2022 SB 1384 Min - Firearms: dealer requirements (Dealer CCTV + Liability Insurance)

[abinsinia]

This bill is getting heard in committee Senate Public Safety 6/8 (next Wednesday).

[Capybara]

Gav Boy's got his signing pen ready. Any anti bill gun going through the committees is just a formality.

[Featureless]

So, this was signed into law 9/30/22. Is there any current information on it?
Any legal challenge?

[Quiet]

So, this was signed into law 9/30/22. Is there any current information on it?
Any legal challenge?

Current info...

It becomes effective 01-01-2024.

There have been no lawsuits filed (legal challenges) to it.

Several home based CA FFL dealers are citing it as one of the reasons, the other being the mandatory $1 million insurance policy that went into effect 01-01-2023, for closing up/going out of business before 01-01-2024.

[The Gleam]

Current info...

It becomes effective 01-01-2024.

There have been no lawsuits filed (legal challenges) to it.

Several home based CA FFL dealers are citing it as one of the reasons, the other being the mandatory $1 million insurance policy that went into effect 01-01-2023, for closing up/going out of business before 01-01-2024.

In no way, shape, or form do I think that insurance should be mandatory - but a $1 Million limit commercial general liability insurance policy is the very basic minimum limit any such policy automatically includes from decent insurance companies, and the least any business should have, whether that's a shoe story, a bridal shoppe, people with an at-home business selling crap on Etsy, or a gun dealer.

It's essentially the lowest limit that is offered, inexpensive, and something that any business/dealer should have anyway for their own protection and benefit, if in fact they are not also already contractually obligated to have at least $1 Million in liability limits by their landlord, vendors, or suppliers anyway. Included in that mix for its importance are mere kitchen-table dealers without a brick-and-mortar store.

---

[LuckyGuy]

ok, BUT

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/f...02120220SB1384

Essentially requires dealers to have a 24/7 video surveillance system recording on their premises that runs continuously, all recordings maintained for 3 years, and allow access to said recordings by law enforcement, among other things.

Also requires that a dealer carries general liability insurance covering at least $1,000,000 per incident.

Finally, it would also require that employees undergo training (developed by CA DoJ) related to firearm laws, recognizing fraud and theft, among other things.

Would this be onsite raw storage or on a cloud somewhere???

[waygeekierthanu]

Would this be onsite raw storage or on a cloud somewhere???

Unspecified, but I assume you must have reasonable access.

Sent from my SM-G781U1 using Tapatalk

[middleofnowhere]

The requirement to record audio is equally troubling. The .ca.gov crowd should not be able to listen to private conversations. If you express wrongthink, the DOJ will know. This law kind of seems to presume guilt of dealers and customers of firearms related stuff.

[mshill]

Other than being related to guns, this is not much different than many other regulations that the state requires. They have been pushing businesses out for decades, we are just hyper sensitive to firearms. CA has not been business friendly since the 70s.

[OlderThanDirt]

It?s no trivial matter to meet the audio, video, storage and security requirements required by this bill. In a busy store, noise levels and poor acoustics will make it difficult to capture individual conversations during transactions. The video has to be of sufficient quality to identify individuals, which will also require multiple angles in different parts of the store. Video storage will likely require a RAID configured disk array to prevent data loss. I would assume that an NVR would need good password protection and physical security. Most consumer products would not be capable of meeting all of these requirements.

The irony is that California is requiring gun stores to do something that the state has done a piss poor job doing themselves. I can?t wait to see what California issues as guidance and performance standards, if anything.

[Featureless]

So the question is, how many smaller shops will be put out of business, giving the survivors a bigger market share and how that will affect PPT and out of state purchase transactions (like when you buy something from KYGUNCO and have it shipped to a CA FFL for example)

[ugimports]

I have some cheap Amcrest cameras that have 128GB uSD cards in them. Recording at 1080p only gets me about 3 days of constant recording. By my calculations a single camera stream recording 3 years would be close to 100TB of storage. That will be expensive on rotating media because you will likely need to be running some form of RAID and it should be backed up off site somewhere.

I have to wonder about why 3 years is so important. If they wanted to make it excessively burdensome, why not 10 years.

