acts of violence by the subject of the petition directed toward himself, herself, or another.

(2) In determining whether grounds for a gun violence restraining order exist, the court may consider any other evidence of an increased risk for violence, including, but not limited to, evidence of any of the following:

(A) The unlawful and reckless use, display, or brandishing of a firearm by the subject of the petition.

(B) The history of use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force by the subject of the petition against another person.

(C) Any prior arrest of the subject of the petition for a felony offense.

(D) Any history of a violation by the subject of the petition of an emergency protective order issued pursuant to Section 646.91 or Part 3 (commencing with Section 6240) of Division 10 of the Family Code.

(E) Any history of a violation by the subject of the petition of a protective order issued pursuant to Part 4 (commencing with Section 6300) of Division 10 of the Family Code, Section 136.2, Section 527.6 of the Code of Civil Procedure, or Section 213.5 or 15657.03 of the Welfare and Institutions Code.

(F) Documentary evidence, including, but not limited to, police reports and records of convictions, of either recent criminal offenses by the subject of the petition that involve controlled substances or alcohol or ongoing abuse of controlled substances or alcohol by the subject of the petition.

(G) Evidence of recent acquisition of firearms, ammunition, or other deadly weapons.

(3) For the purposes of this subdivision, "recent" means within the six months prior to the date the petition was filed.

(c) If the court determines that there grounds to issue an ex parte gun violence restraining order exist, it shall issue an ex parte gun violence restraining order that prohibits the subject of
the petition from having in his or her custody or control, owning, purchasing, possessing, or receiving, or attempting to purchase or receive, a firearm or ammunition, and expires no later than 21 days from the date of the order.

I see the above as an attempt to work around the issue of the person NOT doing anything he can be committed for, but at the same time restrict a person with mental problems from having a weapon. The problem is HOW is this consistent with the concept that we are innocent until proven guilty AND that we are competent until shown to be incompetent? It is an attempt to work around that problem, but an attempt I suspect will fail. Again IGNORING the right to bear arms argument, how is this different from declaring someone incompetent? No one is arguing that an incompetent person CAN possess a firearm, but the above is saying a COMPETENT person can NOT possess a firearm under certain conditions that shows he is less then Competent but is still Competent?

Competency is a very low threshold, it is knowing what one owns and NOT a danger to themselves or others. A Seven year old can be "Competent". The Common Law Rule was were you as competent as a typical 14 year old? (This rule has changed, state by state, but 18 is the age one is assumed to be competent). Competency is a very low standard, but it is the standard that permit people to cross state lines, enter into contracts, get abortions, seek medical care and even enlist. Yet such a person can NOT own a firearm that "More Competent" people can?

Thus I have problems with this statute, it is an attempt to change competency law without changing competence law. The better approach would have been to say one is INCOMPETENT if after a hearing the above was found. The problem with that approach then you have to name a guardian and it appears the Legislature did not want to do that for that costs money.

Think about it, if someone can NOT be trusted to own a firearm, should he or she be trusted to know when to sell her or his home? Cross State Lines? Get a Credit Card? Yes, such a person will harm less people by obtaining credit cards, but if he or she can NOT be trusted with a Firearm, should they be trusted with a Car, or Credit Cards?

Maybe the courts will restrict this so much that it becomes meaningless (i.e. rule the test is one of Competency for the terms are so close as to no difference in their effect, thus this law only affect people who are clearly incompetent, and thus come under the laws governing competency not this law, i.e. this law becomes a dead letter).



The complete bill can be found at the following cite:

http://legiscan.com/CA/bill/AB1014/2013

Below is the actual changes in the law:

1524. (a) A search warrant may be issued upon any of the following grounds:

(14) Beginning January 1, 2016, the property or things to be seized are firearms or ammunition or both that are owned by, in the possession of, or in the custody or control of a person who is the subject of a gun violence restraining order that has been issued pursuant to Division 3.2 (commencing with Section 18100) of Title 2 of Part 6, if a prohibited firearm or ammunition or both is possessed, owned, in the custody of, or controlled by a person against whom a gun violence restraining order has been issued, the person has been lawfully served with that order, and the person has failed to relinquish the firearm as required by law.

DIVISION 3.2. Gun Violence Restraining Orders

CHAPTER 1. GENERAL

18100. A gun violence restraining order is an order, in writing, signed by the court, prohibiting and enjoining a named person from having in his or her custody or control, owning, purchasing, possessing, or receiving any firearms or ammunition. This division establishes a civil restraining order process to accomplish that purpose.

18105. The Judicial Council shall prescribe the form of the petitions and orders and any other documents, and shall promulgate any rules of court, necessary to implement this division.

18107. A petition for a gun violence restraining order shall describe the number, types, and locations of any firearms and ammunition presently believed by the petitioner to be possessed or controlled by the subject of the petition.

18109. Nothing in this division shall be interpreted to require a law enforcement agency or a law enforcement officer to seek a gun violence restraining order in any case, including, but not limited to, in a case in which the agency or officer concludes, after investigation, that the criteria for issuance of a gun violence restraining order are not satisfied.

18110. Prior to a hearing on the issuance, renewal, or termination of an order under Chapter 3 (commencing with Section 18150) or Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 18170), the court shall ensure that a search as described in subdivision (a) of Section 6306 of the Family Code is conducted. After issuing its ruling, the court shall provide the advisement described in subdivision (c) of Section 6306 of the Family Code and shall keep information obtained from a search conducted pursuant to this section confidential in accordance with subdivision (d) of Section 6306 of the Family Code.

18115. (a) The court shall notify the Department of Justice when a gun violence restraining order has been issued or renewed underthis division no later than one court day after issuing or renewing the order.

(b) The court shall notify the Department of Justice when a gun violence restraining order has been dissolved or terminated under this division no later than five court days after dissolving or terminating the order. Upon receipt of either a notice of dissolution or a notice of termination of a gun violence restraining order, the Department of Justice shall, within 15 days, note document the updated status of any order issued under this division.

(c) The notices required to be submitted to the Department of Justice pursuant to this section shall be submitted in an electronic format, in a manner prescribed by the department.

(d) When notifying the Department of Justice pursuant to subdivision (a) or (b), the court shall indicate in the notice whether the person subject to the gun violence restraining order was
present in court to be informed of the contents of the order or if the person failed to appear. The person's presence in court shall constitute proof of service of notice of the terms of the order.

(e) (1) Within one business day of service, a law enforcement officer who served a gun violence restraining order shall submit the proof of service directly into the California Restraining and Protective Order System, including his or her name and law enforcement agency, and shall transmit the original proof of service form to the issuing court.

(2) Within one business day of receipt of proof of service by a person other than a law enforcement officer, the clerk of the court shall submit the proof of service of a gun violence restraining order directly into the California Restraining and Protective Order System, including the name of the person who served the order. If the court is unable to provide this notification to the Department of Justice by electronic transmission, the court shall, within one business day of receipt, transmit a copy of the proof of service to a local law enforcement agency. The local law enforcement agency shall submit the proof of service directly into the California Restraining and Protective Order System within one business day of receipt from the court.

18120. (a) A person subject to a gun violence restraining order issued pursuant to this division shall not have in his or her custody or control, own, purchase, possess, or receive any firearms or ammunition while that order is in effect.

(b) (1) Upon issuance of a gun violence restraining order issued pursuant to this division, the court shall order the restrained person to surrender to the local law enforcement agency all firearms and ammunition in the restrained person's custody or control, or which the restrained person possesses or owns.

(2) The surrender ordered pursuant to paragraph (1) shall occur by immediately surrendering all firearms and ammunition in a safe manner, upon request of any law enforcement officer, to the control of the officer, after being served with the restraining order. A law enforcement officer serving a gun violence restraining order that indicates that the restrained person possesses any firearms or ammunition shall request that all firearms and ammunition be immediately surrendered. Alternatively, if no request is made by a law enforcement officer, the surrender shall occur within 24 hours of being served with the order, by either surrendering all firearms and ammunition in a safe manner to the control of the local law enforcement agency, or by selling all firearms and ammunition to a licensed gun dealer, as specified in Article 1 (commencing with Section 26700) and Article 2 (commencing with Section 26800) of Chapter 2 of Division 6 of Title 4 of Part 6 of the Penal Code. The law enforcement officer or licensed gun dealer taking possession of any firearms or ammunition pursuant to this subdivision shall issue a receipt to the person surrendering the firearm or firearms or ammunition or both at the time of surrender. A person ordered to surrender all firearms and ammunition pursuant to this subdivision shall, within 48 hours after being served with the order, do both of the following:

(A) File with the court that issued the gun violence restraining order the original receipt showing all firearms and ammunition have been surrendered to a local law enforcement agency or sold to a licensed gun dealer. Failure to timely file a receipt shall constitute a violation of the restraining order.

(B) File a copy of the receipt described in subparagraph (A) with the law enforcement agency that served the gun violence restraining order. Failure to timely file a copy of the receipt shall constitute a violation of the restraining order.

