1. Bikerdoc's passing and how you can help

    As many of you know, bikerdoc- AKA Al Spiniello- is no longer with us. There are always extra expenses when someone passes. If you would like to contribute to support his family, please do so here: Bikerdoc GoFundMe page.

    (Note - this notice can be dismissed by clicking on the X in the upper right corner.)
    Dismiss Notice

Question about Ca resident buying ammunition in another state

Discussion in 'Legal' started by Freedomharmonizes, Nov 2, 2020.

  1. Freedomharmonizes

    Freedomharmonizes Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2020
    Messages:
    43
    Given the numerous and changing laws about our freedom, firearms and ammunition, does anyone here know if people who live in California are able to purchase ammunition in another state ( Nevada for instance ) and bring in back with them to California? Without having to declare or it go through other California hassles?

    Im partly asking since ammunition is so scarcely available in California. Wondering if its more available and affordable in a nearby, less restrictive state like Nevada? And to understand differences in attitudes generally.
     
  2. earlthegoat2

    earlthegoat2 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2008
    Messages:
    8,356
    Location:
    SE GA
    If you have to ask....
     
  3. Insignificant bill

    Insignificant bill Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2019
    Messages:
    550
    The answer is no
     
  4. MEHavey

    MEHavey Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2010
    Messages:
    3,745
    Location:
    virginia
  5. George P

    George P member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2018
    Messages:
    7,775
    Not legally anyway
     
  6. Quiet

    Quiet Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2007
    Messages:
    3,114
    Location:
    bouncing between the 909 & the 702
    While in another State, a non-prohibited person that is a CA resident can legally buy ammunition in that State, in accordance with Federal laws and that State's laws.

    With a few exemptions [PC 30314(b)], a non-prohibited person that is a CA resident can not legally bring ammunition, they acquired while in another State, into CA, unless it is transferred to them through a CA DOJ licensed ammunition vendor or a CA FFL dealer. [PC 30314(a)]

    Which means, in order to be legal, they can buy the ammo in another State, then pay to have it shipped to a CA DOJ licensed ammunition vendor or a CA FFL dealer, who will then transfer it to them.

    Failure to utilize a CA DOJ licensed ammunition vendor or CA FFL dealer equates to an infraction ($500-5,000 fine, depending on Judge & Court fees) for the first time being caught and a misdemeanor ($1,000-10,000 fine + up to 1 year in jail) for any susbequent times being caught. [PC 30314(c)]
    Also, if caught, the ammunition is confiscated as evidence and is subject to disposal (destroyed, auctioned, internal use) by the LE agency that confiscated it.


    The availablity of ammo in Nevada is currently the same as in California.
     
    Last edited: Nov 2, 2020
    Freedomharmonizes and CapnMac like this.
  7. jimboecv

    jimboecv Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2017
    Messages:
    87
    Location:
    NorKal
    I would look here, in CALGUNS.
    https://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=1413768
    It's an entire thread regard buying ammo here in Ca. And there is ZERO ammo in the shops for common calibers. Primers are gone, little powder or projectiles.
     
    Freedomharmonizes likes this.
  8. CapnMac

    CapnMac Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2009
    Messages:
    12,247
    Location:
    DFW (formerly Brazos County), Texas
    There are two issues.
    One, ammo is not that much more available outside of CA.
    Two, use is important to this question.

    A CA resident who was competing in NV, UT, AZ or the like would be free to purchase ammo (where available) for use in that State.

    The CA statute defines that bringing that extra-state ammo to CA is a crime.

    Whether or not the statute is enforceable in a practical sense is a different question. CA does not--from my reading of the statute--require some unique marking of CA-purchased ammo. So, if a person had, say, an MTM box of 115gr FMJ 9x19, how would an external, enforcing, party know which ones came from exactly where (and when).

    Barring extreme surveillance of every person crossing the CA border, there's no way to enforce the law in a practical way. Sadly, this is not a reason to overturn the law, as it takes an overt, deliberate act to violate the law.
     
