CA Assembly passes SB362 Ammo ban


PDA






glockman19
June 7, 2007, 11:46 PM
CA Assembly passes SB362 Ammo ban and it now goes to the senate. I don't think Arnold will sign it if it gets to him but we must form a plan to stop abusive legislation. Since they can't get rid of firearms they're trying to get rid of the bullets. This bill limits residents to 50 rounds a month and imposes a $25 fee to process background check at purchase.

I don't think arnold will sign it because it clearly violates interstatee commerce laws because it bans internet sales. If passed and signed it will take effect in June 2008.

A Good reson to get into reloading.

If you enjoyed reading about "CA Assembly passes SB362 Ammo ban" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
woo18
June 7, 2007, 11:55 PM
It is important that everyone act to stop this. Complacency is how stupid gun laws get passed.

I don't think this law violates any interstate commerce laws. California and many other states have laws that prevent certain internet sales. For instance, high (standard) capacity magazine sales.

JLelli
June 19, 2007, 01:19 AM
Why do you think Arnie will not sign it? He is far from being a pro-gun politician (he recently appeared on the cover of Time magazine with gun-control kingpin Michael Bloomberg). And 50 rounds a month is a ridiculously Draconian restriction. How it got past the legislature is absolutely dumbfounding.

silverlance
June 19, 2007, 01:44 AM
somebody write up a letter and post it up here with the appropriate link to send it to. im dead tired tonight and i did the last one. if no one steps up to the plate by tomorrow afternoon i will do it again.

we need to get the word out to stop this bs. who are these idiots who propose these bills? are there actually people out there campaigning for this?

jlbraun
June 19, 2007, 01:47 AM
What can non-CA residents do?

silverlance
June 19, 2007, 01:53 AM
god, this guy is just barely outside my district.

anyone live in district 45? that's in the los angeles/silverlake area. i will look on calguns. if we can get a bunch of people we can walk around asking for signatures, stuff like that.

glockman19
June 19, 2007, 02:00 AM
I've made calls and written letters and unfortunately teh votes have been split right down party lines. All Dems in favor All Repubs opposed. The Gov. will NEVER sign this bill.

But if he does I have made plans to buy into a shooting range. I'll also get into reloading BIG TIME. I already have saved over 1,000 rounds of .308/7.62 and .223/5.65 brass. And considerable amounts of once fired .45, .357 & 9mm.

I'll buy enought brass, bullets, powder and primers to last me a lifetime, or take trip to Arizona or Nevada and fill up the car.

Next elections vote for a Republican, Bleading heart Dems of the nanny state want to disarm you and controll you.

jeepmor
June 19, 2007, 02:43 AM
We feel for you Californians. Let us know how I/we can help and I'll/we'll flood your reps with letters, emails and phone calls.

jeepmor

Noxx
June 19, 2007, 03:12 AM
This bill limits residents to 50 rounds a month and imposes a $25 fee to process background check at purchase.


Actually it doesn't, it requires that sellers of more than 50 rounds a month register as vendors, etc, etc. There is also no "background check fee", but all your DL information IS required and recorded.

Now, let me say up front that I'm vehemently opposed to this bill, as we all should be, for the obvious reasons, but it's important to have the proper information. As always I suggest reading the bill in it's native form, however here is a concise rendering...


AB 362 (De Leon) would require that, beginning July 1, 2008, no handgun ammunition seller may sell handgun ammunition without recording the following information on a form prescribed by the State Department of Justice (DOJ): a) date of the transaction, b) name, address, and date of birth of the buyer, c) buyer's driver's license or other identification number, and the right thumbprint, d) brand, type, and amount of ammunition purchased, e) buyer's signature, and f) salesperson's name.

This bill would also require that no person shall sell or transfer more than 50 rounds of handgun ammunition in any month unless they are registered as a handgun ammunition vendor with DOJ. It would require vendors to obtain a background clearance for employees who handle ammunition in the course and scope of their employment.

AB 362 would further mandate that no retail seller of ammunition shall sell, offer for sale, or display for sale, any handgun ammunition in a manner that allows ammunition to be accessible to a purchaser without the assistance of the retailer or employee thereof. Violation of these provisions would be punishable as an infraction with a fine of $500, or as a misdemeanor.

Finally, AB 362 would further provide that handgun ammunition, which includes reloading components, may only be purchased in a face-to-face transaction. This would do away with all mail or internet purchases by lawful California users of handgun ammunition.

Where to begin? No interstate mail or internet transactions? I wish this bill did limit customers to 50rds / month, because then it would never pass. As it stands, it's onerous enough to make you grind your teeth, yet innocuous enough that a bunch of pandering screwballs will line up to pass it.

These restrictions on sales never work. The sale of spraypaint is restricted, any impact on graffiti? Nope. The same for Alcohol and underage drinking, cold medicine and meth labs, you name it.. this sort of legislation has never had any success in abating the problems that engendered it.

It's a bunch of state money going to waste to install and monitor a record keeping system that will never serve to abate gang violence, random shootings, etc.

For those of us who bang steel for fun, cinch up your wallets. No out-of-state sales eliminates most of the competition in ammo prices, CA ammo will be on the rise in short order once the vendors have us by the shorts.

In short, bad legislation, lots of bad info going around about it, just a wreck in general. If you do write or contact your rep, be sure to address the text of the bill, not the "hype" that is making the rounds, or your concerns will be dismissed out of hand.

jlbraun
June 19, 2007, 10:22 PM
Load the $(&% thing down with poison pill language. Repeal the Cali AWB.

SaMx
June 19, 2007, 11:00 PM
...

yhtomit
June 19, 2007, 11:00 PM
50?

I'm in my early 30s, and I've been interested in guns since early childhood -- but I never owned one until less than 10 years ago. If you'd asked me a while back, I wouldn't have had the foggiest idea how many rounds a "typical" gun owner might want to have on hand / shoot in a month / spend on a range weekend, but I sure know now that "50" just doesn't cut it.

Something tells me that more legislators in CA need to get .22 autopistols for Xmas.

timothy

woo18
June 19, 2007, 11:26 PM
Such an obscene bill is a threat to gun owners everywhere. One simple request is that out of staters visit Arnold's website, and submit an e-mail opposition to this bill.

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

For those of you within the state, you should try and call your state reps in addition to e-mailing the governor.

This is bad!!!!

TheOld Man
June 19, 2007, 11:33 PM
Everybody in CA should remember this stuff in November of 2008.
Any Representative who votes for such a @#$$%% will be unemployed in 2009.:cuss:

K-Romulus
June 21, 2007, 09:57 AM
As I read the bill, the seller can't SELL more than 50 rounds a month without becoming a licensed dealer. Nothing about the purchaser. :confused:

Il Duca
June 21, 2007, 12:20 PM
Alright guys, I emailed the Govenator, now the rest of you need to as well. This could very well turn into an epidemic if this bill passes.

vta33
June 21, 2007, 02:10 PM
I just fired off three emails. The first one to my assemblyman, democrat Pedro Nava. He's never replied before and I doubt he will reply to my last email. The guy is anti-gun.

State Senator Tom McClintock, Republican good guy. He always replies and explains in his response his efforts to defeat these absurd bills.

Arnold. Takes a while to get a response. He's vetoed gun control bills in the past. I trust he will do the same again.

And thanks to the THR members from other states who are assisting in this fight.

vta33
June 21, 2007, 02:13 PM
If this bill is signed into law, I guarantee that Walmart and possibly Big 5 will stop selling ammo.

orionengnr
June 21, 2007, 03:50 PM
Just emailed the Governator. :)

Carl N. Brown
June 21, 2007, 04:56 PM
Part of the 1968 Gun Control Act (federal) was the requirement
that all dealers keep such records on ammo sales. It was quietly
dropped because it was useless for law enforcement purposes.
Now California revives something from '68 that the feds dropped?

Noxx
June 21, 2007, 05:26 PM
The voting record shows this was a pretty narrow pass in Assembly, which gives a little hope. MY A.M. voted No, guess he can keep his job. For now.

Librarian
June 21, 2007, 10:28 PM
Part of the 1968 Gun Control Act (federal) was the requirement
that all dealers keep such records on ammo sales. It was quietly
dropped because it was useless for law enforcement purposes.
Now California revives something from '68 that the feds dropped?Yep. This is another 'look at us, we're doing something' bills, not based on any possible effective use.

We get a lot of these. :fire: I want legislators to do things which are measurably, objectively a positive influence on some clearly identified problem. That's not what most of them seem to be there for.

Abndoc
June 21, 2007, 10:43 PM
E-mail sent.

Does anyone have any phone numbers or a site where I can get them? I think that a phone call is much more effective and much harder to ignore.

bensdad
June 22, 2007, 12:50 AM
e-mail sent. Wish there was more I could do.

Librarian
June 22, 2007, 12:55 AM
Does anyone have any phone numbers or a site where I can get them?Links to all the CA legislators' web sites and contact information here (http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/yourleg.html).

SoCalShooter
June 22, 2007, 01:54 AM
I fired off some emails too, does anyone konw know the status?

Librarian
June 22, 2007, 06:54 AM
I fired off some emails too, does anyone konw know the status?
"BILL HISTORY
2007
June 21 Referred to Com. on PUB. S."

So, communication with the Senate Public Safety Committee is indicated:

Public Safety-(5)-
Romero (Chair), (916) 651-4024
Cogdill (Vice Chair), (916) 651-4014
Cedillo, (916) 651-4022
Margett (916) 651-4029
Ridley-Thomas. (916) 651-4026

Note that last 2 digits of Capitol phone # are same as senate district #

Chief Counsel: Alison Anderson.
Counsels: Mary Kennedy, Jerome McGuire and Steven Meinrath.
Consultant: Sara Kaeni.
Assistants: Barbara Reynolds and Mona Cano.
Phone: (916)651-4118. Room 2031.

Jim K
June 22, 2007, 12:48 PM
Anyone heard the term "racism" lately? In 1968, the common saying on Capitol Hill was that "we" (whites) had to stop "them" (blacks) from getting guns. Now in Sacramento the idea is that "we" (white and black Liberals) have to stop "them" (Mexicans) from getting guns. Same old, same old. Just the KKK in suits proclaiming how liberal they are.

Jim

Abndoc
June 22, 2007, 07:15 PM
Thanks Librarian. These are local calls for me, so I'm going to burn up their phone lines. I'm going to get my Pop to call too.

Matt King
June 22, 2007, 07:21 PM
What can a Texan do to help you guys out?

Byron Quick
June 23, 2007, 02:05 AM
Anyone heard the term "racism" lately? In 1968, the common saying on Capitol Hill was that "we" (whites) had to stop "them" (blacks) from getting guns. Now in Sacramento the idea is that "we" (white and black Liberals) have to stop "them" (Mexicans) from getting guns. Same old, same old. Just the KKK in suits proclaiming how liberal they are.

Same old, same old, Jim. In the 19th century, southern states passed their first laws against concealed carry of various weapons without stating the purpose was to control black access to and carry of weapons. Numerous court cases explicitly noted such laws were not meant to be applied to white citizens.

One thing the racists need to remember though...in 1964 the Civil Rights Act was passed by Congress and signed into law by President Johnson. The southern state governments were then forced to choose between either repealing these racist statutes or enforcing them against EVERYONE-regardless of color. Guess which one the state governments chose to do?

Anytime you support the increase of governmental power for any reason, you are placing a noose around the neck of the citizenry. That noose might not be tightened for months, years, decades, or even centuries. However, if that government is forced to choose between taking the noose off or tightening it up...guess which one, according to the historical record, will be chosen?

Alphazulu6
June 23, 2007, 02:19 AM
If this is true it is one of the biggest infringements of the 2nd amendment since those communists in Chicago banned pistols. I am sick of the liberal trash passing legislation to infringe the 2nd ammendment. Shame on the people for allowing this to happen. Karl Marx was a man but he wasnt an American. There is no room for these anti-gun hippies anywhere in a free and constitutional United States.

kermit315
June 23, 2007, 04:13 AM
I sent emails to Arnie, and my sentaor and assy thing ( who voted for this piece of trash ). I basically told my assy thing that i cant wait till she is voted out of office, and led on to my senator that me and my military friends votes will be directly proportional to her gun votes, and there are a lot of military here where i am .

jamie

bluto
June 23, 2007, 04:41 PM
I just sent this letter to the author of the Assembly Bill, Kevin DeLeon:


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 with AB362. The bill 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 over zealous legislators who should be targeting real criminals rather than law abiding, tax- paying gun owners.

Although I don’t live in your district, I will be contributing as heavily as possible to your opposition when you are next up for re-election in 2008. I hope to convince many other affected voters to do so as well.

david_the_greek
June 23, 2007, 07:32 PM
my god this isn't actually a joke? I read the O.P. and it didn't hit me that this was serious.... my word. its a sad day in America.

SoCalShooter
June 23, 2007, 07:59 PM
^ its a sad day in California... if anyone can help even if you are not living in this state we could sure use the backup, if you know any other gun owners who live in california who are not informed please let them know.

gyp_c2
June 24, 2007, 07:31 AM
...the next thing will be primers...
I'll send a love letter to the gov, but I'll have to look up the senators addresses...geez, that's creepy...http://emoticons4u.com/smoking/rauch06.gif

Noxx
June 24, 2007, 08:52 AM
...the next thing will be primers...

Finally, AB 362 would further provide that handgun ammunition, which includes reloading components, may only be purchased in a face-to-face transaction. This would do away with all mail or internet purchases by lawful California users of handgun ammunition

Not even the next thing, handily bundled with the current silliness.

If you enjoyed reading about "CA Assembly passes SB362 Ammo ban" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!