PDA

View Full Version : Will Ca DOJ threaten border state gun stores?


Deamer
10-15-2009, 7:07 PM
With the signing of ab962 do you think the DOJ will threaten border state stores with legal action for selling handgun ammo to Ca residents? I can see them doing it just like they did with magazines and other out of Ca legal items.

mofugly13
10-15-2009, 7:10 PM
But it's not illegal to go out of state, buy ammo, and bring it back. How could they threaten legal action for something perfectly legal?

sorensen440
10-15-2009, 7:11 PM
But it's not illegal to go out of state, buy ammo, and bring it back. How could they threaten legal action for something perfectly legal?
Its not illegal to go out of state and buy magazines either (just cant bring them back in tact )

mofugly13
10-15-2009, 7:13 PM
Its not illegal to go out of state and buy magazines either (just cant bring them back in tact )

And that's the difference.

GearHead
10-15-2009, 7:18 PM
They are allowed to threaten all they want...hopefully the smart gun store owners will realize that CA is absolutely powerless to do anything to them

freakshow10mm
10-15-2009, 7:24 PM
They aren't powerless. Ask Southern Ohio Gun.

ke6guj
10-15-2009, 7:37 PM
what happened to SOG?

Deamer
10-15-2009, 7:41 PM
They are allowed to threaten all they want...hopefully the smart gun store owners will realize that CA is absolutely powerless to do anything to them

That is my point. My dad has a house 10 minutes from the strip and I was denied buying 17 round Glock magazines at the gun store. Even when I expained I had no intention to take them to CA they still refused. My dad was standing with me when all this was going on and told them they would stay at his house. I have legally owned 17 rounders in CA already. I wanted to buy a couple to keep at my dad's so I didn't have to worry about being harassed if I got pulled over when going to Vegas to shoot.

Shane916
10-15-2009, 7:45 PM
That is my point. My dad has a house 10 minutes from the strip and I was denied buying 17 round Glock magazines at the gun store. Even when I expained I had no intention to take them to CA they still refused. My dad was standing with me when all this was going on and told them they would stay at his house. I have legally owned 17 rounders in CA already. I wanted to buy a couple to keep at my dad's so I didn't have to worry about being harassed if I got pulled over when going to Vegas to shoot.

I had quite the opposite experience in Zephyr Cove/Stateline. They kept insisting on buying HC's when I only wanted 10 rounders lol.

Deamer
10-15-2009, 7:48 PM
You should change your title to represent a question.

"Can CA DOJ threaten border state gun stores?"

The way you have it at the moment makes it seem as if they are and you are presenting the news to us.



I wrote it that way to grab attention. But they already have the Vegas gun stores scared to sell legal items to CA residents.

thempopresense
10-15-2009, 7:52 PM
I agree with Caiman, You should change the title. Almost seems like your spreading FUD.

Mute
10-15-2009, 7:53 PM
How the hell do they know you're from CA?

sorensen440
10-15-2009, 7:55 PM
How the hell do they know you're from CA?
we all smell like hippies

freakshow10mm
10-15-2009, 7:56 PM
what happened to SOG?
Bunch of CA cities sued them and a handful of other dealers and distributors with backing of the Brady Bunch.

http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:iYTGSuCeKtAJ:www.gunweek.com/2003/california0910.html+Brady+Center+sues+Southern+Ohi o+Gun&cd=5&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
Anti-Gun Spin begins afer CA Case Settled
by Gun Week staff

Anti-gunners are crowing about an Aug. 20 out-of-court settlement between five gun dealers and distributors, and a dozen California cities that had sued the gun industry, while an industry spokesman downplayed the gloating as “unadulterated spin.”

The anti-gun spin, however, is likely to be used on Capitol Hill when Congress returns to work in September in an attempt to torpedo S-659, the “Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act” that would shield the firearms industry from just the kind of frivolous lawsuits brought by the California communities and some 20 other localities across the country. So far, none of these suits has been successful and many high-profile municipal actions have been dismissed in several state and federal courts. The US House has already approved the bill and President Bush has said he would sign it if it reaches his desk.