(c) (1) Any firearms or ammunition surrendered to a law enforcement officer or law enforcement agency pursuant to this section shall be retained by the law enforcement agency until the expiration of any gun violence restraining order that has been issued against the restrained person. Upon expiration of any order, any firearms or ammunition shall be returned to the restrained person in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 33850) of Division 11 of Title 4. Firearms or ammunition that are not claimed are subject to the requirements of Section 34000.

(2) A restrained person who owns any firearms or ammunition that are in the custody of a law enforcement agency pursuant to this section and who does not wish to have the firearm or firearms or ammunition returned is entitled to sell or transfer title of any firearms or ammunition to a licensed dealer provided that the firearm or firearms or ammunition are otherwise legal to own or possess and the restrained person otherwise has right to title of the firearm or firearms or ammunition.

(d) If a person other than the restrained person claims title to any firearms or ammunition surrendered pursuant to this section, and he or she is determined by the law enforcement agency to be the lawful owner of the firearm or firearms or ammunition, the firearm or firearms or ammunition shall be returned to him or her pursuant to Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 33850) of Division 11 of Title 4.

18122. This division shall become operative on January 1, 2016.

CHAPTER 2. TEMPORARY EMERGENCY GUN VIOLENCE RESTRAINING ORDER

18125. (a) A temporary emergency gun violence restraining order may be issued on an ex parte basis only if a law enforcement officer asserts, and a judicial officer finds, that there is reasonable cause to believe both of the following:

(1) The subject of the petition poses an immediate and present danger of causing personal injury to himself, herself, or another by having in his or her custody or control, owning, purchasing, possessing, or receiving a firearm.

(2) A temporary emergency gun violence restraining order is necessary to prevent personal injury to the subject of the petition or another because less restrictive alternatives either have been tried and found to be ineffective, or have been determined to be inadequate or inappropriate for the circumstances of the subject of the petition.

(b) A temporary emergency gun violence restraining order issued pursuant to this chapter shall prohibit the subject of the petition from having in his or her custody or control, owning, purchasing, possessing, or receiving, or attempting to purchase or receive, a firearm or ammunition, and shall expire 21 days from the date the order is issued.

18130. A temporary emergency gun violence restraining order is valid only if it is issued by a judicial officer after making the findings required by Section 18125 and pursuant to a specific request by a law enforcement officer.

18135. A temporary emergency gun violence restraining order issued under this chapter shall include all of the following:

(a) A statement of the grounds supporting the issuance of the order.

(b) The date and time the order expires.

(c) The address of the superior court for the county in which the restrained party resides.

(d) The following statement:

"To the restrained person: This order will last until the date and time noted above. You are required to surrender all firearms and ammunition that you own or possess in accordance with Section 18120 of the Penal Code and you may not have in your custody or control, own, purchase, possess, or receive, or attempt to purchase or receive a firearm or ammunition, while this order is in effect. However, a more permanent gun violence restraining order may be obtained from the court. You may seek the advice of an attorney as to any matter connected with the order. The attorney should be consulted promptly so that the attorney may assist you in any matter connected with the order."

18140. A law enforcement officer who requests a temporary emergency gun violence restraining order shall do all of the following:

(a) If the order is obtained orally, memorialize the order of the court on the form approved by the Judicial Council.

(b) Serve the order on the restrained person, if the restrained person can reasonably be located.

(c) File a copy of the order with the court as soon as practicable after issuance.

(d) Have the order entered into the computer database system for protective and restraining orders maintained by the Department of Justice.

18145. (a) (1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), the petition for a temporary emergency gun violence restraining order shall be obtained by submitting a written petition to the court.

(2) If time and circumstances do not permit the submission of a written petition, a temporary emergency gun violence restraining order may be issued in accordance with the procedures for obtaining an oral search warrant described in Section 1526.

(b) The presiding judge of the superior court of each county shall designate at least one judge, commissioner, or referee who shall be reasonably available to issue temporary emergency gun violence restraining orders when the court is not in session.

CHAPTER 3. EX PARTE GUN VIOLENCE RESTRAINING ORDER


18150. (a) (1) An immediate family member of a person or a law enforcement officer may file a petition requesting that the court issue an ex parte gun violence restraining order enjoining the subject of the petition from having in his or her custody or control, owning, purchasing, possessing, or receiving a firearm or ammunition.

(2) For purposes of this subdivision, "immediate family member" has the same meaning as in paragraph (3) of subdivision (b) of Section 422.4.

(b) A court may issue an ex parte gun violence restraining order if the petition, supported by an affidavit made in writing and signed by the petitioner under oath, or an oral statement taken pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 18155, and any additional information provided to the court shows that there is a substantial
likelihood that both of the following are true:

(1) The subject of the petition poses a significant danger, in the near future, of personal injury to himself, herself, or another by having in his or her custody or control, owning, purchasing, possessing, or receiving a firearm as determined by considering the factors listed in Section 18155.

