PDA

View Full Version : AB962 Workaround?


bsim
10-07-2009, 3:32 PM
Throwing this out here for dissection...

(text of AB 962 here (http://info.sen.ca.gov/pub/09-10/bill/asm/ab_0951-1000/ab_962_bill_20090921_enrolled.html))

The bill states A "vendor" (as defined in 12060 .c) has to gather ID / fingerprint data (12061 .3)
But there is no limiting text to say this is a "California" based vendor. Can they regulate other states too? Like when I go buy ammo in Vegas? I think not. So it appears that the "vendor" laguage only applies to vendors selling within CA, or else it applies to "me" as a California resident. I also do not believe it applies to "me" as a California resident, as it would then prohibit me from travelling to Florida and purchasing rounds to shoot while on vacation.

Using this logic, I am able to purchase ammunition at a retailer outside of Califonia.

12061 .3 fingerprinting only applies to the purchase of ammo. So now that I have purchased this ammunition outside of Califonia, I want to get it to my home in California. How do I do that?

Well, first I could drive it back. Second, I could fly home with it (adhering to airline regs of course). But, can I have it UPS'd home? I believe so.

12318 .a defines delivery of ammunition (post purchase)
12318 .a states ...the delivery or transfer of ownership of handgun ammunition may only occur in a face-to-face transaction with the deliverer or transferor being provided bona fide evidence of identity from the purchaser or other transferee... 12318 b 1 says that a drivers license fulfills this requirement.

So what stops me from showing my ID to the UPS driver when signing for my signature required delivery? Nothing of course.

There is also a provision that the "deliverer" "know", or "reasonably know" that the person receiving the shipment is not a prohibited person. But as they (the parcel companies) do not have access to that information, there's no way they could, so deliveries continue as long as signatures are required.

I now have my ammo purchased out of state.

Discuss...:D

dantodd
10-07-2009, 3:36 PM
So what stops me from showing my ID to the UPS driver when signing for my signature required delivery? Nothing of course.

There is also a provision that the "deliverer" "know", or "reasonably know" that the person receiving the shipment is not a prohibited person. But as they (the parcel companies) do not have access to that information, there's no way they could, so deliveries continue as long as signatures are required.


Do UPS/FedEx/DHL etc. have a service in which they verify ID for delivery? I've seen adult signature required but that doesn't need ID only an adult, same for 21 and over.

5hundo
10-07-2009, 3:37 PM
I also was wondering about the whole "pistol ammunition" wording in the bill. What if you own a Marlin Camp 9, or Camp .45?

...it would not be "pistol" ammunition, would it? :43:

bsim
10-07-2009, 3:40 PM
Do UPS/FedEx/DHL etc. have a service in which they verify ID for delivery? I've seen adult signature required but that doesn't need ID only an adult, same for 21 and over. Well if they need to verify that a recipient is over 21, they'd need to look at an ID, right? So I don't think it's out of the question...

Sinestr
10-07-2009, 3:42 PM
So let me get this straight, your going to go to a vendor out of state, buy your ammo, then have it shipped to yourself:)

fuegoslow
10-07-2009, 3:46 PM
So let me get this straight, your going to go to a vendor out of state, buy your ammo, then have it shipped to yourself:)

Well, you wouldn't be breaking any laws pertaining to AB962. In fact, I'll non-incriminate myself right here and now by saying that I will be taking vacations for ammo runs, or not, maybe. :D

tba02
10-07-2009, 3:54 PM
I take at least one trip a year to AZ and NV and have for the past several years (former AZ resident). Hopefully I won't have to bring along a trailer next trip (as I dial 916-445-2841 and get a busy signal - redial)

Whiskey_Sauer
10-07-2009, 4:15 PM
Yes, it is pretty clear that nothing will prevent you from buying ammunition out of state, and bringing it into this state, or shipping it to yourself.

bsim
10-07-2009, 4:24 PM
I also don't think it's that big of a deal to buy ammo from (say) Cabelas (which gets around the sig / fingerprint requirements) and having them ship it to me (sig required).

Sinestr
10-07-2009, 4:26 PM
The lengths at which they force us to go. I see no upside to any of this, except some mandatory road trips to Reno.

Whiskey_Sauer
10-07-2009, 4:28 PM
I also don't think it's that big of a deal to buy ammo from (say) Cabelas (which gets around the sig / fingerprint requirements) and having them ship it to me (sig required).

Well, it is a big deal if you have to drive all the way to Reno to do it. The point is, you would no longer to be able to buy from Cabela's online, or Midway USA, or Natchezs, or Palmetto State Armory, or AmmotoGo, etc. etc.

