Mail Order Ammo Threatened by AB362 Bill {CA}


PDA






silverlance
June 1, 2007, 10:50 PM
Please cut and paste the following text (I wrote it, or write your own) in an email to our legislators here in CA who are considering passing a bill that would require all ammo sellers to personally identify and record information about purchasers face to face, essentially killing internet/mail ammo sales for californians!

To find contact information or help identifying your legislators please use the "Write Your Representative" feature found at www.NRAILA.org.

---
Please vote NO on AB362.

AB362, sponsored by Assembly Member Kevin de Leon (D-45), would require identification be presented for all mail order and face-to-face ammunition sales. Sellers of ammunition would be forced to keep detailed and accurate sales records. No retail seller of ammunition would be able to sell, offer for sale, or display for sale any ammunition in a manner that allows ammunition to be accessible to a purchaser without the assistance of the retailer or authorized employee.

As an avid shooting sportsman and collector of military history, I am deeply worried by this upcoming bill. Many calibers for historic military rifles are obsolete and can no longer be acquired easily. Thus, I order ammunition through the mail from well-respected import houses in other states. Requiring these import houses to keep detailed and accurate sales records would essentially mean an end to all mail order sales of ammunition to Californians as no seller will be willing to expend the costs necessary to emplace and run such a record-keeping process. This would be disastrous to the shooting sports in California.

The Federal law requiring ammunition purchasers to present I.D. was repealed by the Firearms Owners Protection Act of 1986, because it was found to be ineffective in reducing crime. Likewise, AB362 if passed will also be ineffective at deterring crime, since criminals can easily bypass such a law by having a person purchase for them or by purchasing ammunition out of state. The only people it will hurt will be law abiding citizens for whom the shooting sports is a cherished hobby, and who cannot afford to pay inflated prices for ammunition.

I understand that you may not be a shooting sportsman as I am, or that you may not value the sport. But I and many many others do. Many of us do not make enough money, especially with the high cost of southern california living, to pay for the greatly increased costs such a bill would cost. T his bill would discriminate against these law abiding citizens by essentially making the shooting sports unaffordable to them, placing a constitutional right out of their reach.

Again, PLEASE VOTE -NO- ON AB362. ----

If you enjoyed reading about "Mail Order Ammo Threatened by AB362 Bill {CA}" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
woo18
June 8, 2007, 12:21 AM
Kevin DeLeon
Capitol Office:
State Capitol
P.O. Box 942849
Sacramento, CA 94249-0045
Tel: (916) 319-2045
Fax: (916) 319-2145

District Office:
106 North Avenue 56
Los Angeles, CA 90042
Tel: (323) 258-0450
Fax: (323) 258-3807

This is the smart guy responsible for this piece of legislation. Please contact him and every other member of the California Assembly and Senate.

joe4702
June 8, 2007, 01:07 AM
Very good letter. Unfortunately many of the pols who vote for this crap know full well these gun bills are aimed squarely at lawful gun owners and shooters. This is a state where a Legislator once said (paraphrasing) "if you believe in the Second Amendment, we dont want you here (in CA)". I believe it was Don Perata.

Oohrah
June 8, 2007, 02:35 AM
California shooters need to replace these anti gun
politicians, some of which have been in for years!
It appears that they desire to have the same
control on firearms as Mexico. Not too many
more laws to become that condition. Remember
without the ammo these people continue to ban
or restrict, the firearm is not much of a tool:D

bluto
June 20, 2007, 10:44 PM
Thanks for the heads-up.

I wrote Guv. Schwarzenegger last night. I asked him to veto the bill if it comes to his desk and emphatically asked him to stop the legislature from PUNISHING law abiding voters.

Search Cal. Gov's. Office and his site will come up.

Erebus
June 21, 2007, 07:36 AM
It's defacto like that in MA. We have to present a permit to buy ammo and apparently our wonderful former AG harassed the mail order companies enough they won't ship to MA. Our new AG won't be any better. I need to find a place in state to buy bullets for reloading.

It's a royal pain in the rear, don't let it happen to you.

Librarian
June 21, 2007, 04:17 PM
I wrote Guv. Schwarzenegger last night.
It's always good to keep lines of communication open. However, the Gov's office really does not start tracking this stuff until it gets out of the legislature and on the way to his desk.

He'd probably take notice of a hundred thousand letters sooner, though. And sometimes governors have made it publicly known that he won't sign a bill if it gets to him, but that usually happens before a bill is introduced.

glockman19
June 21, 2007, 05:50 PM
Good letter I'll copy it and send it to EVERY Denocratic legislator as the Republican party all voted NO and it still made it out of theassemble on party lines.

Needless to say I'll be buying as much ammo as I can afford and getting into reloading should this bill be made into law.

bluto
June 21, 2007, 08:37 PM
Librarian,

I'm not sure what you're suggesting. Do you mean that it is futile to write the Gov? My rationale is that it's futile to write anyone other than my own reps. AND THE GOV. Gerrymandering has all but immunized state legislators against challenges to their incumbency. Writing early and writing often to a governor who knows that he still needs to retain his base for re-election seems the best strategy. I write my reps and the Guv. frequently BTW.

I would never assume or suggest that any communication is ineffective. That thinking can be used as an excuse for inaction; a course that too many gun owners are happy to follow.

Librarian
June 21, 2007, 09:53 PM
Do you mean that it is futile to write the Gov?Not at all; it's just that until the bill gets out of conference and on the way to his desk, the Gov isn't expending any effort on it. If we could get a lot of letters to him, that might change, and if there's no real hope with your local legislator, maybe trying to influence them isn't as good a use of your time as writing the Gov.

I certainly share your frustrations with local legislators; my district had a weak pro-gun Senator (Rainey), replaced by an anti, Torlakson, who was himself replaced in the Assembly by a relatively neutral Canciamilla, who was just replaced by what is proving to be an anti, DeSaulnier. (I kind of liked Canciamilla; he voted pretty logically, thus he had little influence in the polarized environment in Sacramento. :()

I'm trying to work on DeSaulnier. He at least answers email, after a while, but does not seem to be susceptible to persuasion. He co-sponsored AB 1471, the loony microstamping bill.:banghead:

Bluehawk
June 22, 2007, 05:13 PM
AB362, sponsored by Assembly Member Kevin de Leon (D-45), would require identification be presented for all mail order and face-to-face ammunition sales. Sellers of ammunition would be forced to keep detailed and accurate sales records.

Doesn't that mean you simply have to show ID to the UPS driver when he delivers the ammo to your door?? Don't mail order ammo dealers already have you show proof of identification before you are allowed to order from them anyway? Yes I know that can be faked but as long as an adult shows ID when the ammo arrives whats the big deal??
Detailed sales records...I believe thats called a receipt which if memory serves correctly all mail order ammo dealers keep on hand for tax purposes.
Look I don't like any further legislation on guns here in California but this seems to be a tempest in a teacup!

bluto
June 22, 2007, 07:42 PM
Bluehawk -

It might sound like a tempest in a teapot on the face of it, but IMO there's no such thing where the California State Legislature is concerned.

Upon reading the bill:

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/07-08/bill/asm/ab_0351-0400/ab_362_bill_20070601_amended_asm_v97.html

what you'll find is that, among other restrictions:
1) ammunition will no longer be accessible to customers as it is now when it is stacked on shelves in the aisles of gun and sporting goods stores. This is because:

2) Only employees who have undergone state background checks will be allowed to *ahem* dispense ammunition from behind the counter.

3) Huge new state bureaucraies will be needed to keep records of those employees AND to

4) Track and verify the thumbprint you must provide when you purchase ammo.

That will undoubtedly lead to further licensing of the citizens so you can make ammo purchases - which will presumably lead to a favorite past legislative initiative in California - a cap on the amount of ammunition you may buy and possess.

In any case, the impact on the cost of ammunition will be enormous. Which is the goal of the legislators. If they can't ban guns, they'll make owning and shooting them so expensive and difficult that no one will be able to afford to keep them.

I don't know about you, but .45 ammo is going for $17 a box in my area. I buy it at gun shows by the case for about $13 a box. Six months ago it was going for $11. What do you think it'll cost if AB362 passes?

I hope everyone writes the Guv' and their legislators. Kick up a ruckus. It's such an easy thing to do but for some reason millions of gun owners can't be bothered to take 20 minutes out of their lives to make themselves felt as a voting presence. (NOT directed at anyone here.) There's always a rationale for inaction. I can really get worked up about it. It just makes me laugh when I read all the talk on the forums about self defense when I know that many of the posters are letting a few activists out there do all the heavy lifting for them when it comes to defending their right to keep and bear arms.

TheOld Man
June 23, 2007, 02:13 PM
Member


Join Date: 04-29-06
Posts: 52

Kevin DeLeon
Capitol Office:
State Capitol
P.O. Box 942849
Sacramento, CA 94249-0045
Tel: (916) 319-2045
Fax: (916) 319-2145

District Office:
106 North Avenue 56
Los Angeles, CA 90042
Tel: (323) 258-0450
Fax: (323) 258-3807

This is the smart guy responsible for this piece of legislation. Please contact him and every other member of the California Assembly and Senate.
This guy should be facing the specter of unemployment come November 2008 :cuss:

Correia
June 25, 2007, 10:43 AM
Guys, please, no discussion about why this or that won't work. This forum is for action. Thread started great, don't get bogged down in the whys and hows, just act.

bluto
June 25, 2007, 09:06 PM
O.K., now I've written to Representative DeLeon as well.

Here's the text of my letter. Feel free to cut and paste. I wonder what these Reps will think if voters from OUT OF STATE start writing to say they'll contribute to any opponet of his? Thanks for the address TheOldMan

Saturday, June 23, 2007

Kevin DeLeon
Capitol Office:
State Capitol
P.O. Box 942849
Sacramento, CA 94249-0045
Tel: (916) 319-2045

Dear Representative DeLeon:

I am extremely sorry to see that you have continued the Democrat’s assault on law abiding, responsible gun owners in this state with AB362. As usual, this bill and many others like it originating in our Assembly will do nothing to prevent crime. It will only drive up the cost of recreational shooting.

As a native Californian, responsible citizen, and recreational shooter, I’m tired of being picked on by legislators who should be targeting real criminals rather than law abiding, tax- paying gun owners. It has always been my understanding that responsible legislation enhances freedom. Recent legislation has done just the opposite by making current benign activity into new criminal behavior. This does not seem to be the action of a legislature that is friendly to its constituents.

Although I don’t live in your district, until I see responsible restraint from elected officials I see no other course of action than to contribute as heavily as possible to your opposition when you are next up for re-election in 2008. I hope to convince many other affected voting gun owners both in and out of the state of California to do so as well.

Sincerely,

longeyes
June 26, 2007, 03:59 PM
1) ammunition will no longer be accessible to customers as it is now when it is stacked on shelves in the aisles of gun and sporting goods stores. This is because:

2) Only employees who have undergone state background checks will be allowed to *ahem* dispense ammunition from behind the counter.

3) Huge new state bureaucraies will be needed to keep records of those employees AND to

4) Track and verify the thumbprint you must provide when you purchase ammo.


The health nazis consider shooting a form of disease. Ammo is our Methadone.

dmrodco
June 27, 2007, 09:23 AM
yet another reason why I will never live in the messed up state

If you enjoyed reading about "Mail Order Ammo Threatened by AB362 Bill {CA}" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!