Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Buy your ammo now before July 1 hits

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • #31
    The Gleam
    I need a LIFE!!
    • Feb 2011
    • 11168

    Originally posted by P5Ret

    A Basic Check is not instant. I've seen denials come back in hours, but I've never seen an approval that didn't take at least 3-5 days, most were longer.

    From DOJ's FAQ.
    "The Basic Ammunition Eligibility Check requires the Department to conduct a comprehensive review of its records to determine the person’s eligibility to own or possess ammunition. This eligibility check is similar to a firearms eligibility check and may take days to determine eligibility. For this type of eligibility check, the California Ammunition Vendor will have to provide you with an Ammunition Transaction Number so that you can monitor the status of the eligibility check through the Department’s California Firearms Application Reporting System (CFARS)."
    Yes, for the $19 one which is treated as a full background check, anomalies arise, but no mandated 10-day wait with that, and not the $1.00 version - (or $5.00 as of today).

    And of course, we saw the DOJ playing a lot of delay/undetermined games all through the 'COVID years' due to volume of purchases which I still think had more to do with hostile spite as opposed to any legitimacy.

    My point being, if you already own a firearm in AFS, the same $1.00 ($5.00) should be all that is necessary for additional gun purchases - regardless of the fact there should not be any background check at all.

    ---
    Last edited by The Gleam; 07-01-2025, 4:52 PM.
    -----------------------------------------------
    Originally posted by Librarian
    What compelling interest has any level of government in knowing what guns are owned by civilians? (Those owned by government should be inventoried and tracked, for exactly the same reasons computers and desks and chairs are tracked: responsible care of public property.)

    If some level of government had that information, what would they do with it? How would having that info benefit public safety? How would it benefit law enforcement?

    Comment

    • #32
      Snoopy47
      Veteran Member
      • Aug 2010
      • 3756

      The point is it should be $0.

      $5 will eventually be $500 per bullet.

      Now............. if the point is to keep firearms out of the hands of the poor then I'm totally for that. That LAST thing the political class wants is an armed majority.

      Keep guns and ammo out of the hands of the poor.

      Before there was Polymer there was Accuracy.

      Comment

      • #33
        Deelayed
        Senior Member
        • Jun 2020
        • 682

        Originally posted by OLD-skool454#3
        This guy lol, my boss has a $250,000 annual property tax and he is crying over $4. So, how long you gonna cry about $4 or any other thing in life that is just a part of growing up? Guns are not for everybody...just don't own guns if you can't handle the responsibility or cost of them...so simple... What's chit is people who think they are owed something all the time, champagne tastes on beer budgets. I feel sorry for all the women married/dating whiners and complainers...it really is only $4 more per attempt...buy in bulk. If the fee is causing you that much of an issue then you truly are in the wrong game. Bet that if you owned a business and could make an xtra $4 per sale you would not complain. Everybody has options, it's on you to make the best choice. For me family comes first, then my job...guns are toys (not necessities) and I can accept and live with what Ca gives me or I can reject it and move on. Yes, there are literally tons of guns available already and yes...10 rounds is enough if you know how to use your weapon hint, hint.
        Even toy firearms are not toys . I learned that when I was 5 years old after having my daisy bb gun taken away after using the (full ) box of tide laundry detergent as a target . In my defense the logo did resemble a bullseye . Which i hit dead center from 300 yards away . In the rain . With 40mph cross winds . At 11:30 pm . With iron sights .

        Comment

        • #34
          splithoof
          Veteran Member
          • May 2015
          • 4871

          Originally posted by OLD-skool454#3
          It's only $4 more, I've seen people pay $30 a day for two packs of smokes at the gas station...same people flying gun stickers and same people complaining about an extra $4. Either way, if you only buy a box every month or two or you buy 100 boxes every couple weeks...it really isn't going to be so expensive that true gun enthusiasts won't be able to keep guns. Even if that was the case...sell some guns, get a caliber that one can afford ammo for. There are so many budget firearms available everywhere now that not being able to afford ammo because of an xtra $4 should not be an excuse except for lazy people who don't want to work for money. I believe most stores realize that impact of these fee increases and have tried to offset them by offering discounts, sales, specials on ammo. Yeah it sucks that everything is going up, either we stop what we are doing and quit crying about it or we do it better and go for what we need/want/deserve. I will just take a $1 a day Mon-Fri and on Fri I have my $5 for my ammo purchase. Those $5 I would have lost in a soda that went flat, a half eaten burger I threw away, some coins that fell out of my pocket that I didn't care or remember to pick up, paying $.10 at the market for plastic bags I truly don't need etc. The thing is that no one is obligated or forcing anyone else to own/keep guns, it's a personal choice...if it's not financially viable any further then those people research alternative options in employment or weapons.
          As I read this, Im sitting here in an airport in Africa, waiting to come back from a place that treats gun ownership by it’s citizens as a privilege to be freely taxed, regulated, and suppressed as some bureaucrat sees fit. It is the attitude of this member that gets us to situations exactly like that of the place I’ve been visiting, and will certainly get us to like circumstances at home. Simply put, this member doesn't get it, is happy to be compliant, happy to have some government official decide what is best for them. It is a cancer, that has sadly metastasized into a segment of the gun owning community. Note that I did not say the 2A community, as there is a distinct difference. There are simple gun owners, and then there are true advocates for the 2A, Unfortunately, OLD-skool has failed the test.

          Comment

          • #35
            splithoof
            Veteran Member
            • May 2015
            • 4871

            Originally posted by The Gleam

            We know, we know, your other avatar is a flamboyant furry racoon.

            Your boss is Gayvin Newsom.

            And you're full of crap on all counts Go back to cacaguns.

            ---
            My thoughts as well. I read over there that one particular member actually posted that they would vote for our current governor to be the next president, and also liked the failed Tim Walz as well. If anything, it only proves that a dildo can actually speak.

            Comment

            • #36
              Sam Hainn
              Senior Member
              • Jan 2007
              • 655

              I bought all my ammo before Gray Davis hit, before the millennium hit, before Newsom hit, before Prop 63 hit, and before COVID hit!
              "No throwing live ammunition into bonfires on runs."

              Comment

              • #37
                xxINKxx
                Veteran Member
                • Jun 2008
                • 4289

                I still got my stock piles from the Obama era ammo scare lol
                "If a law is unjust, a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so." - Thomas Jefferson

                Comment

                Working...
                UA-8071174-1