AB 879 (2025): Unsafe Handgun Act Amendments

What the Bill Would Do

AB 879, authored by Assembly Member Joe Patterson (R), proposes technical, nonsubstantive amendments to California's Unsafe Handgun Act, codified at Penal Code section 32000 et seq. ^[1]. The Unsafe Handgun Act is the framework that establishes the Roster of Certified Handguns. Only handguns on the roster may be sold by licensed dealers in California, and the underlying statute makes it a misdemeanor to manufacture, import, keep for sale, offer or expose for sale, give, or lend an unsafe handgun, punishable by up to one year in county jail.

The amendments in AB 879 do not expand or contract the substantive design requirements (loaded chamber indicator, magazine disconnect mechanism, microstamping) that govern roster eligibility. The bill's practical effect, if enacted, would be to clean up cross-references and definitional language in the underlying chapter. Because the bill's changes are technical, the Senate Public Safety Committee approved it 6-0 with amendments, and it received unanimous bipartisan support in the Assembly.

Current Status

AB 879 passed the full Assembly on May 8, 2025 by a 69-0 vote, then passed the Senate Public Safety Committee (6-0) with amendments. It was held under submission in the Senate Appropriations Committee following the August 29, 2025 hearing. As a 2025 first-year bill, it carried over into the 2026 second year of the session. As of July 22, 2026, the bill's last recorded action on the Legislature's website remains the August 29, 2025 Senate Appropriations hold. Because AB 879 passed its house of origin in 2025, it survived the January 31, 2026 carryover deadline. The Legislature is in summer recess until August 3, 2026, and August 31, 2026 is the last day for final passage in the 2025-2026 session. Unless Senate Appropriations releases the bill before that deadline, AB 879 will fail when the session ends.

Context

California's handgun roster has been the subject of sustained legal challenges. The microstamping requirement effectively halted new model additions to the roster, with the listed-model count declining steadily as manufacturers allow certifications to lapse. The Ninth Circuit has heard challenges to the roster requirement, and Boland v. Bonta remains active. AB 879's technical-cleanup framing, combined with bipartisan unanimity in both the Assembly and the Senate Public Safety Committee, suggests the bill is not viewed as substantively altering the roster framework.