GUNS/RLTD GOVERNOR MOONBEAM GOES AFTER AMMO SALES IN CALIFORNIA 11-30-2016

[Doomer Doug]

California passed yet another wave of anti-Second Amendment, anti gun and ammo laws on November 9th, 2016. I wonder if Oregon and Washington can be far behind. The way "they" deal with the Second Amendment is to strangle it like a Boa Constrictor does. I am also not sure whether any court challenge would be effective since it is a voter passed measure.

The link is here.

http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2016/11/09/gun-control-measure-approved/

California Voters Approve Gun Control Measure
November 9, 2016 4:44 AM
Filed Under: Ammunition, Guns
LOS ANGELES (CBSLA.com) — A gun and ammunition control initiative will become the law of the land in California, thanks to voters’ approval.

Proposition 63 will require most individuals to pass background checks and obtain Department of Justice authorization to purchase ammunition.

The measure will also prohibit the possession of large-capacity magazines.

Prop. 63 will require the following:

— Most ammunition sales to be made through licensed ammunition vendors and reported to the Department of Justice

— Lost or stolen firearms and ammunition will need to be reported to law enforcement

— Those convicted of stealing a firearm will be prohibited from possessing firearms

— Procedures will be established for laws prohibiting firearm possession by felons and violent criminals

— The Department of Justice will need to provide information about prohibited people to the federal National Instant Criminal Background Check System

Passage of the initiative will result in increased state costs in the tens of millions of dollars annually related to regulating ammunition sales, according to an analysis conducted by the Legislative Analyst’s Office and Department of Finance.

There will also be an increase in court and law enforcement costs, not likely to exceed the tens of millions of dollars annually.

These costs could be offset to some extent by fees authorized by the measure.

There will also be a potential increase in state and local correctional costs, not likely to exceed the low millions of dollars annually, related to new and increased penalties.

(

 

[bw]

Those convicted of stealing a firearm will be prohibited from possessing firearms

Prima facie I have no problem with this. The problem comes up with how they define 'stealing'. If Kali defines stealing as possessing a firearm without having passed a background check (i.e. your buddy loaned it to you, and I don't put that definition past Kali) then I would take issue with it.

 

[Doomer Doug]

This is merely abuse and harassment of gun owners by the state of California. The real problem is California is now full enough of anti gun extremists to actually vote this in. It will be incredibly difficult to buy ammo now. For one thing, the law requires anybody who buys ammo to have a background check done on them. I am not sure if they have to do this every time they buy ammo, just like with a gun. If nothing else, this is going to stress the FBI background check systems with several MILLION additional background checks per year. It is solely designed to bully gun owners in California and nothing else.

It will lead to a large exodus of any remaining normal people in California. OF course, it will also mean the remaining Snowflakes are effectively disarmed and easy prey for the taking.

Jerry Brown is a vile man who has pretty much finished the destruction of California that has been going on for decades now.

The anti gun groups have adopted a policy of abusing and bullying gun owners since Heller decision. I believe this law would be upheld by even a Trump Supreme Court since it was voted in directly by the people.

 

[Old Gray Mare]

The OP failed to mention the emergence of a black market in ammo. I can imagine trips to Las Vegas funded or subsidized by ammo smuggled back into Cali for a "friend".

 

[Dennis Olson]

Prima facie I have no problem with this. The problem comes up with how they define 'stealing'. If Kali defines stealing as possessing a firearm without having passed a background check (i.e. your buddy loaned it to you, and I don't put that definition past Kali) then I would take issue with it.

Wel goooooolllllleeeeee sergeant Carter! I just KNOW that someone who steals a gun and becomes "prohibited" from possessing one, will sure obey that law!!!


/sarc

 

[bw]

Wel goooooolllllleeeeee sergeant Carter! I just KNOW that someone who steals a gun and becomes "prohibited" from possessing one, will sure obey that law!!!

I certainly don't expect them to; I doubt you do either. I didn't say anyone would obey the law, I said I had no problem with such a law (depending on how they define stealing). The rest of that garbage I do take exception to.

 

[Intestinal Fortitude]

http://www.guns.com/2016/11/10/cali...e-to-sue-over-ammo-regulation-ballot-measure/



California: Gun rights groups promise to sue over ammo regulation ballot measure
11/10/16 | by Chris Eger
Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom has enshrined a host of new gun control laws with the help of voters, but may have to defend their legality when compared to the Second Amendment. (Photo: Carlos Avila Gonzalez/ The San Franciscio Chronicle)

Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom has made the state’s tough gun laws tougher with the help of voters, but may have to defend their legality when compared to the Second Amendment. (Photo: Carlos Avila Gonzalez/ The San Franciscio Chronicle)

California Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom’s “Safety for All” voter proposition may have won over voters but it could soon face legal scrutiny in court.

Listed on the ballot as Proposition 63, voters approved the initiative 63-37 on Tuesday. Funded by $5.2 million from the state’s Democratic Party and wealthy donors, the measure not only further protects new gun control bills signed earlier this year but also requires background checks prior to all ammunition sales – a first for any state.

Attorney Chuck Michel, who also serves as president of the California Rifle and Pistol Association, advised that with a new Republican president choosing potential U.S. Supreme Court Justices, the time is right to take not only Prop. 63 but also other legally questionable laws to court.

“With our victory in the presidential election, successful legal challenges will now be filed against all these new ill-conceived and unconstitutional laws, and those cases will be heard by a new Supreme Court that will see these laws as the Second Amendment violations that they are,” Michel said in a statement.

The CRPA, along with the National Rifle Association and scores of law enforcement and civil rights associations joined to oppose Newsom’s ballot measure as part of the Coalition for Civil Liberties. With the measure now moving forward with a mandate from California voters, the coalition will remain and refocus their efforts.

“Those activists are now a part of the self-defense civil rights coalition political action committee, and a grassroots activist force that anti-gun-owner politicians will have to reckon with for years to come,”Michel said.

Another gun rights group formed to oppose the ballot referendum, Stop Prop 63, was sponsored primarily by the California-based Firearms Policy Coalition, who is also looking to the courts.

“Following the historic election of Donald J. Trump, we look forward to challenging Proposition 63 and many other extreme gun control laws in federal courts that respect the original public meaning of our great Constitution and the unambiguous text, history, and tradition of the Second Amendment,” Craig J. DeLuz, director of communications with the FPC, said in a statement emailed to Guns.com.

Barring possible suits and court injunctions or rulings, the list of new gun control mandates and effective dates, as provided by Gun Owners of California, is below:

Reporting mandate of lost and stolen guns: July 1, 2017
“Large” capacity magazine possession ban: July 1, 2017
Illegal ammunition transfers: Effective immediately
Ammunition sales process (deadline for completion of regulations): January 1, 2018
Ammunition vendor licensing requirement and ban on internet sales: January 1, 2018
Limitations on ammunition displays: Effective date is unknown
Registration of ammunition sales: January 1, 2019
Ammunition purchase permits: January 1, 2019
Local regulation of ammunition – not preempted: Effective immediately
Confiscation of firearms from prohibited persons: January 1, 2018

 

[Publius]

So how many registered voters do they have and how many voted in this election?
It stands to reason that we have the right to bear arms such a law is unlawful.

 

[DryCreek]

This makes reloading even more attractive. The whole idea behind background checks and creating a paper trail does two things - one, it makes buying ammo a pain. two, it creates a paper trail to you - another way to identify what caliber firearms you own.

The part about making it illegal for felons to own a firearm - wasn't that already on the books? I am pretty sure that is federal law.

One part of the law does make it prime for judicial review - and that is the prohibition of interstate commerce via prohibiting ammunition sales through mailorder. I can see the ammo stores in Arizona and Nevada doing a brisk business in the future!

 

[Sleeping Cobra]

Politicians sure hate you. They don't want you to defend yourself. Time to fight back, America.

 

[Hermantribe]

Part of the reason we will be retiring in Idaho in a couple of years, just want 2 youngest boys to finish high school where they are.

 

[sierra don]

Looks like I got out of commifornia just in time, living in the wilds of Idaho now and will never set foot in that hell hole of a state ever again.

So they legalize weed but put heavy restrictions on guns and ammo.......yep, keep them stoned and stupid and they will give up their freedoms without a second thought........F'n morons...!!!

 

[Secamp32]

For one thing, the law requires anybody who buys ammo to have a background check done on them. I am not sure if they have to do this every time they buy ammo, just like with a gun. If nothing else, this is going to stress the FBI background check systems with several MILLION additional background checks per year.

NICS won't do background checks for ammo sales. NYS already tried this. They passed a law requiring checks before each sale without checking with the fed gov to see if it was ok. They are supposed to create their own check system and database but that's never going to happen.

 

[Tundra Gypsy]

That's why I moved to Idaho. And, I ask anyone moving from California to Idaho to leave their way of life behind. Don't come here and try to change things; that includes all the conveniences. My little town only has one traffic light and I like it that way. Not much in the way of shopping; we don't need subdivisions; shopping malls or fast food restaurants. We like to keep things simple. We learned the locals don't like to hear what things are like in California...they hate Californians; so if you want to make friends; don't tell them where you are from for a few years; tell them you're from Montana, Iowa or Arizona...

One retired, pompous ass, fireman from San Diego said some unkind things about our volunteer firefighters; until a tree fell on his friend. Those same volunteer firemen came to his friend's rescue and saved the guy's life. Now the pompous ass is eating crow..........

 

[Bubble Head]

I welcome all Constitutional minded Californians who have had enough to come to Colorado. We need all the help we can get to turn this state around. It is not lost but they are sure trying. California is lost and will remain a blue island.

 

[Thomas Paine]

Is California still a state? I thought we were gonna set the pretty butterfly free to go it's own way. You know to become the Mexican province of gangsterstan.

 

[Snyper]

This makes reloading even more attractive. The whole idea behind background checks and creating a paper trail does two things - one, it makes buying ammo a pain. two, it creates a paper trail to you - another way to identify what caliber firearms you own.

The part about making it illegal for felons to own a firearm - wasn't that already on the books? I am pretty sure that is federal law.

One part of the law does make it prime for judicial review - and that is the prohibition of interstate commerce via prohibiting ammunition sales through mailorder. I can see the ammo stores in Arizona and Nevada doing a brisk business in the future!

I'd bet there are provisions in the law that cover reloading supplies as well as loaded ammunition. If not, they will soon be added once they realize the loophole.

 

[NoDandy]

I am surprised if there are any people with at least two brain cells still in California.

You could not pay me to live, or even visit there.

If the state fell into the ocean, the only loss would be the San Francisco Mint

 

[Bensam]

Where is that fault line when you need it.....

 

[Lurker]

Where is that fault line when you need it.....

Same place it's been for years. What you need is said fault line to give up its energy in a 10.9 magnitude or so jolt. Hopefully in the middle of the night to make sure you capture the roaches while they're sleeping.

 

[dstraito]

I certainly don't expect them to; I doubt you do either. I didn't say anyone would obey the law, I said I had no problem with such a law (depending on how they define stealing). The rest of that garbage I do take exception to.

I question to whether it could be enforced fairly. Yes, it is obvious the person found with a gun that has been reported stolen. How about the going through a divorce proceeding and the husband leaves with his belongings including the gun(s) he bought while they were married? Vindictively, she says they were stolen.