Glock22Fan
10-07-2009, 4:37 PM
Well, it is a big deal if you have to drive all the way to Reno to do it. The point is, you would no longer to be able to buy from Cabela's online, or Midway USA, or Natchezs, or Palmetto State Armory, or AmmotoGo, etc. etc.


Especially if you live down here in LaLa land (or south).

bsim
10-07-2009, 4:45 PM
Well, it is a big deal if you have to drive all the way to Reno to do it. The point is, you would no longer to be able to buy from Cabela's online, or Midway USA, or Natchezs, or Palmetto State Armory, or AmmotoGo, etc. etc.That's teh point of my argument. If the vendor is out of state, it's not bound by CA laws, and as such does not have to get thumbprints from me, nor record the sale for CA.

I can still purchase online.

As long as I show an ID to a delivery driver, I'm also still in compliance, and can receive shipments.

So, does this stop me from getting internet ammo? I don't see how.

ship12
10-07-2009, 4:47 PM
Throwing this out here for dissection...

(text of AB 962 here (http://info.sen.ca.gov/pub/09-10/bill/asm/ab_0951-1000/ab_962_bill_20090921_enrolled.html))

The bill states A "vendor" (as defined in 12060 .c) has to gather ID / fingerprint data (12061 .3)
But there is no limiting text to say this is a "California" based vendor. Can they regulate other states too? Like when I go buy ammo in Vegas? I think not. So it appears that the "vendor" laguage only applies to vendors selling within CA, or else it applies to "me" as a California resident. I also do not believe it applies to "me" as a California resident, as it would then prohibit me from travelling to Florida and purchasing rounds to shoot while on vacation.

Using this logic, I am able to purchase ammunition at a retailer outside of Califonia.

12061 .3 fingerprinting only applies to the purchase of ammo. So now that I have purchased this ammunition outside of Califonia, I want to get it to my home in California. How do I do that?

Well, first I could drive it back. Second, I could fly home with it (adhering to airline regs of course). But, can I have it UPS'd home? I believe so.

12318 .a defines delivery of ammunition (post purchase)
12318 .a states ...the delivery or transfer of ownership of handgun ammunition may only occur in a face-to-face transaction with the deliverer or transferor being provided bona fide evidence of identity from the purchaser or other transferee... 12318 b 1 says that a drivers license fulfills this requirement.

So what stops me from showing my ID to the UPS driver when signing for my signature required delivery? Nothing of course.

There is also a provision that the "deliverer" "know", or "reasonably know" that the person receiving the shipment is not a prohibited person. But as they (the parcel companies) do not have access to that information, there's no way they could, so deliveries continue as long as signatures are required.

I now have my ammo purchased out of state.

Discuss...:D

It has no application outside the state. Go to Florida, buy and shoot all you want. The onlything CA could possibly do is prevent you from importing rounds.

1 thing gets me... since when do I need to be a vendor to buy ammo? I don't see anything limiting what I can buy, just what I can sell. Of course, what I buy, I'll shoot so... that leaves no internet buying of "ammo." Which kinda sucks. My point is, if I want to go to say, wal-mart and buy 200 rounds... Legally, what stops me?

Whiskey_Sauer
10-07-2009, 4:56 PM
That's teh point of my argument. If the vendor is out of state, it's not bound by CA laws, and as such does not have to get thumbprints from me, nor record the sale for CA.

I can still purchase online.

As long as I show an ID to a delivery driver, I'm also still in compliance.

So, does this stop me from getting internet ammo? I don't see how.

No, because the vendor still needs to comply with California law. Otherwise, it faces possible criminal sanctions, or more likely, a civil suit.

bwiese
10-07-2009, 5:04 PM
If the vendor is out of state, it's not bound by CA laws, and as
such does not have to get thumbprints from me, nor record the
sale for CA.

Bulloney. Pure BS.

A vendor cannot stand outside of CA and send in illegal products into CA.



No, because the vendor still needs to comply with California law. Otherwise, it faces possible criminal sanctions, or more likely, a
civil suit.

Thanks. Whiskey.

So many people make the stupid mistake of thinking "hey, I'm outside of CA so I can violate CA's laws and send in crap" and it's just not so.

And they keep repeating it no matter how much we refute it. Somehow they believe "half transactions" can be illegal with the other half legal.

This isn't just about guns, it deals with imports of a variety of products that are controlled under CA law (my past experience is with performance engine parts vs. "smog legal" status in relation to Calif. Air Resource Board regulations).

Scratch705
10-07-2009, 5:16 PM
Bulloney. Pure BS.

A vendor cannot stand outside of CA and send in illegal products into CA.




Thanks. Whiskey.

So many people make the stupid mistake of thinking "hey, I'm outside of CA so I can violate CA's laws and send in crap" and it's just not so.

And they keep repeating it no matter how much we refute it. Somehow they believe "half transactions" can be illegal with the other half legal.

This isn't just about guns, it deals with imports of a variety of products that are controlled under CA law (my past experience is with performance engine parts vs. "smog legal" status in relation to Calif. Air Resource Board regulations).

so can we send ammo to ourselves from out of state? or have family send us ammo? or do we have to literally drive out of state to purchase and pickup? cause i always thought the bill only covers retail purchase of ammo, not private transfer of ammo (even from out of state)

bsim
10-07-2009, 5:17 PM
I appreciate your thoughts Bill, but the smog analogy doesn't apply as the "use" of the non-CARB parts are illegal, not the sale nor import are restricted (though heavily warned against). I buy "off-road use only, non-CARB approved" parts for my racecar all the time.

If I can DRIVE to Nevada to buy ammo, the "vendor" does not have to get fingerprint (et al) data from me. If so, "I" am being restricted from buying ammunition from a range in Florida for use in Florida which a Florida resident does not have to succumb to. This is NOT a Federal law. Or are out-of-state vendors going to prohibit sales based upon me living in CA, like if I want to purchase ammo for hunting in Alaska? Or are they going to have to keep ammo out of the customers reach (ala 962) for CA residents only?

Now, if I can buy ammo from a vendor out-of-state without this 962 interference, it does not matter whether I do it in person or over the internet. All I need to worry about is "importing".

1) Bringing it back with me is OK, since it's already in my possession.
2) I already "own" it, so 12061 .c doesn't apply to me
3) 12318 .a still applies, but as long as I show an ID, I can receive it now matter how it gets to my doorstep.

Dr Rockso
10-07-2009, 5:35 PM
The workaround for AB962 is to call the governor.

The second workaround is to get an 03 FFL and a COE.

bwiese
10-07-2009, 5:43 PM
I appreciate your thoughts Bill, but the smog analogy doesn't apply as the "use" of the non-CARB parts are illegal, not the sale nor import are restricted (though heavily warned against). I buy "off-road use only, non-CARB approved" parts for my racecar all the time.

Yes but in this case, it's a slight variation - it's not really about use/acquisition it's about advertising for sale that CA controls on these parts.

But the bottom line is the same: CA can demand compliance by an out of state vendor, and if they violate CA's laws they can be in trouble.

Anyone shipping a non-CARB-approved part into CA *must* include one of three specific statements in both their *advertising* as well as on the product/instructions:

-"Not legal for sale or use in California on pollution-controlled motor vehicles.
- "For racing use only."
- "Not legal for use in emissions-controlled vehicles in CA" (approx.)

These statements may have changed slightly since late 80s-1995 when I was in the biz, but CARB would go after any vendor not doing this and sue the hell out of them.

I believe the only other alternative was that they'd not sell to California and would include that in their ads ("No sales to California.")

Lotsa Georgia and Texas racer boys finally learned how to read after they got butt-hurt by five-figure demand lettters from CARB. The ones who fought lost in court and got huge judgments against them.

bwiese
10-07-2009, 5:45 PM
The workaround for AB962 is to call the governor.

The second workaround is to get an 03 FFL and a COE.

Yes, and because there are some Fed legal issues conflicting with AB962 we have friends in other industries that are helping. If it were to pass we can go to Fed court - this is not an RKBA issue.

wellerjohn
10-07-2009, 5:46 PM
The workaround for AB962 is to call the governor.

The second workaround is to get an 03 FFL and a COE.

What is the benefit of the 03 FFL?

djm315
10-07-2009, 5:48 PM
If AB962 becomes law there will not be one out of state online vendor that will put there necks out and sell ammo to you , you know just like standard cap magazines .

Dr Rockso
10-07-2009, 5:50 PM
What is the benefit of the 03 FFL?

03 FFL + COE = exempt from AB962

(c) Subdivision (a) shall not apply to or affect the deliveries,
transfers, or sales of, handgun ammunition to any of the following:

[...]

Persons licensed as collectors of firearms pursuant to Chapter
44 (commencing with Section 921) of Title 18 of the United States
Code and the regulations issued pursuant thereto whose licensed
premises are within this state who has a current certificate of
eligibility issued to him or her by the Department of Justice
pursuant to Section 12071.

