********** bullet ids


PDA






PinnedAndRecessed
June 2, 2005, 10:32 PM
http://sacbee.com/state_wire/story/12994280p-13840904c.html


SACRAMENTO (AP) - Dueling proposals to identify handgun bullets to help police solve shootings were approved by state lawmakers Thursday, despite concerns the requirements are impractical or would harm law-abiding citizens.

Ammunition manufacturers would be required to laser-cut each bullet with a serial number under the Senate bill, while the Assembly version requires guns to stamp identification numbers on bullet casings each time they are fired.

"With a simple magnifying glass (police) can read that identifying number ... and determine who purchased that ammunition," said Sen. Joseph Dunn, D-Garden Grove, who is carrying the Senate version. "This is a tremendous benefit for law enforcement."

The Senate sent the measure to the Assembly on a 21-14 vote, while the Assembly proposal by Assemblyman Paul Koretz, D-West Hollywood, passed 41-37 despite heavy opposition from gun groups. Both passed by one vote.

Ammunition manufacturers said that Dunn's bill will either force them to abandon the lucrative California market or force them to install unaffordable technology to mark the 8 billion bullets they make each year.

The bill would punish anyone possessing unmarked ammunition outside their home after July 2007, though Dunn said he is working with law enforcement to amend the bill so owners could use older bullets at firing ranges.

"A law abiding citizen has nothing to fear," said Sen. Jack Scott, D-Pasadena, comparing the markings to the use of fingerprints or DNA in crime solving.

Dunn's bill would require purchasers to pay up to a halfpenny per bullet to fund record-keeping by the state Department of Justice on every handgun-caliber bullet made or sold in California. Vendors would pay up to $50 a year to register. Rifle ammunition would be exempted, though some calibers are used in both handguns and long guns.

Opponents of Koretz's bill said criminals could file down the guns to remove the microstamping or use revolvers, which don't eject shell casings.

Assemblyman Todd Spitzer, R-Orange, said Koretz' bill would make it easier to frame someone by spreading cartridges around a crime scene that hadn't come from the shooter's gun.

"In some criminal prosecutions, the only evidence linking a defendant to that murder is shell casings, nothing more," Spitzer said.

Koretz said much of the opponents' arguments were "dead wrong," including the claim that someone would be able to file off the microstamping.

"This will work almost perfectly," Koretz said. "Every casing will have a number that's tied to a database."

If you enjoyed reading about "********** bullet ids" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Shear_stress
June 2, 2005, 10:40 PM
Fortunately, there will be some delay while the chuckleheads in the Senate and Assembly hammer out a compramise bill. Now is the time to bombard your State Senator or Assemblyperson with protest emails. Or, failing that, send word to the Governor that now would be a perfect time to atone for signing that 50BMG ban.

R.H. Lee
June 2, 2005, 10:45 PM
"A law abiding citizen has nothing to fear," Why does that statement make my skin crawl?

SnWnMe
June 2, 2005, 10:51 PM
I pray that Speer, Corbon et al, will pressure their distribution to help give Kali the safe Utopia we want. Stop ammo sales to ANYONE in Kali.

Cops can learn rasslin' or sumthin'

shermacman
June 2, 2005, 10:54 PM
Search raids at midnight, no problem; a law abiding citizen would have nothing to fear.

Being forced to stop your car for no reason, (repeat after me) a law abiding citizen would have nothing to fear.

Warrantless search on the street...a law abiding citizen would have nothing to fear.

Blood test on demand? A law abiding citizen would have nothing to fear.

Finding the stamp engraved ID on the plastic shell of your 12 gauge shot gun ammo? A law abiding citizen would have nothing to fear.

torpid
June 2, 2005, 10:54 PM
"A law abiding zitizen haz noting to feahh. Now show uz your paperz, pleaze."


.

Standing Wolf
June 2, 2005, 10:58 PM
"A law abiding citizen has nothing to fear,"
Why does that statement make my skin crawl?

It's one of many justifications and/or excuses for tyranny.

Lennyjoe
June 2, 2005, 11:07 PM
Make all the fun you want fellas, but dont be suprised if other states start looking into this nonsense!

Whatsit
June 2, 2005, 11:28 PM
Hmm that would be one HUGE database

sumpnz
June 2, 2005, 11:37 PM
The anti's have found that they can't get the guns. There is absolutly no political will to do so.

If you can't take the guns, the only logical (to them) alternative is to take away the ammo. They know full well the proposals are unworkable, unenforceable, and prohibitively expensive. That last part is their real goal. Make the ammo too costly to produce and/or buy and all those guns they couldn't confiscate become nothing more than expensive paperweights.

Phil Ca
June 3, 2005, 12:24 AM
Looks like 2007 will be the year I become a felon by default. :mad:

Standing Wolf
June 3, 2005, 12:28 AM
The anti's have found that they can't get the guns. There is absolutly no political will to do so.

Not today, but there will be.

griz
June 3, 2005, 12:36 AM
1/2 cent per bullet for the paperwork? They can't possibly believe that. That's 10 cents for a box of Hydra shocks. A clerk earning $10 an hour would have to do the paper work in about 35 seconds to break even. No way.

Logan5
June 3, 2005, 02:06 AM
So that'd be the end of surplus/import ammo in CA, huh? What an incredibly stupid idea. Assemblyman Paul Koretz is evidently a forensic scientist, or perhaps an experienced federal prosecutor? no? Imagine my surprise! How about we pass a law requiring criminals to file detailed before action reports with the local police 72 hours in advance of any crime? Surely, that's a foolproof solution.

dasmi
June 3, 2005, 02:09 AM
"A law abiding citizen has nothing to fear," said Sen. Jack Scott, D-Pasadena,
Right, comrade.
It seems I'll have to be out of California by 2007. At least I have a timeline now.

No_Brakes23
June 3, 2005, 02:21 AM
I got enough ammo to defend my home, so I would love to see all ammo stop coming into the state if this were to pass. None for the people and none for the cops.

Doubt that will happen, though.

This is the first mention I have seen of grandfather clausing. (No possesion outside the home.)

I can't afford to move now, but perhaps by 2007, I could.

On the other hand, if rifle ammo is exempt, maybe the SKS will become the HD weapon for me.

Elmer
June 3, 2005, 02:22 AM
1/2 cent per bullet for the paperwork? They can't possibly believe that. That's 10 cents for a box of Hydra shocks. A clerk earning $10 an hour would have to do the paper work in about 35 seconds to break even. No way.

That's just to fund the state's recordkeeping. The cost's involved from manufacturing, to distribution, to dealer will be astronomical..... Those costs will be added to the price of ammuntion. Can you say dollar a shot ball ammo?

Dunn's bill would require purchasers to pay up to a halfpenny per bullet to fund record-keeping by the state Department of Justice on every handgun-caliber bullet made or sold in California.

The Grand Inquisitor
June 3, 2005, 04:13 AM
Does this apply to just ammo made in the state of California or all ammo SOLD in California, because there is a huge difference. Keeping a registry of every bullet fired by members of this message board is entirely unfesiable, much less the entire state of California.

Jwar88
June 3, 2005, 05:17 AM
The time has come to stand up and be counted....

As these draconian laws are passed by the village idiots in Sacramento, (or any other corrupt legislature), I pray that more manufacturers will have the courage to stand up and be counted like Ronnie Barrett of Barrett firearms, who has refused to sell his products to any CA state agency, in the wake of the .50 cal ban recently enacted.

"Barrett cannot legally sell any of its products to lawbreakers. Therefore, since California’s passing of AB 50, the state is not in compliance with the US Constitution’s 2nd and 14th Amendments, and we will not sell nor service any of our products to any Government agency of the State of California. "

Here ...Here...

TC

gcerbone
June 3, 2005, 08:18 AM
The antis have realized that they can't get guns banned outright, so instead they are using things like this to have them virtually banned.

Ammo makers should take Ronnie Barrett's lead, and refuse to sell to Kali. That's really the only way that these jokers will get the message. Reciprocity. Make their laws apply to them, too, and see how fast these things get lifted.

dolanp
June 3, 2005, 08:54 AM
Koretz said much of the opponents' arguments were "dead wrong," including the claim that someone would be able to file off the microstamping.

"This will work almost perfectly," Koretz said. "Every casing will have a number that's tied to a database."

The stupidity almost makes me want to cry. WHY?!?! What on Earth makes these fools so ignorant? Do they know ANYTHING about crime and/or guns? Of course those are rhetorical questions... but this CA legislature smacks of a 6th grade student government or something. These people are so naive.

This needs to be fought tooth and nail, but if it does pass the ammo manufacturersneed to stop selling to police, or just pass on the tremendous cost and let the CA budget seep further into deficit.

K-Romulus
June 3, 2005, 09:00 AM
Koretz said much of the opponents' arguments were "dead wrong," including the claim that someone would be able to file off the microstamping.

"This will work almost perfectly," Koretz said. "Every casing will have a number that's tied to a database."

Ever heard of a Dremel Tool & polishing compound? I guess not . . . :rolleyes:

dolanp
June 3, 2005, 09:05 AM
And when the criminals do file it down in less than 5 minutes' work, they will blame the gun manufacturer for making it too easy, then sue them for somebody's death. :banghead:

Waffen
June 3, 2005, 09:30 AM
As these draconian laws are passed by the village idiots in Sacramento, (or any other corrupt legislature), I pray that more manufacturers will have the courage to stand up and be counted like Ronnie Barrett of Barrett firearms, who has refused to sell his products to any CA state agency, in the wake of the .50 cal ban recently enacted.

Ronnie Barrett is doing what all gun manufactures need to do. If Kali is going to pass all these senceless laws that are heading in the direction of banning gun products outright, why even sell to their government officials at all? Make the choice yours insted of some senators.

Everyone needs to follow Ronnie's lead.

rick_reno
June 3, 2005, 09:44 AM
********** has passed ridiculous gun legislation in the past. Look at the assault ban requiring registration. I've seen reports that put the compliance with that one at less than 5%. This will produce a similar backlash, there will be a dramatic increase in handloading.

boofus
June 3, 2005, 10:05 AM
I'd rather the government just declare ********** no longer part of the union and send in General Sherman Jr to burn the whole bloody place to the ground and keep the fires going until they decide to ratify the Constitution again.

natedog
June 3, 2005, 10:14 AM
1/2 cent per bullet for the paperwork? They can't possibly believe that. That's 10 cents for a box of Hydra shocks. A clerk earning $10 an hour would have to do the paper work in about 35 seconds to break even. No way.

There's no cap on the tax, and the Attorney General can increase it arbitralily. So...if this passes, he could say the next day that it is a $5 tax per bullet, or $100 tax per bullet.

TheEgg
June 3, 2005, 10:30 AM
Assembly version requires guns to stamp identification numbers on bullet casings each time they are fired.

:what:

the sheer stupidity is just ------ breathtaking! :eek:

shermacman
June 3, 2005, 10:56 AM
Come on, Egg! No big deal! Here is how it works: with the electronic safe gun, the radio frequency identification chip embedded in your dominant hand's index finger will boot a software check-sum sub-system that compares the safe gun's user authorized database to the RFID chip's ROM memory. Once the secure socket layer verification is complete (probably a triple fault 128 bit transaction) the gun's computer will instruct the firing mechanism's piezo-electric random number generator to etch, with a laser, an identification number into each casing as it is brought into battery.

What could possibly go wrong?

fletcher
June 3, 2005, 11:02 AM
^^ We need more engineer politicians :p

dolanp
June 3, 2005, 11:10 AM
I think the CA politicians watched Judge Dredd and said 'PERFECT!! Let's do it!'

Waffen
June 3, 2005, 11:12 AM
hahah the judge dredd comment is spot on.

I have said it before and I will say it again. There is a reason the lord put california on a fault line.

TheEgg
June 3, 2005, 11:17 AM
Come on, Egg! No big deal! Here is how it works: with the electronic safe gun, the radio frequency identification chip embedded in your dominant hand's index finger will boot a software check-sum sub-system that compares the safe gun's user authorized database to the RFID chip's ROM memory. Once the secure socket layer verification is complete (probably a triple fault 128 bit transaction) the gun's computer will instruct the firing mechanism's piezo-electric random number generator to etch, with a laser, an identification number into each casing as it is brought into battery.

What could possibly go wrong?

You are so right, PLEASE FORGIVE ME!

How could I doubt the wisdom of the great leaders in Sacramento?

Uh, wait a minute -- :barf:

There, now I feel better.

Elmer
June 3, 2005, 11:23 AM
I'd rather the government just declare ********** no longer part of the union and send in General Sherman Jr to burn the whole bloody place to the ground and keep the fires going until they decide to ratify the Constitution again.

I understand how you feel Boof.

But there's a lot of good folks in California. It's just the state is run by the population bases in SF and LA, which is where the looney left live. I'm sure you're not crazy about some of the crap coming out of Dallas and Houston and Austin.

The mistake in the past by the pro gun groups, was to throw California to the wolves. My friends in the Midwest and the South just shook their heads and gave up on us. It gave the anti's an open season.

If we lose everything here, we'll all lose. The stand has to be taken here. I'm going to be leaving the state soon, but my checks and letters will still keep going to California.

rick_reno
June 3, 2005, 11:29 AM
"A law abiding citizen has nothing to fear,"

This catch phrase will replace "It's for the children"

wolf
June 3, 2005, 11:30 AM
the LA Times...to the rescue...they will get their way...our new mayor will push his agenda..and the few gun shops still in the LA area will go down..and this person will sleep well at night..

Re "Two-Day Rampage Leaves Trail of Death and Questions," June 1: Would the horrific and bloody rampage by Toby Whelchel have been possible had he not possessed a handgun? Would he have been able to fire at five people, steal two trucks, break into a gated community, beat two children and fatally beat their mother had he not possessed a lethal weapon? I think not.

Clearly it is the National Rifle Assn.'s catastrophic crusade that allows the Whelchels of our society to possess dangerous guns. Our politicians equally share the blame in fearfully yielding to the NRA lobby.

At what price can our society continue to accept tragic incidents such as Whelchel's? It is time for California to lead the nation and outlaw the possession of all handguns by private citizens.

David Rosen

Long Beach

George S.
June 3, 2005, 11:36 AM
They can pass their bills, but there has to be a final version that goes to the Governator for his signature. Is there any word about Ahhnold's stance on this joke?

CA is still in a financial mess. The burden of starting up and maintaining this system will have to be borne by the state. The whole program, regardless if there is a pre-numbered bullet or a gun that stamps something on a round is going to cost millions of dollars to get running. Every place in the state that sells ammo (assuming that the internet ammo suppliers turn their backs on CA as they should to fight this BS) will have to submit data to some state office where it will be entered into some sort of system.

My years of experience in state government and the IT world is that when a new system is needed, computer equipment is purchased, a variety of software is loaded, programmers and developers are hired to build the custom application and then other programmers do the maintenance. Data entry staff hae to keep up with the incoming data. All of this will cost money. State offices that already have large computer resources (hardware and software) are usually very relictant to share their computers and staff unless they get a lot of money for doing somebody else's work.

And if a pre-numbered bullet system is used, who gets to inform the state that bullet #105,035,602,596,001 was fired at a target last Tuesday at the local range? And who deletes the info from the data base. Databases are funny things, they need maintenance and you cannot really have an open-ended file in them. It takes lots of work to allow things like serial numbers to expand in terms of how many digits in a serial number and the other data that is related to the bullet number, like seller, buyer, store and city where it was sold.

Even if you remove the argument and implications of "Big Brother", another step in trying to take away the rights of the citizen, much less the issue of RKBA, this thing is going to backfire big time in somebody's face. From the standpoint of time, money and resources, this is just not going to work. To me, the bills were introduced more from an emotional anti-gun point of view on the part of the legislators compared to anything that could remotely help in solving of a crime.

Another sad thing about this whole deal is that ammo makers may not want to stand up to CA and refuse to do something like pre-number a bullet. They want to sell their product and make money. I just don't see Remington, Winchester, CCI and other makers telling CA to stuff their law where the sun doesn't shine. And even if this thing does go into law, the ammo makers will probably continue to sell to LEO organizations. If the current bills do not have anything that exempts police agencies, the final versions probably will have some such thing.

Waffen
June 3, 2005, 11:38 AM
The whole argument that the leftist anti's have really boggles my mind. I almost feel like not trying to argue the point that they are wrong, because I know we will never convince somone whose opinion is already made up.

The thinking is pure insanity. Blame inanimate objects except for the HUMAN commiting the actions.

Seriously, I wish there was a way on a large scale to show these people that their thinking makes no sence whatsoever.

This "for the children" and "A law abiding citizen" crap makes me want to projectile vomit on my monitor and keyboard.

dasmi
June 3, 2005, 11:53 AM
Folks, the time to change tactics has arrived. Quit fighting the politicians in California. Lobby gun and ammo manufacturers to boycott california. That is the only way. We must force them to follow Barrett's lead.

shield20
June 3, 2005, 11:57 AM
So now that they want to register ammo too...every round you ever fire at the range, competition, hunting, whatever, you had better pick up and take the brass with you - so it doesn't get into the wrong hands.

And ONLY your casings - and every one of them! - that should be fun!

