San Francisco Supervisor: Register All Ammunition Purchases

“Supervisor Mark Farrell is set to put in a public request at today’s San Francisco Board of Supervisors meeting to begin drafting legislation that would require the videotaping of all gun and ammunition sales within San Francisco,” kron4.com reports, “and require the regular storage and electronic transmission of ammunition sales data to the San Francisco Police Department.” Big Brother much? Oh yeah. And there’s Marky Mark’s rationale . . .

The goals of the gun control package are to prevent and detect illegal trafficking of firearms and ammunition; prevent the loss and theft of firearms and ammunition from dealers; prevent and detect the sale of firearms and ammunition by dealers to persons who are prohibited by law from possessing these items, and protect overall public safety, Ferrell’s office reports.

“Protecting overall public safety.” POPS. Catchy isn’t it? Let’s just hope this justification for pissing on the United States Constitution doesn’t catch on. You know; more than it already has. Before you trot out Franklin’s quote about liberty and safety, note that the scheme is gun registration taken to the next level. Like this:

The package would also require any permittee who has the proper documentation to sell or transfer ammunition to keep records of their ammunition sales and transfer data for up to five-years, and electronically transmit the ammunition sales data at least weekly to the SFPD. The SFPD would develop the forms and information that would need to be regularly transmitted to the department, and at a minimum will include:

(1) The date of the transaction;

(2) The name, address and date of birth of the transferee;

(3) The number of the transferee’s current driver’s license or other government issued identification card containing a photograph of the transferee, and the name of the governmental authority that issued it;

(4) The brand, type, caliber or gauge, and amount of ammunition transferred;

(5) The transferee’s signature; and

(6) The name of the permittee’s agent or employee who processed the transaction.

San Francisco has a large population of homosexual residents. Despite the city’s friendliness to the LGBT community, they are still targets for violent attack. Why would anyone think that this new gun control regime would reduce the likelihood of an assault on LGBT Americans? Or anyone else? And why wouldn’t anyone think that this system sets the stage for government abuse (i.e., “proactive” police raids on citizens who buy “large” amounts of ammo)?

California craziness continues.

comments

  1. avatar brentondadams says:

    I think there is exactly one gun store open to the public in SF county.

    There might be a few Big 5’s that sell ammo.

    1. avatar Cliff H says:

      The city and county of San Francisco are the same thing and there is only the one gun shop. I smell a windfall for ammo sales in adjacent cities.

    2. avatar John L. says:

      High Bridge Arms.

      I’ve been there to do a transfer; it’s a family run shop, seemed like nice folks.

      I don’t know of any other gun store in SF. There are a number of them down the peninsula, so thanks to BART this would be ridiculously easy to circumvent. Just like the ban on HP sales.

      All this is going to do, if it passes, is hurt High Bridge.

    3. avatar Mark N. says:

      The City has been trying for years to shut this little shop down. It was closed for a while (don’t remember why now, but it was for reasons unrelated to gun sales), and the city did everything it could to keep them from getting a business license to re-open. (Fortunately, the neighboring business had no objections to this little shop being where it is.) As I recall, they are only allowed to keep a small amount of ammo on premises as it is. so yes, another anti-business, anti-gun feel good law that will accomplish nothing when everyone goes to Oakland or Daly City for their gun needs.
      One other comment: this proposal is modeled after the last legislative effort to enact essentially the same sales restrictions, and which also included an internet sales ban state wide. That effort was hamstrung by the Governor (who told the “powers that be” that he wouldn’t sign it), who had vetoed the second attempt, after the first attempt was shot down as unconstitutional by a federal district court. No one (except maybe Gov Brown) has considered that there is no funding for the infrastructure and manpower needed to record sales of millions of rounds of ammunition every year, much less to equate those sales to crimes.

      1. avatar Kent W says:

        Oakland has no gun stores at all. City taxed them out years ago. Also SF voters a few years ago passed a proposition to outlaw all firearms in SF and it passed. NRA went to court and won. Sometimes libbies don’t get their way.

  2. avatar dph says:

    On the upside this only affects one shop (High Bridge Guns), downside is ideas like this spread like a cancer and cancer requires radical measures to eradicate it.

    1. avatar anaxis says:

      And unfortunately, such radical measures tend to kill off healthy portions as well.

  3. avatar James in MO says:

    Because it was so easy for the NY SAFE Act to do….. Wait. Never mind.

