AB962 Ammo Sales Bill--Only can buy 50rnds a month

Here's the thread on Cal Guns with the contact info for the senators:
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=176297
Let them know what you think about this bill!

This is at best a complete money waste for a broke state and at worse unconstitutional. The jist of it is that, you can only buy 50 rnds of handgun ammo per month via private party transfer. THIS INCLUDES .22lr! Other wise you can only by your ammo from a "lisenced ammo vendor" in CA. That means no more buying in bulk to save money from online retailers.

Link to the actually wording of the Bill
AB 962, as introduced, De Leon. Ammunition.
Existing law requires the Department of Justice to maintain
records pertaining to firearms transactions.
This bill would require the department to maintain additional
information relating to ammunition transfers and licensed handgun
ammunition vendors, as specified.
Existing law generally regulates the sale of ammunition.
This bill would establish a program administered by the Department
of Justice for licensing handgun ammunition vendors, as specified.
The bill would establish a database maintained by the department
to serve as a registry of handgun ammunition vendors.
This bill would require that commencing July 1, 2010, unless
specifically excluded, no person shall sell or transfer more than 50
rounds of handgun ammunition in any month unless he or she is
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.
By creating a new crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated
local program.
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.
The bill would further provide that handgun ammunition may only be
purchased in a face-to-face transaction and only if certain
conditions exist.
Existing law generally regulates what information is required to
be obtained in connection with the transfer of ammunition.
This bill would, subject to exceptions, commencing July 1, 2010,
require certain ammunition vendors to obtain a thumbprint and other
information from ammunition purchasers, and would require submission
of that information to the Department of Justice, as specified. A
violation of these provisions would be a misdemeanor.
This bill would provide that a person enjoined from engaging in
activity associated with a criminal street gang, as specified, would
be prohibited from having under his or her possession, custody, or
control, any ammunition. Violation of these provisions would be a
misdemeanor.
The bill would prohibit supplying or delivering, as specified,
handgun ammunition to prohibited persons, as described, by persons or
others who know or by using reasonable care should know that the
recipient is a person prohibited from possessing ammunition.
Violation of these provisions is a misdemeanor with specified
penalties.
By creating new crimes, 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.

I can get .223, .308, 30-06, and 45-70 pistol barrels for the TC-contender, and I KNOW there were a lot of rifle caliber XP-100s made.

Man I feel for you guys out there.

Ha! Buying in bulk! 4 magazines for my smith 422=48 rounds, or about 2 minutes slow fire.

"hope you can kill this. Good luck with your jacka**es in Sacramento.

is it bad that I'm just envious of the fact that you can have 12rnd mags.......:rattle:

I really feel for you californians, what a lousy bill.

Read and disseminated with "Distribution: Unlimited" to my own contacts. In and out of California. Logic? California is a "Judas Goat" with stupid crap like this, and it needs to be made as widely-known as possible.

That's a stupid motion for one simple reason: people that commit illegal acts seldom let formalities like "the law" get in their way. Than again, I'm trying to understand who needs more than 600rounds/year? Do California deer wear body armor? Is the zombie pandemic imminent? Is Schwarzenegger really a terminator? Is Canada going to attack with their all-new super-secret maple syrup canon?

This law sucks no doubt, but I'm trying to get a grasp of the perspective.

Think "slippery slope" or "nose of the camel."

Gun control in an incremental form has been happening since 1934 (NFA1934) and got a serious boost in 1968 (GCA1968) - I'm not sure what triggered NFA34 - St. Valentine's Day Massacre, perhaps? - but GCA68 got a boost with the assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr. and RFK. (JFK was five years earlier - it may have been a factor, but I rather doubt it.)

Each time the measure is being hawked as "reasonable" - putting a $200 transfer tax on a WWII trophy machine gun that cost $30 to make was "reasonable," putting a $200 transfer tax on a suppressor that cost $5 to make was "reasonable."

The institution of FFL as an occupational license (and then dividing it into licenses of increasing difficulty to get was "reasonable") - before 1968, you could get decent firearms at the hardware store. 60% ditching dynamite as well. No trouble.