What jerk-offs - not to help cops, but to get rid of guns totally.

boofus
June 3, 2005, 11:58 AM
the LA Times...to the rescue...they will get their way...our new mayor will push his agenda..and the few gun shops still in the LA area will go down..and this person will sleep well at night..

Re "Two-Day Rampage Leaves Trail of Death and Questions," June 1: Would the horrific and bloody rampage by Toby Whelchel have been possible had he not possessed a handgun? Would he have been able to fire at five people, steal two trucks, break into a gated community, beat two children and fatally beat their mother had he not possessed a lethal weapon? I think not.

Clearly it is the National Rifle Assn.'s catastrophic crusade that allows the Whelchels of our society to possess dangerous guns. Our politicians equally share the blame in fearfully yielding to the NRA lobby.

At what price can our society continue to accept tragic incidents such as Whelchel's? It is time for California to lead the nation and outlaw the possession of all handguns by private citizens.

David Rosen

Long Beach


The shooter was a convicted felon with a rap sheet from 3+ different states plus he was less than honorably discharged from the military. He was already banned from owning or even touching a firearm by federal law.

Nice to see how well that ban worked.

Brainless idiots like Rosen should be required to spend a year in prison every time they write drivel like that. After all guns and knives and weapons of all types are banned in prison, so it must be a paradise on earth right?
:banghead:

shermacman
June 3, 2005, 12:07 PM
It is not like the gang bangers are going to the range and put 500 rounds of .22lr to practice their Weaver stance. The gang bangers aren't going to be paying this tax, it won't affect them. They stole the gun and they stole the ammo anyway.

The tax revenue issue is important, the politicians clearly want to milk whatever cow they can find. But I think they are even more dangerous than that. They want money coming in but they want to spend even more. They know this will not work. It will be a bureaucratic nightmare that costs a fortune and the politicians can crow about how hard they worked, how they "fought for public safety" but ultimately, some punk will simply steal a gun and some ammo and shoot a person dead and the database will be of no help.

Then our duly elected officials will throw up their hands and say: "Well, we tried. Now the only thing left to do is completely ban guns."

Gordon Fink
June 3, 2005, 12:31 PM
Folks, the time to change tactics has arrived.…

Maybe … if the system completely fails. That Koretz is just like the little boy who can’t stop poking the hornet nest.

~G. Fink

Punkermonkey
June 3, 2005, 12:59 PM
Assuming this passes, which I most seriously hope it does not! It would solve absolutely NOTHING! They only people it would effect are the people who obey it. When will these politicians get it through their ever thickening skulls!?!? :banghead:

So I'm a criminal and want to get around this law. What would I do?

Serialized ammo:

1. Steal the ammo
2. Buy the ammo out of state
3. Scratch the serial number off
4. Use a revolver
5. Use the AK-47's I'm suppose to have
6. Use any other rifle/shotgun I can get my hands on
7. Grab a handful of brass from my local range to spread around the crime scene

And if the handgun stamps the serial number:

1. Scratch of the serial number stamp
2. If the stamp is recessed, fill it with JB Weld
3. Use a revolver
5. Use the AK-47's I'm suppose to have
6. Use any other rifle/shotgun I can get my hands on
7. Steal a gun
8. Keep using the gun I already have because it does not stamp a number

BECAUSE I DON'T GIVE A CRAP ABOUT YOUR LAW! I'M ALREADY COMMITTING MURDER, DO YOU REALLY THINK I CARE ABOUT YOUR STUPID SERIAL NUMBERS?

So the law abiding have nothing to worry about........

walking arsenal
June 3, 2005, 01:16 PM
This is an eazy thing to solve. Send a letter to the law makers. THEN send a letter to everyone you know and ASK THEM to send a letter to ALL ammo manufacturers saying that if they send lazer engraved rounds to california you will stop buying their ammo.


In theory, that SHOULD have some clout.

Beethoven
June 3, 2005, 02:10 PM
"A law abiding citizen has nothing to fear," said Sen. Jack Scott, D-Pasadena


That statement absolutely turns my stomach.

:barf: :barf: :barf:

God, I think the time has come....

heypete
June 3, 2005, 02:29 PM
Ugh. Just ugh.

Ladies and Gentlemen, as a Californian, I must apologize greatly for the idiots that inhabit my state of birth.

Rest assured that I have done all I possibly can to influence my legislators -- written letters, called, written emails, posted messages online, sent messages to my college's rifle club, talked about this issue in public, etc.

However, the bills have still passed out of their respective bodies. One can only hope that the passage was only because they were doing a last-minute rush to get the bills to the other house before the window for new bills was closed. Hopefully they will now seriously consider each bill and review it for their individual merit or lack therof. Since each bill passed only by the barest majority, there is still hope.

One can hope that if the bills reach the Governator, he will veto them. More letters are in order.

If these bills actually are signed into law, I'm afraid I'll have to again offer my apologies for the rest of the state. We're not all GFWs...its just the legislators tend to be. There's still a lot of good gun folks here in the state; it's just that we're under constant attack from all levels of government (the local public range is being constantly threatened with closure, and has been for over a decade) and it's tough to bear another burden. We're doing the best we can...

armoredman
June 3, 2005, 02:36 PM
Ladies and gentlemen of this board living in California, if you can, please emigrate to AZ, we have plenty of room for good gun people.
I agree we should keep tabs on what companies are selling to Cali, and especially, IF A COMPANY SELLS TO CALI LAW ENFORCEMENT AND NOT TO GENERAL PUBLIC AFTER THIS PASSES. These companies who do discriminate like this should be driven out of business, as several smaller ammunition manufacturers are waiting to pick up the slack for us.
BTW, what happens to reloaders with the marked ammo thing? Do you have to buy new unprimed brass with the serial etched already? I have 32 pounds of 9mm brass....would I,( if I was living in Cali) be required to turn in my "evil" brass for "good" brass, at my expense?

boofus, read my siggie line....

sumpnz
June 3, 2005, 02:57 PM
What if, rather than having CA gunnies move out, a lot of us gunnies moved there? Maybe target some specific areas to build clout and oust particularly bad politicians and replace them with gun friendly ones? It would take a lot of effort and coordination, but it might work. Might even be able to get DiFi and Boxer out before they croak if we work hard enough. There's a good aerospace industry there, so I'm sure I could get a good enough job. So long as my wife was able to as well, we could maybe even afford to move there.

jlwatts3
June 3, 2005, 02:58 PM
Ladies and Gentlemen, as a Californian, I must apologize greatly for the idiots that inhabit my state of birth.
+1

I too have written, called and emailed assemblymen, and the governator. It is so exhausting to have to constantly battle the idiocy and tyranny. I love this state, not the morons who live and vote here but the actual physical land. That is the only thing that keeps me from just giving up and moving someplace free. But I don't know how much more of this I can take.
:banghead: :cuss: : :barf: :fire: :mad: :barf: :barf:

Ok I feel a little better.Time to go write more letters.

Nick1911
June 3, 2005, 03:02 PM
Looks like California is trying to take a big step out of that awkward (http://www.clairewolfe.com/) phase...

mainmech48
June 3, 2005, 03:07 PM
Gotta believe that the intent here is make legal ammo available only to the Chosen Few. If you make the bulk of the civilian ammo supply dry-up, their guns will be rendered essentially useless, at least that would appear to be the theory.

Can't just ban all firearms from being sold? Make the "qualification" process so convoluted and expensive that the manufacturers withdraw the product "voluntarily".

Legal as Church on Sunday (wait one; is that still legal in CA?) and as nauseating as last week's garbage. Also of about as much real usefullness in stopping/solving criminals as you-know-whats on a boar.

Look for provisions for asset confiscation when the "New, Improved" version of this dreck comes on-line if and when this one passes and doesn't "work".

If your legislature is truly a reflection of the mean-intelligence of the majority of it's constituents, it's time to GTFOOD. The place is beyond redemption.

jlwatts3
June 3, 2005, 03:20 PM
What if, rather than having CA gunnies move out, a lot of us gunnies moved there?
No sumpnz, we wouldn't want that. We need to save the room for our "undocumented aliens".

griz
June 3, 2005, 03:40 PM
Does anyone know of the specific requirement to report/record the firing of ammo, or is that an assumption? I ask because it would seem to be a nightmare for a big match such as End Of Trail, the big cowboy match that used to be held in California.

Imagine 700 shooters running through 12 stages, with about 20 rounds per stage. That's not including shotgun ammo or side matches. Of course most shoot reloads now. But I suppose the expense and aggravation of buying factory ammo and doing more paper work than shooting would reduce the number of competitors greatly. That is probably the real intent of the law.

Elmer
June 3, 2005, 04:00 PM
But I suppose the expense and aggravation of buying factory ammo and doing more paper work than shooting would reduce the number of competitors greatly. That is probably the real intent of the law.