  4. avatar Bill Kohnke says:

    I imagine their next great idea will be to assign everyone a number.

    1. avatar Number 6 says:

      We’ve already been enumerated via the social security system.

      1. avatar AhClem says:

        I think Bill was being sarcastic……

  5. avatar Adam says:

    Another ban on defending yourself while poor. The hypocrisy is real in SF. Everyone with a car will go to where this isn’t required.

    1. avatar Mark N. says:

      Or hop on BART.

    2. avatar charlie44 says:

      WHY DON’T THEY BAN THE “Bureau of Land Management agent” WHOSE STOLEN GUN WAS USED TO KILL Kathryn Steinle IN SANCTUARY SAN FRAN along with everything else that city is so famous for.

  6. avatar Removed_californian says:

    They already tried ammo registration in California (if I remember correctly) and it failed. But state law hasn’t stopped San Fran from being a piece of shit on it’s own accord.

    1. avatar Mark N. says:

      That law applied to sales of “pistol” ammo, and failed because the definition of “pistol” ammo was unconstitutionally vague. A second try, which applied to all ammo, was vetoed by Gov. Brown, who advised legislators to “keep their powder dry” while the lawsuit on the first law wended its way through the courts. A third attempt never made it to a vote after a back channel warning from Brown that he wouldn’t sign it.

      1. avatar J-El says:

        I’m sure it will keep coming up until it becomes law…probably during the Gavin Newsome administration.

        Eventually, President Kamala Harris will sign a similar measure into law nationwide.

  7. avatar Bob Watson says:

    Little Marky also has a Bloomberg funded study that shows his gun control package will keep lions, tigers and bears away, plus vampires and werewolves.

  8. avatar Bob109 says:

    San Francisco Supervisor? So, that is what they are calling some totalitarians these days.

    1. avatar Rokurota says:

      Dianne Feinstein resembles that remark!

  9. avatar Accur81 says:

    F SF.

  10. avatar Shire-man says:

    When asked specifically how any of the 6 steps would prevent the illegal trafficking of arms or ammunition Mark Farrell responded “we have to do SOMETHING!!!”
    Take my name, the date, the make and quantity of ammo, my license, my signature, my permit and still I can hand over any object to any person.
    Do these clowns not understand the physical world around them?

    Hypothetical and in no way a representation of my behavior:
    Oh shit, look at that. I can drive even without my license!!! How is this possible?!?!?!?!?!
    Oh, but I’ll be punished after the fact. I wasn’t deterred before by all the crimes my gang-banging cronies and I participate in worth decades or centuries in prison like robbery, assault, rape, selling drugs, murder. But man, you tack on a couple of years or whatever for selling some ammo to a guy and man I’ll sure think twice.

    1. avatar In4apennyIn4apound says:

      ” But man, you tack on a couple of years or whatever for selling some ammo to a guy and man I’ll sure think twice.”
      Excellent points
      The willful ignorance of focusing on the object is a sign of cognitive dissonance and emotional retardation, which is exactly the same logic that is a firearm enhancement charge. WE responsible gun owners get the blame for failed policies and failed people, and willingly accept that the consequences of emotional edicts decreed as law/policy will only affect us and not the criminal predators.

  11. avatar tdiinva says:

    Kate Steinle was unavaible for comment.

    1. avatar wlysium says:

      Too soon… wait no.. it’s the perfect time for it.

  12. avatar Dirk Diggler says:

    It is discriminatory. Bruce Jenner no more. What happens when the LGBT’s find out that someone they broke the law when they change their sex. Oooopps

  13. avatar mark s. says:

    POPS ! Lets take it national , they just care so much . God bless those tender hearted progressives . They make me so warm and fuzzy feeling all over knowing that they are looking out for me and my family . Everything is so screwed up on the TTAG sight this morning I must give a big shout out to the NSA . Good morning UTAH .

    1. avatar Owen says:

      “Good morning UTAH” <- now that there is funny!

  14. avatar MotoJB says:

    ‘effing retarded. Shouldn’t they also be videotaping any fool buying gin/juice? After all, they’re prone to violence, right?

