Ammo Law Challenged

PUBLISHED: 8:23 PM 1 May 2018

Olympic Shooter Suing California Over Ammo Restrictions

The law has hindered her ability to obtain training ammunition.

A six-time Olympic shooting champion is suing California Attorney General Xavier Becerra over ammunition laws which are preventing her from practicing.

Being a gun owner in a liberal state such as California is tough. However, it is detrimental to those who pursue firearm related sports and also live in the blue state. This is the case for multi-Olympian Kim Rhode who is now limited in her shooting practice due to recently implemented California gun laws.

However, like a true patriot, the six-time medalist is not going down without a fight and is suing Attorney General Xavier Becerra on behalf of the state of California for its recent series of ‘gunmageddon’ laws. Thankfully, the Constitution is on Rhode’s side, so victory in the lawsuit can be said to be ‘in her sights.’

California’s Prop 63, passed in 2016, implemented stricter gun control laws pertaining to ammunition, specifically the sales and transfer of such. Yet such a type of measure infringes not only on the second amendment but also on the ‘dormant commerce clause’ which mandates that states’ rights, including those to trade with one another, shall not be limited if not otherwise prohibited in the U.S. Constitution.

The series of ‘gunmageddon’ laws admittedly included several sensible ones such as background checks, yet also include ‘high capacity magazine’ restrictions, among others.

However, the ammunition clause affecting Olympian Kim Rhode is that now, in her home state of California, she faces challenges in simply obtaining practice ammunition of which she requires a significant quantity of.

It is reported that, on average, Rhode shoots 800 rounds of ammo every day.

Due to the specialty of her sport, Rhode is required to use a certain type of ammunition with which she practices.

Previously, she had her required supplies sent to either “her home, range, and coach by sponsors,” or she would simply bring it back with her from the ammo supplier located in Arizona.

However, thanks to Prop 63, Rhode has neither option for transferring the necessary ammunition across state lines, faces restrictions for ammunition quantity, and also faces regulatory fines for such transfers.

Naturally, this affects her ability to keep her well-practiced.

The recent gun laws are undeniably disruptive; however, Prop 63 specifically has brought out the activist side of Kim Rhode, as she “was featured in ads against” the prop.

As can be expected, Rhode has extensive support on her side as one of 75 members on the board of the NRA. The California Rifle & Pistol Association, “as well as a number of out of state ammo retailers who can no longer ship their products” to California have pledged to support Rhode in her suit against the state.

While one might think that the feminist hub of California, of all places, would be supportive of Rhode’s accomplishments considering that she “made history in 2016 to become the first woman to medal in six straight Olympics.”

However, it has been less than welcoming to the needs of her sport which may eventually require her to relocate to another state that will not infringe on her gun rights.

Thankfully, due to the detrimental effect of the series of laws which have been working against Rhode, she has a strong case in her defense.

That is undeniably promising but also disturbing in regard to the obstacles that Rhode will face just to pursue her career. Above all, this just goes to show that overreaching gun laws will always only affect those with any regard for the law.

Rhode must remain within gun laws for obvious reasons, but criminals have little to nothing to lose in regard to buying, selling, or transferring illegally obtained guns.

Some have noted that there are only a few hours separating the Arizona and California borders, meaning that criminals are highly unlikely to be discouraged by differing state laws. Not only that, ammunition is often the least of worries for those who have unlawful firearms or any corresponding accessories.

Simply put, ammunition restrictions are not going to keep any state or community safer than any ‘assault rifle’ ban will.

For these important reasons, Rhode deserves necessary support from the gun community to fight against these ridiculous overreaching laws; however, she and her support groups may be overly optimistic that they will enact real change in corrupt California considering that it would pass ridiculous ammunition restrictions in the first place.

In any event, Rhode is deserving of her accomplishments and will hopefully win her suit to enable her to most adequately pursue her competitive shooting career. That in itself would be an exciting win; however, if it proves to be even more effective in repealing ridiculous, gun-grabbing, California laws, then it can rightfully be called a victory.