Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Ammunition controls, too tight(CA)
thereporter.com ^ | 26 December, 2010 | Charles R. Fry

Posted on 12/27/2010 4:13:48 AM PST by marktwain

Last year, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger signed Assembly Bill 962, making it a crime to deliver handgun ammunition if the transaction is not done face-to-face, and if the driver fails to determine, through government identification, whether the recipient is legally authorized to receive the ammo.

This is a back door effort by the anti-gun lobby to stop private ownership of guns. In the immortal words of Rooster Cogburn, "A gun that's unloaded and cocked ain't good for nothing."

This law is scheduled to go into effect in February and criminalizes much of the commercial shipping of handgun ammunition in the state.

Drivers for delivery firms (UPS, FedEx, etc.) would have to become the police by determining what is being shipped and whether the person is qualified to receive it.

Second Amendment-advocates, including the NRA and the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association, are vowing to fight the statute.

They also contend that the law violates the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act, which prohibits states from interfering with common carriers, saying, "We cannot allow California to subject our members to criminal liability where the state has no right to meddle."

The real fear is that the law could set a precedent that would influence anti-gun local governments nationwide to set up a nightmare of a bureaucracy. The more red tape they create, the more they discourage people from becoming involved in shooting sports.

Finally, this is all about stopping Internet sales of ammunition. If you control the ammunition, you control the gun.

(Excerpt) Read more at thereporter.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Government; News/Current Events; US: California
KEYWORDS: ammunition; banglist; ca; gun
Yes, ammunition is as much protected by the Constitution as guns are.
1 posted on 12/27/2010 4:13:53 AM PST by marktwain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: marktwain

As I’ve said before, ALL gun laws are unconstitutional.


2 posted on 12/27/2010 4:27:25 AM PST by Emperor Palpatine (I'm shocked! Shocked to find out that gambling is going on in here!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

All it would take is for the Ammo Mfg’s to grow a set and take a stand by REFUSING to Sell Any Ammunition in California to ANYONE. Let the Police Agencies and other government agencies reload their own. Tough pill to swallow for a company but it is the cure for madness like this.


3 posted on 12/27/2010 5:42:09 AM PST by eyeamok
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

Bttt.


4 posted on 12/27/2010 5:44:15 AM PST by Inyo-Mono (Had God not driven man from the Garden of Eden the Sierra Club surely would have.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

5 posted on 12/27/2010 8:42:22 AM PST by Iron Munro (Claire Wolfe: Leave the government even if you can’t leave the country.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: eyeamok
I certainly wouldn't accept ammo shipments to Kali if I were UPS or FedUp. Why do the hassle just to appease some control freaks. OTOH, maybe that's just what they want.

Since purchase of ammo by out-of-staters isn't regulated like purchase of firearms (yet), watch for dealers in a 25 mile buffer zone around Kali to do a booming business as Kalifornians show their minders the finger.

6 posted on 12/27/2010 9:47:09 AM PST by Still Thinking (Freedom is NOT a loophole!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking

Well here in Mohave Valley, AZ just across the river from Ca. EVERY Store that sells ammunition or firearms, have BIG SIGNS EVERYWHERE::

NO PURCHASES of FIREARMS OR AMMUNITION BY CALIFORNIA RESIDENTS


7 posted on 12/27/2010 10:29:07 AM PST by eyeamok
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: eyeamok

Why would they restrict people beyond the already egregious requirements of the (for now) valid laws?? That’s as bad as when your bank or ISP waives the warrant process on your behalf over information that doesn’t belong to them and shares it with law enforcement on that basis of a simple request.


8 posted on 12/27/2010 11:04:24 AM PST by Still Thinking (Freedom is NOT a loophole!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: eyeamok

And, just where do they get off asking to even see your ID when they have no legal requirement to do so for ammo sales? If I were buying ammo and someone wanted to see mine I’d stop the sale take my business elsewhere and explain why I’m doing so. Just having to comply with the infringements that HAVE been enacted is bad enough, but you can’t really blame them for doing something that would get them shut down if they didn’t do it.


9 posted on 12/27/2010 11:07:01 AM PST by Still Thinking (Freedom is NOT a loophole!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking

Because ATF came in and TOLD THEM they had to, goes into full swing in February when AMMO is officially outlawed in CA. It is also against Federal Law I believe to transport Ammo across State Lines. Either way the Signs are up and unless you act like an idiot nobody will ask for ID when buying Ammo, at least I haven’t been asked yet, but I have AZ id anyway


10 posted on 12/27/2010 11:25:15 AM PST by eyeamok
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: eyeamok

Someone should be filing suit over this. Californians have the right to buy ammo while out of state and it’s none of the store’s or ATF’s damned business how far out of state or for how long. And ATF is a federal agency. Enforcement of local or state laws is NONE of their business. And how can transporting ammo across state lines be illegal??? How did it get to the store in the first place? What about internet sales that as of today are still legal even in Kalifornistan?


11 posted on 12/27/2010 11:44:38 AM PST by Still Thinking (Freedom is NOT a loophole!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: eyeamok

I mean think about it. If it WERE illegal to transport ammo across state lines, then these shops would HAVE to sell ammo to people in from Kalifornistan in AZ to hunt because it would be illegal to bring their own into the state with them.


