Gov Signs AB962 (Ammo bill) in CA

Status
Not open for further replies.
L

Legasat

New member
This is SO ridiculous, I just don't have words for it. Arnold has been SUCH a disappointment!!!!

Luckily the Cal Guns Foundation is already pushing ahead with their legal strategy to overturn.

Why should YOU care, because if it stands, it will spread!

This is a sad day in the People's Republic of Kalifornia!
 
Last edited:
Thanks so much. I appreciate it. :)

Makes the mod job easier so we don't get political regional wars. Don't need to discuss what guns to put on the Monitor or the Virginia anymore.

Glenn
 
OK, what's the next step? Wait for the Chicago SC case, or proceed with getting the law thrown-out based on the CA constitution? (or a massive recall election to throw the bums out)

BTW, how could Arnold not sign it, he's a Kennedy-in-law -- although he had me going for a while when he vetoed the Cow Palace bill.
 
OK, what's the next step? Wait for the Chicago SC case, or proceed with getting the law thrown-out based on the CA constitution? (or a massive recall election to throw the bums out)

BTW, how could Arnold not sign it, he's a Kennedy-in-law -- although he had me going for a while when he vetoed the Cow Palace bill.
Click to expand...
I can't see how this can be construed as a 2A issue, even if Heller is incorporated, so my guess is those of you who live in the less-than-free state of California are going to have to live with it. The rest of us will have to be extra-vigilant to be sure our elected representatives are not so insane as yours.
 
I can't see how this can be construed as a 2A issue, even if Heller is incorporated, so my guess is those of you who live in the less-than-free state of California are going to have to live with it.
Click to expand...
That depends. If we win McDonald, the Court will likely come up with a standard of scrutiny to apply against registration schemes. It's likely that the most onerous schemes, such as this one, will fail to stand up to such scrutiny.

After all, it's just as hard to exercise 2nd Amendment rights without ammunition as it is to practice 1st Amendment rights without a typewriter.

We'll have to wait and see. In the meantime, my condolences to the citizens of California. I know the Calguns foundation was fighting this while it wound its path through the legislature. At this point, I'd imagine they're preparing a suit as we speak.

Any word?
 
Tom,

I don't read it that way at all. If you look at the specific language of the bill, it's very similar to what California and most other states apply in terms of firearms sales. If anything, it's making the treatment of ammunition sales more consistent with respect to firearms sales, and I don't see prohibitory language anywhere in it. Of course, it will have a prohibitory effect to some degree, but there's no such language in the bill one can point to which clearly signals that.

I think it will be extremely difficult to even get federal review of this law.
 
It's a defacto ban if you shoot a gun that uses obscure ammo that is only available via internet or catalog order -- like .380 ACP right now ;)
What are the penalties if, say, Cabela's were to ignore the new law? (They don't have a physical presence in CA.)

This could also be fought as a violation of the Interstate Commerce Clause (a valid use of the clause, for once, consistent with its original intent)
 
NO runs on ammo...yet. The bill doesn't go into effect until Feb 2011.

At least that gives us in CA a chance to fight this stupid legislation that does NOTHING to deter violent crimes, costs the state money we don't have, and punishes law abiding gun owners!
 
My brother who lives in California said there is already a bill limiting households to 1,000 rounds of ammo TOTAL, all cartridges. And that a bill is already under construction to restrict handloading by permits.

If true then AB962 is just another stepping stone to the State gravely restricting legal firearm usage. This is not the end state, just another step along a pre-planned path.

Once something is controlled by permits, then it is left to the State's whimsy to define what is approved under the permit. And of course it creates a whole new bureaucracy that has to be funded. Just what California needs right now!
 
My brother who lives in California said there is already a bill limiting households to 1,000 rounds of ammo TOTAL, all cartridges.
Click to expand...
What bill it this? Haven't heard that one yet.

Good thing I shot up 14,000 rounds last month, puts me just within the limit now ;)
 
My brother who lives in California said there is already a bill limiting households to 1,000 rounds of ammo TOTAL, all cartridges.
Click to expand...

I have not heard that one, but that doesn't mean it's not true. Very little the "anti's" do anymore surprise me.
 
It's a defacto ban if you shoot a gun that uses obscure ammo that is only available via internet or catalog order -- like .380 ACP right now
Click to expand...

Yep.

Taking away ammo and saying you still have 2nd adm rights is like someone cutting out your tounge and saying you still have 1st adm rights.IMHO
 
Last edited:
There has been a run on ammo here for a year +. Hard to find any pistol ammo - especially 38Spec, 357, 40S&W, 44M, 9MM, even 380 - and a lot of rifle ammo. Hoarding of ammo and reloading components is underway and understandable. Makes it hard for those of us who can't buy in quantity when it pops up.
 
Long gun ammo and COE holders are exempt so there are workarounds. A COE is a certificate from the state (renewed annually) that you have passed a background check and are officially a good guy. We use them combined with a C&R to skip 10 day waits on instate C&R transfers and the one handgun a month law.
 
If I'm reading this correctly, the CA law (AB 962) requires that sales of handgun ammunition can only be made to certain adults and requires the vendor to record:

(A) The date of the sale or other transaction.
(B) The purchaser’s or transferee’s driver’s license or other
identification number and the state in which it was issued.
(C) The brand, type, and amount of ammunition sold or
otherwise transferred.
(D) The purchaser’s or transferee’s signature.
(E) The name of the salesperson who processed the sale or other
transaction.
(F) The right thumbprint of the purchaser or transferee on the
above form.
(G) The purchaser’s or transferee’s full residential address and
telephone number.
(H) The purchaser’s or transferee’s date of birth.
Click to expand...

If I remember correctly, about 20 or so years ago there were requirements similar to the above. I think I remember when I bought handgun ammo the dealer took my drivers license and wrote down the info in a book he had to keep. There was no thumbprint required back then.

I wonder if all that record keeping prevented or help solve any felonies?

As I read further in the law:
(c) For purposes of this section, “ammunition” shall include,
but not be limited to, any bullet, cartridge, magazine, clip, speed
loader, autoloader, or projectile capable of being fired from a
firearm with deadly consequence. “Ammunition” does not include
blanks.
Click to expand...

I hate it when politicians define words waaaaay outside of normal usage.

I wonder how long Kalifornia could remain functional if all the responsible people voted with their feet and left the state.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top