  9. Freedomharmonizes

    Freedomharmonizes Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2020
    Messages:
    43
    Asking is how we learn.
     
    rodregier and Coyote3855 like this.
  10. Freedomharmonizes

    Freedomharmonizes Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2020
    Messages:
    43

    Thank you for your thoughtful, intelligent response.
     
  11. Metal God

    Metal God Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2015
    Messages:
    413
    I’ve always believed that you can bring 50 rounds back with you . Don’t quote me on that but I think they threw that in there for those people shooting competition out of state and take their ammo with them . They allow you to bring 50 rounds of it back with you . So don’t take more than you’re gonna need . One of the most interesting parts of the law is it only pertains to California residents . If you’re not a resident you can bring as much ammo into the state as you want .
     
  12. GAF

    GAF Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2012
    Messages:
    1,137
    Location:
    Wisconsin
    When one buys ammo in California does the state save and compile the background checks?
     
  13. NVcharlie

    NVcharlie Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2019
    Messages:
    167
    Location:
    Sparks,NV
    There are some gun stores in Reno that are checking ID's for ammo and magazine purchases. One "wild" store in Carson City prohibits California residents from entering the store by requiring a Nevada id at the door.. He denies all non Nevada transactions
     
  14. George P

    George P member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2018
    Messages:
    7,775
    What store in Carson is that? Been a while since I lived there.
     
  15. Quiet

    Quiet Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2007
    Messages:
    3,114
    Location:
    bouncing between the 909 & the 702
    This belief does not comply with current CA laws.

    There is no exemption that allows a non-exempt CA resident to bring 50 or less rounds of ammo into CA without using a CA licensed ammunition vendor or CA FFL dealer.

    Yes.
     
  16. vintovka

    vintovka Member

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2020
    Messages:
    666
    I think all the laws do is increase demand and price. It also create demand simply by imposing unnecessary and possibly unconstitutional restrictions. One wonders what all the out of work pot dealers and gangs in CA are doing now that its legal there.
     
  17. Quiet

    Quiet Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2007
    Messages:
    3,114
    Location:
    bouncing between the 909 & the 702
    Because of CA's high tax and licensing fees for legal marijuana, it is still less expensive to grow/sell illegally and be busted for it (with assets seized for forfeiture), then to comply with all the licensing and taxes.
     
  18. Miami_JBT

    Miami_JBT Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2009
    Messages:
    464
    Location:
    Big Bend of FL, originally from Miami.
    I'm curious how the CA DOJ establishes probable cause for seizure and/or arrest. What prevents a CA Resident from taking their legally owned ammunition out of state and returning with it?

    As a better explanation, Bob lives in Po'Dunk, CA and has been buying cheap and stacking deep before the laws changed. He decided on a lark to go to Nowhere, AZ to go shooting there. He legally has 500rds of 9mm when he packs up his car and leaves his home. He shoots 250rds in AZ and upon his return trip he crosses the border and CHP at the Agricultural Checkpoint sees the ammunition sitting in plainview on the back seat.

    How can they establish PC? Bob doesn't have an receipts, he has no proof that he purchased it in CA and owned it there. But the CA DOJ doesn't have any proof either to prove he purchased it in AZ or NV or the Moon for Christ's sake. All they have is him crossing the border with ammo.

    Does the CA DOJ require Bob to complete a declaration form like DHS does when a citizen leaves the US with a firearm so when they return they can bring it back into the country?

    No, they don't.
     
    P5 Guy likes this.
  19. Frank Ettin

    Frank Ettin Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2006
    Messages:
    12,380
    Location:
    California - San Francisco Bay Area
    There's no way to answer that question. It depends on exactly what happens and how it happens. Sometimes someone can commit a crime and get away with it, but it would be foolish to count on getting away with it. The prisons are full of people who didn't think they's get caught.

    There's a difference between doing things legally and committing a crime. We try to gain sufficient understanding of the law and how it works so that we can make the choices that avoid violating the law. When someone commits a crime he is betting his freedom, fortune, and future on not getting caught.
     
  20. Miami_JBT

    Miami_JBT Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2009
    Messages:
    464
    Location:
    Big Bend of FL, originally from Miami.
    As a LEO, one must establish PC to make an arrest and the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a crime was committed.

    So I'm still curious how they establish PC.
     
