It is the opinion of most California gun owners that the state government intends to eradicate private handgun ownership in the state by making handguns illegal, making handguns expensive or by making handgun ownership burdensome. A prime example of this strategy can be found in California’s Roster of Handguns Certified for Sale.

In 2000, California passed SB 15, creating the so-called Roster of Handguns Certified for Sale. This bill mandated that, in order to be sold in the state of California, all “pistols” (semi-automatic or not) shall be subject to a series of “drop tests” to determine the gun’s resistance to discharging when accidentally dropped. Additionally, it stipulated firing requirements to test the structural integrity of the gun.

This, presumably, was a good safety law, as the intent was to protect the public from poorly made guns. But rather than creating a much shorter list of unsafe handguns that are not approved for sale, the law created an all-encompassing list of “approved” handguns which, effectively, made all guns unsafe until the manufacturer paid a fee and submitted their handgun for testing. Once approved, a yearly fee was required to keep a handgun on the list. If the fee was not paid or the gun not resubmitted, it fell off of the list, once again, becoming an “unsafe” handgun.

Worse yet, one might argue that a citizen’s rights should not have an expiration date based on the expiration of a government fee. It also did not matter that nearly all firearms manufacturers already subject their product to testing and quality control far more rigorous than anything the state of California could ever dream up.

But that wasn’t enough. In 2003, California passed SB 489 requiring two very questionable “safety features” to be installed on any new handgun submitted for testing, approval, and addition to the list. These two features were the loaded chamber indicator (a device indicating that there is a bullet chambered in the gun) and a magazine disconnect (a device that will not allow the gun to fire if there is a bullet in the chamber when the magazine has been removed from the gun).

Suddenly, the list of laboratory drop tested firearms had been distorted into a vehicle used to enforce mandated “safety features.” This was not the intent of the original SB 15.

Still that wasn’t enough. In 2008, California passed AB 1471 requiring “micro stamping” for all new semi-automatic handguns to be added to the roster. Never mind that micro stamping has nothing to do with firearm safety. Never mind that micro stamping technology is unproven and unreliable. Never mind that no major firearms manufacturer has the ability to make this technology available without huge expense. Never mind that criminals can foil micro stamping with the stroke of a metal file. The roster had been distorted into a “wish list” of “safe” handguns which the state of California envisions for the future — which is no handguns at all.

More and more firearms are dropping off of the roster with no guns being added due to the micro stamping mandate. This translates into fewer and fewer firearms being available to those law-abiding Californians who wish to purchase a handgun for self-protection or otherwise. It will not be long before the list is abused further by mandating “smart gun technology” even though only one such gun exists.

From the start, SB 15 has been distorted by agenda-pushing politicians with one goal in mind — taking away firearms. They have expanded the definition of “unsafe handgun” to the point where every handgun is unsafe unless it is included on the roster. Handguns may not appear on the California list of approved firearms, but according to the supreme law of the land, they do appear in the Second Amendment.

It is time to scrap this mutated Roster of Handguns Certified for Sale in California and restore common sense into the governance of constitutional rights vs. public safety.

Steven Oetzell is vice president of the South Bay Members’ Council of the National Rifle Association.