Ding Ding Ding!!

We have a winner!!

They know it will have no effect on crime. The 1989 California AWB banned guns that had never been used in a crime. They just want to keep grinding us down.......

PrudentGT
June 3, 2005, 04:48 PM
Let's see... unintended consequences:

1) Ban standard capacity magazines -- can't spray and pray, criminals are forced to become better marksmen.

2) Institute a 'drop test' that costs manufacturer's money to have performed -- Criminals are forced to steal more reliable, higher quality guns.

3)Serialize ammo -- Criminals, having honed their skills due to 1), resort to wheelguns, which are typically of larger caliber.

Now instead of being held up with a .25 caliber Lorcin, you'll have a .480 Ruger revolver in your face! Thank you Sacramento! What would I do without your gentle reminders to buckle up for safety and your incessant (and expensive!) meddling in issues beyond your ken?

PS - Even though he couldn't afford it, guess who stocked up on CCI Blazer from Natchez? The UPS guy looked really uncomfortable...

OneFireStick
June 3, 2005, 04:59 PM
This is really bad news. I live in CA and after hearing this, I'm going to start stockpiling reloading componants for the long haul.

TRLaye
June 3, 2005, 05:19 PM
Ok folks. Let's take a breath here.

1. You're discussing two separate bills in the Kalif legislature, not an assembly and senate version of the same bill.

SB357 is the ammunition serialization bill where a serial number will be engraved on lots of 50 handgun bullets. This bill may, or may not, apply to law enforcement but does not apply to the state National Guard. It does apply to bullets used for handloading. You will not be able to cast your own bullets if this bill passes.

Hoarding ammo won't work as you will not be able to legally transport it outside of your personal property. Whether to take out of the state or to the range to shoot it.

AB352 is an amendment to the ********** Safe Handgun act in that any semi-auto handgun that does not mark it's ejected case with information identifying that specific handgun is declared unsafe.

Shalako
June 3, 2005, 06:02 PM
I am trying to brainstorm a list of why this bill (SB357) is a detriment to California.

This bill is bad for the Economy
The recordkeeping will burden small business and reduce their profits.
The sales of ammo will drop and reduce profits of small business.
Fees for the database will hurt small business.

This bill is bad for the State Budget
A bureaucracy will need to be maintained to manage the database, collect fees, collect data and regulate bookkeeping violations.
This new bureaucracy will compete for funding with critical infrastructure needs that are already short on funds.
California law enforcement agencies will have to pay additional hundreds of thousands of dollars for higher priced ammunition.
California courts and law enforcement will be burdened by the creation of a whole new class of criminals to seek and prosecute.
Reduction in ammunition sales will diminsh tax revenues from in-state ammunition retailers.

This bill is bad for California citizens
The registration of every box of handgun ammunition at the store counter will usurp our very valuable time.
The Government's knowledge of every caliber, cartridge type, and quantity of ammunition that is bought infringes on our right to privacy.
The burden of having to painstakingly collect every peice of brass cartridge casing ejected at the range is an infringement on our valuable time.
This bill will only impact legal handgun shooters and can be interpreted as the persecution of a minority of individuals engaging in a legal activity.
Legal handgun shooters will be targeted by criminals as sources of ammunition.
Computer and database errors could falsely trigger the infringement of liberties of legal handgun shooters.
Selection and availability of ammunition and components could be reduced and thus impact ammunition sales and hinder the enjoyment of a legal activity.
Citizens who stocked up on ammunition in quantities commensurate with high volumes of competitive shooting may be forced to liquidate stocks of ammunition in a manner counter to their budgeted usage.
An unlawful black market of unserialized ammunition will emerge and fuel further criminal activity.
Criminals will opt to use unserialized ammunition for crimes or steal serialized ammunition from legal purchasers.
Otherwise law abiding citizens may be caught unawares with a friend's or partner's serialized ammunition left in their possesion subsequent to a hunting trip, shooting event, or other legal activity.
Human error in the serializarion, recordization, or database entry could cause undue hardship or loss of liberties to a law abiding citizen.
Shooting enthusiasts who choose to load their own ammo would fire the same casings numerous times with different projectiles, therefore causing a lack of consistency in the numbering scheme that would confuse the database and enforcement entities and thereby cause undue scrutiny of a law abiding citizen.
No effort will be made by the database to track the removal of serialized ammunition from circulation by legal means, thereby each projectile and casing will be owned by the purchaser in perpetuity. This creates an undue burden on the citizen enjoying a lawful activity.

Please feel free to modify or add to this list and use it at your convenience.
We need to get the message out!

R.H. Lee
June 3, 2005, 06:42 PM
Y'all can slam California all you want, but you can be sure that if this becomes law, and the ammo makers re-tool to accomodate it, YOUR state will most assuredly adopt the same requirements. Chuckle that off.

Boats
June 3, 2005, 07:33 PM
The singlemost effective thing you can possibly do is to write two letters.

The first goes to Senator Larry Craig, R-Idaho
The other goes to Congressman Tom DeLay, R-Texas

In both, you simply ask that in light of developments in California, that they pass legislation reserving to Congress the power, under the interstate commerce clause, to pre-empt the legislative powers of the various state in regards to firearms design and ammunition manufacturing.

Some might think that a dangerous precedent, to give Congress power over gun and ammo design. Think about it though. They have already spoken on this topic several times, from barring the CPSC from regulating these items, to banning "cop-killer" bullets.

The argument is that the Feds have supreme power over the topic and so Congress should make a law instructing the US Attorney to order the states to clear the field. The goal is to pass a federal law ending "co-soveriegnty" over the issue of gun and ammo manufacture and design.

Problem solved, though the act of Congress would occupy a lot of Bill Lockyer's time and budget.

“Preemption” describes the removal of a government’s power to regulate a specific subject matter. When an act of Congress removes a local or state government’s power to regulate a specific subject matter, the process is called “federal preemption.” State and local laws are often challenged on the theory that Congress has preempted the subject matter. However, in examining such challenges, the courts presume that the state or local law is not preempted. The courts have developed the following rule. For a court to find that Congress has “preempted” the power of a lower level of government to regulate a subject matter, the court must be “absolutely certain” that Congress intended to preempt that field of regulation. Gregory v. Ashcroft, 501 U.S. 452, 464 (1991). When the state or local law in question concerns public health and safety, the law is within the historic police power of the States, and thus the requirement of “absolute certainty” of congressional intent to preempt is “particularly warranted.” Rice v Sante Fe Elevator Corp., 331 U.S. 218, 230 (1947).

To determine congressional intent, the courts look for one or more of the following:

* An express statement by Congress that it is taking over that field of regulation;

* A pervasive scheme of federal regulation of the field that leaves no room for state or local regulation; or

* An actual conflict between the federal law and the challenged state or local law.

However, the courts find such a conflict only when compliance with both the federal regulation and the challenged law would be physically impossible.

With respect to regulation of firearms, the courts have held that Congress made no explicit statement of its intent to take over that field of regulation. They have also found that congressional regulation of firearms is not a scheme so pervasive that it leaves no room for state and local law. Thus, absent a specific, actual conflict between a challenged state or local firearms law and a federal enactment, there is no federal preemption of that state or local law. See Richmond Boro Gun Club, Inc. v. City of New York, 896 F.Supp. 276, 285-288 (E.D.N.Y. 1995) (discussing the fact that Congress has nowhere made a statement of intent to preempt local regulation of firearms and the federal laws regulating firearms do not establish a pervasive scheme of regulation, and holding that New York City’s ordinance banning ”assault weapons” was not in actual conflict with the provisions of the Federal Civilian Marksmanship Program).

So, under the current state of the law, all that is required is clear Congressional intent to pre-empt the field, leaving no wiggle room for the states.

PinnedAndRecessed
June 3, 2005, 08:41 PM
If you would help..............

Please email the governor and let him know your displeasure on this bill.

http://www.govmail.ca.gov/

Librarian
June 4, 2005, 03:40 PM
Shalako's list is pretty good.

It would be useful, if only the Assembly and Senate cared about the effects and thought them 'bad'. H. L. Richardson, former CA state Senator 66-88, wrote a book "What makes you think we read the bills?"; some folks there really are clueless. Most legislators are party hacks. And a large number are positively anti-gun, and see all the negative effects listed as either benefits or reasonable costs to get those benefits.

Maybe Arnold will listen.

wasrjoe
June 4, 2005, 03:57 PM
Y'all can slam California all you want, but you can be sure that if this becomes law, and the ammo makers re-tool to accomodate it, YOUR state will most assuredly adopt the same requirements. Chuckle that off.

So people shouldn't slam California's governing body and general voting population because they are going to screw it up for the rest of the US, too? :confused:

PinnedAndRecessed
June 4, 2005, 05:38 PM
So people shouldn't slam California's governing body and general voting population because they are going to screw it up for the rest of the US

I normally don't subscribe to the notion that, re gun laws, as California goes, so goes the rest of the nation. Granted, there are isolated pockets of anti-gun liberalism, e.g., New York city, Chicago, et al, but they don't need help from California.

And I often hear people out here on the left coast say that the rest of the nation will follow our assault rifle ban, drop safety test, etc. I don't agree with that.

However, this bullet id law maybe different. If the anti gun legislators in Kal manage to pull this off and if the only inconvenience is higher price for ammo, I'd guess you could look for a lot more states to follow.

What does this mean? It means that we should all apply as much pressure as possible on the gov of Kal to veto this. Even if you're not in state, the email address that I listed earlier does not require an address.

Arny is no friend of gun owners. But he is politically sensitive.

R.H. Lee
June 4, 2005, 06:32 PM
So people shouldn't slam California's governing body and general voting population because they are going to screw it up for the rest of the US, too? No, it's this condescending high and mighty attitude that (some of you) feel you're somehow immune from gun control legislation simply because you don't live in California. Like it's real easy to sit on your high horse and take gratuitous pot shots. I'm saying you shouldn't be so smug. IIRC, you've got a real lib governor in AZ, dontcha? :p Didn't she just override the will of the people on some immigration issue?

El Rojo
June 4, 2005, 06:41 PM
Did you read where it says, (c) (1) For purposes of this chapter, "serialized handgun
ammunition" means any of the following, which are subject to
serialization pursuant to subdivision (d):
(A) Ammunition as defined in subdivision (a) of Section 12323.
(B) .22 caliber rimfire ammunition.
(C) Assembled handgun ammunition packaged for retail sale.
(D) Bullets used for reloading or handloading handgun ammunition
that are packaged for retail sale.Am I reading that right that all .22 ammo will have to be serialized? Well that is good news because the non-handgun shooting crowd better figure that out and realize the cost of a brick of 22 ammo is about to skyrocket. How in the hell do you serialize a .22LR bullet?

Start writing the governor.

sumpnz
June 4, 2005, 06:51 PM
How in the hell do you serialize a .22LR bullet? Same as all the rest of the affected bullets. That and good by 500 round bricks. 50 round boxes will be it.

sumpnz
June 4, 2005, 07:01 PM
Just picked up on something: (c) (1) For purposes of this chapter, "serialized handgun
ammunition" means any of the following, which are subject to
serialization pursuant to subdivision (d):
(A) Ammunition as defined in subdivision (a) of Section 12323.
(B) .22 caliber rimfire ammunition.
(C) Assembled handgun ammunition packaged for retail
sale.
(D) Bullets used for reloading or handloading handgun ammunition
that are packaged for retail sale. Does this mean if you bought it wholesale it wouldn't have to be serialized? Or what if they simply didn't "package for retail sale" and packaged for some other arbitrary type of sale?

PinnedAndRecessed
June 4, 2005, 07:49 PM
sumpnz said, "Does this mean if you bought it wholesale it wouldn't have to be serialized?"

The bill will punish anyone having unmarked bullets, outside their home, after 2007. All bullets will have to be marked if taken outside their home. I guess if you have an indoor range in your house you'd be o.k.

One question. If, as I have been told, the id number is going to be on the base of the bullet which will be completely encased in the bullet case, how would a police officer know if the bullet is legal? Without pulling the bullet, that is?

The above is germane only if the version of the bill passes which says each "bullet" must be marked. IIRC, there is another version which says that each bullet "case" must be marked when the gun is fired. The latter version requires the chamber of the gun to do the marking.

Weird. Really weird. They are determined to just keep chipping away till it's too much hassle/too expensive to shoot anymore.

Librarian
June 4, 2005, 07:54 PM
The above is germane only if the version of the bill passes which says each "bullet" must be marked. IIRC, there is another version which says that each bullet "case" must be marked when the gun is fired. The latter version requires the chamber of the gun to do the marking.
2 separate bills (see TRLaye's post) - we could get BOTH.

mussi
June 4, 2005, 08:27 PM
I hope that one day, such a serialized casing blows up when firing, thus enabling the shooter to use the state of California so badly that it turns to the IMF for financial aid.

Black_Talon
June 4, 2005, 10:05 PM
One question. If, as I have been told, the id number is going to be on the base of the bullet which will be completely encased in the bullet case, how would a police officer know if the bullet is legal? Without pulling the bullet, that is?

Probably by requiring the outside of the round to be identified as "serialized". Possily a special character on the headstamp for instance.

Gewehr98
June 5, 2005, 12:15 AM
Y'all can slam California all you want, but you can be sure that if this becomes law, and the ammo makers re-tool to accomodate it, YOUR state will most assuredly adopt the same requirements. Chuckle that off.

I'm chuckling now. Coming from my "high and mighty" position here in Florida, where we still have unmolested C&R licenses, .50 BMG rifles, Title III firearms, and the '94 AWB really did expire, I dare say that the PRK's ammo serialization experiment is a long ways off for those of us in the free states. Methinks Riley's argument is more akin to sour grapes.

(Having escaped the PRK with my DOJ-banned collection just before SB-23 went into effect, myself, so I'm perfectly entitled to be smug) ;)

Sounds like cap and ball revolvers will be the preferred, non-serialized method of defense on the Left Coast, perhaps followed by blackpowder stagecoach shotguns?

clone
June 5, 2005, 02:35 AM
How many BS bills have been passed that have made u more free....? On that note will the Senate just one day stop with these BS bills thinking that we are safe enough? Makes ya think. :scrutiny:

I see it comeing to the point of tracking guns with chips useing GPS or out-lawing guns all together.

MichaelEzekiel
June 5, 2005, 05:11 AM
These two bills, when passed into law, will greatly increase the civil discontent and more rapidly lead to Revolution and the reestablishment of our Constitution. Brevity in warfare being the most humane way of accomplishing Revolution...let us pray for a quick beginning and an even quicker end to the conflict that is upon us. The more insane our politicians...the sooner we shall get to work.

berettashotgun
June 5, 2005, 06:36 AM
Being too lazy to read the proposed laws, what 'bout shotguns? How many 22 rounds did YOU pop last year? I went thru 12-13 bricks, PLUS a coupla' thousand 22mag. The AR/Mini-14/remy 788 used up about 4k in new ammo, Mini-30 went thru 2 cases of wolfie, and believe I reloaded 800 22-250 (sounds like a cool phone # :D ) rounds. I know that I've left out some other cartridges, but the point I'm trying to make is the absuridity of that database. The shotgun question is very valid, let's see a show of hands on everyone who reloaded a minimun of 2k 12ga. for league/practice last year, Holy crap :eek: - that's a lot of people. I personally believe the sheer volume of information will overwhelm the system capacity and resources, then the actions of the politicians to recoup will be even more asnine. I forgot to add the 2-3k in .308 that went thru the fal's. BTW-I don't get the pleasure of squeezing the trigger on all of those rounds, but a lot of kids sure smiled when they did. :cool:

twency
June 5, 2005, 09:53 AM
How...do you serialize a .22LR bullet? Drop packets of 5 or 10 rounds into every box of Cap'n Crunch? Maybe as a special bonus, put 100 rounds in every 100th box? :)

R.H. Lee
June 5, 2005, 10:51 AM
I'm chuckling now. Coming from my "high and mighty" position here in Florida, where we still have unmolested C&R licenses, .50 BMG rifles, Title III firearms, and the '94 AWB really did expire, I dare say that the PRK's ammo serialization experiment is a long ways off for those of us in the free states. Keep whistling in the dark and hope the bogeyman doesn't get you. You made my point. Your so-called 'free' states are subject to change with the political climate. Even inane ideas floated, but not legislated here, are sometimes codified by other states. Look at Maryland's failed 'ballistics fingerprinting'. :rolleyes: Not to mention y'all are subject to Federal regulation, and it's just a matter of time before the leftists re-take both the Congress and the White House. Just because you're in {insert your favorite 'free state' name here} doesn't mean you're not on the gun grabber's list.

As far as SB23, I'm still seeing .50 BMG's, AK's and other assorted banned 'assault weapons' here and there around the state. Ammo serialization won't be any more effective.

shermacman
June 5, 2005, 11:13 AM
Twency:
Pink hearts, silver moons, brass .22's!
"They're GGGRREEAAAATTTT!!!!!!

PinnedAndRecessed
June 5, 2005, 11:45 AM
Your so-called 'free' states are subject to change with the political climate.

How true, Riley. Because as the politics of Kal grows more insane, the more Californians abandon ship and move east or north. They take their politics/sentiments with them. And many liberal Californians are moving, you guessed it, to the conservative states.

BenW
June 5, 2005, 01:52 PM
And many liberal Californians are moving, you guessed it, to the conservative states.
Consider it payback for all the liberals that moved here from other states in the 60's and 70's and ruined things for us.
:evil: :neener:

I find liberal statists to be like locusts. They swarm in, consume, destroy, then move on to the next green field.

Guy B. Meredith
June 5, 2005, 03:31 PM
Uh, serializing bullets is not going to be cheap. Would manufacturers have to raise prices across the country to cover the c0sts 0f the gear?

PinnedAndRecessed
June 5, 2005, 04:15 PM
Consider it payback for all the liberals that moved here from other states in the 60's and 70's and ruined things for us.

Ain't it the truth, Ben. Barbara Boxer, enemy of the 2nd amendment, born in Brooklyn, NY. Gray Davis, Bronx, NY. Terminator, Austria. Charles Manson, Cincinnati, Ohio.

Keyster
June 6, 2005, 10:43 AM
Just crunching the numbers and letters.

SB 357 Serialized handgun ammunition.
Ayes 21. 21 Dem.
Noes 18. 2 Dem. 16 Rep.
Not voting. 1 Dem.

AB 352
Require Microstamping of fired cases.
Ayes 41. 41 Dem
Noes 38. 7 Dem. 31 Rep.
Not voting. 1 Dem.

hth
K.

PinnedAndRecessed
June 6, 2005, 01:34 PM
This is the house, is that right? It now goes to the senate? And isn't the senate the real test of gun control laws for California?

Keyster
June 6, 2005, 01:55 PM
This is cut and pasted from a NRA Alert.
Not sure if this answers your question.

K.

CALIFORNIA
Anti-gun legislation, Senate Bill 357, was voted out of the Senate and is to be considered in the Assembly.
This bill would establish a program requiring serialization of handgun ammunition to be enforced by the Department of Justice.
The manufacture, transfer, and possession of non-serialized handgun ammunition after July 1, 2007, would be considered a crime.
SB 357 would also require ammunition vendors and manufacturers to register with the Department of Justice.
Please contact members of the Assembly and ask them to oppose SB 357. Assembly Members can be reached at (916) 319-20 (plus your 2-digit district number for the last two numbers). Please make the call today!

Assembly Bill 352 was voted out of the Assembly and now moves to the Senate.
AB 352 expands the definition of "unsafe handguns" to include semi-automatic pistols that are not designed and equipped with an array of microscopic characters which identify the make, model, and serial number of the pistol by imprinting the characters on each cartridge case when the firearm is discharged.
This legislation could essentially ban all semi-automatic pistols commonly used by California gun owners.
Please contact members of the Senate, and ask them to oppose AB 352. Please encourage your friends, family, and fellow sportsmen to contact their State Senators as well.

PinnedAndRecessed
June 6, 2005, 03:20 PM
Thanx Keyster.

I did not realize until now that "AB" meant an assembly bill and "SB" meant a senate bill. So if they originate in the assembly they must go to the senate and vice-versa.

Do the respective bills have to have a majority in both assembly and senate to make it to the governor's desk?

pbhome71
June 6, 2005, 03:49 PM
The way I look at it, I think we should prepare to write to Arnold for veto on both bills.

-Pat

PinnedAndRecessed
June 6, 2005, 03:52 PM
You can contact the gov by email. Dunno how effective it is but is probably better than a chopstick in your eye.

http://www.govmail.ca.gov/

ClonaKilty
June 6, 2005, 04:11 PM
what 'bout shotguns?

The bills are for handguns only (for now), but of course ammo like .22, .44 etc can be used in rifles. My guess is that if it can be used in handguns,it'll be covered by this bill.

I've been a dutiful CRPA member; I've emailed, faxed, voted, got out the vote, taught gun newbies to shoot, got people signed up into the NRA and CRPA...but I have reached my limit. If they insist on treating me like a de facto criminal -- if this bill is signed into law -- I am going to shrug this state off of my back and leave for Free America within 6 months.

Randy in Arizona
June 6, 2005, 04:37 PM
sumpnz - post 49 in this thread
What if, rather than having CA gunnies move out, a lot of us gunnies moved there? Maybe target some specific areas to build clout and oust particularly bad politicians and replace them with gun friendly ones? It would take a lot of effort and coordination, but it might work. Might even be able to get DiFi and Boxer out before they croak if we work hard enough. There's a good aerospace industry there, so I'm sure I could get a good enough job. So long as my wife was able to as well, we could maybe even afford to move there.

I lived there once, had my dog poisoned with strychnine, stuff stolen out of our storage shed, etc. All this within about 14 months. Lived in Carmel Valley, not South Central or other known hellhole.

Far more effective would be to publish maps of all the hog farms in the state and make arrangements for feeding times. :D :D

Beethoven
June 6, 2005, 06:20 PM
Bump.

PinnedAndRecessed
June 6, 2005, 09:29 PM
I emailed the governator with my displeasure with this bill. Here's what I got back:

Thank you for emailing Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger regarding SB 60
and SB 357. The Governor appreciates you voicing your opinions on
proposed legislation affecting our State.

The Governor does not take a position on legislation until a final bill
has reached his desk. The Legislature has until September 9, 2005 to
pass legislation and the Governor has until October 9, 2005 to sign or
veto proposed bills.

You may continue to follow this and any other bill before the State
Legislature at the Official California Legislative Website:
www.leginfo.ca.gov. You may also read any legislative messages from the Governor at
his website: www.governor.ca.gov.

Again, the Governor appreciates your interest in California's future.
An informed and engaged citizenry is important to effective government
in our State.

Sincerely,


Office of Constituent Affairs

PinnedAndRecessed
June 7, 2005, 02:02 PM
If they insist on treating me like a de facto criminal -- if this bill is signed into law -- I am going to shrug this state off of my back and leave for Free America within 6 months

Dunno where you're thinking about, but unless you live somewhere like LA or San Fran, Cal is better than most places. Even with our draconian gun laws I can still buy enough guns to keep me broke.

Assault rifles? As soon as they passed the AWB in Kal I went out and bought one of the most reliable assault rifles available, the Mini 30. And I'm going to buy another, the M1A.

The thing that most upset me was the drop safety law. It effectively stopped us from buying the older pinned and recessed Smiths except from private parties. That one has been a real inconvenience.

Anyway, some places I've lived are worse than Kal. For example, when I moved to Michigan, I had to hand carry every handgun I owned downtown to the govt offices and let the lady physically check the serial numbers. Then I carried them back home and waited for the registration papers. At least in Kal I only had to mail the info.

Bartholomew Roberts
June 7, 2005, 02:14 PM
Well since this law also applies to law enforcement (unlike many previous gun control efforts) it is bound to be an utter failure. You see they can't just inconvenience the average joe, they will also be disarming their own state agencies.

A failure of legislation on that level might actually help us quite a bit in the long run.

PinnedAndRecessed
June 7, 2005, 02:22 PM
A failure of legislation on that level might actually help us quite a bit in the long run.

They have run into periodic road blocks along these lines. For example, Barrett rifles refused to perform service on a 50 cals rifle because of the inane BMG ban.

I heard there was a similar debacle concerning Kal law enforcement, the drop safety tests, and Glock.

Anyway, give them enough rope and all. It's just pretty frustrating to be here while they are experimenting with the constitution.

:banghead:

ClonaKilty
June 7, 2005, 02:33 PM
P&R:

Yeah unfortunately I live in Oakland, which might as well be SF (just a lot uglier and more dangerous). You are right that many counties in CA are better to live in than where I do. Problem for me is that my work requires I am near a major city, and also, even in the best counties in CA, you still:

* don't have "shall issue" CCW (some Sherrifs are pro CCW, some aren't. Their choice.)
* buy semi-auto rifles that I enjoy shooting (M1A is great but I also like FALs, ARs, etc)
* can't have normal capacity magazines
* have to wait 10 inexplicable days before taking possession of a gun

There are many other states where I can live near a major city and exercise my rights. Trust me, I LOVE California -- being close to the Sierras, the beaches, the very comfortabe climate, the great food. But if 357 is signed into law, then CA has crossed the line and I am leaving.

PinnedAndRecessed
June 7, 2005, 03:51 PM
ClonaKilty,

I can't argue your logic. It's a shame such a gorgeous state has been infected by totalitarianism. Our politics (from the Latin "poly", meaning "many" and "tics" meaning "blood sucking creatures") comes from an elitist oligarchy who spits on the people/constitution.

