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

[XJEEPER]

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.

Means to an end......


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?

If there isn't, there soon will be if you don't stand up and take your State back.

 

[5-90]

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

Perhaps. Perhaps I'm just paranoid (although Gawd knows experience has made me that way, and it's got a lot to do with why I'm still kicking...)

Let's look at this in two directions, then.

1) It's meant as a sidewise approach to citizen disarmament. This is possible - you can't stay usefully in practise on a paltry 600 rounds per annum. Marksmanship is a highly frangible physical skill - especially marksmanship under stress. I'm reasonably certain that higher-higher knows this, and is counting on that factoid.

2) It's meant as a fund-raiser for Scrappymento (which is asinine - they don't need more money coming in, they need to better control money going out. I habitually vote against bond measures, they always end up in overrun. I'll vote against infrastructure projects, unless you can convince me that it's 1) necessary and 2) viable for future expension. I'm always willing to be convinced. If the option were left to the body politic for raises for Congresscritters and suchlike, I'd vote against those out of hand - they make too much money as it is. You get the idea - I may vote against tax rate hikes in general, but I also vote against spending in general.

(Throw in that every time there's some budget crisis, we're told we need to tighten our belts - but that never happens in Sacramento. Or Washington. So, there's a definite disparity there, and I'd like to see that corrected. What about the future effects of the near-trillion-dollar bailout - TARP covers most of it - when the bill comes due? Obama, with TARP, has probably done more to devalue the dollar in the last six months than America has in the last fifty years.

(TARP is a good name for that programme - it's symbolic of pulling a cover over our eyes, hoping we won't see enough to figure out the effects in the future.)

Fine - Sacramento thinks they need more money. And we're expected to make all of the sacrifices. Leadership is best defined in two words - "Follow me." Leadership by example would be a good idea - let Congresscritters put themselves on half-pay for a fiscal year. Reduce their staffs. Reduce the opulence of their offices (I'm sure they're nicer than mine. And larger, too. And in higher-rent districts.)


Whenever I've been in a position of leadership (it's happened more than a few times,) I was able to lead effectively because I was out front, setting the example. If you didn't go somewhere behind me, that was because I had something else that wanted doing - and you'd still see my 11-1/2EEE bootprint from where I'd been there before.

Considering that most Congresscritters are independently wealthy, it should not be a "sacrifice" for them to take half-pay - or no pay! - for a year or two while they get this mess sorted out. Someone mentioned that the people that can't be "unpaid" when there's a budget crisis out here are public safety personnel (makes sense. They're out there putting it all on the line, and damned well shouldn't get screwed unless they breach that trust) and Congresscritters (which sucks, because that removes a lever against them. If they didn't get paid - and lost the pay they missed - until a "budget crisis" was resolved, we'd see action that much sooner.

(And, if the constituency were to vote on pay rises vice Congresscritters themselves, I'd be willing to bet that their pay rates would remain rather closer to "static" than they do. Letting them vote on their own pay rises, to me, smacks sharply of letting the fox guard the henhouse. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Who shall guard the guards themselves? We're supposed to, but most people seem to have forgotten that.)

 

[XJEEPER]

IAnother 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?

Assumed risk.
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=164819

 

[Jeepman401]

That bill sucks.
Think about it from another angle other than Personal ownership
During the summer I spend time Running ranges at A Scout camp.
The initial order this year was 70,000 rounds of .22, 20,000 rounds od 12ga and 8,000 rounds of 20ga, and after the first week, We think we may come out closer to 100,000 round of .22 by the end of summer.
The program goes a long way towards teaching kids gun saftey, and at this time, there is no fee to shoot above the regular camp fee.

If this bill were to pass, or worse yet come up on a federal level, what happens to programs like these? you can be sure that any in state ammo purchases will be accompanied by a tax, driving up the cost, on top of the fact that you are already loosing the discount from buying in bulk online.

 

[Boatwrench]

Assumed risk.
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=164819

Thanks for the website.

From post#12
"So the gist of my post is this... if you go to an out of state gun show DO NOT even think about buying a firearm. Buy all the ammo and accessories and parts you want, but forget about anything with a serial #. "

 

[tbburg]

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

Naw,...

Don't feel bad about that. S&W quit making 12rd Mod 41/422/622 mags like forever ago.

You should feel envious about the 30rd AR mags I can get from Dillon Precision pretty much in bulk.

You can also feel envious that I can walk to Dillon Precision from where I live. :roll:

 

[XJEEPER]

Naw,...

Don't feel bad about that. S&W quit making 12rd Mod 41/422/622 mags like forever ago.

You should feel envious about the 30rd AR mags I can get from Dillon Precision pretty much in bulk.

You can also feel envious that I can walk to Dillon Precision from where I live. :roll:

Got a couple 15rd mags for my S&W 59. :laugh3:

 

[5-90]

Thanks for the website.

