Targeting Ammunition

GGReporter · 07-03-2008, 09:32 AM

A bill in California's State Senate would prohibit the private transfer of more than 50 rounds of ammunition per month between individuals, even friends or family. I suspect we'll see more attacks on the Second Amendment using the back door of ammunition registration, purchase limits, and even serialization in the months ahead.

California's bill, known as AB2062, would also require that anyone purchasing ammunition submit to a fingerprinting, and records of your ammunition purchase would be sent to a statewide database administered by California's Department of Justice.

Bills like this don't do anything to reduce violent crime, but they most certainly will add to the size of government and send yet another message to the law-abiding gun owners of California: you're not welcome here. Isn't it time the criminals got that message instead of us?

More...

iflylow74 · 07-03-2008, 10:13 AM

Yeah this will definitely make people safer because we all know that the criminals will follow this law, even though they break all the others right?

GlockMeister · 07-03-2008, 10:24 AM

Can't get the guns, go after the ammo. And no one saw/sees this coming? Bet the Bloomberg/Brady and Daley tools and the likes of the same are making this their next target/s...

Deersniper · 07-03-2008, 11:49 AM

A free people ought not only be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from ANY who would might abuse them, which would include their own government. George Washington 1790.
Glad to say I'm stocked up. If they try to make me register our ammo, good luck. All these acts are military strategy's aimed at a civilian population. Just what Hitler did.

troy2000 · 07-06-2008, 05:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deersniper

A free people ought not only be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from ANY who would might abuse them, which would include their own government. George Washington 1790.
Glad to say I'm stocked up. If they try to make me register our ammo, good luck. All these acts are military strategy's aimed at a civilian population. Just what Hitler did.

As much as I agree with everything else you said there, Deersniper, I wish you hadn't added, "just what Hitler did."

Hitler did not disarm his own populace, although many folks not only consider it an article of faith that he did so, but also believe our own laws are just English translations of his. The truth is that the people of Germany had already been disarmed by the Weimar Republic that came into power after WWI, and Hitler actually loosened those controls for the average German. His anti-gun policies inside Germany targeted the minorities he wanted to suppress and/or exterminate, like the Jews. They didn't affect the general population.

Cyrano · 07-06-2008, 05:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by troy2000

As much as I agree with everything else you said there, Deersniper, I wish you hadn't added, "just what Hitler did."

Hitler did not disarm his own populace, although many folks not only consider it an article of faith that he did so, but also believe our own laws are just English translations of his. The truth is that the people of Germany had already been disarmed by the Weimar Republic that came into power after WWI, and Hitler actually loosened those controls for the average German. His anti-gun policies inside Germany targeted the minorities he wanted to suppress and/or exterminate, like the Jews. They didn't affect the general population.

Troy, I have to agree - reluctantly - with your assertion that the Nazis loosened the gun laws in Germany. They did partly do away with the ownership permit Weimar had required of every gun owner; but the only people who benefitted were the members of the Nazi Party. Non-party members still had to get an ownership permit. They also continued with the registration policy, so the central government knew who owned what and where they lived. And you still had to get a carry permit for a pistol, though I imagine for Party members that was pretty much pro forma and never denied.

But note who could not own guns. Hitler realized that to oppress the population or any segment thereof, you must first disarm them so they cannot resist. His gun law stands as a warning to Americans.

billy · 07-06-2008, 06:06 PM

OK ,
TARGETING AMMO.

this is a great fear to me.
and i dont really know what to do about it.
i can only buy so many 1000's of bullets
and i DONT want to stockpile 100's of lbs. of powder

Deersniper · 07-07-2008, 12:01 AM

Those are the facts, but hasn't gangs and criminals been left to acquire guns and kill people while restricting [suppress] further the rights of law abiding citizens trying to defend themselves. This power could be wielded at anybody they wanted to suppress. There lies in the danger. The same pattern is emerging now. We must make sure that the populous have enough ammo to prevent this, that is what the founders meant, I think.

troy2000 · 07-07-2008, 12:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deersniper

Those are the facts, but hasn't gangs and criminals been left to acquire guns and kill people while restricting [suppress] further the rights of law abiding citizens trying to defend themselves. This power could be wielded at anybody they wanted to suppress. There lies in the danger. The same pattern is emerging now. We must make sure that the populous have enough ammo to prevent this, that is what the founders meant, I think.

I'm also worried about this, Deersniper. Controlling ammo sales somehow sounds so much more innocent than controlling guns...

troylaplante · 07-08-2008, 09:28 AM

A big time gun opponent and "reverend" in the Triangle area of NC was proposing this very thing. He supposes that if ammo is banned or seriously limited, then there would be fewer gun crimes. Still, ammunition is a part of having arms. What part of "shall not be infringed" does he not understand? I asked him to be a guest on my talk show and he never once even acknowledged the invite, much less decline it.

