Background Check for All Ammo Purchases?
Adam Scepaniak 04.02.18
A bill has been recently proposed in both the House of Representatives and the Senate which would place restrictions on ammunition sales. Debbie Wasserman Schultz of Florida (House – Democrat) and Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut (Senate – Democrat) have respectively proposed to add a NICS background check to all ammunition sales.
Connecticut’s Richard Blumenthal attempted to voice a strong case for their newly proposed legislation:
Ammunition sales should be subject to the same legal requirements as firearm sales, and that includes instant background checks. The same laws that prevent dangerous individuals from purchasing firearms also prohibit them from amassing arsenals of ammunition, with one major loophole: there are no background checks for ammunition sales to enforce the law.
While many people are advocating for FIX NICS legislation, Schultz and Blumenthal are looking to add in more checks to the NICS background check system. Something that would more thoroughly slog down a process that needs significant reform and change.
The language for this newly proposed legislation is not available for the public to read quite yet. According to Debbie Wasserman Schultz, current FFL holders or sellers of ammunition would be allowed to utilize the current NICS background check system that is in place. This would leave the door open for consumers to be Approved, Denied or Delayed for their ammo purchases.
At the moment, there are only 2 states (California and New York) that have laws on the books that openly require a background check for ammunition sales, but there are several that demand a firearm license; thus, a check is still completed. These over-politicized states are:
- New Jersey
New York and California have their own versions of shackling ammunition from law-abiding gun owners. New York’s legislation is currently being re-worked while California’s laws are already significantly hampering dealers and consumers alike.
Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s bill is H.R.5383 while Richard Blumenthal’s similarly-aligned legislation is S.2627 which will hopefully gain no traction. At the moment, both bills have multiple Democratic co-sponsors, but no significant movement on either has occurred.