McCarty is a crackpot if he really believes that outlawing something will keep criminals from violating that law.

All this law will do is increase ammunition sales in Nevada and increase black market sales by those who are willing to drive out of state.

Did prohibition stop alcohol consumption? Do drug laws prevent drugs from pouring onto our country?

Criminals will continue to be criminals Mr. McCarty. And BTW you will lose your assembly race.

One of the few lessons Democrats have learned lately, at least on the national level, is to leave gun control the hell alone. Don't forget that lesson, lest you receive a stern reminder of why that is the case. There are apparently enough gun-toting liberals out there to make the difference in a tight race--it isn't just conservatives who respect the right to keep and bear arms.

Want a way to curb violence? Implement a citywide concealed-carry permit program. Make life riskier for criminals, and violent crime drops--36 states have implemented such programs, and saw their violent crime rates drop. There is a state bill, AB 357, to make California a shall-issue state, but its passage is unlikely. A city-based program could make the difference by setting an example.

There is nothing wrong with being ambitious, but local politicians trying to contend with the US Constitution is laughable, at the very best. I can name at least one local politician who just lost any chance at ever receiving my vote.

I support gun control, and I suppose I'm a riffle shooting liberal, but the shotgun and rifles stays in the cabin - not at home in the city. I believe the right to bear arms as stated in the Constitution was proscribed as we had NO STANDING ARMY. I don't see how Keven's attempt to regulate ammunition sales impedes law abiding citizens from buying ammo. As for Gadfly and William Burg - your disrespectful tones are the problem with Conservatives and why your party was booted out of every major political institution from the White House to the State Capitol Keep on rockin' in the free world.

John Gomez: You believe incorrectly; the United States established its first standing army during the same period it adopted the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. It was smaller, but we were a smaller country.

The job of a firearm in the city is home defense and self-defense, which are legitimate and protected uses for firearms. Hunting, on the other hand, isn't constitutionally protected. And no shooter I know keeps their rifles and shotguns "in the cabin," but then, no shooter I know has enough money to own a separate cabin in the woods. Firearms ownership shouldn't be the exclusive province of the wealthy and powerful.

I have great respect for Councilmember McCarty, but I disagree with him on this issue and urge him to reconsider. As to "my party," I don't belong to a political party but I'm not a Republican and wouldn't make a very good conservative. I tend to get along better with Democrats but disagree with their general opinion on this issue (although there are plenty of Dems who support the 2nd Amendment.)

The right to keep and bear arms isn't a liberal/conservative issue: just ask the Pink Pistols, a national collection of gay & lesbian firearms enthusiasts and activists. Personally I think that there are smarter ways to address the issues behind the violence. Suicides make up a very significant number of firearms deaths: a better public mental health system could reduce their occurrence, regardless of method (because there are many other methods to suicide, even if guns are not available.) Reduce inner-city poverty and hopelessness through public works and better education. Legalize or decriminalize at least some drugs to eliminate the profit margin that fuels violent gang wars. Teach tolerance and appreciation of diversity to reduce violence based on race, religion, gender or sexual orientation. To me, these are ways to discourage violence without having to sacrifice rights. Maybe they're a tall order, but I think they would make for a better world.

Geoff: Here is a chart from the Center for Disease Control, indicating suicide accounts for an average of about 46% of firearms deaths from 1989-1998:

http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/pub-res/American_Indian_Injury_Atlas/11c-Allmaps-firearm.htm

Here's a page from "Washington Ceasefire," an anti-gun group:

http://washingtonceasefire.org/resource-center/national-firearm-injury-and-death-statistics

Their statistics from 2004, also derived from CDC statistics, claim suicide accounts for 57%.

Here is a US Bureau of Justice web page with statistics for total firearms deaths between 1991 and 2001:

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/tables/frmdth.htm

Note that suicides go from 48% to 57% of that total. Also note the total drop in firearms deaths, by about 25%, during that period--indicating that total firearms-related homicides have been dropping very dramatically during that period (by about one-third!) while firearm-related suicides are on a generally downward trend.

Here is an article on worldwide homicide and suicide rates, from the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons. Note that the United States is far from the nation with the highest homicide or suicide rates:

http://www.jpands.org/hacienda/stolinsky.html

By focusing on "gun violence," anti-gunners place all emphasis on the guns, and not on violence. By attacking a perceived symptom, they fail to address the real causes. Firearms deaths in the United States have been dropping for decades; the facts bear this out.

Afraid I don't have numbers for the Sacramento area, but it would be interesting to see.

I used to be staunchly pro gun control, and while I'm still in favor of most of the regulations we impose on the selling of guns I don't lose any sleep when the NRA wins a legal battle. Having watched the 4th Amendment get curtailed and "worked around" by Executive fiat while the leaders in the Democratic party -- my party -- collaborated with the NSA on warrantless wiretapping, I have to say that I have begun to sympathize with pro gun people who get spooked whenever anyone wants to monkey around with their 2nd Amendment rights.

More to the issue of the article, I appreciate that many people would like to see background checks and waiting periods done away with, but assuming that those laws are going to remain in place for the time being, will fingerprinting and logging the purchase of ammo really affect law-abiding gun owners that much? I understand the principled argument against it: get off gun-owners backs! But are there practical consequences that I, as some one who has never bought a gun, am missing?

In a few minutes I will be stopping by Big 5 to get a couple boxes of #8 12 guage shells as my boys and I head out to the Auburn Trap Club for a little fun & resposible recreation, this is a spur of the moment decision, I would hate to not be able to go due to someones idea of how best to protect me. Somehow the concept that the individual is responsible to society got flip flopped. BTW when will politicians start writing a bill that will ban pencils and other writing devices that allow for spelling errors. More legislation, more money, more loss of rights. Individual responsibility & common sense needs to find a place, next thing I know we will be shutting down bridges due to suicides.

the world is what it is, there is no changing that. law or no law.

Mr. McCarty is taking a losing position here, which in the long run will not help his political ambitions. His statement about ammunition being easier to get than cold medicine is ludicrous, and what he says about keeping ammunition out of the hands of children makes no sense. Virtually all crimes are committed with handguns, and pistol ammunition sales have been restricted to adults for a long while.
Our constitutional right to keep and bear arms implies access to ammunition. Restricting local access will just dry up a certain amount of sales tax revenue. Gun owners will buy elsewhere, or buy on the internet and have it delivered via UPS to their homes.
Crimes are committed by a very small percentage of the population. Statistically, virtually all ammunition sales are made to law abiding citizens who do not commit crimes, but McCarty is fine with interfering with and impinging on the rights of these law-abiding ammunition purchasers.