Seesm
10-07-2009, 6:11 PM
keep calling as we need it wiped out not a work around.

GrizzlyGuy
10-07-2009, 6:19 PM
Discuss...:D

I'm not a lawyer, but I can't find any flaw in your analysis. The key is that you are not a vendor, nor are you transferring ownership of the ammunition. You are simply shipping your own ammunition interstate from you at point A to you at point B. 12318 would apply as you said, as would federal laws regarding the shipment of ammunition, explained here:

http://www.adazonusa.com/howtoshipammunitionorammo-a-45.html

Good work, I'm going to give it a MythBusters' CONFIRMED! :D

Iknownot
10-07-2009, 6:44 PM
Doesnt anyone from this board live in LA city? If you did, you'd already have the answer to the op's question.

Look up any of the FAQs on any online ammo seller's website and see what it says about sales to LA.

That should clear up things with regards to real world application of this state law real quick.

GrizzlyGuy
10-07-2009, 7:01 PM
Look up any of the FAQs on any online ammo seller's website and see what it says about sales to LA.

They wouldn't be selling to the OP in LA, they would be selling to him in person at the ammo store wherever he is (FL, NY, etc.). OP is then going to ship his ammo home to himself in CA, in LA or wherever he is.

bsim
10-07-2009, 7:01 PM
But the LA city folks can leave the city limits and buy all they want. Hence this new law to stop them from doing that (and inconvenience the rest of us).

BTW, we're on day 2 of the lines to the gov being busy - keep it up!

Iknownot
10-07-2009, 8:24 PM
They wouldn't be selling to the OP in LA, they would be selling to him in person at the ammo store wherever he is (FL, NY, etc.). OP is then going to ship his ammo home to himself in CA, in LA or wherever he is.

That's not what he was asking in post #13. If what he was asking in post #13 was allowed, people in the city of LA could mail order ammo, which is clearly not the case.

Digital_Boy
10-07-2009, 10:50 PM
Yes, and because there are some Fed legal issues conflicting with AB962 we have friends in other industries that are helping. If it were to pass we can go to Fed court - this is not an RKBA issue.

I interpret this to mean that AB962, or portions thereof, would try to impose CA restrictions outside the borders of CA, and thus encroach on Federal territory?

Jpach
10-07-2009, 11:18 PM
Yes but in this case, it's a slight variation - it's not really about use/acquisition it's about advertising for sale that CA controls on these parts.

But the bottom line is the same: CA can demand compliance by an out of state vendor, and if they violate CA's laws they can be in trouble.

Anyone shipping a non-CARB-approved part into CA *must* include one of three specific statements in both their *advertising* as well as on the product/instructions:

-"Not legal for sale or use in California on pollution-controlled motor vehicles.
- "For racing use only."
- "Not legal for use in emissions-controlled vehicles in CA" (approx.)

These statements may have changed slightly since late 80s-1995 when I was in the biz, but CARB would go after any vendor not doing this and sue the hell out of them.

I believe the only other alternative was that they'd not sell to California and would include that in their ads ("No sales to California.")

Lotsa Georgia and Texas racer boys finally learned how to read after they got butt-hurt by five-figure demand lettters from CARB. The ones who fought lost in court and got huge judgments against them.

I dont know if this makes a difference of not but the car parts you are talking about seem to be banned from being USED or SOLD in/into CA.

Ammo isnt banned, illegal for use, or even illegal for sale. Correct? Why would it be illegal for out of state vendors to ship it to us if none of the above are illegal AND that vendors are not said to be in CA only? Perhaps I just dont know what Im talking about (which I dont), but I do see a difference in technicalities in your comparisons between the car parts and what I understand to be the deal with AB962. Just giving us all food for thought.

Someone help!

Scratch705
10-07-2009, 11:26 PM
I dont know if this makes a difference of not but the car parts you are talking about seem to be banned from being USED or SOLD in/into CA.

Ammo isnt banned, illegal for use, or even illegal for sale. Correct? Why would it be illegal for out of state vendors to ship it to us if none of the above are illegal AND that vendors are not said to be in CA only? Perhaps I just dont know what Im talking about (which I dont), but I do see a difference in technicalities in your comparisons between the car parts and what I understand to be the deal with AB962. Just giving us all food for thought.

