Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 4/12/2018 7:39:10 PM EDT
This ammo nonsense is the worst thing to come out of Sacramento in my lifetime. Is there any serious effort to have the courts strike it down? I'd think it should be done if nothing else then to ensure other states don't copy it.
Link Posted: 4/13/2018 12:42:10 PM EDT
The NRA is supposedly preparing a lawsuit to challenge it. Last update I could find on that was from January.
Link Posted: 4/22/2018 2:11:49 PM EDT
I want to believe...
Link Posted: 4/22/2018 3:29:01 PM EDT
What is the "ammo ban"? Do you mean having to go thru a background check to buy ammo?
Link Posted: 4/22/2018 6:22:56 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Trollslayer:
What is the "ammo ban"? Do you mean having to go thru a background check to buy ammo?
View Quote
Are you being all technical with the OP's wording? Agreed that it is not a 'ban' but rather extreme limitations and rules...
Link Posted: 4/22/2018 7:37:57 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/22/2018 7:38:22 PM EDT by Trollslayer]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By RIP-Yataski:
Are you being all technical with the OP's wording? Agreed that it is not a 'ban' but rather extreme limitations and rules...
View Quote
Well, I'm wondering if something is coming of which I am not yet aware or perhaps I have misunderstood. I am trying to clarify what the OP is asking about. Clarity is a key aspect of effective communication.
Link Posted: 4/24/2018 11:46:29 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/25/2018 6:43:23 PM EDT by CFletch]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Trollslayer:
Well, I'm wondering if something is coming of which I am not yet aware or perhaps I have misunderstood. I am trying to clarify what the OP is asking about. Clarity is a key aspect of effective communication.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Trollslayer:
Originally Posted By RIP-Yataski:
Are you being all technical with the OP's wording? Agreed that it is not a 'ban' but rather extreme limitations and rules...
Well, I'm wondering if something is coming of which I am not yet aware or perhaps I have misunderstood. I am trying to clarify what the OP is asking about. Clarity is a key aspect of effective communication.
I am referring to the background/in-person requirement, which has been an effective ban in many ways. For example my good old standby of SGAmmo won't deal with CA (due to the high paperwork requirements) at all which eliminates some of the best deals. The law is also similar to those that have been struck down elsewhere iirc, so I'm hoping it can be struck down here as well. It's a clear infringement on the 2A.

ETA: Not to mention that all the shops I've talked to are charging some serious fees to take in ammo from third parties, so things get very pricey very fast.
Link Posted: 4/25/2018 11:18:28 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By CFletch:
I am referring to the background/in-person requirement, which has been an effective ban in many ways. For example my good old standby of SGAmmo won't deal with CA (due to the high paperwork requirements) at all which eliminates some of the best deals. The law is also similar to those that have been struck down elsewhere iirc, so I'm hoping it can be struck down here as well. It's a clear infringement on the 2A.

ETA: Not to mention that all the shops I've talked to are charging some serious fees to take in ammo from third parties, so things get very pricey very fast.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By CFletch:
Originally Posted By Trollslayer:
Originally Posted By RIP-Yataski:
Are you being all technical with the OP's wording? Agreed that it is not a 'ban' but rather extreme limitations and rules...
Well, I'm wondering if something is coming of which I am not yet aware or perhaps I have misunderstood. I am trying to clarify what the OP is asking about. Clarity is a key aspect of effective communication.
I am referring to the background/in-person requirement, which has been an effective ban in many ways. For example my good old standby of SGAmmo won't deal with CA (due to the high paperwork requirements) at all which eliminates some of the best deals. The law is also similar to those that have been struck down elsewhere iirc, so I'm hoping it can be struck down here as well. It's a clear infringement on the 2A.

ETA: Not to mention that all the shops I've talked to are charging some serious fees to take in ammo from third parties, so things get very pricey very fast.
This ammo shipping restriction has had the effect of a ban to me, this being that I haven't purchased any since the first of the year. I will eventually but don't know when. This is no doubt the desired result of the supporters of this restriction. While I am not arguing or disagreeing with your reference to this being anti-2A, the courts will have the ultimate say. I ain't holding my breath on a favorable ruling any time soon based on their unfavorable ruling(s) on the constitutionality of the handgun roster.

What fees have you been finding that FFLs are charging to receive, handle and transfer ammo? I haven't asked a single one about this yet...
Link Posted: 4/26/2018 12:43:19 AM EDT
There's no background check requirement yet. Dealers have to do a lot more handling, display changes, now. The brick and mortars I've checked? Can't tell because I haven't compared apples to apples with mail orders w/fees, etc. Turner's is steeper than some of the others. That's not a big change. Haven't tried any local WalMarts. Rifle Gear is less expensive than Turner's, duh. Haven't tried LAX Ammo. They already were playing games in store versus on-line. They don't seem to list their in store prices but suggest they aren't too much more expensive but I had the feeling they'd push prices up if they could.

