Calguns.net  

Home My iTrader Join the NRA Donate to CGSSA Sponsors CGN Google Search
CA Semiauto Ban(AW)ID Flowchart CA Handgun Ban ID Flowchart CA Shotgun Ban ID Flowchart
Go Back   Calguns.net > POLITICS, LITIGATION AND ACTIVISM > California 2nd Amend. Political Discussion & Activism
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

California 2nd Amend. Political Discussion & Activism Discuss gun rights activism and 2A related political topics here. All advice given is NOT legal counsel.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 05-22-2019, 1:17 PM
MCubeiro's Avatar
MCubeiro MCubeiro is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 72
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default DOJ Submits Ammo Regs to OAL

For Immediate Release:

Beginning July 1, 2019, all ammunition transactions in the state of California will be subject to a background check requirement. But in order to implement this requirement, the California Department of Justice (“DOJ”) must first adopt necessary regulations which, as of today, have been submitted to the Office of Administrative Law (“OAL”) for review.

As reported earlier, California gun owners were given an opportunity to comment on DOJ’s proposed regulations on two separate occasions. CRPA and NRA submitted two comprehensive comment letters on DOJ’s proposal. The first letter highlighted the many key substantive provisions lacking in the proposal and serious issues as to the required authority, clarity, and consistency required by California’s Administrative Procedures Act. The second letter addressed key revisions and statements made by DOJ during a recent stakeholder’s meeting concerning the proposed regulations.

OAL has until July 1—the day the new requirements are scheduled to take effect—to approve or deny DOJ’s proposed regulations. Assuming OAL approves, California gun owners need to know what to expect when purchasing ammunition beginning July 1. To that end, CRPA, with the support of NRA, has prepared a comprehensive Information Bulletin addressing many frequently asked questions regarding the upcoming ammunition background check requirements.

To access CRPA’s Information Bulletin, click HERE.

In the meantime, CRPA attorneys are working to obtain a copy of the regulations as submitted to OAL to determine any necessary course of action. Members should also know that a lawsuit, titled Rhode v. Becerra, has already been filed challenging California’s new ammunition sales restrictions. To learn more about the Rhode lawsuit and to stay informed on DOJ’s ammunition background check regulations, be sure to visit the CRPA webpage at https://crpa.org/.
__________________


NRA Certified Instructor- Pistol, Rifle, PPITH, PPOTH, Metallic Cartridge Reloading, Home Firearm Safety, Refuse to be a Victim
NRA Range Safety Officer

NRA Patriot Life Member - Benefactor Level
CRPA Life Member
CGN/CGSSA Contributor

Last edited by MCubeiro; 05-22-2019 at 1:19 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 05-22-2019, 6:30 PM
BeAuMaN's Avatar
BeAuMaN BeAuMaN is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 795
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Thanks Matt.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 05-22-2019, 7:00 PM
Python6357's Avatar
Python6357 Python6357 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 465
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

What happens if the DOJ are rejected by the OAL?
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 05-22-2019, 7:02 PM
tankton tankton is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 518
iTrader: 25 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Python6357 View Post
What happens if the DOJ are rejected by the OAL?
If it's like last time, nearly nothing. They tweak a few things, and it gets rubber stamped.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 05-22-2019, 7:23 PM
Python6357's Avatar
Python6357 Python6357 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 465
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tankton View Post
If it's like last time, nearly nothing. They tweak a few things, and it gets rubber stamped.
Would it delay the background check requirement?
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 05-22-2019, 7:35 PM
sevendayweekend's Avatar
sevendayweekend sevendayweekend is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 854
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Default

^^^
Yeah the same way it delayed our current batch of aw regulations
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 05-22-2019, 7:35 PM
sevendayweekend's Avatar
sevendayweekend sevendayweekend is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 854
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Default

Where can we see the proposed ammo regulations?
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 05-22-2019, 7:38 PM
BeAuMaN's Avatar
BeAuMaN BeAuMaN is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 795
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sevendayweekend View Post
Where can we see the proposed ammo regulations?
Read OP. They're requesting them, but the last draft of ammo regs is linked.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 05-22-2019, 8:04 PM
M76's Avatar
M76 M76 is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Urbanized Suburbia
Posts: 1,459
iTrader: 80 / 100%
Default

Single stage or progressive press, 2 better choices over this BS
__________________


1A - 2A = -1A
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 05-22-2019, 8:43 PM
Skip_Dog's Avatar
Skip_Dog Skip_Dog is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Nor Cal
Posts: 1,416
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