Someone help!

parts that are not carb approved aren't illegal here in CA. they just are not legal to be used on-road. there are many amateur race drivers that have track-only cars run non-carb approved parts since they provide better performance. plus it is on a track setting. CARB has no pull on a private racetrack.

this is the difference between car part vendors out of state and gun stores out of state. the products they sell are only restricted in a limited way but not illegal. with this AB962 bill, it specifically states that no one can order ammo online and have it shipped to their private residence. they must only pick up the ammo ordered though mail order at a FFL in which a FTF transaction can be conducted where the FFL will acquire your fingerprints and get all your personal info to be put into a database. this is the same as what we have to do now where we can't have guns shipped directly to our houses, it must be sent to a FFL in order for us to DROS it. or how we can't just order 30 rounders online from out of state and have it shipped to us, because we have that CA only AW ban that bans the importation of 30 rounders to civilians.

bwiese
10-07-2009, 11:29 PM
I dont know if this makes a difference of not but the car parts you are talking about seem to be banned from being USED or SOLD in/into CA.

No, only on street vehicles. As long as the parts have the labelling they can be sold into CA.

My smaller point was that CA indeed can force out of state companies to modify their advertising for nationally-advertised products shipped into CA.

Somehow people think they can hang out on other side of the border and say "Nyah nyah..." and rain in products illegal (or which have some illegal aspect to them) or not follow CA laws.

My larger point was indeed general was to refute the unwise statement that just because a company is outside CA it doesn't have to follow CA's laws for the products shipped into CA, that's all. If you are an out of state company shipping into CA, you have to honor CA laws regarding that product or you'll get $$$screwed$$$ by whatever relevant regulatory agency is involved.

Brianguy
10-07-2009, 11:48 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rendition_(law)

Jpach
10-08-2009, 12:07 AM
No, only on street vehicles. As long as the parts have the labelling they can be sold into CA.

My smaller point was that CA indeed can force out of state companies to modify their advertising for nationally-advertised products shipped into CA.

Somehow people think they can hang out on other side of the border and say "Nyah nyah..." and rain in products illegal (or which have some illegal aspect to them) or not follow CA laws.

My larger point was indeed general was to refute the unwise statement that just because a company is outside CA it doesn't have to follow CA's laws for the products shipped into CA, that's all. If you are an out of state company shipping into CA, you have to honor CA laws regarding that product or you'll get $$$screwed$$$ by whatever relevant regulatory agency is involved.

Ah OK ok, I get it now. Thanks guys. Not that I even need to say it but this bill sucks.

Bill, you said that we have a decent chance at destroying it if it becomes law correct?

GrizzlyGuy
10-08-2009, 7:05 AM
That's not what he was asking in post #13. If what he was asking in post #13 was allowed, people in the city of LA could mail order ammo, which is clearly not the case.

Ahhhh... Yes, you're right. His scenario from post #1 (buying out of state when he is physically in the other state, then shipping it home to himself) would be OK but the scenario in post #13 wouldn't fly.

Cnynrat
10-08-2009, 7:16 AM
03 FFL + COE = exempt from AB962

(c) Subdivision (a) shall not apply to or affect the deliveries,
transfers, or sales of, handgun ammunition to any of the following:

[...]

Persons licensed as collectors of firearms pursuant to Chapter
44 (commencing with Section 921) of Title 18 of the United States
Code and the regulations issued pursuant thereto whose licensed
premises are within this state who has a current certificate of
eligibility issued to him or her by the Department of Justice
pursuant to Section 12071.


Looking at the text of the latest version of the bill here (http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/09-10/bill/asm/ab_0951-), this lanuage seems to have changed a little. Instead of referencing "collectors", it now talks about "manufacterors or importers". Do we still think getting an 03 FFL is a way to sidestep the ban on purchases of ammo over the Internet if AB 962 passes?

bwiese
10-08-2009, 7:16 AM
Ah OK ok, I get it now. Thanks guys. Not that I even need to say it but this bill sucks.

Bill, you said that we have a decent chance at destroying it if it becomes law correct?


Yes, there are issues completely outside of RKBA matters readily attackable.

These issues have been pointed out formally, and run thru proper channels to ensure the message gets there.

But we don't want to have to go into that mode - let's kill the sum***** now.

gazzavc
10-08-2009, 7:38 AM
Let's just say for arguments sake that this POS bill passes.

Do you really think that ammo vendors will accept the FFL03 + COE to ship ammo, or will the most likely outcome be the dreaded NO SALES TO CA of any ammo products because of all the associated FUD that will get dredged up by people who are too lazy, or ignorant to actually follow the laws ??

A similar situation to the CLFC that we have now ??

Opinions ?

Gary

Dr Rockso
10-08-2009, 7:55 AM
Let's just say for arguments sake that this POS bill passes.

Do you really think that ammo vendors will accept the FFL03 + COE to ship ammo, or will the most likely outcome be the dreaded NO SALES TO CA of any ammo products because of all the associated FUD that will get dredged up by people who are too lazy, or ignorant to actually follow the laws ??

A similar situation to the CLFC that we have now ??

Opinions ?

Gary
I'm sure that some vendors will accept the FFL+COE and some won't. It will add an additional headache, that's for sure. I'm also betting that there will be a lot of vendors who won't sell rifle ammo to CA either, even though it's not covered by 962.

Glock22Fan
10-08-2009, 7:59 AM
That's not what he was asking in post #13. If what he was asking in post #13 was allowed, people in the city of LA could mail order ammo, which is clearly not the case.

Let's just say for arguments sake that this POS bill passes.

Do you really think that ammo vendors will accept the FFL03 + COE to ship ammo, or will the most likely outcome be the dreaded NO SALES TO CA of any ammo products because of all the associated FUD that will get dredged up by people who are too lazy, or ignorant to actually follow the laws ??

A similar situation to the CLFC that we have now ??

Opinions ?

Gary

That's what I expect to happen. We already know from other related areas that out of state vendors are more interested in avoiding problems altogether than they are in understanding exactly what they can or can't do.

curtisfong
10-08-2009, 10:49 AM
Let's just say for arguments sake that this POS bill passes.

Do you really think that ammo vendors will accept the FFL03 + COE to ship ammo, or will the most likely outcome be the dreaded NO SALES TO CA of any ammo products because of all the associated FUD that will get dredged up by people who are too lazy, or ignorant to actually follow the laws ??



Exactly.

CALboy
10-08-2009, 7:13 PM
Think of it like this, as it would be great if online companies would do this look at CTD, they wont even sell a pistol grip for a rifle here because they want to play it safe, im sure all the ammo sellers are going to play it safe, at least for a few years.

gazzavc
10-08-2009, 7:18 PM
John

I'm guessing you are most likely correct on your assumption. I have had an inner gut feeling myself and have come up with the same answer you did.

If this goes through, forget about getting any ammo shipped here. The FUD and rumors alone will kill any chance of out of state ammo companies dealing with us.

Even if you have proper documentation , they'll claim "grey area" or "we had a letter from xxx stating" , or better yet "our lawyers said"

And that'll be it.

Gary

Quser.619
10-08-2009, 7:24 PM
It's my understanding that Caleba's & Midway have stated that they would stop all ammo to CA if AB962 passes. Look for local retail shops to stop carrying it outright - Walmart would probably as well. Who needs the attentional labor costs.

gazzavc
10-08-2009, 7:28 PM
It's my understanding that Caleba's & Midway have stated that they would stop all ammo to CA if AB962 passes. Look for local retail shops to stop carrying it outright - Walmart would probably as well. Who needs the attentional labor costs.

And so it starts.........

This is only the first step, there will be more jumping on the bandwagon.

Lets hope this bill gets the veto it deserves.


Gary

8-Ball
10-08-2009, 7:48 PM
It's my understanding that Caleba's & Midway have stated that they would stop all ammo to CA if AB962 passes. Look for local retail shops to stop carrying it outright - Walmart would probably as well. Who needs the attentional labor costs.

It is my understanding that CA LEOs are exempt from AB962.

If companies like Cabelas, Midway, etc., stop ship shipping ammo to CA (no exceptions), the LEOs are going to make a stink I think...

bsim
10-08-2009, 7:51 PM
How about this one:

My brother in Florida buys a 1000 rounds and gifts them to me. Shipped to my door.

Kid Stanislaus
10-08-2009, 9:42 PM
Well, you wouldn't be breaking any laws pertaining to AB962. In fact, I'll non-incriminate myself right here and now by saying that I will be taking vacations for ammo runs, or not, maybe. :D

That has all the look of a "definite maybe"!!

Kid Stanislaus
10-08-2009, 9:46 PM
The lengths at which they force us to go. I see no upside to any of this, except some mandatory road trips to Reno.

HOWEVER, the feds or NV LEO's friendly to CA may just jot down your license number and give the CHP a call. They'll stop you and find some cheap excuse to make a search and then confiscate your ammo. Better to rent a car in NV to take to the gun store/gun show and then transfer the ammo to your car at the motel.

GrizzlyGuy
10-09-2009, 7:08 AM
How about this one:

My brother in Florida buys a 1000 rounds and gifts them to me. Shipped to my door.

No, the transfer of ownership (from your brother to you) did not occur face to face:

"12318. (a) Commencing February 1, 2011, the delivery or transfer
of ownership of handgun ammunition may only occur in a face-to-face
transaction..."