12 posted on 12/27/2010 11:47:23 AM PST by Still Thinking (Freedom is NOT a loophole!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: eyeamok

That’s odd. They don’t seem to give a s*** in Nevada.


13 posted on 12/27/2010 11:49:13 AM PST by Smogger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking

I asked all these same questions the last time I was int the Gun Store, and the only answer available is ATF told us to. And No dealer is going to mess with the ATF if they wish to stay open. I believe it is against federal law to travel across state lines for the purpose of purchasing and transporting ammunition to your home state. So i have been told at least.


14 posted on 12/27/2010 11:51:10 AM PST by eyeamok
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: eyeamok
I asked all these same questions the last time I was in the Gun Store, and the only answer available is ATF told us to. And No dealer is going to mess with the ATF if they wish to stay open.

True enough, but that's how they get away with all this crap. Something needs to be done. We need to start thinking seriously about this.

I believe it is against federal law to travel across state lines for the purpose of purchasing and transporting ammunition to your home state. So i have been told at least.

I guess if it's that narrowly defined, it might be the law without having created most of the issues I mentioned. Still seems like that's what you're doing (via a proxy) if you order online. Maybe that's OK because there's a record of the state in which it was transferred to the end user.

15 posted on 12/27/2010 11:56:53 AM PST by Still Thinking (Freedom is NOT a loophole!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking

I will take a pic of signs this weekend and post them here


16 posted on 12/27/2010 11:57:38 AM PST by eyeamok
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

Gotta love CA! Went to buy a 22 cal rifle to plink around with during the Thanksgiving break in southern Utah. Everything went well until I showed them my Cali drivers license. Then I was informed that my 2nd ammendment rights were null and void, as well as the Commerce Clause being null and void. I was denied the right to purchase the firearm. I went to a different store and got the same response. I was shocked....

It was a good opportunity to teach my kids about the rights we used to have, and to apologize that the nation we are turning over to them is much worse than the one our parents gave us.


17 posted on 12/27/2010 1:01:15 PM PST by TheDon (The Democrat Party, the party of the KKK (tm))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TheDon

I took my old buddy from school days to a gun shop in the Kansas City area. He has some fire arms that he enjoys but hadn’t been to a store outside of California for thirty years.

The shop was very large and very busy and he said that to most Californians it would look like a giant porn shop as most of the shops he had been to in CA were like going to the Doctor’s Office — appointments, low key, very limited in stock, marketing and displays.


18 posted on 12/27/2010 1:13:48 PM PST by KC Burke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking

“Someone” already is suing over this. The guys from the Calguns foundation. They already had one hearing where they were denied because the law hadnt gone into effect yet, but there are more cases pending in several courts.


19 posted on 12/27/2010 4:22:45 PM PST by Mr Inviso (ACORN=Arrogant Condescending Obama Ruining Nation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Mr Inviso
“Someone” already is suing over this. The guys from the Calguns foundation.

Over the law itself or this ridiculous issue? Because if they're suing over this issue, it would certainly seem that they already have standing, because ATF's already butting in and trying to help enforce it. ATF's overstepping their authority by getting involved in enforcing state laws, to the point of ordering private businesses in OTHER STATES to err on the side of caution and turn away business which may or may not be allowing citizens of the first state to be doing something displeasing to that state*, but which is also beyond the legislative reach of that state in the first place?

And besides, when a bunch of freedom-oriented states passed Firearms Freedom Acts, didn't ATF send all the FFL's in those states nasty letters saying that federal law "of course" superseded state law? Seems they don't have a consistent legal philosophy after all except that whichever law abridges more of our rights is the better one. Credibility, what's that?

*Even if they sell to Californians, they have no way of knowing if they intend to use in a way that violates that law (they might be buying it for use in a free state) and besides, the purchase itself CANNOT reasonably criminalized because it occurs outside the boundaries of the state passing the law.

20 posted on 12/27/2010 6:58:56 PM PST by Still Thinking (Freedom is NOT a loophole!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: TheDon

That wasn’t because you’re from Kali, it was because you weren’t from Utah. FFL’s in any state aren’t allowed to sell to someone from a different state without transferring the weapon to a home-state FFL for transfer to the purchaser.


21 posted on 12/27/2010 7:04:53 PM PST by Still Thinking (Freedom is NOT a loophole!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking

Actually, it was because I was from Cali. The salesman mentioned a Cali law which prevented Californians from purchasing firearms from out of state. It sounded like nonsense to me. Certainly a violation of the Commerce Clause and my 2nd ammendment rights.


22 posted on 12/29/2010 8:37:49 AM PST by TheDon (The Democrat Party, the party of the KKK (tm))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: TheDon

It is a violation of your Second Amendment rights but not unique to Cali residents. People are supposed to be able to receive transfers only from home state FFL’s. Now maybe for all I know, Cali has passed a redundant state law to “protect” their tyranny in the remote possibility that the feds come to their senses, but for now it’s the same for everyone. Like I said, if you order from an out of state FFL or even private seller, they have to transfer to an FFL in your home state, and he takes a 4473 and is responsible for compliance with any state laws.


23 posted on 12/29/2010 10:17:26 AM PST by Still Thinking (Freedom is NOT a loophole!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson