California: Ammo Background Check, Registry Gun Control by Robert Farago | Jan 17, 2013 | 35 comments facebook twitter linkedin email comments JB says: January 17, 2013 at 18:08 Mother of God, why do I live in this state *groan* Reply Sammy says: January 17, 2013 at 18:17 My brother winters in you once glorious state and loves it. Well, for 1 he’s never owned a gun, except for that period when he was in South Korea, in his life. So all this is not of his world. But he raves about the weather and something about women on the beach. I’m not sure what he means, but he gets happy there, and that’s all I care about. I’d like to live there if there was a way to put a pull chain on Sacramento and flush it out. Reply S.CROCK says: January 17, 2013 at 19:03 trust me you don’t want to live in ca. it is nice having sun, but if you leave your house you will find far to many undesirable people. not all people are bad in ca, but to many for it to be pleasant. also not enough supporters of the 2A Reply Steve says: January 17, 2013 at 18:19 Yep me too. F^ck California Reply AlphaGeek says: January 17, 2013 at 18:24 Did any of you actually watch the video? There’s a lead segment from an LA legislator pushing an idea that’s been smacked down hard by the courts in the last few years, but the other two segments are all good. This is NOT bad coverage. It’s one guy restricting rights, one guy protecting your privacy, and a sympathetic figure with first-hand experience saying “no more gun control”. Frankly, that’s about as good as it gets. Reply Oddux says: January 17, 2013 at 18:37 I’m with AlphaGeek. This is actually an improvement on California’s norm. They’re not jumping to create all the most rediculous laws they can think of like New York, and there’s actually some skepticism showing rather than the usual rabid fervor. Watch the video. There are only three laws mentioned here, one is ammo background checks which would be a pain in the ass and probably stamp out online sales further, but one of those is a law to protect gun owners personal information from being obtained by anyone outside of law-enforcement or from being published, the third is mental health reform not anything pertaining to guns was mentioned in that one. Jack says: January 17, 2013 at 19:07 Yep, agreed AlphaGeek. This is about as good as it gets and especially from USA Today (Gannett) coverage which is outright anti-arms. I don’t see Jerry Brown supporting this as he’s already said our gun laws are tough enough and we’re up to our elbows in other issues. TS says: January 17, 2013 at 18:21 I hate living here. I’ve got about 2 years before I can leave. I’ve already written my assemblyman 2 times via email. Gonna be time to send the handwritten letter and maybe go down to see him – seeing as how I live in Sacramento, it isn’t too hard. Reply AlphaGeek says: January 17, 2013 at 18:21 For those who can’t watch the video right now: (1) Jackhole Los Angeles state legislator proposes licensing, background checks for buying ammo — this is a non-starter, the CA courts have smacked down (hard) on previous attempts to implement such laws (2) Republican state legislator wants stronger privacy laws for the growing number of concealed-carry permit holders in CA — clearly in reaction to that newspaper brouhaha back east (3) Matt Gray FRACKING NAILED IT. This guy is a fracking WINNER. He and 5 family members are the survivors of an attack by a criminal wielding an AR15 — and he showed where he got shot in the abdomen (it’s not a death ray! he survived!) and said we didn’t need gun control, we need to raise our kids better and provide better mental health services. Who is this Matt Gray guy? Can TTAG get in touch with him for further comment? Reply Mark N. says: January 17, 2013 at 18:40 Maybe you know of a case I don’t; the only one I know about a trial court enjoined a law that required ID and a fingerprint to buy handgun ammo based on an unconsitutionally vaugue definition of what ammo the bill applied to. That case is on appeal. The second law, trying to iron out the difficulties with the first one, was smacked down by our Governor until the appellate court rules on the first (which is sensible: if the trial court is overturned, we would have had two different laws on the books). This is the third go round and it is the most offensive of the lot. Can you imagine, paying for a background check just to buy a box of .22s???? And at what cost? They run $25 for fireams. More than double the cost of ammo, anyone? Is there a ten day waiting period that goes with it too? And it would ban internet sales, the next boggie on the radar screen, here and elsewhere. Reply Blake says: January 17, 2013 at 18:46 What’s really sad is that Jerry Brown is better on gun rights than Arnold. In fact, I think Brown signed the law making open carry illegal, full well knowing it would force the CCW issue. In case anyone is interested, look up the laws pertaining to CCW in CA and note that Jerry Brown is the one who put everything together. One interesting aspect of CA CCW law is that CA allows CCW on K-12 by permit holders. Individual districts may have rules against employees carrying, but it is not illegal to CCW on a K-12 campus. Reply AlphaGeek says: January 17, 2013 at 18:50 I would characterize current CCW law in CA as assuming that only LEOs and members of the special class are permitted to carry, therefore there are very few restrictions. If we ever get statewide CCW here, and I agree that the death of open-carry should force that in the next few years, I’ll be shocked if we don’t get a restrictive package of no-carry-zone laws along with it. Ralph says: January 17, 2013 at 22:41 I think Brown signed the law making open carry illegal, full well knowing it would force the CCW issue. Do not let anyone know that this is your opinion. Insane people are not allowed to have guns. AlphaGeek says: January 17, 2013 at 18:47 Fair enough — I was optimistically overstating how things were going with the ammo-sales restrictions. One upside to the more ridiculous proposals is that it’s a lot easier to argue that they’re unreasonable on their face. The downside is that in CA, sometimes they actually pass. 