The California agreement announced by San Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herrera’s office on Aug. 21 was approved by the San Diego County Superior Court judge who had been assigned the consolidated case.

Associated Press quoted Dennis Henigan, director of the Legal Action Project at the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, insisting that the agreement “has a number of implications and makes it very clear that there are additional, significant steps that gun sellers could undertake to help prevent the flow of guns into the illegal market.”

The Brady Center is touting this agreement as a first for gun distributors and retailers who had been hit with lawsuits over their business practices.

But Chuck Michel, spokesman and attorney for the California Rifle and Pistol Association (CRPA), sees it another way. “They’ve spent several million bucks, and they got back $70,000,” he said of the 12 plaintiffs. “That’s the kind of math that got us in trouble in Sacramento.”

“The litigation that we filed has resulted in significant reforms. And I think that people should consider that when they’re considering a vote on a prospective piece of legislation that would grant the industry widespread immunity,” Herrera said. But proponents of the bill say no significance should be read into the deal, beyond five companies extracting themselves from a lawsuit.

Yet Lawrence G. Keane, vice president and general counsel for the National Shooting Sports Foundation, told Gun Week, “This so-called settlement . . . is nothing more than unadulterated spin to deflect attention from the complete waste of taxpayer money in the lawsuit against the industry.”

Weeks ago, the court had thrown the case out against the firearms industry defendants, leaving only Trader Sports of San Leandro, Andrews Sporting Goods, MKS Supply and Southern Ohio Gun Distributors, both based in Ohio, and South Carolina-based Ellett Brothers, another distributor, as defendants. Andrews operates the Turner’s Outdoorsman chain in southern California.

Judge Vincent P. DiFiglia had earlier dismissed the suit against the industry, but an appeal is pending.

Under the agreement, Southern Ohio Gun will pay $50,000 in legal expenses for the plaintiffs. Trader Sports will no longer sell guns at gun shows and will train employees to detect straw man purchases and stop them. Southern Ohio Gun will also sell firearms only to storefront retailers in California and neighboring states.

“The so-called ground-breaking settlement,” Keane contended, “is nothing more than an agreement by these defendants to continue obeying the law, and continue to engage in their ongoing business practices. They are not agreeing to do anything new and different.”

Keane asserted that the Brady Center was being “highly misleading” in suggesting that they are making industry do more than the law requires.

“The fact is,” he insisted, “members of industry have always done more than is required by law.”

Keane dismissed the possibility that this settlement will encourage other lawsuits. Keane seemed confident that industry lawsuits will fail, and he pointed to a solid string of defeats in various state and federal courts.

bodger
10-15-2009, 7:57 PM
You should change your title to represent a question.

"Can CA DOJ threaten border state gun stores?"

The way you have it at the moment makes it seem as if they are and you are presenting the news to us.


I agree, no offense to the OP, but when I saw that title I thought it was already starting.




I wrote it that way to grab attention. But they already have the Vegas gun stores scared to sell legal items to CA residents.

I'm sure there will be some blow-back if this law doesn't get struck and a lot of CA gunnies hit the stores in CA and NV. But as many have pointed out, the damn stores are low on inventory anyway almost everywhere so it could be long trip for nuthin'. Except the gun shows maybe.

I'm having internet purchases dropped to my relatives in Scottsdale, and going there to pick them up, end of story. And I won't be breaking the law either. As long as I pay CA their bloody "use tax".

bodger
10-15-2009, 8:00 PM
we all smell like hippies



Just wear BDU camo trousers and a Sun Devils shirt in AZ, and you'll blend right in. :chris:

Deamer
10-15-2009, 8:12 PM
How the hell do they know you're from CA?

I went to the cash register and set the holster and mag pouches I wanted to buy on the counter. I then requested 2 magazines since they keep them behind the counter. I pulled out my cash and the guy asked for ID. I pulled out my Military ID and they said it had to be a drivers license. When I pulled out my license he grabbed the magazines off the counter and told me he couldn't sell to me because of the CA ID. I explained that they were to stay in Vegas. He told me that the CA DOJ will file charges against them if they sell hi caps to Ca residents.

