SwordRapier
Member
You're right. Its I nice place to visit, but i wouldn't want to live there. Too restrictive gun laws. Too Expensive.I notice you don't live there............
California Ammo Restriction Law
- Thread starter PublicRelations
- Start date
- Status
SwordRapier
Member
----
Last edited:
Guy B. Meredith
Member
The law apparently does not restrict components, but there is the possibility that out of state vendors will not want to deal with having to figure out the potential liabilities.
LiveLife
Member
In addition to finger print at the time of retail sale, this law was driven to capture tax revenue from sales of ammunition. Online sales do not require sales tax to California, but any retail sale inside state line does. Gun show vendors will continue to do business as usual (probably more after the law goes into effect) and bring the ammunition from other states/online vendors.
The original law version included limit of rounds per month and that got dropped when they realized it would reduce tax revenue ...
LiveLife
Member
I believe not much. Many match shooters reload and Ammo Restriction Law doesn't apply to reloading components.
0VERKILL
Member
AMEN! I'd say any member that's ever posted anything truly pro-gun, pro-freedom, or pro-rights has had it happen at least once. As to the California situation, why not move to a free(er) state.
Don't forget that onerous law passed at the same time which outlawed the private sale or transfer of any firearm by one private party to another, without going through an FFL, background check, waiting period, etc., and paying fees to do so. The communistnazis took over California inch by inch by inch, years ago... and it ain't gonna change.
(I lived in Los Angeles for nearly 36 years and saw it, and California, slowly but surely slide down into the Marxist muck.)
L.W.
California ramped up most of its anti-gun laws in a short period of time. Several other states had a much longer history being authoritarian and restrictive.
Illinois, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New York, and New Jersey have been bad a long time.
The rapid change in California has made California much more noticed and talked about.
In just over a decade California went from not much worse than Texas, more free than much of the East Coast, freer than a lot of the Midwest, and even than some of the Jim Crowe South, to restricting all sorts of things.
Every time you turn around California is implementing something new.
It caught up and quickly surpassed states that had been worse than it in a short number of years.
It went from one of the freer states, especially for its population size, to being quite restrictive.
California was even the source of the "ring of fire" guns that a lot of the nation sought to ban as being too affordable for undesirables.
In the late 80s California had a waiting period after buying a gun. Little else that differentiated it from free states.
While several other states were already firmly entrenched with numerous restriction and licensing schemes to limit legal possession of various arms.
Illinois, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New York, and New Jersey have been bad a long time.
The rapid change in California has made California much more noticed and talked about.
In just over a decade California went from not much worse than Texas, more free than much of the East Coast, freer than a lot of the Midwest, and even than some of the Jim Crowe South, to restricting all sorts of things.
Every time you turn around California is implementing something new.
It caught up and quickly surpassed states that had been worse than it in a short number of years.
It went from one of the freer states, especially for its population size, to being quite restrictive.
California was even the source of the "ring of fire" guns that a lot of the nation sought to ban as being too affordable for undesirables.
In the late 80s California had a waiting period after buying a gun. Little else that differentiated it from free states.
While several other states were already firmly entrenched with numerous restriction and licensing schemes to limit legal possession of various arms.
Librarian
Member
0VERKILL
Member
I'd like to thank you Librarian for posting that link, it was very informative and greatly helped anoutsider understand California gun laws better. I know the OP has already been answered, but for every answered question it brings up 2 more unasnwered. I feel the law is rediculous and will only hinder both the people and government of California. Any extra steps and/or hassle will increase work and therefore prices, consumers will pay more and practice less. When the consumers buy less the government will see less revenue. Some buisnesses may stop selling ammo and others may be afraid to start due to extra hassles, which would also cost the government even more. I'd like to see government think things through a bit more before they pass laws, with things like this it's no wonder California as a state is in the red financially.
Bovice already put down how most crooks will defeat this law.
Bovice already put down how most crooks will defeat this law.
Last edited:
Spec ops Grunt
Member
How long until a Heller style case from CA reaches the supreme court?
Also, where's the NRA, seems like they are just leaving Calguns out there by themselves.
Also, where's the NRA, seems like they are just leaving Calguns out there by themselves.
Rusty Shackleford
Member
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2010
- Messages
- 197
Free people in California need to go Galt on these idiots. All the winners and thinkers in Silicon Valley would do well to get the heck out of there before the rest of the Commies decide to divide up their hard earned money and eat their children.
Librarian
Member
For that, please visit Calguns! You'll hear about it there first.
In California...
I Can't give the reference to prove the following, maybe somebody can verify or disprove.
Compliance rate for registering so called assault weapons is 1% or less. Less than 20,000 were/are registered.
Estimated number of so called assault weapons in Calif. 2,000,000+
I Can't give the reference to prove the following, maybe somebody can verify or disprove.
Compliance rate for registering so called assault weapons is 1% or less. Less than 20,000 were/are registered.
Estimated number of so called assault weapons in Calif. 2,000,000+
Gottahaveone
Member
Well, there's always the San Andreas Fault. One can hope.......
Librarian
Member
State says 166,424, .pdf at link. Los Angeles County alone registered 46,609.
State does not break out 'private' vs 'peace officer' stat in this doc.
As to how many are in state? Nobody knows; most guesses suggest that about 10% were registered during the various times when that was allowed. Since then people have moved in and out of the state, and since 2007 we have had the 'off list lower' phenomenon. OLLs are not 'assault weapons' - that's the point of them - but it's quite easy to misconfigure one and create an 'assault weapon'.
- Status
