Ammo Purchase

[bruce381]

I shoot only lead 185 gr so should be NO liability shooting "ball" ammo

[Jaytil]

As for me? I'll just move to where the inmates are not in charge of such decisions.....



"JUST SAYIN"

Run Forrest, Run!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[pennstater]

Not arguing with some here, but, what makes some of you[posts #5, 6 and 10] believe OP is wrong? Seriously, I'd like to know. No sarcasm intended.

[kcstott]

I to trust my reloads and would definitely use them for carry defense, if it were not for those attorneys who would most definitely make an issue of using :super hot, custom killer ammo" against a poor attacker just trying to get by.

Never seen one actual case ever cited in an publication or court documentation.

I've only heard Anecdotal evidence, From what I know from first hand sworn court testimony from forensics investigation. The statement of "We need to test ammo exactly like the ones fired" is BS and i say it BS because only if there is any question to the story, if your facts do not line up with what the scene is telling investigators will they really dig and try to turn things around on you.

If it's a clear case of self defense and the police investigating are not being pressured by an agenda, you lawyer up but tell the complete truth. In all but the most extreme cases you will be fine reloads or not.

The BS of Reloads = intent or implied malice... No

Remember when questioned, You were in fear of your life, you reacted as trained, and you were trying to stop the attack. thats the language you need to use until your lawyer shows up.

[JackEllis]

Another way to think about it that may be way too rational is as follows:

The likelihood you'll ever have to use your gun in self-defense is very small. The likelihood someone will come after you for using hand loads is a small fraction of that small number. I'm not a lawyer or a cop but it seems to me you have nothing to worry about unless you shoot someone who is running away or has already been restrained. If you do shoot in those cases, your problems are much bigger than whether or not the ammo was hand loaded.

My brother the cop once told me he was trained to shoot to stop without worrying about whether the bad guy would survive, in which case the only other possible concern about "hot rounds" is injuring bystanders and I for one can't see how a hotter round materially affects that risk.

Spend your worry budget on drunk drivers.

[the86d]

The reality of all this is that Democrats have no clue how much they are going to lose in tax-revenue due to decreased sale of ammo, people switching to reloading, and people going to buy from other states...

[wpage]

The state shall lose on ammo sale tax revenue for certain. Serves them right for further violations of rights...

[Supersapper]

It's just me, but...

I err on the side of caution. Only carry with commercially available stuff. The best self defense ammo you can buy. It is just so easy if you ever had to draw down on someone (either as CCW or in the home) to be able to shut everyone up on the subject by saying "Here's the receipt for where I bought it so let's move on".

Just because there never has been a successful case of "you were loading your own ammo just to be able to ensure killing someone" does NOT mean that there isn't going to be some sort of successful case here in Cali in the future to make the point. When they're done with commercial ammo sales, they'll come after the reloaders. Wouldn't surprise me if this were on the agenda.

California legislators and libs in the law have made a case (pardon the pun) of not exactly following the rules to get things done and there have apparently been cases where things that should not have happened, did.

But...as I said in the beginning: it's just me. Validity on both sides of this issue. I have a friend in one of the Deputy DA's office. There's a lot of chicanery that goes on....ultimately, it is your choice, but remember:

Every bullet fired comes with a lawyer attached.

[JackEllis]

The reality of all this is that Democrats have no clue how much they are going to lose in tax-revenue due to decreased sale of ammo, people switching to reloading, and people going to buy from other states...

Might not be as much as you think. In fact, I think it could be just the opposite, though the impact will likely be relatively small. Why?

1) Most gun owners won't be inclined to break the law so they'll buy in state.

2) High volume shooters that used to buy from on-line retailers will either get set up as dealers or switch to buying in California.

The net is slightly higher ammunition sales by California retailers that might otherwise have gone to out-of-state retailers.

[Hinnerk]

JackEllis,

re high volume shooters, surely the cheapest route would be to get an FFL03 and COE.

[pennstater]

"Every bullet fired comes with a lawyer attached". Couldn't have said it better myself. In fact, I did in another post. In my HD/SD firearms, I'll have factory rounds in them. Everyone else can load as they wish.

[ScottsBad]

The state shall lose on ammo sale tax revenue for certain. Serves them right for further violations of rights...

I think this is incorrect. It is more likely that the State will gain in sales taxes from ammunition sales because fewer people will buy online and because the cost of ammo will probably increase. AND, I don't believe that the laws will significantly reduce demand.

I've spent more than $10K on ammo in the last several years. All of it purchased online and tax free. Any purchases I make once my horde is gone will probably be taxed unless the process of online sales becomes streamlined under the law.

[GW]

I think this is incorrect. It is more likely that the State will gain in sales taxes from ammunition sales because fewer people will buy online and because the cost of ammo will probably increase. AND, I don't believe that the laws will significantly reduce demand.

I've spent more than $10K on ammo in the last several years. All of it purchased online and tax free. Any purchases I make once my horde is gone will probably be taxed unless the process of online sales becomes streamlined under the law.

Pretty safe bet that if your interstate ammo purchase goes through a dealer, you'll be paying sales tax on it.

[Citadelgrad87]

It's just me, but...

I err on the side of caution. Only carry with commercially available stuff. The best self defense ammo you can buy. It is just so easy if you ever had to draw down on someone (either as CCW or in the home) to be able to shut everyone up on the subject by saying "Here's the receipt for where I bought it so let's move on".

Just because there never has been a successful case of "you were loading your own ammo just to be able to ensure killing someone" does NOT mean that there isn't going to be some sort of successful case here in Cali in the future to make the point. When they're done with commercial ammo sales, they'll come after the reloaders. Wouldn't surprise me if this were on the agenda.

California legislators and libs in the law have made a case (pardon the pun) of not exactly following the rules to get things done and there have apparently been cases where things that should not have happened, did.

But...as I said in the beginning: it's just me. Validity on both sides of this issue. I have a friend in one of the Deputy DA's office. There's a lot of chicanery that goes on....ultimately, it is your choice, but remember:

Every bullet fired comes with a lawyer attached.

[ScottsBad]

Pretty safe bet that if your interstate ammo purchase goes through a dealer, you'll be paying sales tax on it.

LOL. I did overlook that.

I have to say that one of my first impressions when the bill came out is that it is a way to increase sales taxes. I believe that had to be part of the thinking in Excremento.