AB 962 - Appropriations Committee Hearing May 6, 2009

The Assembly Appropriations Committee is scheduled to have a hearing on the merits of AB 962, a bill introducing sweeping new regulations on the sale of handgun ammunition. Most importantly it would require all sales to be made in face-to-face transactions, and that records be kept including the identity of the purchaser, the amount of ammunition purchased, and type of ammunition purchased.

Private transfers of ammunition in amount greater than 50 rounds would be prohibited by all by licensed ammunition vendors.

The hearing is scheduled for May 6, 2009. It is now time to contact the members of the Assembly Appropriations Committee to lodge opposition to this bill. The following lists the members of the committee.

De León (Chair) (D-45), 
Nielsen (Vice Chair) (R-2), 
Ammiano (D-13) , 
Calderon (D-58), 
Davis  (D-48), 
Duvall (R-72),
Fuentes (D-39), 
Hall (D-52), 
Harkey (R-73), 
Miller (R-71), 
J. Pérez (D-46), 
Price (D-51), 
Skinner (D-14), 
Solorio (D-69), 
Strickland (R-37), 
Torlakson (D-11)

This bill is of course intended to keep ammunition out of the hands of criminals, but it remains to be proved that the new purchase restrictions would actually have that effect. Felons are already prohibited from possessing firearms and ammunition, but they have then anyway. This bill simply makes something that is illegal even more illegal, while mostly impacting law-abiding gun owners. Criminals already have trade networks in place for importation and sale of illegal goods (drugs, guns), and would have no problems adding ammunition to the mix.

Ammunition purchases over the internet would be prohibited. The increased regulations and required record keeping will increase the price of ammunition. Some ammunition vendors may stop selling ammunition. Many chain stores that sell ammunition in other states, notably Wall-Mart, do not sell ammunition in Santa Clara County, and others that do, like Big 5 Sporting Goods, may stop as a result.

I think we should demand that lawmakers present a viable proof that this bill would impact violent crime, and if they cannot, then it should be voted down.