Schwarzenegger Delivers Huge Victory for Gun Control Advocates
Last week, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed a law that requires handgun ammunition to be treated by retailers in much the same way that cigarettes, some cold medicines and even spray paint are treated.
As already shown in some California cities, this common sense measure will go a long way toward keeping ammunition away from gang members and felons in California, and provide law enforcement crucial leads to track down and apprehend armed criminals.
Getting this bill passed was the top priority of our California Brady Campaign Chapters this year, and was the result of tireless advocacy by our activists and allies alongside the bill’s sponsor, Assembly Member Kevin DeLeon of Los Angeles.
Watch the signing ceremony here:
What does this new California law do? It requires handgun ammunition vendors to record identifying information of ammunition buyers, including their names from a state-issued ID, a thumbprint and a signature. In addition, vendors will also have to record information about the type and amount of ammunition purchased or transferred. These records are to be maintained by the vendor for at least five years and must be made available to law enforcement.
Similar measures have been tested in California cities, and they work.
For example, Sacramento already has a similar law in effect. From January 16, 2008 to August 31, 2009, Sacramento police used their ordinance to find 229 prohibited people – including gang members – who had illegally purchased ammunition. Of those, 173 had previous felony convictions. After police matched ammunition purchase records to the California prohibited persons file, the Sacramento District Attorney was able to charge 181 illegal ammunition purchasers with felonies.
As a result of these investigations, 160 illegal firearms were seized from these prohibited purchasers, as well as cash, drugs, and even explosive devices. Beyond the immediate benefits of catching illegal ammunition buyers, this ordinance actually helped Sacramento law enforcement discover and punish other unlawful behavior.
The Governor cited these local ordinances, and the success they demonstrated, in explaining why he signed the current bill after having vetoed a similar measure a few years back. If other states would show some confidence in letting local communities try different measures like this – instead of pre-empting local efforts to prevent gun violence – maybe we would learn of other successful strategies to make us all safer.
The new law signed by Governor Schwarzenegger had the strong support of law enforcement officials from across California, and the Brady Campaign was proud to join them.
By adopting a common sense policy to give law enforcement powerful tools to disarm felons and gang members in possession of illegal guns and bullets, the state of California has once again set an example for the rest of the country to follow.
Other states should note what California has done here, and consider similar measures.
Sign up for the OV Daily Newsletter
OV Social
Glad this passed. Now all the liberals in this God forsaken State will feel more safe as their gun related crime deaths soar. The same for Illinois. Before we know it, ALL the bleeding-heart liberals will have been killed by all the criminals who don't pay any attention to any of their worthless gun control laws. All we have to do is sit back and wait. Their worthless ideas will eliminate them from society and we can then go back to following the COnstitution and Bill of Rights the way they are written.
As many of their kids as possible.
The plural of 'anecdote' is not 'data'.
I can't believe the idiotic things this guy in California does. He's totally incompetent and besides bankrupting an entire state, he treats it's citizens like subjects. Between him and Bloomberg, I feel like we're in a dictatorship instead of a constitutional republic !
Which undermines the privacy consumers are entitled to. Keep the repeat offenders off the streets, search out violent criminals, and prevent them from obtaining illegal weapons.
If they have a weapon they will always find bullets .
Speaking of illegal weapons, California law is somewhat sketchy with their laws. If they say they've confiscated " drugs , cash, and explosives" with these measures in Sacramento, how many of the firearms were in fact perfectly legal weapons in other States?
As an example: In Florida you can have JHP loaded and chambered in a gun which resides in your glove-box whereas in New Jersey just one JHP, even in your trunk, without a gun, will send you to jail. It doesn't mean that the person who is sent to jail is a criminal, only that they were arrested and convicted by a Nanny State which commands: "Don't play with these, they are bad for you."
