The law requires that all ammunition sales be made "... in a face-to-face transaction with the deliverer or transferor being provided bona fide evidence of identity from the purchaser or other transferee" and further requires the purchaser to provide a right thumbprint at the time of sale.
Baker's suit alleges these requirements are a de facto ban on internet and out of state purchases of handgun ammunition in violation of Commerce Clause of the Constitution and constitute "... an unwarranted and illegal restraint of trade."
Baker's suit also takes issue with the law's section which he alleges would prohibit internet or out of state purchases of replacements for some handgun parts and accessories by redefining ammunition:
"For purposes of this section, 'ammunition' shall include, but not be limited to, any bullet, cartridge, magazine, clip, speed loader, autoloader, or projectile capable of being fired from a firearm with deadly consequences. 'Ammunition' does not include blanks."
As we follow the progress of Baker's suit, the question looms large: Why was it necessary for Baker, a private citizen, to step forward and file suit to protect the rights of California's law-abiding gun owners? Where are the major gun rights organizations?
The Case number assigned by the Clerk of the United States District Court, Central District of California is CV10 1843 DMG (JEMk). As of this posting, it has not made it onto the Court website for easy access. However, Baker posted his filing for reading on his blog.
Major H/T to TownHall blogger, BrianR, for taking on what the big boys won't.
Dennis P. O'Neil