    P5 Guy likes this.
  21. RickD427

    RickD427 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2010
    Messages:
    270
    Location:
    King County
    Please keep in mind that a lot of California's laws are written in a manner that makes enforcement quite difficult. The legislative process that produces law tends to result in a product that mutually acceptable to enough legislators that it can be passed, it doesn't necessarily produce law that is consistent with other laws, is practically enforceable, or is well-tailored to meet its objective. I'll use California's "Zip Gun" statute as an example. "Zip Guns" are generally thought to be crudely manufactured firearms, and a crime to possess. But when you parse out the elements of California's "Zip Gun" statutes (Penal Code sections 17360 and 33600), you'll see that there is no real feasible way to prosecute a violation.

    It's also important to make sure that you've got a good understanding of the legal terms and concepts involved in an arrest and prosecution:

    1) The lowest standard of certainty is often called a "Hunch", "Whim or Fancy." There really isn't a specific legal term, because there is no legal standing attached to it.

    2) "Reasonable Suspicion" is the next higher standard. The suspicion must be based on articulable facts, but it's a very low standard. The Supreme Court case that first recognized the standard found it present when a suspect made multiple "walk-by's" of a storefront, while looking inside. An LEO with "Reasonable Suspicion" may briefly detain the suspect to investigate, and may perform a non-invasive personal search for weapons only.

    3) "Probable Cause" is the next higher standard. It is required for the making of an arrest, and the issuance of a search warrant. It is also often the key legal component when a warrantless search is conducted. Although the root of the word "Probable" is that the outcome is more likely than not, the courts have found that "Probable" means there is a "Fair Likelihood" that the believed condition actually exists. One of the most frequent mis-conceptions about this standard is that it does not exclude other lawful explanations for the condition. It's only required that the "Fair Probability" exist.

    4) "Good Faith Belief That a Conviction Can be Obtained" - This is the traditional standard for a prosecutor to file criminal charges.

    5) "Proof Beyond a Reasonable Doubt" - This is the standard for a criminal conviction. It does not require prove beyond all doubt. A common technique used by prosecutors in cases like your hypothetical above, is to show the lack of any plausible alternative explanation for a defendant's conduct. The best example was the conviction of mobster Al Capone. The government never proved the source of Mr. Capone's income that resulted in his conviction, it only showed that the income was not lawfully received, leading the jury to conclude the alternative.

    In your example about a person being arrested at California's agricultural checkpoint (and that may not be a good example. The checkpoints are normally manned by persons who lack LEO authority, but for the sake of example, let's proceed as if they were LEOs), the observation of ammunition in vehicle would provide "Probable Cause" for an arrest. It's the "Fair Probability" thing that makes it so. While it is "possible" that the ammunition was exported and then was being re-imported, and it is also "possible" that the ammunition was purchased in-state between the border and the checkpoint, it remains more "probable" that it was purchased outside the state. This is where it's important to remember that alternative explanations don't necessarily negate a finding of Probable Cause.

    But to file criminal charges, the LEO has to make the next higher hurtle, that being the "Good Faith Belief" of the DDA. I don't know of any that would file charges based only on the above. Every DDA has a boss DA and the DA's are elected. They're more concerned with conviction rates than with filing rates. But once an arrest is made, there is also the ability to do post-arrest investigation. In your example, I would expect that investigation would be to document the movements of the defendant from the time of the border crossing to his/her arrival at the checkpoint.

    At trial, the DDA will only present their evidence showing that the defendant is guilty as charged. The DDA ain't go gonna down the road where the defendant exported, and then re-imported, the ammunition. If that defense is going to come out to the jury, the defense is gonna have to put it on. No defense attorney wants their client to testify and I'm hard pressed to see how the defense could raise that issue without the defendant testifying. They likely outcome of that effort is that DDA will make every effort the "shred" the defendant through cross examination, and then will argue that the prosecution theory is more credible. In a criminal trial, the prosecution has no obligation to negate anticipated defenses (although it may be advantageous to do so), or to respond to defense theories. They have to carry their burden of proof, but they get to decide how they do it.
     
    Last edited: Nov 23, 2020
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice