Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Ca: Bullet/Case serialization could be final straw?

Discussion in 'Legal' started by Jim Diver, Jun 1, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Jim Diver

    Jim Diver Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    376
    Location:
    San Jose, PRK
    A bill (SB 357 [love the bill number.... :barf: ]) that amounts to a ban on handgun ammunition is on the move in the PRK Legislature.

    Serialization requires each box of cartridges to have its own serial number. Matching numbers would then be engraved inside cases and on the bases of bullets. When a box of ammunition is sold, the serial number would be registered to the buyer. Then, presumably, at a crime scene, police would be able to match bullets or cases with an alleged purchaser.

    Reasons this is not possible or practical are listed here: http://www.nssf.org/share/PR/042505.cfm?wTPL=x&print=N and at http://www.saami.org/ .

    It is likely, should this bill pass, that the ammo manufacturers will ABANDON PRK and refuse to make a product for PRK.

    Could this be the straw that breaks the camel's back?
     
  2. Bob

    Bob Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    132
    As a resident of California, it is my hope that should it come to that, the ammo manufacturers would not only not sell to citizens in the state, but they would also refuse to supply ammo to ALL firearms users. I mean this to specifically include ALL law enforcement, government agencies, and the national guard. When we are ALL in the same stinking boat, someone will have some motivation to stop this stupid crap. But not until then.
    Bob
     
  3. Crosshair

    Crosshair Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2005
    Messages:
    1,985
    Location:
    Grand Forks, North Dakota
    I think there is actualy a good possibility that ammo makers WOULD stop selling to the entire state. What if some LEO ammo gets stolen. What if a LEO takes some home. What about a national guard member. No ammo maker is going to comply with this law and SN their ammo. Even if LEOs are allowed non-SN ammo, nobody is going to supply them with it because of liability concerns. Considering how lawsuit happy KA is, I think they will just say FU to KA. Lets get a letter campaign going to the ammo makers.
     
  4. pbhome71

    pbhome71 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2003
    Messages:
    897
    How do they come up with this stuff....

    If you have a brick of "old" .22lr at a public range, that is 10 infraction/misdemeanor. It is getting harder to be lawful...
     
  5. Jim Diver

    Jim Diver Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    376
    Location:
    San Jose, PRK

    I know it is not the intent of the bill, but I read this as 50 bullets could mean 50 crimes.... Nothing says they have to break it down for every 50 or less.

    My question is what will happen when the handgun ammo supply dries up in the state.... Any guesses?
     
  6. JDThorns

    JDThorns Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2004
    Messages:
    13
    Location:
    Central Ca
    Stupid Serial Numbers

    I think we have a golden opportunity to ram this bill up the collective butts of the sponsors.
    We should write all the ammo makers to let them know we will support them if they decide to stop all sales to law enforcement and the military until this piece of garbage is thrown in the trash where it belongs. I would think this bill would have a very short life span

    Jim T :cuss:
     
  7. taliv

    taliv Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2004
    Messages:
    22,063
    i'm surprised it's not a felony
     
  8. Elmer

    Elmer Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2005
    Messages:
    998
    I don't think we can depend on the major ammo companies to abandon California. They are all public companies, with a duty to shareholders, not political causes. 20% of the business is in California, and if one of the companies blink, they all will.
     
  9. Igloodude

    Igloodude Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2004
    Messages:
    733
    Location:
    southern NH
    Looks like home reloaders/bullet casters will become felons, too.

    Anyone have subdivision (g) handy?
     
  10. Old Fuff

    Old Fuff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    23,908
    Location:
    Arizona
    Elmar:

    Are you saying that 20% of the ammunition sold in the United States is sold in California, or just handgun ammunition, or ammunition sold to law enforcement agencies?
     
  11. Elmer

    Elmer Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2005
    Messages:
    998
    I've heard the 20% figure thrown out by the manufacturers many times, but I don't have statistics, so I probably shouldn't have quoted it.

    But whether it's 20%, or 10%, (and my hunch is the 20% figure is closer,) none of the majors can afford to abandon it.
     
  12. Henry Bowman

    Henry Bowman Senior Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2002
    Messages:
    6,717
    Location:
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    I do not see any exemption for the king's men (state LEOs, etc.) in the quoted portion of the bill. :confused:
     
  13. auschip

    auschip Member

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2003
    Messages:
    1,032
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    Respectfully, I disagree. If the cost of producing ammo for CA is so high that it doesn't make financial sense to try, I predict they would walk away faster. Then you would have niche manufacturers who would step in and produce specialty ammo for a much higher price. Talking pure guesstimates, I wouldn't expect the ammo companies to completely retool their entire line of products to fit CA. Then again, I could always be wrong.
     