From post#12
"So the gist of my post is this... if you go to an out of state gun show DO NOT even think about buying a firearm. Buy all the ammo and accessories and parts you want, but forget about anything with a serial #. "

Tom - if you buy a gun out-of-state, they look up the requirements once they see your ID (for your state of residence.) Then they follow those requirements.

With waiting periods and suchlike, that means they have to send the gun to an FFL local to you, and you end up having to pay shipping for that, your state's transfer fees, wait out your state's waiting period, and whatever other nonsense we're subject to out here.

Stupid, no?

 

[alex22]

There was a similar bill proposed at the state level before (possibly Mass or CT), it limited the amount of live ammo you could have. Primers were considered "live ammo"

Urban, Last week I bought a case of 308 surplus ammo, thats 1000 rounds. I typically don't consider buying ammo unless its in a case of at least 500.

 

[Boatwrench]

Tom - if you buy a gun out-of-state, they look up the requirements once they see your ID (for your state of residence.) Then they follow those requirements.

With waiting periods and suchlike, that means they have to send the gun to an FFL local to you, and you end up having to pay shipping for that, your state's transfer fees, wait out your state's waiting period, and whatever other nonsense we're subject to out here.

Stupid, no?

Jon,
Absolutely stupid idea.
I copied that quote from the recommended reading website to show it is still OK to purchase ammo at Reno and bring back to California. The topic is the purchase of ammo, not an actual weapon.


Tom

Optional thread hi-jack
The day the Cal supreme court ruled on Prop 8 legality I had a distruber at my door from "the community" I told him he now knows what gun owners in the state feel like. He looked at me puzzled. So told him I could still own guns IAW The Constitution, but not certain ones, the one I really want to. (Thompson sub=machine gun with a drum). Continued with he could still constitutionally marry, just not who he wants to. So told him stand up for gun owner rights and maybe they'll stand up for you.

 

[AL BUNDY]

"It's meant as a fund-raiser for Scrappymento (which is asinine - they don't need more money coming in, they need to better control money going out."
-That is our state budget crisis in a nut-shell.

"You should feel envious about the 30rd AR mags I can get"
-I remember when you could buy them here & that's why any bills like this are a bad idea.

 

[Jeepman401]

There was a similar bill proposed at the state level before (possibly Mass or CT), it limited the amount of live ammo you could have. Primers were considered "live ammo"
.

I think mass has some kind of law limiting what you have on hand

Hell, if you count primers, I have somewhere around 1300 for my muzzleloader alone

 

[bluedragon436]

Forget ordering them online now..... or you could just find someone from another state, have them order the rnds for you, and either ship them to you, or get up with them to get your rnds in bulk... That is complete BS either way, and I think it does almost seem unconstitutional to me... but then again I guess they are upholding the constitution by allowing you to own the firearms.... doesn't say anything about having ammo or being able to shoot the arms you are bearing!!! That is f**ked up if you ask me... all about reading between the lines and trying to make a stand to benefit their careers.....

 

[muddyrocks]

But it completely undermines the spirit of the law and therefore makes it UNCONSTITUTIONAL!

 

[OCMI_Teddy]

I think it does almost seem unconstitutional to me... but then again I guess they are upholding the constitution by allowing you to own the firearms.... doesn't say anything about having ammo or being able to shoot the arms you are bearing!!! That is f**ked up if you ask me... all about reading between the lines and trying to make a stand to benefit their careers.....

Actually back then "to bear arms" meant to use or "take up arms", to keep ment "to have". Think about it., Why would they say the same thing twice?

 

[Tenny]

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.

I do not hunt. I do not stock pile ammo. I do not shoot competitively.

I shoot more than 600 rounds a year, with each of my guns. I enjoy the hobby of shooting, each time I go to the range I go through about 500 rounds if I am shooting .45 or .223. If I am at an indoor range shooting 22LR, I can easily go through a brick in about 2 hours.

Now I don't go to the range every month (though I would like to), but I don't want to have to remember to buy ammo every month just so that I have enough to enjoy my time when I go to the range.

This is just another law that will piss off the average law-abiding citizen and not affect criminals in almost any way.

 

[kastein]

I don't even own a real gun yet (Mass? hahaha. Worcester Mass? I'd need to walk on water before I could get a permit!), only an air pistol. I have gone through 500 rounds in an evening of plinking before. A side benefit is that it's a lot cheaper, at around 1-1.2 cents per pellet in qty1000. 600 rounds per year is a ridiculously low limit for a target shooter who actually practices.

oh wait... I'm responding to urban yan on the subject of gun control... why am I bothering...

 

[Darky]

This is just another law that will piss off the average law-abiding citizen and not affect criminals in almost any way.

And here you have the problem with most of these gun control laws. Laws only affect those who obey them.