Comments on: Semi-Auto Ban Vetoed in California, But Lead Ammo Ban Approved

By: Matt D.

Matt D. — Sun, 13 Oct 2013 22:01:02 +0000

Guy, The lead ammo ban only affects hunting and not target/recreational shooters so the actual impact on ammo will be slight. There are not that many hunters in CA and the amount of ammo used in hunting is exponentially smaller than the amount used in target/competition/recreational shooting.

Its still bad, but at least the major bills where struck down. Also a good chance to let the fudd hunters see that they are not safe from bad laws.

By: Guy

Guy — Sun, 13 Oct 2013 20:58:54 +0000

They put feinstein in the women`s hall of fame!! oh boy

By: Guy

Guy — Sun, 13 Oct 2013 20:57:49 +0000

They continue to go after not only mags but bullets as well. The availability of non lead bullets for competition is slim at best. I see it as a death blow to CA. Democrats dont like guns and plan to take them or make them useless, thats what it amounts to in this country.

By: Bob

Bob — Sun, 13 Oct 2013 02:45:35 +0000

While there are a lot of gun-owners here (2nd only to Texas) many of them don’t hunt. Access to public lands is quite restrictive and few private land owners allow it – many hunt of preserves or club lands. I think the motivation for the law is bogus; 200 Condors.

That said, I think the market will step up to fill the need of non-lead bullets both in factory ammo and components. Just as the shotgun-shell manufacturers provided us with steel shot when lead was outlawed.

With a couple of exceptions, the Bills approved aren’t going to change life that much – but they’ll probably lead to the recall efforts of some of the authors of these infringements on our rights as well as legal appealsto hinder implementation.
The proviso for an incremental roll-out should provide a window of time to do just that.

The 6 Bills the Governor vetoed were the absolute worst of the bunch – the Calguns Foundation helped flood the Governor’s office with calls and emails urging their veto.