Now, banning a magazine with a capacity of more than ten rounds is "reasonable." Banning a rifle based on looks is "reasonable." They keep trying to ban the assorted Barrett .50BMG rifles as "reasonable" and in the interest of "crime control" - and this is a rifle that can run somewhere around $10K, wants a scope that runs $2-4K, and many of them are single shot bolt-action rifles (the only one I can shoot effectively is the M82A1 - I'm left-handed, and the bolt actions are right-hand only. And, I don't want to take the bolt handle in the teeth on the bullpup version.)

Oh - and let's not forget - the common Barretts are five bloody feet long and weigh somewhere around 35 pounds. Yep - definitely the weapon of choice for street gangs.

At least Feinstein put the question properly when she was pushing for a ban on the .50BMG in general because it could "penetrate an armored limousine." Really? Who have you been pi$$ing off lately, Senator?

Every time we accept some "reasonable" measure for gun control, they start looking for the next thing that any "resonable" person would vote for. Since people are, in essence, sheep; they continue to vote for this nonsense and the people who continue to foment it.

I honestly don't think anything is reasonable when it comes to self-defense. Look at the trend in gun control, then compare it to the trend in crimes against the person (rape, robbery, assault in its various flavours, murder, home invasion, &c.) As gun control has expanded, crimes against the person have increased. In jurisdictions where gun control has been reversed (or hasn't been passed at all,) crimes against the person have declined sharply or just not happened at all.

The State of Vermont does not require the issuance of CCW for concealed carry - if you own it, you can carry it. They only bother you if you use it, and it's to make sure you were justified in doing so. Capital.

Kennesaw, GA passed a law some years ago that each household had to maintain at least one firearm, and at least the adults had to be proficient in its use. Home invasions dropped overnight.

Dade County, FL was one of the first "shall issue" jurisdictions in the country. Gun grabbers and hoplophobes set up a hue and cry that the streets would run with blood. They did it anyhow. Dade County SD offered a training course for CCW as a requirement (they would still issue the permit, but wanted to make sure people understood what they were getting into.) The course had to be moved to a local park - too many people attended for the original venue - and had to be offered for more than the one day planned. Crimes against the person dropped overnight.

Even "open carry" states are moving in the right direction - Arizona and Nevada come readily to mind. I don't know about you, but I feel better seeing a few sidearms in the grocery store when I'm over the state line, even if one of them isn't mine.

Gun control, to me, means nothing more than "steel on target." That's it. There is no reason for our political "masters" to impose any more control on us that the consequences for misuse of the right to defend yourself - meaning you'd damned well better be defending yourself or someone else if you shoot someone.

Did you know that before 1968, felons were allowed to keep their hardware? They'd get it back when released from prison? And this went back 150 years or so - felons didn't cause anywhere near as much trouble as we thought they did. But, they were made a "prohibited class" in 1968.

Oddly enough, violent felony arrests and prosecutions have increased dramatically since then - particularly in the last twenty years or so. What changed?

So you see my problem with the idea? Maybe I don't see the need to go buy ammo 1500 rounds at a whack (unless I'm planning on spending a day plinking with the 10/22.) But, it's not anyone's damned business to tell me I can't go buy 1500 rounds of .45ACP, if I should suddenly feel the urge to. No-one at all.

Let's say I'm practising for a 3-gun match. You can burn through a few thousand rounds in a month getting ready for those things! Target shooters using small calibres have no trouble burning through 200-400 rounds in a day of practise. Silhouette shooters? Same level of usage - high. So, this can effectively kill shooting sports in CA (yes, I'm aware that many target competitors load their own ammo - particularly benchrest shooters. Many competitors do not - like IPSC, silhouette shooters, cowboy action shooters, and the like.)

Buying 500 rounds for a day's (or a few days') practise isn't a crime anywhere else in the country - why should it be illegal here?

urban yan said:

Than again, I'm trying to understand who needs more than 600rounds/year? Do California deer wear body armor? Is the zombie pandemic imminent? Is Schwarzenegger really a terminator? Is Canada going to attack with their all-new super-secret maple syrup canon?

