can we take this without objection? so moved. madame clerk, which call in #6? >> item 6, resolution authorizing the office of the district attorney retroactively accepting to expand this $714,138 allocated from the california victim compensation and government claims board for a project entitled the joint powers agreement for july 1st, 2011 through june 30th, 2012. >> this is the grant that funds of the staff in the d.a.'s office to handle the applications and all of the bills and outreach that goes on with providers. as i said earlier, the amount of the grant was cut by 5% and we are currently -- which currently holds seven staff members

whereas before it was able to pay for eight. we still have eight working on the program because that is what is needed to make it work. supervisor campos: why is the grant retroactive? >> i think that was a timing issue. it has taken that long to get here. we have been doing the load all along and there has not been a gap in service. supervisor cohen: how many people on staff will this grant cover? >> 7. supervisor cohen: and you are not looking to expand or contract staff? >> we have had eight for a number of years, but only seven are covered by the grand -- to the grant. supervisor cohen: how is the eighth covered? >> to the federal fund. supervisor mirkarimi: the you

have a volunteer program? sometimes i hear about people who are motivated by what happens in their neighborhood and want to help. maybe through internship there a particular criteria that is trained, maybe you could update us about that. >> we have a very robust intern and volunteer program. we currently have six or seven volunteers working on this program, which, without them, i don't know what we would do in terms of phone calls and data entry. we do use that and it supports a lot of our operations. supervisor mirkarimi: thank you. keep up the good work. any other public comment? public comment is closed. colleagues, can we take this without objection? so moved. madame clerk, item number seven. >> item #7 is an ordinance amending the san francisco police code by adding sections 4511 dissections613.9.5 to add

findings to ordnances requiring a handgun to be kept in a locked container or disabled with a trigger lock and prohibiting the sale of enhanced lethality ammunition. supervisor mirkarimi: the purpose is to add a findings backed by research of two separate, existing laws. one requires handguns to be kept in locked containers or disabled with a trigger lock. the other, which prohibits the sale of the hands of lethality ammunition, the most common of which are hollow point bullets. in 2008, the supreme court decision change the interpretation of the second amendment to mean that it protected an individual's rights to possess a gun for self- defense. since then, gun advocates have been challenging local gun laws across the nation, including san francisco, which is why i teamed up with the city attorney's

office so we can fortify our defense of reasonable gun safety laws. this ordinance is needed to clarify the board of supervisors on going intend to reflect updated research to ensure existing gun laws in the police code are for look -- are fully enforceable. there is ample evidence these laws are needed now more than ever and they will save countless lives every year. in addition to several shootings in august, a man was shot a forty-niners game we heard about when the police chief was on which made national news about insufficient staffing at a tailgate party that erupted. in july, at least eight innocent bystanders were hit by stray bullets, two of them were children, one was in my district, which are is absolutely livid about and visited in san francisco general hospital. fortunately, she survived. a north beach woman was hit by a bullet that passed through her body. it fortunately did not cause

life-threatening injuries, but the police department confirmed they were hollow point bullets that hit her. they are illegal in my mind and would not have passed through her body because it would have expanded and a much greater damage and would have then possibly life-threatening. each year, there are hundreds of gun-related injuries in san francisco and we can only guess how many would be fatalities if it were easier for people to buy hollow point bullets. with regard to the locked container and trigger locks, dozens of studies show keeping a loaded door unlocked done in the home is associated with an increased risk of a gun-related injuries or death. less than one year ago, and 8- year-old boy found a gun in his house, took it outside in a play yard and shot himself in the stomach. another personally visited and who luckily survived, that was a tragedy. the sad truth is that guns left

at home are often used in suicides or against friends and family and it is these incidences we are trying to prevent. we have a number of speakers today that include the following -- the deputy city attorney, the city attorney's office, which we appreciate for their hard work in arriving at this particular reintroduction of our laws. the san francisco police department officer, san francisco general surgeon resident and trauma researcher, and we are familiar that there are a number of other people here to speak -- i would like to go ahead and invite you to help introduce this and we can go from there. >> thank you, supervisor. i am currently employed as a san francisco police officer. i started my law enforcement