I have an Amcrest 2MP IP Camera now recording audio/video 24x7 via Blue Iris and it's 6G per day which equates ~2TB / yr.

The only relevance I can think of 3 years is that is how long we are required to keep DROS records.

[Tankhatch]

I have an Amcrest 2MP IP Camera now recording audio/video 24x7 via Blue Iris and it's 6G per day which equates ~2TB / yr.

The only relevance I can think of 3 years is that is how long we are required to keep DROS records.

Looks like you need to have at least of 4 cameras recording at the same time. So that is 24G per day and 8TB / yr w/storage for 3 years.

A WD external 12 TB hard drive cost is $219, add a back up for CYA, so cost is $438 per year.

Each Amcrest 2MP IP Camera cost is $50, times 4, equals $200 investment.

So, on 1-1-24 you would have needed to spend at least $638 to stay in business.

That will kill table top FFL's and will put out of business, quite of few LGS.

Since the law wants
""(8) The system shall be equipped with a failure notification system that provides notification to the licensee of any interruption or failure of the system or storage device.""
Does that mean "cloud storage" is needed to satisfy their BS.
10TB of cloud cost $999.99 per year, 3 years keeping would be around $3k

[DrewN]

10TB of cloud cost $999.99 per year, 3 years keeping would be around $3k

I have 16Tb storage, with 30TB traffic allocation for $600 a year. Not that that's all that much better, but I use mine to host entertainment.

[ugimports]

Looks like you need to have at least of 4 cameras recording at the same time. So that is 24G per day and 8TB / yr w/storage for 3 years.

A WD external 12 TB hard drive cost is $219, add a back up for CYA, so cost is $438 per year.

Each Amcrest 2MP IP Camera cost is $50, times 4, equals $200 investment.

So, on 1-1-24 you would have needed to spend at least $638 to stay in business.

That will kill table top FFL's and will put out of business, quite of few LGS.

Since the law wants
""(8) The system shall be equipped with a failure notification system that provides notification to the licensee of any interruption or failure of the system or storage device.""
Does that mean "cloud storage" is needed to satisfy their BS.
10TB of cloud cost $999.99 per year, 3 years keeping would be around $3k

Where is the 4 camera requirement? I have more than 1 camera, but not all of them are set to record 24x7... the main one that matters is the one that has a view of all my exits (1 door) and can identify people doing paperwork.

Given that I work in a small office (and I assume many table top FFLs do too) I have 1 camera angle that covers the necessary requirements.

Also, the "failure notification system" I read as something that tells me it is broken. I don't see anything in the law that says you must have 24x7x365 NVR operations with 0 downtime and no loss of data. Everyone is assuming some version of that. It's unrealistic.

In theory, if my drives die and I lose months 6-12 then I lose it. I would explain what happened, fix the system and keep collecting the data again. What they want to make sure is that you don't know your system is broken and it stopped recording 6 months ago.

For example, I was away from my office for about a week.. 1st day into it I noticed my system was down, but I was away... couldn't fix it till I came back... I fixed it when I did...many people setup camera systems and never look at them until they need to so they would never know when it stopped recording/broke.

Also, what is the 3 year reference from? I just double checked the SB-1384 text and don't see any reference to 3 years. I was looking at this link from earlier in the thread: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/f...02120220SB1384

If a $638 expense puts a LGS / brick and mortar place out of business they have much bigger problems then this new law. If that puts a table top FFL out of business then I would argue they were not really in business and it was more of a hobby. My full system cost me $1k and I didn't buy it all at once. it includes the PC, software, drives, and 7 cameras. There's a separate discussion in the FFL's only thread where I provided details/context for other small times dealers which I am more aligned with than a retail shop.

I've had some form of camera system in place since I started in 2008. I added more cameras in 2016 after we were burglarized and robbed. I only recently turned on the audio recording in prep for the new law coming up to see what my storage consumption would be. I likely will need to add 1 additional USB drive to account for the additional storage, but that's it. I'm not investing in any cloud storage or 24x7 type backups for this stuff. None of that is in the PC so there's no reason I'm going to add on that requirement.