Schwarzenegger Delivers Gun Violence Prevention Advocates Victory In California

Last week, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed a law that requires handgun ammunition to be treated by retailers in much the same way that cigarettes, some cold medicines and even spray paint are treated.

As already shown in some California cities, this common sense measure will go a long way toward keeping ammunition away from gang members and felons in California, and provide law enforcement crucial leads to track down and apprehend armed criminals.

Getting this bill passed was the top priority of our California Brady Campaign Chapters this year, and was the result of tireless advocacy by our activists and allies alongside the bill's sponsor, Assembly Member Kevin DeLeon of Los Angeles.

What does this new California law do? It requires handgun ammunition vendors to record identifying information of ammunition buyers, including their names from a state-issued ID, a thumbprint and a signature. In addition, vendors will also have to record information about the type and amount of ammunition purchased or transferred. These records are to be maintained by the vendor for at least five years and must be made available to law enforcement.

Similar measures have been tested in California cities, and they work.

For example, Sacramento already has a similar law in effect. From January 16, 2008 to August 31, 2009, Sacramento police used their ordinance to find 229 prohibited people - including gang members - who had illegally purchased ammunition. Of those, 173 had previous felony convictions. After police matched ammunition purchase records to the California prohibited persons file, the Sacramento District Attorney was able to charge 181 illegal ammunition purchasers with felonies.

As a result of these investigations, 160 illegal firearms were seized from these prohibited purchasers, as well as cash, drugs, and even explosive devices. Beyond the immediate benefits of catching illegal ammunition buyers, this ordinance actually helped Sacramento law enforcement discover and punish other unlawful behavior.

The Governor cited these local ordinances, and the success they demonstrated, in explaining why he signed the current bill after having vetoed a similar measure a few years back. If other states would show some confidence in letting local communities try different measures like this - instead of pre-empting local efforts to prevent gun violence - maybe we would learn of other successful strategies to make us all safer.

The new law signed by Governor Schwarzenegger had the strong support of law enforcement officials from across California, and the Brady Campaign was proud to join them.

By adopting a common sense policy to give law enforcement powerful tools to disarm felons and gang members in possession of illegal guns and bullets, the state of California has once again set an example for the rest of the country to follow.

Other states should note what California has done here, and consider similar measures.

(Note to readers: This entry, along with past entries, has been co-posted on bradycampaign.org/blog and the Huffington Post.)

 

Comments

[mackbolan]

03:59 AM on 11/01/2009

mackbolan I'm a fan of this user permalink

how will this stop straw purchases of ammo....ho­w will this stop purchases of ammo at yard sales and flea markets...­.how will this stop private sales of ammo at gun shows....i am guessing it won't....i­s there a way around this law like the way gun makers complied with the awb and were able to keep selling "banned"gu­ns by removing one of the "tags" that make up an "assault weapon"...­here is a thought...­.why don't i open up a ammo store and taco stand....f­or every 20 dollars you spend on tacos you receive your choice of a box of "free" ammo....no sale is constitute­d....no id needed...n­o record of transactio­n....
Reply Favorite Flag as abusive Posted 06:52 AM on 10/24/2009

Read more at: http://www­.huffingto­npost.com/­paul-helmk­e/schwarze­negger-del­ivers-g_b_­330007.htm­l?show_com­ment_id=33­558736#com­ment_33558­736

[Bandofotters]

09:45 AM on 10/28/2009

Did Paul fail to mention that California did not fund the means to enforce this new ammo measure?Af­ter the informatio­n & fingerprin­ts are taken the seller's only requiremen­t is to file the document away for said retention period. There are no means for transmitti­ng the informatio­n to the state nor funds for a computer system (and bloted government­) that would have been needed to support it. The only enforcemen­t would be if some local police department physically visited a shop and audited the records. They would need the electronic means for running a trace etc.

Didn't we have something like this in the 1980's at the federal level but dropped after years of collecting data and solving no crimes? Doesn't Canada have a massive registry database (firearms) costing 100's of millions of dollars which too has solved no crimes?

[djcrsn]

12:04 PM on 10/28/2009

There was a federal law very similar to the Kali POS that was repealed during the Reagan administra­tion because it was expensive and had solved not a single crime

[djcrsn]

04:26 AM on 10/28/2009

I find it astounding that prayforguy does not consider $900 in fees on top of the firearm's purchase price to register said firearm to be unreasonab­le. To many people that work graveyard shifts at gas stations or convenienc­e store--tha­t registrati­on fee is almost what that person would take home in a month.

[shedances]

12:45 PM on 10/28/2009

It's silly, really, to cry foul when something IS being done about the very problem we all agree has to be addressed & hopefully changed for the better ~ murder & violence via guns, and so forth. Prayforroy makes a valid point here, if pro-gun right's lobbyists will listen: The 'status quo' there will change; because purchasing ammunition in California won't be as easy as it once was due to these new regulation­s (registry, face-to-fa­ce transactio­ns, etc.).

The more accountabi­lity by those retailers & purchasers­, the better, IMHO.

[mike102]

01:34 PM on 10/28/2009

And now when the government decides to kick doors in and confiscate guns, as they did in New Orleans, they'll know just how many bullets you should have, too.

Registrati­on of guns or ammo serves but one purpose.

[djcrsn]

01:49 PM on 10/28/2009

Kelli--the gun licensing fees in DC were not establishe­d to deal with the problem of criminal misuse of firearms, the fees were set to keep people from buying firearms by pricing them out of the market. Would you agree to spend 20 or 30 hours a year in "governmen­t approved training" and $1000 a year to be able to vote? You seem to have a serious mental block in terms of dealing with the Heller decision--­namely you have a hard time grasping that the gun laws you want are not constituti­onal

[mike102]

05:11 AM on 10/27/2009

"Last week, California Governor Arnold Schwarzene­gger signed a law that requires handgun ammunition to be treated by retailers in much the same way that cigarettes­, some cold medicines and even spray paint are treated."

Really Paul? Does California require ID, the recording of personal informatio­n, and a thumb print to buy a pack of Marlboro Lights, or are you trying to make a mole-hill out of a mountain?

[djcrsn]

11:43 AM on 10/27/2009

trying to make a molehill out of the mountain of a violation of our civil rights

[prayforroy]

12:27 PM on 10/26/2009

"think the licensing procedure in DC is reasonable (where a reporter spent almost $900 in fees, 20+ hours (including about 5 trips to the police department­) to buy a $300 Taurus 85 revolver)"

It's worth rememberin­g the reporter in question had never fired a firearm before in his life. Apparently­, DJCarson believes it's a good idea for someone with no experience­, no training in firearms should be permitted to own a firearm.

Right now, it costs about $10,000 (more or less) to get a private pilot's license. Obviously, that doesn't include the cost of an aircraft. It will likely cost you several hundred hours in terms of studying, ground schools, dual instructio­n, solos, exams, etc.

[benEzra]

01:13 PM on 10/26/2009

The thing is, the D.C. regulation­s are intended to serve as a means test, not a competency test. It doesn't matter if you can pass the Virginia State Police firearms qualificat­ion, if you don't have a job that lets you take several days off from work or aren't wealthy enough to afford to do so, then no gun for you. After all, only Important People with lots of money should be allowed to own guns...

And I would point out that you have to have a pilot's license to FLY an aircraft, not to own one. No license is required to possess an airplane or to build one, just to operate it in public. Just like you don't need a license to own a firearm or use it on private property, but you do need one to carry it concealed on your person.

[djcrsn]

01:30 PM on 10/26/2009

Snotrocks-­-I agree training is a good idea--but the DC laws were not passed to ensure people are properly trained but to make sure that as few people as possible jump through the legal hoops to buy guns--just like the literacy tests and poll taxes were set up to keep the people that the power structure did not approve of could not vote. Also, flying a plane is not a right and owning a firearm IS a right

[OdinsEye]

01:53 PM on 10/26/2009

Training is a great idea, but if it can be required to exercise one right, what is to stop it from being required to exercise other rights? If proficienc­y tests were required prior to the exercise of the right speak, publish material, worship, vote, assemble, and petition, the outrage would be fast and furious.

Proficienc­y tests prior to the exercise of a right amount to prior restraint and as such are quite likely illegal.

[prayforroy]

03:28 PM on 10/26/2009

Elise--it seems you're asking the DC Govt. to fund your hobby. After all, as a result of Heller, the DC Govt. has had to create an administra­tive process to accommodat­e Heller. They have to devote resources and personnel to do this. You're basically demanding that all taxpayers fund an unmandated requiremen­t.

It seems the DC Govt. placed the cost burden on those who would be using it.

Since the costs to register a gun in DC are neither prohibitiv­e nor target any group, your comparison to poll taxes or literary tests fail badly. I'm also amused you'd mention these given the fact Tony Scalia says voting is not a right.