Or we can deal with a one hour back ground check for ammo and GUNS... If they can get it that fast for ammo well...
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 05-22-2019, 9:56 PM
tenemae's Avatar
tenemae tenemae is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: ҚФꙦꙦѤ ꙆꚈҊԂ ™
Posts: 927
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

What are you talking about, skip? Background check for guns is basically instant. Are you confusing the background check for the 10 day waiting period?
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 05-22-2019, 10:34 PM
Mr. Beretta Mr. Beretta is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,644
iTrader: 226 / 100%
Default

INFORMATION BULLETIN

MAY 21 2019

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS REGARDING
UPCOMING JULY 1 ST AMMUNITION BACKGROUND CHECK REQUIREMENTS


http://michellawyers.com/wp-content/...-Ammo-Regs.pdf
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 05-22-2019, 11:45 PM
BeAuMaN's Avatar
BeAuMaN BeAuMaN is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 795
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tenemae View Post
What are you talking about, skip? Background check for guns is basically instant. Are you confusing the background check for the 10 day waiting period?
From the bulletin above:
Quote:
XI. HOW LONG DOES EACH BACKGROUND CHECK PROCESS TAKE?

California law requires the background check to be completed instantly, but DOJ regulations suggest this will not be the case. California law requires DOJ to issue approval “at the time of purchase or transfer,” meaning the process should be instant upon submission to DOJ. However, DOJ’s most recent regulatory proposal suggests DOJ will not comply with California law in this regard. Instead, DOJ will issue “Ammunition Transaction Numbers” allowing purchasers to “monitor the status” of the background check.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 05-23-2019, 10:56 AM
TruOil TruOil is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 619
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Python6357 View Post
What happens if the DOJ are rejected by the OAL?
The NRA seems to think that if the regulations are rejected by the OAL no one except exempt persons will be able to buy ammo after the first of July until the regs are in place.

Restate, since Becerra hates all things guns, the DOJ has an incentive to delay getting the regs approved, since he can "blame the OAL" if the regs do not pass scrutiny. As it is, it appears that the DOJ is attempting to sneak in additional requirements that are not authorized by law.

Meanwhile, the Roster continues to shrink. According to a count by the FPC:
Based on our survey (see sections entitled Note and Methodology, below), we found that California's Handgun Roster is comprised of the following (as of January 30, 2019):

27 listings for "derringer" type handguns
268 listings for "revolver" type handguns
468 listings for "pistol" type handguns
In sum, there were 763 total listings for all handgun types

Of those:

Only 9 of the 27 listings for "derringer" type handguns were found to be materially unique
Only 214 of the 268 listings for "revolver" type handguns were found to be materially unique
Only 305 of the 468 listings for "pistol" type handguns were found to be materially unique
In sum, only 528 of the 768 total listings for all handgun types were found to be materially unique
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 05-23-2019, 12:32 PM
tenemae's Avatar
tenemae tenemae is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: ҚФꙦꙦѤ ꙆꚈҊԂ ™
Posts: 927
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
XI. HOW LONG DOES EACH BACKGROUND CHECK PROCESS TAKE?

California law requires the background check to be completed instantly, but DOJ regulations suggest this will not be the case. California law requires DOJ to issue approval “at the time of purchase or transfer,” meaning the process should be instant upon submission to DOJ. However, DOJ’s most recent regulatory proposal suggests DOJ will not comply with California law in this regard. Instead, DOJ will issue “Ammunition Transaction Numbers” allowing purchasers to “monitor the status” of the background check.
So...
  1. law requires BG check to be instant
  2. DoJ submits regulation suggesting it won't be
  3. if DoJ reg is rejected (with deadline a month away).....
    • BG check deadline postponed?
    • Nobody can buy ammo?
    • ??? ???
  4. if regs accepted as is, we may need to buy ammo one day. Wait for BG to complete, then return a separate day to pick up ammo when BG passes??

Is this like letting kindergartners plan your city waste disposal? It would at least explain SF and LA. Can we get an adult to talk to at the DoJ?

Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 05-23-2019, 12:41 PM
curtisfong's Avatar
curtisfong curtisfong is online now
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 6,013
iTrader: 9 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tenemae View Post
Can we get an adult to talk to at the DoJ?
They are all adults, and they are all your enemies. They cannot be reasoned with, not because they are children, but because they demonstrably wish to do you direct harm.
__________________
The Rifle on the Wall

"“[S]cientific proof” of both gun-rights and gun-control theories “is very hard to get”; therefore, requiring “some substantial scientific proof to show that a [firearm] law will indeed substantially reduce crime and injury” is tantamount to applying strict scrutiny to, and almost certainly will lead to invalidation of, the law." - Kamela Harris

Lawyers and their Stockholm Syndrome
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 05-23-2019, 1:54 PM
Python6357's Avatar
Python6357 Python6357 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 465
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by curtisfong View Post
They are all adults, and they are all your enemies. They cannot be reasoned with, not because they are children, but because they demonstrably wish to do you direct harm.
Skynet confirmed! They are skynet, sending terminators our way!
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 05-23-2019, 2:21 PM
Rodell Rodell is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Wet side of Washington State
Posts: 450
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

And no method for us out of staters without a CA ID to buy ammo.

Painful for everyone, including visitors.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 05-23-2019, 2:28 PM
Sputnik's Avatar
Sputnik Sputnik is offline
Shiny
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: East Bay
Posts: 1,474
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

So why, exactly, would the doj not have to comply with the law?
It's bad enough to have this background check but for doj to insinuate that they will not be processing them as the law requires (instant check) is adding insult to injury.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 05-23-2019, 2:39 PM
Python6357's Avatar
Python6357 Python6357 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 465
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sputnik View Post
So why, exactly, would the doj not have to comply with the law?
It's bad enough to have this background check but for doj to insinuate that they will not be processing them as the law requires (instant check) is adding insult to injury.
Because clearly, the government is far more trustworthy than us measly peasants.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 05-23-2019, 2:42 PM
curtisfong's Avatar
curtisfong curtisfong is online now
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 6,013
iTrader: 9 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sputnik View Post
So why, exactly, would the doj not have to comply with the law?
The legislature implicitly allows the DoJ to create whatever regulation they wish out of whole cloth, with no oversight.

You can argue the Legislature does not have the power to let another branch write laws, but I do not see anything stopping them.

Certainly the courts will do nothing.

This is why FGG's legal blathering (no matter how correct) is irrelevant; the Legislature and the DoJ are not actually bound by any rules whatsoever if the courts refuse to interfere.
__________________
The Rifle on the Wall

"“[S]cientific proof” of both gun-rights and gun-control theories “is very hard to get”; therefore, requiring “some substantial scientific proof to show that a [firearm] law will indeed substantially reduce crime and injury” is tantamount to applying strict scrutiny to, and almost certainly will lead to invalidation of, the law." - Kamela Harris

Lawyers and their Stockholm Syndrome
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 05-23-2019, 3:06 PM
golfish's Avatar
golfish golfish is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Alta Loma
Posts: 5,184
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
California law requires the background check to be completed instantly, but DOJ regulations
suggest this will not be the case. California law requires DOJ to issue approval “at the time of purchase or
transfer,” meaning the process should be instant upon submission to DOJ.16 However, DOJ’s most recent
regulatory proposal suggests DOJ will not comply with California law in this regard. Instead, DOJ will issue
“Ammunition Transaction Numbers” allowing purchasers to “monitor the status” of the background check
The 10 day wait is supposed to go away. Pretty soon it's going to take longer to get ammo than to buy a gun
__________________
It takes a lot of balls to play golf the way I do

MLC________________________________

Happiness is a warm gun
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 05-23-2019, 3:17 PM
curtisfong's Avatar
curtisfong curtisfong is online now
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 6,013
iTrader: 9 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by golfish View Post
The 10 day wait is supposed to go away
Unfortunately, that is unlikely.
__________________
The Rifle on the Wall

"“[S]cientific proof” of both gun-rights and gun-control theories “is very hard to get”; therefore, requiring “some substantial scientific proof to show that a [firearm] law will indeed substantially reduce crime and injury” is tantamount to applying strict scrutiny to, and almost certainly will lead to invalidation of, the law." - Kamela Harris

Lawyers and their Stockholm Syndrome
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 05-23-2019, 3:45 PM
Kokopelli's Avatar
Kokopelli Kokopelli is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: "the drop edge of yonder"
Posts: 2,484
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Do any other states have such background checks in order to purchase ammunition?
__________________
“If we lose freedom here, there is no place to escape to. This is the last stand on earth.” - Ronald Reagan
"God is not on the side of the big battalions, but on the side of those who shoot best." - Voltaire
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 05-23-2019, 4:00 PM
BeAuMaN's Avatar
BeAuMaN BeAuMaN is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 795
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tenemae View Post
So...
  1. law requires BG check to be instant
  2. DoJ submits regulation suggesting it won't be
  3. if DoJ reg is rejected (with deadline a month away).....
    • BG check deadline postponed?
    • Nobody can buy ammo?
    • ??? ???
  4. if regs accepted as is, we may need to buy ammo one day. Wait for BG to complete, then return a separate day to pick up ammo when BG passes??
CRPA claims it's supposed to be instant. There's probably supporting documents or testimony that says it's intended to be instant. DOJ wrote draft regs that imply that it may not be "instant". I'm tired and I'll be highlighting some stuff, but I may miss some stuff too since I'm on little sleep here.

I'm going to quote some stuff:
CRPA Claim:
Quote:
XI. HOW LONG DOES EACH BACKGROUND CHECK PROCESS TAKE?

California law requires the background check to be completed instantly, but DOJ regulations suggest this will not be the case. California law requires DOJ to issue approval “at the time of purchase or transfer,” meaning the process should be instant upon submission to DOJ. However, DOJ’s most recent regulatory proposal suggests DOJ will not comply with California law in this regard. Instead, DOJ will issue “Ammunition Transaction Numbers” allowing purchasers to “monitor the status” of the background check.
The "at the time of purchase or transfer" is quoted from CA PC 30370(a) afaik. Also going to reference (d), since it's relevant.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CA PC 30370
(a) Commencing July 1, 2019, the department shall electronically approve the purchase or transfer of ammunition through a vendor, as defined in Section 16151, except as otherwise specified. This approval shall occur at the time of purchase or transfer, prior to the purchaser or transferee taking possession of the ammunition. Pursuant to the authorization specified in paragraph (1) of subdivision (c) of Section 30352, the following persons are authorized to purchase ammunition:
...
(d) A vendor is prohibited from providing a purchaser or transferee ammunition without department approval. If a vendor cannot electronically verify a person’s eligibility to purchase or possess ammunition via an Internet connection, the department shall provide a telephone line to verify eligibility. This option is available to ammunition vendors who can demonstrate legitimate geographical and telecommunications limitations in submitting the information electronically and who are approved by the department to use the telephone line verification.
Now we look at the most recent draft CA DoJ posted before they submitted their regs to OAL (still waiting on those).
Quote:
Originally Posted by § 4302. in proposed regs
§ 4302. Standard Ammunition Eligibility Check (AFS Match).

(a) A purchaser or transferee is authorized to purchase ammunition if their information matches an entry in the Automated Firearm System and does not match an entry in the Prohibited Armed Persons File.
...
(c) The ammunition vendor shall collect the purchaser’s or transferee’s name, date of birth, current address and driver license or other government identification number in the manner described in Penal Code section 28180, and telephone number, and enter this information into the DES website.
(d) Upon the Department’s completion of the Standard Ammunition Eligibility Check, the Department shall then update the purchaser’s or transferee’s DES record to instruct the ammunition vendor to approve or reject the ammunition purchase or transfer.
So as you can see, CRPA says the regulations suggest it will not be instant... and that the law requires DOJ to issue approval "at the time of purchase or transfer" means it should be instant. However, as you can see above, there's no explicit declarations of time, only an order of how things are to be performed. With that said, there may be testimony and other peripheral documents around the passing of this law and these regulations that do explicitly claim it's supposed to be an instant check that CRPA may have. It's entirely possible that CA DoJ stated the three step process because it will be instant, but the order of operations is three steps (submission by licensed vendor, cross checking the database, and approval and updating of the ATN (Ammunition Transaction Number)).

