What is the best testimony against this bill?
My thoughts are:
1) Anybody owning an AR lower can shoot virtually any caliber anyways, right? So the most common rifle would brings with it a "buy whatever you want" card anyways?
2) Ammunition, including even shell casings, has no current legal or logistics system or infrastructure in place to allow for tracking across state lines. It's common and totally unregulated for reloaders to buy cases and bullets across state lines; can a Hawaii ban be enforced against somebody from Iowa selling brass to somebody in Hawaii?
3) Putting an "Alternate Person allowed to purchase ammunition for the gun" on the firearms registration form is ridiculous. Is this a workable system in any other state? (A cursory look doesn't find anything, short of when a Hawaii House bill used the same language in 2020. What was the story there and how was it argued against then?)
If I know two guys named Robert Smith, and I put "Robert Smith" as the alternate on my form, which Bob is now allowed to buy ammunition? (The point being, the system as proposed has no sort of legal rigor to it.)
Can the alternate person be changed ever? If it is my wife and we get divorced, do I now need to re-register the gun just to put a different alternate person on the form?
If every AR registration has a different alternate person listed, then it wouldn't take long for a significant portion of the phone book to be listed as an alternate person somewhere. What if I list Karl Rhoades, or Carl Rhodes, as my person? So now some person I barely know on a different island can carry around a photocopy of my registration form so they can buy ammunition, and that's totally copacetic under this law, right?
Is there any reason I couldn't take payment in exchange for listing somebody as my alternate person?
What am I missing with the "Alternate Person" language?
4) Do police departments want to deal with the huge expansion of paperwork this bill would entail? Do they not have their hands full just dealing with firearm purchases?
5) Isn't the Supreme Court expected to weigh in on laws like this? I know California's "background check for every ammo purchase" got overturned.
6) It doesn't have an exception for ammunition that is sold to somebody at a shooting range for a rented or borrowed firearm?
7) Not to give them ideas, but it would have no impact on gunpowder and primer sales, correct?
Edit: Oh, and this bill also try to bans POSSESSION in some bizarre ass way? Correct me if I'm wrong, but it doesn't say you can't possess ammo for a gun you don't own, only that you can't purchase it. But you also can't possess ammo owned by somebody else. So as long as I say I owned the ammo, the unserialized and untrackable ammo, since before this law went into effect, or that I purchased it in another state, then that's totally legal, right? Even in the world of asinine gun bills, this seems beyond the pale.
I also like the clause, "This section shall not apply to ammunition purchases for firearms manufactured before 1899." So, um, I'm buying this 45 Colt ammo for an 1885 single action army, and that's cool? Well, no, I don't actually have an 1885 SAA, only a reproduction from 1985. But I'm not using this ammo in my reproduction, I'm specifically holding onto this ammo to shoot out of my authentic 1885 SAA; in case I ever find and purchase an 1885 SAA, I want to have ammo to shoot out of it, and that's what I'm buying this ammo for, because it's just such a good deal.
Or God forbid somebody take an 1800's rifle and chambers it in a modern caliber. That wouldn't count, right? But I'm pretty sure any shotgun ammo would count? 12 gauge has been around a long time... "Ah yes Your Honor, people from all over the state buy new 12 gauge rounds all the time so that they may one day come visit me and shoot it through my double barrel from 1895. I have given everybody in the state an open invitation to come and shoot my 1895 shotgun, and I guess they're all buying ammo in case they ever get to take me up on that offer."
Edit Edit: Seriously, when the gun store asks for my firearms registration when I'm trying to buy ammo, and I say it's for a gun from the 1800's, and then what? Do I need to prove to the gun store I have a gun from the 1800's that can fire the ammo? No, this language clearly doesn't apply to "ammo for guns from the 1800's"! Obviously the exception to me proving I have a specific gun, can't require me to prove that I have a specific gun? How does this not mean that this law would ONLY apply to calibers first invented after 1899?