• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Ammunition Bill Signed into Law

stevenb

ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒ&
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 1, 2007
Messages
1,560
Reaction score
523
Location
Gilbert, Az
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Ammunition Bill Signed into Law | News10.net | Sacramento, California | Local News


the Article said:
Moreover, this type of record keeping is no more intrusive for law abiding citizens than similar laws governing pawnshops or the sale of cold medicine. Unfortunately, even the most successful
local program is flawed; without a statewide law, felons can easily skirt the record keeping requirements of one city by visiting another. Assembly Bill 962 will fix this problem by
mandating that all ammunition vendors in the state keep records on ammunition sales.

As Governor, I have sought the appropriate balance between public safety and the right to keep and bear arms. I have signed important public safety measures to regulate the sale and transfer of .50 caliber rifles, instituted the California Firearms License Check program, and promoted the use of microstamping technology in handguns. I have also vetoed many pieces of legislation that sought to place unreasonable restrictions and burdens on firearms dealers and ammunition vendors.

Assembly Bill 962 reasonably regulates access to ammunition and improves public safety without placing undue burdens on consumers. For these reasons, I am pleased to sign this bill."


Wow, it must hurt to have his head so far up his ass... This will do nothing for violent crime in California.. I guess I should stock up on ammo and open a stand on the border of California and Az and sell ammo to them.

How do they plan on stopping people from going out of state to purchase? Further, how do they plan on stopping those same people from selling it to their friends?

Stupid ****ing legislation, the gun grabbers just don't have any common ****ing sense.
 
Wow.....wow. Thumb print customers...record their identification and report it to police!!! WTF ever happened to being able to secure your person, paper, and property against unreasonable search and seizure? Holy communists! More reasons as to why California should be kicked out of the Republic and sunk into the ocean.
 
Wow.....wow. Thumb print customers...record their identification and report it to police!!! WTF ever happened to being able to secure your person, paper, and property against unreasonable search and seizure? Holy communists! More reasons as to why California should be kicked out of the Republic and sunk into the ocean.

Actually, lets just kick everyone that lives there out and into the ocean.. then reoccupy it with people who are ****ing intelligent.
 
I have 2 conditions for someting to qualify as "reasonable" limit on the right to keep and bear arms:
1: It must have a demonstrably reductive effect on gun violence
2: it must not violate the constitution.

One of the bills that he signed was Assembly Bill 962.
1: It requires handgun ammunition to be kept behind the counter where customers cannot access it without assistance.
2: It also requires gun shop owners to thumbprint people who buy handgun ammunition, as well as record their identification and provide that information to police.
1: So what? how does this accomplish anything?
2: So what? how does this accomplish anything?

This law does not pass the first condition.

Further, registering people who buy ammunition is no different than registering people that buy guns. This is a precondition to the exercise of the right that is not inherent to the right itself, and therefore an infringement.

Thus, this law does not pass the second condition.
 
I have 2 conditions for someting to qualify as "reasonable" limit on the right to keep and bear arms:
1: It must have a demonstrably reductive effect on gun violence
2: it must not violate the constitution.


1: So what? how does this accomplish anything?
2: So what? how does this accomplish anything?

This law does not pass the first condition.

Further, registering people who buy ammunition is no different than registering people that buy guns. This is a precondition to the exercise of the right that is not inherent to the right itself, and therefore an infringement.

Thus, this law does not pass the second condition.


I guess the idea is the thumbprint will probably be on the casing.. from when they loaded the ammunition... therefore they'll be able to track it back to whoever bought it... and stuff.
 
I guess the idea is the thumbprint will probably be on the casing.. from when they loaded the ammunition... therefore they'll be able to track it back to whoever bought it... and stuff.
Which is, of course, meaningless.

My thumbprint associated with a box or ammo means I bought the box of ammo. Nothing else.
My thumbprint on a casing means I touched the casing with my thumb. Nothing else.
 
Which is, of course, meaningless.

My thumbprint associated with a box or ammo means I bought the box of ammo. Nothing else.
My thumbprint on a casing means I touched the casing with my thumb. Nothing else.

Well, those that think logically could deduce that..

But we're talking about liberals...
 
They're just trying to get their foot in the door...again...