Click to expand...

you've never heard of target practice? either be it for fun or practice for shooting competitions. you would be surprised how fast you can burn through 600 rounds.

urban yan said:

Than again, I'm trying to understand who needs more than 600rounds/year? Do California deer wear body armor? Is the zombie pandemic imminent? Is Schwarzenegger really a terminator? Is Canada going to attack with their all-new super-secret maple syrup canon?

This law sucks no doubt, but I'm trying to get a grasp of the perspective.

Click to expand...

Because bulk ammo is cheaper. Who doesn't like to save money?

urban yan said:

...,Than again, I'm trying to understand who needs more than 600rounds/year?,... ...,but I'm trying to get a grasp of the perspective.

Click to expand...

This was buried in my earlier post:

tbburg said:

4 magazines for my smith 422=48 rounds, or about 2 minutes slow fire.

Click to expand...

Mind you, I'm not a real serious shooter now. When I go to an indoor range, I stay on the line for an hour, maybe an hour and a half. In that time I'll burn:

300, maybe 350 rounds of .22: slow fire and rapid fire
Then I break out the .45.
Bare minimum: 2-3 mags(that's 14-21 rounds, it's TINY) left handed and maybe 10-12 right handed.
So a short day at the range for me is 385+ rounds of pistol ammo.

I used to shoot competition. Not unusual to shoot 200 rounds at a single competition.

So with that law in effect, I could go to the range twice a year, or go to 3, maybe 4 competition events with no other practice.

When I was shooting, I blew off 1500+ rounds of .45 a month in practice. Nothing like spending 2+ hours a night, 3 nights a week, to have ammo for the weekend. 'Love my dillon

urban yan said:

That's a stupid motion for one simple reason: people that commit illegal acts seldom let formalities like "the law" get in their way. Than again, I'm trying to understand who needs more than 600rounds/year? Do California deer wear body armor? Is the zombie pandemic imminent? Is Schwarzenegger really a terminator? Is Canada going to attack with their all-new super-secret maple syrup canon?

This law sucks no doubt, but I'm trying to get a grasp of the perspective.

Click to expand...

:confused1 I shot almost 200 rounds last weekend at a match (and it was a relatively low round count match.) A single rifle or pistol class is easily 600 rounds, if not way more. Even a day or two of shooting for fun can eat up 600 rounds.

Dumb question - are there any restrictions on buying expended brass? Seems to me this could open up one heckuva market for reloading services (if you've got the brass, we've got the lead!). You wouldn't be buying functional ammo, you'd be buying "parts" and the service of assembly.

Yes, I know reloaders are probably too picky to not do their own work (just like us Jeepers), but hey, a loophole's a loophole...

I did 1,000 rounds of rifle and pistol last week between ar, 308, and 3 pistol competitions.

I guess I'm done for the next year and a half!


Good thing i've got about 30,000 primers for pistol and rifle set aside. I'll be sure and wait until next year to start loading again.

I don't even sit down at the reloading bench for less than a THOUSAND rounds at a time. I used to take my sons and daughters friends shooting when they reached about 9 or so, picked up a few .22's at yard sales, packed a few bags of balloons, case of soda in the cooler, maybe a few PB&J sandwiches, some chips, pretzels and other munchies and head to the range with 4 BOXES OF 550 ROUND FEDERAL .22's. We'd spend a good 4-6 hours there punching paper, popping balloons, shooting a few water filled plastic bottles so they could see first hand what even a little .22HP can do.
It's a great thing to do with kids, especially ones who are single parent ones, usually a mother, no dad, even the girls had a good time. Wish now I had done it more than I did.

"This law sucks no doubt, but I'm trying to get a grasp of the perspective."

It's harmless, right. Look at England. Nobody paid attention to gun rights and now they are banned.

urban yan said:

Than again, I'm trying to understand who needs more than 600rounds/year?

Click to expand...

People who actually use their guns for target practice and hunting and not letting them sit use 600 a year easily. I for one feel sorry for the guys in Cali who actually enjoy shooting guns.

Rob Mayercik said:

Dumb question - are there any restrictions on buying expended brass? Seems to me this could open up one heckuva market for reloading services (if you've got the brass, we've got the lead!). You wouldn't be buying functional ammo, you'd be buying "parts" and the service of assembly.