(2) An ex parte gun violence restraining order is necessary to prevent personal injury to the subject of the petition or another because less restrictive alternatives either have been tried and found to be ineffective, or are inadequate or inappropriate for the circumstances of the subject of the petition.

(c) An affidavit supporting a petition for the issuance of an ex parte gun violence restraining order shall set forth the facts tending to establish the grounds of the petition, or the reason for
believing that they exist.

(d) An ex parte order under this chapter shall be issued or denied on the same day that the petition is submitted to the court, unless the petition is filed too late in the day to permit effective review, in which case the order shall be issued or denied on the next day of judicial business in sufficient time for the order to be filed that day with the clerk of the court.

18155. (a) (1) The court, before issuing an ex parte gun violence restraining order, shall examine on oath, the petitioner and any witness the petitioner may produce.

(2) In lieu of examining the petitioner and any witness the petitioner may produce, the court may require the petitioner and any witness to submit a written affidavit signed under oath.

(b) (1) In determining whether grounds for a gun violence restraining order exist, the court shall consider all evidence of the following:

(A) A recent threat of violence or act of violence by the subject of the petition directed toward another.

(B) A recent threat of violence or act of violence by the subject of the petition directed toward himself or herself.

(C) A violation of an emergency protective order issued pursuant to Section 646.91 or Part 3 (commencing with Section 6240) of Division 10 of the Family Code that is in effect at the time the court is considering the petition.

(D) A recent violation of an unexpired protective order issued pursuant to Part 4 (commencing with Section 6300) of Division 10 of the Family Code, Section 136.2, Section 527.6 of the Code of Civil Procedure, or Section 213.5 or 15657.03 of the Welfare and Institutions Code.

(E) A conviction for any offense listed in Section 29805.

(F) A pattern of violent acts or violent threats within the past 12 months, including, but not limited to, threats of violence or acts of violence by the subject of the petition directed toward himself, herself, or another.

(2) In determining whether grounds for a gun violence restraining order exist, the court may consider any other evidence of an increased risk for violence, including, but not limited to, evidence of any of the following:

(A) The unlawful and reckless use, display, or brandishing of a firearm by the subject of the petition.

(B) The history of use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force by the subject of the petition against another person.

(C) Any prior arrest of the subject of the petition for a felony offense.

(D) Any history of a violation by the subject of the petition of an emergency protective order issued pursuant to Section 646.91 or Part 3 (commencing with Section 6240) of Division 10 of the Family Code.

(E) Any history of a violation by the subject of the petition of a protective order issued pursuant to Part 4 (commencing with Section 6300) of Division 10 of the Family Code, Section 136.2, Section 527.6 of the Code of Civil Procedure, or Section 213.5 or 15657.03 of the Welfare and Institutions Code.

(F) Documentary evidence, including, but not limited to, police reports and records of convictions, of either recent criminal offenses by the subject of the petition that involve controlled substances or alcohol or ongoing abuse of controlled substances or alcohol by the subject of the petition.

(G) Evidence of recent acquisition of firearms, ammunition, or other deadly weapons.

(3) For the purposes of this subdivision, "recent" means within the six months prior to the date the petition was filed.

(c) If the court determines that there grounds to issue an ex parte gun violence restraining order exist, it shall issue an ex parte gun violence restraining order that prohibits the subject of
the petition from having in his or her custody or control, owning, purchasing, possessing, or receiving, or attempting to purchase or receive, a firearm or ammunition, and expires no later than 21 days from the date of the order.

18160. (a) An ex parte gun violence restraining order issued under this chapter shall include all of the following:

(1) A statement of the grounds supporting the issuance of the order.

(2) The date and time the order expires.

(3) The address of the superior court in which any responsive pleading should be filed.

(4) The date and time of the scheduled hearing.

(5) The following statement:

"To the restrained person: This order is valid until the expiration date and time noted above. You are required to surrender all firearms and ammunition that you own or possess in accordance with Section 18120 of the Penal Code and you may not have in your custody or control, own, purchase, possess, or receive, or attempt to purchase or receive a firearm or ammunition, while this order is in effect. A hearing will be held on the date and at the time noted above to determine if a more permanent gun violence restraining order should be issued. Failure to appear at that hearing may result in a court making an order against you that is valid for a year. You may seek the advice of an attorney as to any matter connected with the order. The attorney should be consulted promptly so that the attorney may assist you in any matter connected with the order."

