Ca AB 362 ammo bill amended to req a LICENSE to buy ammo !

[fastattack]

This is the sort of stuff that will make me be glad to leave this socialist state once I retire. I live in the land of fruits and nuts! These folks don't give up. They wear you down. Whats a good place to move to?

 

[longeyes]

I am thinking this state is in dire need of a real good natural disaster, right around LA, SF, and Sacp

Be careful what you wish for.

Of course occasionaly one will depart from the flock and venture into the shadowy world of gun purchase where the very act makes you feel like an untrusted criminal they are taking all the same steps they would to book someone into jail, and already taking the steps that they are a suspect in a crime they have yet to commit. That very atmosphere will reinforce they are bad, and that individual will feel they are doing something dirty. Americans themselves will eventualy after a couple generations of this programming support the government removing those dangerous items from society, especialy when at that point they are galvanized by some high profile shooting or mass killing.
Such has be

Plausible scenario, but some day all the buried guns will rise from the dead...

 

[czbegenner]

Well osia is allways trying to mess something up.Remember when they had the old oil tanks dug up , where did they store that old oil? We got to fight.

What is it do they think the ammo will blow up if transported in your car?

 

[MD_Willington]

"Is this 9x19 for a handgun"?

"oh no it's for a carbine, a rifle in 9x19mm"...



Would that get you around the legislation?

 

[Zoogster]

Plausible scenario, but some day all the buried guns will rise from the dead...

Not likely, most of the determined individuals will be pacified with grandfather clauses for a couple types of weapons (which of course will require them to be stored in a way making thier use in self defense impossible.) Others will feel joyous that they managed to figure out a way to jump through many loopholes to have a very limited type of firearm in very restricted settings for use in recreation. Lets not forget you can still hunt in the UK, even though they have banned pocket knives for carry. You can still shoot, but firearms, especialy for self defense are banned in practice.
Bottom line is most will be pacified by the ability to somehow someway rationalize that all is not lost yet, and they can still occasionaly use a firearm.
That they can file pages of paperwork, sign over thier 4th amendment, and pay large fees to hold and fire thier weapon.

In the early 1900's the people and the government did not even believe they had the right to ban firearms even if they felt they should be and agreed. The NFA was supposed to be a ban, but done under the premise of an increased tax. Banning was outside thier powers, taxing was not. So even though no normal folk could afford $200, which was many many times the price of the firearm itself, during the years of the depression and it was for all intents and purposes a ban, they still implied it was merely a tax, and not a ban because nobody believed the government had legal authority to ban firearms.

Now fast forward. After accepting thier generaly banned status as the norm for generations, it became logical and acceptible to actualy ban them without the power to tax premise. They simply stopped legal importation, and stopped legal domestic manufacture later. The most likely to notice and be strongly outspoken were pacified through grandfathering and of course individual persecution and prosecution of those choosing to be too much of a thorn in the side.
The AWB would have eventualy had the same result had it not had a sunset clause and existed another 10-20 years. In fact the whole term "Assault weapon" has survived along with the adaption of similar laws by some states which shows it did have a lasting impression on gun rights.

So I am glad you find comfort in believing people will all realize at the same time it is time to take physical action. However the reality is there is no clear finish line, line in the sand, or green light. What is too much for some is not too much for others still allowed to hunt. Some defend certain firearms, but will concide the EBR and other "assault" weapons. Others will understand handgun bans, as places like Chicago and NYC have shown, because they are the concealed types most often utilized by criminals (self serving prophecy since once outlawed obviously only a criminal by definition would use one) because they are concealable. You don't NEED a handgun for home defense. Others line in the sand is...
So the minority that is the active gun rights supporters all have different lines in the sand. Most gun owners are not fighters in terms of rights, they are simply owners, that will adapt to whatever the state tells them they need to adapt to. The line in the sand also moves every generation. What would have been proposterous 50 years ago is the norm now. General registration many places, licenses to purchase firearms, many types outlawed altogether, a green light from the government the whole 2nd is supposed to deter is necessary through the NICs check. The purpose of the second has been undone.

A child born today will find all the rules and restrictions we have normal. That means there is a lot more that can be taken from them before they feel things are starting to go too far.
The youngest population is always the most numerous. This means the general consensus on what is right or acceptable is defined by them. This means every generation the noose on many rights can be tightened further before anyone feels anything wrong is being done.

 

[glockman19]

Golden State Ammo Registration Bill Gutted

Golden State Ammo Registration Bill Gutted!

In a major victory for California’s gun owners, the Senate Public Safety Committee gutted Assembly Bill 362 on Tuesday, July 10. The bill will now be re-worked to require the California Department of Justice to only study the regulation of ammunition sales.

AB362, sponsored by Assembly Member Kevin de Leon (D-45), would have required identification to be presented for all mail order and face-to-face ammunition sales. Sellers of ammunition would have been forced to keep detailed and accurate sales records. No retail seller of ammunition would have been able to sell, offer for sale, or display for sale any ammunition in a manner that allows ammunition to be accessible to a purchaser without the assistance of the retailer or authorized employee. The Federal law requiring ammunition purchasers to present I.D. was repealed by the Firearms Owners Protection Act of 1986, because it was found to be ineffective in reducing crime.

No new language has been written yet but will be published sometime in the next few weeks.

 

[kcmarine]

Topic!!!! Topic!!!! THAT WAS WORTHY OF IT'S OWN TOPIC!!!!

 

[kermit315]

woo hoo, now to get rid of the rest of the crap laws here.

 

[longeyes]

A child born today will find all the rules and restrictions we have normal. That means there is a lot more that can be taken from them before they feel things are starting to go too far.

Don't mistake my words for optimism; I'm merely suggesting that there are things that can be done. Even runaway trains require tracks and fuel.