CA Assembly Targeting Ammunition Sales

Status
Not open for further replies.

sm

member
Joined
Dec 22, 2002
Messages
28,387
Location
Between black coffee, and shiftn' gears
http://www.nraila.org/CurrentLegislation/Read.aspx?ID=2227

California Assembly Targeting Ammunition Sales!

Friday, May 19, 2006

Please Contact Your State Assembly Member Today!



Assembly Member Alberto Torrico (D-20) has sponsored a bill that would strictly cripple the rights of California’s firearm owners. Simply put, Assembly Bill 2714 would codify into California law a ban on the sale of ammunition through the mail or internet.

Again, action is critical, as AB 2714 could be up for a vote as
early as Monday, May 22!

Please contact your State Assembly Member today at (916) 651-4120 and
ask them to vote “no” on AB 2714!
 
I first moved there in 1989 because my last duty station was there. I got out of the USMC and decided to stay there until 2005. During that time everything got progressively worse there. The traffic congestion, gangs, taxes, sky high real estate prices, liberal/socialist legislature, oppressive gun laws and the ever increasing illegal alien population. I finally said enough is enough and moved out.

In my opinion, gun laws are only going to get worse in CA. I got tired of the BS and voted with my feet and a 24' Uhaul and got out. They won't be getting any more tax revenue from me. If you own a gun move to place where the state gov't at least trusts the people.
 
I think it's going to get worse and worse as well, until the only people freely roaming with guns will be the Crips and Bloods and Latin Kings and their ilk.

Especially if they get the former eBay anti-gun guy as governor. If they keep taking guns, the next major earthquake, the aftermath is going to be an absolute hell of lawlessness as the criminal element has free reign to loot, rape and murder with nobody to stop them.

I think, unfortunately, if you live in CA, it's locked in a downward spiral and there is no longer any way to pull up before slamming into the ground. Time to pull the handles and punch out while you still can.
 
california and illinois are only going to see the light of day when they suffer through something similar to whats going on in brazil right now.
 
For all in California this is the Rep pushing the bill

Name and his office location.

Alberto Torrico
39510 Paseo Padre Parkway
Suite 280
Fremont, CA 94538
(510) 440 - 9030
(510) 440 - 9035 fax
:cuss:
 
I had a "heated discussion" with a staffer of my local AB about it. She said the bill limits purchases to 1,000 dollars. When I explained how economy of scale works and discounts work, she said that the bill's spirit is that there are no legitimate purposes for anyone to buy that much ammunition when a box is worth 27 to 35 dollars depending on the ammunition type. When I asked her what kind of ammo she means and how many rounds per box, she could not answer. A little parrot with "talking points".

I stated my opinion that this is yet another instance of harassing legal gunowners in California and yet another step on the ratchet of creeping incrementalism, which only limits lawabiding citizens rather than the criminals that do not care about the laws.

These revelations were awarded with "well, you have your opinion and I have mine.", at which point I explained that it is not a matter of opinion but of the constitution and infringements thereon. Then she said "Well, laws are fluid and change all the time." My assertion that the Constitution trumps any local laws was awarded with a short lecture on "interpretation", at which point I ended the conversation more or less politely, to prevent myself from asking her which of her own rights she would like "interpreted".

I am sorry to say it, but I think this state is screwed. There is so much idiocy and empty-headed parroting that the principles of the free republic simply cannot be upheld. Too many people have become weak in body and mind, and so they happily give away their liberties in exchange for preceived security happily promised by an ever-expanding gov.
 
I ended the conversation more or less politely, to prevent myself from asking her which of her own rights she would like "interpreted".
Actually, I WOULD have - politely - asked her which of HER rights she would like "interpreted" . . . that sounds like a good, thoughtful comeback. (I think I'll file it away and use it sometime . . . )
 
CAnnoneer should have ask her this after his first question

If she was a Kalifornian, you should have asked her if she wanted the government regulating her reproductive rights. It worked so well for the PRC(Peoples Repubic of China). It's worked out so well for them, they are running out of girls to wed to bear the next generation of the PRC.
 
that sounds like a good, thoughtful comeback.

Problem is that starting from "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness", such a comeback may be twisted in court as a death threat, taped and everything. Besides, people that think the Constitution is "fluid" really mean that anything pertaining to them is solid, while anything they dislike is "fluid". Only personal experiences of "fluidity" can teach them otherwise.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top