Ruiner
10-09-2009, 7:19 AM
No, the transfer of ownership (from your brother to you) did not occur face to face:

"12318. (a) Commencing February 1, 2011, the delivery or transfer
of ownership of handgun ammunition may only occur in a face-to-face
transaction..."

So uh whats their definition of "handgun ammunition" .. I missed the explanation for that.

GrizzlyGuy
10-09-2009, 8:10 AM
So uh whats their definition of "handgun ammunition" .. I missed the explanation for that.

It's defined in here:

http://info.sen.ca.gov/pub/09-10/bill/asm/ab_0951-1000/ab_962_bill_20090921_enrolled.html

"Handgun ammunition" means handgun ammunition as defined in
subdivision (a) of Section 12323, but excluding ammunition designed
and intended to be used in an "antique firearm" as defined in Section
921(a)(16) of Title 18 of the United States Code. Handgun ammunition
does not include blanks.

Mayhem
10-09-2009, 8:18 AM
Umm Ab962 or any law that has been passed before as far as I know has no restrictions on purchasing ammunition out of state. Essentially Ab962 doesn't do crap except cut off Internet and mail order sales from within California, And makes minor restrictions to instate ammo sales (Face to face sales, Behind counter ammo storage personal Information and thumb print of buyer recorder). As pointed out before a prohibited person will not be stopped from purchasing ammo at wally world and can only be prosecuted for a misdemeanor after the fact if such sales records are researched and infact enforced by local law enforcement and District attorneys. which I doubt.

If anything I'm starting to suspect ab962 is aimed at large ammo retailers (Turners bass pro ect.) who have to change the way they sell ammo. And is targeting large chain stores like wall-mart who already keep handgun ammo behind the counter but will probably slow to conform to the new law (recording), Get in trouble, have to make a million dollar settlement with California, and stop selling ammunition, like they did with firearms.

All one has to do is to get around the law is have a gun shop order ammo for them, Get the proper licensing (C&R ect, to legally order ammunition yourself), go out of state to get ammo, and/or have an out of state friend purchase ammunition online and reship it to you.

Gang bangers and prohibited persons will probably just walk in show I.D. (possibly fake) put down the thumb print and walk out with ammo. If they get prosecuted after the fact will depend on how the law is enforced and by who and makes little difference as the prohibited person probably would have already used the ammo in a bigger crime before any one even notices they purchased same said ammo. Gang bangers and Prohibited persons can also show fake I.D. which means unless the thumb prints are checked means they are going to get away with it. If all else fails they can get a non prohibited person to purchase ammo for them.

ab962 is a do nothing, feel good, tax waisting Law that does absolutely nothing to inhibit criminals and is a deliberate attack on Retailers and Law abiding citizens.

Ruiner
10-09-2009, 8:22 AM
It's defined in here:

http://info.sen.ca.gov/pub/09-10/bill/asm/ab_0951-1000/ab_962_bill_20090921_enrolled.html

"Handgun ammunition" means handgun ammunition as defined in
subdivision (a) of Section 12323, but excluding ammunition designed
and intended to be used in an "antique firearm" as defined in Section
921(a)(16) of Title 18 of the United States Code. Handgun ammunition
does not include blanks.

Wonder what this means for my supply of 5.56/.223 and 7.62/5.45x39. I typically buy those in bulk online. I purchase .45 ACP locally. Either way, this bill cannot and should not pass. Time to do more calling :chris:

GrizzlyGuy
10-09-2009, 8:25 AM
HOWEVER, the feds or NV LEO's friendly to CA may just jot down your license number and give the CHP a call. They'll stop you and find some cheap excuse to make a search and then confiscate your ammo. Better to rent a car in NV to take to the gun store/gun show and then transfer the ammo to your car at the motel.

They could, but they would have no legal grounds for confiscating it. Under AB962, it would still be legal to drive into NV, buy a truckload of handgun ammo, and drive it back into CA (or ship it in to yourself).

Isn't it a sad state of affairs when we law-abiding gun owners are having a conversation that is likely going on in Crips and Bloods HQs as well... :mad:

Mayhem
10-09-2009, 8:40 AM
They could, but they would have no legal grounds for confiscating it. Under AB962, it would still be legal to drive into NV, buy a truckload of handgun ammo, and drive it back into CA (or ship it in to yourself).

Isn't it a sad state of affairs when we law-abiding gun owners are having a conversation that is likely going on in Crips and Bloods HQs as well... :mad:

I wounder if I can set up a redirector Mail box in Nevada at a service like Mail Box ext. one that will automatically for a fee redirect my mail to me in california?

As far as gang bangers go I don't think they know ... or even care about ab962 as I pointed out above it's not going to have much of an effect on them as they typically get what they can where they can. Most gang members to the best of my knowledge do not use the internet, don't have computers (unless they stole them) and don't have credit cards (again unless they stole them).

slappomatt
10-09-2009, 9:12 AM
ok guys heres what I'm willing to do for CA. I will move to yuma and open the worlds largest ammo store. its only 3 hour drive from san diego. :D

Scratch705
10-09-2009, 11:25 AM
ok guys heres what I'm willing to do for CA. I will move to yuma and open the worlds largest ammo store. its only 3 hour drive from san diego. :D

you and probably a few others are thinking of that already. and i'm sure those in the border states are thinking the same thing.

Scratch705
10-09-2009, 11:27 AM
No, the transfer of ownership (from your brother to you) did not occur face to face:

"12318. (a) Commencing February 1, 2011, the delivery or transfer
of ownership of handgun ammunition may only occur in a face-to-face
transaction..."

but what if you ship them to yourself from out of state? and it is defined in the bill, the transferer and the receiver must meet face to face, but if it is yourself, all you have to do is look in the mirror! :D

cmaynes
10-09-2009, 11:37 AM
It is my understanding that CA LEOs are exempt from AB962.

If companies like Cabelas, Midway, etc., stop ship shipping ammo to CA (no exceptions), the LEOs are going to make a stink I think...


Duty ammo is issued- if this is for personal use, I think LEO's should suffer like the rest of the law abiding public. The only way to make an impact with the LEO leadership however (who in many cases endorses this ***-hattery) is for those companies to take Barrett's lead and offering the middle finger of support and compassion to the departments who are supposed to be acting in the public interest.

If 962 passes, I want Law Enforcement to be SUBSTANTIALLY inconvenienced by the new restrictions.

nicki
10-09-2009, 12:12 PM
Let's face it, if this bill passes, I can see many of us on the board getting together for HUGE Quarterly group buys where some of us go to Nevada, Oregon and Arizona to pick up bulk ammo.

Ammo has a long shelve life, although for some of us it doesn't stay on the shelve very long.

The issue is not the people on this board, but everyone else.

Most people don't buy 1000's of rounds of ammo, until recently, I would estimate many gun owner's kept maybe one or two boxes of ammo for their guns.

Unlike the people on this board, many people may only own one, maybe two guns. It is those people who will be affected by this bill.

Nicki

8-Ball
10-09-2009, 3:41 PM
but... but won't gang members do the same thing...

Let's face it, if this bill passes, I can see many of us on the board getting together for HUGE Quarterly group buys where some of us go to Nevada, Oregon and Arizona to pick up bulk ammo.

Ammo has a long shelve life, although for some of us it doesn't stay on the shelve very long.

The issue is not the people on this board, but everyone else.

Most people don't buy 1000's of rounds of ammo, until recently, I would estimate many gun owner's kept maybe one or two boxes of ammo for their guns.

Unlike the people on this board, many people may only own one, maybe two guns. It is those people who will be affected by this bill.

Nicki

Scratch705
10-09-2009, 3:46 PM
well duh, that is why ab962 won't do Sh*t to crime and the gangsbangers that use ammo.

except they won't goto other states, they just need to tell their buddies to bring them up from mexico. the border enforcement is so weak, it might as well be not there.

GrizzlyGuy
10-09-2009, 4:34 PM
If 962 passes, I want Law Enforcement to be SUBSTANTIALLY inconvenienced by the new restrictions.

I think your wish would come true if this goes into law. LEO agencies are exempt, but not LEOs themselves (such as for personal use):

"Paragraph (3) of subdivision (a) shall not apply to...Sales or other transfers of ownership made to authorized law enforcement representatives of cities, counties, cities and counties, or state or federal governments for exclusive use by those government agencies..."

http://info.sen.ca.gov/pub/09-10/bill/asm/ab_0951-1000/ab_962_bill_20090921_enrolled.html

dchang0
10-10-2009, 2:45 AM
No, the transfer of ownership (from your brother to you) did not occur face to face:

"12318. (a) Commencing February 1, 2011, the delivery or transfer
of ownership of handgun ammunition may only occur in a face-to-face
transaction..."

Well, is there a "transfer of ownership" going on if I paid for the ammo, had it shipped to my brother, who then ships it to me here? Technically, I own the ammo, since I paid for it and my name is on the bill of sale/invoice.

Then only the "delivery" portion of the law would apply...