It will take some time but Gun Control Advocates will soon realize that the crime won't stop, just that the criminal behavior will adapt. You don't think criminals have relatives or accomplices without records who will buy the ammunition for them? Once a legal, non-felon purchases the ammo, what SYSTEM or DATABASE exists to trace the bullets used in a crime back to the cartridges that were bought by a legal citizen with no record?
Don't think it won't happen? I highly suggest this read about HOW CRIMINALS TRAIN. http://www.stoppingpower.net/commentary/comm_cop_killers.asp
Are you saying: Police the criminals, ignore the weapons?
I'm sorry but Gun Rights Advocates are going to have to realize that we aren't taking about aspirin here. I laugh in terror when I read opinions of Gun Rights Advicates that pretend that gun control is more dangerous to our "human rights than criminals owning guns .
Your opinion reads like a pro-pot defense, but converted to support lethal weapons.
Your hypocrisy knows no bounds. Out one side of your mouth you disapprove of criminals, and out the other, you support criminal acts committed by government on your behalf. In my book , that makes you the same kind of low life scofflaw of which you complain. Your view is you should not have to abide by the law if you disagree with it. That is the view of criminals. The Constitution is the highest law of the land. In no uncertain terms, it lays out those acts government is forever and unconditionally prohibited from doing.
infringe: To transgress or trespass on rights or privileges; enchroach on.
My right to keep and bear a dozen eggs is not constitutionally protected, yet it is not infringed. I do not need to obtain a license to keep and bear eggs. I do not have to provide identification to keep and bear eggs. I do not need to be finger printed to keep and bear eggs. I do not have to wait ten days to keep and bear eggs. I do not have to register my egg purchases with the government to keep and bear eggs. I do not have to have my name automatically included as a possible suspect any time there is an egg related crime . I do not risk having my eggs seized while transporting them in my car. I'm probably missing a few other examples as to how my right to keep and bear eggs has not been infringed, but the above should at least hit some of the high points.
You sir, are an aider and abettor of criminals and a supporter of criminal acts. The reason Americans are specifically and unconditionally guaranteed an uninfringed right to keep and bear arms is so that we may protect ourselves against criminals exactly of your sort.
Bring it on Don! Then cry me a river!
Your "right" to own firearms is not infringed by leaving your name, address, and fingerprint at the gun shop when you buy bullets . I leave that much information cashing a check and it's never stopped me before.
I support Gun Control because guns are deadly weapons YOU HYPOCRITE. You can't even realize that real criminals kill people with those toys you love so much... you're desire not to be nuisanced when buying your toys is actually YOU defending criminals because you want all firearms laws repealed so you can play and criminals have to jump through as fews hoops as possible to obtain weapons. And no, I have no problem making criminals lives more difficult.
As I posted above:
"Sacramento police used their ordinance to find 229 prohibited people – including gang members – who had illegally purchased ammunition. Of those, 173 had previous felony convictions."
I'm convinced of the legality and soundness of this law . I'm not a hypocrite or a supporter of criminals with my support of this law, I am very interested in stopping felons from getting guns.
"I leave that much information cashing a check and it's never stopped me before. "
But nobody ever told you could only cash one check per day, did they? If they had, your "right" to cash a check (which is not a right, but privilege, but that's another point) would be INFRINGED.
Limiting the amount of ammo that can be purchased is just one step in Brady's campaign to completely disarm Americans , period. They have stated in no uncertain terms that they will not stop short of that end goal.
But I'm not aware of this bill including per dorm restrictions. Does it have time limitations? If not, your argument sounds like a straw man, but for you I give the benefit of the doubt. Please explain.
However, you should be smarter than to assume that because I support this effort, that I support the end goals of the Brady Campaign. I don't care if THEY want to completely disarm every American (although you're wrong), I don't want to disarm all Americans , I want to disarm criminals and improve the law enforcement of firearms . I'm more liberal than the NRA, and I think the GOA is an anarchist loony bin, but I'm not joining one extreme position just because I oppose the other extreme position.
Per dorm = per diem