Calguns.net  

Home My iTrader Join the NRA Donate to CGSSA Sponsors CGN Google Search
CA Semiauto Ban(AW)ID Flowchart CA Handgun Ban ID Flowchart CA Shotgun Ban ID Flowchart
Go Back   Calguns.net > POLITICS, LITIGATION AND ACTIVISM > 2nd Amend. Litigation Updates & Legal Discussion
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

2nd Amend. Litigation Updates & Legal Discussion Discuss California 2A related litigation and legal topics here. All advice given is NOT legal counsel.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #81  
Old 12-20-2017, 6:57 PM
Supersapper Supersapper is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 572
iTrader: 33 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chris View Post
This has been my issue is that NICS isn't setup to be used for the background check for ammo and since people buy ammo a lot especially this state. it's seems to be an unfair use of a federal system for one state alone for one type of transaction.

If the FEDS tell this state to pound sand in regards to use NICS what will the state use? I seriously doubt they have a back up plan in place.
I'd be curious as to the end result of that particular scenario:

01JAN2018, can't buy ammo without the system. No alternate in place, so presumably no ammunition can be sold anywhere in the state and it is illegal to bring in from out of state.

Since a firearm is nothing more than a paperweight or a club without it, would that give rise to a constructive ban on "arms", as defined in the Constitution?

BTW...I hold to the interpretation that "arms", as written by the founders included both the firearm and the munitions that were fired from it.
__________________
Since you see light before you hear sound, is that why so many people appear bright until you hear them speak?

Ask me about low cost Commander memberships to Frontsight!

Quote:
Originally Posted by ar15barrels View Post
Don't attempt to inject common sense into an internet pissing contest.
Reply With Quote
  #82  
Old 12-20-2017, 7:07 PM
Scope2x Scope2x is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 509
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Default

I think the main issue is this has been done in other states and it has been upheld
Reply With Quote
  #83  
Old 12-20-2017, 7:13 PM
Cokebottle's Avatar
Cokebottle Cokebottle is offline
SeŮor Member
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: IE, CA
Posts: 31,246
iTrader: 14 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scope2x View Post
I think the main issue is this has been done in other states and it has been upheld

Where?

NO other states have the registration/reporting that will go into effect in 2019.
__________________
- Rich

Quote:
Originally Posted by dantodd View Post
A just gov't will not be overthrown by force or violence because the people have no incentive to overthrow a just gov't. If a small minority of people attempt such an insurrection to grab power and enslave the people the RKBA of the whole is our insurance against their success.
Reply With Quote
  #84  
Old 12-20-2017, 8:18 PM
aBrowningfan aBrowningfan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 674
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Supersapper View Post
I'd be curious as to the end result of that particular scenario:

01JAN2018, can't buy ammo without the system. No alternate in place, so presumably no ammunition can be sold anywhere in the state and it is illegal to bring in from out of state.

Since a firearm is nothing more than a paperweight or a club without it, would that give rise to a constructive ban on "arms", as defined in the Constitution?

BTW...I hold to the interpretation that "arms", as written by the founders included both the firearm and the munitions that were fired from it.
My Magic 8-Ball says to expect a sh*tstorm of litigation commencing January 2, 2018.
Reply With Quote
  #85  
Old 12-21-2017, 5:46 AM
Dvrjon Dvrjon is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 5,677
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Supersapper View Post
I'd be curious as to the end result of that particular scenario:

01JAN2018, can't buy ammo without the system. No alternate in place, so presumably no ammunition can be sold anywhere in the state and it is illegal to bring in from out of state.

Since a firearm is nothing more than a paperweight or a club without it, would that give rise to a constructive ban on "arms", as defined in the Constitution?

BTW...I hold to the interpretation that "arms", as written by the founders included both the firearm and the munitions that were fired from it.
Electronic reporting doesn't go into effect until 2019. PC 30352 (http://codes.findlaw.com/ca/penal-co...ect-30352.html)
Quote:
(b) Commencing July 1, 2019, an ammunition vendor shall electronically submit to the department the information required by subdivision (a) for all sales and transfers of ownership of ammunition.
Plenty of time for the Legislature to amend the deadline.
Reply With Quote
  #86  
Old 12-21-2017, 10:26 AM
Supersapper Supersapper is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 572
iTrader: 33 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dvrjon View Post
Electronic reporting doesn't go into effect until 2019. PC 30352 (http://codes.findlaw.com/ca/penal-co...ect-30352.html) Plenty of time for the Legislature to amend the deadline.
My error. I guess I was mixing the whole thing together. However, my question is still valid in a sense.

You can't buy it online, you can't go get it out of state, and I tried reading up and it seemed that ammo vendor licenses are required to sell after 01JAN18. I was under the impression that it is too late to apply for one in time for 01JAN, so a store selling would be locked out of selling ammo if they don't have one. Which, please enlighten me if I am incorrect, does not exist as such yet? I keep trying to keep up with this, but every time I think I'm ready to kick, they keep moving the goal posts.

For example: Walmart, Big 5, etc.

Did they settle the issue over a firearm seller's license being legit to sell ammunition?

I guess in the end, if a system a can not be created to handle millions of transactions of one box here and one box there when 01JUL19 comes, I guess it would be a constructive ban.
__________________
Since you see light before you hear sound, is that why so many people appear bright until you hear them speak?

Ask me about low cost Commander memberships to Frontsight!

Quote:
Originally Posted by ar15barrels View Post
Don't attempt to inject common sense into an internet pissing contest.

Last edited by Supersapper; 12-21-2017 at 10:33 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #87  
Old 12-21-2017, 10:36 AM
Dvrjon Dvrjon is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 5,677
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Supersapper View Post
Did they settle the issue over a firearm seller's license being legit to sell ammunition?
Never an issue; it's in the statute.
Reply With Quote
  #88  
Old 12-21-2017, 10:48 AM
aBrowningfan aBrowningfan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 674
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dvrjon View Post
Electronic reporting doesn't go into effect until 2019. PC 30352 (http://codes.findlaw.com/ca/penal-co...ect-30352.html) Plenty of time for the Legislature to amend the deadline.
So, between January 1, 2018 and July, 2019, all that is being done at the retail level is to prepare a manual log of ammunition sales? How is that going to make the vast fearful masses any safer?

I am starting to think there is a viable restraint of trade argument. At least until July, 2019....
Reply With Quote
  #89  
Old 12-21-2017, 11:26 AM
Dvrjon Dvrjon is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 5,677
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aBrowningfan View Post
So, between January 1, 2018 and July, 2019, all that is being done at the retail level is to prepare a manual log of ammunition sales? How is that going to make the vast fearful masses any safer?

I am starting to think there is a viable restraint of trade argument. At least until July, 2019....
The courts are open. Jot down your ideas and find a judge.

Manual logs for ammo purchases have been around for years...the City of Sacramento has had one for over a decade. (Drive-by shootings continue to abound in the city.)

I would think that the inability to issue vendor licenses to non-FFL businesses (Walmart) would be a much greater constraint on trade than a manual listing requirement.

The DOJ Regulations for licenses are pending at the Office of Administrative Law with a due date of 1/18/2018. Until approved, OAG can't accept and review applications for licenses, so no vendor license will be available for some time*.

*By the time one drafts a filing and gets it before a judge, the regs will be in place and licenses will be issued. The action will be dismissed.
Reply With Quote
  #90  
Old 12-21-2017, 11:41 AM
aBrowningfan aBrowningfan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 674
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dvrjon View Post
The courts are open. Jot down your ideas and find a judge.

Manual logs for ammo purchases have been around for years...the City of Sacramento has had one for over a decade. (Drive-by shootings continue to abound in the city.)

I would think that the inability to issue vendor licenses to non-FFL businesses (Walmart) would be a much greater constraint on trade than a manual listing requirement.

The DOJ Regulations for licenses are pending at the Office of Administrative Law with a due date of 1/18/2018. Until approved, OAG can't accept and review applications for licenses, so no vendor license will be available for some time*.

*By the time one drafts a filing and gets it before a judge, the regs will be in place and licenses will be issued. The action will be dismissed.
There seem to be some fruitful avenues for challenge. I wonder when the first lawsuit will be filed; any guesses? January 2nd? Or?
Reply With Quote
  #91  
Old 12-21-2017, 11:53 AM
Dvrjon Dvrjon is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 5,677
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aBrowningfan View Post
There seem to be some fruitful avenues for challenge. I wonder when the first lawsuit will be filed; any guesses? January 2nd? Or?
Did you miss this?

"*By the time one drafts a filing and gets it before a judge, the regs will be in place and licenses will be issued. The action will be dismissed."
Reply With Quote
  #92  
Old 12-21-2017, 12:35 PM
aBrowningfan aBrowningfan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 674
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dvrjon View Post
Did you miss this?

"*By the time one drafts a filing and gets it before a judge, the regs will be in place and licenses will be issued. The action will be dismissed."
Your reference was about licenses for non-FFL holders. I suspect there will be other avenues for litigation. Time will tell, the 1st is fast-approaching.
Reply With Quote
  #93  
Old 12-21-2017, 12:56 PM
wannabefree wannabefree is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: State of Jefferson
Posts: 99
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dvrjon View Post
Did you miss this?

"*By the time one drafts a filing and gets it before a judge, the regs will be in place and licenses will be issued. The action will be dismissed."
Do you know something the rest of us don't know. How long do you expect it to take to get the first license issued ?

Could there not be an emergency Temporary injunction or Stay on the law issued until this all gets settled.

Also how could the State enforce a Law that they themselves are not in compliance of by not issuing license in the time frame state in the Law.
Reply With Quote
  #94  
Old 12-21-2017, 1:54 PM
aBrowningfan aBrowningfan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 674
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wannabefree View Post
Do you know something the rest of us don't know. How long do you expect it to take to get the first license issued ?

Could there not be an emergency Temporary injunction or Stay on the law issued until this all gets settled.

Also how could the State enforce a Law that they themselves are not in compliance of by not issuing license in the time frame state in the Law.
Easily. They are about to do it come January 1st. Happy New Years!
Reply With Quote
  #95  
Old 12-21-2017, 3:03 PM
Supersapper Supersapper is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 572
iTrader: 33 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dvrjon View Post
The courts are open. Jot down your ideas and find a judge.

Manual logs for ammo purchases have been around for years...the City of Sacramento has had one for over a decade. (Drive-by shootings continue to abound in the city.)

I would think that the inability to issue vendor licenses to non-FFL businesses (Walmart) would be a much greater constraint on trade than a manual listing requirement.

The DOJ Regulations for licenses are pending at the Office of Administrative Law with a due date of 1/18/2018. Until approved, OAG can't accept and review applications for licenses, so no vendor license will be available for some time*.

*By the time one drafts a filing and gets it before a judge, the regs will be in place and licenses will be issued. The action will be dismissed.

So I'm guessing that between 01/01/2018 and 01/18/2018, if you're not an FFL, then you can't sell ammo? Or am I missing something in the details? I talked to the manager at my WalMart and he said that all of his employees engaged in selling ammunition were all fingerprinted and cleared. He indicated that they were planning on selling after the first, but that corporate has issued no guidance yet, so he was a bit in the dark.

I always thought that a law that can NOT be complied with can NOT be enforced, since there is no way to comply. Or have I just not been able to read any of this correctly?
__________________
Since you see light before you hear sound, is that why so many people appear bright until you hear them speak?

Ask me about low cost Commander memberships to Frontsight!

Quote:
Originally Posted by ar15barrels View Post
Don't attempt to inject common sense into an internet pissing contest.
Reply With Quote
  #96  
Old 12-21-2017, 6:00 PM
Tripper's Avatar
Tripper Tripper is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Central Coast-Salinas
Posts: 7,744
iTrader: 102 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dvrjon View Post
I would think that the inability to issue vendor licenses to non-FFL businesses (Walmart) would be a much greater constraint on trade than a manual listing requirement.

Walmart had their employees do whatever it is they had to do to still be able to sell ammo, probably half dozen at the Walmart I was at today got their Ďcredsí


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #97  
Old 12-21-2017, 6:51 PM
taperxz taperxz is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 16,366
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tripper View Post
Walmart had their employees do whatever it is they had to do to still be able to sell ammo, probably half dozen at the Walmart I was at today got their ‘creds’


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
So you think a COE was issued to 6 people on the same exact day from CA DOJ?

That would be a statistical miracle.
Reply With Quote
  #98  
Old 12-21-2017, 7:08 PM
wannabefree wannabefree is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: State of Jefferson
Posts: 99
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by taperxz View Post
So you think a COE was issued to 6 people on the same exact day from CA DOJ?

That would be a statistical miracle.
My guess is Walmart Corporate knows what they are doing and perhaps there legal team has determined that this law is dead until the DOJ makes good on there responsibility to issue the proper permits or what ever is needed to comply
Reply With Quote
  #99  
Old 12-21-2017, 7:08 PM
Tripper's Avatar
Tripper Tripper is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Central Coast-Salinas
Posts: 7,744
iTrader: 102 / 100%
Default Out off state ammunition purchase injunction?

Quote:
Originally Posted by taperxz View Post
So you think a COE was issued to 6 people on the same exact day from CA DOJ?

