• 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!

Californians Thrown Curve Ball on Eve of New Ammo Control

Wayne Jr said:
Its purpose is to reduce general gun ownership.
Click to expand...

More specifically, to reduce gun ownership and access to ammo for legal and lawful gun owners. The impediments are ineffective for criminals. In particular, when speaking of the Real ID requirement, it is not the slightest problem for criminals because they are aware that you can't trace a used bullet back to a point of sale so there is no reason for a criminal to be concerned with showing an ID.

What could be a concern though is the periodic background check to buy ammo. But here again, as guns are freely bought and sold on the black market (a large number being foreign copies without valid serial numbers) the sellers of these same guns are going to also sell the criminal the ammo as needed.

So is just one more fee, one more background check hassle, and another procedure that ONLY impede lawful gun owners.

California has joined the gun loathing lobby, and like NJ and some other states I am sure it will pass a never ending stream of laws that are designed to make it a hassle or entrap people with procedural slip-ups of innocuous transport.

Bottom line: this is not crime control or safety, its harassment that facilitates intentional entrapment under the color of law.
 
Last edited:
maxparrish said:
More specifically, to reduce gun ownership and access to ammo for legal and lawful gun owners. The impediments are ineffective for criminals. In particular, when speaking of the Real ID requirement, it is not the slightest problem for criminals because they are aware that you can't trace a used bullet back to a point of sale so there is no reason for a criminal to be concerned with showing an ID.

What could be a concern though is the periodic background check to buy ammo. But here again, as guns are freely bought and sold on the black market (a large number being foreign copies without valid serial numbers) the sellers of these same guns are going to also sell the criminal the ammo as needed.

So is just one more fee, one more background check hassle, and another procedure that ONLY impede lawful gun owners.

California has joined the gun loathing lobby, and like NJ and some other states I am sure it will pass a never ending stream of laws that are designed to make it a hassle or entrap people with procedural slip-ups of innocuous transport.

Bottom line: this is not crime control or safety, its harassment that facilitates intentional entrapment under the color of law.
Click to expand...
Note the absence of a revolt. I guess Americans are ok with these laws.
 
Wayne Jr said:
I do not support having to undergo a background check to buy ammunition, but I do support having a real ID generally. Everyone should have a real ID regardless.
Click to expand...

Too bad the demonrats don't want to use it for voting purposes.
 
justabubba said:
without the ID requirement, how do they confirm you are a LAWFUL gun owner?
Click to expand...

WTF?

It should be assumed that if you are using ammo, you already are a legal gun owner.

Don't you think?

Why make it so hard? I think it just gives some people hard-ons to be so authoritarian.
 
maxparrish said:
More specifically, to reduce gun ownership and access to ammo for legal and lawful gun owners. The impediments are ineffective for criminals. In particular, when speaking of the Real ID requirement, it is not the slightest problem for criminals because they are aware that you can't trace a used bullet back to a point of sale so there is no reason for a criminal to be concerned with showing an ID.

What could be a concern though is the periodic background check to buy ammo. But here again, as guns are freely bought and sold on the black market (a large number being foreign copies without valid serial numbers) the sellers of these same guns are going to also sell the criminal the ammo as needed.

So is just one more fee, one more background check hassle, and another procedure that ONLY impede lawful gun owners.

California has joined the gun loathing lobby, and like NJ and some other states I am sure it will pass a never ending stream of laws that are designed to make it a hassle or entrap people with procedural slip-ups of innocuous transport.

Bottom line: this is not crime control or safety, its harassment that facilitates intentional entrapment under the color of law.
Click to expand...

which is why those on this board , who favor harassing lawful gun owners, are either supportive of this law, or dismissive of the concerns raised about it.
 
beefheart said:
No, you are just blathering. Go hug your gun, its your first love.
Click to expand...

Freedom is my first love-which is why lefties criticize me.
 
TurtleDude said:
This isn't about being a lawful gun owner-it is about making another requirement that is only designed to harass lawful gun owners.
Click to expand...

California’s next step it to tax ammunition out of reach of average citizens.

Gun owners as a class are presumed to be criminals and murderers, yet most gun crime is blue state democrat on democrat, mayhem.
 
