PDA

View Full Version : AB 962: CGF Action Is Planned - see Gene's post at #35


oaklander
10-12-2009, 7:02 AM
This is really a placeholder for Bill & Gene. I'm not at liberty to say what we have up our sleeve, but I can tell you that the CGF will be doing something about AB 962.

All hope is not lost. Do not move out of the state!!!

EDIT: see Gene's post at #35

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showpost.php?p=3197663&postcount=35

n2k
10-12-2009, 7:04 AM
Planned Counter strike, I love it.

FordFreak
10-12-2009, 7:04 AM
All hope is not lost. Do not move out of the state!!!

That was my first thought. This is the last straw. If I'd have seen all the crap like this coming, I'd have never moved back here when I got out of the service. I hate the politics of my home state:mad:

andrewj
10-12-2009, 7:08 AM
Well that's comforting

AEC1
10-12-2009, 7:08 AM
I hope it is good. I own a home on the other coast, I am so ready to move....

hill billy
10-12-2009, 7:20 AM
That was my first thought. This is the last straw. If I'd have seen all the crap like this coming, I'd have never moved back here when I got out of the service. I hate my home state:mad:

I am with you. I hope CGF strikes hard. More money sent.

Nodda Duma
10-12-2009, 7:21 AM
I'm very disappointed in this state right now. I am never buying a round of ammunition inside of California again. AB962 just guaranteed that the state never gets revenue from my ammunition purchases.

-Jason

Mitch
10-12-2009, 7:27 AM
All hope is not lost. Do not move out of the state!!!

Holy cow, why would I move out of the state? I love this state.

The new law means I just have to visit outside the state to buy ammunition. But I can still come back.

Dont Tread on Me
10-12-2009, 7:27 AM
I'm very disappointed in this state right now. I am never buying a round of ammunition inside of California again. AB962 just guaranteed that the state never gets revenue from my ammunition purchases.


My plan too.

MrSigmaDOT40
10-12-2009, 7:27 AM
i'm not buying the SS/Soviet fingerprint ammo either

MrSigmaDOT40
10-12-2009, 7:30 AM
I also expect matches and shoots to take a massive kick in the nutz after this law kicks in, it won't even be fun to shoot here anymore. I will have to make out of state trips to sustain me while i'm saving and preping to move.

Mitch
10-12-2009, 7:32 AM
It's not a bad law at all. It means I will visit my parents more often.

Cal-Irish
10-12-2009, 7:33 AM
This is pathetic. I have lost a lot or faith in people. Logic and reason seem to have been completely brushd aside in California.

The state is sinking and the big wigs do nothing but pass petty bills...prior to this bill I had motr hope.

yellowfin
10-12-2009, 7:35 AM
I wish I could hope for this action having personal consequences to those responsible for 962's passing.

rkt88edmo
10-12-2009, 7:38 AM
"Thats it, we're moving out of state and would like to announce the Nevadaguns Foundation" :43:

PatriotnMore
10-12-2009, 7:45 AM
Once again, we are relegated to the position of reaction, and defense. The dog chasing its tail seems to be the norm for 2A crowd.

If we do not vote out those who are ruining this state financially, and constitutionally, you will see more and more of your freedoms, and money that rightfully belong to you, given to the state, of which, it is not theirs to take.

Vote out ALL the incumbents, send a message loud and clear.

thempopresense
10-12-2009, 7:47 AM
can a FOIA request be submitted to see how many people called to oppose or support a specific bill? I would be interested to see the stats.

oaklander
10-12-2009, 7:47 AM
What we have planned is much better than that. . .

can a FOIA request be submitted to see how many people called to oppose or support a specific bill? I would be interested to see the stats.

obeygiant
10-12-2009, 7:48 AM
Eagerly awaiting an action plan

Mitch
10-12-2009, 7:50 AM
can a FOIA request be submitted to see how many people called to oppose or support a specific bill? I would be interested to see the stats.

I think we all know what the stats are. It wasn't pro-ban people who were jamming the lines and ringing the phone off the hook.

I hope this is a lesson for political neophytes that grassroots action can only accomplish so much. Especially with term-limited offices, elected representatives needn't respond to organized and noisy public sentiment at all. I've seen it with my own eyes at city council meetings.

The only reliable way to work city councils, county boards and state legislatures is behind the scenes.

Phones and e-mails don't work.

gd-bh
10-12-2009, 8:00 AM
What we have planned is much better than that. . .

I think given this defeat, that plan needs to be shared asap...If you want to retain credibility as an organization to those who matter most: your supporters, especially after a statement like that, quickly sharing a well conceived plan of action is critical.

hill billy
10-12-2009, 8:04 AM
I think given this defeat, that plan needs to be shared asap...If you want to retain credibility as an organization to those who matter most: your supporters, especially after a statement like that, quickly sharing a well conceived plan of action is critical.

So you would rather a plan be exposed, possibly giving those who would oppose it time and means to form a plan against it to satisfy your curiosity? I am as upset as everyone else but I am sure the CGF has earned enough respect that when they say they are going to do something, they ought to be believed.

Cal-Irish
10-12-2009, 8:06 AM
Ill see this super plan when I believe it.

dirtnap
10-12-2009, 8:09 AM
Ill see this super plan when I believe it.

+10

Blacktail 8541
10-12-2009, 8:11 AM
That was my first thought. This is the last straw. If I'd have seen all the crap like this coming, I'd have never moved back here when I got out of the service. I hate the politics of my home state:mad:

This ^^^^^. I'm sorry I ever moved back to this state. But if the CGF can mount an effective counter strike it will give me good reason to open my wallet even more . This bill effects me very little personally, but it does effect a lot people that have no choice but to buy ammo or bullets.

oaklander
10-12-2009, 8:11 AM
It's no big secret, Gene has alluded to it before. But it's not my place to share it, since I do not have approval from the rest of the board.

I just wanted to post SOMETHING so that people would know that we are on top of this.

ltspongebob
10-12-2009, 8:11 AM
It's not a bad law at all. It means I will visit my parents more often.

It's a bad law and all. It means I will visit my parents more often. :D:D:D;)


Sponge

freonr22
10-12-2009, 8:12 AM
So, to sum it up, Gene is an allusionist

gd-bh
10-12-2009, 8:15 AM
So you would rather a plan be exposed, possibly giving those who would oppose it time and means to form a plan against it to satisfy your curiosity? I am as upset as everyone else but I am sure the CGF has earned enough respect that when they say they are going to do something, they ought to be believed.

No, what I'm saying is that if CGF is truly the force that we all wish it to be, they have already planned for this outcome, and should already be executing said plan. I have seen some awesome things from those who are leading this war, but given the exposure, the likelihood of defeat, and the lead time, it is not unreasonable that this should be happening.

My curiosity isn't the issue really, it's the credibility of the organization that wants to take the lead in the fight here in the peoples republik. I think the general readership is not going to be very tolerant of the "trust us, all in due time" approach to any encroachment on our 2A rights. My comment is simply that time is of the essence, and has nothing negative concerning the past good works of the fine people who work within GCF.

oaklander
10-12-2009, 8:19 AM
We actually started this about a two months ago. But there is strategic advantage in not letting the whole world know what we are doing.

No, what I'm saying is that if CGF is truly the force that we all wish it to be, they have already planned for this outcome, and should already be executing said plan. I have seen some awesome things from those who are leading this war, but given the exposure, the likelihood of defeat, and the lead time, it is not unreasonable that this should be happening.

My curiosity isn't the issue really, it's the credibility of the organization that wants to take the lead in the fight here in the peoples republik. I think the general readership is not going to be very tolerant of the "trust us, all in due time" approach to any encroachment on our 2A rights. My comment is simply that time is of the essence, and has nothing negative concerning the past good works of the fine people who work within GCF.

hill billy
10-12-2009, 8:20 AM
No, what I'm saying is that if CGF is truly the force that we all wish it to be, they have already planned for this outcome, and should already be executing said plan. I have seen some awesome things from those who are leading this war, but given the exposure, the likelihood of defeat, and the lead time, it is not unreasonable that this should be happening.

My curiosity isn't the issue really, it's the credibility of the organization that wants to take the lead in the fight here in the peoples republik. I think the general readership is not going to be very tolerant of the "trust us, all in due time" approach to any encroachment on our 2A rights. My comment is simply that time is of the essence, and has nothing negative concerning the past good works of the fine people who work within GCF.

I understand.

Man, I am pissed off this morning.:mad::mad:

AndrewMendez
10-12-2009, 8:22 AM
OAKLANDER, Should we start donating more or to somewhere else?

oaklander
10-12-2009, 8:23 AM
I do not like to ask for donations. That being said, we can use the money - there is a fight brewing.

OAKLANDER, Should we start donating more or to somewhere else?

WokMaster1
10-12-2009, 8:24 AM
Gene for Governor!!!!


I knew it.:D

hoffmang
10-12-2009, 8:25 AM
All,

The regulation of internet delivery of ammunition as drafted in AB-962 is preeempted by the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act of 1994.

AB-962 Regulates The Routes and Services of Common Carriers

AB-962 creates a misdemeanor in a proposed Penal Code §12318 for not following the appropriate steps for “delivery . . .of handgun ammunition”. The bill goes on to state that deliveries may “only occur in a face-to-face transaction with the deliverer . . . being provided bona fide evidence of identity from the purchaser or other transferee.” However, the bill exempts law enforcement agencies, sworn police officers, ammunition manufacture/importers, “handgun ammunition vendors” as defined in the statute, and certain firearms collectors. As such, common carriers will now have to make modifications to their rates and services in an attempt to ascertain whether delivering a package marked ORM-D to any given address is allowed, or is punishable as a crime.

This requirement on a common carrier’s service is particularly difficult for carriers where a retail establishment meets the definition of a “handgun ammunition vendor” under the act but is not otherwise a Federal Firearms Licensee. These retailers are exempted from the non-delivery requirement but there is no documentation proving that such a recipient is exempt. Many “big box” retailers in California sell ammunition but do not sell firearms .

Even if an alternate narrower statutory construction is followed, on the face of the proposed law, common carriers would have to attempt to obtain evidence of identity to comply with proposed Penal Code §12318(a), which is clearly a state law that has a substantial impact on a carrier’s service.

Regulation of the Routes or Services of Common Carriers is Federally Preempted

Federal preemption of the routes, rates, or services of common motor carriers is found in 49 U. S. C. §14501(c)(1):

(1) General rule. Except as provided in paragraphs (2) and (3), a State, political subdivision of a State, or political authority of 2 or more States may not enact or enforce a law, regulation, or other provision having the force and effect of law related to a price, route, or service of any motor carrier (other than a carrier affiliated with a direct air carrier covered by section 41713 (b)(4)) or any motor private carrier, broker, or freight forwarder with respect to the transportation of property.

Additional Federal preemption for common carriers was enacted in the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act of 1994 (“FAAAA”) and was codified in 49 U.S.C. § 41713:

§ 41713. Preemption of authority over prices, routes, and service

(a) Definition. In this section, “State” means a State, the District of Columbia, and a territory or possession of the United States.

(b) Preemption.
(1) Except as provided in this subsection, a State, political subdivision of a State, or political authority of at least 2 States may not enact or enforce a law, regulation, or other provision having the force and effect of law related to a price, route, or service of an air carrier that may provide air transportation under this subpart.

(4) Transportation by air carrier or carrier affiliated with a direct air carrier.—
(A) General rule.— Except as provided in subparagraph (B), a State, political subdivision of a State, or political authority of 2 or more States may not enact or enforce a law, regulation, or other provision having the force and effect of law related to a price, route, or service of an air carrier or carrier affiliated with a direct air carrier through common controlling ownership when such carrier is transporting property by aircraft or by motor vehicle (whether or not such property has had or will have a prior or subsequent air movement).


The Supreme Court Unanimously Ruled That Laws That Regulate Delivery By Common Carriers Are Preempted

In 2008, the Supreme Court ruled 9-0 that a Maine statute that placed limitations on the delivery of cigarettes was preempted by the FAAAA. That statute is very similar to the restrictions on delivery found in AB-962 .

In Rowe v. New Hampshire Motor Transport Association, 128 S. Ct. 989 (2008) the court found that a requirement for shippers to choose a special shipment method and that a carrier would be deemed to have knowledge that shipment had prohibited tobacco products in it were both preempted by Federal Law. Maine attempted to defend the regulation by claiming that there was a public health exception to the FAAAA. The court replied to that argument as follows:

Maine’s inability to find significant support for some kind of “public health” exception is not surprising. “Public health” does not define itself. Many products create “public health” risks of differing kind and degree. To accept Maine’s justification in respect to a rule regulating services would legitimate rules regulating routes or rates for similar public health reasons. And to allow Maine directly to regulate carrier services would permit other States to do the same. Given the number of States through which carriers travel, the number of products, the variety of potential adverse public health effects, the many different kinds of regulatory rules potentially available, and the difficulty of finding a legal criterion for separating permissible from impermissible public-health-oriented regulations, Congress is unlikely to have intended an implicit general “public health” exception broad enough to cover even the shipments at issue here.
(Id. at 997.)

There is not an equivalent “public safety” exception to the FAAAA to allow AB-962 either.

AB-962, as written, is preempted by the FAAAA.

We have already done initial planning regarding plaintiffs and counsel for this case. We have time as the law does not take effect until February of 2011.

-Gene

devildog999
10-12-2009, 8:25 AM
All this crap in our state, not just gun stuff but everything, really makes we want to go to Colorado

CessnaDriver
10-12-2009, 8:26 AM
I understand.

Man, I am pissed off this morning.:mad::mad:


Let it turn man, let it turn. ;)


We all are angry as hell.

It is wrong to treat us like criminals.
It is wrong to limit where we buy ammo from.
It is wrong to LIE to people that this will stop crime.


This isn't over. Not by a longshot.

8-Ball
10-12-2009, 8:27 AM
All this crap in our state, not just gun stuff but everything, really makes we want to go to Colorado

Colorado is right on the heels of California regarding 2A...

That state is moving at light speed toward liberalism...

FortCourageArmory
10-12-2009, 8:29 AM
Gene,
You are this ammo vendor's hero. If I could vote for you for something , I sure would.

CessnaDriver
10-12-2009, 8:31 AM
Colorado is right on the heels of California regarding 2A...

That state is moving at light speed toward liberalism...

Yep

California poison bleeds into the rest of the nation.

Makes it even more important we fight it here, you can run, but it will follow you.

putput
10-12-2009, 8:32 AM
Hahaahaahaa.... I knew there must be some way to fight this without going to the 2A. Hahahahaahaa....

pullnshoot25
10-12-2009, 8:32 AM
CGF= badass geniuses.

bradph
10-12-2009, 8:33 AM
Will be sending donation to Calguns asap. Don't have a lot of money, baby on the way... but I hope every little bit helps.
Brad

duane_black
10-12-2009, 8:34 AM
CGF= badass geniuses.

Seriously - Thank you Gene and CGF !

truthseeker
10-12-2009, 8:35 AM
This is another example where the "legislature" can pass laws even if the people do not want them.

They think "we will let the courts figure this out" as to whether or not it breaks any other laws.

I am sick of the .gov telling me what/when/where/how I can live my life.

I really hope after incorporation happens that we can finally have some breathing room with respect to the 2A and rest of the U.S. Constitution!

MolonLabe2008
10-12-2009, 8:36 AM
Colorado is right on the heels of California regarding 2A...

That state is moving at light speed toward liberalism...

+1 on that.

And that's because a lot of Californians who are tired of high taxes and regulation move to nearby States, like Colorado, and end up voting the same way they did when they lived in California. Go figure.

wash
10-12-2009, 8:36 AM
I'm glad to know that CGF is already on the case.

ZRX61
10-12-2009, 8:37 AM
AB-962, as written, is preempted by the FAAAA.



Ooops :)

Chatterbox
10-12-2009, 8:37 AM
From seeing what's been done in the past, this is what I would personally have expected. However, now that the deed has been done, there is really little left to the imagination as to what's next. Having two months of lead time to research and prepare, it would seem likely a lawsuit should be filed the very minute the courts open. Any delay will only benefit the anti's, as we will need every second possible between now and the impending implementation of this travesty to have a chance at overturning the stupidity before it sees the light of day.

And once that happens, won't it all be there for the world to see anyway? My point is the readership here is sophisticated enough to understand that time is of the essence, and the "we are doing 'something' isn't going to work" this time. Yes it's all probably going to tie right back into SCOTUS, which means lots of "waiting", but the line's long...gotta get in it as soon as you can..;)

I disagree. I think we should wait until the late 2010 to file this action. While I sincerely hope that we'll win this suit, we have to face the fact that there is a certain probability that we will not. In that case, it's in our interest to run out the clock as much as we can while the case winds it's way through the courts, and the law isn't being enforced due to it's being challenged.

mmartin
10-12-2009, 8:38 AM
Once again, we are relegated to the position of reaction, and defense. The dog chasing its tail seems to be the norm for 2A crowd.

If we do not vote out those who are ruining this state financially, and constitutionally, you will see more and more of your freedoms, and money that rightfully belong to you, given to the state, of which, it is not theirs to take.

Vote out ALL the incumbents, send a message loud and clear.

how are we going to do that with the secure districts the way they are? the system is rigged for security of the currently elected.
megan

Pace
10-12-2009, 8:39 AM
Good job, CGF. Keep the pressure on!

WokMaster1
10-12-2009, 8:39 AM
Colorado is right on the heels of California regarding 2A...

That state is moving at light speed toward liberalism...

One idea is to make the political lives of these politicians as difficult as possible so much so that they will leave the staff for CO. This is my home. I'm not going anywhere.;)

glockman19
10-12-2009, 8:40 AM
Thank You Gene and the CGF

mossy
10-12-2009, 8:40 AM
sorry this is the last straw for me, soon as school is done i am outta here. fighting for any freedom in CA is like telling a apple tree to grow an orange. you can yell and moan all you want(and i did with many calls, and e-mails), but it just aint gonna happen.

winwithagrin
10-12-2009, 8:42 AM
how are we going to do that with the secure districts the way they are? the system is rigged for security of the currently elected.
megan

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_11_(2008)

Edited to fix broken URL.

bodger
10-12-2009, 8:42 AM
The line is long and so is the timeline to actually get anything substantial decided in the courts that would stop us from having to give a fingerprint to buy ammo in 2011.

And meanwhile, how many new bills are going to be introduced and passed?

If this ridiculous POS can become law, anything is possible, including some dumb-azz like DeLeon becoming so emboldened by this that he actually wants to come for our guns next in a full-on confiscation.

Arnie vetoed this thing before didn't he, what has changed?

I'm embarrassed to live in this nanny-azz territory. It no longer deserves to be called a "state". Not in reference to it being part of America anyway.

It boils my blood to see these nancyboys piss on the Constitution. I happen to be one of those people who once took an oath to lay down my life if necessary to protect it. So scumbags like DeLeon and Arnie could prosper in freedom.

Eff 'em.

tgriffin
10-12-2009, 8:42 AM
CGF= badass geniuses.

Seriously - Thank you Gene and CGF !

I'm glad to know that CGF is already on the case.

Good job, CGF. Keep the pressure on!

Thank You Gene and the CGF

Big +1 to all the above, don't know how you do it.

AndrewMendez
10-12-2009, 8:43 AM
I do not like to ask for donations. That being said, we can use the money - there is a fight brewing.

To anyone specific besides CGF?

mmartin
10-12-2009, 8:46 AM
CGF= badass geniuses.

^^this.
sweeeeeet.
megan

dfletcher
10-12-2009, 8:46 AM
I think we all know the Cow Palace is not exactly the hotbed of illegal gun activity it's portrayed by Leno, Newsom, Harris, etc. But given the 962 paperwork requirements and their unsuccessful efforts to have the show killed, shouldn't we expect:
1) Some (small) ammo sellers will stop selling at the show
2) A "fee" will be established by the big sellers
3) LE will troll about for small sellers getting rid of their personal stock

gucci pilot
10-12-2009, 8:47 AM
Gene, what about the counties and municipalities that already have no internet ammo sale bans in place? I know that you're under initial proceedings but this would be a great 1-2 punch. Defeat 962 and illegal local ordinances.


Darin

Kid Stanislaus
10-12-2009, 8:47 AM
My question is this. Will the police in LV, Reno, and Ashland jot down CA license plate numbers they see at/around gun stores and send them to the CHP? If so, you might want to coordinate your purchases with other people and rent a car when you go to those guns stores.

Kid Stanislaus
10-12-2009, 8:51 AM
I think given this defeat, that plan needs to be shared asap...If you want to retain credibility as an organization to those who matter most: your supporters, especially after a statement like that, quickly sharing a well conceived plan of action is critical.

You've got to be something of a poker player when your working in the politacal arena and showing your hand too soon just gives aide and comfort to the enemy.

Alexthewelder
10-12-2009, 8:51 AM
My question is this. Will the police in LV, Reno, and Ashland jot down CA license plate numbers they see at/around gun stores and send them to the CHP? If so, you might want to coordinate your purchases with other people and rent a car when you go to those guns stores.

lol when you rent a car your info goes down.

pay with cash, and put paper plates(not the picnic kindlol the dealer logo plate) on your car, drive safe and youll be fine. thats how people go over the bay bridge without paying toll.lol

cr250chevy
10-12-2009, 8:52 AM
Due to post #35 I will be making my first (of more to come) donation, Thanks Calguns!!!

Pvt. Cowboy
10-12-2009, 8:55 AM
All,

AB-962, as written, is preempted by the FAAAA.

We have already done initial planning regarding plaintiffs and counsel for this case. We have time as the law does not take effect until February of 2011.

-Gene

Dang it. I mean, I hope CGF wins this case, but I am slightly annoyed that this throws a monkey wrench into my plans for opening 'Pvt. Cowboy's Ammo Hut' at the CA/NV state line on I-80, purveying to visiting NorCal gun owners the finest assortment of handgun ammunition, OLL-AR parts, fried chicken, and waffles.

obeygiant
10-12-2009, 8:55 AM
I do not like to ask for donations. That being said, we can use the money - there is a fight brewing.

now that's more like it. the first post to elicit a smile from me since the news this morning.

mmartin
10-12-2009, 8:56 AM
really truly deeply glad you guys are on it.
still moving to MO.
count me in the fight until then.
after I move, I'll send money back or help online. support the righteous underdog.
cannot live in this state, all done. the hubby and I are moving to the US where they have a constitution and they (sometimes) honor it.
you've got me for a year, play me where you need me coach.
megan

advocatusdiaboli
10-12-2009, 8:57 AM
Excellent work Gene. Those who blamed your organization for the defeat and want to resign are not only wrong but shooting themselves and our cause in the foot.

I haven't heard what the governor said about this bill and why he signed (anyone know post links--I want to know). But I wonder if the governor signed the bill so as to bring this on--after all he's vetoed it twice and it just keeps coming back. But if he signs it and this challenge prevails, then it is truly dead unless they can find a way to ban internet sales without interstate commerce and carrier issues and I think that will be a Herculean task. I have no evidence to lend credibility to my speculation but this wouldn't be the first time that has happened to bad laws.

freonr22
10-12-2009, 8:58 AM
pm sent

wash
10-12-2009, 8:59 AM
Hey Gene, is there any chance of getting CA to pay our legal fees when we win?

I always like to hurt them in the wallet when they do stupid crap like this.

Oregonish
10-12-2009, 9:04 AM
^^ So basically, we'll all be paying for anyway?

GuyW
10-12-2009, 9:06 AM
I wish I could hope for this action having personal consequences to those responsible for 962's passing.

If nothing else - its a good vehicle for enraging the gunowners who, up to this point, have NOT been in the fight, or even registered to vote....

....use the rage....
.

Lone_Gunman
10-12-2009, 9:06 AM
I do not like to ask for donations. That being said, we can use the money - there is a fight brewing.

I just set up my online bill pay to send a check to CGF automatically once a month. It wont be for a lot of money but it will get sent consistently without me having to do anything else at all. I suggest you all do the same. Even if its only $5.00 a month. It will add up. The CGF info is here. (http://www.calgunsfoundation.org/index.php/donate)

Greg-Dawg
10-12-2009, 9:07 AM
From Post 35...if you can understand it:

All,

The regulation of internet delivery of ammunition as drafted in AB-962 is preeempted by the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act of 1994.

AB-962 Regulates The Routes and Services of Common Carriers

AB-962 creates a misdemeanor in a proposed Penal Code §12318 for not following the appropriate steps for “delivery . . .of handgun ammunition”. The bill goes on to state that deliveries may “only occur in a face-to-face transaction with the deliverer . . . being provided bona fide evidence of identity from the purchaser or other transferee.” However, the bill exempts law enforcement agencies, sworn police officers, ammunition manufacture/importers, “handgun ammunition vendors” as defined in the statute, and certain firearms collectors. As such, common carriers will now have to make modifications to their rates and services in an attempt to ascertain whether delivering a package marked ORM-D to any given address is allowed, or is punishable as a crime.

This requirement on a common carrier’s service is particularly difficult for carriers where a retail establishment meets the definition of a “handgun ammunition vendor” under the act but is not otherwise a Federal Firearms Licensee. These retailers are exempted from the non-delivery requirement but there is no documentation proving that such a recipient is exempt. Many “big box” retailers in California sell ammunition but do not sell firearms .

Even if an alternate narrower statutory construction is followed, on the face of the proposed law, common carriers would have to attempt to obtain evidence of identity to comply with proposed Penal Code §12318(a), which is clearly a state law that has a substantial impact on a carrier’s service.

Regulation of the Routes or Services of Common Carriers is Federally Preempted

Federal preemption of the routes, rates, or services of common motor carriers is found in 49 U. S. C. §14501(c)(1):



Additional Federal preemption for common carriers was enacted in the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act of 1994 (“FAAAA”) and was codified in 49 U.S.C. § 41713:



The Supreme Court Unanimously Ruled That Laws That Regulate Delivery By Common Carriers Are Preempted

In 2008, the Supreme Court ruled 9-0 that a Maine statute that placed limitations on the delivery of cigarettes was preempted by the FAAAA. That statute is very similar to the restrictions on delivery found in AB-962 .

In Rowe v. New Hampshire Motor Transport Association, 128 S. Ct. 989 (2008) the court found that a requirement for shippers to choose a special shipment method and that a carrier would be deemed to have knowledge that shipment had prohibited tobacco products in it were both preempted by Federal Law. Maine attempted to defend the regulation by claiming that there was a public health exception to the FAAAA. The court replied to that argument as follows:


(Id. at 997.)

