ALL please send a hardcopy letter (not email) to your State Senator today. This is through the House and going to the Senate to vote on!!! here is the letter I sent in case you want to use it (or parts of it)
FIND THEM AT
Senators
After being placed in the suspense file, and everyone thinking it was dead, Assembly Bill 962 is moving through the state legislature again. It passed the state assembly Wednesday and now moves to the state senate. How it got this far is a mystery.
In case you've forgotten, Los Angeles assemblyman Kevin DeLeon's bill would:
1) Stop the sale of more than 50 rounds of handgun ammunition per month to individuals.
Since "handgun" ammunition is not defined anywhere in the bill, it effectively means "all" ammunition, since you can buy handguns in just about any metallic cartridge today. It would also include rimfire cartridges, which are routinely sold in 100-round packs, and are used in many handguns.
How can state government tell me I can only buy and shoot 50 rounds of ammunition per month to be competent with my handgun (or any gun)? The part of the law would effectively ban competitive shooting by civilians, if the law was followed to the letter. It would make those who live in dangerous neighborhoods less safe because gun owners would be less practiced, less trained.
How limiting how much ammunition we buy is supposed to do anything to help prevent crimes or help solve crimes is a complete mystery to anyone who has seriously examined this legislation.
2) It would license and tax anyone selling handgun ammunition commercially and force these stores to get background checks on anyone selling that ammunition.
This would make it more expensive to operate a firearms business in California, already one of the most expensive and highly-regulated businesses in the state. How does this help prevent or solve crimes? It doesn't, of course.
3) It would require ammunition sellers to get a thumbprint from anyone buying handgun ammunition, and mandate store owners keep these records for five years.
The bill would force store owners to keep track of their customers so they know if John Doe has bought or tried to buy more than 50 rounds in any given month. (There are no provisions, however, for anyone to know if John Doe bought 50 rounds from a business across town earlier yesterday.) First, imagine the paperwork nightmare this creates for these businesses. Second, it has been proven that even if law enforcement knows someone purchased a box of ammunition does nothing to help solve a crime. Zip. This is just another harassment of gun owners and legal gun sellers. Plus there's the law enforcement oversight, adding more bureaucratic costs to a state that is going bankrupt, and wasting law enforcement's time and money with an effort that won't help them. This is a really bright thing. Don't you think?
4) It would ban all ammunition sales that don't take place face-to-face, effectively banning all mail-order sales.
If this was the only provision of the bill, it might be supported by local gun retailers because it would mean they wouldn't have to compete with mail order businesses that provide a lot of us with ammunition cheaper and offer more selection than the local gun shops. This is restraint of trade, but worse, it would effectively put out of business several local business who custom load ammunition for hunters. Custom Cartridge in Santa Barbara is one of the few companies that will load non-lead bullets into just about any hunting round to make it legal for use in California's condor hunting zone. They'd be forced out of business by this bill.
The bill was supposedly amended recently, but the only real change I could find in the legislation was the name. This horribly prejudical legislation is now called: PROTECTION Act of 2009: Providing Regulation and Oversight To End Community Terrorism In Our Neighborhoods. Isn't that clever? Never mind that it has nothing to do with making our neighborhoods safer.
It has everything to do with a bias against legal gun ownership and those who legally sell guns and ammunition. This is legislated discrimination. It is about a legislator who doesn't have the courage to introduce legislation to ban handguns. That's what he wants, but he realizes that even in his liberal Los Angeles district that stand would get him kicked out of office in the next election. This is his way to get at gun owners and sellers by making their lives more difficult and expensive.
I respectfully hope you will support your constituent base and vote against this bill while encouraging your colleague to the same. This is an important issue to the voting public and will be remembered during election seasons to come.