Maybe that wouldn't happen anymore, but IMHO, gun laws are for the law-abiding folks, the criminals are going to ignore it anyway and the reason for the agenda to be pursued is the existing power structure is planning on enforcing laws that do not represent the people, they do not want, and the only was to enforce those laws is with brute force which will be very difficult against an armed population.

 

[Medical Maven]

I welcome all Constitutional minded Californians who have had enough to come to Colorado. We need all the help we can get to turn this state around. It is not lost but they are sure trying. California is lost and will remain a blue island.

That is a great idea. I think that some organization should arise in Colorado to foster such a migration because California is truly lost. But Colorado could be turned around with a concentrated effort. And the illegals who are currently voting there might be leaving soon, self-deporting.

 

[Terrwyn]

Same place it's been for years. What you need is said fault line to give up its energy in a 10.9 magnitude or so jolt. Hopefully in the middle of the night to make sure you capture the roaches while they're sleeping.

Careful what you people wish for. The New Madrid is overdue for an earthquake experts believe could be more powerful than you could imagine. And where are all the preppers now that moved to the Smokies? Creekmore had a fire come within 1/2 mile of his place. Not to mention how the great redoubt will be obliterated if yellowstone goes off. You all don't want to be eatin your words now do you? That is if any of you survive to eat them.

 

[Medical Maven]

That is a great idea. I think that some organization should arise in Colorado to foster such a migration because California is truly lost. But Colorado could be turned around with a concentrated effort. And the illegals who are currently voting there might be leaving soon, self-deporting.

What we need is a billionaire benefactor who would bankroll people who wanted to move to Colorado who were certified Constitutionalists.

 

[Terrwyn]

Woops! Forgot the tornadoes. So many of them in the last year I lost track of all the Baptist churches I donated to.

 

[Captbill]

Don't forget the CA state legislature voted to exempt themselves from the CA draconian gun laws.

 

[Adino]

Ex post facto.

It is unconstitutional to make something you legally own today illegal to own tomorrow.

To abide by the tenet of ex post facto all hi cap mags have to be grandfathered in.

As far as the new regulations for ammo purchases, that will probably stand when this all goes to the 9th to try to have fedguv bless it.

It is wrong, it does infringe on the right to self defense, imo, but they will probably legally get it to stand.

 

[Lurker]

Ex post facto.

It is unconstitutional to make something you legally own today illegal to own tomorrow.

To abide by the tenet of ex post facto all hi cap mags have to be grandfathered in.

As far as the new regulations for ammo purchases, that will probably stand when this all goes to the 9th to try to have fedguv bless it.

It is wrong, it does infringe on the right to self defense, imo, but they will probably legally get it to stand.

Prohibition? Yes, it was repealed one day you could drink a beer, the next you couldn't.

 

[bw]

Ex post facto. It is unconstitutional to make something you legally own today illegal to own tomorrow. To abide by the tenet of ex post facto all hi cap mags have to be grandfathered in.

It's not a violation of the ex post facto concept if they prohibit possession of something. If you happen to own it, possessing it is a violation only AFTER the law is in effect. The law would not criminalize the fact that you once owned it BEFORE the law was in effect. That would be ex post facto.

They might grandfather some things, but that's a marketing tool to reduce blowback, not an obligation. Your loss on stuff that you now can't sell or possess is, of course, your problem.

I'm not saying it's a good law or even a valid one, much less one that passes Constitutional muster. It's just not a violation of ex post facto.

 

[Captbill]

Also, for those that thinks this stands b/c it was voted in by the people, judges have been well known to overturn the voting public (remember gay marriage many years ago in CA--voted no but overturned).

 

[eXe]

The OP failed to mention the emergence of a black market in ammo. I can imagine trips to Las Vegas funded or subsidized by ammo smuggled back into Cali for a "friend".

Yup that happens already, if you go to the local gun shows in Vegas, the lot has tons of California plates in it already, I expect it to grow in numbers as this law goes into effect.