There is not an equivalent “public safety” exception to the FAAAA to allow AB-962 either.

AB-962, as written, is preempted by the FAAAA.

We have already done initial planning regarding plaintiffs and counsel for this case. We have time as the law does not take effect until February of 2011.

-Gene

Legasat
10-12-2009, 9:08 AM
I will NEVER leave a fingerprint for ammo.

Thank heavens CGF in on the case!

Go GENE!!!

GuyW
10-12-2009, 9:09 AM
I think we all know what the stats are. It wasn't pro-ban people who were jamming the lines and ringing the phone off the hook.

I hope this is a lesson for political neophytes that grassroots action can only accomplish so much. Especially with term-limited offices, elected representatives needn't respond to organized and noisy public sentiment at all. I've seen it with my own eyes at city council meetings.

The only reliable way to work city councils, county boards and state legislatures is behind the scenes.


I disagree - working any pol is probably ineffective unless one has a few sticks in their hand - grassroots numbers, threatened litigation, etc.

.

Kid Stanislaus
10-12-2009, 9:11 AM
I attempted to make a donation but there is something wrong with the Google Pay webpage.

greasemonkey
10-12-2009, 9:15 AM
I think given this defeat, that plan needs to be shared asap...If you want to retain credibility as an organization to those who matter most: your supporters, especially after a statement like that, quickly sharing a well conceived plan of action is critical.

EDIT: see Gene's post at #35

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showpost.php?p=3197663&postcount=35


No, what I'm saying is that if CGF is truly the force that we all wish it to be, they have already planned for this outcome, and should already be executing said plan. I have seen some awesome things from those who are leading this war, but given the exposure, the likelihood of defeat, and the lead time, it is not unreasonable that this should be happening.

My curiosity isn't the issue really, it's the credibility of the organization that wants to take the lead in the fight here in the peoples republik. I think the general readership is not going to be very tolerant of the "trust us, all in due time" approach to any encroachment on our 2A rights. My comment is simply that time is of the essence, and has nothing negative concerning the past good works of the fine people who work within GCF.

Really? You're not sure about CGF's credibility? Do you seriously think they're not dedicated to the right cause?! If so, you need to do A LOT more lurking here before you carry on with this ignorant nonsense: read some older posts, read the 'Sticky' threads in the 2A forum before you keep spewing this mind numbing crap.

We actually started this about a two months ago. But there is strategic advantage in not letting the whole world know what we are doing.


Yep

California poison bleeds into the rest of the nation.

Makes it even more important we fight it here, you can run, but it will follow you.
Arizona and Colorado are unfortunate examples of this ^^^^^. I share everyone's frustrations with California, they're effectively shutting down the food production industry which IS the San Joaquin Valley...but I'd much rather get involved and make an uncomfortable stand for what's right. I love this State and as long as I can afford to support my family, I'll stay here and get involved...there's a lot more to it than just showing up at the voting booth.

My question is this. Will the police in LV, Reno, and Ashland jot down CA license plate numbers they see at/around gun stores and send them to the CHP? If so, you might want to coordinate your purchases with other people and rent a car when you go to those guns stores.

Based on the NV police escorting LA gun unit officers out of the show, I doubt they really care. NV has been running advertising and news media blitz campaigns inviting CA businesses and customers for quite a while now. Look at fireworks...NV/AZ absolutely love when you buy fireworks over there, they don't care. The unmarked/undercover CHP sitting in the NV/AZ parking lot does, however.

Spitfire75
10-12-2009, 9:19 AM
Dang it. I mean, I hope CGF wins this case, but I am slightly annoyed that this throws a monkey wrench into my plans for opening 'Pvt. Cowboy's Ammo Hut' at the CA/NV state line on I-80, purveying to visiting NorCal gun owners the finest assortment of handgun ammunition, OLL-AR parts, fried chicken, and waffles.

Oh god, it's like Roscoe's with an FFL! :D

greasemonkey
10-12-2009, 9:20 AM
Even if its only $5.00 a month. It will add up. The CGF info is here. (http://www.calgunsfoundation.org/index.php/donate)

Yes to ^^^.

guns_and_labs
10-12-2009, 9:22 AM
We have already done initial planning regarding plaintiffs and counsel for this case. We have time as the law does not take effect until February of 2011.

-Gene

An additional donation is inbound. Thank you for fighting the good fight for us all.

pdq_wizzard
10-12-2009, 9:26 AM
Donation made

also anything bought from my for sale thread I will donate $5 for each item sold. (see my sig)

CABilly
10-12-2009, 9:30 AM
Ah-HA! I was right (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=230317)! Smooth move, Gene, but guess I'll let you bask in my triumph.:D

Who's a Debbie Downer now, huh?!

I eagerly await my induction to the CGF board.


...or at least back into OT.. Not really sure what I did, but I'm ready to come out of time out now.

All,

The regulation of internet delivery of ammunition as drafted in AB-962 is preeempted by the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act of 1994.

AB-962 Regulates The Routes and Services of Common Carriers

AB-962 creates a misdemeanor in a proposed Penal Code §12318 for not following the appropriate steps for “delivery . . .of handgun ammunition”. The bill goes on to state that deliveries may “only occur in a face-to-face transaction with the deliverer . . . being provided bona fide evidence of identity from the purchaser or other transferee.” However, the bill exempts law enforcement agencies, sworn police officers, ammunition manufacture/importers, “handgun ammunition vendors” as defined in the statute, and certain firearms collectors. As such, common carriers will now have to make modifications to their rates and services in an attempt to ascertain whether delivering a package marked ORM-D to any given address is allowed, or is punishable as a crime.

This requirement on a common carrier’s service is particularly difficult for carriers where a retail establishment meets the definition of a “handgun ammunition vendor” under the act but is not otherwise a Federal Firearms Licensee. These retailers are exempted from the non-delivery requirement but there is no documentation proving that such a recipient is exempt. Many “big box” retailers in California sell ammunition but do not sell firearms .

Even if an alternate narrower statutory construction is followed, on the face of the proposed law, common carriers would have to attempt to obtain evidence of identity to comply with proposed Penal Code §12318(a), which is clearly a state law that has a substantial impact on a carrier’s service.

Regulation of the Routes or Services of Common Carriers is Federally Preempted

Federal preemption of the routes, rates, or services of common motor carriers is found in 49 U. S. C. §14501(c)(1):



Additional Federal preemption for common carriers was enacted in the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act of 1994 (“FAAAA”) and was codified in 49 U.S.C. § 41713:



The Supreme Court Unanimously Ruled That Laws That Regulate Delivery By Common Carriers Are Preempted

In 2008, the Supreme Court ruled 9-0 that a Maine statute that placed limitations on the delivery of cigarettes was preempted by the FAAAA. That statute is very similar to the restrictions on delivery found in AB-962 .

In Rowe v. New Hampshire Motor Transport Association, 128 S. Ct. 989 (2008) the court found that a requirement for shippers to choose a special shipment method and that a carrier would be deemed to have knowledge that shipment had prohibited tobacco products in it were both preempted by Federal Law. Maine attempted to defend the regulation by claiming that there was a public health exception to the FAAAA. The court replied to that argument as follows:


(Id. at 997.)

There is not an equivalent “public safety” exception to the FAAAA to allow AB-962 either.

AB-962, as written, is preempted by the FAAAA.

We have already done initial planning regarding plaintiffs and counsel for this case. We have time as the law does not take effect until February of 2011.

-Gene

trashman
10-12-2009, 9:31 AM
this is great work! glad to see cgf is on top of it. --neill (following the veto news and eating lunch in astoria)

cortayack
10-12-2009, 9:32 AM
Donation made....Stick to these Bastardz...............

383green
10-12-2009, 9:39 AM
I'm surprised and disappointed by all of the "I'm moving out of CA now" comments. The passage of AB962 is a minor setback in a war that we're finally starting to win. After decades of being in retreat, gun rights advocates are finally on the offensive, and we're gaining ground. CGF already has a solid contingency plan in place for challenging AB962, and has well over a year to work that angle before 962 even goes into effect.

CA is one of the front lines of the fight for our Second Amendment rights. This is where the action is, and I'm damn well staying and fighting! I could move to another state for some temporary selfish gain, but that would only weaken the pro-2A fight and increase the chance that the cancer of CA-style gun laws will spread farther.

When the Second Amendment is once again respected the way it should be across this nation, it'll be because people like me stood and fought instead of turning tail and running.

pdq_wizzard
10-12-2009, 9:41 AM
I'm surprised and disappointed by all of the "I'm moving out of CA now" comments. The passage of AB962 is a minor setback in a war that we're finally starting to win. After decades of being in retreat, gun rights advocates are finally on the offensive, and we're gaining ground. CGF already has a solid contingency plan in place for challenging AB962, and has well over a year to work that angle before 962 even goes into effect.