career back in november of 1970 with the oakland police department. i worked in special investigations and crime reduction in that city and retired in 1991 and went to work for the california department of justice. while with the california department justice, i worked in gangs and organized-crime until 2000 when i was promoted to a position of special agent supervisor. i assisted in founding in putting together the firearms division in sacramento. during that time, i testified on numerous occasions before the legislature and its superior and federal court on firearms issues, prohibited possessions, ballistics, and assault weapons identification and operations. over those times, i from a 2000 to 2008, i sat on the committees

that approved storage locks and safes for the sales in california and requirements they have to pass to be certified for sale in this state. during that time, we were given the information on all accidental shootings that occurred within the state. what was predominately clear to us is that a number of those shootings were the fact that those guns were accessed by persons who were unaware of the aspects and operations of the firearm and the fact they could not tell if the firearm was loaded or not. during that time, laws were passed for delivery of the firearms through the firearms safety certificate. not only did they have to take a test to acquire a firearm safety certificate to purchase the gun, prior to delivery of the gun, that person has to go through a hands-on, objective test with

dummy ammunition to show they know how to load, unload, and secure the firearm in their home. during the passage of those laws, a section was added that, during the sale of the gun, the firearm has to be supplied with a certified lock, certified by the state of california, or the person can bring a lock in that shows a certified number on it, certified by the state of california, or they can sign an affidavit with the model and co. of the gun say they have at home that would allow them to take the gun home without having to have those requirements of a lock on site at the delivery time. one of the easiest access to a firearm in the home through a safe is through an electronic keypad lock for a firearm safe, which is a small safe that allows a person to keep a firearm in the safe, relatively

accessible with a digital combination only known to persons who are the owner or someone else who is allowed to know the combination for that safe. there are saves which are relatively accessible to the person who knows the combination but keeps other people who are unaware of the operations or loaded capabilities of the gun away from a firearm. in addressing the hollow point issue, hollow point ammunition, over the last 41 years in law enforcement, i have been involved in numerous armed confrontations, shootings, so on and so forth and experience them myself and investigated them. one thing we have found is hollow point ammunition expands as it hits whatever medium it strikes, whether it is closing, flash, and it expands. normally in 38-caliber, it will

try to expand in diameter so that it causes a larger temporary wound cavity in the object it hits. that temporary wound cavity causes incapacitation in the target and thus allows the cessation or incapacitation to start and the altercation to cease. that's the efficiency of the whole point and mission, that it expands, what ever it hits opens up, and it is more efficient on the target. we have had numerous shootings where i investigated, while i was on gang task force, currently i'm with the new violence reduction team, and four persons were shot by one assailant. the person was using full metal jacket ammunition. everyone that was not hit in a vital organ was treated and

walked away from sfgh. the person who was injured the most was shot right in the aorta. the surgeons at sfgh, saved the man, patched the young man up, and if it had been hollow point ammunition, opening it up and making a larger temporary wound cavity, they probably would not have been able to save this young man. i think there is a legitimate reason for law enforcement, because we are held to an extremely high regulation about the use of deadly force that, if we see a threat to our life or someone else's life and we have to seize that threat, hollow point ammunition, which we carry, it does act more efficiently, for less rounds expanded to seas confrontation. we do not want a large amount of

rounds launched in that direction because it would cause ancillary damages that would not be accepted by our department. so we want something that is efficient to put the threat down, and one of the other issues, are there legitimate issues for having hollow point ammunition within the city and county of san francisco? there is relatively no particular use for target shooting. hollow point ammunition costs twice as much as full metal jacket ammunition. the shooting ranges we have in san francisco does not allow you to bring your own ammunition in because of the lead in the indoor range. have to purchase the alleged free ammunition from the range. -- the lead-free ammunition from the range. is full metal jacket ammunition

as efficient? for the purposes of self-defense and home defense, i would not want to be shot with either full metal jacket or hollow point ammunition. that is why we were ballistic vest. -- why we where ballistic vests. i believe the ancillary damage to what average hits as well as a way by the fact that full metal jacket can and does the same job, as shot placement is done by the person trying to defend their lives, and familiarization with the firearm, practice with it, that will help that person in using the right kind of ammunition to acquire the same desire effect. -- the same desired effect. do you have any questions? supervisor mirkarimi: i am sure

we have a few. the ballistic vest, are they fortified enough to withstand the impact of a hollow point bullet? >> yes. on the level that we carry, that we wear and the normal types of ammunition we are running into, yes, they will stand up to hall. ammunition. on tests i conducted what i was certifying whether we can allow the 57 around to be sold in california, that very fella -- very fast round coming out of a small pistol was stopped as it expanded on the seventh layer of the 21 layers of the front panel. so, yes, as it grabs the kevlar material, it does slow the ball down and stop. supervisor mirkarimi: you make a good case in explaining the technical reasons why and public safety reasons why we would want to resist this allowing of

hollow point bullets in san francisco. but can you speak to the general trend as to why people feel the need who are gun advocates, who believe in the right to possession, which is of course there second amendment right, why do you think they have to have something that is that much more lethal that is made available or can be accessed? >> i think it is the same reason they feel they need assault weapons. they need what ever is accessible to them without encumbering their second of amorites. we are stepping into an area of that is limiting them from free access to whatever they want. granted, we're limiting the sales here in the city and county of san francisco, but hollow point ammunition is accessible south of the border on a bimonthly or try monthly basis at the san francisco gun

show in daly city. i believe they want the same lethality we desire as a police department to seize the confrontation. that's another issue i believe gun advocates would want. supervisor mirkarimi: i am traversing between both themes and here that are fortifying our gun safety laws. with respect to gun locks, which -- when a gun is not kept safe and locked, such as the incident of the 8-year-old who found a gun and shot himself, what then do we do with the parents or guardians where the gun was made available or not kept safe? i never hear that side of the story too much about either arrest or prosecution.

>> from my experience over these years in law enforcement and dealing with the shootings and the response of the state -- of the safe storage laws in california, which has been on the books for almost 15 years -- if -- there is a variance in punishment, and it is all to the discretion of the district attorney's office. of all the shootings i have investigated and responded to, only one has been prosecuted for the un safe storage act. it was a grandfather who left a 25 auto on the coffee table and the grandson picked the gun up and shot himself with it. that's the only time i've ever seen the un safe storage laws prosecuted. >> that is of recent memory in san francisco -- supervisor mirkarimi: it is not consistent with news reports you read in the "chronicle" or hear

about how a child in particular will find a gun, shoots themselves, or shoot somebody else and that gun was supposed to be kept safe based on laws currently obligatory. what is missing in this picture? >> i truly believe it is very difficult to mandate laws that look into the homes and dictate what a person does inside the house. there is another case where a young kid shot himself with a gun the mother said the boyfriend just pulled out of the safe that afternoon and loaded and left it in a closet. happened in contra costa county. they are prosecuting the boyfriend. but how do we legislate, when we pass all of the laws, about save storage in the books and now we're going to put one on the

san francisco ordinance to restrict the storage of a firearm in the home, how do we look into the house? most of the safe storage gun laws are kind of after the fact, after the gun is used illegally or someone is hurt. supervisor mirkarimi: but the process is when somebody is rushed to san francisco general and aid to the brilliant job of saving somebody's life, any time a weapon is used, there's a normal reporting process. that reporting process that i assume triggers the intervention of the police department to investigate if it was deliberately used or if it was an accident and how access to the weapon occurred, especially for a child, i would assume is that next step that an investigation or prosecution -- i recall in my district of

hearing of children who get guns, shoot themselves or shoots somebody else, and i never hear of anybody being arrested for an investigation resulting in prosecution of those parents at all for the guardians. >> i understand your results. it is the same one i have. the route the bay area and california, it is at the discretion of the district attorney's office after they review the investigation whether or not to prosecute the person, number one who had the obligation to store the weapons faithfully, and, number two, whether that person reneged on that by bringing the gun out and leaving it loaded in an unsafe area. supervisor mirkarimi: thank you. colleagues, any questions? supervisor campos: thank you. first of all, i want to thank

supervisor mirkarimi for bringing this legislation forward and thank you, officer, for your presentation. i think this legislation makes a great deal of sense and i don't see that it is in any way infringing upon anyone's constitutional rights. i think it is a very well thought out public policy approach that ultimately tries to prevent a number of things, including accidental deaths that happen. in terms of what can be expected that in terms of this moving forward, is there a legal challenge? is that a possibility? is that a concern as we are moving forward? i know that supervisor mirkarimi has drafted this very carefully in coordination with the city attorney's office. have we heard anything?

supervisor mirkarimi: them -- this is a good time to insert the city attorney. >> i am the deputy city attorney and i can answer that question. there are a lot of laws under challenge all across the nation in the wake of the decision and a subsequent decision which applied heller to state and localities, announcing the individual right to a firearm in a home for purposes of self- defense. any laws that appear to burden their right in any way, such as even a requirement to have your loaded weapon in a gun save that you can open in a few seconds are under challenge. or laws that would reduce the sale of incredibly lethal ammunition or reduced the use to law-enforcement. these sorts of things which seem

very common sense to a lot of people are under legal challenge. that's true in this city and it's one of the reasons you are being presented with this legislation. the national rifle association is actually suing the city and county of san francisco over these two ordnances. when the city originally adopted them, it was not the case under that law that there was a second amendment right that might be infringed. we did not prepare as would normally be the case, with legislation with a constitutional dimension. we did not prepare findings at that point because we did not know these laws would be so closely scrutinized by the judiciary. now that we know that, it's important to come back to these laws and explain what the foundation is for them exactly and so, the fact these laws are

under challenge right now in this city is one of the primary reasons why it is important for the board of supervisors to express what its rationale was for these laws. supervisor campos: thank you, and i reiterate the point that it is important to clarify the policy reasoning behind these laws and i think the discussion here today and the findings that will come out of it are clearly outlined, why from a public policy standpoint this makes sense. i do think ultimately, the connection with any constitutional violation is remote, if at all, and hopefully that will prevail in the courts. thank you supervisor mirkarimi,

and officers for work. supervisor mirkarimi: i would like to call up san francisco general surgeon, randy smith. >> i am a surgery resident in my fourth year of training, currently working at the san francisco injury center on a violent intervention program. i have a particular interest in trauma surgery after witnessing day after day young people coming in with gunshots, stab wounds, and assaults. as you alluded to earlier, this is a big public health problem nationally and locally. homicide's represent the second leading cause of death for age 15 to 44 years old and, on a local level, firearms represent the third leading cause of all entries at san francisco general hospital. i want to speak to you about my clinical experience with hollow

point bullets and the injuries they cause as a result of their severe destruction. destruction. i have operated on a lot of people that have suffered from gunshot wounds and i will tell you is very typical, as a trauma surgeon, to deal with these injuries. most recently, i operated on someone who was shot in both kidneys. if you can imagine, as a trauma surgeon in the moment, you want to do as much as you can to repair whatever injuries are possible to save someone's life so that they can go on and become a productive member of society. hollow point bullets caused massive destruction that is terrible. i liken it to hamburger meat. everything has exploded in front of you, the kidney is irreparable, you have to remove it. so you have gone from a bullet that can cause a laceration in the kidney that can be repaired, to something that has to be

removed. imagine two kidneys gone. someone who is now on dialysis dependent, 20 years of age, that is a considerable cost for the city and county, especially the disability associated with the patient. i have several stories like that, but it stems from what we have already heard from the ballistics expert, that the bill expands. and that is its job, to expand and causing massive destruction and have a larger area of impact inside the body. i also want to say, from a violent intervention standpoint, i have had the opportunity to continue to work with people outside of the operating room ever ready of projects, and mortality is definitely there, but disability is worse. we see people that are quadraplegic, paraplegic, have colostomy bags that they have to deal with, dialysis dependents.

-- dependence. i think that this issue is very important locally. the medical implications are grand, and i believe that you can go from having a patient that can be -- that can recuperate fillet to someone that can die from all of the destruction, or have significant disability as a result of a hollow point bullets. happy to answer any questions you might have . supervisor mirkarimi: thank you for your testimony. on behalf of many of us here who have heard from repetitive from san francisco general hospital, in the trauma department, just so impressed with what you do saving people's lives. brilliant. brilliant.