I was wearing shorts and a Jeep T-shirt and we drove in my dads truck with vegas plates so I guess they just always check ids there.

This was a year ago so yes the DOJ is still threatening Vegas gun stores.

Choptop
10-15-2009, 8:14 PM
With the signing of ab962 do you think the DOJ will threaten border state stores with legal action for selling handgun ammo to Ca residents? I can see them doing it just like they did with magazines and other out of Ca legal items.

you might want to change the title of this thread. The CA DOJ is NOT threatening borber gun stores.

maybe something like "Will the CA DOJ threaten border guns stores?" would be more appropriate.

thanks.. FUD Police.

darkwater
10-15-2009, 8:19 PM
Bunch of CA cities sued them and a handful of other dealers and distributors with backing of the Brady Bunch.

http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:iYTGSuCeKtAJ:www.gunweek.com/2003/california0910.html+Brady+Center+sues+Southern+Ohi o+Gun&cd=5&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

Sounds like this lawsuit had to do with strawman purchases...I don't see how this generally illegal maneuver has anything to do with the legal purchase of ammunition in a face-to-face transfer. There is no provision in AB962 that prohibits CA residents from purchasing handgun ammo in other states...we are only barred from receiving handgun ammo by mail. The burden is really on CA ammunition vendors, and CA can't enforce its recordkeeping requirements on vendors that don't have a business nexus in CA. Of course, I'm not 100% until we see a test case in court, but hopefully by then, AB962 will be shot down.

jdberger
10-15-2009, 8:28 PM
ID for mags and a holster?

Tell him your name is Bugs Bunny and you live on 55 Rabbit Hole Lane. You don't have an ID because some lisping redneck took a shot at you during last hunting season.

dwtt
10-15-2009, 8:36 PM
I pulled out my Military ID and they said it had to be a drivers license. When I pulled out my license he grabbed the magazines off the counter and told me he couldn't sell to me because of the CA ID. I explained that they were to stay in Vegas. He told me that the CA DOJ will file charges against them if they sell hi caps to Ca residents.


What store was this? They seem to want to go overboard in checking ID. If your green military ID shows you are over 21, that should be good enough.

ZRT650
10-15-2009, 8:41 PM
honestly i cannot see this law holding for very long. I feel that its just waiting asking to be ruled out for effecting interstate commerce.

freakshow10mm
10-15-2009, 8:41 PM
Sounds like this lawsuit had to do with strawman purchases
SOG sold the gun to an FFL who sold the gun at a gun show to a strawman and CA went after SOG.

It was an illustration that CA can and will go after businesses in other states if they want to. The fact that they are not in California gives them very little legal protection. If California, Illinois, Maine, or Montana wanted to come after me for something, there's no stopping them from filing suit. That's my point.;)

darkwater
10-15-2009, 8:46 PM
SOG sold the gun to an FFL who sold the gun at a gun show to a strawman and CA went after SOG.

It was an illustration that CA can and will go after businesses in other states if they want to. The fact that they are not in California gives them very little legal protection. If California, Illinois, Maine, or Montana wanted to come after me for something, there's no stopping them from filing suit. That's my point.;)

There's really no stopping anyone from filing a lawsuit against anyone these days...just hope it doesn't hold up in court, but in any case the attorneys always win, even when they lose...:)

Deamer
10-15-2009, 8:57 PM
What store was this? They seem to want to go overboard in checking ID. If your green military ID shows you are over 21, that should be good enough.


The Gun Store in Las Vegas. The CA DOJ must have them scared sh**less. Took my wife in there a while later to show her the machine gun rentals. A guy was looking at Aks while I was showing her the store. He mentions to the saleman AKs being illegal in CA. They grabbed the gun he was looking at and said he could not handle any of the guns if he was from CA. But he was welcome to rent them on the rental side.

After he walked away I did mention Calguns to him.

Theseus
10-15-2009, 9:06 PM
I was thinking of starting a State Line Ammo store. . . haha. . . Next to the fireworks stand!

bodger
10-15-2009, 10:35 PM
I was thinking of starting a State Line Ammo store. . . haha. . . Next to the fireworks stand!


Ha! Good idea.

Let's hope that five years from now we don't have to drive out of state and rent a gun just so we can still shoot at all.

Amacias805
10-16-2009, 12:53 AM
The Gun Store in Las Vegas. The CA DOJ must have them scared sh**less. Took my wife in there a while later to show her the machine gun rentals. A guy was looking at Aks while I was showing her the store. He mentions to the saleman AKs being illegal in CA. They grabbed the gun he was looking at and said he could not handle any of the guns if he was from CA. But he was welcome to rent them on the rental side.

After he walked away I did mention Calguns to him.

the other side of that is that since he wasn't from NV he cant buy any guns from there (per federal law) since he is out of state. so the sales person probably didn't want to waste any time with him.

ke6guj
10-16-2009, 1:04 AM
the other side of that is that since he wasn't from NV he cant buy any guns from there (per federal law) since he is out of state. so the sales person probably didn't want to waste any time with him.He may not be able to take delivery of any guns there, but he most certainly can purchase guns there. They would just need to be shipped to his local FFL to be DROSed. So, they could have made a sales had they taken the time to humor the guy a bit. It could have been californicated with a maglock if the buyer had one, could have been made featureless by removing the grip and flashhider, or could have been shipped to a middleman FFL to let them deal with it and the CFLC. But its easier to just 86 them apparantly.

Deamer
10-16-2009, 1:25 AM
the other side of that is that since he wasn't from NV he cant buy any guns from there (per federal law) since he is out of state. so the sales person probably didn't want to waste any time with him.

From the federal law quoted in another thread, that only applies to handguns. Rifles and shotguns can be bought in other states as long as you follow the laws of both states. The 10day wait and every transfer must go through a FFL is I think what screws us from cash and carry. If I remember the salesman right he said they sell long guns all the time to customers that live in the states that border Nevada. Too much DOJ BS to deal with in CA.

If I would of had my Missouri DL they probably would have sold me the Glock mags.

Mute
10-16-2009, 7:44 AM
This is ridiculous. I don't think I've ever been to a gun store where all the magazines were tucked away awaiting customer ID before they were released for sale.

darkwater
10-16-2009, 7:48 AM
SOG sold the gun to an FFL who sold the gun at a gun show to a strawman and CA went after SOG.

It was an illustration that CA can and will go after businesses in other states if they want to. The fact that they are not in California gives them very little legal protection. If California, Illinois, Maine, or Montana wanted to come after me for something, there's no stopping them from filing suit. That's my point.;)

Thinking about cross-state implications some more...isn't it Federal law that governs strawman purchases? If so, then that opens up the borders between states to allow for such lawsuits. Are there any similar Federal laws that govern the sale of ammunition? It seems there would have to be some Federal law that would allow CA to enforce AB962 across state lines.

freakshow10mm
10-16-2009, 8:08 AM
From the federal law quoted in another thread, that only applies to handguns. Rifles and shotguns can be bought in other states as long as you follow the laws of both states.
That and the fact that CA law states all sales to residents must be run through DROS, a system which is available only to CA FFLs.

Are there any similar Federal laws that govern the sale of ammunition? It seems there would have to be some Federal law that would allow CA to enforce AB962 across state lines.
Ammunition sales are the same as they are for firearms for standard prohibited persons, straw purchase applies, age requirements. Beyond that, nothing unless you are manufacturing and dealing in armor piercing ammunition.

California isn't regulating interstate commerce, they are regulating commerce inside the state, same with the CFLC. If they are regulating internally that's fine (legal) and any fallout from interstate commerce doesn't fall on their shoulders. If the effect of internal regulation will somehow effect interstate commerce, the federal government can choose jurisdiction (forgot the legal term for claiming it), but in matters like this they will wash their hands and declare it a state matter.

With the CFLC, they aren't telling me, an FFL outside CA what to do, they are telling the CA FFL that they can't accept a firearm shipment without first having this letter. That doesn't make me immune to civil suit with CA being the plaintiff. If that was the case, I wouldn't bother with mag locks I'd just ship as is and be done with it. The markup on the locks is crap anyway, more of a burden fee to acquire if anything (I make $5 on the locks which covers my time to place the order, maintain the inventory status on my site, and the 10 seconds to install).