If they can't restrict firearms, they'll try to restrict ammo. they're insidious like that.
 
Last edited:
Well, those that think logically could deduce that..
But we're talking about liberals...
Yes, well. liberals routinely display their inabaility to support a sound argument against guns.
 
Further, registering people who buy ammunition is no different than registering people that buy guns. This is a precondition to the exercise of the right that is not inherent to the right itself, and therefore an infringement.

Thus, this law does not pass the second condition.



You must register to vote to exercise your right to vote, so registration is not an infringement.
 
You must register to vote to exercise your right to vote, so registration is not an infringement.

Maybe I'm dense, but voter registration is used to ensure that people are voting from their correct districts.. and disallowing people to be bussed in from neighboring states / districts?

I think your argument is kinda flawed.
 
Maybe I'm dense, but voter registration is used to ensure that people are voting from their correct districts.. and disallowing people to be bussed in from neighboring states / districts?

I think your argument is kinda flawed.


The argument presented was that registration as a pre-condition to exercising a right was an inherent infringement; I demonstrated it is not.
 
You must register to vote to exercise your right to vote, so registration is not an infringement.
I said:

Further, registering people who buy ammunition is no different than registering people that buy guns. This is a precondition to the exercise of the right that is not inherent to the right itself, and therefore an infringement.

Registration determines where the person should cast his ballot and, when he attemps to cast a ballot, if said person is in the right place to cast that ballot; as both of those things are a necessary component of the right to vote, registration IS a a precondition inherent to that right - which is why registration is not an infringement.

The same is -not- true for guns.
 
I have signed important public safety measures to regulate the sale and transfer of .50 caliber rifles

Is there a law in California prohibiting the purchase of .50 caliber rifles?? Can you buy .50 caliber muzzle loaders there?

Crazy California. :doh
 
Is there a law in California prohibiting the purchase of .50 caliber rifles?? Can you buy .50 caliber muzzle loaders there?
Crazy California. :doh
They mean the .50BMG rifles.
'Cause, you know, -so- many people have used them in crimes, and -so- many people have been killed by them.
 
Is there a law in California prohibiting the purchase of .50 caliber rifles?? Can you buy .50 caliber muzzle loaders there?

Crazy California. :doh

I believe you can buy .50 cal muzzle loaders.. but no modern .50bmg rifles.

It's what caused Ronnie Barrett to stop selling his rifles to California PD and swat teams... along with not servicing them for them anymore.

The letter said:
December 11, 2002
Via Facsimile (213) 847-0676 and
U.S. Mail

Chief William J. Bratton
Los Angeles Police Department
150 North Los Angeles Street


Re: LAPD 82A Rifle, Serial No. 1186

Point of Contact: Jim Moody
213 485 4061

Dear Chief Bratton,

I, a U.S. citizen, own Barrett Firearms Mfg. Inc., and for 20 years I have built .50 caliber rifles for my fellow citizens, for their Law Enforcement departments and for their nation's armed forces.

You may be aware of the latest negative misinformation campaign from a Washington based anti-gun group, the Violence Policy Center. The VPC has, for three or so years, been unsuccessful in Washington, D.C. trying to demonize and ban a new subclass of firearms, the .50 caliber and other "too powerful" rifles. This type of nibbling process has been historically successful in civilian disarmament of other nations governed by totalitarian and other regimes less tolerant of individual rights than the United States .

The VPC's most recent efforts directs this misinformation campaign at your state, attempting to get any California body to pass any law against .50 caliber firearms. In March 2002 the VPC caused the California State Assembly, Public Safety Committee to consider and reject the issue by a 5 to 0 with 1 abstaining vote.

Regrettably, the same material has been presented to your city council. I personally attended the council meeting in Los Angeles regarding attempts to bar ownership of the .50 caliber rifle in your city. I was allowed to briefly address the council. The tone of the discussion was mostly emotionally based, so the facts that I attempted to provide were ineffective to the extent they were heard at all. The council voted to have the city attorney draft an ordinance to ban the .50, and further, to instruct the city's representatives in Sacramento and in Washington D.C. to push for bans at their respective levels.

At that council meeting, I was very surprised to see an LAPD officer seated front and center with a Barrett 82A1 .50 cal rifle. It was the centerpiece of the discussion. As you know, there have been no crimes committed with these rifles, and most importantly, current California law does not allow the sale of the M82AI in the state because of its detachable magazine and features that make it an "assault weapon." This rifle was being deceptively used by your department. The officer portrayed it as a sample of a currently available .50 cal rifle, available for sale to the civilians of Los Angeles. One councilman even questioned how this rifle was available under current laws, but as I stated, facts were ineffective that day.

Your officer, speaking for the LAPD, endorsed the banning of this rifle and its ammunition. Then he used the rifle for photo ops with the Councilmen each of whom, in handling the firearm, may have been committing a felony. I was amazed.

Since 1968, with the closing of the U.S. Springfield Amory, all of the small arms produced for the various government agencies are from the private sector. Every handgun, rifle or shotgun that law enforcement needs comes from this firearms industry. Unless the City of Los Angeles has plans of setting up its own firearms manufacturing, it may need to guard the manufacturing sources it has now.

When I returned to my office from Los Angeles, I found an example of our need for mutual cooperation. Your department had sent one of your 82A1 rifles in to us for service. All of my knowledge in the use of my rifle in the field of law enforcement had been turned upside down by witnessing how your department used yours. Not to protect and serve, but for deception, photo opportunities, and to further an ill-conceived effort that may result in the use of LA taxpayer monies to wage losing political battles in Washington against civil liberties regarding gun ownership.

Please excuse my slow response on the repair service of the rifle. I am battling to what service I am repairing the rifle for. I will not sell, nor service, my rifles to those seeking to infringe upon the Constitution and the crystal clear rights it affords individuals to own firearms.

I implore you to investigate the facts of the .50, to consider the liberties of the law-abiding people and our mutual coexistence, and to change your department's position on this issue.

Sincerely,
BARRETT FIREARMS MANUFACTURING, INC.
 
They mean the .50BMG rifles.
'Cause, you know, -so- many people have used them in crimes, and -so- many people have been killed by them.

According to the site 50calterror.com, they're commonly used in holdups and drive by shootings. :doh:shock::shock::shock::shock:
 
I believe you can buy .50 cal muzzle loaders.. but no modern .50bmg rifles.
It's what caused Ronnie Barrett to stop selling his rifles to California PD and swat teams... along with not servicing them for them anymore.
Of course, the anti-gun loons will ask: What do you need a 50BMG rifle for?

I ask:
Why, exactly, does a police department need a 50BMG rifle?
 
Of course, the anti-gun loons will ask: What do you need a 50BMG rifle for?

I ask:
Why, exactly, does a police department need a 50BMG rifle?

EXACTLY.


My response usually is... "So I can shoot **** at a mile away, why else?"
 
They mean the .50BMG rifles.
'Cause, you know, -so- many people have used them in crimes, and -so- many people have been killed by them.

Yeah, every cheap street thug can afford a $1,000. dollar rifle and the ammo to go with it. Not to mention the required shoulder padding.

I know there was a lot of concern about muzzle loaders when the .50 caliber baloney came up, but I didn't know any state had actually passed a law.
 
EXACTLY.
My response usually is... "So I can shoot **** at a mile away, why else?"
For civilians, there are any number of legitimate, legal uses for a .50BMG rifle.

HOWever... the police are only authorized to use a firearm when deadly force is necessary. In what situation is it -necessary- to use a .50BMG rifle?

That is, in what situation is the ONLY effective choice of weapon a .50BMG rifle?
 
For civilians, there are any number of legitimate, legal uses for a .50BMG rifle.

HOWever... the police are only authorized to use a firearm when deadly force is necessary. In what situation is it -necessary- to use a .50BMG rifle?

That is, in what situation is the ONLY effective choice of weapon a .50BMG rifle?



They are very useful at disabling vehicles...Both police and civilians should have access to them. Civilians more likely for hunting big game. very big game.
 
Yeah, every cheap street thug can afford a $1,000. dollar rifle and the ammo to go with it. Not to mention the required shoulder padding.

I know there was a lot of concern about muzzle loaders when the .50 caliber baloney came up, but I didn't know any state had actually passed a law.

holy ****, $1k... where have you bought your .50 bmg rifles?

The one I'm eyeballing right now is $7200. :(
 
Back
Top Bottom