Ammo Bros and Rifle Gear post their charges, Rifle Gear is lower. Aces Jewelry and Loan in West Covina is very low but I've misplaced my notes on their fee sched. give them a call, I guess. Less than the others I'd checked.
Link Posted: 4/26/2018 7:17:07 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By RIP-Yataski:
This ammo shipping restriction has had the effect of a ban to me, this being that I haven't purchased any since the first of the year. I will eventually but don't know when. This is no doubt the desired result of the supporters of this restriction. While I am not arguing or disagreeing with your reference to this being anti-2A, the courts will have the ultimate say. I ain't holding my breath on a favorable ruling any time soon based on their unfavorable ruling(s) on the constitutionality of the handgun roster.

What fees have you been finding that FFLs are charging to receive, handle and transfer ammo? I haven't asked a single one about this yet...
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By RIP-Yataski:
Originally Posted By CFletch:
Originally Posted By Trollslayer:
Originally Posted By RIP-Yataski:
Are you being all technical with the OP's wording? Agreed that it is not a 'ban' but rather extreme limitations and rules...
Well, I'm wondering if something is coming of which I am not yet aware or perhaps I have misunderstood. I am trying to clarify what the OP is asking about. Clarity is a key aspect of effective communication.
I am referring to the background/in-person requirement, which has been an effective ban in many ways. For example my good old standby of SGAmmo won't deal with CA (due to the high paperwork requirements) at all which eliminates some of the best deals. The law is also similar to those that have been struck down elsewhere iirc, so I'm hoping it can be struck down here as well. It's a clear infringement on the 2A.

ETA: Not to mention that all the shops I've talked to are charging some serious fees to take in ammo from third parties, so things get very pricey very fast.
This ammo shipping restriction has had the effect of a ban to me, this being that I haven't purchased any since the first of the year. I will eventually but don't know when. This is no doubt the desired result of the supporters of this restriction. While I am not arguing or disagreeing with your reference to this being anti-2A, the courts will have the ultimate say. I ain't holding my breath on a favorable ruling any time soon based on their unfavorable ruling(s) on the constitutionality of the handgun roster.

What fees have you been finding that FFLs are charging to receive, handle and transfer ammo? I haven't asked a single one about this yet...
$15 per transaction plus a fee per box or per lbs of ammo is what I've been seeing, so they can charge more for bulk ammo (negating the savings). They seem to see that the law gives them a chance to push in-store ammo by making internet sales more expensive/frustrating. That was a while ago, though, and few had any firm fee structures in place yet. I have some stuff stockpiled and I'm hoping the whole thing gets struck down before I need to buy anything.

I haven't gone shooting in months though, and probably won't more than a couple of times this year at this rate. I can't afford to with the new law.
Link Posted: 4/26/2018 7:18:35 PM EDT
NRA sent out an email saying that they filed a lawsuit against the law. Hopefully it'll go as quickly to an injunction as the one against the magazine ban did.
Link Posted: 4/26/2018 8:16:25 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By CFletch:
I haven't gone shooting in months though, and probably won't more than a couple of times this year at this rate. I can't afford to with the new law.
View Quote
Soon, only the wealthy will be able to afford to shoot. That was their plan, right?
Link Posted: 4/26/2018 9:39:30 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Featureless:
There's no background check requirement yet. Dealers have to do a lot more handling, display changes, now. The brick and mortars I've checked? Can't tell because I haven't compared apples to apples with mail orders w/fees, etc. Turner's is steeper than some of the others. That's not a big change. Haven't tried any local WalMarts. Rifle Gear is less expensive than Turner's, duh. Haven't tried LAX Ammo. They already were playing games in store versus on-line. They don't seem to list their in store prices but suggest they aren't too much more expensive but I had the feeling they'd push prices up if they could.

Ammo Bros and Rifle Gear post their charges, Rifle Gear is lower. Aces Jewelry and Loan in West Covina is very low but I've misplaced my notes on their fee sched. give them a call, I guess. Less than the others I'd checked.
View Quote
Originally Posted By CFletch:
$15 per transaction plus a fee per box or per lbs of ammo is what I've been seeing, so they can charge more for bulk ammo (negating the savings). They seem to see that the law gives them a chance to push in-store ammo by making internet sales more expensive/frustrating. That was a while ago, though, and few had any firm fee structures in place yet. I have some stuff stockpiled and I'm hoping the whole thing gets struck down before I need to buy anything.