CA's ban on kangaroo leather, which effects interstate commerce, is completely legal as they can bar certain products from their state. That is a state's rights issue which the federal government has, and might have to, respect.

As Mr Weise has said numerous times, it doesn't give a foreign entity a pass on raining illegal products into the state without repercussions.

In my opinion, the CFLC is legally implemented but I don't agree with the system in principle. If CA said I can't ship to CA unless I do this, that's illegal. Instead, CA is telling the CA FFL you can't receive unless you have this. The burden to show is on the domestic entity, not the foreign, thus it doesn't violate interstate commerce laws. I still think it's a BS program and fight back by sending the most evilest guns into the state as I can possibly find.:D

Deamer
10-16-2009, 8:44 AM
This is ridiculous. I don't think I've ever been to a gun store where all the magazines were tucked away awaiting customer ID before they were released for sale.

The gunstore on Tropicana in Vegas does. The gunstore a couple miles behind the Bass Pro shop did not have them behind the counter but they wanted $40 for a 17 round mag so I didn't try buying any.

Freakshow, thanks for the clarification on the DROS.

armandolo
10-16-2009, 9:29 AM
Its not illegal to go out of state and buy magazines either (just cant bring them back in tact )

Is this true or do you mean HiCap (10+) Magazines?

tube_ee
10-16-2009, 9:58 AM
As I understand the law, you are allowed to import parts for legally-owned "high capacity" magazines, and there's nothing in the law that says you can't import all of the parts at one time.

So if you have a pre-2000 magazine that holds over 10 rounds in California (legal), you can then import parts for that magazine, even if you bought the parts in assembled form out of state, and disassembled them before crossing the State line.

10 rounds and under, bring 'em across. You can even mail-order them.

--Shannon

chuckdc
10-16-2009, 12:38 PM
CA's ban on kangaroo leather, which effects interstate commerce, is completely legal as they can bar certain products from their state. That is a state's rights issue which the federal government has, and might have to, respect.




That ban is no longer in force. They passed a bill a while back that removed it.

freakshow10mm
10-16-2009, 12:40 PM
Sweet. Well it still serves as an example though. Thanks for the update.

famas619
10-16-2009, 12:47 PM
You mean regular capacity magazines? High capacity are like glock 33 rounders or cmags that hold 100 rounds.

locosway
10-16-2009, 4:24 PM
962 makes no law against importing ammunition, you just can't sell it. Unlike magazines which are specifically banned from being imported there's no such working in 962.

Now, what we DO need to worry about is when they incorporate 962 into 373. When they do that they may try to add new provisions.

Legasat
10-16-2009, 4:31 PM
They cannot mess with the border stores.

It's US they could mess with with. So far no problems with buying out of State and bringing it back, but of course, it IS coming. We just don't know when yet.

The anti's will never stop. That's why WE have to stand together, resolute and unwavering!!!

Rob454
10-16-2009, 5:02 PM
That is my point. My dad has a house 10 minutes from the strip and I was denied buying 17 round Glock magazines at the gun store. Even when I expained I had no intention to take them to CA they still refused. My dad was standing with me when all this was going on and told them they would stay at his house. I have legally owned 17 rounders in CA already. I wanted to buy a couple to keep at my dad's so I didn't have to worry about being harassed if I got pulled over when going to Vegas to shoot.

HTF did they know you were a cali resident? I mean if youre paying cash they dont ask for ID do they?

locosway
10-16-2009, 5:03 PM
HTF did they know you were a cali resident? I mean if youre paying cash they dont ask for ID do they?

Next time he should let his dad drive with the NV plates... ;)

redcliff
10-16-2009, 5:15 PM
The gunstore on Tropicana in Vegas does. The gunstore a couple miles behind the Bass Pro shop did not have them behind the counter but they wanted $40 for a 17 round mag so I didn't try buying any.

Freakshow, thanks for the clarification on the DROS.