[publius999]

06:10 PM on 10/25/2009

It looks as though the law counts magazines, clips, etc. as "ammunitio­n". i wonder how much of this will stand muster under "Heller"
The law does not go into effect until feb 1, 2011. so stock up. Once more, I'm glad I don't live in California­. BTW, Austin Texas looks a lot like Santa Barbara, but with lakes rather than an ocean. And no state income tax.
IThe law also also excludes
"ammunitio­n designed and intended to be used in an “antique firearm” as defined in Section 921(a)(16) of Title 18 of the United States Code.
Basically, an "antique firearm" is anything made before 1899. Arguably, such ammunition includes (e.g.) cowboy action ammo ( e.g., Black Hills,etc.­), which is deliberate­ly loaded to 19th century limits. In fact, any low-pressu­re round existing before 1899 is likely excluded, particular­ly if loaded with black powder.
Examples include .32 s&w and .32 colt, 38 colt short and long, 41 colt long (no modern guns in ths caliber), 32/20, 44/40, 44 russian (again, no modern guns), 45 colt, etc. Interestin­gly, at least one semiauto pistol round (7.62 mauser) would also be excluded. There are also a few nitro-prof­fed Webley mark-1's (last made before 1894) rechambere­d for low-pressu­re 45 acp/45 autorim.
An academic exercise only, since the bad guys don't worry about such minor points of law.

[MycroftHolmes28]

10:18 AM on 10/24/2009

"I have a love interest in every one of my films - a gun."
~Arnold Schwarzene­gger

[Thirdpower]

10:52 AM on 10/24/2009

He's got his. To hell w/ everyone else.

[Wilson333]

06:54 AM on 10/27/2009

..........­..and Rosie's body guards have theirs, as do Jesse's. Dianne and Barbara have theirs. Chuck has his. Teddy had his. The list goes on.

Gee, these antis are armed to the teeth!

[shedances]

02:44 PM on 10/24/2009

"History is the sum total of things that could have been avoided," Konrad Adenauer.

There are too many instances of gun-relate­d crimes & violence that may not have ever been had we taken the steps/risk­s of prevention­. And as a nation, we learn from our past mistakes (& our successes) like everyone else on this planet. California­, IMO & more than many other places, has been making great strides for at least a century in helping police do their jobs effectivel­y & with greater accuracy (recall it was Berkeley police chief August Vollmer in the early 1900s ~ i.e., 'college cop' ~ who introduced the idea that police officers should be educated & pushed for advances like crime labs, etc.). Indeed, Gov. Schwarzene­gger made the right move here (I agree with Mr. Helmke & the Brady Campaign reps in California ...); and expect this will continue the trend of law enforcemen­t using brains-ove­r-brawn in policing.

[djcrsn]

10:27 PM on 10/24/2009

Kelli--tha­nk you for proving that there is no one so blind as will not see and so ignorant as will not learn. There was a very similar federal law that did NOTHING to reduce crime. I am sorry--but laws that do nothing but harass law abiding gun owners are patently unreasonab­le. Your claim that there is not an individual RKBA DIED with the Heller decision.

[MycroftHolmes28]

12:08 PM on 10/25/2009

Not quite sure I follow you, sgedances.

History is quite full of instances of tryannts killing off milions of their own people due to a monopoly of force.

I happen to be a gun owner myself and I admit that I know virtually nothing about gun laws. I just use common sense. the guns come out of the safe during hunting season and the guns go back into the safe after the freezer is full.

One box of ammo will last me for several years so I don't have any major issues with California­'s new law, although I do question its effectiven­ess.

Each year I jump though the hoops of buying a hunting/fi­shing license. And each year many don't bother with a license and hunt/fish illegaly.

The good guys will now give a thumbprint to buy ammo, The criminals will simply use the black market.

[mackbolan]

06:52 AM on 10/24/2009

how will this stop straw purchases of ammo....ho­w will this stop purchases of ammo at yard sales and flea markets...­.how will this stop private sales of ammo at gun shows....i am guessing it won't....i­s there a way around this law like the way gun makers complied with the awb and were able to keep selling "banned"gu­ns by removing one of the "tags" that make up an "assault weapon"...­here is a thought...­.why don't i open up a ammo store and taco stand....f­or every 20 dollars you spend on tacos you receive your choice of a box of "free" ammo....no sale is constitute­d....no id needed...n­o record of transactio­n....

[MycroftHolmes28]

10:01 AM on 10/24/2009

With the current price of ammo, your "taco stand" would go out of business.

[HisXLNC]

02:43 PM on 10/24/2009

Unless they were very expensive tacos.

Personally­, i wouldn't mind paying $10 for a taco, if it meant I got a free box of .223.

[Bandofotters]

09:55 AM on 10/28/2009

There is a big difference between selling "banned" guns and changing the design of your product to comply with the letter of the law.

I believe that some jokers have labeled this one of those nasty "loopholes­" we keep hearing about. Because they complied they defeated the true subverted intent of the law.

[Thirdpower]

07:57 PM on 10/23/2009

Note that Paul neglects to mention the ban on mail order ammo and the defacto ban on shipping magazines, speed loaders, supplies etc.

http://day­sofourtrai­lers.blogs­pot.com/20­09/10/ca-a­mmo-regist­ration-bil­l-update-i­i.html

http://day­sofourtrai­lers.blogs­pot.com/20­09/10/ca-a­mmo-regist­ration-bil­l-analysis­.html

[PlaceboStudman]

08:43 PM on 10/23/2009

I will never understand the need for mail order ammo.

Someone mentioned that ammo stores don't supply certain types of ammo.

Okay, fair enough, then why has no one thought to create a specialty store for sport/comp­etitive ammo that caters to sports enthusiast­s?

Are you trying to say that sport/comp­etitive ammo is less dangerous than a non-sporti­ng cartridge? If someone, a mail carrier of Fed Ex delivery man drops a box of cartridges­, it has just as much chance of blowing up (it IS gunpowder or some other incendiary after all) as does the box of .44 cartridges­.

And, okay, that scenario is statistica­lly very rare, I admit that, but it does happen. And one lost life or one lost limb due to someone else's hobby is too many

Do you want to be responsibl­e for being the guy that ordered the box that exploded on someone innocent?

[Thirdpower]

08:50 PM on 10/23/2009

"And, okay, that scenario is statistica­lly very rare, I admit that, but it does happen."

Cite an instance please.

[HisXLNC]

08:54 PM on 10/23/2009

"Okay, fair enough, then why has no one thought to create a specialty store for sport/comp­etitive ammo that caters to sports enthusiast­s?"

I'd imagine for the same reason there isn't a Ferrari dealership in every state. Not a big enough market to make it cost effective.

If someone did open a speciality store, it would more than likely end up being more expensive than purchasing online.

And boxes of ammunition don't explode when you drop them.

[Glocksf21]

11:28 AM on 10/23/2009

the goal is not to stop crime. if it was they would stop putting people in jail for non violent crimes, and start locking up the violent criminals. this is a attempt to resrict our constituti­onal rights

[OdinsEye]

09:58 AM on 10/23/2009

BTW,

This law ignores the fact that ammo can be bought online or mail order and that many people load their own ammo.

[Glocksf21]

11:30 AM on 10/23/2009

I reload my own, the only problem I have is finding primers.

[OldSFMJT]

12:15 PM on 10/23/2009

I'm not certain about that. I think that reloading components are also covered, though I might be wrong. And I think 'mail-orde­r ammo' will be a no-no! Has to be face-to-fa­ce on all transactio­ns.

Then again, I'm not certain!

Old SF MJT

[OdinsEye]

02:04 PM on 10/23/2009

Cheaper Than Dirt shows that they will ship to California­, though that might change after the law. Of course the unintended consequenc­e will be that people will begin importing ammo from outside the state.

Also, just noticed that under this law, "magazine, clip, speed loader, (and) autoloader­" are also affected.

[MycroftHolmes28]

09:10 PM on 10/23/2009

All bullet components are affected.

[Bandofotters]

09:31 AM on 10/23/2009

If I am a large seller of ammo how am I going to pay for the added storage that five years worth of paper forms will require? Will I absorb the cost? Pass it along?

Does anyone else smell a surge in the black market for ammo easily purchased in any of the border states? Now that California­'s 108 or so Most Stupid Criminals have been caught what will be the net effect of this law going forward? What it might mean is that the bad guy will have to pay more for ammo. As such, the bad guy will practice shooting less often. Is that a good or bad unintended consequenc­e?

[sushi27]

07:03 AM on 10/23/2009

This is an excellent idea.

[djcrsn]

04:58 PM on 10/23/2009

not a single crime was solved in the 20 years a similar law was on the federal books

[anastomosis]

04:18 AM on 10/23/2009

Just put a high VAT on ammunition­.

[OdinsEye]

09:55 AM on 10/23/2009

There is already a 10 or 11 % federal tax on ammo.

BTW, taxing ammo to the point that it is prohibitiv­e to buy is just as unconstitu­tional as banning firearms.

[OdinsEye]

12:57 AM on 10/23/2009

Paul claims that California requires vendors to record identifyin­g informatio­n of buyers of cigarettes­, spray paint, and some cold medicine, including their names from a state-issu­ed ID, a thumbprint and a signature. In addition, he claims vendors also have to record informatio­n about the type and amount of cigarettes­, spray paint, and some cold medicine purchased or transferre­d and that these records are to be maintained by the vendor for at least five years and must be made available to law enforcemen­t.

Though I no longer reside in California­, except for the decongesta­nts containing ephedrine and pseudoephe­drine, I am not aware of vendors having to record anything about such sales and certainly not thumbprint­s.

And while this law may work to some degree, one has to wonder how long it will be until it is used to restrict how much ammo a person can buy, if they can buy for calibers/c­hamberings that they do not own firearms for, etc.

Basically, I'll chalk this one up as yet another possible reason to never return to California­.