October 15, 2009
"I'm Sure Everyone is Exploring Their Options Right Now."
I contacted several shooting industry sources regarding California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger's decision to sign oppressive ammunition restriction bill AB962.
The bill requires ammunition to be held behind the counter, restricts sales to individuals to a maximum of 50 rounds per month, bans direct mail and internet sales, and requires retailers to collect intrusive personal information for each sale including:
Date of transaction.Buyer's date of birth, full address, driver's license number, right thumbprint and signature.
Brand, type and amount of ammunition purchased.
Name of the salesperson who processed the sale.
While the law theoretically affects only handgun ammunition, many rifles also shoot handgun-caliber ammunition and owners of those firearms will be affected as well. That information would be turned over to the government which would effectively be able to compile a backdoor handgun ownership database on all California gun owners.
The prohibition does not outlaw the unregistered ownership of handgun ammunition, nor does it stop individuals from crossing state lines to purchase as much ammunition as they desire. In effect, it penalizes law-abiding recreational shooters, while potentially creating a lucrative market for ammunition smuggling into California.
The California Association of Firearms Retailers (CAFR) and the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) are highly critical of the bill, stating:
NSSF has estimated that AB 962 would cost California at least $2.92 million annually in lost sales taxes and $629,000 in increased operating costs for state agencies. Lost retail sales in California were estimated at $35.7 million. These estimates followed the recent release of a study by the Governor's Office of Small Business Advocate that show over-regulation of small businesses in California costing the state an estimated $492 billion, almost five times the state’s general fund budget and almost a third of the state's gross product. The Small Business Advocate study also found that California's regulatory burdens costs an average of $134,122 per California business, $13,801 per household and $4,685 per resident each year. Small businesses are 98 percent of the state's enterprises and provide 52 percent of the jobs."Despite the excuses given this morning by the governor, nothing will change the fact that this legislation will drive many small, independent retailers already struggling in a poor economy out of business or force them to flee California's burdensome and hostile regulatory environment for greener economic pastures elsewhere-- taking with them their jobs and tax revenue," said CAFR President Marc Halcon.
I sent email to contacts within the ammunition industry, and few seem willing to talk about a possible response.
I asked them all the same specific question: Do you anticipate sanctions by manufacturers against the state of California in response for this law, perhaps similar to Barrett's refusal to sell or service CA state agencies after the ill-advised .50 BMG rilfe ban went into effect?
While anti-trust laws keeps the companies from discussing such an idea with one another, one highly-placed industry source was willing to provide his opinion off the record.
He would not rule out a decision by one or more ammunition manufacturers to refuse to do business with the State of California while the ban was in effect.
"Nothing would surprise me. I'm sure everyone is exploring their options right now."
If ammunition manufacturers do decide to go this route in response, state and local law enforcement agencies may have to find other vendors to supply their ammunition, or face running low on ammunition themselves.
Arnold has as much to do with the conservative agenda as did Bush. Which is nothing.
Posted by: David at October 15, 2009 05:39 PMI thought i read somewhere that the "50 round limit" part got cut at/before the signing?
the text/comments from ah-nold here: http://www.news10.net/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=68596&catid=2
imply that there's no limit. but yes, the entire thing is stupid. In that article the governator even pats himself on the back for the .50 cal debacle.
Posted by: John at October 15, 2009 07:23 PMWell, since I fly to CA regularly and go shooting with my daughter I will just have to bring a couple thousand rounds each time I visit.
She can mark them up 100% and sell them to her friends.
Thank you, CA, for some more untraceable income.
Posted by: iconoclast at October 15, 2009 08:07 PMwouldn't the interstate purchase ban be an unlawful restraint of trade, like the former bans against mail order wine purchases, or am i just being a fool for trying to be logical when we're talking about yet another gun control law?
the 6 element and i are both natives, but moving away is looking better and better every day. what a shame....
Posted by: redc1c4 at October 15, 2009 09:46 PMWould this mean that the City and County of Los Angeles would be restricted to 50 rounds a month?
Most of you sound like folks we welcome to Texas. The more honest Gun owners the better.
We don't have earthquakes...Convinced?
Posted by: Marc at October 15, 2009 11:53 PMWell lets just let Kalifornia slide into the ocean. They elect those idiots let them sort 'em out.
Posted by: tjbbpgobIII at October 15, 2009 11:53 PMwith the upcoming census overcount of illegal aliens, CA looks to gain quite a few more gerrymandered ultra-liberal loons in Congress.
But by then CA will be its own 3rd world country.
Posted by: iconoclast at October 16, 2009 12:55 AMMarc: Glad to hear that. Bought my new house in the hill country 3 months ago.
Posted by: CFM at October 16, 2009 02:39 AMActually, with the increasing large amount of money the US owes to China, it wouldn't be surprising to see China demand ownership of California if the US defaults....
Posted by: _Jon at October 16, 2009 10:19 AMStep 1. Open a drive through store on the road from California to Los Vegas, right on the Nevada line.
Step 2. Sell bulk ammo. Let customers call ahead, use a website, or fax/email/twitter orders with Paypal or credit cards, so there is essentially a zero wait time at the store's loading docks.
Step 3. Profit.
And I did not have to collect underpants with gnomes.
Posted by: Mikee at October 16, 2009 11:07 AMYes hey should stop selling there. The truth is that in the long run it will just make Cali even more broke than they already are. They will loose all of that business and all of the taxes that go with those sales. They cant have thier cake and eat it too, if they want to be able to tax the crap out of thier citizens(oh my appolagies, SUBJECTS) they must give them something for it. If you are a decent and conservitive person VACATE the state and leave those Commie assholes to thier vices. Good luck and God speed:)
Posted by: Spook45 at October 16, 2009 11:53 AMThis is the amount of incredulous influence the--OPEN BORDER--lobbyists (business power brokers and ethnic zealots)) have on certain Democratic devious rabble? Once again the senate top echelon have huddled secretly (BEHIND CLOSED DOORS), recklessly placing E-Verify worker identification system in jeopardy. The obnoxious
R-O-P-E Senate group as its being called on the Internet and nationwide, who are marked as Reid, Obama, Pelosi Emmanuel have indifferently pushed American Workers in the background, allowing the millions of illegal aliens to take their jobs. They have driven into the ground amendments from appearing in the final Homeland Security "conference committee" bill. They eradicated--ANY CHANCE--of a Senate's permanent authorization of the E-Verify program.
They have religiously under-funded, undermined the Senate's mandate to beef up and complete the final 300 mile Mexican border fence. Then again it was never the original border wall as designed by Rep. Duncan Hunter. Illegal Aliens would have first had to scale the--FIRST--fence, run across the two lane highway for the Border Patrol vehicles, then scale an identical--SECOND FENCE. Under funded and weakened just like E-Verify, the police 287(g) arrest and detainment and ceasing the massive ICE raids. Finally the ROPE group strangled the Senate (already) passed ability of countrywide businesses to run their previous hires employees through E-Verify. So you can guess this is a harbinger to drop on the AMERICAN WORKER YET ANOTHER ULTIMATELY EXPENSIVE BLANKET AMNESTY. THOSE TAXPAYERS WILL BE FORCED TO PICK UP A TRILLION DOLLAR TAB. Be advised that Reid D-NV , Pelosi D-CA have one of the largest population of illegal immigrants in the country, who they are subservient too. Remember to expend your frustration and anger at 202-224-3121on your lawmakers. They are juggling with millions of American Workers job lifeline, by pandering to people who shouldn't even be here?
MY SUGGESTION IS DON"T BUY ANY SERVICES FROM BUSINESS THAT DOESN'T DISPLAY THE E-VERIFY PLACARD. Remember the real conniving happens in rooms hidden from the public awareness in conference committees. In addition, Remember Harry Reid as an incumbent Senator who carries the blemish of being anti-American Worker, Anti-Sovereignty must not be re-elected. Speaker Pelosi must go? So must Emmanuel? They have proved they cannot be trusted As NUMBERSUSA president says," With no chance now of E-Verify dying in any minute, because they couldn't annul the 3 year extension? The pro-amnesty forces no longer can try to use it as a bargaining chip. States, counties, cities and businesses can now be quite confident that they can set policy based on the E-Verify program being around." IT'S NOT PERMANENT YET THANKS TO ROPE. This group has given preference to illegal workers instead of the 15 million authorized AMERICAN WORKERS. COMPREHEND MORE OF THE CORRUPTION THAT CANNOT BE DENIED BY POLITICIANS AT JUDICIAL WATCH. NUMBERSUSA will explain in detail the consequences, that includes the 2010 Census, Health Care, hidden welfare programs, Anchor babies, criminals amongst the illegal immigration occupiers. CAPSWEB for OVERPOPULATION information.
Hey CA, you made your bed, now lay in it!!!
Posted by: Andrew at October 16, 2009 07:18 PMJust make sure that there's a hill or a curve between your store and the California border. Don't want the CHP surveilling your place from the CA side and harassing your customers, as MA did with people who brought liquor in NH,
Posted by: PKO Strany at October 20, 2009 01:30 PM
