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.)
Brad Balfour: Director Roland Emmerich Give Us Something to Look Forward to in 2012
Roland Emmerich doesn't seem megalomaniacal. In fact, he seems so unassuming that you just want to grab him a beer and sit in rapt attention as he tells how he destroyed the world, again.
12316 thru 12325 Ammunition - Dangerous Weapons Control Laws ...
New California law tracks ammunition sales - On Deadline ...
L.A. council tightens gun, ammunition laws - Los Angeles Times
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
mackbolan I'm a fan of this user permalink
how will this stop straw purchases of ammo....ho
Reply Favorite Flag as abusive Posted 06:52 AM on 10/24/2009
Read more at: http://www
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?
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
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.
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.
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.
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
Also Kelli--a federal law functionally identical to the Kali law was repealed 25 years ago for being an expensive failure--I am sorry, laws that are proven to be expensive failures are unreasonable by ANY rational standard
This law will change nothing for the criminals. It is a feel-good measure which simply puts more restrictions on the law abiding.
"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?
trying to make a molehill out of the mountain of a violation of our civil rights
"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.
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.
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
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.
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.
And where exactly in the Constitution or BoR is the right to fly a plane specified?
It's odd that you're so fond of the Heller decision, OE, given it's apparent you've not read it.
In the majority decision, Tony Scalia said licensing and registration of guns was fine as was requirements to satisfy said licensing and registation.
Baloney. DC's registration requirements and fees are prohibitive, which is why they exist.
Ever since Heller, the Socialist government of DC has been trying to find ways to slither around the Supreme Court. Making handgun ownership too expensive is one of them.
There is only one FFL holder (besides Josh Sugarmann) in DC, and he charges $125 to do a transfer of a gun from outside the District. People have no choice other than to go this route, since DC has no gun stores.
Most dealers charge about $30 to do a transfer.
Of course, Jade thinks ripping people off for the privelege of exercising their rights is perfectly OK , because it's bound to prevent SOMEONE from buying a gun.
Someone spending $10,000 for training on top of $1,000,000 is not prohibitive.
Someone spending $900 for a $300 gun is prohibitive.
Your analogy is not valid.
which was my point in the first place--which snotrocks chooses to ignore
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.
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.
"I have a love interest in every one of my films - a gun."
~Arnold Schwarzenegger
He's got his. To hell w/ everyone else.
..........
Gee, these antis are armed to the teeth!
"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.
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.
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.
how will this stop straw purchases of ammo....ho
With the current price of ammo, your "taco stand" would go out of business.
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.
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.
Note that Paul neglects to mention the ban on mail order ammo and the defacto ban on shipping magazines, speed loaders, supplies etc.
http://day
http://day
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?
"And, okay, that scenario is statistically very rare, I admit that, but it does happen."
Cite an instance please.
"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.
Unless a store has a lot of resources or can cover a large geographic area, the chances of some of the rarer or lower demand ammo selling are fairly small. Some stores will special order for you, but that means longer lead times.
"And, okay, that scenario is statistically very rare, I admit that, but it does happen."
No, it does not happen. Ammo does not "blow up" if dropped.
Ammunition doesn't "explode." From a shipping standpoint, it is less dangerous than a case of hair spray.
Smokeless powder is not an explosive, it is a propellant, and it is stable. In a worst-case scenario (the case of ammo is placed in a hot fire for long enough to ignite the powder or primers), the cases just vent; it would make a mess of the cardboard box but wouldn't hurt anybody.
"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".
Which is virtually nil.
For Jade, and others who have never actually seen a real box of real cartridges, allow me to explain.
Cartridge packaging is pretty much universal. Cartridges are inserted into a block of styrofoam, which has a hole for each, individual cartridge. Once full of cartridges, the block is inserted into a tightly fitting cardboard sleeve, as it's a bit more secure than a conventional box and lid.
One (even a UPS driver) could drop a box of cartridges from now til Doomsday, and nothing is going to happen.
Nothing.
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
BTW,
This law ignores the fact that ammo can be bought online or mail order and that many people load their own ammo.
I reload my own, the only problem I have is finding primers.
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
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.
All bullet components are affected.
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?
This is an excellent idea.
not a single crime was solved in the 20 years a similar law was on the federal books
Just put a high VAT on ammunition.
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.
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/c
Basically, I'll chalk this one up as yet another possible reason to never return to California.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