That would be a statistical miracle.

No. I didnít mean to imply that all got them today. I meant only that the specific Walmart I was at today. talked to one guy, heís good and he said about 6 in that store completed the process to be able to sell ammo. I didnít think to ask how many actually applied vs. approved or what their time frame was. I recall a while back him talking about doing the application part.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #100  
Old 12-21-2017, 7:12 PM
Supersapper Supersapper is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 572
iTrader: 33 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wannabefree View Post
My guess is Walmart Corporate knows what they are doing and perhaps there legal team has determined that this law is dead until the DOJ makes good on there responsibility to issue the proper permits or what ever is needed to comply
I would give my ridiculous government salary to see WalMart tell the state to pound sand and dare them to prosecute.

Not that it will happen, but dang it, that would, in the immortal words of Harry Callahan, "...make my day."
__________________
Since you see light before you hear sound, is that why so many people appear bright until you hear them speak?

Ask me about low cost Commander memberships to Frontsight!

Quote:
Originally Posted by ar15barrels View Post
Don't attempt to inject common sense into an internet pissing contest.
Reply With Quote
  #101  
Old 12-21-2017, 9:57 PM
taperxz taperxz is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 16,366
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wannabefree View Post
My guess is Walmart Corporate knows what they are doing and perhaps there legal team has determined that this law is dead until the DOJ makes good on there responsibility to issue the proper permits or what ever is needed to comply
You would be wrong. Walmart would be lucky to be able to actually figure it out.

Not to mention, the BS required to sell ammo in CA isnít profitable enough for Walmart to bother
Reply With Quote
  #102  
Old 12-21-2017, 10:04 PM
wannabefree wannabefree is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: State of Jefferson
Posts: 99
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by taperxz View Post
You would be wrong. Walmart would be lucky to be able to actually figure it out.

Not to mention, the BS required to sell ammo in CA isnít profitable enough for Walmart to bother
All I know is my Little Wally World in a Town of 10,000 told me that its business as usual and they will be selling Ammo on January 1st 2018. Big 5 told me the same as did my Local private Gun Store.

Of course most of us up here do not claim to be part of California, We are part of the State of Jefferson.
Reply With Quote
  #103  
Old 12-22-2017, 1:13 PM
Dragginpanda Dragginpanda is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 388
iTrader: 22 / 100%
Default

My local Walmart finger printed their workers who sell ammo. Business as usual they said in 2018.
Reply With Quote
  #104  
Old 12-22-2017, 11:07 PM
Daddo's Avatar
Daddo Daddo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Sandy Eggo
Posts: 1,008
iTrader: 190 / 100%
Default

Yup...same thing in SD. 2018, it's biz as usual at all Wal-Marts.
Reply With Quote
  #105  
Old 12-23-2017, 9:45 AM
splithoof splithoof is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 1,130
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wannabefree View Post
Of course most of us up here do not claim to be part of California, We are part of the State of Jefferson.
Nice to know there are like-minded folk around.
Reply With Quote
  #106  
Old 12-23-2017, 4:50 PM
Dvrjon Dvrjon is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 5,677
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tripper View Post
Walmart had their employees do whatever it is they had to do to still be able to sell ammo, probably half dozen at the Walmart I was at today got their Ďcredsí
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The issue isn't about certifications employees have to get to manage the program, it's about whether DOJ has the legal ability to issue licenses by 1/1/2018.

The regulations which put the program in place (including the $196 fee to be charged) are in the draft regulations at OAL, but are not scheduled to be completed until mid-January (See below). Transmittal to Sec of State for publishing will take more time.

If a Walmart sells firearms, the FFL is deemed to be a licensed ammunition vendor. Stores without FFLs don't have that cover, since each license specifies the location of sales, so a blanket "State of California Walmart" license won't work.

See Codes at:
http://codes.findlaw.com/ca/penal-co...ect-30385.html
http://codes.findlaw.com/ca/penal-co...ect-30390.html
http://codes.findlaw.com/ca/penal-co...ect-30395.html

See Proposed Regulations at: https://oag.ca.gov/sites/all/files/a...-licensing.pdf

See OAL Regulations status at: https://oal.ca.gov/proposed-regulations/ (Search "Department of Justice")



Since the regs aren't in place, The fee can't be charged. No fee; no license (?)
Attached Images
File Type: jpg OAL Ammo Regs 23Dec2017.jpg (16.5 KB, 767 views)
Reply With Quote
  #107  
Old 12-23-2017, 4:51 PM
Dvrjon Dvrjon is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 5,677
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wannabefree View Post
All I know is my Little Wally World in a Town of 10,000 told me that its business as usual and they will be selling Ammo on January 1st 2018. Big 5 told me the same as did my Local private Gun Store.

Of course most of us up here do not claim to be part of California, We are part of the State of Jefferson.
FFLs are deemed to be licensed ammo vendors; no additional licensing required, so Big 5 and LGS would continue to do business as usual.
Reply With Quote
  #108  
Old 12-23-2017, 4:55 PM
Dvrjon Dvrjon is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 5,677
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wannabefree View Post
My guess is Walmart Corporate knows what they are doing and perhaps there legal team has determined that this law is dead until the DOJ makes good on there responsibility to issue the proper permits or what ever is needed to comply
I suspect this is where the issue would land, but until that happens, is DOJ in violation of the law? If so, who would prosecute?
Reply With Quote
  #109  
Old 12-24-2017, 11:24 AM
Supersapper Supersapper is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 572
iTrader: 33 / 100%
Default

DVRjon,

Doesn't that bring us back to the beginning, in a sense? Since the law can NOT be complied with, can it be ignored?

And I think you asked a VERY valid question that applies here: Who's going to prosecute? CADOJ? I'm not sure they could; a law that can not be complied with can not be prosecuted, so I wonder what the legal ramifications are...
__________________
Since you see light before you hear sound, is that why so many people appear bright until you hear them speak?

Ask me about low cost Commander memberships to Frontsight!

Quote:
Originally Posted by ar15barrels View Post
Don't attempt to inject common sense into an internet pissing contest.
Reply With Quote
  #110  
Old 12-24-2017, 12:59 PM
hossfol hossfol is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 59
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Angry

Quote:
Originally Posted by Supersapper View Post
My error. I guess I was mixing the whole thing together. However, my question is still valid in a sense.

You can't buy it online, you can't go get it out of state, and I tried reading up and it seemed that ammo vendor licenses are required to sell after 01JAN18. I was under the impression that it is too late to apply for one in time for 01JAN, so a store selling would be locked out of selling ammo if they don't have one. Which, please enlighten me if I am incorrect, does not exist as such yet? I keep trying to keep up with this, but every time I think I'm ready to kick, they keep moving the goal posts.

For example: Walmart, Big 5, etc.

Did they settle the issue over a firearm seller's license being legit to sell ammunition?

I guess in the end, if a system a can not be created to handle millions of transactions of one box here and one box there when 01JUL19 comes, I guess it would be a constructive ban.
Both Wal-Marts in Roseville, a suburb of Sacramento will no longer sell ammunition as of Jan 1 2018 due to the new "law"...
Reply With Quote
  #111  
Old 12-24-2017, 2:55 PM
Supersapper Supersapper is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 572
iTrader: 33 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hossfol View Post
Both Wal-Marts in Roseville, a suburb of Sacramento will no longer sell ammunition as of Jan 1 2018 due to the new "law"...
If you find their prices reasonable, then I would probably get as much as you can now before the inevitable price hikes. :P

My WalMart does not sell firearms. I just picked up some ammo there and talked with the assistant manager and they thought that it would be business as usual on 01JAN18; that they were expecting to sell after the 1st.

I mentioned that that OAL won't publish guidelines for licensing (meaning there, in effect, is no licensing available yet) until 16JAN18 (as noted above), then unless WalMart intends to tell the state to pound sand, they wouldn't be selling between 01JAN18 and 16JAN18 (soonest). If WalMart hasn't picked up their license to sell ammunition, it's probably too late now.

I asked him if there'd be a firesale on ammo on December 31st. We kind of chuckled about it. Then I looked at him dead pan in the eyes.

I told him I'd see him in 4-5 days. :P
__________________
Since you see light before you hear sound, is that why so many people appear bright until you hear them speak?

Ask me about low cost Commander memberships to Frontsight!

Quote:
Originally Posted by ar15barrels View Post
Don't attempt to inject common sense into an internet pissing contest.
Reply With Quote
  #112  
Old 12-25-2017, 8:44 AM
Tripper's Avatar
Tripper Tripper is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Central Coast-Salinas
Posts: 7,744
iTrader: 102 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hossfol View Post
Both Wal-Marts in Roseville, a suburb of Sacramento will no longer sell ammunition as of Jan 1 2018 due to the new "law"...

Thatís weird, both Walmartís here in salinas will continue. The got their employees fingerprinted and all


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #113  
Old 12-25-2017, 2:26 PM
RichV RichV is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 13
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

The employees at Walmart in Folsom said they would continue to sell after Jan 1.
Reply With Quote
  #114  
Old 12-26-2017, 3:32 PM
MarVin1020 MarVin1020 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 25
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default Another one bites the dust

Right before Xmas got an email from a web supplier who notified everybody that they will not process orders after 12 31 17.
Reply With Quote
  #115  
Old 12-26-2017, 6:09 PM
Dvrjon Dvrjon is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 5,677
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MarVin1020 View Post
Right before Xmas got an email from a web supplier who notified everybody that they will not process orders after 12 31 17.
So, with a title of "Another one bites the dust," What's the vendor's name?
Reply With Quote
  #116  
Old 12-26-2017, 11:43 PM
lapriester lapriester is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Cobb in N CA
Posts: 289
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Question

So they are going to shake down every vehicle that enters CA from another state? I believe they need probable cause to search without a warrant and I don't give anyone blanket permission to search my vehicle without probablte cause they can produce.

I often take my personal ammo from CA with me when I travel to my vacation home on Oregon and then bring back some of that ammo when I return. Where is the burden of proof for that ammo I bring back because, of course, I NEVER buy any ammo in Oregon...or Nevada.....or Arizona when I hunt there. But, I always bring back what I don't use. I see no prohibition for bringing back ammo you legally bought in CA when you return from out of state and almost all that ammo was bought many years ago and I no longer have any proof of purchase to verify that.
Reply With Quote
  #117  
Old 12-26-2017, 11:46 PM
lapriester lapriester is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Cobb in N CA
Posts: 289
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Exclamation

Quote:
Originally Posted by MarVin1020 View Post
Right before Xmas got an email from a web supplier who notified everybody that they will not process orders after 12 31 17.
Well that's simply too late. If they send it to you and you receive it after 12/31/17 you will both be in violation of the law.
Reply With Quote
  #118  
Old 12-27-2017, 12:02 AM
NorcalGSG NorcalGSG is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 839
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lapriester View Post
Well that's simply too late. If they send it to you and you receive it after 12/31/17 you will both be in violation of the law.
I have read here that the transaction must be done before 2017 ends, but interstate shipping company can deliver after the 1st is still ok. I checked the doj bof web page and saw nothing at all about ammogeddon period to explain or clarify. So right now, I'm in the dark.
Reply With Quote
  #119  
Old 12-27-2017, 4:33 AM
aBrowningfan aBrowningfan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 674
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NorcalGSG View Post
I have read here that the transaction must be done before 2017 ends, but interstate shipping company can deliver after the 1st is still ok. I checked the doj bof web page and saw nothing at all about ammogeddon period to explain or clarify. So right now, I'm in the dark.
This is one example of why I am expecting lawsuits over the new law.
Reply With Quote
  #120  
Old 12-27-2017, 8:08 AM
champu's Avatar
champu champu is offline
NRA Member, CRPA Member,
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Redondo Beach
Posts: 704
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NorcalGSG View Post
I have read here that the transaction must be done before 2017 ends, but interstate shipping company can deliver after the 1st is still ok. I checked the doj bof web page and saw nothing at all about ammogeddon period to explain or clarify. So right now, I'm in the dark.
This argument is probably covered elsewhere, but if you read PC 30312 carefully...

Quote:
(a) (1) Commencing January 1, 2018, the sale of ammunition by any party shall be conducted by or processed through a licensed ammunition vendor...

(b) Commencing January 1, 2018, the sale, delivery, or transfer of ownership of ammunition by any party may only occur in a face-to-face transaction with the seller, deliverer, or transferor...
If the sale was before 1 Jan 2018 and delivery occurs face-to-face (e.g. signature required) then that follows the letter of the law without requiring involvement of an ammunition vendor. And since there are no regulations in effect at this time, the statute is all we’ve got to work with.

Ultimately it depends on what the vendor is comfortable with. I doubt the carriers give a crap and worrying about transient issues like this is a waste of calories both for us and for DoJ/DAs.

Last edited by champu; 12-27-2017 at 8:10 AM..
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 9:50 AM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Proudly hosted by GeoVario the Premier 2A host.
Calguns.net, the 'Calguns' name and all associated variants and logos are ® Trademark and © Copyright 2002-2018, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.
Calguns.net and The Calguns Foundation have no affiliation and are in no way related to each other.
All opinions, statements and remarks made by Calguns.net on this web site and elsewhere are solely attributable to Calguns.net.