(b) (1) An ex parte gun violence restraining order shall be personally served on the restrained person by a law enforcement officer, or any person who is at least 18 years of age and not a party to the action, as provided in Section 414.10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, if the restrained person can reasonably be located.

(2) When serving a gun violence restraining order, a law enforcement officer shall inform the restrained person of the hearing scheduled pursuant to Section 18165.

18165. Within 21 days after the date on the order, before the court that issued the order or another court in the same jurisdiction, the court shall hold a hearing pursuant to Section 18175 to determine if a gun violence restraining order should be issued under Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 18170).

CHAPTER 4. GUN VIOLENCE RESTRAINING ORDER ISSUED AFTER NOTICE AND HEARING


18170. (a) An immediate family member of a person or a law enforcement officer may request that a court, after notice and a hearing, issue a gun violence restraining order enjoining the subject of the petition from having in his or her custody or control, owning, purchasing, possessing, or receiving a firearm or ammunition for a period of one year.

(b) For purposes of this subdivision, "immediate family member" has the same meaning as in paragraph (3) of subdivision (b) of Section 422.4.

18175. (a) In determining whether to issue a gun violence restraining order under this chapter, the court shall consider evidence of the facts identified in paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) of Section 18155 and may consider any other evidence of an increased risk for violence, including, but not limited to, evidence of the facts identified in paragraph (2) of subdivision (b) of Section 18155.

(b) At the hearing, the petitioner shall have the burden of proving, by clear and convincing evidence, that both of the following are true:

(1) The subject of the petition, or a person subject to an ex parte gun violence restraining order, as applicable, poses a significant danger of personal injury to himself, herself, or another
by having in his or her custody or control, owning, purchasing, possessing, or receiving a firearm or ammunition.

(2) A gun violence restraining order is necessary to prevent personal injury to the subject of the petition, or the person subject to an ex parte gun violence restraining order, as applicable, or another because less restrictive alternatives either have been tried and found to be ineffective, or are inadequate or inappropriate for the circumstances of the subject of the petition, or the person subject to an ex parte gun violence restraining order, as applicable.

(c) (1) If the court finds that there is clear and convincing evidence to issue a gun violence restraining order, the court shall issue a gun violence restraining order that prohibits the subject of the petition from having in his or her custody or control, owning, purchasing, possessing, or receiving, or attempting to purchase or receive, a firearm or ammunition.

(2) If the court finds that there is not clear and convincing evidence to support the issuance of a gun violence restraining order, the court shall dissolve any temporary emergency or ex parte gun violence restraining order then in effect.

(d) The gun violence restraining order issued under this chapter shall have a duration of one year, subject to termination by further order of the court at a hearing held pursuant to Section 18185 and renewal by further order of the court pursuant to Section 18190.

18180. (a) A gun violence restraining order issued pursuant to this chapter shall include all of the following:
(1) A statement of the grounds supporting the issuance of the order.

(2) The date and time the order expires.

(3) The address of the superior court for the county in which the restrained party resides.

(4) The following statement:

"To the restrained person: This order will last until the date and time noted above. If you have not done so already, you must surrender all firearms and ammunition that you own or possess in accordance with Section 18120 of the Penal Code. You may not have in your custody or control, own, purchase, possess, or receive, or attempt to purchase or receive a firearm or ammunition, while this order is in effect. Pursuant to Section 18185, you have the right to request one hearing to terminate this order at any time during its effective period. You may seek the advice of an attorney as to any matter connected with the order."

(b) When the court issues a gun violence restraining order under this chapter, the court shall inform the restrained person that he or she is entitled to one hearing to request a termination of the order, pursuant to Section 18185, and shall provide the restrained person with a form to request a hearing.

18185. (a) A person subject to a gun violence restraining order issued under this chapter may submit one written request at any time during the effective period of the order for a hearing to terminate the order.

(b) If the court finds after the hearing that there is no longer clear and convincing evidence to believe that paragraphs (1) and (2) of subdivision (b) of Section 18175 are true, the court shall terminate the order.

18190. (a) (1) An immediate family member of a restrained person or a law enforcement officer may request a renewal of a gun violence restraining order at any time within the three months before the expiration of a gun violence restraining order.

(2) For purposes of this subdivision, "immediate family member" has the same meaning as in paragraph (3) of subdivision (b) of Section 422.4.

(b) A court may, after notice and a hearing, renew a gun violence restraining order issued under this chapter if the petitioner proves, by clear and convincing evidence, that paragraphs (1) and (2) of subdivision (b) of Section 18175 continue to be true.

(c) In determining whether to renew a gun violence restraining order issued under this chapter, the court shall consider evidence of the facts identified in paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) of Section 18155 and any other evidence of an increased risk for violence, including, but not limited to, evidence of any of the facts identified in paragraph (2) of subdivision (b) of Section 18155.

(d) At the hearing, the petitioner shall have the burden of proving, by clear and convincing evidence, that paragraphs (1) and (2) of subdivision (b) of Section 18175 are true.

(e) If the renewal petition is supported by clear and convincing evidence, the court shall renew the gun violence restraining order issued under this chapter.

(f) The renewal of a gun violence restraining order issued pursuant to this section shall have a duration of one year, subject to termination by further order of the court at a hearing held pursuant to Section 18185 and further renewal by further order of the court pursuant to this section.

(g) A gun violence restraining order renewed pursuant to this section shall include the information identified in subdivision (a) of Section 18180.

18195. Any hearing held pursuant to this chapter may be continued upon a showing of good cause. Any existing order issued pursuant to this division shall remain in full force and effect during the period of continuance.

18197. If a person subject to a gun violence restraining order issued or renewed pursuant to this chapter was not present in court at the time the order was issued or renewed, the gun violence restraining order shall be personally served on the restrained person by a law enforcement officer or any person who is at least 18 years of age and not a party to the action, as provided in Section 414.10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, if the restrained person can reasonably be located.

CHAPTER 5. OFFENSES


18200. Every person who files a petition for an ex parte gun violence restraining order pursuant to Chapter 3 (commencing with Section 18150) or a gun violence restraining order issued after notice and a hearing pursuant to Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 18170), knowing the information in the petition to be false or with the intent to harass, is guilty of a misdemeanor.

18205. Every person who owns or possesses a firearm or ammunition with knowledge that he or she is prohibited from doing so by a temporary emergency gun violence restraining order issued pursuant to Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 18125), an ex parte gun violence restraining order issued pursuant to Chapter 3 (commencing with Section 18150), or a gun violence restraining order issued after notice and a hearing issued pursuant to Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 18170), is guilty of a misdemeanor and shall be prohibited from having in his or her custody or control, owning, purchasing, possessing, or receiving, or attempting to purchase or receive, a firearm or ammunition for a five-year period, to commence upon the expiration of the existing gun violence restraining order.

SEC. 4. Section 18250 of the Penal Code is amended to read:

18250. (a) If any of the following persons is at the scene of a domestic violence incident involving a threat to human life or a physical assault, or is serving a protective order as defined in Section 6218 of the Family Code, that person shall take temporary custody of any firearm or other deadly weapon in plain sight or discovered pursuant to a consensual or other lawful search as necessary for the protection of the peace officer or other persons present:

(1) A sheriff, undersheriff, deputy sheriff, marshal, deputy marshal, or police officer of a city, as defined in subdivision (a) of Section 830.1.

(2) A peace officer of the Department of the California Highway Patrol, as defined in subdivision (a) of Section 830.2.

(3) A member of the University of California Police Department, as defined in subdivision (b) of Section 830.2.

(4) An officer listed in Section 830.6, while acting in the course and scope of the officer's employment as a peace officer.

(5) A member of a California State University Police Department, as defined in subdivision (c) of Section 830.2.

(6) A peace officer of the Department of Parks and Recreation, as defined in subdivision (f) of Section 830.2.

(7) A peace officer, as defined in subdivision (d) of Section 830.31.

(8) A peace officer, as defined in subdivisions (a) and (b) of Section 830.32.

(9) A peace officer, as defined in Section 830.5.

(b) This section shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2016, and as of that date is repealed, unless a later enacted statute, that is enacted before January 1, 2016, deletes or extends that date.

SEC. 4.5. Section 18250 of the Penal Code is amended to read:

18250. (a) If any of the following persons is at the scene of a domestic violence incident involving a threat to human life or a physical assault, is serving a protective order as defined in Section 6218 of the Family Code, or is serving a gun violence restraining order issued pursuant to Division 3.2 (commencing with Section 18100), that person shall take temporary custody of any firearm or other deadly weapon in plain sight or discovered pursuant to a consensual or other lawful search as necessary for the protection of the peace officer or other persons present:

(1) A sheriff, undersheriff, deputy sheriff, marshal, deputy marshal, or police officer of a city, as defined in subdivision (a) of Section 830.1.

(2) A peace officer of the Department of the California Highway Patrol, as defined in subdivision (a) of Section 830.2.

(3) A member of the University of California Police Department, as defined in subdivision (b) of Section 830.2.

(4) An officer listed in Section 830.6, while acting in the course and scope of the officer's employment as a peace officer.

(5) A member of a California State University Police Department, as defined in subdivision (c) of Section 830.2.

(6) A peace officer of the Department of Parks and Recreation, as defined in subdivision (f) of Section 830.2.

(7) A peace officer, as defined in subdivision (d) of Section 830.31.

(8) A peace officer, as defined in subdivisions (a) and (b) of Section 830.32.

(9) A peace officer, as defined in Section 830.5.

(10) A sworn member of the Department of Justice who is a peace officer, as defined in Section 830.1.

(11) A member of the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District Police Department, as defined in subdivision (a) of Section 830.33.

(b) This section shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2016, and as of that date is repealed, unless a later enacted statute, that is enacted before January 1, 2016, deletes or extends that date.

SEC. 5. Section 18250 is added to the Penal Code, to read:

18250. (a) If any of the following persons is at the scene of a domestic violence incident involving a threat to human life or a physical assault, is serving a protective order as defined in Section 6218 of the Family Code, or is serving a gun violence restraining order issued pursuant to Division 3.2 (commencing with Section 18100), that person shall take temporary custody of any firearm or other deadly weapon in plain sight or discovered pursuant to a consensual or other lawful search as necessary for the protection of the peace officer or other persons present:

(1) A sheriff, undersheriff, deputy sheriff, marshal, deputy marshal, or police officer of a city, as defined in subdivision (a) of Section 830.1.

(2) A peace officer of the Department of the California Highway Patrol, as defined in subdivision (a) of Section 830.2.

(3) A member of the University of California Police Department, as defined in subdivision (b) of Section 830.2.

(4) An officer listed in Section 830.6, while acting in the course and scope of the officer's employment as a peace officer.

(5) A member of a California State University Police Department, as defined in subdivision (c) of Section 830.2.

(6) A peace officer of the Department of Parks and Recreation, as defined in subdivision (f) of Section 830.2.

(7) A peace officer, as defined in subdivision (d) of Section 830.31.

(8) A peace officer, as defined in subdivisions (a) and (b) of Section 830.32.

(9) A peace officer, as defined in Section 830.5.

(10) A sworn member of the Department of Justice who is a peace officer, as defined in Section 830.1.

(b) This section shall become operative on January 1, 2016.

SEC. 5.5. Section 18250 is added to the Penal Code, to read:

18250. (a) If any of the following persons is at the scene of a domestic violence incident involving a threat to human life or a physical assault, is serving a protective order as defined in Section 6218 of the Family Code, or is serving a gun violence restraining order issued pursuant to Division 3.2 (commencing with Section 18100), that person shall take temporary custody of any firearm or other deadly weapon in plain sight or discovered pursuant to a consensual or other lawful search as necessary for the protection of the peace officer or other persons present:

(1) A sheriff, undersheriff, deputy sheriff, marshal, deputy marshal, or police officer of a city, as defined in subdivision (a) of Section 830.1.

(2) A peace officer of the Department of the California Highway Patrol, as defined in subdivision (a) of Section 830.2.

(3) A member of the University of California Police Department, as defined in subdivision (b) of Section 830.2.

(4) An officer listed in Section 830.6, while acting in the course and scope of the officer's employment as a peace officer.

(5) A member of a California State University Police Department,as defined in subdivision (c) of Section 830.2.

(6) A peace officer of the Department of Parks and Recreation, as defined in subdivision (f) of Section 830.2.

(7) A peace officer, as defined in subdivision (d) of Section 830.31.

(8) A peace officer, as defined in subdivisions (a) and (b) of Section 830.32.

(9) A peace officer, as defined in Section 830.5.

(10) A sworn member of the Department of Justice who is a peace officer, as defined in Section 830.1.

(11) A member of the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District Police Department, as defined in subdivision (a) of Section 830.33.

(b) This section shall become operative on January 1, 2016.

SEC. 6. Section 8105 of the Welfare and Institutions Code is amended to read:

8105. (a) The Department of Justice shall request each public and private mental hospital, sanitarium, and institution to submit to the department information the department deems necessary to identify those persons who are subject to the prohibition specified by subdivision (a) of Section 8100, in order to carry out its duties in relation to firearms, destructive devices, and explosives.

(b) Upon request of the Department of Justice pursuant to subdivision (a), each public and private mental hospital, sanitarium, and institution shall submit to the department information the department deems necessary to identify those persons who are subject to the prohibition specified by subdivision (a) of Section 8100, in order to carry out its duties in relation to firearms, destructive devices, and explosives.

(c) A licensed psychotherapist shall report to a local law enforcement agency, within 24 hours, in a manner prescribed by the Department of Justice, the identity of a person subject to the prohibition specified by subdivision (b) of Section 8100. Upon receipt of the report, the local law enforcement agency, on a form prescribed by the Department of Justice, shall notify the department electronically, within 24 hours, in a manner prescribed by the department, of the person who is subject to the prohibition specified by subdivision (b) of Section 8100.

(d) All information provided to the Department of Justice pursuant to this section shall be kept confidential, separate, and apart from all other records maintained by the department. The information provided to the Department of Justice pursuant to this section shall be used only for any of the following purposes:

(1) By the department to determine eligibility of a person to acquire, carry, or possess firearms, destructive devices, or explosives.

(2) For the purposes of the court proceedings described in subdivision (b) of Section 8100, to determine the eligibility of the person who is bringing the petition pursuant to paragraph (3) of
subdivision (b) of Section 8100.

(3) To determine the eligibility of a person to acquire, carry, or possess firearms, destructive devices, or explosives who is the subject of a criminal investigation, if a part of the criminal investigation involves the acquisition, carrying, or possession of firearms, explosives, or destructive devices by that person.

(e) Reports shall not be required or requested under this section if the same person has been previously reported pursuant to Section 8103 or 8104.

(f) This section shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2016, and as of that date is repealed, unless a later enacted statute, that is enacted before January 1, 2016, deletes or extends that date.

SEC. 7. Section 8105 is added to the Welfare and Institutions Code, to read:

8105. (a) The Department of Justice shall request each public and private mental hospital, sanitarium, and institution to submit to the department information the department deems necessary to identify those persons who are subject to the prohibition specified by subdivision (a) of Section 8100, in order to carry out its duties in relation to firearms, destructive devices, and explosives.

(b) Upon request of the Department of Justice pursuant to subdivision (a), each public and private mental hospital, sanitarium, and institution shall submit to the department information the department deems necessary to identify those persons who are subject to the prohibition specified by subdivision (a) of Section 8100, in order to carry out its duties in relation to firearms, destructive devices, and explosives.

(c) A licensed psychotherapist shall report to a local law enforcement agency, within 24 hours, in a manner prescribed by the Department of Justice, the identity of a person subject to the prohibition specified by subdivision (b) of Section 8100. Upon receipt of the report, the local law enforcement agency, on a form prescribed by the Department of Justice, shall notify the department electronically, within 24 hours, in a manner prescribed by the department, of the person who is subject to the prohibition specified by subdivision (b) of Section 8100.

(d) All information provided to the Department of Justice pursuant to this section shall be kept confidential, separate, and apart from all other records maintained by the department. The information provided to the Department of Justice pursuant to this section shall be used only for any of the following purposes:

(1) By the department to determine eligibility of a person to acquire, carry, or possess firearms, destructive devices, or explosives.

(2) For the purposes of the court proceedings described in subdivision (b) of Section 8100, to determine the eligibility of the person who is bringing the petition pursuant to paragraph (3) of subdivision (b) of Section 8100.

(3) To determine the eligibility of a person to acquire, carry, or possess firearms, destructive devices, or explosives who is the subject of a criminal investigation, or who is the subject of a petition for the issuance of a gun violence restraining order issued pursuant to Division 3.2 (commencing with Section 18100) of Title 2 of Part 6 of the Penal Code, if a part of the investigation involves the acquisition, carrying, or possession of firearms, explosives, or destructive devices by that person.

(e) Reports shall not be required or requested under this section if the same person has been previously reported pursuant to Section 8103 or 8104.

(f) This section shall become operative on January 1, 2016.

SEC. 8. The Legislature finds and declares that Section 3 of this act, which adds Section 18110 to the Penal Code, imposes a limitation on the public's right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies within the meaning of Section 3 of Article I of the California Constitution. Pursuant to that constitutional provision, the Legislature makes the following findings to demonstrate the interest protected by this limitation and the need for protecting that interest:

In order to protect the privacy rights of a person subject to a search pursuant to Section 18110 of the Penal Code.

SEC. 9. Sections 4.5 and 5.5 of this bill incorporate amendments to Section 18250 of the Penal Code proposed by both this bill and Senate Bill 1154. They shall only become operative if (1) both bills are enacted and become effective on or before January 1, 2015, (2) each bill amends Section 18250 of the Penal Code, and (3) this bill is enacted after Senate Bill 1154, in which case Sections 4 and 5 of this bill shall not become operative.

SEC. 10. No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution for certain costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school district because, in that regard, this act creates a new crime or infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the Government Code, or changes the definition of a crime within the meaning of Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution.

However, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that this act contains other costs mandated by the state, reimbursement to local agencies and school districts for those costs shall be made pursuant to Part 7 (commencing with Section 17500) of Division 4 of Title 2 of the Government Code.