(March 23, 2009) -- The National Rifle Association is taking aim at a proposal to enact a LB ordinance requiring ammunition vendors in the City of Long Beach to keep ammunition sales records.

Screen save: NRA email

The item scheduled for the March 24 City Council meeting would direct the City Attorney to prepare such a measure...which would then return to the Council for another recorded vote.

"This [proposed] ordinance will do nothing to reduce crime. It is simply an attempt to restrict the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens," says the NRA in an emailing and on its website. "The results of previous ammunition registration experiments have been so dismal that other cities have abandoned these schemes rather than pay to maintain them. The ordinance is also illegal. These ammunition registration ordinances are preempted by state law and constitute an unconstitutional infringement on the Second Amendment," the group says.

In February 2009, the Council's Public Safety Committee voted 2-0 (Yes: Lerch, Reyes Uranga; Schipske and Gabelich absent) to recommend Council approval of the measure.

The item requiring ammunition sellers to keep certain ammo sales records was first proposed on July 17, 2007 by then-Vice Mayor [now Assemblymember] Bonnie Lowenthal and Councilwoman Gerrie Schipske with a memo stating:

Ammunition sales records are a valuable resource in crime prevention. Records help curb illegal sales and purchases of ammunition. Both federal and state laws prohibit certain convicted individuals from purchasing ammunition, but there are no mechanisms in place to enforce these laws . Because there is no federal background check requirement for ammunition purchases, it is difficult to know when prohibited purchasers, such as felons and domestic violence offenders, attempt to buy ammunition illegally. With a process in place to track ammunition sales, law enforcement officials will be able to identify when an illegal sale has been made.

Requiring vendors engaged in the retail sale of firearms ammunition to keep detailed legible records of ammunition sales would provide law enforcement officials with important information for criminal investigations and deter prohibited purchasers from attempting to buy ammunition .

I would like to respectfully request that the City Council consider an ordinance that requires vendors/retailers selling any form of ammunition for a firearm to maintain a record of the sale and specific information about the purchaser. The record should be developed and provided by the City of Long Beach Police Department and include:

1) Date of transaction
2) Name, address and date of birth of the purchaser
3) Drivers license or other identification number
4) Brand and type of ammunition purchased
5) Purchaser's signature
6) Name of the sales person who processed the transaction
7) Thumbprint of the purchaser

The record should be maintained by the vendor/retailer on the premises for a period of 2 years and be available for inspection by the Police Department or other appointed officials . This type of recorded information would assist police detectives in identifying persons who may have purchased ammunition but are legally prohibited from owning or possessing ammunition.

In May 2008, the Council's Public Safety Committee took up the proposal...which was supported by LBPD...and opposed by a lawfirm representing the NRA and the CA Rifle & Pistol Ass'n.

In the opposition letter from Trutanich & Michel, LLP, attorney C.D. Michel argued that state preemption and the proposed use make the proposal illegal.

With regard to the use of ammunition sales records, at a meeting of the Long Beach Public Safety Advisory Commission, Sergeant Rodriguez of the Long Beach Police Department recently clarified that under the proposed ordinance all ammunition sales records would be collected by the Long Beach Police Department (in other words, ammunition sales would be illegally registered by the city). The Department would then, in turn, perform background checks on each ammunition purchaser . This is also illegal . Background check databases cannot be accessed for such a purpose . During a previous examination of this type of local ordinance the City Attorney of Los Angeles opined that the Department of Justice was the only agency legally authorized to conduct background checks of this nature. [citation omitted]

The firm cited the then-pending [subsequently decided] Heller case...in which the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the 2nd Amendment protects an individual [not merely collective] right to bear arms.

...[T]here will likely be numerous 'test case' lawsuits filed throughout the nation, including California . The registration of ammunition sales is highly restrictive and substantially burdensome when examined alongside other firearms regulations . The imposition of this type of ordinance by a local government will likely amount to an unconstitutional restraint on the right to keep and bear arms...

The Committee referred the opposition letter to the City Attorney's office...and once the Heller case was decided, the City Attorney's office opined that the City could still legally enact an ammunition registration ordinance. In an August 12, 2008 memo, Deputy City Attorney Gary J. Anderson writes:

The primary argument articulated by Trutanich and Michel is that the area of ammunition regulation is preoccupied by the State and therefore the City is pre-empted from passing an ordinance regulating the sales of ammunition . To support their argument the Trutanich firm cites two legal cases, (Fiscal v. City and County of San Francisco and District of Columbia v . Heller). However, the cases relied upon by the Trutanich firm, do not address the issue of ammunition regulation . Both cases address whether the respective city, county and district could regulate firearm sales/possession .

Thus, the Trutanich firm's reliance on these cases is totally misplaced . Research reveals that the area of ammunition regulation that the City is contemplating is not preoccupied by the State or Federal Government . Therefore, the City is not pre-empted from adopting the proposed ordinance .

There are several California cities that have already adopted ammunition ordinances of the kind the City is considering ; (i .e.) Oakland, Sacramento, and Los Angeles . Oakland and Sacramento's ammunition ordinances are attached . The Oakland ordinance was adopted in 1995 while the Sacramento ordinance was adopted in 2007 . Earlier this year, California Assemblyman Kevin De Leon, introduced Assembly Bill 2062, "the ammunition background check bill," which would regulate handgun ammunition in a similar fashion as the City's proposed ordinance . Unfortunately, this bill has been unable to survive committee review . Nevertheless, at the present time, there are no legal impediments that prohibit the City of Long Beach from enacting an ordinance regulating the sale of ammunition .

On Feb. 12, 2009, armed with the City Attorney memo, the Council's Public Safety Committee voted (2-0: Yes: Lerch, Reyes Uranga; Absent: Schipske, Gabelich) to recommend that the full Council direct the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance that would require firearms ammunition vendors in the City of Long Beach to keep ammunition sales records.

The item comes to the City Council on March 24, 2009.

In a mass emailing, the NRA tells recipients:

On Tuesday, March 24, the Long Beach City Council is set to vote on whether to draft an ordinance to force ammunition sellers in Long Beach to record the identity of all ammunition purchasers, as well as other details of the sales transaction. These records would then be collected and used by the Long Beach Police Department to identify purchasers who are legally prohibited from possessing ammunition.

This ordinance will do nothing to reduce crime. It is simply an attempt to restrict the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens.

The results of previous ammunition registration experiments have been so dismal that other cities have abandoned these schemes rather than pay to maintain them.

The ordinance is also illegal. These ammunition registration ordinances are preempted by state law and constitute an unconstitutional infringement on the Second Amendment.

Your help is needed to defeat this proposal. Please call and email the Long Beach City Council and/or attend the City Council meeting on March 24, 2009 and voice your opposition. Tell your neighbors to do the same...

Developing.