🙁 Reply Blake says: January 17, 2013 at 19:11 Alpha, it depends on your county Sheriff. I believe Sacramento, Tulare, Kings and Kern are all as close to “shall issue” as you will find in CA. (I think there are other counties that are good about CCW, but I don’t know which ones they are off the top of my head) AlphaGeek says: January 17, 2013 at 19:17 Blake, I was talking about statewide CCW being the legal result of the legislature banning open-carry. I’m aware, and envious, that there are reasonably populous shall-issue counties in CA. I’ve volunteered to be a test case for CCW in Alameda County, but we may have state-wide CCW by the time CalGuns gets here. I’m cautiously hopeful that it will work out that way. Brian says: January 17, 2013 at 18:28 Wait until some California lawmakers find out some of us reload, and thus are producing our own ammunition! Reply AlphaGeek says: January 17, 2013 at 18:37 ShutUpShutUpShutUp… no need to educate them! Reply Casey T says: January 17, 2013 at 19:47 Yeah, I’m with you. Don’t tell them about reloading because they will take action. They will probably try to make it illegal or something. I wouldn’t want to see that for anyone in Cali, they already have to endure way too much B.S. Reply dudebro says: January 17, 2013 at 18:40 reloading components are tapped out online (eg midwayusa). no powders, no primers, barely any bullets, no backorders. my local supplier canNOT get small rifle primers (ARs). Reply louis Ringe says: January 17, 2013 at 18:40 Ben there done that. The state did this in the 80’s, it was a pain in the a** and didn’t do a thing except add to a dealers paperwork. We Vegas 4 hours away good luck with it again. I am SO GLAD I moved to TX Reply OkieRim says: January 17, 2013 at 18:42 I swear, with these 5-7 states, it’s like a race to see which can be the dumbest.. Reply Tony says: January 17, 2013 at 18:42 The race is on, which state lawmakers can prove how good they are at bending laws to take away our freedoms, the don’t care about those that voted them into office, if it was a violent outbreak of farts caused by tomatoes they would be racing to be the first to ban ketchup Reply O.E says: January 17, 2013 at 19:10 Crystal Meth labs go pop, imagine what these standards on ammo regulation have a possibility of starting if the the legislation intends to primarily target convicted felons. Reply MOG says: January 17, 2013 at 19:15 I am not leaving Texas anyway, at least till the statue of limitations runs out in the other 56 states I have been in. Reply Casey T says: January 17, 2013 at 19:48 I think you need to either check your math or history. Last time I checked, there were only 50 states. Reply Ralph says: January 17, 2013 at 22:43 Casey, he was making fun of Obama who once famously said that he had visited most of the 57 states. Reply v says: January 17, 2013 at 20:16 obongo says there are 57 states, so the ‘official’ number of states is now ’57’… Reply Gerry Nance says: January 17, 2013 at 20:26 As of January 1, 2013 California has banned open carry unloaded handguns, open carry loaded handguns, open carry long guns, and sheriff’s are tight about issue of CCW. The only place you can conceal/open carry is at home, fishing or camping. A CCW case Peruta v. San Diego is awaiting 9th CCA Opinion due around May 2013. See http://michellawyers.com/guncasetracker/perutavsandiego/ Reply Gerry Nance says: January 17, 2013 at 20:30 Per California laws, “The militia of the State shall consist of the National Guard, State Military Reserve and the Naval Militia–which constitute the active militia–and the unorganized militia. The unorganized militia consists of all persons liable to service in the militia, but not members of the National Guard, the State Military Reserve, or the Naval Militia. The unorganized militia may be called for active duty in case of war, rebellion, insurrection, invasion, tumult, riot, breach of the peace, public calamity or catastrophe, or other emergency, or imminent danger thereof, or may be called forth for service under the Constitution and laws of the United States.” Should you have a right to buy weapons equal to your county sheriff under the 2nd Amendment? Reply OldLawman says: January 17, 2013 at 21:28 I am sure all the gang bangers and Mexican narco squads will leap at the opportunity to comply with the laws. There is not enough money in the world to make me want to move to CA (or NY, or MA, or NJ, or IL). Reply Bob2 says: January 18, 2013 at 07:02 God forbid, if there is ever another civil war or revolution, I am glad that the California liberals will be out gunned by their own actions. 🙂 Reply Gerry Nance says: January 18, 2013 at 12:59 As the Mexican drug cartels get squeezed in Mexico, or if the borders are finally secured, then Mexicans trapped north of the border and squeezed by immigration enforcement might riot. Eight years ago I learned of the Reconquista de Aztlan, Brown Berets de Aztlan, and M.E.Ch.A., and I also learned of the Mexica Movement. These organizations have risen in part due to the improvements in communication over the Internet and continue to grow. Just stand on a street corner or freeway overpass with a STOP ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION sign as someone keeps a camera on you and you might get a surprise. The Southwest USA is about to be taken. Reply APBTFan says: January 19, 2013 at 17:23 WOW!!!!!! He actually freakin’ said ammunition is what fuels the violence! With my 15,000+ rounds of ammo I should be in the record books. I’m no genius but I can’t imagine having that level of stupidity, naietivity and denial. Reply Dano says: January 21, 2013 at 19:08 Someone said Jerry Brown is better on gun issues than Arnold S. That’s an easy one, as Arnold is, and will always be anit gun, just like Sylvester S. Both, including Matt Damon, pour mt. of cash into these programs. Check it out ! Also this you can see, as they never take a positive view on the subject, always side steeping it. this is the real political way, to do things. Seems pretty screwed up to me, that if you make most all you money on films, that are based on the use of weapons, mostly of the type, that some would say are EVIL, ( AR”S AK”S ) that your not anti gun, or negative on 2A. But like many, they are just the largest type of hypocrite. Hypocrite : one that says one thing & doing another. Just my 2.5 cents, Dano… Reply Write a Comment Cancel replyYour email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *Comment Name * Email * Website Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment. Notify me of follow-up comments by email. Notify me of new posts by email.