CA is one of the front lines of the fight for our Second Amendment rights. This is where the action is, and I'm damn well staying and fighting! I could move to another state for some temporary selfish gain, but that would only weaken the pro-2A fight and increase the chance that the cancer of CA-style gun laws will spread farther.

When the Second Amendment is once again respected the way it should be across this nation, it'll be because people like me stood and fought instead of turning tail and running.


This +100,000,000,000,000,000

EdCo
10-12-2009, 9:42 AM
Donation inbound.

Santa Cruz Armory
10-12-2009, 9:42 AM
So, is there a chance C&R FFL holders can still have ammo shipped to their homes?

GuyW
10-12-2009, 9:44 AM
I'm surprised and disappointed by all of the "I'm moving out of CA now" comments.

+1

If you get hit in a fistfight, do you walk away after the other guy lands a punch?

"Let me tell you something you already know. The world ain't all sunshine and rainbows. It is a very mean and nasty place and it will beat you to your knees and keep you there permanently if you let it. You, me, or nobody is gonna hit as hard as life. But it ain't how hard you hit; it's about how hard you can get hit, and keep moving forward. How much you can take, and keep moving forward. That's how winning is done. Now, if you know what you're worth, then go out and get what you're worth. But you gotta be willing to take the hit, and not pointing fingers saying you ain't where you are because of him, or her, or anybody. Cowards do that and that ain't you. You're better than that!"
-Rocky Balboa-

rolo
10-12-2009, 9:45 AM
If you get hit in a fistfight, do you walk away after the other guy lands a punch?

A big +1 from me. Self-loathing is disgusting.

M. D. Van Norman
10-12-2009, 9:46 AM
So I don’t have to buy a 10-year supply of ammunition next year? ;)

383green
10-12-2009, 9:46 AM
If you get hit in a fistfight, do you walk away after the other guy lands a punch?

Heck no! I stand back up and shoot the bastard for having the audacity to punch me. ;)

obeygiant
10-12-2009, 9:49 AM
I'm surprised and disappointed by all of the "I'm moving out of CA now" comments. The passage of AB962 is a minor setback in a war that we're finally starting to win. After decades of being in retreat, gun rights advocates are finally on the offensive, and we're gaining ground. CGF already has a solid contingency plan in place for challenging AB962, and has well over a year to work that angle before 962 even goes into effect.

CA is one of the front lines of the fight for our Second Amendment rights. This is where the action is, and I'm damn well staying and fighting! I could move to another state for some temporary selfish gain, but that would only weaken the pro-2A fight and increase the chance that the cancer of CA-style gun laws will spread farther.

When the Second Amendment is once again respected the way it should be across this nation, it'll be because people like me stood and fought instead of turning tail and running.

Very well said. Thank you 383.

obeygiant
10-12-2009, 9:50 AM
Heck no! I stand back up and shoot the bastard for having the audacity to punch me. ;)

:43:

Phil3
10-12-2009, 9:54 AM
+1 on that.

And that's because a lot of Californians who are tired of high taxes and regulation move to nearby States, like Colorado, and end up voting the same way they did when they lived in California. Go figure.

Reminds of what Mark Levin said. Liberals are like locusts, they descend on an attractive area (built by conservatives), then consume it, destroy it, look around and don't like it, then move on to repeat, all the while oblivious as to why things went to hell.

- Phil

Harley Quinn
10-12-2009, 10:05 AM
Many may join the fight to overrule this in court, could be good to continue, one of the nice things about rights.:o

I personally feel better locations, to put my money regarding rights.
The sales will soar out of state right now, UPS will love it.

Regards

JoeC
10-12-2009, 10:07 AM
Time to hoard between now and 2011.
Lucky for me I only have 2 calibers to hoard. Sadly this puts a damper on future gun purchases I want to make. :(

It would be great to get this nonsense shut down. It would be even better to do it in such a way as to set a precedent that will prevent this sort of insanity from cropping up again in the future as we all know Mr DeLeon is adept at doing.

Heh, other states should be happy. Less ammo in CA means more for them.

We should also still keep an eye on bill 585. If I understood Arnold's reasoning for veto correctly then it seems mostly based on technicalities. I would imagine it'll be reworded and submitted again down the road.

Hoop
10-12-2009, 10:15 AM
Colorado is right on the heels of California regarding 2A...

That state is moving at light speed toward liberalism...

Yeap. All the people running away from CA to that "friendly state" need to look at a map of all the states O won in the last prez election. Lots of those "safe" states went to him. Our firearm rights are not safe everywhere but "Kalifornia", not by a long shot.

5ohguy
10-12-2009, 10:15 AM
I can see it now. CG members organizing carpools and convoys to Arizona and Nevada and bringing back tens (or hundreds?) of thousands of rounds to be sold in PPTs.

This bill will do nothing for public safety or to regulate the ammo market. All it will do is create a HUGE underground market.

BigBamBoo
10-12-2009, 10:17 AM
............

cj cake
10-12-2009, 10:27 AM
Give them time....they will close that "loop hole" as well. It is all about the long game for them....remember the story about the two bulls on a hill looking at a pasture full of cows? Well we be the cows.

Peace,Stan

How does that one go again?:)

Joe
10-12-2009, 10:28 AM
tagged for later reading

mauritz45
10-12-2009, 10:32 AM
this could have a devestating effect on pittman- robertson funds as well. hunting is a tough go in this state as it is. ab 962 may strangle it even more-cam

NovaTodd
10-12-2009, 10:34 AM
Heck no! I stand back up and shoot the bastard for having the audacity to punch me. ;)

Make sure to do a mag dump also... :43:

gn3hz3ku1*
10-12-2009, 10:35 AM
those that want to move out.. please do so..

i been out of CA.. life isnt so great.. guns/ammo and such is mucho better.. but uhhh there is the overall quality of life.

I will take LA traffic anytime..

stagman
10-12-2009, 10:41 AM
Give them time....they will close that "loop hole" as well. It is all about the long game for them....remember the story about the two bulls on a hill looking at a pasture full of cows? Well we be the cows.

+1

Moooooo.

BigDogatPlay
10-12-2009, 10:43 AM
Yeap. All the people running away from CA to that "friendly state" need to look at a map of all the states O won in the last prez election. Lots of those "safe" states went to him. Our firearm rights are not safe everywhere but "Kalifornia", not by a long shot.

Not to drift the thread off topic but there were very specific political and demographic reasons that went down that way. Please note that the Congress has passed out no significant new infringements, even with a massive drumbeat for a new and permanent AWB from the top levels of the administration early on. More and more states are enacting protections, rather than prohibitions. A great many of the Democrats who moved into the Congress in January come from those "safe states" and they know that if they vote for any kind of infringement it amounts to political suicide for them.

Fold into that that if the economy takes another sharp dip under the weight of all the massive borrowing and spending, it could be very difficult for the administration in 2012.

We in California are the tip of the spear in this fight. Remember the old saying that as goes California, so goes the nation? We in California gave Nordyke to the judicial record which begat no less than our Democrat Attorney General to brief the SCOTUS that Amendment Two needed to be incorporated against the states. If that's not a win, then the word needs to be redefined.

While my retirement (still 10-15 years off) plans include relocating, assuming California's taxation and business climate remain the same or get worse, in the meantime I will continue to fight with my energy and my checkbook at each and every stand. We will not win them all, but we've shown that we can win.

I was born here, as were three generations before me. I will not give up.

USAFTS
10-12-2009, 10:45 AM
i'm not buying the SS/Soviet fingerprint ammo either

That is one of my problems with this crap. I will drive to NV to make my puchases just to avoid the fingerprinting. It will be a small victory but it's a point I will be happy making.

stagman
10-12-2009, 10:49 AM
those that want to move out.. please do so..

i been out of CA.. life isnt so great.. guns/ammo and such is mucho better.. but uhhh there is the overall quality of life.

I will take LA traffic anytime..

Dont forget, 17 percent unemployment, second highest overall cost of living, rediculous taxes (state income, ludicrous property taxes, gasoline prices, sales taxes, etc), liberal-run government destroying any resemblance of the constitution or bill of rights (little by little), smog, overcrowding and yes, traffic...

You're right, California is WAY better than other states. (sarcasm) Uh-huh... these politicians could screw up an anvil in a sand pile!

technique
10-12-2009, 10:52 AM
Damn...sorry guys. Thanks to everyone that had the fight in them every day and tried to make this go away.

When will the bull**** end?

oaklander
10-12-2009, 10:55 AM
It will end when CGF ends it. We ARE winning. This is only a setback, and is not a surprise.

Look at everything that CGF and the Coalition has accomplished in just two years. Setbacks are inevitable. But we are still on a winning streak.

Damn...sorry guys. Thanks to everyone that had the fight in them every day and tried to make this go away.

