California's Inefficiency May Screw Over Ammo Vendors

California has a reputation as perhaps the most anti-gun state in the country. Yes, New York, New Jersey, and Illinois have all made their bids to be part of that number, but Massachusetts may be one of the few states who really compares to California when it comes so pretending the Second Amendment amounts to nothing more than a polite suggestion.

The latest problem in California comes from an issue involving ammo sales. You see, the state passed a new law that created new regulations for ammunition vendors. The process for complying with those regulations, however,  didn’t come from the legislature, but from the bureaucracy, and that’s where the problems kick in.

California’s onerous new ammunition regulations haven’t even gone into effect yet, and gun stores are already wondering whether they’ll be able to sell ammo when the new background check requirement kicks in.

Last year Californians voted in favor of Proposition 63, a measure that institutes background checks for all ammunition purchases and requires sellers to obtain an “ammunition vendor license.” The new law goes into effect on January 1, 2018.

The California Department of Justice (DOJ) was supposed to have solidified in July the process for obtaining such a license. But they failed to do so. They submitted the proposed regulations three days ago (December 1), which, as the NRA-ILA points out, doesn’t give ammunition vendors enough time to apply for and obtain a license before the law takes effect.

Even if the Golden State bureaucracy expedites the approval process, ammunition dealers will still not have enough time to get the state’s permission to sell ammunition. Unless the state extends the deadline, 6 million firearms owners in California might not have access to ammunition after the beginning of the new year.

Online sales aren’t an option as out-of-state vendors begin halting direct sales to customers in California.

The paranoid guy in me can’t help but wonder how much of this is intentional, but then I just tighten the tinfoil and move on.

However, this is a significant problem as firearms are nothing more than expensive and fairly fragile clubs without ammunition, yet it appears that on January 1, there won’t be any ammo for sale anywhere within the state.

Savvy shooters will likely stock up prior to the implementation of the new law, but that will still leave plenty of shooters without access to ammunition and a lot of vendors unable to sell a product that makes up a good bit of their revenue. This is hurt struggling businesses and small-time operations the most but serve as barely a blip on the radar of big box stores like Walmart.

Way to go, California. Screw over the little guys so you can benefit the larger retailers. Good job.

Is there any wonder that so many of us looked at the idea of California seceding from the United States and thought, “Great!” and little else? Any state that can screw the pooch this badly is hardly a state I’d want to model anything after, much less laws that deal with our constitutionally protected rights.

Not that we should be modeling squat over them in the first place. After all, the phrase is “shall not be infringed.” Words have meanings, after all.