The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old January 5, 2009, 12:12 AM   #1
Kenpo
Member
 
Join Date: December 20, 2007
Posts: 46
Ammo accountability legislation

I received the following email. Gave it a brief look, there is link provided. I had heard of this, but hadn't seen the website.


Ammunition Accountability Legislation

The bill that is being pushed in 18 states (including Illinois and Indiana ) requires all ammunition to be encoded by the manufacture a data base of all ammunition sales. So they will know how much you buy and what calibers.
Nobody can sell any ammunition after June 30, 2009 unless the ammunition is coded.

Any privately held uncoded ammunition must be destroyed by July 1, 2011. (Including hand loaded ammo.) They will also charge a .05 cent tax on every round so every box of ammo you buy will go up at least $2.50 or more!

If they can deprive you of ammo they do not need to take your gun!

This legislation is currently pending in 18 states: Alabama, Arizona, California, Connecticut, Hawaii! , Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland, Mississippi, Missouri, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Washington.

Send to your friends in these states AND fight to dissolve this BILL!!

To find more about the anti-gun group that is sponsoring this legislation and the specific legislation for each state, go to:

http://ammunitionaccountability.org/Legislation.htm
Kenpo is offline  
Old January 5, 2009, 01:12 AM   #2
Al Norris
Staff
 
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,316
Very old news.

If you looked on the website, you would have seen that the dates were for the 2007 legislative sessions. Are some of these still pending? Probably. But most were rejected.

If you followed all the links, you would have come up with the company that has patented this idea. One company, proposing legislation. It's the only way they can make a profit on their patents. Why? Because none of the ammo companies want the expense of retooling. None of the ammo companies want to pay the royalty for each and every cartridge they manufacture. If one mistake is made, an entire box of ammo must be rejected. More expense. All numbers must be recorded, by the manufacturer, by the distributer, by the retailer. The expense of that paper trail alone would be enormous.

Expect to see this sort of thing again. At least in some States.
__________________
National listings of the Current 2A Cases.
Al Norris is offline  
Old January 5, 2009, 02:05 AM   #3
armsmaster270
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 25, 2008
Location: California
Posts: 1,944
And the first few times ammo is stolen it will further mess up their bookkeeping. Hell it would be worth the price of the ammo to just report a few boxes.
__________________
http://www.armsmaster.net-a.googlepages.com
http://s239.photobucket.com/albums/f...aster270/Guns/
Retired LE, M.P., Sr. M.P. Investigator F.B.I. Trained Rangemaster/Firearms Instructor & Armorer, Presently Forensic Document Examiner for D.H.S.
armsmaster270 is offline  
Old January 5, 2009, 07:57 AM   #4
Kreyzhorse
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 12, 2006
Location: NKY
Posts: 11,482
As mentioned, old news. In Kentucky (one of the 18 states mentioned in the OP) for example, this was put forth and them killed within a matter of days if not hours last year.
__________________
"He who laughs last, laughs dead." Homer Simpson
Kreyzhorse is offline  
Old January 5, 2009, 12:01 PM   #5
Al Norris
Staff
 
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,316
These people keep saying that the cost of providing this "service" won't drive the cost of ammo up (all quotes are form the OP link):
Quote:
We estimate that the entire ammunition coding process can be implemented without dramatically increasing the purchase price to the end user while maintaining an effective crime fighting system paid for almost exclusively by user fees.
Let's take a close look at this, shall we?
Quote:
There are several manufacturers who can design and build this equipment. Reliable estimates for a complete set of engraving/material handling equipment range from $300,000 to $500,000 each. A licensing fee for each bullet sold would also be required.

However, since approximately 10 billion bullets are sold in the United States alone each year, equipment costs, once amortized over the number of bullets produced and sold are not significant.
Sounds good, on the surface, yes? However, the immediate paragraph just before this says:
Quote:
There are several well known manufacturers currently producing a significant portion of the current commercially available ammunition in the United States. Each ammunition producer would be required to purchase at least one, if not more, laser engraving machines and ammunition material handlers to produce ACS coded ammunition.
... If not more... So. How many individual lines does each major manufacturer have? I would suspect that there are at least two. One for bottleneck cartridges and one for straight walled cartridges. But that's just for the cases. How about for the bullets themselves? And remember, each bullet will have to be matched to each case. Since this is all pretty much computer operated anyway, shouldn't that mean we just need new software? Assuming arguendo, have you ever priced the cost of custom software? It ain't cheap, Bubba!

So, besides the minimum of $600K to $1 million (assuming a single line and engraving equipment - 1 for cases and 1 for bullets), Add in another $1 million to $2 million (conservative est.) in equipment to adjust the flow to match case to bullets (done by hardware and software). That's an estimated 2-3 million in revamping your production line. We haven't even touched the issue of down-time in order to change batches; The cost of wasted product, should a mistake occur in the process; Admin costs in recording and tracking the information... This is just at the point of manufacture. Last, but certainly not least, the manufacturer will then need to pay a royalty for each cartridge actually sold.

Side Note: For us reloaders, it will mean a nightmare. How do we match bullet to case? Do you think reloading will even survive this type of legislation?

Now add in the admin costs of the distributors and the retailers, and we get this little statement from the website:
Quote:
We estimate that the entire ammunition coding process can be implemented without dramatically increasing the purchase price to the end user while maintaining an effective crime fighting system paid for almost exclusively by user fees.
Do you think the manufacturers, after incurring these costs, will produce one line of ammo for military/police use (non-encoded ammo) and another for civilian use (encoded)? The company that has the patents on this, knows this. That's how they get the figure that 10 billion rounds are produced each year. They include what the police and military use.

Finally, such legislation will produce a profit. A profit for the only company that is endorsing this legislation. It will do absolutely nothing in combating crime. The sole purpose of pushing this legislation is to increase the cost of ammo, in order to get it out of the hands of us civilians.

Want to know more? Go to the source: http://www.ammocoding.com/

Three investors from Seattle formed this group. Patents were filed in 2004 and issued in 2005. The websites main page hasn't been updated since 2007.

To be fair, the current "model legislation" only requires handgun and assault weapons ammunition to be encoded. The bullets, not the brass. How long will it be before the brass must be encoded (yes, the patents on this have been issued) also? Should we ask what calibers are assault ammunition?

One more thing. Over and above whatever the costs might be from the manufacturers (et al) end, the model legislation will also charge an end user fee, so that the State can implement and fund its databases.

If you are at all worried about this, don't wait for such legislation to be introduced in your State. Contact your legislators now, and pass on this information. This will affect the availability of ammo, not just for civilians, but all State agencies that must procure ammunition... And this assumes that the manufacturers will even sale to your State.

They just won't spend the funds to upgrade their lines unless they absolutely have to, in order to stay in business. The cost will be absorbed by everyone, not just civilians. That's the point that really needs to be made.
__________________
National listings of the Current 2A Cases.
Al Norris is offline  
Old January 5, 2009, 05:10 PM   #6
jckeffer
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 29, 2007
Posts: 182
I just saw this as well on the Welding WEB - my response:

TO: Representative Jay Rodne

CC: Representative Glenn Anderson
Senator Cheryl Pflug

What is your position on House Bill 3359? This is a critical issue with me.

Received this message so far: E-mail Successfully Sent
jckeffer is offline  
Old January 17, 2009, 11:15 PM   #7
alan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 7, 1999
Posts: 3,745
Let's take a quick look at some items included in post # 5 by Antipitas.

1. We estimate that the entire ammunition coding process can be implemented without dramatically increasing the purchase price to the end user while maintaining an effective crime fighting system paid for almost exclusively by user fees.

Who would this “we" be, perhaps the three overly coffeed Seattleites, the patent holders" or some numb-nuts political types? Then who might it be that would actually pay the "user fees" mentioned? As to this being any sort of "crime fighting system", to ridiculous for words.

2. There are several manufacturers who can design and build this equipment. Reliable estimates for a complete set of engraving/material handling equipment range from $300,000 to $500,000 each. A licensing fee for each bullet sold would also be required.

However, since approximately 10 billion bullets are sold in the United States alone each year, equipment costs, once amortized over the number of bullets produced and sold are not significant.

Whose pockets would be the source of the referenced "amortization" ? You have one guess. As to the following, "Sounds good on the surface, yes?". The answer to that is not simply NO, it's HELL NO.

3. To be fair, the current "model legislation" only requires handgun and assault weapons ammunition to be encoded. The bullets, not the brass. How long will it be before the brass must be encoded (yes, the patents on this have been issued) also? Should we ask what calibers are assault ammunition?

Re the "assault weapons ammunition that would be encoded", at the risk of sounding dumb, define "assault weapons" and or this "assault weapons ammunition". For instance, 5.55 x 45 mm ammunition, also known as 223 Remington is fired in "assault style weapons" otherwise known as semi-automatic rifles, a type of long gun commonly available in the U.S. since PRIOR to World War 1. Bolt action rifles are chambered for this round too, which might lead us to a discussion of those vicious bolt action assault rifles, who knows. Then there are those lever and slide operated rifles

4. Al goes on to mention: One more thing. Over and above whatever the costs might be from the manufacturers (et al) end, the model legislation will also charge an end user fee, so that the State can implement and fund its databases.

Can't you just wait to see the solons at your state capitol, fill in the blank, or county/city governments rushing off in their endless quest for money, and at the end of this sad tale, who might be the source of all the fees, taxes or whatever in blazes you might call them? You have one guess.

All of this brings us to the following point(s).

This legislation, where proposed, has been to date, pretty much laughed out of town, note the TO DATE, as this situation could change. Remember this, Money Talks while that other stuff walks, and there are some fairly sharp people who see money in this scam, a lot of money, while others see power, which is what they are interested, I'm assuming that the three Seattleites, earlier mentioned, are after the bucks.

Having said that I come to my ending, some will no doubt say/think thank goodness for that, it's up to them.

It's a whole lot easier to prevent damage, less expensive too, than it is to repair damage. Re this, add the fact that the phone and or computer time taken to express your displeasure regarding this ammunition accountability wet dream is slight. Finally, given the small expenditure in time and effort involved, compared to the large benefits defeat of this foolishness will bring, isn't it worth contacting your "elected things" to express your opposition now? I would think so, but what do I know.

Al:

Could you please translate the Latin phrases at the end of your post. One is Who watches the watchmen I believe, I'm lost re the other, having never gotten very far past Noli Bastardus Carborundum and Semper In Excretum, Solus Humus Profundum Variat.

Last edited by alan; January 17, 2009 at 11:56 PM. Reason: to avoid "timing out"
alan is offline  
Old January 18, 2009, 12:17 AM   #8
Al Norris
Staff
 
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,316
Patere legem, quam ipse tulisti. - By your own laws shall you be held.
__________________
National listings of the Current 2A Cases.
Al Norris is offline  
Old January 19, 2009, 07:02 PM   #9
alan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 7, 1999
Posts: 3,745
Thanks for the translation Al.
alan is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:41 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.09106 seconds with 9 queries