When will the bull**** end?

jdberger
10-12-2009, 10:57 AM
I'm surprised and disappointed by all of the "I'm moving out of CA now" comments. The passage of AB962 is a minor setback in a war that we're finally starting to win. After decades of being in retreat, gun rights advocates are finally on the offensive, and we're gaining ground. CGF already has a solid contingency plan in place for challenging AB962, and has well over a year to work that angle before 962 even goes into effect.

CA is one of the front lines of the fight for our Second Amendment rights. This is where the action is, and I'm damn well staying and fighting! I could move to another state for some temporary selfish gain, but that would only weaken the pro-2A fight and increase the chance that the cancer of CA-style gun laws will spread farther.

When the Second Amendment is once again respected the way it should be across this nation, it'll be because people like me stood and fought instead of turning tail and running.

Bingo!

rolo
10-12-2009, 11:10 AM
I gotta say, I'm glad he signed it. If he had veto'd it, we wouldn't have the opportunity to prove how sophomoric DeLeon is in court. It's going to cost CG Foundation more, but I'm sure us proud Californians will step up with donations.

Full Clip
10-12-2009, 11:18 AM
While my retirement (still 10-15 years off) plans include relocating, assuming California's taxation and business climate remain the same or get worse, in the meantime I will continue to fight with my energy and my checkbook at each and every stand. We will not win them all, but we've shown that we can win.

Big +1

secretasianman
10-12-2009, 11:20 AM
Will the police in LV, Reno, and Ashland jot down CA license plate numbers they see at/around gun stores and send them to the CHP?

Huh? Is there verbiage in AB962 that doesn't allow people to import ammo personally purchased out of state?

USAFTS
10-12-2009, 11:21 AM
...I was born here, as were three generations before me. I will not give up.

Great post BigDog! Born and raised here too. Don't want to leave so we might as well try and change the conditions. My Dad passed on to me, my method of decision making. I offer to all of you.

"Son, if you have a situation in your daily life that is negative, you don't need to dwell and stress on the problem. To make a difficult decision that effects your daily life...If you can't face it....ACE it.

A.C.E.

A = Accept
Can you accept the circumstances as they are? If so, go on with your life and always give your best effort with a good attitude. If not:

C = Change
If you cannot accept your circumstances, then change them. Determine what steps are necessary to change your situation into one which is acceptable. If you succeed in the change...problem solved. If the change just cannot be achieved:

E = Eliminate
If after an honest effort, you cannot change your circumstances to an acceptable level...Eliminate the problem. This can apply to any situation. Not KILL it..but take steps to remove the unacceptable situation from your life such as a job, a relationship, even a thought process.

If you can't face it.....ACE it."

I know, It's corny. But it has really helped me weed through the noise and make decisions in my life.

As far as living in California is concerned, I cannot accept the political situation as related to my freedoms so I am actively involved in the CHANGE aspect of ACEing the problem. I hope to be able to assist in bringing a "shall-issue" type of situation to California. Probably not actual SHALL ISSUE, but perhaps a court mandated level of protection for those of us who want to "protect" ourselves and our families.

AND now I step down from my soap-box and open a beer. It's close enough to noon for a beer, right?

wildhawker
10-12-2009, 11:51 AM
Bumping this to the top.

WE ARE GOING TO WIN.

Sobriquet
10-12-2009, 11:55 AM
You know what pisses me off the most about this whole thing? My donation to Calguns is going to end up fighting against my tax dollars when California tries to defend a law clearly preempted by federal legislation.

Can someone please post the link to donate to Calguns again?

Edit: The link was in the signature of the gentleman above me... thanks.

mmartin
10-12-2009, 12:11 PM
Dont forget, 17 percent unemployment, second highest overall cost of living, rediculous taxes (state income, ludicrous property taxes, gasoline prices, sales taxes, etc), liberal-run government destroying any resemblance of the constitution or bill of rights (little by little), smog, overcrowding and yes, traffic...

You're right, California is WAY better than other states. (sarcasm) Uh-huh...

this. to which I add outrageous cost of property.
all of which is why we are already planning our escape.
and in the meantime we're in the fight along with the rest of you, money and time and sweat. once we're relocated you can still have my money and my internet time. we'll just retrench there and guard that territory against encroachment as well.
megan

mmartin
10-12-2009, 12:15 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_11_(2008)

Edited to fix broken URL.

as an idea it's a right thing, and we'll see if it bears fruit.
since both parties participated in creating the last set of divisions, and the deciding commission with be 8/12 composed of those two parties, I'm not certain this will fix anything. they colluded before, not sure that they won't do so again.
megan

Electricboy
10-12-2009, 12:32 PM
When this law takes effect i will more than happy to take orders and carpool to nearby states for ammo.

I am here for the long haul, I will fight, I will not run!

Squeaky Duck
10-12-2009, 1:33 PM
At least some of us live close enough to an adjoining state to buy ammo elsewhere.

It makes me angry as well since I have obsolete calibers I reload, and this stupid bill is going to bring that to an end and/or make it too expensive to reload in general, no thanks to Arnold. :mad:

bomb_on_bus
10-12-2009, 3:36 PM
My question is will the bill AW962 remain written the same until it can be taken to court or can the politicians modify it at a whims notice thereby nullifying any previous errors that were found in the bill thats trumpted by current federal law?

artherd
10-12-2009, 4:19 PM
OAKLANDER, Should we start donating more or to somewhere else?

I on the other hand LOVE asking for money! (I'd better, it's my job at CGF.) So please DONATE NOW (http://www.calgunsfoundation.org/index.php/donate) to help us kill AB962 before it ever becomes effective law, gain shall-issue CCW in CA, and obliterate the handgun list!

artherd
10-12-2009, 4:25 PM
I'm glad to know that CGF is already on the case.

MAKE NO MISTAKE - We've had this plan in the works for months now.

When we say "we're on it - trust us" we really are on it. And I think our record on trust speaks for itself.

wash
10-12-2009, 4:50 PM
I have my Mega Millions ticket, you know what happens if I win...

Capt Jack
10-12-2009, 6:14 PM
I on the other hand LOVE asking for money! (I'd better, it's my job at CGF.) So please DONATE NOW (http://www.calgunsfoundation.org/index.php/donate)to help us kill AB962 before it ever becomes effective law, gain shall-issue CCW in CA, and obliterate the handgun list!

Just donated to CGF, also gave some $ for the web site hosting a few days ago :D we need to support these guys more than ever now!

artherd
10-12-2009, 6:45 PM
Big +1 to all the above, don't know how you do it.

Oh, resources combined with a bad(good?) attitude and refusing to take 'no' no for an answer - most of the board at CGF have that in common! :D

Joe
10-12-2009, 7:47 PM
All,

The regulation of internet delivery of ammunition as drafted in AB-962 is preeempted by the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act of 1994.

AB-962 Regulates The Routes and Services of Common Carriers

AB-962 creates a misdemeanor in a proposed Penal Code §12318 for not following the appropriate steps for “delivery . . .of handgun ammunition”. The bill goes on to state that deliveries may “only occur in a face-to-face transaction with the deliverer . . . being provided bona fide evidence of identity from the purchaser or other transferee.” However, the bill exempts law enforcement agencies, sworn police officers, ammunition manufacture/importers, “handgun ammunition vendors” as defined in the statute, and certain firearms collectors. As such, common carriers will now have to make modifications to their rates and services in an attempt to ascertain whether delivering a package marked ORM-D to any given address is allowed, or is punishable as a crime.

This requirement on a common carrier’s service is particularly difficult for carriers where a retail establishment meets the definition of a “handgun ammunition vendor” under the act but is not otherwise a Federal Firearms Licensee. These retailers are exempted from the non-delivery requirement but there is no documentation proving that such a recipient is exempt. Many “big box” retailers in California sell ammunition but do not sell firearms .

Even if an alternate narrower statutory construction is followed, on the face of the proposed law, common carriers would have to attempt to obtain evidence of identity to comply with proposed Penal Code §12318(a), which is clearly a state law that has a substantial impact on a carrier’s service.

Regulation of the Routes or Services of Common Carriers is Federally Preempted

Federal preemption of the routes, rates, or services of common motor carriers is found in 49 U. S. C. §14501(c)(1):



Additional Federal preemption for common carriers was enacted in the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act of 1994 (“FAAAA”) and was codified in 49 U.S.C. § 41713:



The Supreme Court Unanimously Ruled That Laws That Regulate Delivery By Common Carriers Are Preempted

In 2008, the Supreme Court ruled 9-0 that a Maine statute that placed limitations on the delivery of cigarettes was preempted by the FAAAA. That statute is very similar to the restrictions on delivery found in AB-962 .

In Rowe v. New Hampshire Motor Transport Association, 128 S. Ct. 989 (2008) the court found that a requirement for shippers to choose a special shipment method and that a carrier would be deemed to have knowledge that shipment had prohibited tobacco products in it were both preempted by Federal Law. Maine attempted to defend the regulation by claiming that there was a public health exception to the FAAAA. The court replied to that argument as follows:


(Id. at 997.)

There is not an equivalent “public safety” exception to the FAAAA to allow AB-962 either.

AB-962, as written, is preempted by the FAAAA.

We have already done initial planning regarding plaintiffs and counsel for this case. We have time as the law does not take effect until February of 2011.

-Gene

this is an awesome post

coolusername2007
10-12-2009, 8:11 PM
Don't know if someone asked this yet (this thread is already 14 pages long). Gene's message is great news indeed. But my question is what impact does this have on the fingerprinting issue? I can see the win for deliveries, internet business and so on. But what here would stop the local gun shop fingerprinting requirement? What am I missing? Other than the obvious disparity of internet shoppers not being fingerprinted.

catnipper
10-12-2009, 8:36 PM
Mitch, please tell me that you're kidding, you live in costa mesa, what's to like?

stockranger
10-12-2009, 8:50 PM
Colorado is right on the heels of California regarding 2A...

That state is moving at light speed toward liberalism...

Screw colorado. THe hunting regulations are total insantity. For instance you can't use a beagle to hunt rabbit anytime there is a big game season in progress. That means just about the entire rabbit season no beagles. Then if you a dog is harrasing big game it can legaly be shot by anyone with a gun. Its in the hunting regs.... There is a mountain of hunting laws in that state.

If you want to be free move to oregon, texas, idaho.

hoffmang
10-12-2009, 8:51 PM
Don't know if someone asked this yet (this thread is already 14 pages long). Gene's message is great news indeed. But my question is what impact does this have on the fingerprinting issue? I can see the win for deliveries, internet business and so on. But what here would stop the local gun shop fingerprinting requirement? What am I missing? Other than the obvious disparity of internet shoppers not being fingerprinted.

Until scrutiny is settled under the Incorporated Second Amendment, fingerprinting to buy handgun ammo isn't clearly unconstitutional as it may pass intermediate scrutiny.

-Gene

Roadrunner
10-12-2009, 9:07 PM
I just heard Ed worley say that things are going to get a lot scrappier regarding AB962. I assume that means that Gene, Ed and probably Chuck are all working together on this. And Unless I miss my guess, Don and maybe even Alan will be hosting this party. So, how close am I?

ErikTheRed
10-12-2009, 9:07 PM
Sounds to me like CGF has plans to take AB962 out behind the barn and show DeLeon where the bears eat the barley. And I will be helping to purchase some more barley, because the bears are HUNGRY!!

Donation in the next few days.

And if this piece of crap bill isn't defeated, for whatever reason, then I will NEVER AGAIN, as God as my witness, purchase so much as one single .22 bullet in the PRK. I apologize in advance to the thousands of PRK ammo dealers who will ultimately end up in ruin as a result of this nonsense, but I refuse to be treated as a convicted felon by PRK liberals who take such pride in pissing on the Constitution in order to command power and control over my freedoms.

Remember-- these politicians are deathly afraid of our guns, and theres a darn good reason they are. And thats precisely the reason why we will NEVER GIVE THEM UP! History has proven that tyranny comes at cost to the people while freedom comes at cost to the GOVERNMENT.

coolusername2007
10-12-2009, 9:20 PM
Until scrutiny is settled under the Incorporated Second Amendment, fingerprinting to buy handgun ammo isn't clearly unconstitutional as it may pass intermediate scrutiny.

-Gene

That's what I was afraid of. The internet sales attack is minor compared to the personal liberties attack. This whole fingerprinting issue is getting way out of hand. Fingerprinting for guns, for schools, now ammo. What's next...for cars, gas, for credit card purchases? It's time we made a stand for the 9th Amendment. My enumerated rights aren't the only protected rights I have!

locosway
10-12-2009, 9:52 PM
Oaklander or anyone else who can answer this.

Doesn't the 5A preclude criminals from giving up finger prints or anything else if they are going to purchase ammo?

SkatinJJ
10-12-2009, 9:53 PM
I on the other hand LOVE asking for money! (I'd better, it's my job at CGF.) So please DONATE NOW (http://www.calgunsfoundation.org/index.php/donate) to help us kill AB962 before it ever becomes effective law, gain shall-issue CCW in CA, and obliterate the handgun list!

Sent my donation in an hour ago.

Semper FI!!!

JJ

stockranger
10-12-2009, 10:41 PM
Ok i'm just a hick with a computer... However I get the NRA alerts and read them while I drink beer and fondle my guns.

I got an alert the other day it said there is about to be a case in the supreme court that basicaly will challenge a state or city's authority to regulate firearms. Like how they tried to ban guns in Washington D.C. and Frisco. It is yet to go to court but if the court rules that states and cities cannot go beyond federal law and make their own crazy gun laws would that be helpful in fighting ab962?

slidecatch
10-12-2009, 11:03 PM
http://i218.photobucket.com/albums/cc172/rdavis420/CalGuns/GEHG.jpg
$100 donated to CALGUNS for a total of $200 this year so far...

artherd
10-13-2009, 2:06 AM
I'm surprised and disappointed by all of the "I'm moving out of CA now" comments.

Agreed! Spend your moving bucks on donations to CGF!

CABilly
10-13-2009, 3:41 AM
I just heard Ed worley say that things are going to get a lot scrappier regarding AB962. I assume that means that Gene, Ed and probably Chuck are all working together on this. And Unless I miss my guess, Don and maybe even Alan will be hosting this party. So, how close am I?

That's quite a lineup.

The part that angers me is that AB 962 is a big distraction from CCW, the roster, AW ban, hi-cap ban, etc. Aside from the law itself, it's a big setback as far as time and resources are concerned.

Shouldn't it be illegal to write, submit and pass illegal laws? I mean, if they wanted, couldn't they just write and sign a million needling illegal laws just to keep up busy fighting to get those overturned instead of pressing forward on our own agenda?

greasemonkey
10-13-2009, 7:06 AM
I mean, if they wanted, couldn't they just write and sign a million needling illegal laws just to keep up busy fighting to get those overturned instead of pressing forward on our own agenda?

Yeah they can, it seems like they already do that. And when one comes along that's so outrageous there's no way it can possibly pass, they gut an unrelated bill at the last second and fill it with their over-the-top BS.:mad:

jdberger
10-13-2009, 7:58 AM
Ok i'm just a hick with a computer... However I get the NRA alerts and read them while I drink beer and fondle my guns.

I got an alert the other day it said there is about to be a case in the supreme court that basicaly will challenge a state or city's authority to regulate firearms. Like how they tried to ban guns in Washington D.C. and Frisco. It is yet to go to court but if the court rules that states and cities cannot go beyond federal law and make their own crazy gun laws would that be helpful in fighting ab962?

Maybe - it's the MacDonald case.

Welcome to Calguns and welcome to the fight. Glad to have you with us....

badhabit90
10-13-2009, 8:00 AM
GENE FOR GOVERNOR........
OBEYGIANT as state controller......

all in favor.....AYE:D

WokMaster1
10-13-2009, 8:55 AM
GENE aka OAKLANDER FOR GOVERNOR........
OBEYGIANT as state controller......

all in favor.....AYE:D

Gene & Oaklander are 2 separate entities altogether. One is GOD & the other is his legal advisor. You figure out who is who. That's your homework.:D

stockranger
10-13-2009, 9:20 AM
NRA sent out an alert this morning. They will be taking it to court too.

badhabit90
10-13-2009, 3:13 PM
Gene & Oaklander are 2 separate entities altogether. One is GOD & the other is his legal advisor. You figure out who is who. That's your homework.:D


i understand this...that is why one is a Governor and the other is a "controller" the person who controls the money after the Gov. is told where it should go...:TFH:

ke6guj
10-13-2009, 3:21 PM
i understand this...that is why one is a Governor and the other is a "controller" the person who controls the money after the Gov. is told where it should go...:TFH:

YOu missed Wok's point, Gene is hoffmang, he isn't oaklander. Kevin is oaklander, Gene can't be AKA oaklander.

Gene = hoffmang
Kevin = oaklander
Ben = obeygiant

3 separate people.

badhabit90
10-13-2009, 4:10 PM
YOu missed Wok's point, Gene is hoffmang, he isn't oaklander. Kevin is oaklander, Gene can't be AKA oaklander.

Gene = hoffmang
Kevin = oaklander
Ben = obeygiant

3 separate people.

WHOOPS........sorry im tired and medicated...hahahah!!!

you know what i meant..thankyou..:D

fixed..

sirnonz
10-13-2009, 6:15 PM
we should just buy a lot of wild life (bears, coyote, mountain lions and put it in Deleon's backyard.

daves100
10-13-2009, 6:59 PM
Any way to recall this P.O.S his rating level is only 27%

eaglemike
10-13-2009, 7:59 PM
Donation sent................. :)

obeygiant
10-13-2009, 8:20 PM
GENE FOR GOVERNOR........
OBEYGIANT as state controller......

all in favor.....AYE:D

My first task as the newly appointed State Controller is to repurpose the savings in annual salaries of a full time legislature becoming part-time that was recently signed into law by Governor Hoffman.