The Gun Store on Tropicana is the worst possible place to go in Vegas because of their lack of knowledge and rudeness to California visitors. Most of their full-auto's need serious maintenance and they short load the magazines also in my experience.

For a much better experience I always go to Center Mass Firearms in Henderson.

Deamer
10-16-2009, 5:42 PM
HTF did they know you were a cali resident? I mean if youre paying cash they dont ask for ID do they?

All was good until I asked for the 17 round magazines. My DL is in a plastic sleeve with my change of address card and motorcycle registration and insurance card. Nothing showing in my wallet when I opened it and no clothing that said California.

Next time he should let his dad drive with the NV plates... ;)

Like I posted earlier I was in my dads truck with nevada plates.

Deamer
10-16-2009, 5:53 PM
The Gun Store on Tropicana is the worst possible place to go in Vegas because of their lack of knowledge and rudeness to California visitors. Most of their full-auto's need serious maintenance and they short load the magazines also in my experience.

For a much better experience I always go to Center Mass Firearms in Henderson.

I have heard that most of the gun stores in Vegas are that way. Once you get away from the strip they are more relaxed. I just hope the good gun stores do not cave into the DOJ if they decide to send out threatening letters to border state gunshops about CA residents buying ammo. I have a feeling the "Gun Store" will cave like they do with magazines.

kermit315
10-16-2009, 6:21 PM
I could totally see DOJ 'implying' that they would be doing something wrong to sell to Cali residents. Not that its right, not that its legal, but I could see them doing it.

bodger
10-16-2009, 6:38 PM
I could totally see DOJ 'implying' that they would be doing something wrong to sell to Cali residents. Not that its right, not that its legal, but I could see them doing it.


More than likely the legislators will try some back door regulating on out of state ammo purchases. Transporting more than 200 rounds in a vehicle or some such nonsense. You can be they are already eyeballing a solution to that "loophole".

Hopefully, the lawsuits against 962 will stop this B.S. law before it can ever take effect.

And then WE will have our party and send photos to the Brady Bunch and the newspapers. And of course, invite DeLeon and Arnie and Bratton, et al.

Steve O
10-16-2009, 6:53 PM
But it's not illegal to go out of state, buy ammo, and bring it back. How could they threaten legal action for something perfectly legal?

right! Next time im in NV gambling, and getting laid at the bunny ranch...I'll bring home ammo... lol...

TRICKSTER
10-16-2009, 7:22 PM
I go to Vegas a couple times a year and frequent the gun shops and shows. I have never had anyone ask to see my ID when purchasing mags, ammo or accessories.

Deamer
10-16-2009, 7:24 PM
right! Next time im in NV gambling, and getting laid at the bunny ranch...I'll bring home ammo... lol...

Sorry the DOJ is sending letters to the Bunny Ranch to let them know they will be sued if they serve California residents since prostitution is illegal in CA.

bodger
10-16-2009, 8:00 PM
Sorry the DOJ is sending letters to the Bunny Ranch to let them know they will be sued if they serve California residents since prostitution is illegal in CA.



WTF??? Does this mean I won't be able to go to Nevada and buy prostitutes and bring them back to CA anymore? :43:

joefrank64k
10-16-2009, 8:06 PM
The Gun Store on Tropicana is the worst possible place to go in Vegas because of their lack of knowledge and rudeness to California visitors. Most of their full-auto's need serious maintenance and they short load the magazines also in my experience.

For a much better experience I always go to Center Mass Firearms in Henderson.

And Henderson Defense in Henderson is VERY California friendly! :D

http://shop.hendersondefense.biz/main.sc

Deamer
10-16-2009, 8:23 PM
WTF??? Does this mean I won't be able to go to Nevada and buy prostitutes and bring them back to CA anymore? :43:

You can bring them back but they have to be dismembered and hidden in your trunk.

bodger
10-16-2009, 10:50 PM
You can bring them back but they have to be dismembered and hidden in your trunk.



LOL!
Thanks, I had just been locking them up in there. I didn't know about the dismemberment law.

Foulball
10-16-2009, 11:57 PM
You can bring them back but they have to be dismembered and hidden in your trunk.

Dude, that there is funny.
You get 2 stars!

:43: