New law going into affect ... I think

4

4runnerman

New member
Has any one alse seen this or is this bull?.

AB 962 (Stats. 2009, ch. 628)
Handgun ammunition must be displayed in a manner that makes the ammunition inaccessible to a purchaser or transferee, and requires the assistance of the vendor or an employee of the vendor. (§ 12061.)*1
An employee of a handgun ammunition vendor, who is prohibited from possessing firearms, cannot handle, sell, or deliver handgun ammunition in the course and scope of his or her employment. (§ 12061.)
No one shall supply, deliver, or give ammunition to a minor who is prohibited from possessing ammunition pursuant to section 12101. (§ 12316.)
Any person who is enjoined from engaging in activity associated with a criminal street gang is prohibited from possessing ammunition. A violation is a misdemeanor. (§ 12316.)
Beginning February 1, 2011, the delivery or transfer of handgun ammunition must occur in a face-to-face transaction, with the recipient providing bona fide evidence of his or her identity and age, subject to specified exceptions. Non-face-to-face transfers, such as internet transactions and mail order deliveries are prohibited.*A violation is a misdemeanor. (§ 12318.)
Beginning February 1, 2011, handgun ammunition vendors must obtain a thumbprint and other information related to handgun ammunition transactions subject to specified exceptions (including transfers to ce officers who are authorized to carry a firearm in the course and scope their duties). The information must be retained by the vendor for five years from the date of the transaction.
 
i hope its bull...time to stock up before february. im ok with checking my id to verify im over 21, but a finger print is a tad much, especially from small gun shops/shows or similar.
 
California's Assembly Bill applies only to California. (Arnold's subjects)

Authored by DeLeon

Maybe you should look at his district.
45th District
Angelino Heights, Atwater Village, Chinatown, Cypress Park, City Terrace, Echo Park, El Sereno, Elysian Valley, Glassell Park, Highland Park, Historic Filipinotown, Hollywood, Ramona Gardens, Silverlake, Temple-Beverly & Thai Town

For non-LA guys, its the area around Dodger Stadium.
 
Yes, only California. If you travel to California and try tpo but ammo you will experience this. You may see notice of restrictions on online ammo sites.

AB = Assembly Bill >> a term used for California State Assembly. Not a term used to refer to US House Resolutions or US Senate Bills.
 
California Assembly Bill (AB) 962 goes into effect on Feb. 1, 2011.

If you would kindly direct yourselves to the Current 2A Cases thread, you will find that there are 3 separate lawsuits attempting to overturn the bill on various grounds. It's all in the opening post of that thread, along with links to all the briefs.

# State Ammunition v. Lindley: Challenge of AB962, Handgun Ammunition Regulations (CA), June 2010. U.S. District court for the Eastern District of California. Kevin Chaffin, attorney for plaintiffs.

# Parker v. California: Docket. The NRA-CRPA Foundation Legal Action Project ("LAP") has filed a lawsuit challenging AB962. Details and link, pending. July 2010. Superior Court of California, Fresno. C.D. Michel, attorney for plaintiffs. The complaint has become available via an included exhibit by CA in their MTD the OOIDA case.

# OOIDA v. Lindley: The complaint alleges that AB962 unlawfully interferes with interstate commerce and is pre-empted by Federal laws regulating interstate commerce. Lawsuit seeks to block enforcement of the law. U.S. District Court, Eastern District of California, Sacramento Division. A preliminary injunction request is said to be filed, shortly. Jason A. Davis and C.D. Michel, attorneys for plaintiffs.

Should all three of these cases fail, then it just becomes a matter of time until other repressive States enact their own ammunition bans and controls.
 
It is a law, but as you will learn from this thread at calguns, this law has big problems awaiting it in it's (hopefully brief) future. There is considerable reason to believe that, as written, it not only doesn't iterate or accomplish what it's authors intended, but that it also violates the commerce clause.

According to legal experts, it doesn't even prevent internet sales as long as the carrier gets a positive ID in a face to face transfer or delivery. Federal law forbids states from requiring federally regulated carriers to do anything, as it is a pre-emption issue related to commerce.
 
I will admit that when it comes to law I am stupid,,,, but when a state like CA can stop Mcydees from selling happy meals due to fat kids,,, A law like this is very easy to accept as truth.
Makes me glad I live in Indiana
 
but when a state like CA can stop Mcydees from selling happy meals due to fat kids
Click to expand...
But nobody is seriously fighting those kind of idiot laws. McDonalds doesn't want to spend the money or draw even further ire from the lawmakers. Private citizens aren't going to fund a lawsuit just so their kids can get a free toy with a happy meal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top