Yes, I know reloaders are probably too picky to not do their own work (just like us Jeepers), but hey, a loophole's a loophole...

Click to expand...

Are you talking about selling reloads? If so, that actually requires a license to manufacture ammo. You can reload all you want for yourself, and you can give them to other people, you can even sell some as long as you're not in the business of manufacturing ammo with the intent to sell. It's kind of a gray area at that point though.

In college a friend of mine had re-loading equipment, and I worked at an oil change place next to a tire shop (wheel weights)

Shooting was cheap fun. We went 2-3 days a week before class to the local national forrest. They had a shooting range set-up for $20 a year.

I burned 30,000 plus in a year doing this. Now of course, they were mostly reloads, but 600 rds a year is nothing.

p.s. Guns everywhere out at that range. Never a safer place on earth.

urban yan said:

That's a stupid motion for one simple reason: people that commit illegal acts seldom let formalities like "the law" get in their way. Than again, I'm trying to understand who needs more than 600rounds/year? Do California deer wear body armor? Is the zombie pandemic imminent? Is Schwarzenegger really a terminator? Is Canada going to attack with their all-new super-secret maple syrup canon?

This law sucks no doubt, but I'm trying to get a grasp of the perspective.

Click to expand...

Not that hard to understand, perspective comes from a brief study of history.....:

"No free man shall ever be de-barred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain their right to keep and bear arms is as a last resort to protect themselves against tyranny in government." - Thomas Jefferson



"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be." - Thomas Jefferson



"The said constitution shall never be construed to authorize congress to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms." - Samuel Adams



"The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able may have a gun." - Patrick Henry



"Americans need never fear their government because of the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation." - James Madison



"Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! - I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!" - Patrick Henry



"To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them." - Richard Henry Lee Founding Father


"Arms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property . . . Horrid mischief would ensue were the law-abiding deprived of the use of them." - Thomas Paine, Thoughts on Defensive War (1775).



"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." Thomas Jefferson, Proposed Virginia Constitution (1776).



"The people never give up their liberties but under some delusion." - Edmund Burke (1784).

"You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind each blade of grass."
--Japanese Admiral Yamamoto, 1941

"The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by doing so" --Adolph Hitler.

"Germans who wish to use firearms should join the SS or the SA -- ordinary citizens don't need guns, as their having guns doesn't serve the state." - Heinrich Himmler.


"In the bureaucracy, the identity of state interest and particular private aim is established in such a way that the state interest becomes a particular private aim over against other private aims." -- Karl Marx


"For the bureaucrat, the world is a mere object to be manipulated by him." - Karl Marx

Probably the most disturbing perspective is how far down the road to Socialism we have traveled. Taking away the rights to defend ourselves is part of their grand plan......

1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land
to public purposes.
2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.
4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
5. Centralization of credit in the banks of the state, by means of a
national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly.
6. Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the
hands of the state.
7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the
state; the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the
improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
8. Equal obligation of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies,
especially for agriculture.
9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries;
gradual abolition of all the distinction between town and country
by a more equable distribution of the populace over the country.
10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of
children's factory labor in its present form. Combination of education
with industrial production, etc.

Karl Marx-Communist Manifesto

This is at best a complete money waste for a broke state and at worse unconstitutional. The jist of it is that, you can only buy 50 rnds of handgun ammo per month via private party transfer. THIS INCLUDES .22lr! Other wise you can only by your ammo from a "lisenced ammo vendor" in CA. That means no more buying in bulk to save money from online retailers

Click to expand...

I didn't read the whole thing, but from this paragraph it sounds as if Sacramento wants to generate some revenue by having you purchase from a "licensed ammo vender" that would mean a sale tax would be applied to the purchase.

BT---BT---BT

Jon,
Understand the incremental taking of control but I really believe this is about raising taxes vice disarming citizens.


BT---BT---BT
Another question, what prevents me from driving to the Reno Gun Show and purchasing ammo there and then coming back to CA? I don't know, is there a law or regulation about state lines?