Lutherf said:
Californians Thrown Curve Ball on Eve of New Ammo Control :: Guns.com



This is why nobody trusts "reasonable" gun control measures. The "emergency" regulations are onerous and difficult to comply with before the new law kicks in.

Basically, if you don't have a "real ID" you have to provide a copy of your birth certificate or passport with your regular license. If your name has changed since you were born or got your passport (like, for example, if you got married or divorced) you need to bring even more documentation.

Please keep in mind, this is for the purchase of AMMUNITION. It's not even to buy a "homicidal maniac, fully automatic, more lethal than you could ever imagine, killing machine".

I suspect that many Californians will be making runs to Las Vegas, Lake Havasu and Yuma.
Click to expand...

Oh no....paperwork!!!!!!

The horror
 
notquiteright said:
This is why 'gun' nuts can't be trusted to present a fair account of the event... :roll:

The Real ID Act has been around since 2005. It has 4 phases that were are well known. California has complied with the real ID act. By now most Californians should have a 'real Id'...

You will need the real ID for many other events, from boarding a plane to access to some government buildings.

Tuck the whine back in and get what Congress voted for over a decade ago, right after 9/11.... :peace
Click to expand...

What comes to mind is all the uproar about IDs for voting. What a hypocrisy.
 
Lord of Planar said:
WTF?

It should be assumed that if you are using ammo, you already are a legal gun owner.

Don't you think?

Why make it so hard? I think it just gives some people hard-ons to be so authoritarian.
Click to expand...

Why should that be assumed? Can you be legal when you bought your gun ten years ago but not now?
 
trixare4kids said:
Please tell me you are not a freedom loving liberal. I get asking for ID(s) to check that minors are not buying items that are health-harming but ammo? If the new guideline states we are doing this to prevent minors from buying ammo, I'd get it, but they are asking everyone of age for an ID. Why do they need to know the identity of an adult?
Click to expand...

I'm a freedom loving veteran progressive. I can think of several reasons, bulk purchase, trace ammo for trial purposes, terrorists. California records firearm purchases, this seem a very minor nit, but I realize the rubbers have to lament and rend garments at every little nit.... :peace
 
notquiteright said:
This is why 'gun' nuts can't be trusted to present a fair account of the event... :roll:

The Real ID Act has been around since 2005. It has 4 phases that were are well known. California has complied with the real ID act. By now most Californians should have a 'real Id'...

You will need the real ID for many other events, from boarding a plane to access to some government buildings.

Tuck the whine back in and get what Congress voted for over a decade ago, right after 9/11.... :peace
Click to expand...

Will this real ID be required to vote?
 
Lovebug said:
What comes to mind is all the uproar about IDs for voting. What a hypocrisy.
Click to expand...

It is interesting some demand IDs at the booth. I can't kill someone with a box of votes. The abuse of the vote seems more in the hands of election officials 'cleansing' the rolls, loosing ballot boxes or rigging the absentee vote. No ID stops that.

There is a real use for recording ammo purchases- from terrorist to simple domestic violence. A trail back to the purchase (I'd think those who claim to have been lawyers of some sort would appreciate filling an important element of the crime) in a murder trial.

Is an interesting world... :peace
 
notquiteright said:
I'm a freedom loving veteran progressive. I can think of several reasons, bulk purchase, trace ammo for trial purposes, terrorists. California records firearm purchases, this seem a very minor nit, but I realize the rubbers have to lament and rend garments at every little nit.... :peace
Click to expand...

So you would have no problems with every CA. voter having to show their real ID(s) then?
 
justabubba said:
how do you know it is not about assuring the ammo purchasers are LEGAL gun owners?
Click to expand...

What makes you think you must be a legal gun owner to purchase ammo? Or that you should?
 
jimbo said:
We're speaking specifically of California. But if you prefer:

Will this real ID be required to vote in California?
Click to expand...

If so....do we have a deal?
 
trixare4kids said:
So you would have no problems with every CA. voter having to show their real ID(s) then?
Click to expand...

Can they kill a classroom of kids with their vote? Murder their partner/lover??? Cigarettes, booze, bullets can be harmful to your health.... the vote not so much... :peace
 
jimbo said:
We're speaking specifically of California. But if you prefer: Will this real ID be required to vote in California?
Click to expand...

I don't know what the regulation is in California but I address the issue about IDs and votes in another post... :peace
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom