California's continuing assault on gun owners ( READ )

Status
Not open for further replies.

JAMES77257

Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2006
Messages
197
Location
Colorado
It appears that we have another fight on our hands. If you live in Cali please contact your representative about this, both email, and by phone. We have to defeat these communist pigs.

AB 362 (DeLeon) wants to regualte ammo sales on a whole new level!!!!

"LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST


AB 362, as introduced, De Leon. Ammunition.
Existing law generally regulates the sale of ammunition.
This bill would require that commencing July 1, 2008, unless
specifically excluded, 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, as defined. The bill would also
require these vendors to obtain a background clearance for those
employees who would handle ammunition in the course and scope of
their employment. The bill would require the Department of Justice to
maintain a registry of registered handgun ammunition vendors, as
specified. Violation of these provisions, as specified, would be a
misdemeanor.
The bill would also provide that no retail seller of ammunition
shall sell, offer for sale, or display for sale, any handgun
ammunition in a manner that allows that 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.
The bill would further provide that no ammunition or reloaded
ammunition may be delivered by a common or contract carrier pursuant
to a retail transaction unless certain conditions exist. A violation
of these provisions would be punishable as a misdemeanor, with
enhancements for prior violations.
By creating new crimes, this bill would impose a state-mandated
local program.
Existing law provides that it is a crime to sell ammunition to a
minor, or to sell handgun ammunition to a person who is under 21
years of age.
This bill would provide that any person under 21 years of age who
purchases, or who attempts to purchase, handgun ammunition by using a
false identification document, or by otherwise misrepresenting the
person's age, and any minor who purchases, or attempts to purchase,
any ammunition by using a false identification document, or otherwise
misrepresenting the person's age, is guilty of a misdemeanor.
By creating a new crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated
local program.
The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local
agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the
state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that
reimbursement.
This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this
act for a specified reason.
Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes.
State-mandated local program: yes. "
 
Yep, another newbie freshman legislator carrying a Brady bill. More info on Calguns.net...

(Senior legislators seem to be avoiding gun bills as they're too much trouble - they may vote for one but they don't issue one...)

What is really happening here is that there's all sortsa crap here that's designed to be thrown out in negotiation. The bottom line of the bill is that they want private ammunition deals controlled.

This is a fragment-the-opposition bill and requires CA gunowner unity to oppose.

They won't have opposition from gun dealers or shooting ranges or sporting goods stores, as they are in effect offering a measure protectionism for them. The naive/ compliant CRPA will probably end up supporting the bill, because they'll think they're 'tricky' negotiating away the stuff that was intended to be negotiated away anyway.

So if you have a case of unused 9mm or whatever ammo and your buddy wants to buy it cuz you no longer have a 9mm, you won't be able to. That's the bottom-line intention, because DeLeon is in a gang-infested district and ammo is being sold at flea markets, etc. (Hey, fine with me!)

What will be worse is that gradual infracstructure of ammo regulation will begin being put in place. Stuff like last year's SB357 (the marked/ microstamped *ammunition* bill) gets a bit closer when certain structures are incrementally in place beforehand...

Fortunately, the head of the CA Public Safety committee (Jose Solorio, D) is in a very very marginal swing seat...


Bill Wiese
San Jose CA
 
I wouldn't be so quick to say that there won't be any opposition from regular dealers since the proposed bill does affect retail by way of paragraph two:

The bill would also provide that no retail seller of ammunition shall sell, offer for sale, or display for sale, any handgun ammunition in a manner that allows that ammunition to be accessible to a purchaser without the assistance of the retailer or employee thereof.

It would certainly add an inconvenience to a retailer to have to move floor stock to a new location to make it inaccessible. Besides that, there's really nothing for them to gain from this anyway.

But yeah... this proposal needs to be swiftly taken down too.
 
Basura,

What you quoted is most likely gonna end up being one of the throwaway provisions.

What will end up will be private ammo transfers banned (over 1 box of ammo/month), with the rest of provisions throwaway.

This bill is designed to get one more thing "under control" - an inlking of an infrastructure, policy and legal framework at first, filled in later w/incremental legislation.

Bill Wiese
San Jose CA
 
You have got to love how they include so many absurd and ridiculous subsections of law within the bill so they can be seen as "compromising" when they negotiate a few away, yet still gain a "win".

This would probably stop many places like walmart from even going through the hassle of selling ammo, just like they stopped selling firearms in this state, nevermind many smaller retailers.

Once they create a "handgun ammunition retailer database" and provisions and legislation governing the sale, transfer etc of ammo they can tighten the noose on thier legality at all much as they have for firearms. Making people jump through hoops and driving up prices to obtain ammo.
 
STOOPID laws written by STOOPID legislators! If I'm not mistaken, .22 long rifle ammo will fit into many handguns! Will the gun store owners have to ask if the "brick" of .22 rounds that you want to purchase will be used in a rifle, or handgun? I guess that if you answer "handgun", you'll only be allowed to buy a box of 50 rounds! If you lie by saying "rifle", then it will be "okay" to purchase the 500-round "brick"!

Another HMMM! Might it be "okay" to buy 51 rounds of 9mm, .38/.357 or .45 ACP if you tell the gun store employee that it's for a rifle? I can just see arguments flaring as to what "pistol ammo" is!
 
Desertshooter, rimfire is actually exempted from this bill. But it doesn't matter.
This is what they are after:
The bill would require the Department of Justice to
maintain a registry of registered handgun ammunition vendors, as
specified.
Registration/license can be given, it can be taken away. Requirements for such registration or revocation of thereof will not be decided by legislature, it would be left to DoJ. DoJ bureaucrats would make sure there is an impossible maze of requirements, re-qualifications, inspections, etc to comply with. It's also entirely possible some gun shops would have to shut down if denied ammunition sales. This could go on and on. Not to mention that having in place the infrastructure system to tightly control limited number of ammo retailers it would be entirely possible to ban a caliber here, limit quantities there, you know, before getting to the really serious stuff.
 
DesertShooter said:
STOOPID laws written by STOOPID legislators! If I'm not mistaken, .22 long rifle ammo will fit into many handguns! Will the gun store owners have to ask if the "brick" of .22 rounds that you want to purchase will be used in a rifle, or handgun? I guess that if you answer "handgun", you'll only be allowed to buy a box of 50 rounds! If you lie by saying "rifle", then it will be "okay" to purchase the 500-round "brick"!

Another HMMM! Might it be "okay" to buy 51 rounds of 9mm, .38/.357 or .45 ACP if you tell the gun store employee that it's for a rifle? I can just see arguments flaring as to what "pistol ammo" is!

When buying ammo from Wally Mart I always tell them that my 9mm and 45acp is for a Rifle and my 22 is for a pistol... just to screw with them. I'm 25 years old does it really matter what kind of gun I'm putting my ammo in?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top