It's also entirely possible I've misunderstood this in my current state, but basically the time not being spelled out means DOJ has wiggle room, and they love to get as much wiggle room as they can take.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 05-23-2019, 5:28 PM
rivraton's Avatar
rivraton rivraton is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Merced County
Posts: 1,219
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
III. AS A RESIDENT OF CALIFORNIA, CAN I PURCHASE AMMUNITION WHILE TRAVELING OUTSIDE OF
CALIFORNIA AND BRING IT BACK WITH ME?
NO. You may, however, purchase ammunition and have it delivered to a licensed vendor in
California and pick it up there. As of January 1, 2018, California residents can no longer bring or transport
into California any ammunition purchased or otherwise obtained from out-of-state on their person. The
ammunition can be sent to a licensed vendor in California who will then process the transfer.6
In addition to law
enforcement and certain firearm related businesses, the following persons/transactions are exempt from this
restriction:
• Federally licensed C&R collectors who also possess a California Certificate of Eligibility; or,
• Persons receiving ammunition from a spouse, registered domestic partner, or “immediate family
member” (parent-child or grandparent-grandchild relationship).7
So, say we are in AZ, if my wife buys a box of ammo and gives it to me, I can then legally bring it back to CA?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 05-24-2019, 12:02 AM
TrappedinCalifornia's Avatar
TrappedinCalifornia TrappedinCalifornia is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: What Used to be a Great State
Posts: 881
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kokopelli View Post
Do any other states have such background checks in order to purchase ammunition?
Yes. New York. However, note where they say...

Quote:
This requirement will not apply if the background check system is not operational or if a dealer or seller was issued a waiver from conducting a background check by the state police.
If you go to the New York Safe Act FAQ page...

Quote:
Q: Is there any background check now required for purchasers of ammunition?

A: Not yet. The SAFE Act provides that background check and record keeping requirements imposed on all retail sellers of ammunition are scheduled to take effect 30 days after the Superintendent of the New York State Police certifies that a statewide license and record database is operational for such a process. That certification has not yet been made as the system is being developed. Therefore, there is no set start date for that element of the law to begin. All sellers of ammunition will receive advance notice before the certification is made in order to ensure a smooth process.
This has now been going on for several years... New York Ammo Buyers Won't Need Background Check

It may, and this is sheer speculation, be at the heart of the DOJ's regs 'suggesting' that the check might not be 'instant.'

Does anyone know if a system has actually been created for this or if they have simply tried to shoehorn it into existing systems and aren't all that confident things aren't going to be overwhelmed?
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 05-24-2019, 7:42 AM
curtisfong's Avatar
curtisfong curtisfong is online now
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 6,013
iTrader: 9 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TrappedinCalifornia View Post
Does anyone know if a system has actually been created for this or if they have simply tried to shoehorn it into existing systems and aren't all that confident things aren't going to be overwhelmed?
I don't see any reason why the DoJ would want any of this to go smoothly. It simply isn't in their interest.
__________________
The Rifle on the Wall

"“[S]cientific proof” of both gun-rights and gun-control theories “is very hard to get”; therefore, requiring “some substantial scientific proof to show that a [firearm] law will indeed substantially reduce crime and injury” is tantamount to applying strict scrutiny to, and almost certainly will lead to invalidation of, the law." - Kamela Harris

Lawyers and their Stockholm Syndrome
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 05-24-2019, 8:24 AM
Jimi Jah's Avatar
Jimi Jah Jimi Jah is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: North San Diego County
Posts: 13,365
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

I'm looking forward to watching the latest California gun related sh*tshow.

Me, I'm stocked up. Can't wait to watch folks in line at the range trying to buy some ammo to shoot. I'll probably be in/out/done before they get approved.

I just hope the lines aren't to long.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 05-24-2019, 12:01 PM
aBrowningfan aBrowningfan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 1,034
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimi Jah View Post
I'm looking forward to watching the latest California gun related sh*tshow.

Me, I'm stocked up. Can't wait to watch folks in line at the range trying to buy some ammo to shoot. I'll probably be in/out/done before they get approved.

I just hope the lines aren't to long.
Aren't ranges exempted for ammunition sold for use at the range?
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 05-24-2019, 12:16 PM
furyous68 furyous68 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: San Luis Obispo, CA
Posts: 1,755
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Well.. hopefully the 03FFL & CoE exemption lasts long enough for me to stock up for the next few years.

This is getting freaking ridiculous. Can we just bring up a lawsuit encompassing every law they've passed in the last few years & run it all the way up to SCOTUS? If a CA judge can find that standard capacity mags are a protected, "in common use" item integral to the use of a firearm... how much more so is ammunition????
__________________
Quote:
95,000,000 people die each day in the U.S. from gun violence
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 8:13 AM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Proudly hosted by GeoVario the Premier 2A host.
Calguns.net, the 'Calguns' name and all associated variants and logos are ® Trademark and © Copyright 2002-2018, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.
Calguns.net and The Calguns Foundation have no affiliation and are in no way related to each other.
All opinions, statements and remarks made by Calguns.net on this web site and elsewhere are solely attributable to Calguns.net.