  14. Elmer

    Elmer Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2005
    Messages:
    998
    And I doubt there would be. Iit would be hard to justify why we wouldn't want to identify bullets fired by law enforcement also.

    Can't wait till they find out what the cost difference will be. The idiot promoting this says it can be done for a penny a round. (Course, he gets a license fee.) My contacts say with all the documentation, it may be closer to a buck a round.
     
  15. Elmer

    Elmer Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2005
    Messages:
    998
    I think you are wrong. Some of the gun companies make special models just for California. I've talked to 2 of the major ammo companies. They're making preparations for it now.
     
  16. boofus

    boofus Guest

    Any ammunition company that complies with this nonsense and passes the cost on to customers in other states will lose my business forever.

    Do they want to lose 20% of their business or 100%? I know I won't be the only one pissed off at having to pay $1 per round because of ********** lunacy.

    If a company wants to make **********-only ammo that costs KA customers $100 for a box of 50 that is their business. But I won't finance that nonsense.
     
  17. Old Fuff

    Old Fuff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    23,908
    Location:
    Arizona
    Elmer:

    I disagree ... but only to a point.

    What it will come down to is a question of liability and profits. Obviously there is no way they can keep non-searialized ammunition (made for sale in other places) out of California. They could label the boxes, "Not for sale in California," but that might, or might not be enough to give them protection from being charged under the new law, and it's always possible that a distributor might make a mistake and send the wrong stuff, after which both they and the manufacturer would probably be in trouble.

    Another option would be to number all effected ammunition and components, and some, if not all of the manufacturers might consider it, but if the various related costs and liabilities exceeded any likely profits I think it is quite possible they'd cut out the state.

    It's not a question of population or sales, but rather the cost of doing business vs. making money. Unquestionably they would continue to sell any ammunition not covered by this bill if it should become law.
     
  18. BenW

    BenW Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    1,116
    Location:
    CA
    Of all the gun laws this state has attempted to pass, this one shows the most blatant bias "for the King's Men" as Henry Bowman put it.

    If passing such a law, wouldn't you ESPECIALLY want to know where bullets from police guns end up after armed encounters? This is for the sake of proving that bullets fired from LEO guns never stray from their mark. Including the police in this law actually protects them from anti-cop bias and lawsuits.

    At least that's the general gist of the language that I would put forth if I were a gun rights organization and wanted to get police included in the legislation, and thus get police unions to oppose the legislation.


    Note to LEOs on the forum: In light of the recent cop bashing threads, I find I must make clear that my opinion is not anti-LEO, but rather anti special interest group favoritism.
     
  19. Elmer

    Elmer Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2005
    Messages:
    998
    I doubt they'll do that, I'm sure they will just have a limited selection of "California" ammunition.

    But make no mistake, it's heading your way. The liberals in your state will be watching California. It's why the NRA and other national pro-gun groups are not just giving up on California any more. If they get away with it here, they'll eventually export it to your state.
     
  20. Old Fuff

    Old Fuff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    23,908
    Location:
    Arizona
    Elmer:

    >> I think you are wrong. Some of the gun companies make special models just for California. I've talked to 2 of the major ammo companies. They're making preparations for it now. <<

    Interesting, which companies in particular?
     
  21. Elmer

    Elmer Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2005
    Messages:
    998
    Fuff, it's what they do now, with hi-cap mags, and "assault weapons", not to mention hundreds of models of guns that are not on the Ca "safe guns" list.

    Sorry, but all the majors, and most of the minors, will comply with this if it becomes law.
     
  22. Elmer

    Elmer Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2005
    Messages:
    998
    Not going to throw them down. Trust me, they all will.
     
  23. Elmer

    Elmer Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2005
    Messages:
    998
    You know, we always expect that the manufacturers are going to fight our battles for us. Other than a few small independently owned companies, it's never going to happen. They are publicly traded companies, with a responsibilty to their shareholders.
     
  24. MechAg94

    MechAg94 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2005
    Messages:
    4,732
    So, does this mean that criminals will just use shotguns and cap and ball revolvers for committing crimes?

    Did I read that right? Shotgun shells are not numbered? Not even on the plastic case?
     
  25. Zundfolge

    Zundfolge Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    10,755
    Location:
    Colorado Springs
    Absolutely correct.

    Therefore if this passes in CA the rest of us need to unite and let the ammo companies know that they will lose more business outside of California if they don't boycott the state.

    This will require a LOT of cooperation among the RKBA community, but we need to boycott EVERY ammo company that serializes their ammo for California.


    We can't expect a publicly traded company to fight our political battles, but we can force them to choose sides. We must make it against their self interest to join the California side.


    No it just means that criminals will use out of state ammo, stolen ammo, "straw purchased" ammo or old ammo.

    It will solve zero crimes and prevent even less. Its not about stopping crime, its about controlling and destroying the "gun culture".
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page