This money will be deposited into the newly created CGF Discretionary Litigation Fund on a monthly basis and will be subject to the same cost of living increases that our legislature is afforded each year.

:43:

GrinderCB
10-13-2009, 8:58 PM
All,

The regulation of internet delivery of ammunition as drafted in AB-962 is preeempted by the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act of 1994.

AB-962 Regulates The Routes and Services of Common Carriers

The stated goal of this bill's authors is to cut off ammo sales via the internet, requiring face-to-face transactions where a thumbprint can be collected, a log of the sale kept, etc.

Now I'm a bit rusty on my undergrad business law, but it seems to me that such a transaction would be out of the jurisdiction of the state government and solely under the jurisdiction of the Federal government as interstate commerce as defined in the Constitution.

I'm no lawyer and maybe it'll take an army of them to write up all the details of the arguments, but in the details it seems to me that this issue has plenty of room for argument and stands a strong chance of eventually being overturned. The problem is how long it will take and what the makeup of the court is if it ever gets that high. Sotomayor replacing David Souter to me seems a wash on 2nd Amendment issues; Souter was hardly a conservative strongman. A 2nd Amendment/interstate commerce/FAA carrier argument on this bill now would probably go 5-4 in our favor. But this issue could take years to wind its way through, giving Obama time for a couple more anti-business/anti-gun/Socialistic nominees.

oaklander
10-13-2009, 9:38 PM
LOL - Gene's got a bunch of better lawyers than me advising him. . .

I'm just a lowly Secretary!

See:

http://www.calgunsfoundation.org/index.php/board

Gene & Oaklander are 2 separate entities altogether. One is GOD & the other is his legal advisor. You figure out who is who. That's your homework.:D

hoffmang
10-13-2009, 10:41 PM
The coalition will be in full force and effect on the litigation side of this.

-Gene

LIAN 0208
10-13-2009, 10:47 PM
Just got back from KY and got shocked that it was signed at the last minute. Good to know that there are ways. Let us know how to contribute. I believe this is a costly battle. I am loving this site.

oaklander
10-13-2009, 11:27 PM
http://www.calgunsfoundation.org/index.php/donate

:D

Just got back from KY and got shocked that it was signed at the last minute. Good to know that there are ways. Let us know how to contribute. I believe this is a costly battle. I am loving this site.

freonr22
10-14-2009, 12:14 AM
I like the lineup. It is nice to see the biographies of the stellar, people. I even registered!

corgon1978
07-09-2010, 10:16 PM
This should be bumped. Keep fighting the good fight.

thayne
07-09-2010, 10:27 PM
So whats going on with this now?

Crom
07-09-2010, 10:37 PM
I heard a suit was filed a number of days ago.

https://www.stateammunition.com/store/shopnews.asp?type=News

July Thursday 1 2010
A legal challenge to California’s online handgun ammunition sales ban and fingerprint purchasing requirement (AB962) was recently filed in federal court. A copy of the lawsuit is available at the following link: https://docs.google.com/fileview?id=0B265PzaPpihQYTlhYWIxNTktYjExNy00YTdiL Tk5MjUtZGRhMTJkYzNjMzIz&hl=en (https://docs.google.com/fileview?id=0B265PzaPpihQYTlhYWIxNTktYjExNy00YTdiL Tk5MjUtZGRhMTJkYzNjMzIz&hl=en)

The lawsuit was filed by the Chaffin Law Office http://chaffinlaw.com (http://chaffinlaw.com/) of Ventura, California, on behalf of three Plaintiffs including State Ammunition Inc., a California
company selling ammunition online at http://www.stateammo.com (http://www.stateammo.com/), as well as individuals Jim Otten and Jim Russell, both retired members of the United States Marine Corps. Jim Otten, a Minnesota resident, is the owner of http://www.a1ammo.com (http://www.a1ammo.com/), a company outside California claiming that as a result of AB962, it will no longer be able to sell to California residents and Jim Russell, a retired Marine Corps Major and a Shooting Sports Director for the Paralyzed Veterans Association of America, who claims that as a result of AB962, he will be unable to purchase bulk handgun ammunition online which he uses to help disabled veterans with rehabilitative organized shooting activities.

The legal action claims that AB962 violates the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution by banning handgun ammunition sales in anything other than a face-to-face transaction, and therefore eliminating the ability for California residents to buy ammunition from companies outside the state, as well as the ability for companies inside the state to sell to out-of-state residents. Plaintiffs also argue that AB962 violates Equal Protection and Due Process rights by criminalizing sales of handgun ammunition to various prohibited persons without defining handgun ammunition, and without giving people to ability to know who is actually a prohibited purchaser.

wilit
07-09-2010, 10:49 PM
I heard a suit was filed a number of days ago.

https://www.stateammunition.com/store/shopnews.asp?type=News

:thumbsup: Thanks! I was wondering what was going on with AB962.

azn_wrx
07-09-2010, 10:59 PM
Is that the same lawsuit that CGF was planning?

thayne
07-09-2010, 11:02 PM
Is that the same lawsuit that CGF was planning?

Doesnt look like what Gene said early on in this thread

N6ATF
07-09-2010, 11:04 PM
CGF does have a different case coming that brings a different challenge.

-Gene

...

wildhawker
07-10-2010, 2:01 AM
We have another suit coming; I am confident you'll like this one. ;)

Cali-Shooter
07-10-2010, 2:30 AM
Anyone else think that Cali is run by a bunch of anti-gun fanatics HELL BENT on pissing on 2A non-stop as long as they are alive?
It's "government" like these that are the reason I have to take 1 aspirin a day to keep the headaches at bay. At least we can show them how much of a thorn those of us who are still here can be. We're not taking their s##t lying down.

FirstFlight
07-10-2010, 6:39 AM
We have another suit coming; I am confident you'll like this one. ;)

You got me on pins and needles! I am sure I will like whats coming. You guys are doing a great job.

dantodd
07-10-2010, 8:37 AM
What is the probability that AB962 will be stopped by injunction pending disposition of the pertinent cases? It would seem that as a FUNDAMENTAL right is in question and the law is not addressing a pressing state interest that would be irreparably harmed by delay an injunction SHOULD be relatively "per course" in this situation.

ALSystems
07-10-2010, 8:37 AM
We have another suit coming; I am confident you'll like this one. ;)
Will it be be filed at least before February 2011?

obeygiant
07-10-2010, 10:55 AM
I heard a suit was filed a number of days ago.
https://www.stateammunition.com/store/shopnews.asp?type=News
Is that the same lawsuit that CGF was planning?

Doesnt look like what Gene said early on in this thread

Correct, this is not the CGF lawsuit but Chaffin Law is working in conjunction with CGF on this one.
AB962 Legal Challenge Filed in Federal Court
July Thursday 1 2010
A legal challenge to California’s online handgun ammunition sales ban and fingerprint purchasing requirement (AB962) was recently filed in federal court. A copy of the lawsuit is available at the following link:

Copy of the lawsuit (https://docs.google.com/fileview?id=0B265PzaPpihQYTlhYWIxNTktYjExNy00YTdiL Tk5MjUtZGRhMTJkYzNjMzIz&hl=en)

The lawsuit was filed by the Chaffin Law Office http://chaffinlaw.com of Ventura, California, on behalf of three Plaintiffs including State Ammunition Inc., a California company selling ammunition online at http://www.stateammo.com, as well as individuals Jim Otten and Jim Russell, both retired members of the United States Marine Corps. Jim Otten, a Minnesota resident, is the owner of http://www.a1ammo.com, a company outside California claiming that as a result of AB962, it will no longer be able to sell to California residents and Jim Russell, a retired Marine Corps Major and a Shooting Sports Director for the Paralyzed Veterans Association of America, who claims that as a result of AB962, he will be unable to purchase bulk handgun ammunition online which he uses to help disabled veterans with rehabilitative organized shooting activities.

The legal action claims that AB962 violates the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution by banning handgun ammunition sales in anything other than a face-to-face transaction, and therefore eliminating the ability for California residents to buy ammunition from companies outside the state, as well as the ability for companies inside the state to sell to out-of-state residents. Plaintiffs also argue that AB962 violates Equal Protection and Due Process rights by criminalizing sales of handgun ammunition to various prohibited persons without
defining handgun ammunition, and without giving people to ability to know who is actually a prohibited purchaser.

The case follows a flurry of anti-gun legislation recently emerging from the Democrat controlled legislature in Sacramento, including AB50 (2004 ban on 50 caliber BMG rifles), AB1471 (2007 requirement for ballistic microstamping technology), SB585 (2009 attempted ban of gun shows at San Francisco Cow Palace), AB1934 (2009 ban of open carry of unloaded firearms in public), AB1810 (2010 attempt to require permanent registration of long guns), AB2223 (2010 attempt to expand the “lead free” Condor Zone banning the most common and most affordable types of ammunition), among numerous other gun relates laws and regulations.