The public safety bill, signed by Governor Schwarzenegger Thursday, stops all online ammunition sales, requires that all face to face ammunition sales be recorded and made available for the Department of Justice and requires the buyer to provide a driver's license and their fingerprints.
To me that makes perfect sense, but of course the pro-gun crowd are up in arms about it.
At The Range Pistol Club in Fresno, news of Assembly Bill 962's passing triggers some doubt.
"It's not going to do anything to directly prevent ammunition from falling in the hands of people who are under the age of 21 or possible criminals," Will Ayres, sales associate at The Range, said.
How does that work, exactly? How is it not going to directly affect sales to criminals and minors?
But over at The Range, they say they already require valid id's to buy ammunition. And without doing background checks, the new bill won't really change much except demand more work from employees, and possibly lead to higher prices.
"If they have a valid driver's license and they're over the age of 21, anybody can purchase handgun ammunition. Even now," Ayres said.
Mr. Ayers' argument makes as much sense as you'd expect from someone blindly arguing against something with no regard for the facts. Doesn't it make perfect sense that prohibited persons would benefit from the anonymity of the internet? Wouldn't it be wise to eliminate that option? Of course it would. Arnold is again right on the ball.
What's your opinion? Sebastian makes some good points on his blog, mainly that legitimate buyers of difficult-to-find ammo, sports shooters who can't find the supplies they need in the local shop, and regular gun owners who depend on internet sales for their supplies will be unduly hindered in all these efforts. Sebastian remarked:
And guys like MikeB still want to insist there’s no hidden agenda here? Hell, it’s not even really that hidden!
Part of the hidden agenda that's not very hidden is the idea that certain supplies are also included in this bill, supplies used for reloading ammunition, a practice that Sebastian points out is probably not done very much by criminals and gang members. Well, I certainly can't argue with that, but overall these regulations seem to be a perfect example of what I often talk about.
Legitimate gun owners need to be willing to be inconvenienced in order to assist in the efforts to minimize crime. Gun owners should be willing to do their part, otherwise how can they say they have no responsibility for the problem of gun violence?
What's your opinion? How can gun owners be so upset about this when just a few short years ago there was no such thing as internet sales of ammunition? Do you think this is an example of pro-gun folks resisting any and every gun control law regardless of its merits? Both sides do this, but it's not helpful if we want to find common ground.
What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.