BTW, if you would, email Arnie about this. His office sent me a reply that if the bill is approved it goes to his desk in October. The fact of the email tells me he's listening.

http://www.govmail.ca.gov/

sumpnz
June 7, 2005, 03:56 PM
ClonaKilty - If ya gotsta move, come on over to sunny AZ. I don't know what kind of work you're in, but the Phx area has a pretty diverse economy and could likely provide you a good job. Just make sure your car's AC is working before coming here.

noonanda
June 7, 2005, 03:59 PM
take it with a grain of salt but here is my letter to the governor (you can edit this and use it for yourself if you would like). Sorry if it is kind of long

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger,

As a Former and soon to be again California Resident, I urge you to veto SB357, the ammunition serialization bill. This bill will hurt California firearm owners for no appreciable gain.

I am a United States Marine, and every day the armed forces of the United States defend this Great Nation. We protect the freedoms that some people take for granted every day. Yet while we defend these freedoms, there are people that would like to restrict, reduce or outright ban some of the freedoms granted by the Constitution. SB 357 is the kind of bill that would do this.

The premise behind this bill has merit. The idea is that in a perfect world, if all handgun ammunition in California was serialized, there would never be an unsolved crime. The police would be able to determine who purchased the ammunition, and in conjunction with AB 352, determine what gun the bullet was fired from. But unfortunately this will not work, and we do not live in a perfect world.

SB 357 would make it illegal to possess any un-serialized handgun ammunition after 2007. But herein lies the problem. The Criminal element in California will not be deterred by this bill if enacted into law, just like they are not deterred by any of the laws currently on the books. If they were deterred they would not be called criminals.

This Bill will only affect the hard working law abiding citizens of California. It will increase the price and reduce the availability of handgun ammunition that is used for both recreational and sporting purposes, as well as Self Defense.

Many ammunition companies have already stated that the cost of serialization would be cost prohibitive and impractical to manufacture for the importation into California.

SB 357 will effectively accomplish in California what “The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence” has been trying to accomplish for many years. It would make an entire class of firearms unusable to the civilian populace of California. No SB 357 does not ban or order the destruction of any firearms. But instead it makes possession of un-serialized ammunition illegal, and anyone in possession of said ammunition a Criminal.

If the ammunition companies decide not to produce handgun ammunition that will comply with SB 357 for the civilian market, then it will render all handguns in California as unusable and unshootable. If there is no legal ammunition, the handgun cannot be fired. This will unfortunately only affect the Law abiding citizens of California, not the Criminals. The Criminals will most likely resort to illegal importation of ammunition from other states.

There are other states that have tried to enact such measures and they have failed. Cost alone is one of the reasons. For SB 357 to work there would need to be a database of ammunition dealers licensed to sell in California. Then the dealers would need to report any ammunition sold, what type of ammunition, who it was sold to, and what the serial number of the ammunition is. This will quickly become a paperwork nightmare and burden to California, taking vital tax dollars from other critical issues.

If SB 357 was enacted into law, what would be the recourse of law abiding citizens that possess “un-serialized” ammunition?? Would there be a grandfather clause similar to the Assault Weapons ban? Or would all un-serialized ammunition be rendered illegal and possession makes you an automatic Felon??

I will be returning to the great state of California in March, and look forward to living there. But I ask you as Governor to protect my freedoms as I as a U.S. Marine protect the freedom of all American citizens.

ClonaKilty
June 7, 2005, 04:39 PM
sumpnz: Arizona! Oh yes, that's on the short list. However I hear that many LA refugees have moved there and have driven house prices up to near-LA prices....but it's definitely attractive.

sfhogman
June 7, 2005, 04:46 PM
Noonanda, that was well-written. As a California resident, thank you.

And thank you for your service, as well.

Best,
Jeff

UberPhLuBB
June 7, 2005, 05:18 PM
Criminal: "Yo, lemmie get a box of those 9's."
Clerk: "Ok, here you go. I'll just need your driver's license and you'll need to fill out this bullet serialization form here."
Criminal: "Huh? Form? Like I need to put my address and phone number and stuff on it? Uhh... I left my wallet in the car."

The criminal is not heard from again in that store. He then goes either to his underground network or simply drives to Nevada or Arizona for his ammo, which will be markedly cheaper than in California.

So now the only ones left who are filling out forms, paying extra and having their rights infringed are we law abiding citizens.

Why can't legislators think 2 or 3 steps into the future? :banghead:

PinnedAndRecessed
June 7, 2005, 05:18 PM
Noonanda,

That's an excellent letter. Our gov has not been a friend to gun owners, but he has demonstrated that he is sensitive to the voters/political hot potatoes.

I read somewhere that television networks figure that for every letter they receive, there are 17 other patrons who feel the same way but won't take the time to write.

Doubtless politicians are aware of similar statistics.

The thing that really frosts me is that if you look at a county-by-county breakdown of political ideology in California, the map shows most of the state is conservative. But our voting power is negated because the highest concentrations of population are in the largest metropolitan areas.

DarthBubba
June 8, 2005, 03:38 PM
Lest Ye all forget,

So goes The Peoples Republic of California So goes the rest of the United States eventually.
It is plane to see that the Communist party controlled 9th Circuit Court will find no reason to challenge the new law and eventually it will end up for Federal consideration as a good idea.
You folks in California need to quit inflicting this trash on the rest of us.
Rise up and take your state back before it is to late.
I fear we will have to wall off your state line and give you all over to China soon such a shame, Maybe you can get a good spot on the Central Comity.
Stop whining and do something.

DarthBubba :cuss:

SigLaw
June 8, 2005, 03:43 PM
I contacted the Governor and this is the reponse I got. While the reply came the same day it is a bunch of idle politician speak.

"Thank you for emailing Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger regarding SB 357. The Governor appreciates you voicing your opinions on proposed legislation affecting our State.

The Governor does not take a position on legislation until a final bill has reached his desk. The Legislature has until September 9, 2005 to pass legislation and the Governor has until October 9, 2005 to sign or veto proposed bills. Should the Governor take action on this bill, the Governor's Office will notify you at that time.

You may continue to follow this and any other bill before the State Legislature at the Official California Legislative Website: www.leginfo.ca.gov. You may also read any legislative messages from the Governor at his website: www.governor.ca.gov.

Again, the Governor appreciates your interest in California's future. An informed and engaged citizenry is important to effective government in our State.

Sincerely,


Office of Constituent Affairs" :fire: :fire: :banghead:

UberPhLuBB
June 8, 2005, 04:50 PM
I read somewhere that television networks figure that for every letter they receive, there are 17 other patrons who feel the same way but won't take the time to write.

Doubtless politicians are aware of similar statistics.

I'm sure both of those are true.

But the difference is that television networks HAVE to change their programming to suit their viewers or they loose Nealson ratings immediately. Whereas politicians further their own agenda while keeping their constituents in the dark for as long as possible. Liberal committee members can't actually believe their cause, right? They can't honestly and truely believe that some numbers in a barrel or on the back of a bullet are actually going to stop criminals from getting guns and ammo can they? They just spew 100% lies based on emotion instead of fact to sway the votes coming their way. With voters in high population "liberal" areas being as apathetic as they are (I suspect that big cities aren't actually liberal in majority but are being manipulated by the liberal politicians there) it's got to be easier than ever. It's a shame conservatives are so honest or we might stand a chance.

It's literally sickening to me.

OneFireStick
June 8, 2005, 04:52 PM
I got the same response from the governor as siglaw did. :mad:

Beethoven
June 8, 2005, 05:35 PM
Bump.

bg
June 8, 2005, 05:52 PM
I hung around for 10 or 15 mins until I talked with one of the staff.
She was buried, but did write down my opinion and said she would get
to the Gov's desk. I always make a point of saying thank you for taking
my call and hope I'm not taking too much of your time. I most times
ask how the staff worker is doing will a lil chit chat to go with it. Seems
it works once in a while. You know the ole honey vs vinegar thing..

Didn't work so hot for the 50 bmg deal though.. :(

Gordon Fink
June 8, 2005, 06:12 PM
They can’t honestly and truely believe that some numbers in a barrel or on the back of a bullet are actually going to stop criminals from getting guns and ammo can they?

They believe—perhaps correctly—that if fewer law-abiding citizens have firearms, then fewer criminals will have them. Of course, even eliminating firearms would do nothing to reduce violence.

~G. Fink

PinnedAndRecessed
June 8, 2005, 07:06 PM
You folks California

That's a pretty broad brush you're painting us with.

First, if you look at one of those red/blue maps on a county-by-county breakdown of California, most of California is actually conservative. That has also been my observation since having moved here seven years ago.

Second, the highest concentrations of population are the strongest voting blocks and they override our vote. LA, San Fran, Sac, etc. Actually, many feel we need to split the state and let the libs have southern Cal (with San Fran) and we take the rest.

Third, some of our most notorius people came from back east. Barbara Boxer, anti gun pit bull: Brooklyn, NY. Grayout Davis, anti gun ex-gov: Bronx, NY. Arnie: Austria. Charles Manson: Cincinnati, Ohio.

Finally, we're trying. But there's only so much one can do. The 60's brought the nation's liberals to CA. After the revolution was over (and they lost), they realized they were too stupid to do anything else in life other than a) either walk the streets with a sign which says, "will work for food" or b) go into politics. The latter dominates Cal politics.

ckyllo
June 8, 2005, 07:31 PM
so someone could just pick up spent cases from a gun range and plant them at a crime scene. how about going to the berm, digging up some spent bullets in a smaller caliber, make a sabot to fit a larger caliber.... some unknowing person gets framed for murder cause his cases/bullets were found at the crime scene. great system!

Shalako
June 8, 2005, 08:40 PM
Hey, that way the DOJ can close more cases! Who cares who actually did the crime, they have a number on the shell casing and a new psuedo-criminal to lock up. This will really help the DOJ ratio of crimes:convictions.

My tax dollar at work......

NHBB
June 8, 2005, 09:17 PM
sickening... it truly turns my stomach to hear of these absurd notions, and on top of that those in power to pass them into law agreeing within their majority. I am starting to think CA is just a lost cause.

Henry Bowman
June 9, 2005, 10:21 AM
Given that ammo can be kept for decades, it seems that the assigned "serial numbers" should never be repeated. Has any thought been given to how many digits these serial number would have to have? If the number is too long, there is a great chance that at least part of it will be lost. Would they use a base 10 system (Arabic numberal) or a base 36 system (alpha-numeric) or what? Is serializing all cases and bullets even techologically feasable? (I realize that the lawmakers of Cali don't care because the intent is to make gun use prohibitvely expensive.)

dolanp
June 9, 2005, 10:31 AM
I wonder if they will start requiring stolen ammo to become reported to the governmen like stolen guns? Ammunition will become a much more lucrative bounty for criminals looking to steal arms since the serial numbers will lead to Citizen Joe.

Beethoven
June 9, 2005, 02:00 PM
CALL AND WRITE, CALL AND WRITE!!!

PinnedAndRecessed
June 9, 2005, 03:03 PM
To whom should we write? Email or hard copy? Call?

Beethoven
June 9, 2005, 04:49 PM
PNR: Good to see you. You ever go to GT any more?

Anyhow, follow this link for all the info: http://nramemberscouncils.com/legs.shtml

Currently, we are waiting to see which committee each bill will be assigned to, so until then, we have to sit tight for a bit.

One thing we can and must do is to write the governator and express our opposition to these bills, in case they do make it to his desk:


Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger
State Capitol Building
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: 916-445-2841
Fax: 916-445-4633

To send an Electronic Mail please visit:
http://www.govmail.ca.gov

PinnedAndRecessed
June 9, 2005, 05:29 PM
Thanx for the link. I emailed the gov but got the same canned response as everyone else.

BTW, what is GT?

jobu07
June 9, 2005, 05:34 PM
Are there any images floating around the net (computerized or artists rendition or otherwise) of what one of these cali-bullets would look like? I'm curious also, haven't read for certain, if the S.N. is required to be engraved onto the bullet, the brass, or both?

PinnedAndRecessed
June 9, 2005, 05:45 PM
As I understand it, there are two versions of the bill.

1) Will require a certain type of handgun (autoloaders?) to inscribe a number on a fired case each time the gun is fired. This would necessitate the firearm manufacturer to machine raised numbers inside the chamber of every barrel. There are so many ways to defeat this process (e.g., aftermarket barrels) that it is absurd.

2) Bullet manufacturers will have to inscribe a unique number on the base of every bullet/cartridge manufactured. Also, there are numerous ways to defeat this.

If it passes here, look for other states to follow suit.

sumpnz
June 9, 2005, 07:10 PM
P&R - This would necessitate the firearm manufacturer to machine raised numbers inside the chamber of every barrel. Not as I understand it. Think about the physics of that for a moment. Whether the number was raised or engraved feeding (in the case of raised) or extracting (in the case of engraved) would be impossible. Try feeding even a very slightly crippled (cripple is a localized buckle) case sometime (same effect as raised numbers in the chamber). Besides, either way the number would get smeared during extraction.

What they are requiring for that particular bill is that the gun imprint the identifier somewhere on the case head. I believe the intent is to have the firing pin make the stamp on the primer. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Also, these are two completely seperate bills. They do not have to reconciled before going to the Govenator. Either, both, or neither could become law in KA.

PinnedAndRecessed
June 9, 2005, 07:19 PM
Here's the lead of the article:

Dueling proposals to identify handgun bullets to help police solve shootings were approved by state lawmakers

First sentence, second paragraph:

Ammunition manufacturers would be required to laser-cut each bullet with a serial number under the Senate bill

Second sentence, second paragraph:

while the Assembly version requires guns to stamp identification numbers on bullet casings each time they are fired

On down in the article:

Opponents of Koretz's bill said criminals could file down the guns to remove the microstamping or use revolvers, which don't eject shell casings.

jobu07
June 9, 2005, 07:22 PM
Ok, so S.B. will require the slug to have the SN already laser cut into it. While the A.B. will require a compenent of the firearm to "stamp" the SN onto the rim or head of the casing. Gotcha. Thanks for the info :) Of course, we all know that simple use of the gun would eventually defeat the A.B.

Beethoven
June 9, 2005, 07:36 PM
Ok, so S.B. will require the slug to have the SN already laser cut into it. While the A.B. will require a compenent of the firearm to "stamp" the SN onto the rim or head of the casing.

Correct.

sumpnz
June 9, 2005, 07:39 PM
P&R - Not sure if you're trying to rebut my last post, or agree with it, but in you're last quote of the article I believe they are referencing filing down either the firing pin, or perhaps the bolt face, not the firing chamber itself.

UberPhLuBB
June 9, 2005, 07:57 PM
There are two different bills guys. AB 352 and SB 357 are not the same bill.

http://www.gunownersca.com

PinnedAndRecessed
June 9, 2005, 09:23 PM
I reread the article. The commies don't specify exactly what part of the firearm will imprint the data. It's pretty ambiguous. Maybe that's what they intend. An ambiguously worded law that will allow them to really shaft all gun owners.

Maybe it could be a stamp on the firing pin, but man, that would be small.

PinnedAndRecessed
June 10, 2005, 02:05 PM
Would manufacturers have to raise prices across the country to cover the c0sts 0f the gear?

The article said:

Ammunition manufacturers said that Dunn's bill will either force them to abandon the lucrative California market or force them to install unaffordable technology to mark the 8 billion bullets they make each year.

My guess is that if the bill passes, legal ammunition is going to become REALLY expensive in California. So much so that many shooters will ignore the law and a) buy out of state or b) cast their own.

Legal ammo will skyrocket. And if the antigun fascists pull this off, look for other states to follow suit. Probably NY, Illinois, Ohio, etc.

DarthBubba
June 11, 2005, 03:01 PM
Hey PinnedandRecessed,

Sorry to come off so abrupt.
It is by no means my intention to belittle your efforts in this fight.
It just makes me so mad every time a Polecatatition from CA,NY, or MA opens his mouth it always seems to be something about taking away my rights or taking money from me to help the children or some such tripe.
Hey the Polecatatitions in my home state of Texas are little better talk about a bunch of morons. Do not blame me I vote Libertarian and am a strict Constitutionalist.
So to recap I am sorry if you think I paint all people From ************ with the same brush HAHAHA just kidding.
Really keep up the fight and do not ever quit.

DarthBubba :evil:

MarkDido
June 11, 2005, 06:29 PM
Wouldn't it be easier to stamp a 1" high serial number on every criminal in **********'s forehead?

This way if they commit a crime, you wouldn't even need a "magnifying glass" to tell who the bad guy was. :evil:

PinnedAndRecessed
June 13, 2005, 08:50 PM
So to recap I am sorry if you think I paint all people From ************ with the same brush

No problemo. It is getting absurd, true.

For example, I just returned from a visit to the gold country in Northern Cal. I talked to a man who lives in the country. He has a bunch of huge oak trees. Only he's also got a small oak (ten inch diameter) he needs to cut down.

Here's what he has to do: 1) Call a rep from the state to tag the tree. 2) The rep tags the tree which says if anybody objects to call the state (1-800-etc). 3) Pay $75 to the state rep. 4) Wait to see if anybody objects.
5) Wait for the state to then grant permission to CUT DOWN ONE FRIGGIN TREE!!

That was six weeks ago. He's still waiting.

These people (I'm not from Kal) have let things get waaaaay out of hand.

If you enjoyed reading about "********** bullet ids" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!