That is an insane law. The amount of paperwork is going to be tremendous for the shop owners and the local gov offices. Also, how is California going to pay for the extra work required to register all of these sales? I thought the state was bankrupt.
New ammo law - California
- Thread starter Cragar
- Start date
How does that make any sense? I'm not being condescending, I'm just curious as to your viewpoint. Criminals do not care about responsibility, nearly by definition. There are no serial numbers to theoretically track any shell that exits the firearm. The point is this legislation alone is nothing more than extra paperwork, hassle, and further tightening of firearm use on law abiding citizens.
Anyone who thinks felons are going to be effected by this must be confused as to how people hold up gas stations when it's clearly stated on the front door 'no firearms allowed'.
Last edited:
I'd like to see them try to read the serial #'s off a 12 gauge shotgun round after it's been fired. :biggrin:
Riiiiggghhhtt, let this bill pass and then tomorrow they’ll be rounding us up by the dozens in trains and off to the gas chambers right? Sorry Sahtt, I usually agree with your on just about everything but in this case I just don’t buy these slippery slope arguments. When I got my CCW permit, I had to get fingerprinted and I had to wait a few days. Was that a violation of my rights and liberties? Why isn’t anyone freaking out about that requirement, when it was well less than a generation ago, this wasn’t required? Why do I need to go through a metal detector at the airport when it’s clear that a terrorist isn’t going to book a properly book a flight, and obey all safety procedures? Why should my right to not wear a seatbelt be infringed upon? Isn’t it my choice if I want to go through my windshield or not?
Look, I’ll go back to my Patriot Act argument. People were freaking out the same way with the Patriot act. The government can wire tap your phones! The government can seize your computers! The government is taking away your freedoms and rights! Well the Patriot act passed and has been enacted for years now. In fact, it is still in place in the Obama administration. Did you notice one bit of difference in your freedoms, livelihood or liberties? Seriously, have you? Of course not. That is because you aren’t a terrorist and you aren’t planning on committing a crime. If you aren’t, these laws should and will mean absolutely nothing to you. It’s like if the government made a law that you couldn’t rent a U-haul truck, buy 20,000 pounds of fertilizer and 600 gallons of diesel fuel all in the same day. What?? What a violation of my rights to buy whatever I want. Except the only problem is that the only person that’s going to want to buy that (other than legitimate farmers) are guys planning on blowing up Oklahoma City buildings.
Look, you can still buy your bullets, they haven’t taken that away from you. The day they pass a bill stating that handgun ammunition is illegal, then fine, I’ll walk hand in hand with you to Capitol Hill with guns drawn. But this is not that and it is far from it. It is a minor inconvenience at best. It’s no more of a delay of getting ammunition than a guy in front of me buying with a check. It's not even a move to pull the wool over our eyes either by slowly dissolving our rights. When was the last time you went to bed, and before you knew it, you realized you woke up in jail without due process. American people are smart enough to see the difference and when it comes to a major move of taking away your rights, they'll realize it. The "government" tried to take away your right to smoke and drink in the past and it failed. Hell they are trying to take away your right to smoke pot; so tell me, if you wanted to smoke pot, just how hard do you think it is to get some? Sure it's not in a vending machine, but I bet you could score some within 24 hours if you really wanted it. It's an inconvenience at best. Look so if this bill deters just a half dozen people from buying ammunition and committing a crime (and possibly saving a life) wouldn’t it be worth all this inconvenience? I mean, banning cel phone use while driving is an inconvenience too and a violation of my freedoms and liberties, but it saves lives and in the end that’s worth it right?
Don't get me wrong, I'm not a fan of this bill and I don't want to see it pass, but enough of the "hit the panic" button, slippery slope paranoia every time the government wants to pass a bill. If you want to discuss the merits of it based on logistics and execution, fine, but resorting to the government is taking away all your freedoms argument is tantamount to your girlfriend/wife crying the second you catch her cheating on you.
Last edited:
I don't know Brian...
If law-abiding citizens have nothing to worry about because they will never commit a crime, why don't the government implant cameras and GPS sensors on all people, and inside your home monitor your 24/7, since you'll never break a law and never have to worry right?
It's all for the safety of the kids, right?
Again slippery slope argument. Is having your fingerprint and keep a transaction of your ammunition purchase really the same thing as cameras on your and in your house 24/7? Look, there’s a far cry from the government rounding you up to go to the gas chamber and keeping a transaction of your bullet purchase. I’m just saying using the slippery slope argument really weakens any position in defiance of this bill because the slippery slope argument can be used on everything, everywhere.
I live in Vegas, camera capital of the world. I'd say I'm on camera at least a dozen times a day, if not more. Look at YouTube and Google maps. You already are on camera all the time. In London, you are on CCTV almost all the time. Is it really Nazi Germany all over again? If anything, if a crime were to be committed against me, it would be nice to have that person on camera to identify. Let’s not forget the positive consequences, which is after all, the intent of this bill.
If I recall, don’t you have cameras all around your house. You voluntarily surveillance yourself in the name of safety. And if I were to visit your house, wouldn’t you be violating my privacy rights? Or should I have nothing to fear because I’m not robbing your house.