  15. avatar The Original Brad says:

    It’s simple,

    Step 1. create a black market for a legal product by restricting it.
    Step 2.The increase in crime related to that black market becomes the justification for even greater restriction (ie. more laws).
    Step 3. The increase in laws do nothing but make the situation worse, see step 2, repeat as necessary until;
    Step 4. Outright ban, loss of liberty and increase in government control – for the children.
    Step 5. Bans and restrictions still don’t work, crime increases, enter the police state. Mission acomplished.

    1. avatar charlie44 says:

      step 6: BAN THE “Bureau of Land Management agent” WHOSE STOLEN GUN WAS USED TO KILL Kathryn Steinle IN SANCTUARY SAN FRAN along with everything else that city is so famous for. OR maybe ban all firearms including all federal, state and local law enforcement officers, and politicians too.
      step 7: ban all crime so step 6 will work!

  16. avatar Parnell says:

    Let me see if I’ve got this straight. An illegal alien felon uses a Federal agents’ stolen gun to kill a woman in SF so all transactions at the one LGS should be videotaped and sent to SFPD for tracking? WTH does one thing have to do with the other?

    1. avatar Mk10108 says:

      Governments goal of submission works when law abiding citizens are subjected to logic that on their best day, cannot make sense of its thinking.

    2. avatar tdiinva says:

      I suspect that the establishment is afraid that a sufficient number of San Franciscans will have awakened after Stenle’s murder to start asking why they aren’t allowed to defend themselves. The Supervisor wants to get as restrictions in place before that might happen.

      I keep telling you guys that Progressives have no intention of sending the police after you. They are outsourcing social control to gangs. Wake up and start fighting a 21st Century threat. The StasI isn’t coming for you.

  17. avatar Sian says:

    What do they even expect this to accomplish? Ammunition isn’t serialized, once it’s purchased it could end up anywhere, and there’s no way anyone can tell where it came from.

    All they’re doing is trying to drive the one remaining gun store in SF county out.

    1. avatar John L. says:

      Next step is to require all ammo sold in CA have the lot # and an individual ID etched into each shell case and bullet.

      That plus the microstamping will give them all the information they need.

      1. avatar Sian says:

        Nobody will sell ammo in CA under those conditions. The tooling cost alone would be immense.

        They probably know this, and just don’t want any ammunition sold in the state. (LE will of course be exempt)

        1. avatar Brian says:

          And if the ammo companies want to stay in business, they’ll tell the CA police to pound sand when they start requesting ammo for their departments. Because god forbid the ammo police have might get stolen along with their guns. Don’t wanna give the criminals any more things to steal.

  18. avatar Joe R. says:

    Why is it that people so attuned to taking it in the a_ _ , are ever thought to not be those that would make you take it in the a _ _ ?

    F everyone who asks you to bend over and take it (with a long sharp stick – don’t use any of your own body parts).

    S.F. is a pissant little town IN A LARGE BLUE EVIL DOME OF A_ _ – RAPE, and no one has asked them for any ADVICE/HELP/CONCERN/REGULATION/OPINION. . .

  19. avatar Gunr says:

    I wonder how long it will be before you have to leave a sperm sample and blood sample with the store, and maybe a small piece of skin!

  20. avatar Billy Colman says:

    POPS… Too hard not to invoke Godwin’s law reading that.

    I will say that my move from The Peoples’ Republic of Kalifornia has been the best move I ever made. Will never miss that socialist $hithole. Gun laws are the tip of the iceberg with how the libtards have ruined what should be a paradise beautiful scenery, weather and natural resources.

  21. avatar Bake says:

    You have to have CA ID to get into High Bridge to begin with, so if the government wasn’t giving illegals ID they would never be able to buy ammo from that store.

  22. avatar DBM says:

    Yeah criminals always legally purchase guns and ammo.

  23. avatar Canuck says:

    We already have most of what is on the list here in Canada; when you purchase ammo from a dealer they record the information in a ledger (paper and pen) and keep it in the store. It is available to the federal or provincial authorities on request. There is no centralized storage of the information, however, nor is it provided to the police on any kind of basis unless requested.

    That being said, there are always a few antis attempting to centralize and maintain it with the gov. ‘Cause POPS.

    1. avatar LordGopu says:

      Been shopping at a Canadian Tire? Cuz I think they’re usually the only ones who try that crap. Here in Quebec they don’t but I’ve heard in other provinces they try to get your address. That’s not a law though, just store policy. Find a store that doesn’t ask for that info. Most places just check that you have a license.

  24. avatar Stan Ho says:

    Oh, yeah – all that in a city of gun runner Leland Yee and his associate Shrimpboy
    http://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/Racketeering-charges-filed-against-Leland-Yee-5647390.php

  25. avatar Former Water Walker says:

    It makes me happy I live in Cook co.,IL…which is sad. Are they sure the federale didn’t leave his gat in a toilet?

  26. avatar jeff earle says:

    If I need to guns/ammo I’ll just ask Leland Yee the way to get around SF/CA unconstitutional laws. Enough said!

  27. avatar Ralph says:

    So SF waited until Leland Yee pleaded guilty and the dust settled before inventing this mess.

  28. avatar gsnyder says:

    CA residents should not be shocked when ammo and firearms are restricted and confiscated in the near future. When this tipping point occurs, We The People will find out if we still have the 2A as this would be the point where the CA Gov’t would have moved against the USA. Would the Fed’s swoop in and protect the Constitution or allow a tyrannical action to stand? WA and OR are headed in the same direction with extreme progressive destruction of American liberty. As with the vaccine deal, CA IMO is not part of the “United” as defined.

  29. avatar Pg2 says:

    COMMENT DELETED

    TTAG posting policy: no flaming the website, its authors or fellow commentators. If you have a complaint about TTAG’s editorial stance or style, please email thetruthaboutguns@gmail.com.

  30. avatar Tessius says:

    Glad I live in South Carolina.

  31. avatar Marcus (Aurelius) Payne says:

    How is getting my ugly mug on tape going to help catch the other guy who buys it black market?

  32. avatar GayGunOwner says:

    Just another example of kowtowing to LCAV – see http://www.nrapublications.org/index.php/9476/california-gun-ban-groups-shred-your-gun-rights/ hoping to get campaign money form their white shoe law firm members.

    Agree with others that the proposal’s only impact would be to render further harm to SF’s last remaining gun store. What’s laughable is are what the proposal doesn’t (and can’t) regulate: mail order ammo sales or the Cow Palace gun shows – see http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/14/san-francisco-gun-show_n_2475752.html where “left leaning liberals buy ammo and guns”

    The next one is Aug 8 & 9 and conveniently located on the Geneva Ave (SF Municipal transit) bus line. Can’t wait? Take BART, other transit lines, or Uber to nearby gun shops. By contrast, Yelp lists 31 SF marijuana outlets.

    So glad I no longer live in SF.

  33. avatar Southern Cross says:

    And which apparatchik has the duty to watch the recordings and check the details of those making the purchases?

  34. avatar Jim Greaves says:

    Apparently the noodle-heads in San Francisco never read the California Constitution. You know, that part that has “state pre-emption”. If the state cannot do it, localities MAY not. It called, for all those “civil libertarians of the left” – EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAWS. Or, because they harbor murderous illegals and the nation’s gay NAMBLA members, does the City Council think itself above constitutional laws???

    1. avatar Jim Greaves says:

      California already tried this a couple or three decades ago. They repealed it, because they KNOW it will not deter crime – register baseball bats and swimming pools. They kill a sizable number of people in CA each year – pool drowning accounts for the highest percentage of small child deaths nationally, so one can expect it is no different in the pool-infested city of SF. Yet no one calls for it. Because it is NONSENSE and a WASTE of time.

  35. avatar Jjimmyjonga says:

    The video. What an f’ing animal, my god.

  36. avatar MarkPA says:

    I wonder if the response to any such ammunition sales record-keeping and reporting ought to be a broad-based demand to buy one box at a time.

    The politicians will have to justify their ordinance/law in light of soaring sales of ammo. And, then, with reporting to the police, the police bureaucracy will have to contend with mountains of forms which will never be key-entered into any database. News-films of boxes of papers falling on the floor.

    We threaten the city-councils and State legislatures that they must enforce the law they pass no matter how obvious a waste of time it proves to be. Get our friends in these bodies to add amendments the reporting of signed forms and that the police must keep the original documents.

    The customers affected should, of course, stock-up in bulk from outlying stores. The objective ought to be to flood the system with records of 1-box sales.

  37. avatar D Hardt says:

    I buy life in SF and buy my ammo online and have it shipped to the South San Francisco UPS depot. A little inconvenient, but works well.

  38. avatar Dustin says:

    Mmmm, darknet. Geostashing. Trace that, dickbags.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email