PONTIACDM · 07-08-2008, 09:37 AM

Why isn't the NRA getting involved with this? The more they let Cali get away with the more the the rest of the country is going try to get away with. It's time for California residents to take a huge stand on this, stand up and be heard. I'm not talking about a revolt but a legal and lawful means. They would only use a revolt to pass more restrictions.

AKHunter · 07-08-2008, 12:03 PM

Quote:

Why isn't the NRA getting involved with this? The more they let Cali get away with the more the the rest of the country is going try to get away with. It's time for California residents to take a huge stand on this, stand up and be heard. I'm not talking about a revolt but a legal and lawful means. They would only use a revolt to pass more restrictions.
__________________
I Do Whatever My Rice Krispies Tell Me To.

I suspect, with the recent re-affirmation of the 2nd amendment, that the NRA is going to ride the wave created, and take the offensive against the numerous unconstitutional laws already on the books. Once the dominos are falling of their own momentum, focus will be redirected to the new front of ammunition restrictions.

07-03-2008, 09:32 AM	#1
GGReporter Magazine Staff Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 717	Targeting Ammunition A bill in California's State Senate would prohibit the private transfer of more than 50 rounds of ammunition per month between individuals, even friends or family. I suspect we'll see more attacks on the Second Amendment using the back door of ammunition registration, purchase limits, and even serialization in the months ahead. California's bill, known as AB2062, would also require that anyone purchasing ammunition submit to a fingerprinting, and records of your ammunition purchase would be sent to a statewide database administered by California's Department of Justice. Bills like this don't do anything to reduce violent crime, but they most certainly will add to the size of government and send yet another message to the law-abiding gun owners of California: you're not welcome here. Isn't it time the criminals got that message instead of us? More...

07-03-2008, 10:13 AM	#2
iflylow74 Registered User Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Arkansaw Posts: 1,023 Blog Entries: 11	Yeah this will definitely make people safer because we all know that the criminals will follow this law, even though they break all the others right? __________________ Most things aren't a matter of can or can't, but a matter of want to or don't want to. -me

07-03-2008, 10:24 AM	#3
GlockMeister Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Northern Illinois Posts: 5,362	Can't get the guns, go after the ammo. And no one saw/sees this coming? Bet the Bloomberg/Brady and Daley tools and the likes of the same are making this their next target/s... __________________ I'd rather be tried by 12 than carried by 6!

07-06-2008, 06:06 PM	#7
billy spiritual counselor Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: a secret lab on the shores of lake titicaca Posts: 11,929 Images: 9 Blog Entries: 145	OK , TARGETING AMMO. this is a great fear to me. and i dont really know what to do about it. i can only buy so many 1000's of bullets and i DONT want to stockpile 100's of lbs. of powder __________________ internet yards and real yards are completely different units of measure.

07-08-2008, 09:28 AM	#10
troylaplante Moderator Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Selma, NC Posts: 2,223	A big time gun opponent and "reverend" in the Triangle area of NC was proposing this very thing. He supposes that if ammo is banned or seriously limited, then there would be fewer gun crimes. Still, ammunition is a part of having arms. What part of "shall not be infringed" does he not understand? I asked him to be a guest on my talk show and he never once even acknowledged the invite, much less decline it. __________________ troylaplante.com

07-03-2008, 11:49 AM	#4
Deersniper Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 1,656	A free people ought not only be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from ANY who would might abuse them, which would include their own government. George Washington 1790. Glad to say I'm stocked up. If they try to make me register our ammo, good luck. All these acts are military strategy's aimed at a civilian population. Just what Hitler did.

07-07-2008, 12:01 AM	#8
Deersniper Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 1,656	Those are the facts, but hasn't gangs and criminals been left to acquire guns and kill people while restricting [suppress] further the rights of law abiding citizens trying to defend themselves. This power could be wielded at anybody they wanted to suppress. There lies in the danger. The same pattern is emerging now. We must make sure that the populous have enough ammo to prevent this, that is what the founders meant, I think.

07-08-2008, 09:37 AM	#11
PONTIACDM Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: OHIO Posts: 616	Why isn't the NRA getting involved with this? The more they let Cali get away with the more the the rest of the country is going try to get away with. It's time for California residents to take a huge stand on this, stand up and be heard. I'm not talking about a revolt but a legal and lawful means. They would only use a revolt to pass more restrictions. __________________ We are best friends but if zombies are chasing us. I'm kicking you in the leg!!