I haven't gone shooting in months though, and probably won't more than a couple of times this year at this rate. I can't afford to with the new law.
View Quote
Appreciate the info...
Link Posted: 4/26/2018 9:42:09 PM EDT
Originally Posted By CFletch:
NRA sent out an email saying that they filed a lawsuit against the law. Hopefully it'll go as quickly to an injunction as the one against the magazine ban did.
View Quote
Good news indeed. There were even a few vendors that got in on the suing...
Link Posted: 4/26/2018 9:42:59 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Trollslayer:
Soon, only the wealthy will be able to afford to shoot. That was their plan, right?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Trollslayer:
Originally Posted By CFletch:
I haven't gone shooting in months though, and probably won't more than a couple of times this year at this rate. I can't afford to with the new law.
Soon, only the wealthy will be able to afford to shoot. That was their plan, right?
Definitely one of their desired results...
Link Posted: 4/27/2018 12:52:35 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By RIP-Yataski:
Definitely one of their desired results...
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By RIP-Yataski:
Originally Posted By Trollslayer:
Originally Posted By CFletch:
I haven't gone shooting in months though, and probably won't more than a couple of times this year at this rate. I can't afford to with the new law.
Soon, only the wealthy will be able to afford to shoot. That was their plan, right?
Definitely one of their desired results...
Not that they'd ever suggest. That would clearly introduce constitutionality issues.
Link Posted: 4/27/2018 1:37:23 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By CFletch:
NRA sent out an email saying that they filed a lawsuit against the law. Hopefully it'll go as quickly to an injunction as the one against the magazine ban did.
View Quote
CRPA filed it.
Link Posted: 4/27/2018 4:26:23 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Featureless:
Not that they'd ever suggest. That would clearly introduce constitutionality issues.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Featureless:
Originally Posted By RIP-Yataski:
Originally Posted By Trollslayer:
Originally Posted By CFletch:
I haven't gone shooting in months though, and probably won't more than a couple of times this year at this rate. I can't afford to with the new law.
Soon, only the wealthy will be able to afford to shoot. That was their plan, right?
Definitely one of their desired results...
Not that they'd ever suggest. That would clearly introduce constitutionality issues.
The results should be enough to do that, as they would in any other case. Hopefully the judges will see that. Or rather, hopefully the judges will give a shit about their oath to uphold the Constitution.
Link Posted: 5/6/2018 1:05:26 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By CFletch:
$15 per transaction plus a fee per box or per lbs of ammo is what I've been seeing, so they can charge more for bulk ammo (negating the savings). They seem to see that the law gives them a chance to push in-store ammo by making internet sales more expensive/frustrating. That was a while ago, though, and few had any firm fee structures in place yet. I have some stuff stockpiled and I'm hoping the whole thing gets struck down before I need to buy anything.

I haven't gone shooting in months though, and probably won't more than a couple of times this year at this rate. I can't afford to with the new law.
View Quote
Where are you located? I know of an FFL that isnt charging anything except sales tax to recieve ammo, but theyre out in San Bernardino area by 10/215 junction.

@CFletch
Link Posted: 5/6/2018 1:49:13 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By XxBrainDeadxX:
Where are you located? I know of an FFL that isnt charging anything except sales tax to recieve ammo, but theyre out in San Bernardino area by 10/215 junction.

@CFletch
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By XxBrainDeadxX:
Originally Posted By CFletch:
$15 per transaction plus a fee per box or per lbs of ammo is what I've been seeing, so they can charge more for bulk ammo (negating the savings). They seem to see that the law gives them a chance to push in-store ammo by making internet sales more expensive/frustrating. That was a while ago, though, and few had any firm fee structures in place yet. I have some stuff stockpiled and I'm hoping the whole thing gets struck down before I need to buy anything.

I haven't gone shooting in months though, and probably won't more than a couple of times this year at this rate. I can't afford to with the new law.
Where are you located? I know of an FFL that isnt charging anything except sales tax to recieve ammo, but theyre out in San Bernardino area by 10/215 junction.

@CFletch
That will do wonders for generating foot traffic through their shop...
Link Posted: 5/6/2018 2:49:51 PM EDT
El Dorado County. I just got the check cashed for my C&R FFL, that'll let me get stuff shipped to my door again.
Link Posted: 5/8/2018 6:42:31 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By RIP-Yataski:

That will do wonders for generating foot traffic through their shop...
View Quote
Yea it will, I just looked up other dealers, I had no idea ammo bros charges $50 to receive up to 5000 rounds. Seriously fuck those guys.
Link Posted: 5/8/2018 11:38:52 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By CFletch:
El Dorado County. I just got the check cashed for my C&R FFL, that'll let me get stuff shipped to my door again.
View Quote
Awesome, what are you gonna charge to transfer? ...
Top Top