A bill by East Bay Assemblyman Rob Bonta would put unsafe handguns into the hands of many more government employees. Their “primary duty” is supposed to be “enforcement of the laws,” but most of them do not pursue dangerous criminals. If they need handguns, they should use safer ones on the roster of guns approved for sale in California.

Here’s the background. In 1999 and 2003, a broad-based violence prevention coalition passed California laws establishing safety standards for handguns sold in the state. The California Department of Justice tested handguns and created a roster of guns that can be sold in California.

The laws worked. By 2014, California’s rate of unintentional firearm deaths had fallen to less than one-fourth the rate of the rest of the country.

The California laws allowed certain categories of trained peace officers to purchase off-roster handguns. But a problem developed. When some officers who could not legally obtain off-roster pistols showed their IDs to gun dealers, the dealers (illegally) sold them unsafe off-roster handguns.

Now supporters of AB 2165 say it would be expensive for California to replace those unsafe handguns with safer ones. But this supposedly cost-saving “fix” would be dreadfully expensive in human lives, grief, injuries and medical costs.

Off-roster pistols are unsafe even for highly trained officers. Glocks, for example, have a dangerously light trigger pressure and short trigger pull, no external manual safety and no loaded chamber indicator or magazine disconnect safety to prevent a round hidden in the chamber from being fired when the magazine has been removed.

In a Los Angeles Times op-ed, “Why the Police Shouldn’t Use Glocks,” firearms instructor Bob Owens explained how “accident-prone” they are. Within a decade after the Washington D.C. Police Department adopted Glocks, they had contributed to 120 accidental discharges, 19 officers had wounded themselves or others with them, and D.C. had paid $1.4 million in damages.

One reason this bill is dangerous is that so many additional employees would be allowed to use unsafe handguns. The list includes, for example, employees of Fish and Game, parks and recreation, Consumer Affairs, DMV and many types of inspectors and investigators.

Off-roster handguns demand extensive training and frequent retraining. But AB 2165 requires only introductory training and the bill is unclear how often they would have to requalify. Yet many would carry unsafe handguns — concealed or openly — in public, as well as to their homes.

Peace officers are now able to sell their firearms to the public. If this bill becomes law, thousands more government employees could legally sell their off-roster handguns in private sales. This may be the most worrisome aspect of the bill.

AB 2165 would also tempt more government workers to profit from their access to off-roster handguns by illegally dealing in these firearms without a license. Officers have already been convicted of doing so. In 2015, two former Sacramento County Sheriff’s Deputies were found guilty of purchasing more than 60 off-roster handguns and quickly reselling them at inflated prices, according to ATF.

Many guns, including off-roster handguns, have also been lost or stolen from law enforcement and used in deadly crimes or sold to consumers. In 2015, NBC News reported that 500 guns were missing from eight different Bay Area law enforcement agencies since 2010.

The gun industry has been searching for ways to sell handguns into California that do not meet our safety standards, and AB 2165 may be its backdoor.

If AB 2165 becomes law, thousands more government employees will begin using off-roster unsafe handguns. They and their families will be less safe and so will the public.

More unsafe handguns will be lost or stolen and more will be trafficked illegally and used in deadly crimes. AB 2165 should be defeated or tightly amended.

Griffin Dix’s son was killed in an unintentional shooting with a pistol that lacked a prominent loaded chamber indicator. He is a resident of Kensington.