The government passed a law that it is mandatory to put your kid in a crash proof child seat with 5 point harness. OMG!!! They are witling away my freedoms and liberties. Who is the government to tell me how insure the safety of my child??? They are forcing me to spend substantial amounts of my own hard earned money for a device that “is in the interest of my child’s safety” but how do they know what is safe for my child and who are they to tell me what that is. Today, it’s car seats and 5 point harnesses, tomorrow they’ll taking my kid away to “safety” training camp in deep Montana where they’ll shave his head and force him to watch “government propaganda safety” video 8 hours a day. We must repeal this act immediately for the following reasons:
1) THEY are determining the standards of what is safe and what is not (JUDGE)
2) THEY are mandating how I spend my money for the safety of my own kid (JURY)
3) THEY will heavily penalize me if I don’t obey THEIR rules (EXECUTIONER)
1) THEY are determining the standards of what is safe and what is not (JUDGE)
2) THEY are mandating how I spend my money for the safety of my own kid (JURY)
3) THEY will heavily penalize me if I don’t obey THEIR rules (EXECUTIONER)
Yes, every thing could be slippery slope though.
If some Jews during Nazi Germany in the late 30's started to cry foul to the stuff the Nazi's were doing, like making Jews wear special labels, would people say "hey, stop worrying about slippery slope stuff, as long as you're a good Jew, nothing's going to happen?"
The point is, we don't know where this will eventually lead to. It could be nothing, but then again, it could be something really bad.
That's why I think many of us are concerned. If we're all law abiding citizens, then why do we have to be treated as criminals and get finger-printed and recorded?
At first this may be just ammo, next they may think they should require registration and fingerprinting for pocket knives and kitchen knives. Sounds absurd? I'm sure to someone a generation ago, requiring fingerprinting to buy ammo sounds completely absurd. At what point do we say enough about blaming in-animate things for our problems, and start making people accountable for their actions??
Finally, Brian, you may think you have nothing to worry about. You're asian, remember during WWII Japanese Americans were rounded up and put into concentration camps, some around Vegas / Nevada area. Do you think that we truly have nothing to worry about / fear from the government, and that government always makes the right decisions?
People need to stand up and speak up about what they think is right and wrong. The government should fear the people, not the other way around. This is part of a much larger issue about what makes America free, and how we shouldn't take our freedom for granted. I love America, I love the freedoms we have. I think it's wrong to stand by and let things like this slowly take away the freedoms of the people. Finger printing, what's next? DNA stored in a database just in case you commit a crime? Don't worry, you have nothing to worry about if you never do anything wrong, right?
Last edited:
We've become a nanny state, where government assumes that the individual is incapable of taking care of themselves, and thus must be regulated.
Some people though are okay with that, and think as long as it's in the name of safety, it's good.
I'm more of a libertarian at heart. If you want to do something dangerous, as long as it doesn't risk other people, and only yourself - like riding a motorcycle without a helmet, knock yourself out. I'm not going to babysit you and tell you to wear a helmet.
Vegas, towards the specifics of what you have stated I concur. Our differing opinion lies in the interpretation of the longer term trend at hand. You see it as logical and justifiable. That's always how it starts. I believe people are far too naive about "being loaded onto trains". Do I think it will happen? No. I sure as hell wouldn't be heavily long in the markets, wasting my time in school, bother learning mandarin, etc. if I did.
However, that's completely different then believing it -can't- happen. In fact, if we could both live long enough, I would be willing to bet a steak dinner it will* happen again. It would be foolish to think otherwise. Lately it has been happening every fifty years in a very publicized manner (hitler, mao, etc.) in our "civilized" world.
I see it as wiser to fight these seemingly miniscule battles with no casualties than one day having a war because people reach a breaking point. You can already feel the friction generated from those feeling threatened. Personally, gun ownership is not a significant part of my life. The only times I've even shot a gun in the last few years was at a range with a friend who invited me to test out his new kimber .45. But give them an inch.. they will take a mile.
Last edited:
I feel the exact same way, except when I pay for the ambulance and hospital visit, which is often the case as those without helmets catagorically have less medical coverage/financial security.
Great post.
of course thinking this will prevent ALL crime is ridiculous. the point was that now that law makes it illegal / punishible for a 'citizen' to supply ammo to someone who can't buy it. will that solve it all? no but if a gangsta shoots someone, gets caught and cops find out that he got the ammo through his cousin then thats punishable and will be a deterrent to others. i carry a concealed weapon so i am not a 'gun hater' but the nra-hardcores need to wake up a bit and evolve with the times. we no longer run in the woods hunting for our food, weapons come with responsibilities not 'freedoms'.
there are always drawback to any law but since criminals do not care about law, like you said, the only thing thats remotely effective is to limit access to weapons and ammo- common sense. is it more PITA for you and me and the shop owner? of course. is it better than a total gun ban (which works- see europe)- you bet it is if you like your guns.
Last edited by a moderator:
I'd like to find a statistic on how many crimes are committed by law abiding citizens supplying ammo to criminals. This seems to be a solution for a problem that does not exist.
Criminals are just that - people who break laws. And felons are not supposed to have guns, and yet many of them still get guns / ammo to commit crimes, without assistance from law-abiding citizens.
When do people find adding more none-sensical laws like this that punish law-abiding folks a good thing? When do people say enough is enough?
Times have changed, but many things have not. People now are viewed as "guilty unless proven innocent", and that's what laws like this are established for. If you're guilty, you're against these laws, right? If you're innocent, hey, laws like this shouldn't worry you *wink*wink*...
Yeah but by that arguement, you should discourage any laws against smoking, no-seatbelt laws, j-walking etc. Because the number one cost to the us taxpayers aren't the guys that die relatively quickly in a violent accident or quick acting cancer. It's these senior citizens that do nothing but drain the system with their social security, medicare, and assisted living. Say someone retires at 65 and lives to 100. That's way more of a drain on tax dollars for 35 long years than if they smoked and died at 70 because of lung cancer.
You do have a great point there. People living longer has been a huge strain on Social Security / medicare. If people would die sooner, there would be less strain on the system. Harsh but true. This is of course another topic that would end in thousands of pages of debate.
If you're the one paying, you're on the one side, if you're the one who's receiving, you're on the other side...
your point is invalid- that does not exist as everyone can buy ammo now including criminals. once they can't buy it we can talk about crimes commited with ammo supplied by 'others'.
Actually, the Patriot Act is a fair example of slippery slope in action. I think the ease with which the Patriot Act was passed emboldened Bush & Co to go beyond what it authorized. They broke surveillance laws, got away with it, and Congress later retroactively immunized their partners in crime in the telecom business.
You're right, I haven't personally been hassled by all this, yet. I'm still concerned about the precedent all this sets for diminishing rule of law.
really? why not then save us all money and 'terminate' yourself early? after 50 years of paying taxes don't you want to chill for 20 and try to enjoy the rest of your existance? funny how stark we are when we are young but the views change as we get older- i guess you call it wisdom.
Common sense says - how much money is it going to cost gun owners / gun shops to follow these laws? How much more hassle is it going to be for law-abiding citizens and the gun shop owners? The ATF is already looking for ways to shut gun shops down, and the myriads of local / federal paper work required for gunshops have resulted in many gun shops simply stop doing business.
This paperwork will cause many more stores to simply stop selling ammo because it's not worth the hassle / overhead / costs. And at the end of the day, how many more crimes would it have prevented?
Why are there no hard statistics on how many crimes this could have prevented? There's no analysis of cost versus payback, like many political things, and it's worrying from that side alone, never mind all the ramifications in terms of treating the individual citizen as a suspect instead of someone who has rights.
Yeah but EVERYTHING is a start. Repealing gay marriage is the start of a homophobic genocide. Banning automatic assault weapons is the start of a government takeover and rule. Camera speed traps is the start of a government controlled transportation system is the start of dissecting the population geographically. You could do this for EVERYTHING all the time. Where do you stop? Bills are proposed and passed all day long and all of them are a start to something bigger.
That is why I choose not to fight these petty slippery slope arguments because you'll be in an endless loop of hypothetical arguments of events that never occur. Why not save it for real tangible scenarios that actually have some merit and basis? Give people credit that they will bend but not fold like a house of cards if the government tries to pull something. I think people will realize when the government goes from minor inconvenience to full out taking away your rights. Hell, we just did it right here. You even acknowledge that this is relatively minor compared to the bigger grand scheme of things. Well when it starts to make that turn, I’m sure you and I and other will see it and make it a stand, and that will be well before guns and blood need to be broken out.
You're kidding right? Where is the money going to come from to pay for all of us? I'm saving like a mofo to pay for my retirement. I don't expect government / taxpayers to sustain my retirement.
Hey I'd love to have a Ferrari too. Why isn't there a law that says I deserve a Ferrari and taxpayers should be paying for that too?
Are you truly this ignorant of the ramifications of this discussion?
That wasn't really what I was saying. To your point above, what I was referring to was the situation in which the person survives and has the automatic right to health services. So in that regard, we are connected whether we want to be or not. I concur with everything you said above except that it paralled my argument.
Problem is, a frog sitting on a slowly boiling pot of water may not realize when it's too late.
You assume that people will have an uproar when "the right situation" develops. None of us have a crystal ball, and thus can't sit complacently waiting until that time comes. This is why people are concerned and being pro-active, rather than sitting and waiting until the water is boiling and it's that much harder to get out of the pot.
I mean, at what point in Nazi Germany should the Jews have acted in defiance? Some would say wait until they started taking them to the trains? At that point it was too late. Some would say start reacting when they were forced to wear labels? Some would say where's the harm in labels? YOu just never know what that right time is...
you answered your own question on why that law is coming. now it will be punishable for all those 'aiding' the criminal in acquiring the weapon/ammo. it has to come from somewhere 'legal' in the first place and now you can enforce it.
our 'freedoms' come from an era when dealing with a criminal was simplified to 'justified execution' with nobody blinking twice.
Similar threads
- Locked
